diff --git "a/ef4/autointerp_layer15_res_matryoshka_k256_ef4.csv" "b/ef4/autointerp_layer15_res_matryoshka_k256_ef4.csv"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/ef4/autointerp_layer15_res_matryoshka_k256_ef4.csv"
@@ -0,0 +1,16412 @@
+,latent_id,n_samples_active,frac_samples_active,mean_activation,max_activation,explanation,rationale,train_macro_f1,train_accuracy,train_precision,train_recall,train_support_1,train_support_0,validation_macro_f1,validation_accuracy,validation_precision,validation_recall,validation_support_1,validation_support_0
+0,latent_0,7163,0.014326,0.011202661,3.594017,Systematic comparison between current and prior images.,"Command structures prompting users to compare new imaging studies with prior given images, emphasizing the use of both current and previous images, suggest systemic comparison with historical data to detect changes or stasis, a key pattern in radiology.
+",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1,latent_1,4913,0.009826,0.01055829,5.915808,Unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal contours with no significant acute thoracic findings.,"The highly activated examples include descriptions where no focal consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, or acute findings are present, alongside normal cardiac and mediastinal/hilar contours. The absence of significant or acute pathological findings combined with unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouettes consistently aligns with higher activation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6849291090495362,0.685,0.6907216494845361,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2,latent_2,3884,0.007768,0.0071722805,4.9001245,Normal radiological findings despite clinical indications.,"The samples with high activation levels are predominantly descriptions of radiological findings stating no significant abnormalities, such as clear lungs, normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, and absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax. The focus on normal findings despite potentially different or vague clinical indications determines the pattern recognition within the data set.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.6666666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7076318177235609,0.71,0.6779661016949152,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3,latent_3,17529,0.035058,0.02042705,8.468002,Confusing or incomplete comparisons to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to radiographic findings where there was an explicit mention or implication of a ""prior frontal image"" despite missing comparative data in the findings. These patterns include comparisons to an unspecified date or an incomplete process of comparison.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3571428571428571,0.46,0.4479166666666667,0.9772727272727272,88.0,112.0
+4,latent_4,5975,0.01195,0.014649727,3.2745423,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5,latent_5,19352,0.038704,0.018647008,4.865266,Observations of stability or change compared to prior imaging studies.,"Most examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions comparing current imaging results directly to previous ones, specifically, describing changes like resolution or lack of changes in abnormalities detected in prior studies. They focus on stability or change in identifiable findings over time, reflecting a pattern in radiological interpretation concerned with monitoring progression or resolution.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6,latent_6,6294,0.012588,0.009779462,5.6460195,Evaluation of changes by direct comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently entail the use of both current and prior imaging for comparison, specifically emphasizing descriptions of changes, or lack thereof, in the given findings over time, which is a critical aspect of longitudinal assessment in radiology.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7,latent_7,5490,0.01098,0.008680515,4.058269,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior images.,"Higher activation levels are noted in examples where explicit instructions are provided for making comparisons between current and prior images, especially if there is an explicit prior image available. This suggests that the presence of clear directives to compare findings to previous images intensifies the pattern's activation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4911774385458596,0.4924623115577889,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,99.0
+8,latent_8,4491,0.008982,0.011844845,6.076626,Emphasis on comparing current and prior images.,Examples with high activation levels focus on generating descriptions comparing current and prior images. They emphasize a comparison feature in radiology reporting.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9,latent_9,6257,0.012514,0.0095640095,7.038846,Descriptors indicating chronic pulmonary conditions like fibrosis or COPD.,"These examples frequently describe radiological findings with references to conditions consistent with or suggestive of underlying chronic diseases like fibrosis or COPD, indicated by terminology such as ""persistent"" or ""unchanged"" in the context of chronic conditions.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5464100011063171,0.59,0.7368421052631579,0.28,100.0,100.0
+10,latent_10,4679,0.009358,0.00900928,6.572889,Frequent references to prior image comparisons and interval changes.,"Highly activated examples frequently involve requests for comparative analysis with a prior frontal image or reference to interval changes, emphasizing the dynamic aspect of the patient’s condition or treatments. Comparisons appear integral to the task, modifying how findings are presented.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11,latent_11,6687,0.013374,0.010506766,4.6957917,Higher activations stem from detailed comparative analysis impacting diagnosis.,"Emerging patterns suggest that the notable factors in determining activations include whether direct comparisons are made between images or if comparisons are being used to assess stability or change. Examples with low activation often mention a lack of change or direct description of current findings without notable differences from prior images, signifying a routine or non-threatening observation. Higher activations tend to involve specific comparative analyses between images which affect treatment or diagnosis. This reveals an apparent association between the analytical depth rooted in temporal comparisons and the activation levels.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.39,0.39,0.39,0.39,100.0,100.0
+12,latent_12,103581,0.207162,0.13921985,5.030858,Descriptions of interval change in radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples showing moderate to high activation levels consistently describe changes in radiological findings when compared to prior studies, specifically emphasizing interval changes such as resolution or persistence of pleural effusions, atelectasis, pneumothorax, or other opacities. This pattern showcases how the model is sensitive to descriptions involving changes in the state of particular findings between imaging intervals, often suggesting concern or stability in pathologies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5527638190954773,0.5527638190954773,0.5555555555555556,0.55,100.0,99.0
+13,latent_13,19045,0.03809,0.022282448,4.925563,Analysis includes both frontal and lateral imaging views.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve radiological assessments utilizing multiple imaging views for comparison, including frontal and lateral images, to identify changes possibly indicating pathology. The presence of lateral views in addition to frontal views seems indicative of this pattern in radiology practice.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5158902691511387,0.5276381909547738,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,99.0
+14,latent_14,4407,0.008814,0.007476129,9.685566,References to stable or changed findings compared to prior images.,"High activation levels are associated with the presence of comparative findings between current radiographic images and prior images in the context of stable or changed pathologies, specifically focusing on fibrotic lung changes, pleural effusions, and borderline cardiomediastinal silhouettes. This pattern emphasizes the stability or change of significant findings observed across different radiographic assessments.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.3565891472868217,0.696969696969697,66.0,134.0
+15,latent_15,43515,0.08703,0.05920781,5.256574,Instructions to compare images indicating unchanged or improved conditions.,"Examples with higher activations include instructions for image-based comparisons, observing stability or changes in pathological features, particularly with mentions of stable features post-treatment or intervention. These often include clinical indications and comments regarding unchanged or improved conditions compared to previous examinations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.5581395348837209,0.48,100.0,100.0
+16,latent_16,16871,0.033742,0.017206922,4.2647095,Attention to medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels primarily focus on changes in medical device positioning, placement, and status in relation to prior imaging, especially in the context of central venous catheters, pacemakers, chest tubes, and feeding tubes. Reports often describe these devices' positions accurately in comparison to prior imaging, highlighting stable or altered positioning.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4901960784313725,0.25,100.0,100.0
+17,latent_17,3617,0.007234,0.0068914304,4.121547,Report findings comparing current and prior radiographic images.,"The pattern focuses on the comparative analysis between current and previous radiographic examinations. High activation responses are seen for scenarios where changes or statuses are described explicitly in relation to prior imaging studies, often indicating notable differences or stability in patient condition.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+18,latent_18,8423,0.016846,0.018002516,7.3218966,Mention of specific imaging techniques and comparisons to prior studies.,"Examples with lower and zero activation levels deal mainly with the findings without emphasizing specific techniques or comparisons. Higher activation examples consistently mention specific imaging techniques (e.g., PA and lateral views) and also compare with previous images. The presence of technique and comparative description seems to define the pattern.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4040693549760208,0.475,0.4852071005917159,0.82,100.0,100.0
+19,latent_19,17425,0.03485,0.018830922,5.5358267,Stable or minimal change in findings without acute pathology.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight the presence of an abnormal finding or notable change, even if the overall findings are stated as stable or unchanged. However, many of the examples show minimal activations, suggesting a general lack of pattern or comparison focus in this set.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3742334359590498,0.375,0.3831775700934579,0.41,100.0,100.0
+20,latent_20,7148,0.014296,0.006685696,2.95056,Comparison of findings against prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve descriptions that compare current images with prior images, using a linguistic structure that involves evaluating change or stability in specific radiological findings. Phrases such as ""unchanged"", ""as before"", and ""compared to prior"" are commonly used, emphasizing the comparison and evaluation of change over time.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5227720717916796,0.54,0.5289855072463768,0.73,100.0,100.0
+21,latent_21,3955,0.00791,0.010589468,5.261481,Use of 'given the current...' and specific comparison instructions in imaging descriptions.,"The highly activated examples frequently use the phrase 'given the current...' and provide instructions for the assistant to describe findings as compared to previous images, indicating a focus on specific comparative descriptions of imaging findings as part of the prompt.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4140625,0.49,0.4941860465116279,0.85,100.0,100.0
+22,latent_22,32920,0.06584,0.053122353,4.2255387,"Changes in findings compared to prior imaging, especially relevant to clinical indications.","The activation levels are high when there is a reference to a changed or unchanged finding compared to prior imaging, especially ones related to a clinical indication provided in the prompt (e.g. lines removed, opacities resolved, or new developments). The examples with 'Comparison: None' or lacking evidence of change have low activation, indicating significance lies in the comparative assessment documented.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4444444444444444,0.44,100.0,100.0
+23,latent_23,3353,0.006706,0.0115737105,6.007642,Comparison between current and prior radiological images.,"Highly representative examples involve prompts that mention comparison of current images to any prior images, typically for identifying changes over time, despite some instances not having a comparison available. This pattern reflects radiological evaluation methods.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4403970013726111,0.47,0.4794520547945205,0.7,100.0,100.0
+24,latent_24,33260,0.06652,0.036850687,3.7252188,"Comparison of current image findings with prior, noting pathologic changes.","The examples with high activation levels focus on studies that compare the present findings to prior images and include a clear mention of relevant pathological findings or changes over time, specifically noting resolution or progression of identified conditions (e.g., pneumonia). This pattern indicates that explicit comparison to previous clinical findings, along with a brief assessment of changes in pathological indicators, triggers higher activations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5454545454545454,0.54,100.0,100.0
+25,latent_25,11276,0.022552,0.023143845,9.33086,Unchanged placement of medical devices as compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve descriptions of stable or unchanged placements of medical devices (e.g., PICC lines, catheters, chest tubes) or recurring terms mentioning positions not changing compared to a prior study. This pattern reflects consistent radiological reporting of device positions relative to previous imaging.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5997499456403566,0.628140703517588,0.7659574468085106,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+26,latent_26,8555,0.01711,0.014468677,5.842513,"Comparison implied with prior images, not always explicitly stated.","Examples with activations indicate image comparisons, even in cases where the previous report isn't explicitly referenced. It's a common process in radiology to evaluate current findings against past images, often implied in the narrative or context of stable or unchanged findings.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4959244959244959,0.53,0.5197368421052632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+27,latent_27,4125,0.00825,0.00857801,5.070407,Use of multi-angled view comparisons (frontal/lateral) with past imaging.,"The key pattern in these examples is the use of specific references to directions or technique views (frontal, lateral) tied to comparisons with prior images, indicating radiological practices that involve multi-angled evaluations over time. The presence of past images and multi-directional analysis is crucial for understanding changes or stability in findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4682539682539682,0.59,100.0,100.0
+28,latent_28,3815,0.00763,0.007828597,3.9854465,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies indicating unchanged features or stable progression.,"Examples with high activation levels show consistent use of structured radiological comparison information, matching findings between current and prior reports, along with specific imaging techniques. This suggests a pattern focused on understanding unchanged features, evaluation for progression, or comparison with multiple prior imaging studies across different scenarios while incorporating the comparison aspect explicitly.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4294013901857039,0.45,0.4193548387096774,0.26,100.0,100.0
+29,latent_29,12111,0.024222,0.022741156,8.382304,Comparison with prior images and interval change in findings.,"This pattern is identified through the consistent use of multiple views (frontal and lateral) and comparison to prior images, with an emphasis on the description of interval changes in patient pathologies, including stable, improved, or worsened conditions. The inclusion of prior reports and specific mention of findings in relation to previous exams is a key indicator, marking the importance of tracking changes over time in radiology.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+30,latent_30,23223,0.046446,0.024415016,7.391768,Comparative radiology reports with noted interval changes in pathology or devices.,"Reports showing comparison with previous imaging, with either no significant change, slight progression, or regression in particular abnormalities, lead to higher activation levels. These involve noting changes in clinical findings or positioning of medical devices between studies.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.319672131147541,0.6964285714285714,56.0,144.0
+31,latent_31,2474,0.004948,0.005944814,5.0733223,Focus on identifying interval changes through comparative image analysis.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently require a comparative analysis between current and previous imaging to assess interval changes, especially in the context of evaluating potential or ongoing conditions like pneumonia or post-procedural evaluations. These reports often explicitly request detail-oriented comparative evaluations highlighting even minor changes between the current and prior images.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+32,latent_32,4499,0.008998,0.011094974,5.2088084,Comparative radiological analysis using prior images.,"These examples involve providing descriptions of radiology findings with an explicit comparison of current and prior imaging studies. The pattern involves using newer images in relation to older images to identify changes, which is crucial in monitoring progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4873417721518987,0.77,100.0,100.0
+33,latent_33,5638,0.011276,0.01239027,3.294791,Comparison of current and prior images with detailed evaluations.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve detailed evaluations or changes noted by comparing current images to previous images, typically involving the chest and potential pathologies, using consistent terminology such as 'comparison', 'prior report', or referring explicitly to specific views of anatomical regions. These detailed comparisons and consistency in certain descriptive elements or annotated parts in text indicate it is a pattern notable to this analysis task.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4259259259259259,0.46,100.0,100.0
+34,latent_34,39638,0.079276,0.0439421,3.0534134,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Activation levels increase when the pattern of comparison between current and prior imaging is explicitly noted in combination with the mention of minor changes, stable findings, or unchanged positions of devices, suggesting a focus on stability and lack of significant new pathology, particularly involving medical devices or stable disease conditions.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6153846153846154,0.56,100.0,100.0
+35,latent_35,2186,0.004372,0.0076278825,7.4477024,Acute symptoms or conditions requiring immediate evaluation and comparison.,"The examples with high activation predominantly mention indications related to acute respiratory symptoms and evaluations for potentially serious conditions, reflecting an urgency in diagnosis and intervention. These reports also often request comparisons to prior studies, indicating a need to monitor potential developments in acute conditions, which could explain the focused attention in these scenarios.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,100.0,100.0
+36,latent_36,7746,0.015492,0.013587481,5.469999,Description of interval changes in thoracic findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels feature comparison of a current imaging study with a prior image, specifically mentioning changes such as increased pleural effusion, progression of atelectasis, or persistent pneumonia. This indicates a pattern of using prior images to assess progression or resolution of thoracic pathologies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6254070004070005,0.628140703517588,0.6068376068376068,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+37,latent_37,3401,0.006802,0.0090056565,4.4314604,Provide detailed comparative analysis of images relative to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve tasks that require providing comparative analysis of imaging findings relative to a prior image, focusing on identifying changes or stability in imaging results. These comparisons are often made between similar studies with the use of specific diagnostic terms and typically involve clear documentation of findings compared to previous records, even when prior reports or specific findings are not detailed.",0.2418300653594771,0.36,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4653465346534653,0.47,100.0,100.0
+38,latent_38,21061,0.042122,0.0364883,6.3074555,Specific comparison statements with past imaging studies.,"Observations with higher activations consistently offer specific radiological assessments based on comparison with prior imaging studies, focusing notably on stability or change between examinations. This pattern highlights the importance of comparative analysis in radiology to track and formulate diagnostic conclusions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+39,latent_39,2489,0.004978,0.013269576,4.8226814,Reference to comparison with multiple images or detailed procedural context.,"These instances describe evaluations made by comparing current images to multiple past images, with explicit reference to prior images. Additionally, these scenarios often include technical details of the radiology procedure or specific patient history that extend beyond mere comparison with a previous radiograph. The references to prior images, often with multiple comparisons, in combination with detailed procedural description and context, are the key components.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,100.0,100.0
+40,latent_40,12806,0.025612,0.013690213,3.371798,Temporal stability or change in radiological findings across imaging studies.,"The examples showing higher activation consistently describe observations related to changes in radiographic images over time. Often noted are ""unchanged"", ""stable"", or interval changes in specific anatomical features or pathologies across consecutive imaging studies. This involves comparisons with prior exams, using terminology indicating temporal stability or change.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+41,latent_41,14624,0.029248,0.011430437,3.4153314,Comparative interpretation of radiology findings over time.,"Examples with activations greater than 0 emphasize imaging findings interpretation in the context of changes since prior studies. They mention changes or stability of radiological findings ('unchanged', 'improvement', 'placement', 'slightly asymmetric', 'interval resolution') often including direct comparisons with specified prior dates, indicating focus on temporal evolution rather than singular findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4101244101244101,0.45,0.4671052631578947,0.71,100.0,100.0
+42,latent_42,5282,0.010564,0.010048959,8.527377,"Comparison of current imaging with prior studies, noting changes or stability.","The common element among the higher activation examples is the explicit mention of previous imaging or findings for comparison, along with detailed descriptions or evaluations in the context of those previous studies. This pattern suggests the task involves comparing current findings to evaluate changes or stability over time, typically indicating a focus on analyzing disease progression or stability.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+43,latent_43,4426,0.008852,0.010758521,4.5622187,Positioning of medical devices like tubes or catheters.,The highly activated examples mention findings such as tubes or catheters in appropriate positions within the context of the radiological study. The consistent presence of medical devices like PICC lines or NG tubes in correct placement correlates with the pattern of activation.,0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3670044416074896,0.405,0.3137254901960784,0.16,100.0,100.0
+44,latent_44,20129,0.040258,0.023709275,4.9750266,Stable cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the presence of cardiomegaly or an enlarged cardiac silhouette, noted with attention to stable or unchanged findings compared to the prior studies. The focus is on recognizing the ongoing state of enlargement without acute change, which suggests a monitoring perspective rather than an acute intervention requirement.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5692307692307692,0.37,100.0,100.0
+45,latent_45,8332,0.016664,0.010774083,3.6765275,Comparison to prior images with explicit reporting indications.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing radiological descriptions in comparison to prior images and utilize prompts with explicit indications or directives for report generation. These prompts heavily involve comparison to prior imaging and the inclusion of specific historic or clinical context prompts more detailed assessment by the model.,0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+46,latent_46,15540,0.03108,0.020425787,5.2766805,High activation when prompted to compare findings to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations often include a request to explicitly describe findings in comparison to a prior image, even when no comparison images are specified. This indicates the task itself triggers high activation, particularly when the system interprets a need for a detailed comparison analysis.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4247151233543533,0.48,0.4876543209876543,0.79,100.0,100.0
+47,latent_47,9995,0.01999,0.011542532,6.2434764,Description of interval changes in opacities or effusions related to prior chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on discussing findings related to chest radiographs, especially emphasizing interval changes in opacities, pleural effusions, and cardiac silhouette when compared with prior imaging. These findings indicate significant changes or persistence that could alter clinical management.",0.3122807017543859,0.3469387755102041,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,24.0,0.4304211530598337,0.4723618090452261,0.3636363636363636,0.2222222222222222,90.0,109.0
+48,latent_48,5316,0.010632,0.012875448,5.062702,Bilateral pleural effusions or opacifications compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern across these examples predominantly involves descriptions of bilateral pulmonary opacifications or pleural effusions that remain stable when compared to prior imaging, signifying recurring conditions that are being monitored over time.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5024458420684835,0.555,0.6571428571428571,0.23,100.0,100.0
+49,latent_49,5759,0.011518,0.009389507,4.2516785,Describing radiological findings in comparison with previous imaging.,"The pattern discernible in the examples is the frequent use of comparison language referring to previous images or reports, specifically mentioning changes or stability in findings relative to those comparisons. The focus is on describing current findings in relation to prior records.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5907928388746804,0.6,0.5769230769230769,0.75,100.0,100.0
+50,latent_50,19458,0.038916,0.023707537,5.3315763,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve clear comparison with prior reports, specifically identifying unchanged findings in both current and previous images. It highlights consistency in findings or stability, such as unchanged cardiomediastinal contours or similar lung opacities, rather than new changes or acute findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+51,latent_51,8316,0.016632,0.012083294,4.4109597,Pattern entails evaluating findings relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve descriptions and comparisons of radiological findings to a prior study. This consistent comparison allows for evaluation of changes or stability in the findings across different imaging exams, which is typical in monitoring conditions in radiology.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3814808077132982,0.405,0.4316546762589928,0.6,100.0,100.0
+52,latent_52,4178,0.008356,0.01542289,6.956945,References to unchanged cardiac or mediastinal/hilar contours in comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern observed among the highly activated examples involves references to a stable or unchanged cardiac silhouette or mediastinal/hilar contours. These specific imaging features are frequently compared with prior reports, indicating stable findings which seem to be a common focus for activated response.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6085909273384182,0.61,0.625,0.55,100.0,100.0
+53,latent_53,3137,0.006274,0.007556249,5.8119082,References to mild or unchanged enlargement of the cardiac silhouette.,"These examples contain references to mild enlargement or stability in size of the cardiac silhouette, often in conjunction with additional findings such as vascular congestion, pleural effusion, or lung opacities. The emphasis is on the cardiac silhouette, particularly when it is mildly enlarged, mentioned with descriptions of unchanged or minimally changed conditions from prior imaging.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5510204081632653,0.27,100.0,100.0
+54,latent_54,91643,0.183286,0.12743162,13.041991,Comparison involving both current and prior images with provided reports.,"Examples with non-zero activation primarily involve descriptions that include both current and prior frontal images, indicating the task's focus on comparing the current imaging findings with prior images for any changes, especially when aided by the presence of a prior report.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.4705882352941176,0.7272727272727273,22.0,28.0,0.3668977992161591,0.37,0.2127659574468085,0.6666666666666666,45.0,155.0
+55,latent_55,10350,0.0207,0.01434536,2.5849295,Comparison with prior imaging to note stability or changes.,"The commonality among these examples is the identification of changes or confirmation of stable findings by directly comparing the current radiological image(s) with prior image(s) to assess changes, presence of stability, or need for continued monitoring, often in the context of specific clinical questions or known patient history.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+56,latent_56,3806,0.007612,0.011756643,5.2104897,Instruction to compare current and prior images with structured report sections.,"The examples with higher activation levels are  structured to include explicit instruction to compare current images with prior images. This is a clear prompt to the model, often accompanied by phrases such as 'Indication:', 'Technique:', and 'Comparison:', used consistently in the examples with notable activation levels.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4125585456854806,0.445,0.4625850340136054,0.68,100.0,100.0
+57,latent_57,6290,0.01258,0.0145486435,4.949,References to comparison with prior imaging findings or reports.,"The activation levels are higher in examples where there is a reference to previous radiological findings or reports, often entailing a comparison of the current imaging with a prior study. This comparison inherently suggests an evaluation of changes or stability over time, which is a key component in interpreting imaging studies.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+58,latent_58,25046,0.050092,0.02467837,3.178938,Evaluation of device position and necessary adjustments.,"The high activation samples usually include a detailed discussion or suggestion regarding the positioning or adjustment of devices like endotracheal tubes, central lines, or catheters. This suggests that the model highly activates on cases involving device position evaluation and potential adjustments, which often requires careful clinical consideration.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7341959427267484,0.735,0.7640449438202247,0.68,100.0,100.0
+59,latent_59,59324,0.118648,0.07466082,3.091199,Detailed multi-view analysis and comparison with prior reports for complex presentations.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently detail the findings of different views (frontal and lateral) in the images, often with indications or history of conditions like pleural effusion, pneumonia, or heart conditions. They frequently discuss comparisons to prior reports or images. These examples describe more complex, multi-faceted or corroborating imaging scenarios where multiple perspectives provide a comprehensive analysis needed for accurate diagnosis or monitoring.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4938271604938271,0.8,100.0,100.0
+60,latent_60,16997,0.033994,0.016576147,5.163336,Detailed comparison and changes from prior radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on describing specific findings and changes in imaging when compared to prior reports. Observations like changes in opacities, pleural effusions, and cardiovascular silhouette are specified in relation to previous imaging on different dates. The key pattern is emphasis on noting and detailing changes or stability over time, comparing current status with past studies, which is typical in progressive or investigative medical conditions.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5599695005718643,0.5628140703517588,0.5203252032520326,0.6956521739130435,92.0,107.0
+61,latent_61,2506,0.005012,0.0047037797,4.6969805,"Reference to changes in heart size, particularly cardiomegaly or enlargement.","Reports with high activation levels consistently detail the presence of changes in heart size, often describing cardiomegaly or cardiac silhouette enlargement. This follows from text explicitly referencing cardiac size as a central finding and discussing changes in comparison to prior reports, indicating a focus on heart size in the context of clinical assessment.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.6060606060606061,0.4,100.0,100.0
+62,latent_62,11466,0.022932,0.014146806,6.1511693,Consistent or unchanged findings across prior and current images.,"Examples with high activation involve descriptions of consistent or unchanged findings across current and prior images, often with a focus on stability or persistence of conditions like heart enlargement, lung opacities, or pleural effusions. This pattern of stable findings suggests a routine monitoring theme without acute changes.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3810876623376623,0.39,0.3552631578947368,0.27,100.0,100.0
+63,latent_63,23310,0.04662,0.04480586,4.216033,Previous reports or comparisons documented for longitudinal assessment.,"Examples with high activation feature comparisons to either previous imaging studies or prior reports with explicit documentation of findings from earlier studies. This pattern reflects ongoing evaluation of changes or stability across time referenced by previous exams or reports, significant in monitoring progress or stability of conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.5212121212121212,0.86,100.0,100.0
+64,latent_64,3046,0.006092,0.0075239637,5.7058234,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal and hilar contours with a focus on concise comparison usage.","Examples with high activation levels emphasize the presence of normal mediastinal and hilar contours, absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, and provide structured, concise descriptions over prior comparisons with radiological clarity. These aspects dominate the radiology report style, focusing on unchanged assessments and a thorough yet succinct depiction, often seen in high-activation reports.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6899689968996899,0.69,0.6862745098039216,0.7,100.0,100.0
+65,latent_65,10219,0.020438,0.016677704,6.007588,Focus on placement and position of tubes and lines in radiological findings.,"The activation levels indicate that the model is primarily responsive to the presence of detailed device and tube placements, especially PICC and central line positions, in the reported findings. These activation patterns reflect the model's sensitivity to procedural elements, as these details are often critical in interpreting radiographic images where findings are influenced by or documented for evaluating medical devices.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8255336617405583,0.83,0.75,0.99,100.0,100.0
+66,latent_66,4043,0.008086,0.0068980944,5.4469247,Comparison between current and prior frontal and lateral images.,"The commonality in the high activation examples is the comparison between multiple images, specifically when both current and prior frontal and lateral images are available and utilized to provide a comprehensive comparative analysis of findings.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+67,latent_67,4993,0.009986,0.0067591076,4.8451366,Focus on endotracheal tube placement in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference the presence and precise positioning of endotracheal (ET) tubes. This is a crucial detail in radiological assessments, especially in patients with respiratory complications or post-intubation, as incorrect placement can have severe clinical implications.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7209590739975197,0.73,0.859375,0.55,100.0,100.0
+68,latent_68,22641,0.045282,0.022137113,4.748954,Descriptions of interval improvement compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations describe findings that explicitly state improvements or changes in conditions when compared to prior studies. Lower activations either don't mention improvements or provide inconclusive or unchanged findings, focusing more on deterioration or lack of change.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3910845588235294,0.47,0.3928571428571428,0.11,100.0,100.0
+69,latent_69,5011,0.010022,0.012372077,5.2437687,Comparative analysis of current and prior medical images for changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels include instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images, frequently using specific phrases indicating the need for comparative analysis in the context of new findings or clinical questions. The focus is on change detection or assessment from prior studies, which triggers high activations.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+70,latent_70,5816,0.011632,0.0069930665,6.3650374,Evaluation of medical device positioning relative to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on radiology studies that specifically include evaluations of radiographic findings in comparison to prior images, particularly the positioning of medical devices such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes. This is consistently seen in descriptions of tube placement and potential adjustments needed based on comparison with previous images.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5334776000206095,0.542713567839196,0.5555555555555556,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+71,latent_71,3354,0.006708,0.008734173,4.200317,Stable or unchanged findings across serial chest imaging comparisons.,"Examples demonstrate the observation of chest conditions using both current frontal and lateral images and comparison with prior frontal images, focusing on observations that include stable or unchanged findings over continuous evaluations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5074626865671642,0.34,100.0,100.0
+72,latent_72,9511,0.019022,0.015665652,4.37765,Emphasis on interval change or stability in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples commonly describe changes or stability compared to prior imaging, often including explicit anatomical or device positioning details. Specifically, the pattern emphasizes follow-up assessments of changes in opacities, effusions, nodules, or devices, utilizing comparison phrases like 'similar as compared to the prior study', 'unchanged', 'again noted', or 'interval change'.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+73,latent_73,7001,0.014002,0.016604034,4.0309854,Tasks requesting comparison findings description using given images.,Highly activated examples consistently request a comparison description between current and prior radiological images using given current and prior images. The phrasing in these requests often begins with 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.',0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+74,latent_74,2159,0.004318,0.007450359,6.013279,Comparative evaluation involving multiple views and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve tasks comparing findings on different image views, integrating information from both frontal and lateral images with consideration of prior reports. They often describe specific instructions and involve detailed evaluations or changes across multiple perspectives, such as evaluating different imaging modalities or comprehensive assessments of conditions.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4164515767029514,0.48,0.4879518072289157,0.81,100.0,100.0
+75,latent_75,28165,0.05633,0.025776267,5.5081773,"Comparison with prior imaging to describe interval change, improvement, or stability.","Most examples describe radiological findings that report changes or stability in conditions compared with previous imaging studies. The pattern is characterized by explicit mentions of changes since prior assessments, frequent references to reductions or improvements in observed findings, or direct statements about unchanged observations in comparative assessments.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.607853123169769,0.615,0.5474452554744526,0.8333333333333334,90.0,110.0
+76,latent_76,8823,0.017646,0.02381362,5.2039037,Reports emphasizing findings relative to prior images or interval changes.,"Examples with higher activations are explicitly evaluating changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging in the context of specific clinical backgrounds, often emphasizing stable conditions, interval changes, or comparisons explicitly described in the reports. This is a standard practice in radiologic assessments.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+77,latent_77,5674,0.011348,0.012643708,6.5936847,Comparison with prior imaging to assess change in findings.,"Examples exhibit comparison or evaluation against prior radiological images or reports, especially from times when changes or stability in findings were important. Higher activations occur where findings show interval change or stability in disease progression.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3984962406015037,0.4,0.4090909090909091,0.45,100.0,100.0
+78,latent_78,5564,0.011128,0.011672389,4.964361,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+79,latent_79,8566,0.017132,0.017460786,5.1851788,Evaluate findings for interval changes compared to prior images.,Activation levels are higher in examples where findings are compared to prior images and the assistant is asked to provide a description of these findings relative to changes detected with the latest images. This pattern indicates the importance of evaluating interval changes that existing report structures and tasks emphasize for detection.,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+80,latent_80,3892,0.007784,0.008694656,5.511799,"Assessment involves comparison to prior imaging, focusing on stability or lack of acute findings.","Examples with high activation focus on analyzing changes in radiography imagery by using unfocused templates and assessing differences from prior imagery, even when these changes are minor or non-specific such as the lack of a definitive acute cardiopulmonary process. The presence of comparison, along with descriptions of unchanged findings or normalcy, suggests an emphasis on routine monitoring without detecting emergent conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+81,latent_81,14995,0.02999,0.02123948,7.3186855,Focus on comparing current and prior radiologic images.,"The examples with high activation all involve interpreting changes in radiographic findings compared to prior images. This often involves descriptions of interval changes in clinical features or the positioning of medical devices, such as tubes or catheters. Key to this pattern is the explicit guidance given in the prompts for describing these changes in comparison with earlier examinations, which indicates the model's focus on updating clinicians about the evolving state of the patient.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3964194373401535,0.41,0.358974358974359,0.7567567567567568,74.0,126.0
+82,latent_82,5821,0.011642,0.015330319,3.0102751,Instruction for specific comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include the instruction to compare current imaging (frontal and lateral views, where applicable) to a prior study, while examples with zero activation typically don't include a detailed comparison or mention the analysis of specific changes from a prior image.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+83,latent_83,4124,0.008248,0.011456059,5.456656,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, where the primary task is the detailed interpretation of changes, assessments, or stability of the findings over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+84,latent_84,5493,0.010986,0.010748701,7.19189,Comparison to prior frontal image evaluation.,These examples mention evaluation of findings by comparing a current frontal image with a prior frontal image of the chest. This suggests that determining interval changes or stability compared to previous radiological evaluations is a crucial aspect of the findings being described.,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.562984193649082,0.615,0.5680473372781065,0.96,100.0,100.0
+85,latent_85,12501,0.025002,0.013707199,4.0453877,"Focus on generating findings from current images, without fixed comparisons.","Examples with high activation levels explicitly direct for a description of findings comparing current images to prior ones, without providing any fixed prior comparisons, which seems to focus more on the assistant’s ability to generate a comparative description out of current findings alone.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5714285714285714,0.36,100.0,100.0
+86,latent_86,3940,0.00788,0.008186563,7.4535546,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+87,latent_87,15622,0.031244,0.019387394,6.631881,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples show high activation levels when there is a persistent or stable abnormal finding without change from previous images, indicated by words or phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no relevant change'. This pattern reflects the model's emphasis on stability or lack of progression as noteworthy diagnostic information.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6086956521739131,0.5656565656565656,99.0,101.0
+88,latent_88,4057,0.008114,0.0063389605,3.249789,Comparison with prior images or reference to absence of prior comparisons.,"Samples consistently achieving higher activations involve formulating a comparative analysis of current and prior imaging, despite indicating an absence of prior images or explicit comparisons in some instances. This pattern involves descriptions in reports that suggest or emphasize changes or stability relative to earlier studies or expectations for comparison.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.423007573025604,0.52,0.510989010989011,0.93,100.0,100.0
+89,latent_89,19198,0.038396,0.02764295,5.4707355,Imaging limitations or difficulties in excluding findings.,"The highly activated samples consistently describe findings with limitations in imaging quality or scope. This is present through mentions of positional limitations, difficulty excluding small findings like effusions, or areas not fully imaged. These identifiers reflect the pattern of limited evaluative possibilities in radiological assessments due to imaging constraints.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5996396757081373,0.6,0.6063829787234043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+90,latent_90,3857,0.007714,0.010086021,7.7276506,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging reports for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions about findings in the current radiology study compared to prior imaging reports. This comparison is a common feature in radiological assessments, aimed at identifying changes or stability in conditions over time.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4210917287840365,0.435,0.4503816793893129,0.59,100.0,100.0
+91,latent_91,4879,0.009758,0.009506455,3.0484958,Instructions to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"Looking at the activation levels, the common pattern in high activation examples involves the need for a comparison between current and prior imaging study findings to identify stability or changes.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3851795922769928,0.43,0.4545454545454545,0.7,100.0,100.0
+92,latent_92,3624,0.007248,0.008871555,4.645323,Focus on frontal image comparison analysis with less emphasis on other views.,"Examples with high activation involve analyzing radiological images by focusing primarily on frontal views, or specifically noting lack of lateral images where assumed necessary, with the prompt emphasizing specific analysis based on frontal image comparison, potentially indicating an importance placed on frontal views for assessing conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3867201320910485,0.48,0.4887640449438202,0.87,100.0,100.0
+93,latent_93,44874,0.089748,0.059359916,5.6115556,Evaluation for changes in imaging relative to prior findings.,"These examples emphasize evaluation in relation to previous radiological findings, which is typical in follow-up studies to assess changes or stability over time. This frequently involves reference to previous imaging for comparison; however, there is less explicit focus on unchanged findings, hence moderate activation levels.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+94,latent_94,5441,0.010882,0.02035663,5.471341,Comparison involving both current frontal and lateral images.,Activation is higher when both current frontal and lateral images are evaluated in relation to a prior frontal image. This pattern suggests higher complexity or diagnostic value when multiple current image views are used for comparison.,0.7083333333333333,0.7142857142857143,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.6932746700188561,0.695,0.6695652173913044,0.77,100.0,100.0
+95,latent_95,4870,0.00974,0.012510578,4.1980495,Inclusion of lateral views and comparison instructions.,Examples with high activation often mention both current and prior images with an emphasis on lateral views or specific instructions to make comparisons; these details suggest comparison tasks involving lateral images and prior records are crucially linked to the pattern.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+96,latent_96,28824,0.057648,0.04409427,7.048818,Use of comparative analysis with prior imaging in descriptions.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve the comparison of current and prior radiological images, while the lower activated ones often lack such comparisons or specify 'None' or 'N/A'. The focus is on documenting changes in imaging over time, which is a key purpose of these examinations.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4370404411764705,0.51,0.5058139534883721,0.87,100.0,100.0
+97,latent_97,137892,0.275784,0.1775934,4.1236877,Interval cardiopulmonary changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently describe changes in findings compared to previous studies. Particularly, those with notable activation discuss changes in cardiopulmonary findings such as heart and lung sizes, effusions, pneumothorax, or atelectasis, often mentioning changes in heart silhouette or significant bilateral pulmonary signs.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6254681647940075,0.63,0.6065573770491803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+98,latent_98,3094,0.006188,0.0107507855,7.8640327,Describing changes by comparing current to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently require a description of findings in comparison to prior images. This indicates a pattern in the language model's activation related to tasks that involve assessing current findings against older ones, a common practice in radiology to assess for changes or progression of disease.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4263285024154589,0.43,0.4396551724137931,0.51,100.0,100.0
+99,latent_99,5362,0.010724,0.008667815,4.168844,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,The pattern in these examples includes radiological descriptions where findings are unchanged in sequential imaging or stable with no new pathological developments. This is common in radiology reports when providing continuity or surveillance information to show no progression or new findings in comparative studies.,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5802469135802469,0.47,100.0,100.0
+100,latent_100,15843,0.031686,0.019715788,8.149049,Use of multiple imaging views in conjunction with previous images for comparison.,"The examples with higher activations involve descriptions from multiple imaging views to ascertain findings in comparison to prior images, as indicated by 'frontal' or 'lateral' views, which enhances visual assessment capability.",0.3106617647058823,0.4,0.4418604651162791,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.392156862745098,0.821917808219178,73.0,127.0
+101,latent_101,3514,0.007028,0.0051120548,3.2594123,Requests to compare current images with prior ones and analyze changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve commands with explicit comparison involving prior radiological studies combined with the requirement for detailed descriptions of changes or stability over time. The key element is the request to describe or analyze changes as compared to previous images, using additional findings or historical context in reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+102,latent_102,2248,0.004496,0.004510468,3.6776514,Emphasis on unchanged device or tube positioning in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples all involve comparison with prior imaging, and they highlight notable changes or stability in the current examination. They often include observations about devices or tubes being correctly placed or unchanged in their positions, with specific callouts to comparisons like 'unchanged' or 'interval change'.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4425770308123249,0.5175879396984925,0.5555555555555556,0.1515151515151515,99.0,100.0
+103,latent_103,8942,0.017884,0.010538167,3.970017,Comparison of image findings to track changes over time.,"These examples consistently involve the analysis and comparison between current and prior images, with a focus on changes or stability of specific findings, typically in terms of device positioning, effusion size, lung opacities, or pleural changes, often linked to patient history or procedure outcomes.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+104,latent_104,4667,0.009334,0.011411109,5.1461983,Descriptions of interval changes or device placements compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe changes in specific radiological findings or devices relative to previous examinations. These examples mention modifications or placements of objects (like tubes, devices) or anatomical changes that are evident when compared to prior imaging, suggesting the presence of a particular event or intervention.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4146341463414634,0.415,0.4105263157894737,0.39,100.0,100.0
+105,latent_105,6523,0.013046,0.008390039,5.4174814,Comparison of current findings against prior imaging results with a focus on device positioning and pleural effusion dynamics.,"These examples show patterns where findings are discussed in relation to previous imaging reports, especially focusing on stability or changes in specific conditions, devices, or anatomical features (e.g., pleural effusion size, catheter positioning) between the current and prior images. This includes the use of consistent language about the comparison, emphasizing either explicit changes or stability in these aspects.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+106,latent_106,4120,0.00824,0.010537186,8.906291,Brief comparisons or descriptions without detailed historical context or focus.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing descriptions of current and prior images but often omit specifics like dates or detailed prior comparisons; they may add a description of selected findings (e.g., persistent conditions or placements) without strong emphasis on comprehensive comparative analysis. Lower activation examples often include richer comparative analysis.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5030674846625767,0.82,100.0,100.0
+107,latent_107,4113,0.008226,0.010766432,6.754295,Requests for comparison between current and prior images (interval change/assessment).,"Examples that exhibit high activation levels prominently feature the use of image comparisons in the analysis, suggesting that the model highly activates when there is a request for comparing findings between current and prior radiological images. This includes the presence of strings like 'comparison to the prior frontal image', 'interval', or noting changes over time.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+108,latent_108,6279,0.012558,0.013137539,3.9620407,"Specific anatomical descriptions with spatial terms ('over', 'beneath', 'terminates').","Examples with higher activation levels include specific references to anatomical structures like the heart, aorta, ribs, or lung zones in conjunction with specific spatial terms like 'over', 'beneath', 'above', or 'terminates'. These terms are important in radiological descriptions to precisely convey locations and changes in the observed anatomy or placement of devices.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5143013848896202,0.5527638190954773,0.6136363636363636,0.2727272727272727,99.0,100.0
+109,latent_109,39413,0.078826,0.03966028,4.835099,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, noting changes or stability in findings.",The samples with higher activation levels consistently describe a comprehensive comparison with prior imaging to highlight both change and stability in specific radiological findings. Comparison and assessment of stability or change from prior imaging is a key characteristic of radiological reports.,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6456552706552707,0.6482412060301508,0.6293103448275862,0.73,100.0,99.0
+110,latent_110,41104,0.082208,0.04770255,4.217855,Unchanged positioning or configuration of medical devices from prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings related to previous placement of medical devices such as catheters, tubes, or pacemaker leads, and their position in relation to cardiovascular landmarks or structures. This is common in radiology reports where stability or changes in device placement are critical for patient management.",0.5777777777777777,0.6122448979591837,0.8,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.6206896551724138,0.36,100.0,100.0
+111,latent_111,16318,0.032636,0.01860544,4.9448667,Changes and positioning of medical devices in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples illustrate findings related to the positioning, alteration, and presence of medical devices like chest tubes, central venous catheters, tracheostomy tubes, which are explicitly compared with previous studies, often indicating changes or the absence of complications. Descriptions often include terms like 'unchanged', 'appropriate', 'tip', and location descriptors tied to medical devices.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5272418744289258,0.542713567839196,0.5714285714285714,0.36,100.0,99.0
+112,latent_112,39833,0.079666,0.03766538,3.7558792,Stable or unchanged imaging findings despite existing abnormalities.,"These examples highlight consistent references to interval changes or stability in imaging findings in comparison to prior studies. Highly representative examples consistently focus on stable or unchanged findings, often despite disease history, or mention specific interstitial patterns or bilateral opacities without significant change, linking change/stability with existing conditions like effusion, atelectasis or interstitial diseases.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6245400615754299,0.625,0.616822429906542,0.66,100.0,100.0
+113,latent_113,3296,0.006592,0.0088104,4.4898195,Lack of prior imaging for direct comparison in radiology reports.,"The examples show high activation when the description is generated with given images and is aimed for comparison purpose, especially when past examinations aren't available for direct comparison or are noted absent, suggesting emphasis on current findings without prior imaging context. This suggests that the model is engaged in generating findings with limited historical data for comparison and using the current images as the basis for significant findings despite a lack of comparison.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4013798701298701,0.41,0.3815789473684211,0.29,100.0,100.0
+114,latent_114,2584,0.005168,0.008892446,7.611996,Stable or evolving findings in current vs. prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently reference current and prior imaging studies while highlighting distinct, stable, or evolving findings. They include terms like 'unchanged', 'from prior', or 'interval', indicating stable or resolved findings compared to previous studies. This pattern shows methodical comparison across time to identify changes or stability.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.5704225352112676,0.81,100.0,100.0
+115,latent_115,6383,0.012766,0.014463838,7.25887,Assessment of pleural effusions compared to prior images.,"Examples exhibit a pattern where changes in thoracic structures are evaluated in comparison to prior images, particularly focusing on pleural effusions and their evolution over time. Reports show comparison descriptions of pleural effusion changes with expressions like 'stable', 'increased', 'improved', or reference to interventions like thoracentesis.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.631578947368421,0.24,100.0,100.0
+116,latent_116,4475,0.00895,0.008134831,4.1837816,Images compared to prior studies with elaborative reporting.,"The set of examples include comparisons to prior imaging studies alongside some form of linguistic elaboration or directive to describe or compare the findings. This goes beyond straightforward declarative statements linking current and prior findings, indicating attention to detail in such comparative analysis.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4705882352941176,0.48,100.0,100.0
+117,latent_117,2741,0.005482,0.0077944067,5.5571465,"Detailed comparison of imaging findings to prior studies, noting interval changes or stability.","These examples consistently include explicit language that describes comparing the findings of current imaging to prior studies, with specific emphasis on any changes or stability of certain conditions or devices. The pattern is the identification and description of interval changes or lack thereof in the context of continuous patient monitoring, which is a critical component in radiologic reports.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+118,latent_118,13813,0.027626,0.020015646,8.917049,Low lung volumes or mildly enlarged heart.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings indicating low lung volume or mild enlargement of the cardiac silhouette. These features, particularly when stable or unchanged from prior imaging, appear significant in the dataset for generating a pattern identification.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6591478696741855,0.66,0.6703296703296703,0.6161616161616161,99.0,101.0
+119,latent_119,7549,0.015098,0.009934069,3.9315155,Mild cardiomegaly or tortuous aorta in stable condition.,"The pattern here focuses on mentions of the heart or cardiac silhouette being 'mildly enlarged', 'moderately tortuous aorta', or similar descriptions of stable but abnormal findings related to the heart and mediastinum. These descriptions indicate a stable yet imperfect appearance related to the heart or mediastinal structures when compared to prior imaging, without indicating acute changes.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4233378561736771,0.49,0.46875,0.15,100.0,100.0
+120,latent_120,3712,0.007424,0.012340421,8.795181,Stable or unremarkable heart size.,"For instances with high activation, the heart is commonly described as either 'normal', 'mildly enlarged', 'top normal', or 'normal to mildly enlarged'. Such descriptors aim to denote either a stable or expected cardiac size in the context of radiographic findings.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6408045977011494,0.65,0.6136363636363636,0.81,100.0,100.0
+121,latent_121,21996,0.043992,0.043498296,6.822052,Temporal changes or stability in findings based on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions or diagnoses based on comparison with prior imaging, commonly identifiable with explicit or implied terms about stability, change, or interval findings. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', 'stable', or similar reference time points or comparisons indicate the pattern. This pattern is evident as it is not merely about presence or absence of pathology but emphasizes temporal changes or stability over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,100.0,100.0
+122,latent_122,25072,0.050144,0.02469367,3.3294652,Evaluation of interval changes by comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The observed pattern across examples with higher activations involves explicit comparison with prior studies, focusing on interval changes in findings. Descriptions include phrases such as 'unchanged from prior', 'as compared to previous', or dates related to prior examinations. This pattern is consistent with radiology reports that assess changes over time by comparing to earlier studies.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+123,latent_123,4201,0.008402,0.012028681,4.3429756,Descriptions of interval change compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples all utilize a pattern of describing interval changes in diagnostic imaging by explicitly comparing findings across different studies - highlighting areas that have remained unchanged or have changed since the prior image. The use of comparative language, specific temporal references, and mentions of prior changes is a hallmark of follow-up studies.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5568825910931174,0.5577889447236181,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,99.0
+124,latent_124,4647,0.009294,0.0075414474,3.4151134,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on heart and mediastinal devices.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently feature both comparisons with prior imaging studies and the presence of heart or mediastinal devices like pacemakers, catheters, or endotracheal tubes. These factors are frequently mentioned alongside intervals or changes in these devices' positions.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,100.0
+125,latent_125,6079,0.012158,0.009379026,4.9873075,Stable placement of pacemaker leads or catheters between exams.,"The highly activated examples contain references to placement or stability of lead, catheter, or device positions across different examinations, which are often notable observations in radiological reports for patients with implanted hardware. The pattern focuses on the unchanged status of imaging findings related to these devices.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5735607675906184,0.62,0.8529411764705882,0.29,100.0,100.0
+126,latent_126,14128,0.028256,0.014525462,3.2195673,Focus on medical device positioning and status in radiology description.,"Samples with higher activation levels involve the evaluation or reference to specific medical devices like chest tubes, PICC lines, or ports. This suggests that the pattern involves radiological descriptions focusing on the presence or positioning of medical devices, which are essential features in these reports.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+127,latent_127,16156,0.032312,0.018238954,3.5200937,Presence of low lung volumes.,"Low lung volumes are typically caused by various conditions, but they distinctly appear in the examples with the higher activation levels, indicating that the model heavily associates this pattern with the pattern it is trying to match or identify.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.431162175100673,0.495,0.4848484848484848,0.16,100.0,100.0
+128,latent_128,1965,0.00393,0.008381477,12.541225,Specific comparison or evaluation directives in inputs.,"The commonality in these examples is the incorporation of text or sentences indicating a specific course or question, prompting further investigation or evaluation. Despite not having prior report data, they include specific comparison directives or historical context prompting a focused evaluative view. Activation diminishes without such clear directive or inquiry.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4429590017825312,0.5,0.5,0.82,100.0,100.0
+129,latent_129,8290,0.01658,0.0137359295,6.035347,Position of medical devices is described in radiological comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe medical devices or interventions and their positions in the body, such as PICC lines, chest tubes, or pacemakers, across multiple image projections. These descriptions detail the positions of such devices and any changes or stability in such positions over time. This pattern shows a focus on evaluating the positioning of medical devices within the body against previous images.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.53125,0.34,100.0,100.0
+130,latent_130,7569,0.015138,0.011707918,5.3236966,Comparison findings indicating stability or change over time in specific pulmonary or mediastinal features.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of imaging findings that compare certain observed changes, such as the presence of new devices, stability of known abnormalities, or any significant opacification, between current and prior images. They mention specific changes over time, emphasizing stability or new developments in conditions like effusions, masses, or opacities, often seen in ongoing condition monitoring.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.595034595034595,0.5979899497487438,0.5862068965517241,0.68,100.0,99.0
+131,latent_131,18973,0.037946,0.017265065,3.8313036,Comparison with prior frontal images to describe changes/stability.,"The examples with high activation levels involve describing current radiological findings in explicit comparison to previous frontal images, with a focus on changes or stability in observed radiological features.",0.21968787515006,0.22,0.2083333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5112781954887218,0.68,100.0,100.0
+132,latent_132,6526,0.013052,0.0063984613,3.466611,Observing changes between current and prior images due to medical evaluation or treatment.,"Samples with non-zero activation levels typically involve an explicit request to compare a present image to a prior one for detecting qualitative changes, particularly due to medical procedures or disease. This focus on actively searching for changes or updates between the new and prior image is the consistent pattern that triggers stronger model activation for these inputs.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4945054945054945,0.45,100.0,100.0
+133,latent_133,10583,0.021166,0.009880171,4.5904317,Tasks involving image comparison to identify changes over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature instructions to provide descriptions comparing current and prior radiographic images. This involves looking for changes between the images, which forms a specific task pattern of comparison that is frequently highlighted in the instruction set.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.363619348110912,0.405,0.3952095808383233,0.7857142857142857,84.0,116.0
+134,latent_134,4125,0.00825,0.008203203,6.5343666,Comparison of current and prior chest images is mentioned explicitly.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the use of current and prior images (either frontal or both frontal and lateral) to provide direct comparisons, often without specifying prior imaging. This linguistic pattern is pivotal for evaluating changes or stability over time in radiological assessments.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4233343630933992,0.44,0.4552238805970149,0.61,100.0,100.0
+135,latent_135,27630,0.05526,0.032850087,4.8729615,Interval changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The given examples with higher activation levels describe radiology reports that indicate interval changes in imaging findings. These examples highlight alterations over time, such as improved lung aeration or changes in pleural effusion size, consistent with findings that show progression or stability in comparison to prior images, which is a critical evaluative point in radiology.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+136,latent_136,13774,0.027548,0.014628503,4.97524,Focus on stable cardiomediastinal contour with reference to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation all involve stability or non-significant change noted in the cardiomediastinal silhouette or important structures, often after comparing with previous images. Words indicating stability like 'stable', 'unchanged', and 'normal' in reference to the heart or mediastinal contours are prevalent in the higher activation samples.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6442796663243067,0.645,0.6593406593406593,0.6,100.0,100.0
+137,latent_137,32512,0.065024,0.03387626,4.899821,Significant findings or changes since prior examination.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of significant changes or new findings since prior examinations. These reports highlight alterations in medical status or suggest potential pathological developments, often including the impression of stability or change over time. Lower activation examples lack such defined changes from previous imaging.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6329352608422376,0.635,0.6588235294117647,0.56,100.0,100.0
+138,latent_138,22453,0.044906,0.02255473,2.9567208,Changes or placements of medical devices between images.,"Examples describing changes in medical devices like tubes, catheters, or procedural placements between current and prior images are highly activated. Phrases emphasizing interval change or new placement of medical devices, like nasogastric or PICC lines, correlate with high activation levels.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4308359264874065,0.465,0.4313725490196078,0.22,100.0,100.0
+139,latent_139,38978,0.077956,0.04292203,9.905294,Observations of significant interval changes in condition over time.,"High activation is linked to reports involving analysis over time, identifying or implying significant changes in conditions, such as disease progression or reduction.",0.503968253968254,0.6,0.2666666666666666,0.3076923076923077,13.0,37.0,0.4725738396624472,0.65,0.125,0.25,28.0,172.0
+140,latent_140,28221,0.056442,0.024874575,3.0736198,"Unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours.","The pattern in these examples is closely associated with the findings that include the description of normal cardiac, mediastinal or hilar contours. The examples detail the chest's anatomy, noting no significant changes in contour, which is crucial in medical imaging for identifying abnormalities or confirming stability in conditions like cardiomegaly or pulmonary congestion.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5110565110565111,0.5175879396984925,0.5194805194805194,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+141,latent_141,22016,0.044032,0.026107516,7.014907,Emphasis on evaluating interval change in radiological studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference interval changes or evaluations over time, such as 'evaluate for interval change' and 'no significant change'. This shows a focus on tracking changes over sequential studies, which is a common practice in radiological monitoring for conditions that may evolve, like pneumothorax, effusions, and device placements.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.4306569343065693,0.7564102564102564,78.0,122.0
+142,latent_142,3830,0.00766,0.006409587,6.3594217,Tube positioning or stability compared with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions involving the positioning, placement, or advancement of tubes (such as endotracheal, enteric, or feeding tubes) within the body and their comparison to prior positions. This indicates that the model activates more when identifying descriptions related to the movement or stability of such medical devices between images.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.6071428571428571,0.51,100.0,100.0
+143,latent_143,4144,0.008288,0.008391635,4.3813734,Use of prior imaging comparison to assess current findings.,The data consistently involves comparisons to prior imaging studies when describing findings on chest X-rays or similar radiological scans. The pattern mostly triggers when observations are made about the stability or changes in previously noted features. The presence of terms indicating comparison to previous states or images is highly correlated with the activation scores in the examples.,0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.4201680672268907,0.5,100.0,100.0
+144,latent_144,10172,0.020344,0.018460844,8.593569,Descriptions of changing pleural conditions or opacities compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern emerges that the presence of abnormal or changing findings that directly compare the current study to prior imaging is crucial for high activation scores. High activations focus on descriptions of changing pleural conditions or atelectasis, and characteristics like pulmonary infiltrates or effusions when these are compared to prior images.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6481612446958982,0.6482412060301508,0.6,0.6923076923076923,91.0,108.0
+145,latent_145,4043,0.008086,0.0088173635,4.1155043,"Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing current imaging findings to prior images, highlighting changes or noting stability in specific lung or chest structures. The comparisons often remark on aspects like tube positions, lung volumes, opacities, or structural abnormalities like atelectasis or effusions in relation to previous radiographs.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+146,latent_146,21303,0.042606,0.017319767,2.2896245,Comparison of current and prior imaging emphasize stability or change of findings.,"The activation levels are higher in examples that focus on a textual comparison of present and past imaging findings, indicating findings are stable, improved, or have developed over time. This pattern reveals an emphasis on report content that tracks changes relative to prior conditions, without opining if current statuses are acute or part of a baseline condition.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+147,latent_147,50231,0.100462,0.04744147,3.3258867,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings.,"Higher activations are noted when there is specific mention of changes in radiological findings compared to previous images or studies, indicating a focus on interval change. This is consistent across examples with higher activation scores, which often describe the evolution or stability of medical findings.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+148,latent_148,20711,0.041422,0.022665165,4.6478558,Identification of discrepancies or changes between current and prior imaging related to notable adjustments in structures.,"Examples that highlight discrepancies between current and previous images, modifications in structures like vessels, mediastinum, or effusions, and overall evaluations that necessitate change detection to assess progress or stability. Notable is the emphasis on tubes, catheter placements, and the absence of pleural effusion, central line positioning, or pneumothorax as stable compared to priors.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+149,latent_149,4754,0.009508,0.0061326204,4.5855174,Focus on consistency or change in pacemaker or lead positions.,"The pattern seen in these high-activation examples involves detailed descriptions of pacemaker or lead positions, specifically noting consistency or changes in position compared to past radiographs. These examples often include terms like 'unchanged', 'again seen', or details about the lead's location in relation to the atrium or ventricle, indicative of the focus on the stability or deployment of cardiac devices.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5743352535543006,0.625,0.9032258064516128,0.28,100.0,100.0
+150,latent_150,5089,0.010178,0.018726885,7.2775908,Comparison of current vs prior chest imaging findings.,"These examples stress the description of findings in current images compared with a prior study. This comparison mostly applies to the frontal and lateral chest images, evaluated against past images for any changes or stability in findings.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4294672457659788,0.445,0.4586466165413533,0.61,100.0,100.0
+151,latent_151,4559,0.009118,0.010587139,4.2441,Instructions for comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to providing a description of findings in the current study compared to a prior study. This involves explicit instructions to describe changes or stability observed in the imaging over time, which is crucial in comparative radiologic assessments.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3698609083224468,0.385,0.4122137404580153,0.54,100.0,100.0
+152,latent_152,4574,0.009148,0.011437303,7.187847,Detailed evaluation or description of radiological findings.,"High activation examples generally describe radiological findings in detail, often associated with explanations or evaluations regarding possible diseases or conditions, while low activation examples tend to lack detailed discussions about findings or their implications.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,100.0,100.0
+153,latent_153,17751,0.035502,0.039288457,7.3190513,Focus on specific comparison of findings between current and prior images.,"These examples show a pattern of detailed text descriptions being generated for comparisons between current and prior images of medical conditions. The activated samples provide specific findings compared to previous images, indicating changes or stability in medical conditions or placements of medical devices.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+154,latent_154,20946,0.041892,0.017628143,2.844446,Comparison across multiple views (frontal/lateral) with prior images.,"Examples show image analysis across multiple views and corresponding reports, noting prior imaging for context and changes. This highlights the radiologists' approach of ensuring findings are consistent or noting any changes against historical data. It is used for assessing developments or stability in the condition being evaluated.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+155,latent_155,42132,0.084264,0.049574308,4.722428,Descriptions of unchanged or stable findings in radiology comparisons.,"This dataset includes examples of radiological reports with comparisons, specifically noting unchanged findings or stability over time. This pattern is typical in follow-up imaging where the report confirms either stability or no significant change from prior findings, using language like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar'.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5678282828282828,0.5678391959798995,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,99.0
+156,latent_156,8062,0.016124,0.01029937,4.107797,Explicit references to imaging changes based on comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly discuss changes or constancy in imaging findings by explicitly comparing current and prior imaging studies. These examples contain specific references to previous examinations, either noting stability or changes identified.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,100.0,100.0
+157,latent_157,6125,0.01225,0.012248476,4.557854,Findings are explicitly described in direct comparison with previous images.,"The pattern suggests that highly activated examples include examinations where prior imaging comparison is accessible and explicit implementation of specific findings, such as changes and persistence compared to prior images. These examples often use structured language to systematically address changes or stability in findings compared to previous images.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,100.0,100.0
+158,latent_158,4831,0.009662,0.009782893,5.037354,Analysis of diagnostic equipment placement (lines/tubes) as compared with prior imaging.,"The high activation examples focus on analysis of diagnostic equipment placement, such as lines and tubes, in comparison with previous images. Descriptions include specific metrics on line or tube position, its implication, and stability or adjustment needs, often noting proper placement within anatomical landmarks.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+159,latent_159,4760,0.00952,0.0144588,5.428785,Task involves directly comparing current and prior images for changes.,The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to providing descriptions explicitly based on directly comparing current imaging with prior images without additional findings. This thematic linkage of tasks focused on changes from prior imaging sets them apart from examples where explicit findings rather than mere comparisons are prominent.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+160,latent_160,4576,0.009152,0.013728423,5.422104,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern is detected in examples where a radiological evaluation is provided with direct comparisons to prior images, including specific descriptions of observed changes or stability over time, often with specified historical references or follow-up. The task of making comparisons and noting changes or lack thereof is a common operation in radiology for evaluating progression of known conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+161,latent_161,4212,0.008424,0.016904827,4.4864926,Requests to compare current findings to a prior frontal image.,"The highly activated examples consistently include the request to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,' often specifying both a frontal and lateral view, with an emphasis on evaluating differences noted from previous exams, even when there is no comparison study available.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+162,latent_162,4376,0.008752,0.010922413,5.198435,Mandatory description comparing current image with prior one.,"Examples with high activation levels include instructions for comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting the use of past records or exams as a basis for describing findings. This pattern involves direct references to image comparisons indicating the requirement for reporting changes or stability based on prior imaging records.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+163,latent_163,4819,0.009638,0.007851929,12.175239,Evaluating interval changes for cardiopulmonary findings from prior imaging.,"Activations are high when there are multiple intriguing findings such as fluid overload, effusions, cardiomegaly, or lung pathologies compared to prior imaging, often concerning for acute or significant interval changes.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4074074074074074,0.4583333333333333,24.0,26.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.3023255813953488,0.7358490566037735,53.0,147.0
+164,latent_164,5968,0.011936,0.020423405,9.626502,Description of findings comparing current to prior radiology images.,"High activations are associated with ongoing or residual comparison to a prior frontal image, where findings indicate changes, documentation of stability, or explicit indications of unchanged appearances in key areas like effusions, opacities, or relevant lung or mediastinal observations.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.3076923076923077,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4228657524451594,0.435,0.4496124031007752,0.58,100.0,100.0
+165,latent_165,6717,0.013434,0.008528812,3.2906287,"Low lung volumes with resultant anatomical changes (e.g., crowding, atelectasis).","The examples with high activation feature comparisons of images with new findings versus prior exams, often focusing on changes or stability in the condition but notably highlighting the presentation of low lung volumes and its implications, such as accentuated heart size, bronchovascular crowding, or atelectasis. These specific details consistently appear in high activation examples across varied contexts.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6121981315000882,0.615,0.6385542168674698,0.53,100.0,100.0
+166,latent_166,3585,0.00717,0.011153889,5.0770817,Radiological comparison with prior imaging emphasized.,"The highly activated examples consistently include a directive to compare current imaging against prior images or reports. These examples emphasize making comparisons between current and previous radiological findings for evaluating progression, stability, or changes in the patient's condition. Even the setup of the prompt directs the assistant to compare images, indicating a pattern of evaluating change or continuity over time.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3739737274220033,0.39,0.4166666666666667,0.55,100.0,100.0
+167,latent_167,3173,0.006346,0.0055688634,3.2240975,Description of findings in current images compared to prior image.,"These examples frequently provide descriptions of current radiology findings in comparison to prior images, using directives to provide details from image comparisons regardless of the presence of formal comparison studies.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4117647058823529,0.42,100.0,100.0
+168,latent_168,28176,0.056352,0.025116485,4.2995796,Comparison and evaluation of current vs. prior images with minimal detail.,"Examples with a high activation level reference comparisons of current imaging with previous images and show proficiency in describing changes or lack thereof, even when comparison details are missing or techniques are not specified.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,100.0,100.0
+169,latent_169,10339,0.020678,0.0129627455,6.645179,Interpretations of interval changes in findings compared to previous radiographs.,"Activation levels correlate with descriptions that include INTERPRETATIONS of comparison to prior imaging, specifically descriptions of CHANGE ('increased', 'worsened', 'unchanged') rather than simply stating the presence of prior imaging.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.4186046511627907,0.6835443037974683,79.0,121.0
+170,latent_170,4518,0.009036,0.008118441,4.0922117,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+171,latent_171,4625,0.00925,0.014207707,9.031293,Comparison focused on interval changes in lung condition or related features.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparing current imaging with prior images, particularly focusing on identifying or ruling out interval changes. Additionally, these reports often describe specific findings while assessing for changes since prior imaging, typically within the context of suspected or known lung diseases or conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.562769906811122,0.5628140703517588,0.5612244897959183,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+172,latent_172,4521,0.009042,0.009262681,6.2235785,Descriptions of interval changes in radiological findings.,"The examples exhibit references to interval changes in radiological findings, described in context with prior studies or baseline images. The descriptions often include medical conditions, line placements, and specific finding changes like improvements or worsening, using words and phrases like 'unchanged', 'interval change', 'improvement', 'better than previous', etc. These linguistic features reflect the comparative nature of interpreting radiological images over time.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5888888888888889,0.53,100.0,100.0
+173,latent_173,8512,0.017024,0.022727713,5.539519,Comparative analysis with emphasis on changes from previous imaging.,"Examples that exhibit activation levels indicative of a pattern consistently demonstrate detailed comparative analysis to prior radiological exams, typically marked by significant changes in the images described. This includes progression, stability, or new findings in structures or conditions identified compared to previous studies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+174,latent_174,4199,0.008398,0.008711087,4.6193824,Interval change detection using comparison with prior images.,"Highly active samples describe the use of current and prior images for comparison and often reference specific changes to ensure accuracy and consistency over time. Reports frequently mention prior and current radiographs by technical aspects and physical changes, emphasizing interval change detection.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+175,latent_175,18971,0.037942,0.023045504,3.9175444,Monitoring stability or changes by comparing to prior imaging.,"This set of examples highlights the evaluation of radiographic findings in the context of their stability or change over time rather than focusing on initial detection. Instead of identifying the presence of pathologies, these examples emphasize the comparison to previous images to assess for changes, which may include size stability, resolution, or progression of identified features.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3964194373401535,0.41,0.4307692307692308,0.56,100.0,100.0
+176,latent_176,7351,0.014702,0.018543214,8.364223,"Explicit instructions for comparison with prior images, particularly sequential comparisons.","Higher activation levels are observed when reports require comparison and sequential analysis of images, especially if there are prior images available for comparison. This pattern emerges when explicit instructions are provided for comparison, indicating preference for comparison to previous images with identifiable sequential changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4287014333021562,0.435,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,100.0
+177,latent_177,5451,0.010902,0.014717823,5.2973814,"Use of concise structure, focusing on current vs. prior findings without extensive details.",Examples with higher activation levels typically use a format with 'Given the current frontal image' and lack a sentence disambiguating specific prior report findings. This implies the pattern is structured around a concise setup capturing 'current versus prior image' comparisons without elaborating on detailed comparative findings within prior reports.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+178,latent_178,3925,0.00785,0.008722733,5.832849,Detailed comparative analysis of changes in serial imaging findings.,"Samples with high activation illustrate detailed comparison of current with previous imaging, and also identify relevant changes or stability of findings as a result of medical intervention or natural progression. This includes describing changes in position or characteristics of medical lines and tubes, pulmonary or pleural changes, or changes due to known conditions. Keywords include 'comparison', 'unchanged', 'as compared', or specific mention of changes against prior exams.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+179,latent_179,7072,0.014144,0.017833924,5.708914,Descriptions of findings compared to previous imaging studies.,"Activated examples frequently involve descriptions of radiological findings, especially device placements, opacifications, or pneumothorax, in comparison to prior imaging. The pattern highlights changes or stability between images, using phrases like 'interval change', 'unchanged', or 'similar compared to prior study'.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,100.0
+180,latent_180,12952,0.025904,0.034695283,3.5824246,Task of comparing current imaging to prior studies in reports.,"The pattern here focuses on the specific task of analyzing current imaging findings in the context of previous reports and images, with explicit phrases like 'as compared to previous', which guide the structure of the reports.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+181,latent_181,8030,0.01606,0.015362619,5.6890535,Position and assessment of indwelling devices with comparison to prior imaging.,"The samples with a high activation level involve specific mentions of indwelling devices such as catheters, nasogastric tubes, central venous lines, etc., observing and noting their position in relation to previous images. This pattern highlights consistency in reporting about these medical devices.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+182,latent_182,3118,0.006236,0.007291335,7.3945904,Stable cardiopulmonary structures between current and prior imaging.,"These examples feature descriptions of thoracic findings, particularly focusing on cardiopulmonary structures, and suggest stability or lack of significant change between the current and prior imaging examinations. This often involves terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable size', and comparisons with prior imaging results.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.3970588235294117,0.27,100.0,100.0
+183,latent_183,11276,0.022552,0.014952507,6.6194253,Presence of lung opacities or nodules.,"Instances that demonstrate opacities or nodular densities indicative of discrete lung pathologies like atelectasis, pneumonia, or masses are linked with higher activation values, suggesting the model is sensitive to findings related to lung opacifications and nodules.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.742677665935064,0.745,0.7058823529411765,0.84,100.0,100.0
+184,latent_184,9957,0.019914,0.010334388,5.1598015,Interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels all involve describing new findings or changes seen on current imaging compared to prior imaging, often explaining shifts in clinical status or progression of underlying conditions. Key phrases include 'compared to prior', 'since the previous study', and 'interval change', focusing on differences between current and past studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.4672897196261682,0.6329113924050633,79.0,121.0
+185,latent_185,10880,0.02176,0.012967739,6.399927,Bilateral pleural effusions and cardiomegaly on imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe bilateral pleural effusions and cardiomegaly, often in the context of a comparative analysis with prior imaging studies. These conditions are indicative of fluid overload often related to heart failure, which aligns with the pattern being the focus of the activation motivation.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4181295152168939,0.555,0.4117647058823529,0.0813953488372093,86.0,114.0
+186,latent_186,8625,0.01725,0.012219115,3.390061,Assessment of changes in cardiomediastinal silhouette and presence/absence of cardio-pulmonary pathology in image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed descriptions and comparisons between current and prior images, with an emphasis on stability or changes in the cardiomediastinal silhouette and the presence or absence of cardiopulmonary pathologies, or other anomalies such as atelectasis or pulmonary congestion. This pattern of longitudinal analysis in medical imaging highlights how changes in these areas can influence diagnostic significance.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4629685157421289,0.5025125628140703,0.5032679738562091,0.77,100.0,99.0
+187,latent_187,9614,0.019228,0.014573902,5.6752553,"Focus on interval comparisons with prior imaging, noting findings over time.","Literal comparisons to prior radiographic studies in these examples show an emphasis on describing interval findings or stability of the current study as opposed to previous imaging. Note several examples have linguistic phrases indicating assessment over time for stability, lack of change, or interval developments.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+188,latent_188,3524,0.007048,0.008624348,4.8153615,Assessment of cardiomegaly or cardiac device positioning.,"These examples consistently describe evaluations of cardiomegaly or heart size, often in the context of imaging comparisons to assess changes such as worsening of pulmonary conditions or stable cardiac devices. The examples use phrases like 'moderate cardiomegaly', 'heart size is top normal', and 'unstable cardiac device', showing a pattern of cardiac-related findings in radiologic reports.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6199619961996199,0.62,0.6176470588235294,0.63,100.0,100.0
+189,latent_189,3955,0.00791,0.0073846555,3.0053113,Instructions to compare current study with prior frontal image.,The model shows higher activation levels when the prompt includes explicit instructions or phrases to describe findings in relation to a 'prior frontal image'. This pattern is noted frequently in radiology reports where comparisons to prior imaging are crucial for identifying changes or documenting stability.,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+190,latent_190,3974,0.007948,0.010571326,4.8594165,Analysis involving comparisons with prior images or examination.,"The examples consistently mention ""comparison"" or the presence of 'prior images' as a major aspect, with emphasis on analysis concerning changes or stability over time. Descriptions often reference whether images were current or prior, suggesting this pattern prioritizes cross-sectional analysis of radiological findings over time.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4067522381620105,0.45,0.4675324675324675,0.72,100.0,100.0
+191,latent_191,19514,0.039028,0.024238754,4.136627,Stable or improved findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe interval change in findings with a general report of stability or improvement, using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant change', or 'resolved' compared to prior study. This indicates analysis focused on the absence of worsening or new pathologies upon comparison to previous images.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+192,latent_192,1985,0.00397,0.008223439,7.753725,Comprehensive assessment involving both frontal and lateral views plus prior image.,"High activation examples frequently integrate both available frontal and lateral chest radiograph views along with prior frontal images, which suggests that the model is tracking detailed multi-view imaging comparisons, likely signaling additional thoroughness or detail regarding the comparisons made.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,100.0
+193,latent_193,26968,0.053936,0.026195614,4.3240995,Focus on medical devices and their positional changes.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings related to medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, or other intrathoracic lines, and describe changes in their position or condition. This pattern suggests that the model is more activated by radiological reports explicitly discussing the status of medical devices, especially when they mention changes or stability in comparison to prior.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6005965772643393,0.605,0.6329113924050633,0.5,100.0,100.0
+194,latent_194,7958,0.015916,0.011939,7.104617,Explicit comparison to prior imaging for changes in lung or cardiopulmonary conditions.,"High activation levels occur for examples that describe comparative analysis between current and prior imaging, especially focusing on changes versus stability in lung condition or cardiopulmonary features, often utilizing temporal references to prior studies explicitly.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+195,latent_195,14156,0.028312,0.016788099,4.041211,Mild cardiomegaly on chest imaging.,"The pattern here is stable, mild enlargement of the cardiac silhouette in chest radiographs, often associated with comparisons to previous imaging. Terms like 'mildly enlarged', 'heart size is normal', or 'the heart is at' when used in the findings reflect this.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5482281284606866,0.5879396984924623,0.7073170731707317,0.2929292929292929,99.0,100.0
+196,latent_196,3646,0.007292,0.0068413597,6.329061,Emphasis on changes or intervals in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Significant activation levels occur when there is a description of changes or intervals based on prior imaging, indicating focus on the clinical significance of temporal changes rather than static findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4836065573770491,0.59,100.0,100.0
+197,latent_197,8242,0.016484,0.017045246,6.0033946,Cardiomediastinal contour assessment and procedural context.,"The high activation levels are associated with findings in the reports that mention changes in or assessment of the cardiomediastinal area in response to specific techniques, typically managing or comparing to prior images. Thus, this refers to detailed observation of cardiomediastinal contours specifically in conjunction with consideration on procedural factors such as low lung volumes and positioning.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5528455284552846,0.68,100.0,100.0
+198,latent_198,6630,0.01326,0.009250584,4.05243,High activation for reports detailing comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Activation levels are higher for reports that compare the current imaging study to prior ones, especially when discussing specific changes or stability in clinical findings. Phrases indicating comparison or change from previous imaging, such as 'compared to the previous', 'no new', 'stable from prior', highlight this pattern.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+199,latent_199,3839,0.007678,0.014202355,6.4277835,Focus on interval change or consistency with prior imaging states.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve scenarios where the radiological findings actively highlight interval changes or explicit comparison with prior image states, particularly regarding placements of tubes and catheters or resolution/improvement/change of visible conditions such as opacities or fluid levels.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4769414575866189,0.5025125628140703,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,99.0
+200,latent_200,5934,0.011868,0.010684595,4.1945324,Comparison to prior imaging focusing on condition stability or change.,"The examples with high activation levels include comparisons of current images with 'prior' images, specifically framed around findings relevant to a historical or known condition. This involves consistent referencing and comparison to previous imaging to assess stability or changes in medical conditions.",0.2788461538461538,0.28,0.2608695652173913,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3714285714285714,0.3737373737373737,0.3522727272727273,0.3163265306122449,98.0,100.0
+201,latent_201,33843,0.067686,0.053903095,5.671399,Explicit descriptions of stability or changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern here involves direct acknowledgments of changes or stability compared to previous imaging, with specific emphasis on descriptions detailing stability or changes such as the presence, increase, or decrease of certain findings like opacities, effusions, or device positions. Reports often include qualification details of image comparisons and interval changes, frequently specifying improvement, resolution, or persistence of pathologies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6022031823745411,0.61,0.5859375,0.75,100.0,100.0
+202,latent_202,4801,0.009602,0.009450777,5.2673554,Explicit request to compare current findings to prior imaging study.,"Highly activated examples include explicit requests for descriptions in comparison to a prior study, even when no prior comparison is specified or noted in the question. The structure 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' appears often in these examples and seems to directly contribute to the activation.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+203,latent_203,3335,0.00667,0.011803103,6.391835,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral image views alongside a prior frontal image for comparison.,"In this dataset, the highest activations occur when both frontal and lateral images are analyzed along with a prior frontal image. This suggests a pattern where comprehensive views are provided for a thorough comparison, enhancing the detection of changes between studies. This is noted consistently across examples with high activation scores.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4796747967479675,0.59,100.0,100.0
+204,latent_204,5220,0.01044,0.010391652,6.8471527,References to comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"This set of examples consistently mentions comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, particularly using phrases like 'in comparison with', 'compared to', or direct references to a previous study date, indicating a recurring pattern of assessing changes or stability over time in radiological reports.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+205,latent_205,7184,0.014368,0.010782547,5.732966,Comparisons of current imaging to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize descriptions of radiology imaging findings that compare current studies to previous ones, unambiguously indicating the importance of longitudinal assessment in radiological diagnosis.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+206,latent_206,168098,0.336196,0.29013765,5.900335,Emphasis on changes from prior imaging.,The examples with non-zero activation show a focus on a change of findings compared to previous imaging. This pattern is significant in radiology for identifying the progression or stability of a condition over time.,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+207,latent_207,5789,0.011578,0.014738167,4.8969216,Focus on comparison for interval changes from prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on identifying interval changes compared to previous images, irrespective of the specific medical findings. The task is about identifying signs of change rather than the findings themselves, which might include devices, pathology, or anatomical observations noted in comparison.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+208,latent_208,4421,0.008842,0.0121911215,6.0036483,Focus on cardiac silhouette size and characteristics.,"These examples consistently discuss heart size or characteristics of the cardiac silhouette, often in relation to past radiological studies for comparison. This pattern highlights the importance placed on cardiac observations, frequently noting whether the size is normal, unchanged, or enlarged, and utilizing specific terminology like 'cardiomediastinal silhouette', reflecting a radiological focus on cardiac evaluation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,100.0
+209,latent_209,5661,0.011322,0.0114590805,6.6243315,Use of explicit comparison to prior imaging to describe stability or change.,These examples are marked with activations based on whether they explicitly provide or imply comparisons between current and prior imaging. Explicitly comparative language often signals an interpretation based on temporal changes rather than static findings.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3594234811330197,0.36,0.351063829787234,0.33,100.0,100.0
+210,latent_210,10491,0.020982,0.013074112,4.0838633,Detection and description of medical device positioning on radiographs.,"The pattern involves outlining the presence and position of medical devices on radiographs, such as chest tubes, catheters, or pacemaker leads, often in comparison to previous studies. It focuses on the status and changes of these devices across examinations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.64349376114082,0.645,0.6666666666666666,0.58,100.0,100.0
+211,latent_211,3779,0.007558,0.0052160146,5.377771,"Fractures, especially rib fractures, in chest imaging.","The highly activated examples frequently identify either the presence or suspicion of fractures, specifically rib fractures, which is a distinctive finding in radiology reports. These examples typically mention terms related to fractures like 'rib fracture' or 'irregularity' suggestive of fracture.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4710902752734703,0.56,0.8333333333333334,0.15,100.0,100.0
+212,latent_212,7446,0.014892,0.012789817,6.041915,Emphasis on interval changes or unchanged conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention both a comparison to a prior study and detailed description of interval changes or stability in pathology, focusing significantly on indications of change in patient's condition. This emphasizes the model's detection of observations contingent on prior imaging assessments.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4090909090909091,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4561403508771929,0.52,100.0,100.0
+213,latent_213,2713,0.005426,0.008989563,4.607137,Comparison of multiple views and current/prior images in radiology.,"The examples with high activation levels often include both the current and the prior image descriptions along with explicit comparison phrases. These describe changes or findings across several views (frontal and lateral) or capture the importance of comparison as part of the interpretative process. High activation relates to emphasis on comparison, especially when different views are mentioned in the radiology report.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.4782608695652174,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4289175391537596,0.505,0.5028901734104047,0.87,100.0,100.0
+214,latent_214,5666,0.011332,0.007699729,7.8134527,Evaluation and description of positions or changes in medical devices on radiographs.,"The examples that show higher activation levels often include descriptions of changes or assessments of medical device positioning such as endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, or other indwelling medical devices and their associated impacts or adjustments on recent radiographic evaluations.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5847087839119711,0.6130653266331658,0.5737704918032787,0.4069767441860465,86.0,113.0
+215,latent_215,7238,0.014476,0.020944862,5.880712,Descriptions of interval changes in pleural effusions or respiratory conditions.,"The examples highlighted all describe changes in imaging findings, particularly focusing on the dynamics of pleural effusions or fluid accumulation, respiratory condition aspects, or lung opacities, while often mentioning support or monitoring devices, suggesting evaluations for changes in conditions or device placements.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.489278913817369,0.5326633165829145,0.5853658536585366,0.24,100.0,99.0
+216,latent_216,5274,0.010548,0.008650871,3.2205195,Need for detailed comparison to prior frontal image findings.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight the importance placed on the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This continues to show a specific need for direct comparison of current imaging to prior ones in terms of clinical relevancy for evaluation, forming a pattern wherein the described changes or stability are crucial elements noted.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+217,latent_217,5825,0.01165,0.010865994,4.304824,Assessment of medical devices and anatomical changes compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally describe findings in relation to previous imaging studies, with a focus on changes or stability in medical devices and anatomical features. These reports often include detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging, emphasizing device placement accuracy and anatomical changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+218,latent_218,6608,0.013216,0.01024912,6.5100164,Examination for changes or stability from prior imaging.,"The lower activation levels indicate less specific details, while higher levels focus on differences or changes from prior imaging, using terms like ""decreased,"" ""unchanged,"" or ""improved."" The focus is on recognizing specific changes over time or stability in imaging findings, often leveraged in assessing the progression or stability of a condition.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4873417721518987,0.77,100.0,100.0
+219,latent_219,4810,0.00962,0.011956746,5.86262,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding or atelectasis.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently point out findings related to deviations in lung volumes, often accompanied by bronchovascular crowding or changes in pulmonary opacities. Descriptions of low lung volumes with associated pulmonary and vascular findings, such as atelectasis and crowding, are frequently noted in patterns with high activations.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6334513318771811,0.635,0.6551724137931034,0.57,100.0,100.0
+220,latent_220,3087,0.006174,0.0060732258,5.994661,Structured report with directive for comparison of current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation focus either on comparing current and prior images or provide a structured description format, differentiating between initial instructions and findings/interpretations. There is emphasis on explicit instructions to compare with previously reported details or reference prior radiography, especially through phrases like 'compared to prior' or descriptive specifics unique to new assessments.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+221,latent_221,3301,0.006602,0.012961266,7.262251,Image comparison without prior contextual data.,"The high activation examples consistently use a specific prompt structure involving given images and a request to compare findings to a prior frontal image with no additional context. This suggests the model is recognizing a pattern in the evaluation and comparison process as described in the prompts, which involve instructions for image interpretation without providing historical data or context.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4951456310679611,0.51,100.0,100.0
+222,latent_222,5573,0.011146,0.009318721,3.9456217,Attention to the position of medical devices in imaging.,"The highly activated examples focus on radiological findings that mention the precise positioning and changes in medical devices like catheters, pacemakers, or endotracheal tubes, especially noting their positions and any positional changes. These examples emphasize the continued assessment and documentation of medical hardware positions verified through imaging comparisons.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6349178565177165,0.635,0.6391752577319587,0.62,100.0,100.0
+223,latent_223,8749,0.017498,0.015601503,6.9821043,Prompt seeks comparison with prior images but often lacks specified prior reference.,"Examples with high activation levels include indications to compare current images with prior ones, frequently featuring specific instructions or focus on certain considerations such as evaluating unrelated symptoms or conditions. These examples often do not contain or clearly specify a prior reference despite implying a need for comparative analysis, creating a notable pattern of incomplete or unspecified comparisons.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+224,latent_224,10785,0.02157,0.010162219,5.2630606,Findings unchanged in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve a focus on comparing specific findings to prior images without indicating a significant change from the previous state. They often mention stability, unchanged findings, or same appearances as prior evaluations, highlighting comparisons where no new pathological changes are reported.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4558077791052701,0.4824120603015075,0.4642857142857143,0.2626262626262626,99.0,100.0
+225,latent_225,39584,0.079168,0.037450112,3.9391963,"References to interventional devices (e.g., tubes, lines) in imaging descriptions.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to interventional devices such as lines or tubes, particularly the description of their position, changes, or stability in sequential imaging studies. This indicates a possible pattern focus on interventional or supportive devices in radiological assessments.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.6,0.45,100.0,100.0
+226,latent_226,3122,0.006244,0.012584835,7.261428,"Analysis of current imaging with comparison to prior, focusing on specific clinical histories.","The highly activated examples focus on analyzing new chest radiographs in light of previous imaging, specifically referring to studies where medical histories like COPD, pleural effusion, or cardiovascular issues could be relevant. These comparisons to prior exams, particularly where the medical indication is discussed, are crucial in deciding activation and concern clinical evaluation over standard descriptive imaging findings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4294672457659788,0.445,0.4586466165413533,0.61,100.0,100.0
+227,latent_227,5529,0.011058,0.012933398,3.8863997,Presence of '<image>' framed with brackets like '[[<image>]]'.,"The use of brackets around '<image>' indicates a pattern where the specific prompts request completion or interaction references with these bracketed segments. This specific presentation of '[[<image>]]' is highly correlated with higher activation levels, showcasing its importance in identifying completion or focus areas within prompts.",0.84,0.84,0.84,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,100.0,100.0
+228,latent_228,2106,0.004212,0.0061242725,5.1250525,Use of explicit comparison to prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The pattern being analyzed involves an explicit comparison of findings from current imaging to prior studies, showcasing changes or stability over time. This is evident where reports include detailed assessments such as resolution, persistence, increase, or decrease of specific findings like opacification or effusions, consistent with radiological practice of monitoring through comparison.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.424985624640616,0.425,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,100.0
+229,latent_229,3666,0.007332,0.008227812,3.5653043,Detailed multi-view comparison focusing on cardiomediastinal or lung findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference specific details about the cardiomediastinal silhouette in comparison with prior imaging or other structures, or they provide detailed multi-view findings such as ap, lateral, and previous frontal view. They all describe details like unchanged conditions or new developments in comparison to the former state, particularly focusing on specific organs or conditions including the heart, lungs, or specialized medical devices.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+230,latent_230,130864,0.261728,0.1996533,5.2957335,Stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging studies. The reports often describe unchanged pathologies or stable medical devices, indicating that the pattern involves focusing on stability or lack of significant change in radiological findings over multiple studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5505392716660322,0.5527638190954773,0.5647058823529412,0.48,100.0,99.0
+231,latent_231,35122,0.070244,0.032517403,3.5670605,Stable findings or improvements when compared to prior images.,"Examples with activation suggest examination reports that describe changes in imaging findings over time, either unchanged or unremarkable, indicating stability. This involves noting either unchanged findings or improvements without new acute findings, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'persistent', 'similar', especially in the presence of prior comparison studies.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4883720930232558,0.42,100.0,100.0
+232,latent_232,8305,0.01661,0.013058829,4.6900992,Detailed comparison to prior images with clear descriptions of changed or stable findings.,"The highly activated samples consistently provide a detailed comparison with prior images alongside current findings, emphasizing changes or stability in specific pathological findings. They describe imaging characteristics such as effusions, pleural effusions, opacities, or cardiomediastinal contours, often noting stability or minor changes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4108455646917185,0.425,0.391304347826087,0.27,100.0,100.0
+233,latent_233,6121,0.012242,0.012634777,6.87722,Comparison of current and prior imaging for stability or changes in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve analysis of current radiology images, particularly chest images, compared to previous imaging studies. There is a strong emphasis on identifying changes or stability in medical conditions by comparing two or more sets of images, often noting findings such as consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, and mediastinal contour changes.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4966887417218543,0.75,100.0,100.0
+234,latent_234,9529,0.019058,0.010298041,5.705995,Stable findings or slight changes compared to prior imaging.,"There is an emphasis on slight changes or stability in findings, where changes are minimal or explicitly noted as unchanged. The reports also frequently reference the interval comparison of current and previous radiographs, emphasizing consistent findings over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.4183673469387755,0.4939759036144578,83.0,117.0
+235,latent_235,5223,0.010446,0.006436446,5.1620016,Mentions of cardiomediastinal or hilar contours/silhouettes.,"Examples with high activation frequently involve direct references to the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours or silhouettes, regardless of additional findings. This specific emphasis suggests a potentially significant detail that the model is attuned to.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,100.0,100.0
+236,latent_236,5782,0.011564,0.013200007,5.470257,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes, which suggests a focus on the aspect of the cardiomediastinal region being unremarkable when evaluating the radiological findings, even when other pathologies might be considered. These examples use language that emphasizes the normality or unchanged status of this area, leading to a higher activation level.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6915998887737304,0.695,0.6611570247933884,0.8,100.0,100.0
+237,latent_237,6544,0.013088,0.01718251,6.694856,Presence of findings despite low lung volumes.,"These examples indicate findings in comparison to prior images, sometimes highlighting progression or stability of findings. Those with high activation levels imply findings despite low lung volumes, such as atelectasis or opacities, which are common issues that can still be assessed even when there is limited volume to assess due to patient positioning or technique.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3743148212519051,0.415,0.3265306122448979,0.16,100.0,100.0
+238,latent_238,182584,0.365168,0.321106,7.9106092,Comparisons of cardiomediastinal structures post-intervention.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to focus on changes or comparisons involving cardiomediastinal structures after medical interventions or surgeries. This pattern emphasizes the relevance of tracking alterations in the thoracic area, particularly following procedures like central line placement, thoracentesis, chest tube insertion or management of pulmonary edema.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,100.0,100.0
+239,latent_239,5060,0.01012,0.013805186,4.125155,Emphasis on the need to compare current and prior images.,"These examples emphasize the necessity of comparing current imaging with prior images, including specific requests for providing a description of changes. It signifies the importance of comparative analysis in assessing the progression or resolution of medical conditions through imaging.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+240,latent_240,3029,0.006058,0.0074805375,5.1371,Direct interpretation or analysis of imaging findings without explicit prior comparison.,"The highly activated examples describe findings in the context of providing assistance regarding the interpretation or analysis based on the latest images in radiology reports, typically involving significant descriptors like recommendations, interpretations, or conveying specific details about lines/tubes/other devices, while frequently lacking comparison or prior details. They often feature detailed observations likely to guide clinical or procedural decision making.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4030813906590303,0.445,0.3829787234042553,0.18,100.0,100.0
+241,latent_241,5443,0.010886,0.011094162,4.9319158,Comparison of tubes/lines with previous radiograph.,"Examples show usage of the phrase 'As compared to the previous radiograph', indicating direct comparison with a prior imaging study, while focusing on tubes and lines such as endotracheal, nasogastric tubes, or PICC lines. This pattern is consistent in radiological assessments to determine stability or changes post-intervention.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+242,latent_242,10327,0.020654,0.020010298,3.7230034,Comparison with prior imaging findings.,Higher activations are associated with examples where medical imaging descriptions examine the findings in comparison with previous images. This pattern strongly indicates that examples which offer a descriptive comparison predicated on prior imaging are crucial to the model's intended pattern.,0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+243,latent_243,5612,0.011224,0.0128521975,7.9958286,Descriptions of medical devices or tubes and their positions.,"Samples with higher activation levels describe specific medical devices or tubes and their positions, indicating that the model focuses on reports mentioning particular items like catheters, tubes, or stents and their placement or adjustment over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+244,latent_244,5468,0.010936,0.014385433,5.0725584,Incomplete or corrupted text in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation frequently have missed, incomplete, or fragmented sentences and words that have been cut off, suggesting a pattern related to incomplete or corrupted text in reports.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3311036789297659,0.495,0.4974874371859296,0.99,100.0,100.0
+245,latent_245,4714,0.009428,0.0062846816,3.9003677,No prior imaging available for comparison.,"The pattern focuses on the absence of available prior imaging for comparison despite the format asking for a comparison. This is explicitly stated in the examples by noting 'No prior exams for comparison', 'Comparison: None', or similar phrases indicating no previous images were available to compare with the current study.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4101244101244101,0.45,0.3958333333333333,0.19,100.0,100.0
+246,latent_246,22339,0.044678,0.04897579,5.271127,Detailed comparison of chest images focusing on pulmonary and cardiac findings.,"Higher activation is associated with imaging reports that focus on detailed examination of frontal and lateral chest images, especially in the context of evaluating for pneumonia, pleural effusions, or other specific abnormalities. These reports often compare current to prior images, emphasizing changes in pulmonary and cardiac features.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5756711624919717,0.5829145728643216,0.5634920634920635,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+247,latent_247,2061,0.004122,0.008761973,7.14598,Comparison of current image findings with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation involve the description of current imaging findings directly compared to prior imaging. The comparison of current images with previous ones allows tracking of progress, stability, or change of pathologies, which is a critical aspect of radiology interpretation.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3998575933272302,0.41,0.4285714285714285,0.54,100.0,100.0
+248,latent_248,5162,0.010324,0.009481848,4.573206,Comparison between current and prior imaging in provided radiological context.,"These examples consistently reference the comparison between the current and prior images within the context of radiological assessments. This pattern involves describing findings and making comparisons across different imaging studies, often noting the presence of both current and prior images for evaluation.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5063291139240507,0.8,100.0,100.0
+249,latent_249,13215,0.02643,0.023130758,10.40177,Comparison of current images with prior ones to detect changes.,"Examples with higher activations demand comparisons between current images and previous images, especially when a change or interval finding is involved. The model activates significantly when asked to identify changes in conditions or abnormalities between sequential images, showing reliance on historical data for context in medical imaging.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.4457831325301205,0.925,80.0,120.0
+250,latent_250,1827,0.003654,0.0046165884,5.695937,Comparative analysis of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions of current radiological findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, especially using well-defined imaging techniques regardless of the presence of explicit prior reports. These are indicative of routine procedures to assess changes over time, which is a key aspect of radiological investigations.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.4384615384615384,0.57,100.0,100.0
+251,latent_251,2838,0.005676,0.007193296,4.657634,Instructions emphasizing comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation mention comparing current imaging to previous imaging or refer to a prior report, indicating a focus on describing and comparing changes across studies. This suggests that the pattern recognized by the model is related to instruction sets that task the assistant with making comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,100.0,100.0
+252,latent_252,2900,0.0058,0.008944894,4.8219943,Complex scenarios or specific anatomical findings with changes noted across images.,"The samples with higher activation levels involve more detailed findings and complex scenarios, often related to changes identified from one image to the next. These cases typically have a more extensive list of findings or present with specific medical or anatomical considerations, like multiple comparisons or unusual paths.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+253,latent_253,3351,0.006702,0.010419335,6.4027658,"Stable findings from comparison with prior images, emphasizing unchanged positioning or conditions.","The activation is high for examples involving comparisons with prior imaging studies where unchanged or stable findings are noted. These reports also often include technical details or clinical context, such as tube placements or cardiac device positions, stressing stability and lack of clinically significant changes over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4153846153846154,0.27,100.0,100.0
+254,latent_254,2502,0.005004,0.0128387865,7.917706,Explicit mention of a 'PRIOR REPORT' for comparative analysis.,"The high activation examples highlight the presence of a 'PRIOR REPORT' being referenced explicitly, indicating situations where there is an emphasis on comparisons or evaluations with previous imaging studies. This explicit mention differs from others where no such reference is present, focusing instead on newer information or findings.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4027391617753063,0.42,0.4402985074626865,0.59,100.0,100.0
+255,latent_255,14133,0.028266,0.017846629,5.4170594,Radiological comparison with previous imaging findings.,The examples with higher activation levels either directly describe findings in radiology studies with explicit comparison to prior imaging or request such a comparison. This pattern of comparison often accompanies an evaluation for consistent or unchanged conditions versus new pathological developments.,0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3464583665444498,0.545,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+256,latent_256,25440,0.05088,0.038841765,6.0644236,Presence or repositioning of tubes/lines in radiographic evaluations.,"Examples with higher activation include specific mentions of anatomical tubes, endotracheal, nasogastric or related lines, with details of their placing or changes such as repositioning or implementation between radiographic studies. This pattern reflects a focus on evaluating and reporting medical device placement and adjustments.",0.5875420875420876,0.5918367346938775,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4893071000855432,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+257,latent_257,5468,0.010936,0.009485294,3.259026,Comparison between current and prior images for changes.,High activation levels are seen in examples where the task involves comparing current imaging findings with prior ones to assess for changes. This pattern focuses on identifying any notable changes in radiological features over time through systematic comparison.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,100.0
+258,latent_258,17779,0.035558,0.0237524,3.9060013,Evaluation of imaging based on comparison to prior images for changes or stability.,"These examples involve current images and provide a description comparing findings to prior images. The primary focus is on identifying any existing changes or consistency, especially in scenarios where comparisons to previous images establish whether conditions have changed over time. The core pattern discernible is the reliance on identifying and summarizing both improvements or deteriorations in the condition based on previous imaging reports.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4271932469098582,0.43,0.4385964912280701,0.5,100.0,100.0
+259,latent_259,9293,0.018586,0.025800731,10.941256,Focus on evaluation of interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparing current findings with prior images, using terms like 'interval', 'change', 'compared to previous', 'since prior exam', and other similar comparison phrases. The presence of these terms indicates the focus is on assessing changes from prior findings, which the model recognizes highly.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.5594405594405595,0.8,100.0,100.0
+260,latent_260,5559,0.011118,0.010709545,5.7717643,"Focus on interval changes in opacities, effusions, or devices.","Analysis of the examples reveals an emphasis on stable findings or changes in opacities, effusions, or devices upon comparison with previous imaging. The focus is on identifying changes such as ""unchanged device positioning,"" ""no new effusions,"" or ""unchanged cardiac contours.""",0.67003367003367,0.673469387755102,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.57,0.57,0.57,0.57,100.0,100.0
+261,latent_261,5260,0.01052,0.011447006,5.4828973,Comparison with prior imaging showing unchanged or minimally changed findings.,"These examples show a pattern of referencing previous imaging studies when describing findings, especially noting unchanged conditions or subtle differences compared to prior examinations. The reports include comparison with studies from specific dates or times.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+262,latent_262,5592,0.011184,0.011308935,3.6770058,Descriptions in comparison to prior images.,"The model shows high activation levels when examples involve providing descriptions or comparisons of radiological findings to prior images, even if the focus is not on new findings. This pattern involves comparing changes or stability in imaging findings over time, typically seen as routine practice in radiology analyses for patient monitoring.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+263,latent_263,44317,0.088634,0.038295086,2.6217968,"Detailed comparison with previous imaging, noting changes in condition.","The examples with high activation levels frequently discuss findings in terms of their stability or changes over time by referencing previous images. They often mention unchanged structures, stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes, or the progression or resolution of conditions since the last examination, as well as provide detailed comparisons with prior findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6142187930559382,0.615,0.6055045871559633,0.66,100.0,100.0
+264,latent_264,28841,0.057682,0.028381437,2.5932798,Comparison with prior studies showing interval changes or stability.,"The prominent pattern observed in high-activation examples is the presence of explicit comparisons to prior studies and the detailing of interval or persistent changes indicating stability or worsening of specific findings. This includes descriptions such as 'unchanged,' 'persistent,' or 'interval change' related to features like lung opacities or aortic tortuosity.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5577777777777778,0.5577889447236181,0.5555555555555556,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+265,latent_265,4788,0.009576,0.009974702,4.7882385,Reports detailing study comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with high activations involve a format where a comparison with prior imaging is explicitly mentioned or implied, followed by changes or lack thereof in the findings. This includes phrases like ""in comparison with the prior image"" or changes being described relative to a previous state, often using terms such as ""unchanged,"" ""increased,"" or ""decreased,"" indicating a change in state over time.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+266,latent_266,5125,0.01025,0.008192917,4.9022408,Interval changes and comparison with prior image studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of interval changes or comparisons to previous studies, emphasizing changes in conditions. Specific comparisons and noting changes in patient status are highlighted in these samples, suggesting that such comparative analysis is indicative of the pattern.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.532051282051282,0.83,100.0,100.0
+267,latent_267,7905,0.01581,0.011218515,3.8275645,Significant change in findings compared to prior study.,"The high activation examples feature significant or notable differences in findings that explicitly indicate changes or anomalies compared to previous studies. They include phrases like 'continued enlargement', 'worsened', 'removal', or explicit explanations of interval changes that highlight a shift from a prior baseline.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,100.0,100.0
+268,latent_268,16528,0.033056,0.02682803,7.1950917,Assessment of changes or stability in lung conditions or devices compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions comparing current and prior images, which often include altered lung conditions or device placements that indicate potential changes in patient health status, while not limiting to mere assessment of consistencies with prior reports.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+269,latent_269,8077,0.016154,0.0119954925,6.464433,Comparisons with prior images indicating stable findings or minor changes.,"Instances with high activations consistently describe chest radiographs with an acknowledgment of comparison to prior images or analyses of previous studies, yet lack specific or substantial findings from the current study. These descriptions maintain a focus on relative changes since prior evaluations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5411764705882353,0.46,100.0,100.0
+270,latent_270,5418,0.010836,0.0103180185,4.8069787,Comparison of current to prior chest images for changes in lung pathology.,"These examples involve interpreting radiology findings in comparison to prior images, particularly focusing on lung views. This comparison is often done to track changes or stability in the condition, whether it's post-procedure changes, an evaluation for pneumonia, pneumothorax, or other lung pathologies.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+271,latent_271,39979,0.079958,0.033683654,2.2414823,Analysis of findings comparing current and prior images.,"These examples emphasize descriptions of both current images and specific direct comparisons to prior images. The pattern includes interpreting changes or stability of findings between the present and previous studies, identified by phrases noting interval changes or comparisons with priors, typically denoting alterations in clinical conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+272,latent_272,7448,0.014896,0.0145622995,7.6631303,Emphasis on no relevant change in comparison to prior radiographs.,The examples showing high activation levels consistently provide a comparison with a previous radiograph and note no relevant change or interval change in the findings. This pattern emphasizes a stable or unchanged condition across serial imaging studies.,0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+273,latent_273,15915,0.03183,0.016341394,6.881463,Stable findings or unchanged condition compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations involved clear statement of an unchanged condition or direct comparison that highlights stability or lack of significant change with prior imaging, often relating to pathology or devices.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.2247191011235955,0.3508771929824561,57.0,143.0
+274,latent_274,3030,0.00606,0.006393048,4.2621946,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in imaging comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels typically focus on reports that indicate clear lung fields, normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, and no pleural effusion, often emphasizing a normal or unremarkable status despite a reason for imaging comparison or health concern.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,100.0,100.0
+275,latent_275,3972,0.007944,0.0151940035,3.9192622,Task requires comparison of current and prior radiology images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where the provided task is to compare current radiology images with prior images, indicating the importance of identifying changes or lack thereof over time in the imaging process. This indicates a pattern of monitoring stability or progression of findings across multiple imaging studies.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4924722336487042,0.5326633165829145,0.5192307692307693,0.8181818181818182,99.0,100.0
+276,latent_276,5782,0.011564,0.010938758,7.271351,Comparison to prior imaging in context of specific medical indication.,"This set of examples shows high activation when there is a clear medical history or indication for the imaging study, particularly when conditions are mentioned that require careful monitoring for change over time as seen in the descriptions of radiological changes in comparison to past studies.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+277,latent_277,20893,0.041786,0.025882501,4.231665,Specific comparison of findings to prior imaging studies.,"Instances with low activation generally lack clear or direct language describing findings in comparison to prior imaging. The highly activated examples feature specific changes or stability explicitly compared to prior imaging, indicating the key pattern identified for high activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+278,latent_278,5535,0.01107,0.009608096,6.224318,Providing findings of a current examination without an explicit comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples describing findings compared with those without prior imaging available or explicit comparisons tend to have lower activation levels. The context of findings being described relative to prior imaging, especially when explicit comparisons are lacking, is central to the pattern dictating higher activation levels.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5925925925925926,0.32,100.0,100.0
+279,latent_279,3805,0.00761,0.0066915,4.847315,"Frontal and lateral chest images compared to prior, focused on thoracic findings.","The examples with high activation levels feature the acquisition of frontal and lateral images, comparison with past imaging, and a description of findings related to lung or cardiac conditions. They often describe radiological features like cardiac silhouettes, thoracic structures, lung volumes, or other notable pathology. This pattern connects to standard diagnostic practices using comparative imaging to determine stability or progression.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+280,latent_280,2866,0.005732,0.008941851,5.3642216,Instruction to provide a comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include instructions to provide a detailed comparison of radiological findings between current and prior imaging studies, often with placeholders for prior information or requiring detailed comparison analysis. This suggests an emphasis on generating comparative analysis or instruction for reporting based on prior image references.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,0.5555555555555556,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5093580308167259,0.555,0.5341614906832298,0.86,100.0,100.0
+281,latent_281,4753,0.009506,0.010488639,5.746564,Interval changes compared to prior imaging in significant clinical scenarios.,"Examples with higher activation levels often indicate scenarios where the current radiology examination is directly compared to previous studies, specifically showing significant or explicitly notable interval change, especially in cases with complex patient history or conditions needing monitoring.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5155203895313452,0.5175879396984925,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,99.0
+282,latent_282,4115,0.00823,0.012086317,6.5591197,Comparison with prior images showing stable findings or accurate acute assessments.,The high activation levels correspond to entries where the PA and lateral chest radiographs are accurately depicted with descriptions comparing current and prior findings or the current findings thoroughly without new pathologies.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+283,latent_283,133308,0.266616,0.18472397,7.2312436,Comparison with prior imaging indicating stable or unchanged findings.,"The examples show analyses where radiographic findings are discussed with reference to previous images, often identifying stable, unchanged findings or specific characteristics in the context of a patient's medical history or condition. Such patterns of comparison are typical in radiology to monitor progression or stability of medical conditions.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5967741935483871,0.37,100.0,100.0
+284,latent_284,4955,0.00991,0.010129678,4.0041704,Evaluation for pneumonia or lung consolidation presence.,"These examples refer to the evaluation for the presence of pneumonia, with specific noting of whether lung opacities or consolidations exist, typically indicating detailed observation of the lung fields for signs of infection.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4411984439807301,0.4522613065326633,0.4305555555555556,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+285,latent_285,19497,0.038994,0.018967977,3.6665113,Evaluation and comparison of images against prior radiographs in reports.,"The pattern involves directives for providing radiological findings descriptions that evaluate and compare current images against previous or prior images, a standard practice in radiology to monitor changes over time. Instructions explicitly request this in relation to '<image>' and its prior iterations, a linguistic pattern frequently appearing in the prompts.",0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+286,latent_286,17148,0.034296,0.022167994,5.4675484,Focus on interval changes or stability in findings on comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus specifically on comparisons to prior imaging studies and highlight changes or stability in clinical findings, such as the change in the position of medical devices or stability of medical conditions like atelectasis or pleural effusions. The emphasis is on descriptive changes regarding radiographic findings over time rather than initial findings or unrelated issues.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+287,latent_287,5228,0.010456,0.011564414,8.572215,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images to prior frontal image.,"Prompts with high activation levels frequently involve instructions to compare current to previous images, utilizing both current frontal and lateral images for assessment while comparing them to prior frontal images specifically. This suggests a pattern that emphasizes both the use of multiple imaging views for comprehensive current assessment and explicit comparison to past similar frontal images to detect any changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4683544303797468,0.37,100.0,100.0
+288,latent_288,3680,0.00736,0.005479957,4.8268967,Evaluation and positioning of medical tubes in chest radiographs.,"These examples consistently involve evaluating the positioning of medical devices such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, often with a recommendation regarding their positioning in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina or diaphragm.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6539532084555781,0.655,0.6741573033707865,0.6,100.0,100.0
+289,latent_289,5924,0.011848,0.015132371,5.7394977,Interval changes in medical devices or anatomy in follow-up imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels showcase changes or intervals in medical devices like catheters or tubes, or changes in anatomical structures, as detailed in repeated follow-ups. Descriptions frequently include comparisons with previous images, emphasizing observed changes or stability, particularly in terms of medical equipment or anatomical status.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5620370370370371,0.5656565656565656,0.5875,0.47,100.0,98.0
+290,latent_290,6615,0.01323,0.010646581,6.3081317,Clear lungs and unremarkable mediastinal contours.,"Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions of clear lungs and unremarkable mediastinal and cardiomediastinal contours. The reports emphasize the absence of abnormal findings, a tone often used in normal or stable examinations. This pattern aligns with standard radiological reports where the focus is on ruling out acute changes or abnormalities compared to prior images.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6613300492610837,0.67,0.75,0.51,100.0,100.0
+291,latent_291,7500,0.015,0.010485664,4.556478,Focus on line/tube positioning and anatomical landmark referencing.,"In the provided examples, high activation occurs in scenarios where proper positioning, or the presence/placement of medical tubes and lines like endotracheal tubes, is particularly highlighted and discussed. Such examples emphasize tube positions relative to specific anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina, SVC). The pattern seems less linked to conditions or general observations and more to technical positioning or device placement.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.64,0.48,100.0,100.0
+292,latent_292,3806,0.007612,0.00928296,5.3739533,Questions or evaluations regarding pneumothorax or other acute conditions relative to imaging.,"Examples with high activation often mention specific findings or processes and ask whether there is evidence, comparison, or an evaluation related to a pneumothorax or other acute conditions. This pattern reflects an evaluative context in clinical imaging, looking for explicit changes or confirmations of specific conditions from imaging data.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.5739130434782609,0.66,100.0,100.0
+293,latent_293,33647,0.067294,0.047474634,5.4086876,Detailed comparison with prior images showing stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently show changes or stability in features observed in current imaging when compared to prior studies. They include specific descriptions of stability or interval changes, particularly related to the presence or absence of pathology or medical devices.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.5669291338582677,0.72,100.0,100.0
+294,latent_294,1282,0.002564,0.004328565,6.46941,Mild interstitial edema noted in lung imaging.,"Highly activated examples focus on detailed descriptions of interstitial patterns, often indicative of edema or chronic interstitial disease. These descriptions include the term 'mild interstitial edema', highlighting mild interstitial changes in the lungs usually associated with edema. These findings are recurrently observed across different examples.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.71875,0.73,0.8833333333333333,0.53,100.0,100.0
+295,latent_295,3264,0.006528,0.009522867,7.897785,Precise positioning of medical devices or tubes in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels contain explicit positional measurements or descriptions related to tubes, catheters, or medical devices like 'above the carina' or specific centimeters from a point like '3 cm above the carina', indicating that the activation pattern is associated with radiology report sections that detail the precise positioning of such medical devices.",0.6379834854411126,0.6530612244897959,0.7333333333333333,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.515625,0.33,100.0,100.0
+296,latent_296,3910,0.00782,0.012763549,4.1518965,Changes in radiographic findings after surgical interventions or medical procedures.,"Examples with high activation scores consistently include findings based on comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting ""status post"" surgical procedures or interventions like sternotomy, port placement, or catheterization. The pattern involves evaluating changes following surgical or medical interventions and their impact on chest radiographs.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4308359264874065,0.465,0.4313725490196078,0.22,100.0,100.0
+297,latent_297,3973,0.007946,0.011800877,4.702702,Stable or unchanged findings emphasized alongside comparison to prior images.,"Instances with high activation levels feature detailed radiologic descriptions highlighting unchanged or stable findings, often mentioning procedural comparisons in terms of views obtained or detailed follow-ups from prior examinations. The language specifically relates the current observations to earlier findings, emphasizing stability or unchanged status over time, which is consistent in the highly activated examples.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3879033094719369,0.41,0.3548387096774194,0.22,100.0,100.0
+298,latent_298,33133,0.066266,0.04151246,7.477959,Explicit comparison of findings across multiple time points.,"Examples with significant activation levels include language specifically describing changes between current imaging findings and prior reports - indicators such as interval changes, stability, or newly emergent findings compared to previous examinations. These references explicitly draw conclusions by comparing distinct time points, identifying evolution or stability of pathology, thereby capturing the pattern.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4184397163120567,0.7195121951219512,82.0,118.0
+299,latent_299,13777,0.027554,0.016339127,5.44076,Stable mild to moderate cardiomegaly despite conditions observed.,"The pattern revolves around detailed descriptions of mild or moderate cardiomegaly, with constant references to the size of the cardiac silhouette remaining stable despite changes or conditions being evaluated. Activation levels indicate the degree to which descriptions focus on heart size status in stable or repeated conditions found.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.5641025641025641,0.22,100.0,100.0
+300,latent_300,3823,0.007646,0.0099620195,4.1732326,Comparative analysis with prior images highlighting specific changes or stabilities.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate radiological description prompts that directly reference or imply comparison with a prior image, alongside mentioning specific findings or changes (such as device removal or maintained abnormalities). This pattern provides updates or changes relative to past exams, key to assessing patient progress or stability.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.424985624640616,0.425,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,100.0
+301,latent_301,5091,0.010182,0.010042944,6.00911,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation refer to the integration of findings from prior imaging reports, emphasizing the process of comparison to evaluate changes or stability in conditions. This involves using descriptions like 'comparison made to prior study', 'compared to', or explicit references to changes since prior imaging.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+302,latent_302,3619,0.007238,0.011594782,4.8655243,Descriptions based on current frontal and lateral images.,"The highest activation examples consistently reference the updating of descriptions based on both current frontal and lateral images, indicating that this pattern heavily features in cases where assessments rely on these two perspectives for comparison with prior studies, emphasizing the role of comprehensive imaging.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4880952380952381,0.57,0.5388888888888889,0.97,100.0,100.0
+303,latent_303,4978,0.009956,0.015211985,4.4107943,Comparison of multi-view radiographic images to prior images.,"These examples consistently involve comparing images using explicit mentions of different views or types of images (frontal and lateral) and referencing prior images in a structured way, juxtaposing them against current findings. This repetitive structure highlights an observational pattern that emphasizes consistent comparison of multi-view imaging studies or explicitly requested prior images.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.44,0.55,100.0,100.0
+304,latent_304,3161,0.006322,0.013531712,7.3771667,Comparison findings provided based on prior imaging.,"These highly activated examples emphasize comparison with prior images and require providing a detailed analysis of current imaging in relation to a previous radiograph that is specified. The queries consistently demand a description based on a visual assessment, often indicating whether changes in findings are present or absent compared to prior images.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4392523364485981,0.47,100.0,100.0
+305,latent_305,3571,0.007142,0.0073511563,9.091491,Explicit comparison with prior image findings using both current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involved the presence of both a current and prior image, along with descriptions that explicitly compare findings between these images. This suggests that the pattern focuses on the explicit mentioning and usage of prior image comparisons to assess changes or stability in findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+306,latent_306,3936,0.007872,0.007269098,7.4025474,"Radiological interval changes compared to prior images, considering positioning and technique.","The most representative examples consistently describe radiological changes by comparing the current image with previous imaging. They highlight interval changes, improvements, or stability in findings primarily related to pulmonary or mediastinal anomalies. Differences in technique, patient positioning, or clinical context are acknowledged as potential influencing factors. Low activations lack these detailed comparisons or feature explicit stability in findings without interval change.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+307,latent_307,4932,0.009864,0.009781286,5.40613,Comparison of medical lines or devices positioning in chest imaging.,"Prompts show a consistent focus on changes in medical lines or devices, such as catheters or tubes, in the chest X-ray findings. The reports detail positioning, advancement, or retraction of these devices in comparison with prior imaging, highlighting their clinical relevance in patient management.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.6071428571428571,0.51,100.0,100.0
+308,latent_308,6859,0.013718,0.009930332,2.6296577,Instructions to compare current and prior images and provide a report.,"The high activation examples include directions for comparing current and prior imaging, often involving recommendations to provide descriptions or interpretations based on this comparison, highlighting a structured workflow requiring a detailed comparison as a response action.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.45368492224476,0.495,0.4967741935483871,0.77,100.0,100.0
+309,latent_309,2936,0.005872,0.008287532,6.3541145,Explicit comparison of current and prior images with clinical context.,"All examples with high activation levels involve the explicit provision of 'current' and 'prior' images for direct visual comparison in a radiological evaluation. This generally results in a focus on identifying and comparing changes or consistencies across different examinations, often central to the clinical task of identifying potential changes in patient condition.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4126666493411991,0.435,0.4532374100719424,0.63,100.0,100.0
+310,latent_310,3932,0.007864,0.011607117,6.8428426,Assessment of complex chest conditions using frontal and lateral views.,"This pattern focuses on the thorough evaluation of chest conditions using both frontal and lateral views, detailing medical history and specific conditions to assess such as pneumonia, using various PA, AP, and lateral chest x-ray techniques. The pattern includes detailed examination for complex medical histories requiring in-depth diagnosis via multiple imaging angles.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+311,latent_311,9689,0.019378,0.016826415,5.9064507,Focus on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is requests or indications for comparing the current imaging findings to prior studies. High activation occurs when the instructions involve specifically describing changes over time or assessing interval changes, particularly when these are explicitly noted in the prompt or findings.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+312,latent_312,5349,0.010698,0.0086779,5.1374063,Low lung volumes with atelectasis.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention low lung volumes accompanied by atelectasis, suggesting the model focuses on these two factors combined rather than individually. Several examples have low lung volumes also contributing to accentuated cardiac silhouette or bronchovascular crowding. Examples without these descriptors generally receive lower activations, supporting the pattern recognition focused on these features.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,100.0,100.0
+313,latent_313,3354,0.006708,0.018993268,6.548005,Assessment of stability or changes in imaging relative to previous studies.,"This set of examples focuses on the comparison with prior imaging to assess either changes or stability over time. Higher activation levels are noted with descriptions emphasizing 'compared to previous' findings, while examples that do not specify comparative outcomes show lower activation.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+314,latent_314,5782,0.011564,0.0079599675,6.352241,Comparison of current and prior images showing stability or improvement without new findings.,"Examples with higher activations focus on the detailed comparison between the current and prior images, specifically emphasizing improvements or changes in conditions without new findings, such as resolution or stability of previously noted abnormalities, or the unchanged status of tubes and lines, indicating the importance of stability and comparison language in the pattern.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5205479452054794,0.38,100.0,100.0
+315,latent_315,13696,0.027392,0.020791499,2.9967265,"Provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on technical details and formats.","The examples with high activation levels often involve requests to describe findings in comparison to prior images and include detailed input on image formats (frontal, lateral) and prior image indications, emphasizing comparison descriptions and technical details.",0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.5161290322580645,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+316,latent_316,17695,0.03539,0.01917066,6.2884283,"Comparison with prior images, specifically noting stability or changes in findings.","The examples with higher activations consistently include a comparison with a prior image or mention changes over time, focusing on stability and interval changes of identified issues such as effusions, opacities, or consolidation. This pattern is integral to noting the change or stability of radiological findings, demonstrating the model's responsiveness to the aspect of temporal comparison and change tracking in imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.3953488372093023,0.6710526315789473,76.0,124.0
+317,latent_317,3479,0.006958,0.009426295,5.5611324,Detection of interval change in pathology or device position.,"The samples with high activation levels describe radiological findings that center around evaluating changes over time and making comparisons between latest and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on areas of interest such as lung opacities, pleural effusions, or medical device placements.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5774647887323944,0.41,100.0,100.0
+318,latent_318,5500,0.011,0.015010266,7.1703696,Radiological comparison to prior images with stable or changing conditions.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe scenarios where radiological comparisons are implied or made between current and prior studies. This suggests a pattern focused on the need for comparison, especially in scenarios where monitoring over time is critical, likely indicated by phrases like 'compared to prior' in the description.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+319,latent_319,3699,0.007398,0.009560133,9.778262,Description of findings with emphasis on comparison to prior images.,The highly activated examples consistently include references to radiological comparisons with prior images and often highlight specific changes or stability in findings over time. This suggests the model is activating on reports that emphasize comparative assessment of current and previous imaging studies.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4615384615384615,0.6,100.0,100.0
+320,latent_320,6513,0.013026,0.011617966,3.8024483,Comparison to prior images without detailed description.,"Examples with higher activation levels specifically contain requests to describe current findings in comparison to prior images even when full comparison details are not explicitly provided, demonstrating how the system prioritizes explicit constraints in addressing the task.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5185483870967742,0.5477386934673367,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,99.0
+321,latent_321,72236,0.144472,0.08820164,4.546007,Interval changes or positions of tubes/catheters in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern is characterized by references to changes over time in radiological findings, specifically noting positions, intervals, or progressions concerning catheters, tubes, pleural effusions, and heart size relative to prior examinations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.41,100.0,100.0
+322,latent_322,19769,0.039538,0.017854875,4.1023335,Descriptive changes in lung pathology relative to prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of changes in lung conditions, such as opacities, fluid levels, or pulmonary consolidation, as noted in follow-up comparisons with prior imaging studies. This includes specific changes like the decrease or increase in size of lung opacities or effusions, reflecting careful monitoring of lung pathology evolution over time.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6868686868686869,0.69,0.6583333333333333,0.79,100.0,100.0
+323,latent_323,35782,0.071564,0.03945311,3.533167,Radiological findings associated with support devices like lines and tubes.,"The examples that show activation involve radiological findings accompanied by explicit references to support devices, such as lines and tubes, which relate directly to interventions or ongoing management. These reports note specific changes in the placement or status of these devices, indicating active monitoring of interventions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+324,latent_324,5230,0.01046,0.008887685,5.002029,Mild or moderate cardiomegaly with stable/unchanged findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions involving a combination of mild or moderate cardiomegaly (enlarged heart size) with stable or unchanged findings compared to previous images. This pattern highlights reports emphasizing stability or known conditions without acute changes, focusing on the heart size stability or known enlargement.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5146154675870995,0.55,0.6086956521739131,0.28,100.0,100.0
+325,latent_325,14021,0.028042,0.023464018,6.247025,Attention to changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize comparison with previous imaging studies, particularly in terms of stability or changes in pathology such as lung opacities, effusions, or devices. This pattern highlights the model's focus on continuity or change in medical imaging, using language that explicitly compares new findings to older ones.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+326,latent_326,4625,0.00925,0.00993158,5.7685533,Specific comparisons with prior images or studies.,"Examples with moderate to high activation often include direct comparisons with prior images or studies, highlighting changes, stability, or improvement. This analysis frequently involves evaluating continuity in presence or absence of pathologies, sometimes without providing additional context for the changes described.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+327,latent_327,2030,0.00406,0.007467271,7.0683002,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with clear lungs and no acute findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently demonstrate unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with well-expanded, clear lungs, and no evidence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. This indicates an emphasis on descriptions of normal cardiothoracic imaging findings.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7238331952499311,0.725,0.7586206896551724,0.66,100.0,100.0
+328,latent_328,18838,0.037676,0.023892898,3.9015286,Stability or unchanged status of findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples tend to highlight instances where there is a notable consistency in certain features between current and previous imaging, often with a focus on stability in specific areas like the cardiac silhouette or certain pathologies not progressing. The key phrases include the unchanged status of certain findings with comparison to prior images such as the heart being 'within normal limits', or specific pathologies showing no interval change.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5394736842105263,0.41,100.0,100.0
+329,latent_329,34394,0.068788,0.04197162,6.1771235,"Resolution, improvement, or stable findings in comparison with prior imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the resolution, improvement, or persistent stability of certain conditions upon comparison with prior imaging. The finding of unchanged or improved pathologies is a clear pattern seen in these radiological reports, making it important for identifying conditions that may need no urgent intervention.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6049901247531189,0.605,0.6039603960396039,0.61,100.0,100.0
+330,latent_330,5620,0.01124,0.01380559,4.6948004,Description of unchanged or stable findings relative to prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples consistently reference unchanged or stable findings relative to prior imaging, indicating no significant interval change. This pattern focuses on the stability and lack of progression or resolution in radiological findings, which is crucial in tracking chronic conditions or evaluating the effectiveness of interventions over time.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4705882352941176,0.4,100.0,100.0
+331,latent_331,8090,0.01618,0.015547942,7.370509,Radiological analysis often incorporates referencing earlier exams for comparison and image integration.,"Examples show either referenced earlier exams in findings and interpret integration, or findings adjusted based on earlier exam insights. Including dated earlier exams for inference allows reassessment accuracy.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,100.0,100.0
+332,latent_332,11182,0.022364,0.02983155,6.233072,Comparison of current and prior chest radiographs for new findings.,"These examples consistently refer to evaluating chest radiograph findings, often noting changes like pneumothorax, consolidation, or pleural effusion, in comparison to prior images. This specific task typically involves assessing acute changes or status post procedural effects in follow-up exams.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4591346153846154,0.46,0.4629629629629629,0.5,100.0,100.0
+333,latent_333,44393,0.088786,0.056382913,7.703652,Comparison showing stability or change in radiologic findings versus previous imaging.,"The representative examples focus on changes or stability observed on radiologic findings in comparison to previous imaging. This involves phrases indicating unchanged or changed size, position, or presence of features against historical images, particularly highlighting stability or progression of underlying issues.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.4615384615384615,0.6666666666666666,81.0,119.0
+334,latent_334,10322,0.020644,0.01392667,5.113678,Changes or comparisons in findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on changes or comparisons with prior imaging. Descriptions detail differences or similarities in findings over time or after interventions, using phrases like 'as compared to previous', 'since the prior study', 'interval removal', or 'provide a description of findings in comparison'. This language structure targets sequential analysis or progression based on prior images.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5203836930455635,0.565,0.5403726708074534,0.87,100.0,100.0
+335,latent_335,65065,0.13013,0.09706105,5.4620247,Highlighting absence of significant findings or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently note the absence of significant findings or emphasize normalcy in the radiological contexts provided, such as stating no new focal abnormalities or identifying stable aspects of the anatomy without changes from prior comparisons. These examples focus more on the procedure and technique, providing general reassurance when no concerning changes are present or comparisons are unavailable.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5863019995403356,0.595,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,100.0
+336,latent_336,5104,0.010208,0.013393714,6.605233,"Provision of findings comparing current images with prior, including frontal and lateral views.","The examples with high activation involve providing descriptions of radiology findings that require a direct comparison to prior imaging where a frontal and lateral view are specified. This specific task, of analyzing and comparing current and prior frontal and lateral images, seems characteristic of these cases.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,100.0
+337,latent_337,12100,0.0242,0.015464255,3.1746209,Findings or evaluations suggestive of pneumonia.,"The data points consistently showing high activation involve evaluating radiological findings in the context of pneumonia, particularly highlighting features like changes in opacities, consolidations, or other indicators within the lungs that are consistent with pneumonia. This pattern is evident as multiple references to right lower lobe consolidation or other similar findings suggestive of pneumonia are present in high-activation examples.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,100.0,100.0
+338,latent_338,5284,0.010568,0.012157742,3.818012,Comparative evaluation between current and prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples refer specifically to descriptions of images where findings are requested based on the current and prior frontal images provided in the prompt. These descriptions are indicative of a comparative evaluation with previous studies, highlighting changes or lack thereof in the findings.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.545442098633588,0.585,0.5534591194968553,0.88,100.0,100.0
+339,latent_339,4793,0.009586,0.02548663,7.8873405,Specification of both current and prior images for examination.,"Samples with high activations consistently include phrasing such as 'Given the current ... image' alongside multiple references to a 'prior image' or 'prior study', reflecting a pattern of specifying multiple sources for comparison and findings. These high activations highlight a focus on comprehensive analysis involving both current and prior imagery while lower activations either lack a detailed prior or involve fewer image references.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.50625,0.81,100.0,100.0
+340,latent_340,2377,0.004754,0.0050119665,5.6799097,Clear lungs and normal heart/mediastinal contours.,"The examples showing higher activation levels discuss lung findings, such as clear lungs or absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, while emphasizing normal heart and mediastinal contours. This pattern is reflective of normal or stable radiological findings in the context of pulmonary assessment.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6578099838969405,0.66,0.6904761904761905,0.58,100.0,100.0
+341,latent_341,10126,0.020252,0.015825504,5.061365,Monitoring or support device position with recommendations for adjustments.,"Examples showing descriptions of monitoring or support devices like endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, nasogastric tubes in specific positions (often with measurement in relation to anatomy like carina or SVC) and recommendations for their repositioning or adjustment. This pattern focuses on device management rather than pathologies.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4253384282709796,0.515,0.5714285714285714,0.12,100.0,100.0
+342,latent_342,2305,0.00461,0.0069254073,4.1635857,Includes both frontal and lateral imaging with detailed comparative analysis request.,"The pattern of activation indicates that studies using both current and prior frontal and lateral images accompanied by the request for a detailed description tend to show high activation. These examples emphasize detailed visual comparative study analysis, likely suggesting the presence of complex descriptions or more involved diagnostic evaluations.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6930946291560103,0.7,0.6538461538461539,0.85,100.0,100.0
+343,latent_343,4119,0.008238,0.010623132,4.817984,Interpretation of current images with reference to a prior report.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions for interpreting multiple images, including comparisons to prior images and often involve forming connections or making evaluations based on historical imaging reports, indicated by phrases like 'PRIOR_REPORT' or instructions to provide findings based on multiple images including 'prior' images.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+344,latent_344,12175,0.02435,0.015160483,5.568465,Describing the presence or unchanged position of medical devices compared to prior images.,"The frequent references to the positioning and status of tubes, lines, or implants in conjunction with past imaging comparisons indicates a focus on monitoring these devices rather than diagnosing or assessing organic changes or new pathological findings in the current state.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4736842105263157,0.27,100.0,100.0
+345,latent_345,10266,0.020532,0.014012263,3.894882,Use of PA and lateral views with comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation incorporate use of imaging techniques like 'PA' and 'lateral views' along with detailed comparisons between current and prior frontal images. These elements aid in assessing changes over time, making such entries more prototypical. Statements about techniques (PA/lateral) and direct comparisons tend to increase activation.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+346,latent_346,2145,0.00429,0.0046403585,4.23676,Emphasis on the position and status of medical devices in radiology reports.,"The cases with high activation levels describe radiological evaluations involving implanted devices like pacemakers, PICC lines, or other catheter placements, where the position or status of these devices in the body is specified. These examples tend to focus significantly on detailed description and status of these medical devices, alongside other findings.",0.7306553911205074,0.7346938775510204,0.7894736842105263,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.504097623635196,0.5125628140703518,0.5135135135135135,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+347,latent_347,6318,0.012636,0.009072654,5.295722,References to interval change in imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations frequently mention a comparison with prior imaging studies, indicating the prominence of changes over time or stability in pathology, which is crucial for assessing treatment progress or lack thereof.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+348,latent_348,5181,0.010362,0.009010305,4.7000456,Changes to findings noted in comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently show references to using past imaging studies for comparison. This involves discussing changes in observed features (e.g., pleural effusion, cardiac silhouette) noted when comparing the current and previous imaging, focusing on stability or progression of findings. This often includes explicit descriptions of reducing effusion, stable pneumothorax, or unchanged tubes and is a common practice in radiology.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5245472061657033,0.5326633165829145,0.5405405405405406,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+349,latent_349,5143,0.010286,0.011252127,5.8457103,Pulmonary vascular congestion observed in imaging.,"The highly activated examples describe pulmonary vascular congestion or changes in the lung, such as congestion, that are often associated with heart conditions. This is a frequently observed pattern in cases where the heart condition affects pulmonary circulation, leading to observable changes in the lungs.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,100.0,100.0
+350,latent_350,7771,0.015542,0.015923249,5.5499473,Unchanged findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern focuses on specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability of findings such as unchanged positioning of medical devices, unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes, or unchanged aortic tortuosity.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5063291139240507,0.4,100.0,100.0
+351,latent_351,6370,0.01274,0.018950617,3.6668675,Evaluation and description of stable findings in comparison to prior radiographs.,"The consistent pattern across highly activated examples includes instructions to compare the current radiograph with a prior one, along with detailed descriptions of similarities or specific unchanged aspects across the images, indicating a stable condition over time. These examples emphasize stable findings across different imaging sessions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3861892583120204,0.4,0.3571428571428571,0.25,100.0,100.0
+352,latent_352,4545,0.00909,0.015659949,8.650861,New or persistent pulmonary opacities often suggesting pathology.,"Examples with higher activations describe new, worsening, or persistent opacities/overt pulmonary abnormalities, often suggesting pneumonia or another form of pulmonary pathology. The common terminology used is ""opacities"" and descriptions include new, persistent, or increased opacities, correlating with acute or worsening pulmonary findings.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6631804976632563,0.6633165829145728,0.6601941747572816,0.68,100.0,99.0
+353,latent_353,3921,0.007842,0.0073602092,6.446936,Comparison of cardiomediastinal findings and lung pathology between current and previous images.,"Radiology reports often include a comparison of current and previous imaging studies to identify changes or stability, particularly in findings related to cardiomediastinal structures, pneumothorax, effusion, and lung opacities. Examples with higher activations emphasize comparisons involving findings related to atelectasis, pleural effusions, pneumothorax, and cardiomegaly, highlighting changes or stability in these areas.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+354,latent_354,19951,0.039902,0.02567272,10.718944,Respiratory or infective symptoms evaluation using comparison imaging.,"These examples frequently involve patients with respiratory or infective symptoms, such as pneumonia, and include indications or history related to these conditions like cough, dyspnea, fever, or suspected infiltration. This pattern focuses on evaluating lung changes in such clinical contexts, often requiring comparison to prior imaging.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4546591619762351,0.455,0.3138686131386861,0.7413793103448276,58.0,142.0
+355,latent_355,4793,0.009586,0.010638677,3.8607645,Comparative analysis between current and prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels typically include the presentation of both current and prior imaging studies, specifically a frontal image comparison, which indicates the use of multiple views to compare findings and detect changes. This suggests that the pattern is recognizing cases where both current imaging and historical imaging data are intertwined to compare results, a critical aspect of diagnosing progression or resolution in clinical contexts.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+356,latent_356,37568,0.075136,0.056501355,5.44516,Detailed comparison of interval changes in chest imaging findings.,"High activation samples consistently involve detailed comparison findings between current and prior chest images. These examples often describe changes in lung opacities, effusions, nodules or other specific pulmonary or mediastinal details, focusing on interval changes or stability of findings, indicating the model's focus on detecting progressive or stable pathological states as described through meticulous radiological comparisons over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+357,latent_357,4199,0.008398,0.01380495,6.7121897,Longitudinal comparison to prior radiographic studies.,"These examples consistently involve a comparison of current imaging to prior studies, with explicit indications to assess changes over time, such as improvement, stability, or progression of findings. The pattern involves longitudinal assessment indicated by terms like 'since prior', 'interval improvement', or explicit dates.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4356863658719681,0.455,0.4671532846715328,0.64,100.0,100.0
+358,latent_358,50319,0.100638,0.059728526,8.725081,Stable findings or device positions in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with an activation level of 1.0 describe findings in comparison to prior imaging, highlighting unchanged status or minor variations such as persistent conditions or stable devices. Contrasting changes are not dramatic, focusing on stability or minor developments.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.2162162162162162,0.631578947368421,38.0,162.0
+359,latent_359,6432,0.012864,0.009867768,5.4067435,Evaluating PA and lateral views of lungs and silhouette without prior comparison.,Examples with higher activation levels indicate a pattern focusing on evaluating changes across multiple views (such as frontal and lateral chest views) without reliance on prior images. They describe findings that involve checking the lungs and cardiomediastinal silhouette for any abnormalities specifically noting that no pathological changes have occurred.,0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6673252279635258,0.6683417085427136,0.6853932584269663,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+360,latent_360,3200,0.0064,0.005926924,4.9606,Positioning and changes of medical devices in thoracic cavity.,"The activated examples consistently describe changes or findings in positioning, removal, or insertion of tubes and lines within the chest in post-operative or acute settings. This pattern focuses on the presence and positioning of medical devices within the thoracic cavity.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+361,latent_361,7587,0.015174,0.014149614,4.6003304,Interval change or stability in radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples describe changes in radiological findings compared to prior exams, specifically the interval assessment of conditions such as effusion, edema, or equipment placement (e.g., Dobbhoff tube, ET tube), even in the absence of acute changes. They consistently mention stability, intervals of change, or progression, indicating a focus on temporal monitoring and comparison.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4952380952380952,0.52,100.0,100.0
+362,latent_362,4138,0.008276,0.009975271,7.659097,Emphasis on interval changes in medical device placement or internal findings in radiology reports.,"The most highly activated examples feature descriptions in radiology reports that emphasize interval changes or stable findings, especially comparison with previous images while noting changes or lack thereof in device placements or internal opacities. The descriptions focus on the findings and changes in medical devices or structures such as NG tubes or endotracheal tubes, confirming interval changes or stability, often to aid in clinical decision-making.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,100.0
+363,latent_363,18700,0.0374,0.020930765,4.423477,Comparative evaluations highlighting change or stability of pathology.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature assessments made using multiple views or comparisons with prior studies that emphasize findings of either change or stability, often questioning or addressing potential pathologies. This indicates a pattern focusing on comparative evaluation, particularly when previous imaging helps infer pathology.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4067708738367421,0.4221105527638191,0.4393939393939394,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+364,latent_364,3610,0.00722,0.007999275,5.133503,Comparison with prior images to assess changes in condition or feature positioning.,"These examples focus on the presence of comparison with prior imaging, and involve (1) situations where there is either the mention of a very specific event or anomaly in the findings that must be corroborated with prior imaging and (2) those with new or worsening findings indicating dynamic conditions. This explains the activations around specifics of comparison, stable or changed findings over time, particularly with respect to context-driven annotations or external features such as equipment position or anomalies indicative of potential changes in condition.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5436731290389827,0.5577889447236181,0.5407407407407407,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+365,latent_365,30710,0.06142,0.03486096,6.988744,Changes noted in current findings when prior images are available.,"The pattern observed in these examples consistently involves the presence of prior imaging for comparison, specifically when discussing findings. However, the higher activation examples distinctly note findings or changes in current images compared with specifically provided prior images, often noting intervals between the studies, or specific changes since the prior study, signifying that the presence of changes noted in the findings when prior images are available is crucial to the pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4781212364512244,0.48,0.3716814159292035,0.56,75.0,125.0
+366,latent_366,156228,0.312456,0.21603803,5.844749,Stability or interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior exams.,"Radiology reports discussing interval changes or stability often compare findings to prior exams. Reports that explicitly describe findings as stable, unchanged, or improved despite persisting issues (e.g., stable atelectasis, unchanged pleural effusion), or indicate technical differences affecting interpretation, consistently receive higher activation. This pattern reflects a focus on temporal comparison and evolving or stable status in medical interpretation, which seems to generate higher activation.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6382802811078958,0.65,0.6102941176470589,0.83,100.0,100.0
+367,latent_367,2463,0.004926,0.0067793713,4.799428,Expectation of providing comparisons even when no prior images are available.,"The pattern exhibited in examples with high activation levels consistently refers to providing a comparison between current imaging findings and prior imaging results, albeit indicating no previous comparison is possible. This is explicitly requested in instructions, even when marked as 'None available,' indicating the expectation of such a comparison when no actual prior is available.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.545662100456621,0.5778894472361809,0.5490196078431373,0.8484848484848485,99.0,100.0
+368,latent_368,13935,0.02787,0.02351915,6.846248,Substantial pleural effusion identified in imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels feature radiological findings that highlight the presence of substantial pleural effusions, often unilateral, which can be associated with other pathologies like consolidation or atelectasis. These examples frequently discuss pleural effusions in terms of size, side, or new progression, which are key focal points in determining the activation pattern.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5550674438906255,0.605,0.8181818181818182,0.27,100.0,100.0
+369,latent_369,5859,0.011718,0.009211878,5.4644656,"Post-surgical status, specifically median sternotomy, with stable findings.","Examples showing high activation levels consistently cite post-surgical status, specifically median sternotomy and related procedures, often with stable or unchanged findings in the context of comparison with prior imaging studies. This pattern indicates the model's focus on post-surgical findings and their continuity across imaging sessions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4371871204715779,0.525,0.6190476190476191,0.13,100.0,100.0
+370,latent_370,45182,0.090364,0.040063895,2.6613257,Documentation of interval changes compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations systematically include explicit changes noted in comparison to previous studies. These changes can be stable, improved, or worsened findings in the context of a patient's ongoing treatment or disease course, which is critical in clinical decision making and patient management.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6565164747404488,0.6633165829145728,0.6299212598425197,0.8,100.0,99.0
+371,latent_371,20631,0.041262,0.024458548,7.347645,Observations related to medical device placement compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the placement or condition of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central venous lines, and their positions relative to anatomical landmarks in comparison to a prior image. This suggests attention to positioning and stability of inserted devices is a key pattern.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7088791848617175,0.715,0.5588235294117647,0.8260869565217391,69.0,131.0
+372,latent_372,7547,0.015094,0.017622545,7.486376,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Activation is high when the reports include a stated comparison to prior images indicating specific changes, particularly involving pleural effusions, lung opacities, or other abnormalities. The use of 'compared to' or 'as compared to' to explicitly state the change or stability from prior results drives the activation.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4130434782608695,0.38,100.0,100.0
+373,latent_373,3898,0.007796,0.00854605,4.600459,Tortuosity or unfolding of the aorta identified in reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels often identify tortuosity, enlargement, or unfolding of the aorta, particularly in the thoracic region, which appears as a focused finding relative to the conditions being evaluated, such as pleural effusions or rib fractures. These cases emphasize aortic tortuosity even when it's not the primary condition being evaluated.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5892549084038445,0.625,0.8048780487804879,0.33,100.0,100.0
+374,latent_374,15027,0.030054,0.016005404,3.6128416,Involves comparison indicating stability or change in condition vs prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve references to changes in findings between current and prior images, often focusing on the improvement or stability of a condition. Key phrases include references to ""unchanged"" from previous exams, comparisons like ""as compared to prior,"" and explicit changes such as ""improved"" or ""stable"" findings, which differentiate from descriptions without reference to prior imaging.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+375,latent_375,28210,0.05642,0.03458859,4.813921,Reports of unchanged or improving findings against prior imaging.,"Most examples have low activation levels as they describe negative findings and occasional stability or regression, resulting in unchanged impressions. The few that have higher activation levels often indicate negative findings despite the possibility of abnormal past reports, indicating a subtle shift towards stability.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,100.0,100.0
+376,latent_376,3132,0.006264,0.008358681,5.8691554,Comparison of multiple imaging views with prior images.,"The examples show a pattern where multiple images or views ('frontal', 'lateral') are compared to 'prior' images for changes or confirmation of findings. This is distinct from examples with just one view, which tend to have lower activation levels. Multiple views imply a more comprehensive assessment, often noted earlier as well in prior comparisons, hence the higher activation levels.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+377,latent_377,2352,0.004704,0.005800907,5.2981167,Comprehensive comparison across imaging modalities.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently describe varied imaging techniques and utilize findings from different perspectives (like frontal and lateral), often highlighting changes over time or compared to other forms of imaging. This detailed comparative analysis of images from multiple angles or of diverse modalities is preferred when significant activation is indicated.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4158512720156555,0.457286432160804,0.4130434782608695,0.19,100.0,99.0
+378,latent_378,2043,0.004086,0.0046078567,4.110482,ET tube or line positioning relative to carina on chest XR.,"These examples often involve evaluating the position of endotracheal (ET) tubes or other lines on chest radiographs. They mention specific distances from anatomical landmarks like the carina, indicating detailed analysis of tube placements or modifications between studies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6615351020853806,0.69,0.9523809523809524,0.4,100.0,100.0
+379,latent_379,23343,0.046686,0.034467526,5.403807,Descriptions of endotracheal tube placement compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern exhibits radiological comparisons between current and prior studies where the endotracheal tube (ETT) or similar devices are mentioned. These reports detail the placement, potential for adjustment, or stability of the ETT over time, reflecting a focus on changes related to device positioning and related anatomical adjustments.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5174632352941176,0.58,0.7857142857142857,0.22,100.0,100.0
+380,latent_380,17578,0.035156,0.019609146,5.076437,Documented changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe explicit changes over time or comparisons to previous images with changes in findings relevant to the patient's condition, using terms like 'new', 'increased', 'likely due to', or 'compared to prior'. This pattern highlights the documentation of dynamic changes in medical conditions based on radiological comparisons.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6496847162446202,0.65,0.6595744680851063,0.62,100.0,100.0
+381,latent_381,5636,0.011272,0.017012209,11.555417,Changes in positioning of tubes near the carina.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe observations related to changes in the positioning of tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, in relation to a landmark within the thoracic cavity, often expressed in centimeters from the carina. This indicates close monitoring of precise positions of medical equipment in chest imaging.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5934065934065934,0.63,0.825,0.33,100.0,100.0
+382,latent_382,4854,0.009708,0.012812157,4.8718767,Explicit and detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide a description of current imaging findings in direct comparison to a prior study, specifically highlighting differences or highlighting that something is unchanged without any pending elements or placeholders in the text. These examples include clear completions indicating what changes (if any) have been observed. Activation is higher in samples when these comparative findings are stated explicitly and clearly without any '(N/A)' or placeholder elements.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4316057332779393,0.4472361809045226,0.417910447761194,0.2828282828282828,99.0,100.0
+383,latent_383,4653,0.009306,0.00803999,5.1594834,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"High activations occur when descriptions involve both current and prior images, indicating a pattern of evaluating changes or stability between imaging studies over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+384,latent_384,18953,0.037906,0.021568652,3.9288607,Description focuses on changes noted in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations predominantly involve descriptions that compare the current radiology findings to prior images, emphasizing changes or stability in pathological or structural findings, whereas low activation examples either lack such comparisons or detail devices or unchanged states without significant diagnostic alterations.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+385,latent_385,2728,0.005456,0.004177146,4.098702,Changes in respiratory or cardiac conditions on comparison imaging.,"The pattern exhibits a focus on the comparison of current and prior images which highlight changes or findings that are likely suggestive of acute respiratory or cardiac conditions, such as pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, atelectasis, or pneumothorax. High activations often note alterations in lung volumes or cardiac silhouette without mentioning stability or normality.",0.4081632653061224,0.4081632653061224,0.4,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4836691086691086,0.4874371859296482,0.4878048780487805,0.4,100.0,99.0
+386,latent_386,22877,0.045754,0.03991271,4.827402,Comparison of current and prior imaging for stability or changes.,"The model highly activates when comparisons are made between current and previous imaging to ascertain changes, stable conditions, or the absence of progression in pathological findings.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+387,latent_387,5210,0.01042,0.012253623,6.901321,Presence of technique detail and comparison to prior results.,"The pattern relates to radiology reports that contain explicit mentions of the technique used and a comparison either with the current images or to prior images, allowing observation of changes or stability over time. These reports focus on continuity and consistency, comparing findings to past reports or conditions.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4597285067873303,0.5025125628140703,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,99.0
+388,latent_388,5515,0.01103,0.015281142,4.106992,Current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels typically refer to current imaging interpreted alongside prior imaging. However, examples with two current views (frontal and lateral) alongside prior images are more consistently activated, indicating that frontal and lateral views provide complementary information enhancing the comparative analysis.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5700851442368788,0.5728643216080402,0.5603448275862069,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+389,latent_389,13599,0.027198,0.01675979,5.599204,Comparison of medical device positions across imaging studies.,"The pattern is about comparing the position of medical devices like tubes and lines across different imaging studies. High activation levels correspond to explicit descriptions of unchanged or slightly adjusted device positions, which is specifically noted in comparisons to previous images. The examples describe unchanged or specific positioning of tubes and lines relative to previous images.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6932746700188561,0.695,0.7294117647058823,0.62,100.0,100.0
+390,latent_390,14946,0.029892,0.02647252,3.3137152,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in line placements and procedural contexts against prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve a specific pattern: descriptions and comparison to prior imaging studies, but more specifically, there is a focus on interval changes such as adjustments or stability in catheter/line placements and other procedural changes within the context of a sign or symptom. This context involves significant clinical actions or follow-ups compared to previous imaging.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4342105263157895,0.33,100.0,100.0
+391,latent_391,11162,0.022324,0.010320588,3.5755014,Comparisions with prior imaging and explicit findings reported.,"The examples demonstrating high activation levels commonly involve comparisons with prior radiographic imaging (previous or prior studies) alongside describing specific findings such as stability or changes in conditions such as pneumothorax, atelectasis, and opacities. This suggests a pattern where explicit descriptions of radiographic comparisons and noted changes or stabilities in findings activate the pattern.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5614035087719298,0.57,0.5546875,0.71,100.0,100.0
+392,latent_392,4108,0.008216,0.011870817,5.8212686,Description of medical device placement or intervention compared to prior.,The activation levels are highest when there are descriptions of medical devices or interventions (like tubes or catheters) being placed and compared with prior positions reported in the current imagery. These situations typically require careful radiological assessment and reporting on status or changes.,0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5342465753424658,0.39,100.0,100.0
+393,latent_393,45496,0.090992,0.037277173,1.6026691,Comparison of current versus prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on direct comparison between current and prior radiological images, examining specific changes in structures or pathologies over time. They often describe stability or changes in findings such as effusions, infiltrates, or device placement, indicating the importance of longitudinal analysis.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5220125786163522,0.83,100.0,100.0
+394,latent_394,13272,0.026544,0.04129645,4.567174,Findings unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation values consistently involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging and describe findings that are unchanged or stable over time. The descriptions focus on the continuity and stability of these features, often indicating 'unchanged' or 'consistent' findings concerning cardiomediastinal, hilar contours, or other anatomical structures.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+395,latent_395,17506,0.035012,0.019743288,3.752258,"Evaluation of interval change or stability in imaging findings, particularly pleural effusions.","These examples discuss interval changes or stability explicitly in the findings or impressions section, particularly with respect to the growth or regression of pleural effusions or pneumothorax, which are key indicators of stability or progression of certain conditions over time in radiological assessments.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6458333333333333,0.66,0.7666666666666667,0.46,100.0,100.0
+396,latent_396,21807,0.043614,0.022210468,3.3730948,Descriptions highlighting interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often contain detailed descriptions of changes or stability of findings when compared to prior images, highlighting the significance of interval changes or stability in the imaging findings. The focus on interval changes in conditions or specific findings like effusions, opacities, or device positions indicates active observation or management of ongoing conditions.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,100.0
+397,latent_397,4664,0.009328,0.009100689,5.0315247,Use of 'Given the current ... and the prior' for image comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels commonly describe a given current image while explicitly referring to comparison with a prior image. The phrase 'Given the current ... and the prior' is indicative of the pattern, focusing on radiographic analysis with specific comparative context.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,100.0
+398,latent_398,3218,0.006436,0.010966506,6.808006,Prompting with comparative analysis task instructions.,"These examples focus on the generation or structure of a radiological comparison report when prompted with current and prior images. The high activation examples often prompt the assistant to 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,' which points to a pattern of explicit instructions to generate a comparative analysis within the report insights.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+399,latent_399,7291,0.014582,0.011291194,5.639542,Reports emphasize comparison with previous imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels all have detailed descriptions where present findings are compared to previous images. They specifically highlight changes or stability from prior imaging, often using language like 'unchanged', 'increased', 'improved', 'persistent', or specific previous findings, which is a common radiological practice.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.5496688741721855,0.83,100.0,100.0
+400,latent_400,3250,0.0065,0.0070938254,4.6126575,Comparison with prior imaging reports indicating stable or unchanged conditions.,"These examples describe radiological evaluations that include specific instructions to compare or describe current imaging findings against prior imaging, often with explicit mention of unchanged conditions or significant interval changes. The pattern is not tied to positive or negative findings, but the emphasis is on noting stability or changes against prior reports, often reflecting clinical management or monitoring.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3732718894009216,0.405,0.3272727272727272,0.18,100.0,100.0
+401,latent_401,10622,0.021244,0.012151671,6.8948274,Describing medical equipment position changes compared to prior studies.,"Examples exhibiting the pattern typically include descriptive comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, focusing on medical equipment (e.g., tubes and catheters) positions, and referencing changes such as adjustments or advanced placements of these devices. This type of analysis is a critical part of managing patient treatment and monitoring progress.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6494294929127029,0.6733668341708543,0.640625,0.4939759036144578,83.0,116.0
+402,latent_402,8696,0.017392,0.022752568,6.6713486,Comparison with prior imaging shows no significant change.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe both the current and prior imaging findings, highlighting that no significant change has occurred in the patient's condition. This pattern is common in radiology reports when a prior exam is available for comparison, and it demonstrates stability rather than new or evolving pathology.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,100.0
+403,latent_403,11620,0.02324,0.013076754,2.5131202,Focus on comparison findings with previous images.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve comparisons of current imaging with previous studies. These examples emphasize providing a description of the findings, specifically in relation to any changes observed compared to the prior image, indicating the pattern involves using past comparisons to assess current changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+404,latent_404,9707,0.019414,0.015087016,5.356991,Comparison with prior images to assess interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels often refer to the task of comparing current images with prior images to assess interval changes, especially those that illustrate findings or impressions based on such comparisons.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+405,latent_405,9208,0.018416,0.009177002,4.8792653,Provide a description of findings compared to the prior radiograph.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include the step-by-step query leading from interpreted radiographs, usually involving direct frontal and lateral views alongside prior comparison. The intent is to provide an updated, comparative description of findings emphasizing the stability or changes over a documented timeframe. This aligns with radiological analysis enhancing baseline vs. current state understanding.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5222222222222223,0.47,100.0,100.0
+406,latent_406,8410,0.01682,0.010853782,3.2196631,Documentation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include a direct comparison between the current and prior imaging findings, highlighting interval changes like new opacities, effusions, or device placements. This reflects a radiological assessment pattern where significant developments or modifications in the pathology between imaging exams are identified and documented.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5931237920862578,0.6,0.5793650793650794,0.73,100.0,100.0
+407,latent_407,49380,0.09876,0.058948293,6.163428,Comparisons with prior images indicating significant changes in lung conditions or opacities.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve detailed comparisons with prior imaging that mention significant changes or improvements regarding certain features like opacities, effusions, or volume loss. The presence of low lung volumes, atelectasis, or other changes in lung conditions is noteworthy and contributes to higher activation, indicating these changes are meaningful in the context of the analysis. Such detailed comparative evaluations tend to be more informative about the patient's condition.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.5434782608695652,0.25,100.0,100.0
+408,latent_408,5316,0.010632,0.008843575,5.009909,Absence of prior comparison in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently lack prior comparison studies, as indicated by 'Comparison: None.' This distinguishes them from other examples where findings are compared with previous studies or are given a baseline reference.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,100.0
+409,latent_409,40087,0.080174,0.04568677,4.3904757,Focus on medical device positioning in imaging reports.,"The samples with higher activation levels focus on the presence and descriptions of medical devices such as pacemaker leads and endotracheal tubes in medical imaging reports, particularly those that are explicitly described in terms of placement or positional changes compared to prior images. This inclusion often indicates a specific pattern the model is tracking related to these medical devices rather than the medical conditions they imply.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5794739924128625,0.5829145728643216,0.6049382716049383,0.49,100.0,99.0
+410,latent_410,1497,0.002994,0.006967007,7.841616,Presence of comparison between current and prior frontal images.,"Activation levels are high when a comparison to a prior frontal image is provided or requested explicitly, indicating the model responds strongly when required to analyze or compare a current imaging study with a documented prior study. This is a typical practice in radiology to assess changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+411,latent_411,13682,0.027364,0.015609357,4.758168,Emphasis on evaluating interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"These examples describe the process of evaluating radiological findings specifically for interval changes, with a clear focus on the comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. This pattern is typical in follow-up or longitudinal studies where the assessment of change or stability in pathology is crucial.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+412,latent_412,2116,0.004232,0.0058519915,10.34353,Detailed image comparison instructions even when past images are unavailable.,"Examples with the highest activation prominently feature the instruction to compare current images with prior ones, even when the comparison is noted as 'None available'. They often describe findings in detail despite the lack of available comparisons, which implies a diagnostic protocol standard despite missing historical data.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5937711577522005,0.595,0.6067415730337079,0.54,100.0,100.0
+413,latent_413,11132,0.022264,0.0151037285,5.3393865,Atelectasis seen at lung bases in imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe atelectasis present at the lung bases in various radiological comparisons, indicating this is a key feature in the observed pattern.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7474747474747474,0.75,0.8125,0.65,100.0,100.0
+414,latent_414,2188,0.004376,0.0052496837,4.9190645,Positioning or description of medical devices in imaging.,"The pattern involves the description of medical devices rather than anatomical or pathological findings. Most examples describe the positions of various medical devices, such as catheters, central lines, gastrostomy tubes, and pacemaker leads.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4769230769230769,0.31,100.0,100.0
+415,latent_415,8034,0.016068,0.015258917,5.5409393,Comparison of current and previous frontal and lateral images for stability or change.,"In these examples, there is a consistent mention of both frontal and lateral views comparison with prior studies, often leading to detailed descriptions of findings in relation to previous images. The pattern involves analysis and assessment of changes or stability since past imaging, emphasizing medical stability or changes over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+416,latent_416,11865,0.02373,0.018659266,5.3585005,Presence of detailed multi-view analysis and significant findings/comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe multiple views (frontal and lateral) and present detailed findings across these views, often noting specific pulmonary or mediastinal abnormalities and referencing previous comparisons. Lower activation examples typically lack significant findings or comparisons.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4649545211342964,0.525,0.5149700598802395,0.86,100.0,100.0
+417,latent_417,7972,0.015944,0.016953308,5.4205093,Detailed assessments of interval changes in imaging comparing current and prior exams.,"The highest activation levels are seen in studies where there is a direct comparison of radiological findings between current imaging and prior images, often with linguistic structures emphasizing differences or updates in visual information. This involves using specific comparative or sequential phrases to describe changes detected between the images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5241656491656491,0.5276381909547738,0.5365853658536586,0.44,100.0,99.0
+418,latent_418,4377,0.008754,0.009550732,5.034702,Frequent use of 'unremarkable' for cardiac/mediastinal/hilar contours.,"The examples are characterized by the use of the term 'unremarkable' to describe the cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours in radiology reports. This pattern suggests a normal or unchanged status of these structures, even when other findings are noted.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6693333333333333,0.69,0.88,0.44,100.0,100.0
+419,latent_419,11643,0.023286,0.02977952,4.3196635,Comparison of current frontal image with prior frontal image.,"Highly activated samples consistently involve an explicit request for a description of findings in comparison only to a single prior frontal image, often emphasizing aspects of the lung, heart, and other thoracic structures based on new and prior image juxtaposition.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3319161858487701,0.34,0.3688524590163934,0.45,100.0,100.0
+420,latent_420,20698,0.041396,0.024180405,5.4476395,Detailed anatomical observations and comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation scores frequently involve detailed descriptions of anatomical features, their changes, and medical devices from prior imaging studies, with focus on interval changes. Reports include extensive findings, such as positioning of tubes or catheters and comparisons to prior studies, and use of assertive language indicating follow-up or stability.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+421,latent_421,21497,0.042994,0.025516026,5.7298145,Nuanced interval changes discerned through comparative imaging assessments.,"The examples that show some degree of activation typically engage with nuanced comparisons between current and prior imaging, indicating interval changes in clinical conditions. Less activated reports either lack a clear informational structure or comparison point, or simply state that no significant change has occurred. Higher activation levels are linked to detailed, structured accounts of comparative findings and clinical implications indicating nuanced changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4342105263157895,0.33,100.0,100.0
+422,latent_422,3577,0.007154,0.0065938723,4.1398816,Comparison of frontal and lateral images without prior report.,"Many of the examples with high activation levels include mentions of a current and past image along with lateral and frontal views to evaluate for changes or constants in the findings. Examples with high activations also lack access to the prior report, indicating that the model activates when there's a need for direct visual comparisons without text reviews.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5512820512820513,0.43,100.0,100.0
+423,latent_423,4977,0.009954,0.017848063,6.404995,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+424,latent_424,38747,0.077494,0.049813706,4.926909,Changes or new placements of medical devices compared to previous imaging.,"The samples with higher activation often refer to changes or new placements of medical devices such as catheters, tubes, or lines, as compared to prior imaging. These references are often key components for monitoring patient progress or evaluating procedure efficacy, thus eliciting a higher activation in a pattern detecting such specific findings.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7238331952499311,0.725,0.7586206896551724,0.66,100.0,100.0
+425,latent_425,16436,0.032872,0.019209728,3.6409671,Explicit comparison to prior images or studies.,"The data points with high activation levels involve explicit comparisons to a prior radiological study or image. The description typically includes interval changes or stability of specific findings since the previous imaging, a common practice in radiological assessments to identify disease progression or resolution.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+426,latent_426,3918,0.007836,0.008596602,5.7399755,Detailed comparisons of pulmonary features between current and prior images.,"The higher activation levels correspond to reports that discuss detailed comparisons between prior and current imaging, with specific attention to changes in pulmonary patterns such as edema, opacities, or effusions. Phrases indicating changes or stability in lung or cardiac appearances are central to these reports.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7121431290445375,0.7135678391959799,0.6902654867256637,0.78,100.0,99.0
+427,latent_427,3040,0.00608,0.0055445964,3.1364915,Instructions focus on comparison with prior images.,"The model shows higher activation levels when instructions explicitly emphasize description of radiologic findings in comparison to a prior image, particularly using the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This pattern indicates a high level of expectation for relative analysis rather than absolute findings.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+428,latent_428,3925,0.00785,0.012225828,7.472711,"Comparison between current and prior radiographic images, noting changes in findings.","Highly predictive activations include examples where a new or changing chest condition is described in both frontal and lateral images, particularly when compared to prior frontal images, with varying degrees of severity or change invoked in the description.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+429,latent_429,6862,0.013724,0.012174803,4.186075,Describes comparative changes or accumulations of findings over time.,"Highly representative examples are findings that accumulate changes over time or comparisons with prior study findings, like improving or worsening chest pathologies that are indicated explicitly through language related to the images or medical conditions in the context given, even if not available in prior comparisons.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3521611499139589,0.36,0.3852459016393442,0.47,100.0,100.0
+430,latent_430,10145,0.02029,0.012691996,4.3241515,Temporal comparison of radiological findings to assess changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples focus on comparing current imaging findings with prior ones, emphasizing changes, stability, or resolution of findings over time. This pattern underscores the importance of temporal assessment in radiology to understand disease progression or recovery.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5388245388245388,0.57,0.5460526315789473,0.83,100.0,100.0
+431,latent_431,5755,0.01151,0.011266459,4.47785,Noting interval changes in medical device placement or procedural outcomes.,"These examples frequently mention specific changes or continuity in positioning of supportive devices and other comparative changes after medical procedures, like chest tube removal or new placement of lines and tubes. The high activation levels indicate a pattern focused on comparing procedural changes over time with direct comparison to prior imagery or reports, often involving stable or changed positioning of devices and subtle anatomical shifts.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.3970588235294117,0.27,100.0,100.0
+432,latent_432,20059,0.040118,0.025810739,6.679181,Interpreting improvements in pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples often highlight an improvement or resolution in pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging, with specific reference to reduced pleural effusions, loculated fluid, or consolidation. This suggests a pattern of noting improvement from previous clinical findings in radiology reports.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9230769230769232,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7256089668918744,0.735,0.7236842105263158,0.632183908045977,87.0,113.0
+433,latent_433,28841,0.057682,0.028120812,5.66088,Inadequate utilization of prior images for detailed analysis.,"Despite there being a given current and prior imaging setup, low activation levels indicate the absence of the targeted pattern. Higher activation samples consistently show reports that effectively integrate prior images leading to a tangible interpretation, whereas low scores lack substantive surveillance.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.358974358974359,0.39,0.3885350318471338,0.7011494252873564,87.0,113.0
+434,latent_434,126572,0.253144,0.17490292,7.1867876,Reports emphasizing comparison to prior imaging that highlight changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation often include references to prior imaging studies and explicitly describe changes or stability in findings compared to those prior studies. This implies that the model is activated by reports focusing on changes over time in radiological findings, either of deterioration or improvement.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+435,latent_435,6837,0.013674,0.013834486,5.452861,Comparative analysis with prior imaging focusing on significant pathologies or interventions.,"Examples with an activation value of 4 or higher consistently show descriptive comparisons to a prior image but often involve the identification or discussion of abnormalities like moderate enlargement, pneumothorax, and effusion. The pattern indicates that more significant observations related to pathologies or interventions trigger higher activation levels.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5225648407707655,0.5226130653266332,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,99.0
+436,latent_436,15476,0.030952,0.015979834,3.7270389,Detailed descriptions of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize describing changes between current and prior imaging studies, particularly for findings like faint opacities, subtle changes in fluid levels, and noting specific positional changes. Clear descriptions comparing prior and current studies even without clear acute findings elevate the activation level, showing sensitivity to minor but potentially relevant differences.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5176470588235295,0.44,100.0,100.0
+437,latent_437,24497,0.048994,0.031004861,4.692435,Focus on descriptions of positions and placements of medical devices or lines.,"The examples with higher activations typically involve descriptions of positioning, placement, adjustments, or changes in various lines, tubes, and devices like central venous catheters, endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, and others. These examples often mention comparison with prior positions or recommendations for repositioning, indicating a focus on evaluating and communicating changes or stability in medical device placement.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8626428407086433,0.864321608040201,0.7950819672131147,0.9797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+438,latent_438,9427,0.018854,0.011058507,4.446761,Comparison focus on implanted devices or cardiac pacers.,"The pattern identified involves comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging, focusing on the status and changes of medical devices or cardiac pacers, as opposed to evaluating pathological changes in soft tissues or lung fields. Stable or subtle changes in implanted devices, such as pacemakers or cardiac silhouettes, are highlighted as a primary focus in these examples.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.382769461509619,0.465,0.3703703703703703,0.1,100.0,100.0
+439,latent_439,16905,0.03381,0.018654792,2.5382197,References to stability or changes in current imaging findings compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, with specific notes on stability or change in the findings. These examples focus on discussing the change or stability in the heart or lung condition in comparison to a previous image. This pattern is not only linguistic but contextual within the radiology domain.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4919354838709677,0.61,100.0,100.0
+440,latent_440,4556,0.009112,0.0071634934,4.2631345,"Unchanged post-surgical changes, sternotomy, and devices in comparison to prior imaging.","Examples frequently mention median sternotomy, CABG, and devices like pacemakers and PICCs in the context of unchanged conditions compared to prior exams. These features often stand out similarly in various radiology reports, as post-surgical markers frequently remain consistent over time.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5347469183668012,0.565,0.6326530612244898,0.31,100.0,100.0
+441,latent_441,6870,0.01374,0.013203157,8.411701,Comparative evaluation for signs of heart failure or interval changes.,"Highly activated examples frequently refer to a comparative evaluation for signs of heart failure or assessing interval changes related to heart failure or other cardiopulmonary progressions. This focus on interval changes in cardiopulmonary conditions, specifically heart failure, explains the higher activations.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3970256644118466,0.405,0.3766233766233766,0.29,100.0,100.0
+442,latent_442,5829,0.011658,0.011703679,4.3884335,Comparative descriptions of specific changes between current and prior images.,"This dataset shows a pattern where descriptions refer to both current and prior imaging, often mentioning specific findings like tubes, catheters, effusions, fractures, or pneumothorax, and highlighting changes between them. This comparative approach is standard in following complex conditions or monitoring interventions.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4192361375459967,0.4221105527638191,0.4117647058823529,0.35,100.0,99.0
+443,latent_443,6436,0.012872,0.009991577,5.9118843,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing more detailed descriptions of changes or non-changes in medical imaging findings in comparison to prior images. There's an emphasis on clarifying differences or stabilities in patient conditions over multiple visits.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4218769736011115,0.4221105527638191,0.4230769230769231,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+444,latent_444,18323,0.036646,0.01769888,3.6522093,Sequential radiology comparisons highlight interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels often compare a current image to a prior image, specifically focusing on changes over time (e.g., 'compared to previous', 'interval increase'). This pattern involves detailed comparison between a new and an old image to highlight interval changes, which is a central task in sequential radiology assessments.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+445,latent_445,16662,0.033324,0.021389307,3.7187722,Prompts instructing detailed description with comparison to prior images.,"Across the examples with higher activation, the text consistently prompts a comparison of the current imaging studies to previous studies, specifically requiring detailed descriptions of findings in reference to prior images. High activation examples consistently include this comparison instruction, indicating its importance in the pattern noted by the model.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4540888743312589,0.5,0.5,0.79,100.0,100.0
+446,latent_446,14286,0.028572,0.016585926,4.1322956,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves the detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or stabilities observed over time in various clinical findings. The description often notes similarities, differences, or the absence of change over time between the images in the context of a patient's medical history.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6349189943412314,0.6432160804020101,0.6076923076923076,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+447,latent_447,32119,0.064238,0.03646474,4.57728,Comparative analysis with prior imaging in radiology reports.,"The high activation levels correspond to instances where the findings are explicitly derived by comparing current images with prior images, even without specifying what those comparisons entail. This indicates emphasis on identifying patterns through temporal analysis rather than just static assessment.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+448,latent_448,9164,0.018328,0.015454586,5.6678553,"Findings are compared to prior imaging, noting stability or subtle progression.","Examples with high activation refer to findings compared to prior imaging and specific changes or stability in pathologies. They describe images with terms indicating both stability and progression, such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant change', or explicit descriptions of subtle progression. Examples with low activation either lack specific historical comparisons or changes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4125178880771258,0.415,0.4022988505747126,0.35,100.0,100.0
+449,latent_449,4876,0.009752,0.014769322,8.135897,Explicit comparison to previous images and assessment of change or stability.,"The examples with high activation have descriptions of findings explicitly referring to past comparisons and modifications in imaging findings, including reference to previous reports, as well as detailed examinations of current and past images to assess changes. Commonly they mention changes or stability in conditions over time and often include management or follow-up recommendations.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4595135622059854,0.46,0.4574468085106383,0.43,100.0,100.0
+450,latent_450,8917,0.017834,0.010783278,4.5693226,Comparison of current images with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve the presence of both current and prior images allowing for a direct comparison to assess interval changes, such as improvement or worsening of a condition, or stability over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+451,latent_451,3905,0.00781,0.012401497,5.225509,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior or existing studies.,This pattern involves generating a description based on a provided image prompt and making explicit comparisons with either provided prior images or existing radiology studies. Examples that emphasize identifying changes or similarities compared with prior images or reports have high activation.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4540998217468805,0.51,0.5060975609756098,0.83,100.0,100.0
+452,latent_452,7393,0.014786,0.011092552,4.121086,Comparison with prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of changes or comparisons between a current examination and prior imaging findings, often notating newly observed findings or stable observations. This pattern matches radiology practices where longitudinal imaging assessments are pertinent in monitoring patient conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4019740149771109,0.435,0.4557823129251701,0.67,100.0,100.0
+453,latent_453,32050,0.0641,0.04086426,4.746396,Focus on detailed device and line placement/stability descriptions.,"Examples with high activation levels often feature detailed analysis and descriptions involving support devices, tubes, or lines with specific attention to stability or positioning. This includes terms like 'position unchanged', 'terminates in', and 'placement interval'. These are likely to trigger higher activations due to the emphasis on modifying or maintaining devices and their position relative to the anatomy, which is crucial in medical imaging analysis.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6384100226630338,0.645,0.6986301369863014,0.51,100.0,100.0
+454,latent_454,4988,0.009976,0.009002184,3.5167708,Use of both frontal and lateral chest images in evaluation.,"These examples describe the use of both frontal and lateral chest images in radiographic evaluation, allowing for comprehensive assessment methods by comparing different views. This pattern is common in situations where multiple images are used to assess complex or unclear findings.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+455,latent_455,3930,0.00786,0.016129253,8.523682,Comparative image analysis with minimal change over time.,"These examples highlight instances where descriptions are provided in comparison to prior images, indicating patients with specific histories or findings over multiple studies. The comparison or prior studies often include the terms 'unchanged', 'similar', 'subtle changes', or equivalent reports verifying minimal change, suggesting a thorough inspection over time.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.2857142857142857,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,100.0,100.0
+456,latent_456,5946,0.011892,0.019670088,6.4822283,Detailed evaluation of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature extensive documentation of prior radiographs or CT studies, and an interval evaluation of current pathological status against past images, often finding stability or slight change in conditions. This comparison aspect of examining changes over time with existing imaging seems to define the pattern most sharply.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4838709677419355,0.45,100.0,100.0
+457,latent_457,12341,0.024682,0.012844643,3.1404605,Comparison with previous images highlighting changes or stability.,"These examples involve analysis of recent radiographic studies and highlight changes or stability in findings in comparison with prior studies. The comparisons often reference images, denote the presence or persistence of certain conditions such as pleural effusions or torquosity, and assess stability or changes over time in the context of the clinical setting or interventions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+458,latent_458,3891,0.007782,0.0113427695,5.713294,Structured report with detailed findings compared to prior images.,The pattern comprises radiological reports that describe the imaging findings compared to previous examinations. There is an emphasis on providing a structured report that includes findings and evaluations relative to prior images using phrases like 'as compared to prior' or similar formulations expanded in a structured assistant response.,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4046232300484067,0.425,0.4452554744525547,0.61,100.0,100.0
+459,latent_459,5253,0.010506,0.019183155,3.6978304,Image comparison highlighting interval changes or stability in features.,Examples with high activation levels typically compare frontal images to prior studies and specifically focus on changes noted in the comparison. Phrases signaling image comparison and highlighting interval changes or stability of features are predominant in these reports. Using high activation scores for examples that include both comparisons and specific findings underscores this pattern's importance in the dataset.,0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4027735600769309,0.41,0.4262295081967213,0.52,100.0,100.0
+460,latent_460,4462,0.008924,0.009914157,5.101848,Reports highlighting stable findings or resolution of previous pathologies against prior images.,Activation levels are high when descriptions include stable findings in comparison to prior images and describe resolution of previous pathologies such as pneumonia or a chest tube placement and mention any other unchanged or stabilized conditions. This indicates that the model responds strongly when previous findings are matched with current conditions to illustrate stability or improvement.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.53125,0.34,100.0,100.0
+461,latent_461,9978,0.019956,0.016377302,4.6169043,"Comparison of multiple imaging views or modalities, often with device assessment.","Activation is higher in examples that compare multiple views or modalities (e.g., PA and lateral) rather than a single view (e.g., frontal or lateral), often accompanied by medical implants or devices like pacemakers or catheters that require multi-dimensional analysis for assessment.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.5208333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+462,latent_462,5407,0.010814,0.016981373,6.402288,Report findings without comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activations consistently lack comparison to prior images, focusing instead on describing current findings independently. The internal comparison requirement is diminished in many of these cases, while their distinctive task primarily centers on current findings.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5357142857142857,0.3,100.0,100.0
+463,latent_463,5312,0.010624,0.0075846794,3.9556265,Detailed comparison findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings in terms of comparison to previous images, emphasize changes or stability in these findings, and identify precise similarities or differences, such as 'stable' or 'increased.' These reports display a structured pattern of reflecting on interval changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4868021844660194,0.4874371859296482,0.4859813084112149,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+464,latent_464,5659,0.011318,0.009515609,3.5897717,Task involves direct comparison between current and prior images.,"Higher activation levels are associated with prompts that involve a direct task to evaluate changes by comparing a current radiological image with prior imaging. This pattern is emphasized by explicit instruction in the prompt such as 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior image', which is a common aspect of comparative studies and radiology reports focusing on detecting changes.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3959659152195016,0.44,0.461038961038961,0.71,100.0,100.0
+465,latent_465,28881,0.057762,0.02449546,2.5128138,Changes in medical devices or tubes across serial imaging.,"The pattern shows that when there is a clear comparison between current and previous images focusing on specific changes in medical devices, tubes, or pleural changes, there is a higher activation. This reflects an attentiveness to changes over time which may indicate patient progress or complications.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6236395076797885,0.63,0.6756756756756757,0.5,100.0,100.0
+466,latent_466,4046,0.008092,0.011513909,6.5828767,Instructive prompts to provide findings from images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often require the user to describe findings from current and prior images in an assistive manner, suggesting a pattern of instructive language prompting the model to execute a specific task.",0.595393307257714,0.6122448979591837,0.5714285714285714,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,100.0,100.0
+467,latent_467,4337,0.008674,0.008665531,3.9007232,Technical and straightforward findings on single-image or without complex historical comparison.,"In these examples, the pattern involves providing findings and impressions with reference to the technical examination details, but without background or complex historical imaging comparisons. This simpler approach using technical descriptions and findings within a single-image context or without intricate historical references seems to trigger higher activation.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+468,latent_468,4676,0.009352,0.010237862,5.4579296,Comparison of imaging findings to previous studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently discuss findings in comparison to previous imaging. They focus on changes or stability in radiographic findings over time, often specifying a clear evaluation of said changes related to previous images.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4966887417218543,0.75,100.0,100.0
+469,latent_469,3620,0.00724,0.017265666,6.6549916,Frequent and detailed comparisons against previous images for interval changes.,"The examples emphasize a pattern of consistently making comparisons between current and prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability in medical findings such as lesions, nodules, or effusions. These comparisons are core to understanding progression or resolution of patient conditions. High activation is linked to frequent or detailed comparisons against prior imaging for interval changes.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+470,latent_470,30125,0.06025,0.035062496,4.0068674,Comparison with prior study and description of stable findings or minor changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels demonstrate a pattern of comparing current radiographic findings with previous findings, particularly highlighting stability or change over time in specific features such as cardiac size, atelectasis, pleural effusion, consolidation, etc. This language use is a routine radiographic practice when evaluating chronic conditions that require periodic imaging follow-up.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.514041514041514,0.5175879396984925,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,99.0
+471,latent_471,4662,0.009324,0.0075307335,2.9442058,Description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve tasks where a description is requested for current findings in comparison to prior imaging, indicating a focus on interval changes or updates in the patient's condition. Phrases like 'eval for interval change', 'as compared to prior' and specific observations on progression or unchanged findings characterize these examples.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4591346153846154,0.46,0.4565217391304347,0.42,100.0,100.0
+472,latent_472,22140,0.04428,0.030035527,5.462797,Central line or catheter evaluation.,"The highlighted examples involve the documentation and evaluation of central lines, such as PICC lines or catheters, where the focus is on their placement, changes, or positioning relative to previous observations or standards (e.g., tips at the SVC).",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6511539725473343,0.655,0.6962025316455697,0.55,100.0,100.0
+473,latent_473,9916,0.019832,0.012185001,4.578244,Comparison to prior studies noting stability or minor changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in the current imaging study, comparing them to similar findings noted in prior studies, and often note stability or subtle changes rather than significant new findings, suggesting non-acute observations.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.620253164556962,0.49,100.0,100.0
+474,latent_474,8556,0.017112,0.016304217,4.837474,Direct comparison between current and prior images in reports.,"The pattern involves reports that emphasize the use of current and prior images to describe changes or confirm stability. Reports with high activation values include phrases indicating a direct comparison between current and previous imaging, assessing changes or stability in radiological findings.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5289883834775476,0.555,0.5374149659863946,0.79,100.0,100.0
+475,latent_475,35049,0.070098,0.038735725,4.273988,Stable imaging findings with no acute process noted compared to prior.,The pattern of radiology reports that involve findings and impressions with descriptions that compare current imaging results with prior imaging but specifically note that no acute intrathoracic process or changes are present. This is commonly seen when the findings indicate stability and absence of new acute issues.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.5833333333333334,0.42,100.0,100.0
+476,latent_476,6244,0.012488,0.010300613,6.0855756,Interval change in chest radiograph findings compared to prior images.,"This dataset provides multiple examples where a comparison is made between current and prior imaging studies, with a particular emphasis on identifying interval changes in conditions like pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, pneumothorax, or consolidations. Highly activated examples frequently refer to new or unchanged findings based on previous images, indicating the importance of examining temporal changes in patient imaging for diagnostics.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5784313725490197,0.59,100.0,100.0
+477,latent_477,5310,0.01062,0.009695602,5.956023,Reference to low lung volumes or their effect on findings.,"These examples emphasize the importance of high lung volumes in diagnostic imaging, particularly as low lung volumes can obscure or mimic pathologies, such as increased opacity or vascular crowding. Radiology reports frequently acknowledge low lung volumes and their impact on interpretation.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5365853658536586,0.22,100.0,100.0
+478,latent_478,3511,0.007022,0.012272317,8.256618,Comparison of current findings to prior images based on indications.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve detailed descriptions comparing current images with prior ones, often specifying changes or stability in complex clinical contexts, emphasizing how findings relate to the clinical indication or history provided.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4358686350021394,0.4673366834170854,0.4761904761904761,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+479,latent_479,3800,0.0076,0.007089477,3.6432853,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically involve detailed comparison between multiple views (frontal and lateral) and previous imaging. This emphasizes the process of evaluating changes in types of pathology by analyzing new findings against multiple views and prior images, highlighting communication within a radiological context.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+480,latent_480,2922,0.005844,0.007231142,5.149355,Right hemidiaphragm elevation or eventration.,"The pattern centers around findings related to the diaphragm, particularly elevation or eventration. These findings frequently appear alongside other pulmonary or pleural conditions, making them noteworthy in radiological assessments. Examples with high activation levels often mention diaphragm elevation paired with other lung or pleural observations.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.9166666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5245223210354847,0.595,0.9130434782608696,0.21,100.0,100.0
+481,latent_481,46633,0.093266,0.04234981,3.4109366,Findings compared to prior studies with focus on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels often indicate changes, stability, or resolution in findings between current and prior images, and make comparisons frequently using terms like 'stable compared to', 'worsening', 'unchanged', and 'interval resolution'. These examples describe changes observed over time through multiple imaging studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+482,latent_482,5983,0.011966,0.01877913,5.010013,Comparison of current imaging findings to previous studies.,"The examples show comparisons being made to previous imaging studies, which is a typical approach in radiology to assess changes or stability over time. Often, descriptions include specific findings and how they have altered or remained the same compared to prior images.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+483,latent_483,4647,0.009294,0.011035394,3.7764704,Comparison against previous imaging for interval change assessment.,"These examples utilize radiological findings that compare current images against prior images or studies. This is essential for evaluating interval changes which help assess stability or progression of identified conditions. An integral part of these reports includes the comparison against prior images to provide context and determine if findings are stable, improved, or worsened over time.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.489903745553463,0.507537688442211,0.5036496350364964,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+484,latent_484,15436,0.030872,0.019719074,7.568882,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention prior imaging comparisons that highlight stability or minimal change in findings, often implying benign or stable conditions. They provide clinical reassurance of no new abnormalities since the previous image comparison.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5100109825124609,0.565,0.3484848484848485,0.3432835820895522,67.0,133.0
+485,latent_485,7295,0.01459,0.0099589955,3.3115551,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies focusing on changes in specific pathologies.,"The highly activated examples all emphasize comparisons of current findings with prior imaging, often detailing changes (or lack thereof) in specific observations related to lung pathology, as well as the presence of detailed contextual information like indication and technique. These details help in identifying what progress or stability of conditions like pneumonia, pulmonary edema, or lung nodules are being seen.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+486,latent_486,3484,0.006968,0.011105912,4.2482104,Description of imaging findings with focus on changes over multiple studies.,"Examples with higher activation focus on a description of imaging findings, particularly comparisons to prior images, rather than the specific medical context or diagnosis. The focus is on the factual reporting of observed changes over multiple imaging studies more than any specific patient history or indication.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4796747967479675,0.59,100.0,100.0
+487,latent_487,3327,0.006654,0.011674778,5.283577,Descriptive comparison to prior radiology images with focus on changes or stability.,"The pattern revolves around descriptions of the radiological study in comparison to prior images, especially highlighting any changes or stability of findings over time. The most consistent feature among high activation examples is the inclusion of specific changes or comparisons made to prior studies, often with explicit reference to dates or previous findings, which suggests the importance of identifying interval changes or stability in monitoring patient conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.5692307692307692,0.74,100.0,100.0
+488,latent_488,33307,0.066614,0.035579827,4.769182,Dynamic pleural or mediastinal changes in comparison reports.,"Reports with activations focus on descriptions of changes involving chest tubes, pleural effusions, opacities, and cardiomediastinal silhouettes, often indicating dynamic conditions or interventions such as chest tube placements or evaluations of intrathoracic changes. This includes assessments for pneumothorax, changes following fluid removal, or ongoing monitoring of fluid collections.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5895720909021813,0.595,0.6233766233766234,0.48,100.0,100.0
+489,latent_489,38971,0.077942,0.050484788,6.6110187,Interval change findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe interval change findings in radiology reports by comparing current images with prior ones. This includes descriptive differences such as 'interval increase', 'unchanged from prior', or 'resolved since prior', indicating changes over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+490,latent_490,8552,0.017104,0.016516885,5.103881,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging with noted stability or changes.,"The pattern observed in these examples arises from descriptions of findings in current imaging being compared to prior imaging and detailing stability or change. Reports often note features like unchanged or stable findings, slight changes, or improvements in certain conditions, indicating evaluation over time through comparison.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6799999999999999,0.7,0.6333333333333333,0.95,100.0,100.0
+491,latent_491,6859,0.013718,0.010673537,4.285113,Analysis or comparison with prior images relevant.,"The high activation examples represent reports structured with 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'COMPARISON' sections, indicating examinations of differences or comparisons with previous images, often highlighting unchanged findings. These examples require radiological evaluation against a former standard or benchmark image.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.5308641975308642,0.86,100.0,100.0
+492,latent_492,7626,0.015252,0.01222982,3.7952998,Reports with findings suggestive of significant pathology or change.,"These highly activated examples contain findings indicating potentially significant changes or conditions, such as pneumothorax, significant pathologies, or conditions being investigated for grave concerns (e.g., pneumonia, strokes). This suggests that high activation is tied to serious pathologies or conditions.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+493,latent_493,2727,0.005454,0.007961219,7.8774543,Comparison without a prior report narrative.,"These examples with higher activations frequently include instructions for comparison to prior images, lack a prior report, or use specific terms that discuss the findings in relation to previous exams. This demonstrates a pattern focused on synthesizing findings from current and previous images without prior narrative guidance.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+494,latent_494,7988,0.015976,0.020744951,4.7016187,Explicit requests for detailed comparisons to prior images.,The highly activated examples include commands or requests to provide a comparison or description of changes between current and prior imaging. This suggests the pattern is focused on explicit instructions for descriptive comparison rather than simply noting changes.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4242947610823258,0.425,0.4193548387096774,0.39,100.0,100.0
+495,latent_495,15420,0.03084,0.015490736,3.9851186,Reports lacking specific interval changes or detailed comparisons show lower activation.,"Most examples have low activation because they include incomplete, missing, or limited information in the report compared to those that specify findings in greater detail or make clear direct comparisons with prior studies. Specifically, examples without significant changes or notable observations in the images have lower activations, whereas reports that indicate specific intervals and clear changes between images tend to have higher activations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,100.0
+496,latent_496,16479,0.032958,0.019950349,7.124519,Comparisons highlighting interval changes or stability with prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels are those where the current radiographic findings are directly compared to prior studies, with the primary focus being on capturing any interval change, stability, or lack thereof in clinical progression. Terms like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior exam', and 'since previous study' highlight these direct comparisons with reference to specific or implied time intervals, which is the pattern being highlighted.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.4689655172413793,0.918918918918919,74.0,126.0
+497,latent_497,13700,0.0274,0.011523321,2.5502138,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation focus on the need to provide detailed comparisons of present findings with prior imaging, especially highlighting changes or lack thereof in specific conditions such as atelectasis or pleural effusions. Additionally, specific anatomical changes or stability relevant to the clinical context require emphasis in these comparisons, which influences the activation level.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5344827586206896,0.62,100.0,100.0
+498,latent_498,2169,0.004338,0.007100248,5.761932,Image comparison instructions without detailed findings.,"High activation levels consistently accompany tasks asking to compare given images with prior images, typically without detailed findings given. This pattern suggests the model is particularly stimulated by prompts that focus on broad instructions related to image comparison without significant supplementary findings or indications requiring detailed analysis.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.525,0.63,100.0,100.0
+499,latent_499,5700,0.0114,0.01730115,6.24438,"Current frontal, lateral and prior frontal chest images used.","The examples with high activation levels consistently include multiple views of chest images, notably both current frontal and lateral images, along with prior frontal comparisons, indicating the importance of comprehensive imaging perspectives in detecting the pattern.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+500,latent_500,12165,0.02433,0.014847974,7.0026174,No change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern involves the absence of notable changes or acute findings despite a detailed comparison of current imaging with previous reports. The reports focus on comparing lung, cardiac, or mediastinal features but often conclude with no new or significant change.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5478603154339211,0.575,0.5409836065573771,0.3666666666666666,90.0,110.0
+501,latent_501,3850,0.0077,0.012671431,2.562704,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+502,latent_502,18498,0.036996,0.025117563,6.5671,"Comparison of stable findings across multiple prior studies, notably cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours.","Examples with activations have comparisons between multiple prior studies and notable findings that are consistent or unchanged across these studies, specifically in the context of moderately enlarged cardiac silhouette and stable mediastinal contours despite potential other findings. This consistency is highlighted repeatedly across historical imaging reports, acting as a key contextual comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.6190476190476191,0.39,100.0,100.0
+503,latent_503,14060,0.02812,0.019680543,6.2938933,"Reports include details on mediastinal, cardiac, and hilar contours.","Examples with higher activation describe imaging findings that include mediastinal, cardiac, and hilar contours, either noting them as normal or describing specific conditions. These terms frequently appear in detailed radiological analyses that also include interspersed patient history, techniques, and comparison statements.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6181871958269474,0.645,0.5947712418300654,0.91,100.0,100.0
+504,latent_504,30312,0.060624,0.026126308,3.9047248,Comparison of medical device placement or removal between studies.,"In the given examples, comparisons are made with prior imaging, specifically focusing on the presence and removal of medical devices or tubes like ETT, pacer devices, and catheters. These samples exhibit reports of locational changes or removal of such devices between current and prior studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5734035549703753,0.595,0.6727272727272727,0.37,100.0,100.0
+505,latent_505,6908,0.013816,0.01676771,5.208313,Discussion of endotracheal (ET) tubes and pleural effusion management in context of imaging.,"Highly activated examples focus on findings related to ET tubes, their placement, along with any associated pleural effusions or lung conditions. This pattern features reports discussing the state and position of tubing, indicating monitoring or changes related to interventions such as intubation or management of pleural effusions.",0.6048387096774194,0.6326530612244898,0.75,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.6051386071670047,0.635,0.8,0.36,100.0,100.0
+506,latent_506,3398,0.006796,0.013071558,6.6930003,Detailed comparison to prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The focus of the pattern is on providing descriptions of findings in comparison to previous images. However, examples with 0 activation levels do not complete this task effectively, indicating a possible oversight or missing details that are crucial for adequate comparison with the prior studies.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,100.0,100.0
+507,latent_507,18656,0.037312,0.029818738,3.5415444,Explicit instructions or requests for evaluation in the prompt.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed instructions or requests within the prompt, such as 'provide a description of the findings' or 'please evaluate'. These requests often specify actions or evaluations that the user wants from the model, reflecting a distinct format of interactive engagement in these reports.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+508,latent_508,11451,0.022902,0.030914571,4.7294116,"Expectation to compare findings against prior imaging, including absent comparison data.","Examples with higher activation levels all involve explicit instructions to compare the current imaging findings to prior studies, even when the previous comparison information is marked as N/A or not provided. This pattern emphasizes a preparatory approach of expectance for comparative analysis, consistent with a structured radiological evaluation approach.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3718434343434343,0.4974874371859296,0.4973544973544973,0.9494949494949496,99.0,100.0
+509,latent_509,6188,0.012376,0.009623849,4.5564456,Detailed interval changes compared to prior studies.,"Activation is higher for examples where changes in imaging are explicitly compared to prior studies and notable interval changes are thematically described. The higher activation is typically associated with descriptions of interval changes or persistence of pathological findings, often providing context such as fluid levels, opacities, effusion, pneumothorax, or the position of medical devices compared to prior imaging.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+510,latent_510,3490,0.00698,0.008181604,4.318163,Radiological comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels all involve descriptions of findings in radiology studies that compare current images with prior images to determine stability or changes over time. Key phrases include ""compared to prior"" and verb tenses that suggest evaluating changes or constancy such as ""unchanged"" and ""again noted.""",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4087213599408721,0.44,0.4589041095890411,0.67,100.0,100.0
+511,latent_511,5345,0.01069,0.008067332,7.4422503,Little to no interval change between current and prior images.,"All examples with significant activation consistently refer to little or no interval change between current and prior imaging studies. The explicit mention of 'no relevant change' or 'stable' findings is a key pattern here, as it denotes a static condition over comparative images.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6836634781953754,0.685,0.6666666666666666,0.6595744680851063,94.0,106.0
+512,latent_512,4329,0.008658,0.008504062,4.250643,Detailed evaluation of changes or stability between current and prior imaging studies.,Samples with high activation levels describe detailed comparative analysis between the current and prior imaging studies while identifying specific changes or stability in conditions. This pattern involves highlighting differences or confirming ongoing consistency between studies in an evaluative context.,0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4595135622059854,0.46,0.4622641509433962,0.49,100.0,100.0
+513,latent_513,6245,0.01249,0.0071816714,7.0965176,Low lung volumes causing crowding of bronchovascular structures.,"Examples with activations above 0 commonly refer to low lung volumes and their effects, such as crowding of bronchovascular structures or changes in cardiac silhouette. This specific finding appears associated with the pattern being identified.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5912201190793567,0.655,0.52,0.3661971830985915,71.0,129.0
+514,latent_514,8979,0.017958,0.011420622,4.7096334,Interpretation explicitly focused on changes from prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is that high activation levels correspond with examples where there is an explicit need for a new or unchanged clinical description regarding recent imaging in comparison to prior studies. The prompt calls these descriptions as imperative, marking them as part of the task, distinct from prompts without such direct instructions.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+515,latent_515,84504,0.169008,0.10685892,4.602595,Highlighting stability or lack of change between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include references to unchanged or stable findings compared to prior studies. These examples consistently describe stability or lack of significant change in imaging findings between the current and previous studies, regardless of the specific condition being evaluated. This suggests the pattern involves highlighting findings that show stability over time.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.609375,0.61,0.6018518518518519,0.65,100.0,100.0
+516,latent_516,10639,0.021278,0.017406689,4.747747,Emphasis on device placement or termination sites in radiology studies.,"Postsurgical or post-procedural contexts often involve indicating the position or termination points of medical devices such as tubes or catheters, using descriptors like 'terminates in the SVC' or 'ends at the carina'. The examples reflect this focus on confirming proper device placement or documenting changes.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8526984126984127,0.855,0.784,0.98,100.0,100.0
+517,latent_517,11623,0.023246,0.013584636,3.3157387,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently focus on describing findings in radiology reports where comparisons are made to prior images, specifically noting terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or any indication of minimal to no significant change in the current findings compared to previous imaging, especially in contexts of non-acute or chronic findings.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.4347826086956521,0.3,100.0,100.0
+518,latent_518,35603,0.071206,0.039025716,4.0551515,Comparison of current and prior images for interval changes.,These samples focus on finding changes over time by comparing current to previous medical images. The descriptions often mention the detection of changes or stability in findings from previous images.,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4962025316455696,0.5175879396984925,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,99.0
+519,latent_519,1888,0.003776,0.0045032953,4.1374755,"Unremarkable cardiomediastinal, hilar, and cardiac silhouettes in comparative findings.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe unremarkable cardiomediastinal, hilar, and cardiac silhouettes or contours in radiological findings when comparing current images to prior ones, using standard radiological terms like 'unremarkable', 'stable', and 'within normal limits' to describe these features.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6917226064983792,0.6919191919191919,0.6826923076923077,0.7171717171717171,99.0,99.0
+520,latent_520,2548,0.005096,0.008103056,5.52367,Focus on comparisons between current frontal and lateral views and prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels frequently referenced both the frontal and lateral views of current images in the context of observing differences or similarities relative to past or baseline images. Reports with lower activations either lacked these comparisons or had incomplete comparisons noted as N/A.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+521,latent_521,4667,0.009334,0.01089446,4.2298594,Interpretation of imaging findings relative to prior exams.,"These examples consistently describe the interpretation of imaging findings in relation to prior radiographs or other imaging studies. The assistant response often references the condition relative to prior exams, highlighting stability, changes, or comparison details, which is a common practice in radiological analysis.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5347469183668012,0.565,0.543046357615894,0.82,100.0,100.0
+522,latent_522,3493,0.006986,0.0070381216,3.594908,Complex diagnostic context with imaging comparison and procedural detail.,"The examples with high activation often include complex radiological assessments, feature changes over time by comparing previous imaging, and provide specifications on prior procedures or complications associated with findings from reinterpretation of prior exams. This pattern highlights intricate diagnostic contexts dealing with various conditions and imaging comparisons.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4968944099378882,0.8,100.0,100.0
+523,latent_523,15810,0.03162,0.016662223,5.8612795,Focus on interval change or stability of specific findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently indicate a change or stabilization of findings from previous imaging, especially mentioning specific conditions like pneumonia, atelectasis, or effusions which have evolved over time. In these cases, the comparison with prior images focuses on interval changes or status of previously noted abnormalities.",0.5006645990252547,0.5306122448979592,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.4592592592592592,0.7380952380952381,84.0,116.0
+524,latent_524,2158,0.004316,0.013222915,7.9606075,Focus on detailed comparative analysis of images.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve instructions or tasks requiring a detailed comparison between a current image and a prior image, including specific directives for the AI to generate descriptions or interpretations based on these comparisons. This reflects the model's focus on change assessment.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4538461538461538,0.59,100.0,100.0
+525,latent_525,5012,0.010024,0.0111551285,6.20935,Comparison of multiple imaging views in relation to prior images.,"The examples that have high activations consistently involve multiple imaging views (e.g., frontal and lateral) while acknowledging comparisons with prior frontal images. This suggests the model is sensitive to contexts where multiple views are discussed to draw comparisons over time.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+526,latent_526,3401,0.006802,0.01018153,9.195192,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"In these examples, there is a consistent mention of comparison between the current and prior diagnostic imaging studies. This is a common practice in radiology to identify changes or stability in the patient's condition over time.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5655080213903744,0.61,0.5670731707317073,0.93,100.0,100.0
+527,latent_527,3484,0.006968,0.008170942,4.336204,Comparison of current and prior images with specific findings noted.,"Examples with activation have comparison to prior studies and provide detailed accounts of changes or stable findings over time, which are integral to the pattern being identified. The assistance component that mirrors or extends from prior image findings is common, emphasizing change or stability between imaging sessions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4319312871037009,0.4321608040201005,0.4270833333333333,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+528,latent_528,13326,0.026652,0.01680406,3.6721857,Presence of a large hiatal hernia on chest imaging.,"The presence of a large hiatal hernia appears consistently in higher activation examples, suggesting that this anatomical anomaly is indicative of the pattern the model is tracking.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,1.0,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3311036789297659,0.495,0.0,0.0,100.0,100.0
+529,latent_529,9013,0.018026,0.008271933,3.0620344,Comparative description of imaging over time.,"The pattern is characterized by the task of providing descriptions of imaging findings, especially in chest imaging, in comparison to a given prior image often accompanied by the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This prompts the assistant to describe changes over time, thereby engaging a comparative analysis with minimal direct patient-specific instructions.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+530,latent_530,9337,0.018674,0.017512638,8.005877,Descriptions of surgical or mechanical intervention changes and hardware status.,"This group of examples consistently revolves around the description of surgical or post-surgical hardware, such as rib fixation hardware, screws, or placement of lines and tubes, and the post-operative or mechanical interval changes in these devices. The presence or change in surgical implements is a significant finding and focuses on alterations related to surgical intervention or pathologies like emphysema involving hardware adjustment or observation.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3657289002557544,0.38,0.3285714285714285,0.23,100.0,100.0
+531,latent_531,3849,0.007698,0.010191849,4.6078854,Description and comparison of current and prior image findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the provision for a textual description based on comparisons with provided images. These examples specify different perspectives of chest images being analyzed and focus on disparities or confirmations against previously documented states or corresponding image sets, requiring a comprehensive interpretative effort.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4685314685314685,0.67,100.0,100.0
+532,latent_532,22914,0.045828,0.025944756,5.0783277,Utilization of WILDCARD text patterns.,"Examples with higher activations often employ WILDCARD text patterns such as underscores, incomplete pronouns, and brackets like [[example]]. These placeholders or annotations appear frequently alongside descriptors where space holders for other text inputs are used.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4193796068796069,0.4271356783919598,0.4426229508196721,0.54,100.0,99.0
+533,latent_533,7262,0.014524,0.011073744,6.0313883,Assessment of pulmonary changes or equipment positions in respiratory conditions.,"Many of these examples describe findings in radiology studies with specific attention to anomalies or changes in pulmonary opacities or tubes related to respiratory conditions. In examples with higher activation, there is a focus on assessing or identifying positional changes or abnormalities, particularly notable respiratory complications or device placements, which might require acute clinical attention.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+534,latent_534,3902,0.007804,0.009667796,4.378336,Assessing findings through comparison with multiple image views or prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels largely involve descriptions that require review and analysis of multiple image views and make explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies. This entails looking for changes or stability in findings when the current imaging is juxtaposed with past imaging results, which is also indicated by requests for assistants to describe findings in the context of comparisons.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3975205654037771,0.48,0.4885057471264368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+535,latent_535,5338,0.010676,0.01763511,4.668192,Providing a description to compare findings with previous images or records.,The examples with high activation levels either explicitly indicate instruction to compare radiological findings with previous images or directly involve a comparison process. They request a description of comparison findings even if initial reports fail to provide prior study references.,0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.4469696969696969,0.59,100.0,100.0
+536,latent_536,19182,0.038364,0.027534807,4.9627757,Stable conditions or findings without new developments in serial comparisons.,"These examples commonly involve descriptions about the stability or absence of significant changes in presence of devices, effusions, or pulmonary conditions between the current and prior image assessments. This pattern is evident in examples with no new findings or stable conditions, despite specific comparisons being made.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5543478260869565,0.51,100.0,100.0
+537,latent_537,4132,0.008264,0.009309731,5.0941033,Comparison to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"The consistently high activation levels occur when reports mention comparison to prior studies and describe changes or stability in imaging findings. Instances often distinguish between unchanged or altered conditions in lung, cardiac, or other anatomical features when compared to previous exams.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6495238095238096,0.655,0.624,0.78,100.0,100.0
+538,latent_538,4828,0.009656,0.0094889905,5.6363955,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"These examples emphasize findings on current radiographs compared to prior images, suggesting that the pattern includes making frequent mention of comparisons and assessments of consistency over time. This often helps identify stability or change in medical conditions. Examples also frequently note unchanged positions of indwelling devices, as well as no new findings or resolution of identified conditions from previous imaging.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4125178880771258,0.415,0.4247787610619469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+539,latent_539,13480,0.02696,0.017930368,5.825804,Explicit detailed comparisons with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently show detailed descriptions that relate current findings to prior imaging through explicit comparison, often noting changes or stability. Specifically, these reports include detailed notes on changes over time, location of medical devices, and anatomical differences compared to prior imaging.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+540,latent_540,57134,0.114268,0.05971135,4.9925337,"References to unchanged, new, or resolving pathologies compared to prior imaging.","Examples with high activation frequently involve descriptions of new, unchanged, or resolving pathologies compared to prior imaging studies. Examples often reference significant findings such as unchanged cardiomegaly, atelectasis, pneumonia, and nodules against previous chest radiographs. The explicit comparisons allow us to monitor progression or regression of conditions over time.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6596825396825396,0.665,0.632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+541,latent_541,4290,0.00858,0.016318195,9.974442,Pulmonary vascular congestion or cardiomegaly in chest findings.,"The activation pattern is primarily seen in examples where there is a mention of pulmonary vascular congestion, often related to heart size or silhouette changes, frequent findings in heart failure or pulmonary edema states. Phrases like 'vascular congestion,' 'cardiomediastinal silhouette,' or 'cardiomegaly' are mentioned, indicating an emphasis on vascular and cardiac conditions.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7046381817726715,0.705,0.6915887850467289,0.74,100.0,100.0
+542,latent_542,3178,0.006356,0.008101918,6.9802537,Comparison of current chest images with prior images for changes.,The examples with high activation typically ask for a descriptive comparison between the current chest X-ray images and prior images. The focus on the process of comparing and mentioning any changes or stability of findings relative to previous images is the key pattern here.,0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4041404598813374,0.415,0.4330708661417323,0.55,100.0,100.0
+543,latent_543,3138,0.006276,0.02066333,6.5054307,Radiological comparison using current and prior images with detailed technical methods.,"The highly activated examples consistently use structured image analysis involving comparisons between the current and prior images, paired with detailed technical information. These examples follow a methodical process of evidence verification with emphasis on comparison and integration with historical data.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+544,latent_544,3530,0.00706,0.010643819,4.32672,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung findings across images.,"Patterns in the examples with high activation levels frequently involve the description of general findings from both current and prior chest images, with a notable emphasis on generalized phrases regarding the chest silhouette, contours, or findings like atelectasis, without specific acute findings. These often lack immediate acute distress indications and focus on stable findings or long-term observations across multiple images.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5384142436275138,0.5404040404040404,0.5465116279069767,0.4747474747474747,99.0,99.0
+545,latent_545,5108,0.010216,0.006634252,3.2412624,Observations about heart size or cardiac silhouette stability compared to prior images.,"The non-zero activations are associated with examples that make specific observations about the size or appearance of the heart in relation to previous images. Phrases describing the heart in relation to past exams, such as 'unchanged', 'enlarged but stable', or 'top normal', are highlighted. These details often feature in discussions about cardiac enlargement, device placement, or pulmonary issues that affect heart size.",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5492957746478874,0.39,100.0,100.0
+546,latent_546,12545,0.02509,0.017998166,5.808955,Comparison of current radiographic findings to prior images.,"Examples with high activation are associated with instructions to compare current radiographic images to prior images, as indicated by phrases like 'comparison to the prior frontal image' and contexts suggesting follow-up on previous findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,100.0
+547,latent_547,37880,0.07576,0.033711623,3.3092146,Interval change or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with activations indicate findings that reference specific changes, developments, or unchanging aspects in sequential radiological images. This involves both descriptions of findings and specific comparisons over time with prior images, exhibiting explicit linguistic cues such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'since prior'. This implies these examples focus on the importance of interval changes in follow-up imaging, highlighting continuity, monitoring, or lack of progression in patient conditions.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6601791782514674,0.67,0.6268656716417911,0.84,100.0,100.0
+548,latent_548,27102,0.054204,0.05984016,5.821156,Stable positioning of tubes or devices in follow-up imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention comparisons of the positioning of medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, chest tubes) between current and prior images, or unchanged, stable cardiac and mediastinal structures. These refer to the stability or position of hardware or anatomical structures, which are key considerations in radiological follow-ups.",0.5353448275862069,0.5510204081632653,0.6,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.625,0.3,100.0,100.0
+549,latent_549,5358,0.010716,0.010131769,7.026391,Comparison with prior imaging for assessment of changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to comparisons being made between the current imaging and prior images, with added focus on changes and stable findings. This highlights the importance of a comparative analysis in radiology reporting for these cases.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+550,latent_550,3911,0.007822,0.011382565,5.4111347,Presence of 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]] :' pattern or similar.,"The common pattern in these examples is the use of the 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]] :' format, which is associated with referring to or explicitly stating findings or comparisons to previous reports or images in radiology examinations. These cues are technical or formatting cues observed in dictated or structured radiology reports that often accompany high activations due to their explicit comparison language.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5024458420684835,0.555,0.5333333333333333,0.88,100.0,100.0
+551,latent_551,22971,0.045942,0.028070463,6.254318,Limitations in chest imaging evaluation affecting findings' interpretation.,"Examples with activation levels above 2.0 often include assessments of findings' significance being constrained by factors like patient positioning, portable technique, and limited examination scope, especially portable imaging where image quality might affect interpretation, compared to prior imaging.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7284766515535746,0.735,0.6793893129770993,0.89,100.0,100.0
+552,latent_552,3269,0.006538,0.0059524486,5.7019854,Comparison of current images with prior ones without prior report analysis.,"Data points with high activation levels emphasize situations where the model is asked to provide a comparative analysis explicitly between current and prior imaging, particularly given scenarios that include specific medical conditions or follow-up contexts. The task always pairs with prior images but without a pre-existing prior report description, focusing on visual comparison.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+553,latent_553,2099,0.004198,0.00369444,4.6813073,Comparison with prior images emphasizing unchanged or consistent findings.,"Examined examples predominantly involve cases where images are compared to prior ones with consistent findings related to cardiopulmonary status or other metrics being unchanged or presenting ongoing conditions. Despite presence of multiple views, the essence is still about ongoing conditions over imagery.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.463768115942029,0.32,100.0,100.0
+554,latent_554,2658,0.005316,0.0073981327,6.193138,Comparative description of findings with prior images.,"The pattern observed involves the act of providing descriptions of radiology findings based on the comparison with previous images or reports. Examples with comprehensive descriptions that compare current imaging to prior instances, often recounting stability, changes, or stability of particular aspects, show high activation levels, emphasizing the procedure of comparative radiology analysis.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4125178880771258,0.415,0.4247787610619469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+555,latent_555,15029,0.030058,0.023031766,5.6831794,Normal findings or unchanged device positioning in chest radiographs.,"The examples that have high activation levels often show a normal gastric region with devices like Dobbhoff tubes or stable descriptions of nodules, while others mention devices' positions without new findings. These results focus on devices and stability or normalcy in comparison to other findings, which might suggest a model focused on detecting stable or unchanged states, especially in device positioning or non-pathologic findings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.5,0.47,100.0,100.0
+556,latent_556,12996,0.025992,0.038915023,7.515467,Description of interval changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of changes or stability in radiographic findings when compared to previous imaging studies, denoting differences or similarities in the observed conditions. Key elements include notable interval changes in lung opacities, consolidation, effusion, or other radiographic markers between current and prior images.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3778879146016012,0.3819095477386934,0.3571428571428571,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+557,latent_557,9591,0.019182,0.015770052,6.2735543,Comparison reports noting interval changes with no indication of stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings in current and prior images without noting 'no significant change.' These reports focus on interval changes observed between current and previous studies, indicating new or revised findings as opposed to stable or unchanged conditions. Each example emphasizes findings that are noted in comparison but are not dismissed as unchanged.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.6212121212121212,0.41,100.0,100.0
+558,latent_558,9966,0.019932,0.028413512,5.330939,Comparative analysis with prior imaging studies triggers patterns.,Patterns of activation indicate that the presence of previous imaging for reference and the use of detailed language in comparing current images to prior ones triggers higher activation. This structure involves explicit comparisons or stating differences or stabilities over time.,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4022713687985654,0.425,0.4460431654676259,0.62,100.0,100.0
+559,latent_559,22684,0.045368,0.028785113,6.471346,Focus on changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently discuss radiological changes or findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, indicating a focus on detecting changes or the persistence of findings over time. This pattern is distinct from those describing immediate findings without temporal comparison.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+560,latent_560,10326,0.020652,0.011508049,4.1477656,"Comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies, highlighting unchanged observations.","Highly activated examples consist of descriptions comparing current imaging findings with prior images, highlighting intervals of stability or slight changes. Such descriptions are typical in medical imaging contexts where interval changes are scrutinized.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4868421052631579,0.37,100.0,100.0
+561,latent_561,58176,0.116352,0.058336154,4.240775,Reports with detailed comparative interpretation of the frontal images.,"Examples that are described as 'populated' are those in which there is more information in the assistant's description, reflecting a level of interpretation or discussion of the findings' significance. Populated reports provide an explicit analysis contrasting the current image with the prior one and often include recommendations or diagnoses, particularly when they describe changes detected upon comparative review.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.5547445255474452,0.76,100.0,100.0
+562,latent_562,12184,0.024368,0.0124352975,4.748999,Description involving presence or positioning of endotracheal or chest tubes.,"Examples all involve some mention of endotracheal or chest tubes, including their positioning, or alterations such as removal or continuation in their findings descriptions. This suggests a pattern where such non-standard findings in terms of presence or alteration of medical devices influence a higher activation.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.2,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.5248078266946191,0.575,0.7142857142857143,0.25,100.0,100.0
+563,latent_563,2016,0.004032,0.006095759,5.025282,Comparison-based changes in respiratory status or device placement.,"This pattern frequently mentions intervals or changes in findings compared to a prior imaging exam, often involving placement or repositioning of medical devices such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, as well as findings related to pleural effusions or atelectasis, in particular for conditions that involve respiratory interventions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5576923076923077,0.58,100.0,100.0
+564,latent_564,4892,0.009784,0.009347249,7.0364075,Contrast of findings in context of denied comparison availability.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe scenarios in which comparisons are made to prior imaging studies despite stating 'comparison: none' or 'comparison: _'. These contradictions are often followed by an initial brief description, then leading into radiographic findings, assessing current images relative to previous images. This instruction with a non-existent or unidentified comparison serves as a paradox, likely targeting a need to reconcile initial directives with the final output regions.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6242390841453944,0.625,0.6373626373626373,0.58,100.0,100.0
+565,latent_565,6485,0.01297,0.00907888,3.7233272,Thorough comparison and documentation of interval changes across imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels usually have a thorough comparison with prior imaging, often noting interval changes and frequently involving acute situations or major indications for the imaging, usually included in detailed 'IMPRESSION' or 'ASSISTANT' sections, suggesting a strong correlation to a systematic descriptive and comparative language pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.44,0.4423076923076923,0.46,100.0,100.0
+566,latent_566,6846,0.013692,0.014438211,5.818463,"Comparisons with prior imaging, highlighting stability or change.","Examples that had high activations consistently described radiological findings and their changes over time by directly comparing current imaging to prior imaging studies. Additionally, the focus is on assessments related to pulmonary changes, stability, or potential central causes (like devices or conditions) which are compared to prior studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+567,latent_567,11024,0.022048,0.020331334,7.408505,Interval change noted compared to prior imaging.,"The given examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiology studies where the description focuses on comparing current images with prior or very recent images or exams, highlighting any interval changes in findings.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6334513318771811,0.635,0.6194690265486725,0.7,100.0,100.0
+568,latent_568,3010,0.00602,0.00778913,6.69631,Focus on post-procedural or post-treatment changes.,"The cases with high activation levels consistently emphasize the assessment of interval changes and specific procedures or treatments that have been done between the imaging studies, often post-surgical or related to intervention procedures, indicating this pattern is focused on monitoring changes after clinical interventions.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4745762711864407,0.28,100.0,100.0
+569,latent_569,5402,0.010804,0.01657877,9.66696,Comparison to prior imaging showing stability or changes over time.,"The pattern centers around referencing prior imaging studies for comparison in radiological reports. The higher activation levels are observed where there are consistent descriptions highlighting stability or changes over time, frequently with the use of 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'as before'. This is a crucial element in evaluating the progression of findings over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5304347826086957,0.61,100.0,100.0
+570,latent_570,4517,0.009034,0.010468282,4.672274,Presence or evaluation of free air beneath the diaphragm.,"The consistent factor among activated samples is the explicit evaluation or consideration of the presence of free air, particularly below the diaphragm, which indicates conditions like pneumoperitoneum often addressed in an acute care setting.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4503337259521005,0.545,0.7647058823529411,0.13,100.0,100.0
+571,latent_571,30864,0.061728,0.05082325,7.3543577,Frequent comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize comparing current radiology findings with prior imaging to indicate stability or change in medical conditions, supporting continuity in patient evaluation across multiple studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3876042656530461,0.42,0.4452054794520548,0.65,100.0,100.0
+572,latent_572,3457,0.006914,0.0057988153,6.3107843,Instruction to compare findings with prior image.,"These examples all mention comparison to a prior image explicitly in the instruction, indicating the task involves evaluating changes or lack thereof over time. This context repeatedly appears where images are analyzed in relation to past ones.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5321448737597806,0.565,0.5424836601307189,0.83,100.0,100.0
+573,latent_573,23584,0.047168,0.038223606,4.3106833,"Emphasis on progression, change, or stability compared to prior images.","The examples typically report findings that are assessed relative to other available imaging data for changes, increases, or decreases, using positional terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'improved', 'increased' etc. Particularly, the pattern is defined by changes in severity of previously noted conditions and consistency of findings over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6131114394587449,0.6231155778894473,0.5954198473282443,0.78,100.0,99.0
+574,latent_574,26577,0.053154,0.034078218,5.794275,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"The samples that exhibit higher activation levels often present changes, comparisons, or reassessment based on previous imaging studies, demonstrating intervals of improvement or worsening conditions, indicative of radiological reevaluation based on historical data.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+575,latent_575,5626,0.011252,0.007368028,5.790715,Device/tube positioning adjustments suggested by comparison to prior imaging.,Activation levels increase when there is mention or implication of device positioning adjustments or concerns involving tubes or catheters. This is reflected in the recommendation for advancing or withdrawing devices such as endotracheal tubes or NG tubes based on current and prior imaging.,0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3975205654037771,0.48,0.4230769230769231,0.11,100.0,100.0
+576,latent_576,4533,0.009066,0.01066096,5.2907944,"Normal cardiac and pulmonary contours, no acute abnormalities, with comparison to previous imaging.","Examples with high activation are marked by findings of normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, and normal pulmonary vascularity with unremarkable lungs, lacking acute cardiopulmonary findings or osseous abnormalities, often with imaging noted for comparison without any reported changes or new findings.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5920032639738881,0.6,0.6388888888888888,0.46,100.0,100.0
+577,latent_577,2964,0.005928,0.010504787,6.415757,Identification of focal pathologies in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples highlight focal pathologies such as consolidations and opacities, often described in terms of changes over time identified via comparison with prior images, specifically referenced as new, persistent, improved, or worsened findings. This pattern of focal pathologies being traced over time is crucial for evaluating the progression or resolution of specific lung conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4511746680286006,0.457286432160804,0.4430379746835443,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+578,latent_578,6744,0.013488,0.009673628,5.5820785,References to interval change or stability using prior imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the mention of comparison with prior radiographic images. This pattern involves detecting changes over time using terms like 'unchanged', 'as compared to', and 'no interval change', emphasizing continuity, change, or stability in findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5528455284552846,0.68,100.0,100.0
+579,latent_579,4072,0.008144,0.012078237,6.408363,Evaluation of changes or stability in imaging via comparison with prior studies.,"Activations are high when the report describes findings in comparison with prior images and mentions specific changes or stability of findings over time. This pattern focuses on evaluating subtle changes or noting stability in the condition as indicated by comparison with previous imaging studies. High activation examples specifically note differences, intervals, and/or lack of change relative to prior imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4448829925390237,0.455,0.4645669291338583,0.59,100.0,100.0
+580,latent_580,9891,0.019782,0.014296534,4.1121097,Presence of prior reports or requests for comparison with prior images.,"The prompt examples with higher activations frequently contain references to accompanying prior reports for comparison, and often request detailed evaluations of current images relative to prior studies. This correlation points to the importance of analyses involving longitudinal or comparative imaging data.",0.4595588235294118,0.5102040816326531,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.3274485077763766,0.36,0.4027777777777778,0.58,100.0,100.0
+581,latent_581,3652,0.007304,0.0086209085,4.302627,Instructions to compare current images with prior frontal images.,Samples with high activation levels feature prompts explicitly asking for a comparison or description based on given current and prior imaging. The phrasing consistently involves prompts to provide comparisons between the current image(s) and prior studies directly within the instructions.,0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+582,latent_582,12823,0.025646,0.017804418,7.7195835,Findings or changes related to specific pathologies in comparison to prior imaging.,"The data indicate higher activations when there's a focus on findings or changes related to specific medical conditions or concerns for pathology in relation to previous medical imaging, which are common in follow-up analysis for chronic or serious illness assessments.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4787209569818265,0.4797979797979798,0.4725274725274725,0.4387755102040816,98.0,100.0
+583,latent_583,4480,0.00896,0.011284786,10.679478,Mentions or findings related to rib fractures or deformities.,"High-activation examples generally mention rib fractures or rib-related findings, whether it's detecting new fractures, describing old healed fractures, or indicating presence of rib deformities. In other instances, where activation is low, rib-related observations are either absent or generalized toward indicating the impact of an unrelated pathology.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.483110950835437,0.57,0.8888888888888888,0.16,100.0,100.0
+584,latent_584,20700,0.0414,0.02758804,7.6717267,Cardiac silhouette and pulmonary congestion comparison with prior exams.,These examples focus on changes in the cardiac silhouette and increase in pulmonary vascular congestion or indications of cardiovascular issues as compared to previous exams. Findings related to heart size or vascular congestion are frequently noted when addressing potential or known heart or pulmonary vascular issues.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5,0.5952380952380952,84.0,116.0
+585,latent_585,10463,0.020926,0.014258906,6.136401,Stability over time as seen through comparison with prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently include comparisons with previous radiological exams, emphasizing either no significant change or the stable presence of certain findings across multiple instances. The consistent mention of comparison over time appears to be prominent, particularly indicating unchanged pathology or stability of certain medical interventions/devices.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,100.0
+586,latent_586,3715,0.00743,0.008562645,6.687939,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+587,latent_587,29410,0.05882,0.025615938,3.1928935,Focus on medical device placement and pleural findings stability.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero describe the presence or assessment of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or telemetry equipment, or changes and stability in pleural effusions or pneumothorax. These observations highlight the consistency or adjustment of medical aids, likely due to the importance of monitoring their status in radiological comparisons.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.6056338028169014,0.43,100.0,100.0
+588,latent_588,4961,0.009922,0.015237317,5.1131616,Normal/stable findings in chest radiographs described with no acute abnormalities.,"The highly activated examples frequently describe normal findings across different compartments of the chest (heart, lungs, mediastinal, etc.) and use terminologies indicating a stable condition, such as ""normal,"" ""clear,"" or ""within normal limits."" This suggests that the pattern might be about identifying reports that primarily describe normal/stable findings without acute abnormalities.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,100.0
+589,latent_589,4836,0.009672,0.0071328944,4.39766,"Comparison of current and prior images identifying changes or stability, especially post-surgical or procedural.","The highly activated examples consistently involve language indicating a before-and-after assessment of the same patient's radiographic changes over time, with phrases like 'Compared to prior', 'since prior', or 'unchanged from'. This suggests the model strongly activates when it assesses temporal changes in radiographs involving specific conditions like effusion, edema, or pulmonary opacities, particularly contrasted with the pre-existence of implants or prior surgical changes in the imagery.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5703324808184143,0.58,0.5615384615384615,0.73,100.0,100.0
+590,latent_590,5334,0.010668,0.013863077,7.813566,Findings compared to prior radiographic studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include findings compared to prior radiographic studies, using phrases like 'in comparison with', 'unchanged since', and providing explicit references to prior imaging dates or studies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+591,latent_591,4728,0.009456,0.011215259,3.6958783,Comparative analysis involving multiple imaging views and prior report details.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve multiple radiological images being compared (current frontal, current lateral, and prior frontal image) provided with specific prior report details such as indications or techniques, often including direct references to patient histories.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5165562913907285,0.78,100.0,100.0
+592,latent_592,4985,0.00997,0.018416928,7.9240294,Comparison between current and previous imaging.,"Despite the presence of numerous other findings and assessments, those examples marked with high activations consistently emphasize the presence of results or changes observed between current and prior images. This approach suggests that the model recognizes a pattern of clinical importance based specifically on comparative analysis rather than solely on new diagnostic observations alone.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+593,latent_593,8093,0.016186,0.014660803,4.2730017,Focus on comparative analysis with prior radiology studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently contain the directive to compare current findings to prior images, illustrating the importance of a comparative analysis in these scenarios. Most of these involve checking for consistency or stability compared to previous observations, reflecting a pattern of focus on changes over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.26417004048583,0.43,0.4557823129251701,0.67,100.0,100.0
+594,latent_594,6946,0.013892,0.021337448,4.421614,Unchanged or normal cardiomediastinal silhouette mentioned.,"These examples predominantly feature descriptions of heart and mediastinal characteristics in radiological exams, specifically mentioning either normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes frequently. These descriptions often highlight the absence of acute cardiopulmonary processes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6462312068264933,0.6482412060301508,0.631578947368421,0.72,100.0,99.0
+595,latent_595,2868,0.005736,0.00646109,4.2286515,Structured radiology report format with specified imaging comparison.,"The data indicates that the pattern involves providing descriptions formatted for radiology reports inclusive of past and current imaging in many modalities (frontal/lateral or both) for comparison. Descriptions often involve mentioning current findings compared with prior images, particularly noting improvements or stability, creating comprehensive assessment narratives that accommodate multiple image readings in a consistently structured format.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4095365418894831,0.47,0.4817073170731707,0.79,100.0,100.0
+596,latent_596,4133,0.008266,0.0065554227,4.447611,Presence of detailed comparisons with prior imaging regarding stability or change.,"High activation levels consistently occur when findings are compared with prior imaging, particularly where stability or change in mediastinal, cardiac, or pulmonary abnormalities, such as effusions, cardiomegaly, or vascular congestion, are described. The focus is on the comparison aspect.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4606741573033708,0.41,100.0,100.0
+597,latent_597,22971,0.045942,0.025740458,4.86586,Focus on stability or improvement in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involved findings descriptions often highlighting the stability or follow-up of specific conditions in comparison to prior imaging, such as 'unchanged', 'remains improved', or 'no evidence of new pathology'. This pattern focuses on monitoring changes over time, particularly improvements or stability seen in serial comparisons with prior images.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4971700020214271,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.47,100.0,99.0
+598,latent_598,2576,0.005152,0.009499037,5.991552,Detailed comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide a sequence of detailed comparison findings between current radiography images and prior images, assessing stability and changes in specific features or pathologies, rather than identifying acute changes. They often list findings methodically, even if unchanged, for comprehensive cross-referencing purposes.",0.2525252525252525,0.26,0.2,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4107426153962378,0.415,0.3975903614457831,0.33,100.0,100.0
+599,latent_599,5129,0.010258,0.011214151,5.376916,Evaluation of changes or stability of findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples involve comparisons of current radiographs, with a particular focus on describing and evaluating findings in the context of prior reports or images. This is highlighted by mentioning changes, stability, or progression of identified features (e.g., effusions, opacities) in reference to earlier studies.",0.595393307257714,0.6122448979591837,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.5997816991086047,0.615,0.5827338129496403,0.81,100.0,100.0
+600,latent_600,40174,0.080348,0.06281795,5.2705517,Direct comparison of current and prior images indicating stability or change.,"The pattern pertains to descriptions that make direct comparison between current and previous imaging studies, indicating stability or change in findings, regardless of the type of procedure or technique used. These reports often involve multiple medical fixtures or conditions that require monitoring over time.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5689655172413793,0.58,0.5606060606060606,0.74,100.0,100.0
+601,latent_601,54600,0.1092,0.084571496,5.491476,Emphasis on interval changes and device positioning relative to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples include references to interval changes when examining structures like the lungs, mediastinum, or pleural areas, often noting findings as unchanged or discussing established devices' positions relative to previous studies. This pattern of comparison with prior images, particularly in terms of changes or stability in medical devices' positioning or lung opacities, is critical for tracking patient progress.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.5803571428571429,0.65,100.0,100.0
+602,latent_602,2446,0.004892,0.010787367,7.585138,Use of both current frontal and lateral images along with prior images for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels include references to multiple types of images provided (e.g., current frontal and lateral images in conjunction with prior images), emphasizing the comprehensive analysis using multiple perspectives and notations of historical comparisons. This pattern indicates thorough cross-examination of radiological findings across different views and times.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.591304347826087,0.68,100.0,100.0
+603,latent_603,8307,0.016614,0.011297737,4.435787,Stable appearance or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels either describe normal findings and specific, stable observations from previous exams, with phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'not well assessed'. This pattern focuses on the absence of acute findings and the stability of conditions over time, often referencing previous imaging for verification.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,100.0
+604,latent_604,82317,0.164634,0.093176626,6.8957953,Emphasis on stability or comparison of medical devices or unchanged conditions.,"The format and language of these radiology reports center around the presence and comparison of technological devices or pathological findings on imaging with a specific emphasis on medical devices such as tubes and lines, as well as explicit acknowledgments of unchanged positions of these devices or physiological aspects despite new imaging acquisitions.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6100164203612479,0.62,0.5693430656934306,0.8210526315789474,95.0,105.0
+605,latent_605,6268,0.012536,0.010166838,4.6708813,Detailed descriptions of medical tube placements in relation to anatomical landmarks.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of positioning or adjustment of medical tubes (e.g., endotracheal or nasogastric) in relation to anatomical landmarks such as the carina or stomach. They often conclude with positioning suggestions or observations about the tubes.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6510673234811166,0.66,0.7352941176470589,0.5,100.0,100.0
+606,latent_606,16508,0.033016,0.018999144,4.3055196,Interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The radiology report examples showing higher activation levels focus on findings in current imaging studies that require a description relative to the prior imaging study, which involves identifying and describing interval changes over time. Higher activation examples provide detailed findings in comparison with prior imagery, while lower activation ones do not emphasize changes over time.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4333333333333333,0.39,100.0,100.0
+607,latent_607,37041,0.074082,0.046968848,5.1000896,Resolution or improvement of previously noted condition in comparison to previous imaging.,"These examples contain radiology findings where there is an improvement or resolution of a previously noted condition. The reports often use terms like 'resolution', 'improved', 'decreased', or 'no longer noted', indicating a positive change or stability in prior abnormalities.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4649545211342964,0.525,0.5757575757575758,0.19,100.0,100.0
+608,latent_608,2605,0.00521,0.0064199083,6.9291663,Task requires comparing current and prior images with unchanged/stable findings.,"The examples with higher activations all contain the structured task of producing a description of findings based on current and prior images, with the emphasis put on making comparisons, in particular where there is no significant new pathology found or very standard descriptive language (e.g., lungs clear, no consolidation). The pattern emphasizes unchanged, stable findings seen in both current and prior images",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.34,100.0,100.0
+609,latent_609,3743,0.007486,0.013659293,5.8882203,Descriptions of interval changes across sequential images.,"This pattern occurs when findings are compared across multiple sequential images or studies. The samples with higher activation levels describe interval changes or stability of findings, using language such as 'unchanged since', 'compared to', 'no significant changes', or 'stable'. This highlights a report style focusing on interval assessment and follow-up.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+610,latent_610,8684,0.017368,0.011348809,4.304528,Instructions to provide descriptive findings compared to prior images.,"Many examples reference frontal images and compare current findings with prior images. However, examples with higher activation levels often show explicit instructions to provide descriptions or observations in comparison to prior images, particularly mentioning specific changes or consistent observations over time. The examples with lower activation may involve descriptions without emphasis on comparing specific changes from prior reports.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+611,latent_611,8211,0.016422,0.011018681,8.243405,Moderate/emergent pulmonary edema with stable cardiomegaly.,"Examples with high activation levels describe cases where there is moderate or new significant increase in pulmonary edema, often noted alongside stable or unchanged cardiomegaly. This distinct pattern appears to trigger high activation, suggesting the model is attuned to recognizing newly or increasingly diagnosed edema in the chest radiographs.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.516540282790821,0.635,0.6666666666666666,0.175,80.0,120.0
+612,latent_612,29016,0.058032,0.022700734,2.5441506,Comparison and interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare findings between the current and prior images, explicitly providing indicators of changes or stability over time. This comparison includes specific references to alterations based on interval changes, often involving medical devices or pathologies, and changes in disease states over time.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5944700460829493,0.615,0.5793103448275863,0.84,100.0,100.0
+613,latent_613,5218,0.010436,0.014024221,4.3165817,Direct comparison requests without available prior report.,"The pattern is characterized by instructions or requests for providing descriptions or comparisons of findings between current and previous radiological images when the prior report is marked as ""N/A"" or missing. It emphasizes the need for direct examination and description without pre-existing comparison data.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4675585284280936,0.5175879396984925,0.5125,0.82,100.0,99.0
+614,latent_614,44925,0.08985,0.10930381,6.6688385,References to cardiac/mediastinal silhouette or contours.,"These activations revolve around descriptions of findings in chest imaging reports referencing 'cardiac silhouette' or 'mediastinal contour,' which indicate the appearance or notable features of the heart or central structures of the thorax in the image, often compared to a prior image to note changes or stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.5864661654135338,0.78,100.0,100.0
+615,latent_615,3508,0.007016,0.010686354,4.4819713,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging with stable findings or specific changes noted.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels contain explicit references to a comparison between a current and a prior imaging study, with specific comparisons or stability of findings over time. These indicate the model's recognition of the importance of temporal comparisons in the evaluation of radiological findings, reflecting a focus on changes or consistencies over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4418604651162791,0.38,100.0,100.0
+616,latent_616,11681,0.023362,0.017397227,7.263269,Comparison findings indicating change or stability in radiological features.,"Highly activated examples frequently mention comparison to prior imaging, indicating changes over time or stability, fundamental in evaluating radiological findings. Patterns include identifying improvements, stability, or worsening of findings.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5449967886962106,0.5527638190954773,0.53125,0.7010309278350515,97.0,102.0
+617,latent_617,10969,0.021938,0.02020439,4.167949,Tracking changes over time by comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation involve comparison to prior images and require assessment of changes over time, including continuity of key details like device placement, presence of opacities, and pleural effusions. Cases emphasize detecting interval changes, stability, or improvement in specific findings which suggests an emphasis on tracking progression or resolution of acute or chronic conditions.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+618,latent_618,3172,0.006344,0.006418719,11.085224,"In detail, evaluation of respiratory conditions, particularly asthma or aspiration.","High activation samples consistently include detailed descriptions of specific respiratory conditions, such as asthma or aspiration, along with the presence of specific findings on radiographic images. Lower activation samples lack this granularity or detail related to specific respiratory processes.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.579599513220489,0.62,0.8157894736842105,0.31,100.0,100.0
+619,latent_619,3433,0.006866,0.009849323,7.4582596,Emphasized documentation or comparison in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize situations where findings are either repetitive or where multiple prior examinations or reports are referenced for comprehensive comparison. Terms like 'PREAMBLE', 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'COMPARISON', or 'FINDINGS' signals a detailed or thorough documentation process is part of the pattern.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.369047619047619,0.47,0.4833333333333333,0.87,100.0,100.0
+620,latent_620,10172,0.020344,0.012570693,5.268689,Comparative descriptions highlighting stable or newly evolved findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the importance of clear descriptions of longitudinal changes in finding comparisons, using data from newer images against previous images to monitor changes over time. Recurrent, unchanged, or stable conditions, or newly developing intervals, play a significant role in these radiology report sections.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5711206896551724,0.5778894472361809,0.56,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+621,latent_621,8980,0.01796,0.012924382,3.8037837,Radiological comparisons emphasize changes against prior imaging.,"The examples given indicate comparisons between current and prior examinations, emphasizing changes in findings like lung volumes, opacities, or other stable features like cardiomegaly or aortic tortuosity. The focus on direct comparison suggests this pattern.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+622,latent_622,4785,0.00957,0.009396071,5.2981653,Radiology findings compared explicitly to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiology findings through explicit comparison to prior examinations or imaging studies. These reports leverage previous observations to establish stability, change, or progression in radiological features, a common approach to evaluate patient progress or changes in their condition over time.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+623,latent_623,8553,0.017106,0.01216531,4.503177,Interactions involve comparison to prior imaging changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve radiology reports that compare current findings to prior imaging studies, specifically those that note changes or stability over time. This pattern reflects how radiologists often express progression, regression, or stability in patient conditions by explicitly mentioning comparisons with previous imaging data.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+624,latent_624,20800,0.0416,0.019917155,5.5349245,Intervals or change in findings vs prior studies.,"The pattern is primarily based on references to 'changes' or 'updates' in the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, focusing particularly on intervals or new observations in pathologies or indwelling devices, showing how conditions have progressed or remained stable.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.3655172413793103,0.7464788732394366,71.0,129.0
+625,latent_625,18708,0.037416,0.02280898,3.770657,Comparison to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples involve reports that contain references to prior imaging studies for comparison, explicitly indicating changes or stability in findings. These crucially relate to interpretations concerning developments in the patient's condition by mentioning changes compared to prior studies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4448750968968017,0.445,0.4466019417475728,0.46,100.0,100.0
+626,latent_626,5094,0.010188,0.0094906455,4.6835237,Observations or assessments related to pleural effusions or pneumothorax in chest radiographs.,"These examples reference findings of chest radiographs specifically related to pleural effusions, pneumothorax, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or comparison to prior imaging. Additionally, clear mentions of imaging in the context of evaluating for pneumonia or other processes are evident, using terms like 'unchanged', 'significantly improved', or 'mildly worsened'. The pattern reflects technical descriptions of chest imaging regarding fluid collections and cardiopulmonary assessment.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+627,latent_627,6311,0.012622,0.013959638,5.111994,Comparison to previous radiography with a focus on stable conditions.,"High activation examples focus on comparisons between current and prior images, particularly noting stable conditions or changes over time. The format often includes reference to prior studies and highlights the unchanged status or observed differences, particularly when the status is constant and explicitly described as such.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.363606946391975,0.41,0.3043478260869565,0.14,100.0,100.0
+628,latent_628,11059,0.022118,0.029582698,6.311784,Comparison of current versus prior images focusing on changes or stability in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain descriptions and comparisons of current images against previous ones or specific mentions of changes, especially focusing on stability or change in findings related to internal medical devices or nodules.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.59,100.0,100.0
+629,latent_629,3202,0.006404,0.011776473,7.1355615,Repeated references to previous reports.,"Examples with high activation involve repeated mentions of a prior report, suggesting a pattern where prompts with detailed and explicit references to previous reports or comparisons activate the model strongly.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4384876600978636,0.475,0.4834437086092715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+630,latent_630,2787,0.005574,0.011262382,5.8565626,Descriptions comparing findings to prior frontal images.,"The samples with higher activations consistently describe findings 'in comparison to the prior frontal image', as specified in the prompt, which highly likely leads to the activation pattern.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3521611499139589,0.36,0.3852459016393442,0.47,100.0,100.0
+631,latent_631,13993,0.027986,0.019144528,5.9779105,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes in medical condition.,"In these examples, the model is focusing on scenarios where findings from a current examination are described in the context of seeing some interval change or identifying stable conditions when directly compared to known prior conditions in medical imaging, with a particular emphasis on the detection and description of changes from a clinical context.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+632,latent_632,25020,0.05004,0.034763806,4.9748845,Emphasis on image comparison to assess stability or change over time.,The examples with higher activation repeatedly reference conducting a comparison with prior imaging to assess the current condition or find interval changes. This involves reevaluation of radiological findings using newer images in context of previous studies for monitoring stability or progression.,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+633,latent_633,38747,0.077494,0.043255154,6.23711,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings, noting changes or stability.","The highly activated examples provide a detailed side-by-side comparison of the current findings with prior studies, including specific language on changes or stability, using direct comparisons such as 'unchanged', 'increasing', or 'resolved'. This highlights a pattern where explicit, detailed comparative analysis with previous imaging results is the focus.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.568922305764411,0.57,0.5636363636363636,0.62,100.0,100.0
+634,latent_634,5803,0.011606,0.015906597,4.983937,Clear lungs with no significant change and no acute findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve cases where there is a lack of notable pathology or acute findings in chest images, and there is either no prior comparison or the comparison does not reveal significant change.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5691467002942412,0.59,0.6607142857142857,0.37,100.0,100.0
+635,latent_635,3226,0.006452,0.007552258,5.7214227,Placement and position confirmation of medical tubes on radiographs.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve descriptions of tube placements like endotracheal, nasogastric, or central venous lines. These reports emphasize the positioning and potential implications (e.g., need for repositioning, confirming placement) of tubes relative to anatomical landmarks or prior images.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6363636363636364,0.64,0.675,0.54,100.0,100.0
+636,latent_636,2129,0.004258,0.009469355,7.7715416,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral images for comparative analysis.,"This dataset indicates higher activations when frontal and lateral images are provided along with a prior image, suggesting a pattern of comprehensive radiological comparisons involving multiple viewing angles to better evaluate changes or findings.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+637,latent_637,5853,0.011706,0.008645517,5.99109,Detailed comparison with prior imaging indicates stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed descriptions of the current images compared to prior ones, indicating stability or changes over time. This comparison narrative is distinct in these examples and specifies differential identification or consistency in findings relative to previous imaging, even incorporating precise anatomical or device placement details.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,100.0
+638,latent_638,2713,0.005426,0.008554673,5.395546,Detailed comparison with prior reports in imaging studies.,"The examples show that descriptions involving both 'current' and 'prior' images lead to higher activation levels. This suggests that the pattern involves detailed comparison of current imaging with prior imaging reports, which is a common practice in monitoring changes over time in radiology.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.4845083299471759,0.4874371859296482,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,99.0
+639,latent_639,6537,0.013074,0.01277907,6.5184746,Stability or no change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The data points with high activation consistently involve reports that note stability or no change in findings compared to prior imaging, suggestive of a pattern focused on identifying unchanged conditions over time. This likely reflects a key feature recognized by the model as important for tracking progression or lack thereof in diseases or abnormalities.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.5581395348837209,0.48,100.0,100.0
+640,latent_640,31247,0.062494,0.048232324,4.8787293,Assessment of changes in findings compared to previous imaging.,"This data generally involves the evaluation of changes in radiological findings in comparison to previous images. This includes assessments of stability or change in findings such as lung opacities, cardiac size, effusions, or device placements. Activation levels are influenced by clear descriptions of continuity or change in these aspects, highlighting the importance of comparative analysis.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+641,latent_641,19837,0.039674,0.021763936,5.1316204,Pleural effusion or atelectasis observed.,"The pattern of activation correlates with mentions of pleural effusion and/or atelectasis, even without specifying whether these findings are new or changed. These terms often indicate significant findings in thoracic imaging related to lung changes or fluid presence, which are captured as notable in the model's pattern recognition.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.67996799679968,0.68,0.6764705882352942,0.69,100.0,100.0
+642,latent_642,3997,0.007994,0.009777683,7.315183,Comparison analysis between current and previous images in the report.,"Most examples with high activations refer to a comparison being made between current and prior images, or the provided text prompts the comparison of findings against previous studies, indicating this is the pattern driving the model's high activation outputs.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+643,latent_643,3345,0.00669,0.007473682,5.800973,Descriptions of unchanged status or progression of medical devices and interventions over time.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on documenting stability or change in medical devices or intervention effects, like 'support devices', 'endotracheal tubes', or 'parenchymal opacities', specifically in the context of monitoring medical status over time via radiological comparison. This suggests the pattern links to language around continuous medical monitoring and support.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6262626262626263,0.62,100.0,100.0
+644,latent_644,4642,0.009284,0.013168513,3.8601186,Analysis based on comparison with prior images using frontal view only.,"Examples with high activation levels involve providing findings in relation to previous imaging studies, specifically when a single view (frontal image) is considered for comparison. The comparison with prior imaging provides context and assessment of changes from an earlier date or study.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4624362895005097,0.4673366834170854,0.4705882352941176,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+645,latent_645,28626,0.057252,0.035248898,7.612501,Description of changes in pulmonary opacities based on comparison with prior images.,"These examples with high activations involve chest imaging findings where opacities, aeration or other signs are compared to prior imaging, often indicating resolution, improvement, or persistent changes in lung-related conditions. The examples with lower activation lack significant changes in the findings or do not provide a detailed comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.4556962025316455,0.4285714285714285,84.0,116.0
+646,latent_646,5137,0.010274,0.0077767484,8.015358,Description of medical device positioning and structural deformities.,"These examples involve descriptions that include specific findings related to the positioning or placement of medical devices such as catheters, tubes, or hardware, as well as observations about deformities or changes in body structure due to prior conditions or trauma. These details are often included in radiology reports to indicate the stable or altered positions or conditions since prior examinations.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.4767441860465116,0.4456521739130434,92.0,108.0
+647,latent_647,3408,0.006816,0.008118734,9.060618,Focus on line or tube placement within the chest images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include references to lines or tubes (PICC, ET tube, central venous line, etc.) and their positions in relation to anatomical landmarks within the chest, with instructions or notes regarding their positioning or changes from prior images. This focus on line placement is a specific aspect noted in these high activation examples.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.64024220313648,0.645,0.5955056179775281,0.6022727272727273,88.0,112.0
+648,latent_648,10996,0.021992,0.040327646,6.1016665,Comparison with prior imaging studies described in detail.,"High-activation examples consistently include the task of providing a description based on comparison with prior imaging studies, despite problems being imaging-centered and involving complex clinical contexts. This indicates the activation is driven by the task of comparative analysis, familiar in radiological contexts.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4684684684684684,0.52,100.0,100.0
+649,latent_649,5665,0.01133,0.012138777,4.964879,Studies emphasizing changes in medical device position or key abnormalities over time.,"The pattern identified involves specific mention of findings in context to device placements (like Dobbhoff, pacemakers) or specific conditions like the presence of pneumothorax or opacities. These references highlight changes or stability of specific conditions or devices, usually in response to a request for confirmation of placement, removal, or disease progression.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+650,latent_650,3003,0.006006,0.011718295,5.680427,Clear lung fields and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette highlight absence of acute pathology.,"The examples show emphasis on the evaluation of the lung fields and cardiac silhouette, often focused on confirming their normalcy in the given radiological context, despite different indications and techniques. The stability or normal size of the cardiac silhouette is recurrent, with frequent mention of clear lung fields, indicating a pattern of ensuring no acute anomalies are present.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7133878064110623,0.715,0.7529411764705882,0.64,100.0,100.0
+651,latent_651,19713,0.039426,0.018381894,4.1120815,Focusing on stability or changes in condition compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels are consistently associated with detailed, descriptive comparisons of current imaging findings to previous imaging studies, focusing on stability or changes in pathological presentations as described by the radiologist.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5184038527691779,0.545,0.5306122448979592,0.78,100.0,100.0
+652,latent_652,3936,0.007872,0.008357023,5.094698,Unremarkable chest radiograph findings with normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe chest radiographs that show normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes, clear lungs, and no significant pathological findings, implying a pattern of non-acute or clinically unremarkable findings in chest imaging reports.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6731615336266499,0.675,0.7058823529411765,0.6,100.0,100.0
+653,latent_653,5248,0.010496,0.0108915055,10.188932,Unchanged position of catheter lines or medical devices compared to prior image.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe unchanged positions of catheter lines or medical devices across sequential imaging studies. This pattern illustrates stability over time, a valuable aspect in monitoring and reporting radiological findings related to medical devices or interventions.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6556243735704557,0.665,0.746268656716418,0.5,100.0,100.0
+654,latent_654,6726,0.013452,0.013814542,4.4994884,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention both current and prior imaging studies and provide comparative analysis or summary between them. The higher activation examples emphasize the task of explicit comparison with previous imaging, highlighting changes or stability over time, which aligns with a pattern where detailed comparative descriptions are expected.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3689903846153846,0.37,0.358695652173913,0.33,100.0,100.0
+655,latent_655,7885,0.01577,0.01809518,5.3798156,Comparison with prior imaging studies or reports.,"The examples exhibit a pattern in which the radiology report makes a clear comparison or reference to previous imaging or clinical history, often using phrases like 'compared to', 'prior film', 'previous radiograph'. This pattern highlights changes or stability in radiological findings over time, making it a common practice in clinical imaging to assess progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4608246545021141,0.525,0.514792899408284,0.87,100.0,100.0
+656,latent_656,4454,0.008908,0.019638933,4.382497,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+657,latent_657,5567,0.011134,0.00939966,3.4519687,Comparison of findings to prior imaging with explicit request for descriptive comparison.,"Highly activating examples consistently mention comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, which helps radiologists track changes or stability over time. Furthermore, these examples engage with requesting descriptions of findings explicitly in comparison with the prior imaging.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+658,latent_658,4952,0.009904,0.009314158,5.1478863,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activations involve assessments where findings are unchanged or within normal limits, especially regarding the cardiomediastinal silhouette, often indicating stability or no significant change between current and prior imaging studies.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.572691676139952,0.5728643216080402,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,99.0
+659,latent_659,2261,0.004522,0.011237247,7.784681,Focus on comparing current and prior frontal images without additional details.,"The highly activated examples consistently request comparisons of current and prior images without additional complexity or side details included. Non-activated examples deviate by adding unrelated medical information, history, or separate findings, which dilute the focus on comparing current and previous images.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6443142588136834,0.66,0.6126760563380281,0.87,100.0,100.0
+660,latent_660,8294,0.016588,0.012009611,3.2367425,Comparison with prior frontal image to note changes or stability.,These examples often involve direct comparisons to prior images and indicate either stability or specific changes in features like opacities or medical device positions. They require an understanding of prior versus current observations.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+661,latent_661,3368,0.006736,0.0060991505,3.360039,Detailed chest radiograph findings with complex clinical interpretations.,"Examples with higher activations often include detailed examinations of chest radiographs focusing on complicated clinical conditions, presence or absence of significant radiological findings, and interpretation challenges such as unclear cardiomediastinal contours, pleural effusions, or infiltrates. Examples with lower activation lack detail or are less complex in their imaging findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.540126050420168,0.5577889447236181,0.539568345323741,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+662,latent_662,21836,0.043672,0.033913042,5.0554404,Requests for comparative description between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation involve radiology reports with instructions for comparative analysis of findings between current and previous images, frequently seen with the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior'. This pattern highlights a specific request to evaluate changes over time using specific imaging comparisons.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4315744315744316,0.47,0.4802631578947368,0.73,100.0,100.0
+663,latent_663,28488,0.056976,0.027895343,2.694363,Emphasis on comparative analysis across multiple chest images.,"Examples with non-zero activations include several references to comparison between current and prior imaging, and instructions to provide further description in these comparisons. These examples indicate an emphasis on evaluating changes or stability over multiple images, reflecting thorough and comparative analysis.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3949654464211373,0.455,0.4723926380368098,0.77,100.0,100.0
+664,latent_664,6293,0.012586,0.016012387,5.2608867,Focus on tube and line placement compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently compare current imaging findings to prior images and describe the positioning of tubes and lines, especially noting changes or stability in their positions. This suggests the pattern is related to the monitoring or evaluation of medical devices and their positions in radiographic studies.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5102040816326531,0.25,100.0,100.0
+665,latent_665,9868,0.019736,0.009261973,4.3147435,Explicit comparison with prior imaging and noting of intervention-related changes.,"In these examples, high activation occurs when the findings or status post-operative conditions are compared explicitly with previous imaging studies and mention changes or the stability of conditions related to interventions like tube placements or pneumothorax changes. This suggests the key pattern involves a change or stability check based on prior findings, typically related to treatment or intervention.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5434782608695652,0.5,100.0,100.0
+666,latent_666,1777,0.003554,0.005361585,7.9492803,Occurrence of pneumothorax in the findings description.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature pneumothorax findings, which is a specific type of air leakage into the pleural cavity, often associated with conditions like rib fractures and chest tube placements. Although some examples with pneumothorax findings have lower activations, the pattern is predominantly noticeable in those with higher activations.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7349933748343709,0.735,0.7373737373737373,0.73,100.0,100.0
+667,latent_667,3891,0.007782,0.011876042,3.5029616,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+668,latent_668,6015,0.01203,0.014142207,6.1315646,Comparison of current images to prior for assessing changes.,"The comparison with prior images helps measure progression or resolution of specific clinical findings, particularly the presence or change in pathologies, tube placements, or anatomical structures. This pattern is common in radiology for monitoring disease or treatment effects.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+669,latent_669,3588,0.007176,0.008007657,5.7181406,Pattern of comparing findings between current and prior images to note changes.,"These examples primarily describe subtle changes in imaging findings over time by comparing the current imaging study to previous ones. They use terms like 'interval', 'as compared to', and 'changes from previous', highlighting alterations in lung, heart, chest tube placements, or other medical devices, indicating a temporal analysis for ongoing conditions or treatments.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+670,latent_670,6257,0.012514,0.010543033,5.108924,Detection of interval changes in images when compared to prior exams.,"The highly activated examples emphasize abnormal findings that are compared against previous examinations where specific intervals or changes are described, such as fluid reduction, resolution, or progression of lung opacities and tube positioning changes, indicating how recognition of changes is critical in these cases.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6116504854368932,0.63,100.0,100.0
+671,latent_671,18751,0.037502,0.021947159,6.1911263,Comparison with prior imaging studies showing stability or change.,"The examples with high activation involve reports that include a comparison to prior imaging studies, showing differences in characterization such as stability, improvement, or worsening of specific radiological findings. This pattern is commonly observed in longitudinal assessments where the history and stability of findings are emphasized.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.4628099173553719,0.6222222222222222,90.0,110.0
+672,latent_672,9514,0.019028,0.024806328,4.034206,Instructions to explicitly compare current and prior images in the task.,"In the presented examples, activation levels highlight scenarios where findings are explicitly instructed to be compared against prior images within the prompt, often including a directive to 'provide a description...in comparison to the prior'. This explains why descriptions where comparisons are the focal task result in high activations.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,100.0,100.0
+673,latent_673,30943,0.061886,0.044002302,6.702522,Interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe using prior radiological comparisons to assess interval changes, even if the comparison itself or its findings are unstated. They usually involve detailed descriptions related to changes since prior imaging, which is key in radiological assessments.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+674,latent_674,8119,0.016238,0.0126108965,4.6545134,Unremarkable or stable cardiac and mediastinal structures in imaging.,"These examples include discussions about cardiac and mediastinal structures being unremarkable or stable. This stability signifies that, despite other changes or findings in the images, these structures remain unchanged, a key observation in radiological interpretations.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6742328709541825,0.69,0.6319444444444444,0.91,100.0,100.0
+675,latent_675,10993,0.021986,0.015585937,5.955846,Radiology findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve reports where findings are described with explicit comparison to previous imaging, particularly using phrases similar to 'unchanged since', 'interval change', or 'comparable to prior'. This comparison is a pattern likely emphasized in well-nuanced radiological findings relevant to acute conditions or chronic management.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4596774193548387,0.57,100.0,100.0
+676,latent_676,9923,0.019846,0.011892554,4.5454946,"High-detail prior reports or comparison, limiting the need for generated descriptions.","Highly activated examples share a characteristic of not needing to generate descriptions or findings given the high level of provided structured prior reporting details. These reports have either a high degree of detail in findings or specific comparison indications that are likely to guide the analysis without generating additional conclusions, whereas low activated examples often include just primary indications or findings without elaborate prior reference or conclusion.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+677,latent_677,15507,0.031014,0.02355974,4.75192,High activation with detailed findings and specific clinical indications.,"Observations with notable pattern detections involve detailed descriptions of radiological findings in the context of specific indications, such as for acute changes, trauma evaluations, pneumonia assessments, or chronic problem monitoring. This implies a focus on acute diagnostic considerations rather than generic findings which might not trigger specific activations.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+678,latent_678,44425,0.08885,0.063817695,5.4409595,Describing interval changes or new findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples that describe features compared to previous imaging demonstrate a change in a specific finding, which is often a significant focus in radiology. The increased activation is linked to situations where there's a notable increase or decrease in an imaging feature, such as 'interval change', 'new', or 'resolved'. This highlights the importance of documenting temporal changes in medical imaging for diagnostic purposes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5689655172413793,0.66,100.0,100.0
+679,latent_679,29829,0.059658,0.034696944,4.013086,Presence and positioning of tubes or lines in radiologic comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations (particularly examples 4, 46, and 40) consistently refer to the presence and positioning of tubes or lines and associated findings, indicating increased focus on such elements in the context of radiologic evaluation and comparison with prior images.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+680,latent_680,12759,0.025518,0.014140112,3.7762494,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation all exhibit descriptions of previous radiological findings being compared to current findings and emphasizing the stability or interval changes, particularly noting stable conditions in the context of known issues. This suggests a pattern where continuum and stability in patient condition, rather than acute issues or significant changes, is a key focus.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6142187930559382,0.615,0.6263736263736264,0.57,100.0,100.0
+681,latent_681,3843,0.007686,0.0092306845,5.600247,Comparison of current and prior images to evaluate changes.,"Examples with high activation levels involve providing radiology findings or descriptions compared to prior imaging, indicating a focus on evaluating changes over time. These instances involve an explicit request for such comparative analysis.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+682,latent_682,4084,0.008168,0.007559013,4.99072,"Interval changes noted between current and previous imaging, especially device positions.","The high-activation examples consistently involve radiological studies that compare current images with prior ones, specifically noting changes, positioning of medical devices, or stability. They often contain explicit mentions of interval findings relative to prior exams, using terms like 'compared', 'unchanged', 'interval' changes, or specific observations regarding medical device positions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6101769796512384,0.625,0.7049180327868853,0.43,100.0,100.0
+683,latent_683,6884,0.013768,0.008704883,6.2670145,Comparison of device positioning or changes in imaging studies.,"These examples frequently highlight updates on the positioning or status of medical tubes, devices, or lines, often in comparison to previous imaging studies. Reports regularly note any significant changes or lack thereof regarding these medical devices, as well as new or resolving findings in the chest area, which are particularly emphasized in cases of recurrent imaging for ongoing conditions or evaluations.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6836634781953754,0.685,0.6637168141592921,0.75,100.0,100.0
+684,latent_684,6033,0.012066,0.008952653,6.224623,Unclear comparison requests between current and prior images.,"These examples reference requests for descriptions that specifically compare findings in current images against prior ones, but with unclear prior comparators provided in the documentation. This leaves scope for interpretation and guidance based on visual cues rather than clearly-documented changes.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4356363636363636,0.515,0.5085714285714286,0.89,100.0,100.0
+685,latent_685,5889,0.011778,0.009424128,3.9292958,Comparison with prior imaging and noting interval changes or stability.,"All examples with high activation levels describe a radiological study that includes a comparison with previous images and explicitly note interval changes or stability. This suggests the pattern is the documentation of changes or lack thereof over time, an essential aspect of radiological evaluations for monitoring conditions.",0.4897959183673469,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4343434343434343,0.44,0.45,0.54,100.0,100.0
+686,latent_686,5147,0.010294,0.0094849365,6.335392,In-depth comparison of specific findings between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve detailed technical descriptions of comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, where specific findings on the current image are directly contrasted with those on earlier images. This inter-twined and detailed comparison of technical findings relative to prior imaging studies seems to be the key pattern causing heightened activation.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4517629217742954,0.4522613065326633,0.4516129032258064,0.42,100.0,99.0
+687,latent_687,6708,0.013416,0.009334039,4.6522775,"Report descriptions compared to prior images, despite 'COMPARISON: None'.","The pattern identified here involves examples using images in textual prompts, specifically asking for descriptions to compare current findings with prior images. High activations correlate where such a comparison is explicitly requested, especially when lacking prior visual references ('COMPARISON: None').",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3697478991596639,0.37,0.3645833333333333,0.35,100.0,100.0
+688,latent_688,7734,0.015468,0.012394217,5.4785995,Imaging findings described relative to previous imaging changes or stability.,"The higher activation examples all involve imagery where results are juxtaposed against prior imagery, often involving reported changes in conditions like 'interval change', 'progression', or 'stable'. These aspects often trigger significant patterns in radiology reports as they emphasize change, stability, or progression. Such observations often have a high pathological relevance in follow-up imaging.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+689,latent_689,10215,0.02043,0.026974786,4.6006722,Emphasis on interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"The pattern likely involves comparing current and previous imaging studies, focusing specifically on any noted interval changes in terms of decreased or unchanged findings like atelectasis, pleural effusion, lung volumes, or opacities. Reports frequently highlight these comparisons to note progress or stability in conditions, even if other details vary.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+690,latent_690,3228,0.006456,0.0079115275,5.5843964,Tasks focus on comparing current and prior imaging for analysis.,"The examples with high activation typically include comparisons to prior imaging and a structured format requiring descriptions of both current and previous findings. These examples consistently prompt an assistant to evaluate changes, highlighting improvement or stability, indicating the primary pattern being the active comparison engagement rather than detailed descriptive analysis.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3416721527320605,0.375,0.4137931034482758,0.6,100.0,100.0
+691,latent_691,3773,0.007546,0.009615068,3.8390381,Interval change noted in comparison to prior imaging.,All highly activated examples involve the presence of a prior radiological image for comparison and reference to specific interval changes between the images. The specific trigger is the language that highlights change or no change in condition across different imaging studies.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4415584415584415,0.34,100.0,100.0
+692,latent_692,7678,0.015356,0.011181035,11.089662,Findings are systematically compared to prior studies.,"The examples showcase radiology reports where the findings are systematically compared to prior studies. The pattern is especially evident in scenarios involving monitoring of disease progression or pathology where subtle changes are expected. This systematic comparison approach is often utilized to assess consistency, changes, or stability over time, which is critical for interpreting radiological results in a historical context.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4024362215582624,0.415,0.225,0.5294117647058824,51.0,149.0
+693,latent_693,15875,0.03175,0.015950961,2.9342322,Explicit instruction to compare current and previous radiology images.,"The highest activation examples consistently include a specific request to compare current chest radiographs to previous studies. This pattern involves evaluating changes over time or confirming stability, often using phrases that direct comparison between current and prior imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+694,latent_694,5312,0.010624,0.008828092,7.530667,Descriptive comparison of images.,"The examples with higher activation focus on providing descriptions of radiology findings aimed at evaluating or confirming a pattern or situation relative to previous imaging or examinations, with a focus on descriptive analysis rather than purely reporting measurements or unchanging findings. This suggests that the model looks for situations where there's a definite description comparing current findings with prior exams.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+695,latent_695,2707,0.005414,0.0072647156,7.8303967,Explicit comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels describe radiologic findings explicitly in the context of comparative analysis to prior imaging. These descriptions use specific language related to assessing changes or stability over time, such as 'compared to', 'since prior', and 'interval change'. This detailed comparative aspect is central to understanding the pattern with high activation.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+696,latent_696,7337,0.014674,0.017282495,8.171442,Accurate positioning and comparison of medical devices on imaging.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve findings related to proper placement and positioning of medical devices (like endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and PICC lines) or their comparison to prior imaging to assess changes or stability. Such examples often describe positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or the stomach.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+697,latent_697,3232,0.006464,0.0069857477,4.7374706,"Detailed comparisons of interval changes, focusing on devices or fluid collections.","The pattern indicated by high activation levels involves radiological descriptions that emphasize comparing current images to previous ones. The reports often highlight stability, decrease, or changes in medical devices, fluid collection, or pathologies, using terms like 'unchanged', 'decreased', 'interval improvement', or specific mentions of chest tubes, device placements, or removal.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5675675675675675,0.42,100.0,100.0
+698,latent_698,19667,0.039334,0.028274715,5.5200706,Prevalence of procedural comparison details in identifying or assessing imaging differences.,"Examples show that reports include language referencing a comparison of current imaging findings to prior findings. The findings include details about procedural or patient conditions, but pattern relevance appears higher when variations in conditions or presence of certain equipment are specified, since comparison was less emphasized across lower activation samples.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+699,latent_699,6723,0.013446,0.008627188,3.1108925,Complex comparisons with prior studies showing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature complex comparisons between multiple imaging studies highlighting changes or stability in interventional or pathological findings, such as changes in line placements, pleural effusions, or other cardiopulmonary alterations over time, often with associated procedural context.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+700,latent_700,8374,0.016748,0.0178957,5.6170506,Comparison of images with no notable changes or abnormalities.,"The examples with higher activations involve providing a description that compares frontal images without significant changes or abnormalities, often referencing stable conditions or using a neutral or unchanged language suggesting non-acute findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4583333333333333,0.33,100.0,100.0
+701,latent_701,7008,0.014016,0.01407026,8.722909,Comparison of current and prior imaging showing resolved or positive changes.,"Examples with positive activations primarily entail descriptions of new or resolved medical conditions, where changes are referenced along with prior reports. Importantly, the activation increases with mention of resolving conditions and specific changes noted since previous imaging, particularly indicating resolution or stabilization of previous findings, which are positive aspects in a clinical context.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4040693549760208,0.475,0.4193548387096774,0.13,100.0,100.0
+702,latent_702,6627,0.013254,0.010035401,4.651026,Comparison with prior images indicates no significant change or stable conditions.,"The pattern involves comparing current radiological findings with prior imaging studies and not observing significant changes or noting stability in certain conditions, which is a typical workflow in progressive assessments of medical conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4936123805567096,0.507537688442211,0.5074626865671642,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+703,latent_703,11474,0.022948,0.013859886,4.5193086,Reports focus on medical device positioning or monitoring.,"The examples with higher activations often involve descriptions of medical interventions such as placement or monitoring of devices like PICCs, catheters, tubes, or central lines in the context of reporting findings comparing current and previous imaging. This pattern indicates the importance of technical detail in radiology reports for active medical management.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5925925925925926,0.48,100.0,100.0
+704,latent_704,3110,0.00622,0.015105409,3.368726,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+705,latent_705,5588,0.011176,0.011232312,3.81653,Detailed comparative findings with reference to specific changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels describe comparative analysis between current and prior images, noting changes or stability in certain clinical findings such as cardiomegaly, lung opacities, or device positioning. The pattern emphasizes the use of specific findings compared to a previous state, highlighting continuity or change.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4418604651162791,0.445,0.4521739130434782,0.52,100.0,100.0
+706,latent_706,7823,0.015646,0.01535661,4.911174,Focus on comparative analysis with prior radiological studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently provide a comparative analysis of current images with prior images or reports, highlighting changes over time or stability of certain findings. It involves explicit direction for comparison to understand interval changes, making this pattern highly relevant to the examples.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+707,latent_707,3227,0.006454,0.0113214385,6.5166855,Explicit comparison to a prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation all request a comparison between the current study and prior images, specifically emphasizing ""comparison to the prior frontal image,"" entailing modifications, unchanged states, or interval developments in the context of those prior images. These examples consistently involve evaluation in relation to a ""prior frontal image"" or past imaging findings, which is the key pattern recognized by high activation values.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,100.0,100.0
+708,latent_708,10797,0.021594,0.013802092,6.5659895,Assessment of medical device positioning or placement from prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptive analysis related to positioning or placement of medical devices such as endotracheal (ET) tubes, nasogastric tubes, or catheters. These analyses often involve comparisons with prior images to assess any changes or confirm placements, reflecting a focus on precise positioning and interval changes.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6451612903225806,0.6060606060606061,99.0,101.0
+709,latent_709,4101,0.008202,0.0074205827,6.002899,Stable findings with no significant interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly describe scenarios where imaging findings are stable, unchanged, or show no significant interval changes when compared to prior studies. They often mention findings like catheter placements or linear opacities, but emphasize lack of notable change or progression. This reflects a focus on stability rather than new or acute changes.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,100.0
+710,latent_710,2561,0.005122,0.006569542,6.0793514,Descriptions of changes relative to prior imaging.,"These examples include comparisons with prior studies, often explicitly requesting or documenting an interval change or stability of the current findings against previous imaging. The presence of direct language describing change or stability, along with past imaging references, correlates with higher activation.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4085213032581454,0.41,0.4181818181818181,0.46,100.0,100.0
+711,latent_711,2988,0.005976,0.009281743,5.2790995,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging for changes.,"Examples with high activation consistently mention a 'comparison' aspect in the structure of the prompt and results, emphasizing the evaluation of current imaging against previous imaging for changes or stability as part of the interpretive exercise. This type of task typically pertains to assessing any new or ongoing pathological changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.74,100.0,100.0
+712,latent_712,16943,0.033886,0.029766085,8.09514,Description of interval changes in pleural effusions or lung opacities.,"Examples with observed activation levels indicate description of changes in pleural effusions or lung opacities compared to prior studies, specifically mentioning the dimensions, increase or decrease in effusion sizes, or changes in opacities. This pattern distinctly focuses on the interval change in pulmonary conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.323867478025693,0.375,0.2222222222222222,0.1,100.0,100.0
+713,latent_713,7037,0.014074,0.010621844,6.096169,Stable or non-critical findings described in radiological assessments.,"The examples consistently describe the radiology examination findings comprehensively, detailing aspects of lung conditions, cardiac status, or other anatomical considerations. The pattern noted is the absence of significant pathologies or complications as the focus, using descriptors like 'normal', 'no evidence', 'no acute', and so on. This confirms the predominant characteristic of these high activation examples is the identification of stable or non-critical findings in radiological assessments.",0.4235294117647059,0.5102040816326531,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,24.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4705882352941176,0.72,100.0,100.0
+714,latent_714,5348,0.010696,0.012197763,6.256004,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in pathologic findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include findings that have changed over time compared to previous studies. These findings suggest new opacities, interval worsening of conditions, or stable pathologies that indicate awareness of progression or stasis of disease and significant clinical implications. The phrase structure typically includes 'compared to prior', 'since prior', or 'no change since', alongside specific descriptions of findings linked to these comparisons.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+715,latent_715,3302,0.006604,0.010313457,4.621299,Emphasis on using prior images for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently reference the availability of prior images or mention comparisons with previous examinations explicitly, even when some fields are labelled 'N/A'. This suggests that highlighting such comparison, typically associated with follow-up examinations for evaluating changes or stability, is integral to the observed pattern.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.528931013933426,0.585,0.5502958579881657,0.93,100.0,100.0
+716,latent_716,4962,0.009924,0.011815974,7.8772726,Finding stability or change in radiologic comparison to prior images.,"Examples consistently involve an assessment of the comparative stability or change over time in radiological findings, often paired with recommendations for further actions or explanations. This indicates a pattern focusing on detecting change or confirming stability in medical imaging.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.5,0.5,0.5,100.0,100.0
+717,latent_717,10485,0.02097,0.02580576,8.490042,Direct comparison of current and prior images with explicit interpretation.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention giving a concurrent account of current and prior images, involving explicit instructions to compare findings. These examples often use phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating an analysis that requires direct comparison and interpretation of changes or continuity between current and previous images.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4736842105263157,0.54,100.0,100.0
+718,latent_718,4715,0.00943,0.008942825,7.1136646,"Aortic tortuosity, unfolding, or calcification.","The highly activated examples describe specific observations of aortic tortuosity, unfolding, or calcification. They mention clear patterns such as terms like 'tortuous', 'unfolded', and 'calcified' aorta, which are unique findings in a radiology context.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,1.0,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6979166666666666,0.71,0.85,0.51,100.0,100.0
+719,latent_719,5264,0.010528,0.017334552,4.876362,Absence of a prior report and reliance on images only for comparison.,"Examples with high activation involve providing descriptions based on explicit sequence or combination of current and prior images, especially when multiple images are considered but without clear prior reports for guidance. This setup contrasts with low activation scenarios where prior history is detailed or clear comparisons are absent.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4651162790697674,0.6,100.0,100.0
+720,latent_720,3417,0.006834,0.008087836,6.2752457,Structured comparison of current and prior frontal chest images.,"High activation examples consistently include descriptions that explicitly address a given frontal, current frontal, and prior frontal image, emphasizing a structured approach to comparison in chest imaging. Additionally, they consistently use structured comparative phrases such as 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating an emphasis on comparison with prior images.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.4384615384615384,0.57,100.0,100.0
+721,latent_721,4559,0.009118,0.008227206,5.1952825,Does the report explicitly compare findings with prior imaging?,"Examples with high activation feature descriptions referencing interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging, focusing on pulmonary or cardiopulmonary conditions such as edema, opacities, effusions, and other related acute changes. Reports without comparison show lower activation. Terms like 'improved', 'unchanged', 'versus prior' frequently appear in higher activation reports, showcasing evaluation over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+722,latent_722,39556,0.079112,0.06282355,4.692582,Tracking changes in medical devices/interventions compared to prior images.,"Examples indicate changes in findings compared to prior imaging studies, often noting removal, placement, or modifications of medical devices or interventions, like tubes or catheters. The pattern involves tracking interval changes in devices rather than disease progression.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,100.0,100.0
+723,latent_723,6470,0.01294,0.005797947,3.9729192,Comparison of imaging findings with prior studies assessing changes or stability.,"Although these examples describe various findings, those with high activations consistently involve descriptions of changes or stability in imaging findings when compared to prior studies. These descriptions detail changes, or lack thereof, which is a focus in radiology for detecting disease progression or stability in patients.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+724,latent_724,3428,0.006856,0.008079061,5.5668864,Complex imagery comparison with multiple views or narratives.,"The examples with high activation emphasize detailed imagery comparison across multiple views and past reports, often with differences noted in a sequence-like narrative that encompasses multiple temporal juxtapositions and changes in positioning or statuses of devices and anatomical structures. An aspect of becoming the tissue structures, pathologies, or artifacts that had changed further using diagnostic tools like a prior or compare tag can access.",0.3106617647058823,0.4,0.4418604651162791,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.424,0.505,0.5028571428571429,0.88,100.0,100.0
+725,latent_725,5630,0.01126,0.010402051,5.959999,Diagnostic equipment in unchanged position with emphasis on findings comparison.,"These examples consistently mention the comparison of current findings to previous studies or images. Phrasing that indicates change over time, such as 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'interval change', commonly appears in this pattern. Additionally, the presence of diagnostic equipment like catheters or ports is noted in unchanged positions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4395604395604395,0.4,100.0,100.0
+726,latent_726,5499,0.010998,0.011466172,7.243733,Comparison to prior images with focus on changes in features.,"Examples 6, 8, 15, 22, 33, and other high-activation examples all involve providing findings and impressions based on a comparison to prior radiological images, resulting in statements about changes or stability in clinical features. The task involves descriptions of changes over time based on sequential images.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+727,latent_727,6508,0.013016,0.028193876,7.509406,Stability or unchanged condition in chest findings compared to prior exams.,"The high activation level examples consistently describe stable findings by comparing current imaging with prior exams, emphasizing stability or unchanged conditions in various structures or pathologies in the chest. These reports contrast against instances of acute findings or abnormalities without comparison, which exhibit low activation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4756097560975609,0.39,100.0,100.0
+728,latent_728,9566,0.019132,0.01632228,7.5089283,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate changes.,"These examples repeatedly involve describing findings in comparison to prior imaging, particularly focusing on any interval changes, which is often done to assess the progression, stability, or resolution of medical conditions based on historical imaging evidence.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.5578231292517006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+729,latent_729,78654,0.157308,0.09708896,7.73382,Requests for description of radiographic findings in comparison to prior images.,"Prompts with higher activation levels frequently involve direct requests to provide descriptions or findings specifically in comparison to a prior image. The comparison aspect often involves evaluating changes between current and prior radiographic findings, as seen in requests for description changes like 'increased opacity' or 'resolved effusion'.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3708609271523179,0.7272727272727273,77.0,123.0
+730,latent_730,22006,0.044012,0.017743628,2.977943,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often contain implicit or explicit details describing a comparison between current and prior imaging findings, demonstrating changes or stability in the patient's condition over time. This comparison allows for the evaluation of progressive conditions, stability of concerning findings, or resolution of prior abnormalities.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+731,latent_731,155035,0.31007,0.25048172,8.588598,Emphasize unchanged or improved findings compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples consistently involve comparisons made to previous imaging studies, emphasizing unchanged or improved findings in relation to prior reports. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'similar compared to', 'same as prior', and 'comparison with prior' indicate this pattern.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6249156060113525,0.625,0.6288659793814433,0.61,100.0,100.0
+732,latent_732,5791,0.011582,0.012378622,5.3389015,Comparison with prior images to assess changes in radiological findings.,"The highly representative examples all show comparison with prior images where new findings or unchanged existing conditions are reported, with an emphasis on explaining specific changes or confirming stable conditions within the radiological context. The pattern focuses on the dynamic assessment of patient conditions by referencing changes in findings over time.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4141646615754786,0.44,0.4577464788732394,0.65,100.0,100.0
+733,latent_733,4307,0.008614,0.007509108,4.0187354,Explicit comparison to prior images or studies.,"Among the examples, those with high activation levels frequently involve descriptions where findings are explicitly compared to prior imaging. The presence of specific comparison statements regarding changes or stability between current and prior images is the consistent pattern seen in these examples.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+734,latent_734,35098,0.070196,0.032490328,2.7589934,Presence of specific findings or changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations often contain references to comparisons with prior imaging, specifically noting changes or stability in findings over time. These comparisons are explicit, involving updated findings or describing changes in medical conditions revealed through imaging.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+735,latent_735,29956,0.059912,0.03138557,3.932446,Changes in medical devices or lines' positions on radiological comparison.,"Examples with high activation often involve changes in medical devices or lines' positions, emphasizing the importance of correct placement and monitoring of such interventions in medical imaging.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.6,0.21,100.0,100.0
+736,latent_736,3516,0.007032,0.013281515,7.534883,Radiology reports necessitate comparison with prior images.,"These examples involve radiology studies that specify comparison with prior images, including explicitly stating comparison to a prior frontal image. The presence of both current and prior images for comparative analysis is a common theme in radiological examination reports, used to assess progression or stability of findings.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3971324473801473,0.425,0.4475524475524475,0.64,100.0,100.0
+737,latent_737,12524,0.025048,0.020032141,7.109183,Emphasis on lung volume changes and bronchovascular structure crowding.,"Higher activation examples consistently emphasize changes or stability in lung volumes and crowding of bronchovascular structures in comparison to prior imaging. These observations suggest a focus on detecting atelectasis, effusions, or changes in pulmonary interstitium influenced by lung volume assessments.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.6714285714285714,0.47,100.0,100.0
+738,latent_738,11168,0.022336,0.015724685,4.02493,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging for changes or stability, indicating active monitoring.","Examples with higher activation levels generally contain a comparison to prior studies, along with a detailed enumeration of the findings in the current and the previous images. This pattern of reporting is honed to identify stability or changes in medical conditions, an analytical process central in radiology.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3717919252279169,0.385,0.3380281690140845,0.24,100.0,100.0
+739,latent_739,2801,0.005602,0.006610116,6.2248416,Reports explicitly stating 'no prior comparison' images.,"The high activation examples often lack comparison details from prior images in multiple instances, indicating that the pattern involves situations where there is an absence of available prior comparison information noted in the 'COMPARISON' section of the radiology report, explicitly stated as 'None' or similar phrases.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4381225346916768,0.505,0.5161290322580645,0.16,100.0,100.0
+740,latent_740,95837,0.191674,0.09871578,2.4838777,Focus on stability or change in findings from prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently illustrate cases where the radiological analysis involves a comparison with prior imaging studies and highlights specific findings, emphasizing stability or change relative to these past studies. This is indicative of a pattern where stability or change over time is critically assessed.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5973019591689622,0.601010101010101,0.5847457627118644,0.696969696969697,99.0,99.0
+741,latent_741,38964,0.077928,0.041260496,4.6715255,Comparison of indwelling tubes or lines positions with prior imaging.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels focus on describing changes or the state of indwelling tubes and lines, especially with regards to their position being unchanged or modified compared to prior imaging studies. This specific focus on tube and line position is the pattern that generates a higher activation.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5794380684553216,0.585,0.6103896103896104,0.47,100.0,100.0
+742,latent_742,3167,0.006334,0.011370635,6.4925585,Simultaneous use of frontal and lateral images for analysis.,"Examples with high activation levels include both frontal and lateral images, suggesting that the presence of multiple views and comparative analysis from different angles contributes significantly to activation. Radiological evaluation often incorporates multiple views for thorough assessment, hence higher activation in these cases.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5746446726838883,0.59,0.5652173913043478,0.78,100.0,100.0
+743,latent_743,5301,0.010602,0.008124908,4.397328,Normal cardiac silhouette or heart size with concurrent thoracic findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally mention findings related to heart size or cardiac silhouette in the context of clear pulmonary pathology like consolidation, effusion, or tortuous vessels. The mention of heart size in the findings seems to be a key linguistic pattern in these samples, particularly when it correlates with other thoracic findings.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5631067961165048,0.58,100.0,100.0
+744,latent_744,5739,0.011478,0.011975721,4.6589456,Utilization of prior imaging for comparative analysis.,The examples with high activation consistently involve phrases indicating direct comparison of current imaging findings against previous studies. This pattern demonstrates changes or confirmations in medical conditions based on sequential imaging results.,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5220125786163522,0.83,100.0,100.0
+745,latent_745,10054,0.020108,0.014310962,4.1971073,Detailed comparison to prior imaging indicating significant findings or clinical relevance.,"The examples with higher activation levels provide a detailed evaluation of current findings with reference to a prior radiological image, regardless of whether there was a change. Activation increases when detailed comparisons are made even when noting equipment positioning or changes indicating clinical significance such as cardiomegaly or pleural effusions, rather than indicating unchanged or normal findings.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.6086956521739131,0.42,100.0,100.0
+746,latent_746,11894,0.023788,0.016757261,4.3029103,Need for or reliance on comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples show high activation when there is explicit instruction or need for comparison between current and prior imaging, which aligns with typical clinical practice to identify changes over time. Radiology reports often focus on changes in size, position, or characteristics of specific findings compared to prior studies.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3885795392510099,0.44,0.4620253164556962,0.73,100.0,100.0
+747,latent_747,3787,0.007574,0.011588848,5.0974307,Descriptive image comparison without detailed prior reports.,"The examples that activate highly focus on evaluating the current images in comparison to prior images without specified report data, often emphasizing changes or descriptions of findings specific to the provided images. These prompts request a descriptive output based on direct image comparison in the absence of prior report analyses.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+748,latent_748,8422,0.016844,0.009999336,5.261346,Correct placement of medical tubes near critical anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe the correct and strategic placement of medical tubes and devices, specifically focusing on positions 3 cm above the carina for endotracheal tubes or similar benchmarks, ensuring precision in critical care settings.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.459121548162644,0.4974874371859296,0.4893617021276595,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+749,latent_749,10913,0.021826,0.011319863,4.606501,Description of findings compared to a specified prior frontal image.,"The most highly activated examples consistently feature requests for findings in one or more given images compared explicitly against a particularly described prior frontal image, with specific mention of this prior image for direct comparison, even when no comparison is available or explicitly excluded.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+750,latent_750,4469,0.008938,0.011738555,6.2865925,Comparative descriptions with prior images in radiological findings.,"These examples describe findings in current imaging with explicit reference to past images for comparative evaluation, focusing on changes or stability in the findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4448829925390237,0.455,0.4645669291338583,0.59,100.0,100.0
+751,latent_751,12817,0.025634,0.018773045,3.630468,Findings show clear lungs without pneumonia or pleural effusion.,"Examples in the dataset with high activation levels often focus on findings regarding the lungs being clear, without pneumonia, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or other acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7171717171717171,0.72,0.6833333333333333,0.82,100.0,100.0
+752,latent_752,3847,0.007694,0.009913635,5.682929,Focus on the positioning or changes in medical devices following intervention.,"These examples all focus on post-procedural devices or changes in patient status following medical interventions. They describe positions and changes of various catheters, tubes, stents, or surgical outcomes. This pattern is typical in post-intervention radiology evaluations where non-changes of equipment are noted.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.714935860568628,0.715,0.7216494845360825,0.7,100.0,100.0
+753,latent_753,22012,0.044024,0.017315244,2.6821547,Imaging comparisons with focus on interval changes or significant findings.,"Most activations are zero, indicating no particular pattern. However, in the cases with activations of 2.0 or above, the comparisons involve not just a current image but often specify a focused change in conditions such as placement of devices, or significant findings like pneumothorax or enlargement of a structure, potentially leading to higher activations. These examples also often include explicit imaging comparisons across time in a manner that likely indicates significant interval changes or specific findings in the context of treatment plans.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6176105828854899,0.63,0.5955882352941176,0.81,100.0,100.0
+754,latent_754,4902,0.009804,0.013065871,5.242521,Comparisons to prior imaging emphasizing interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons to prior imaging, where interval changes or stability are noted (e.g., worsening, unchanged, or interval removal) suggesting a pattern of identifying whether there is progression or stability in clinical findings over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4347737877865693,0.4371859296482412,0.425287356321839,0.3737373737373737,99.0,100.0
+755,latent_755,6920,0.01384,0.011539709,5.699096,"Use of both current and prior frontal, lateral images with prior report for comparison.","Examples with significant activation levels involve comparison of present imaging findings with prior findings using both frontal and lateral images, and a prior report is often included. This highlights the importance of detailed comparison across multiple perspectives and documentation, likely indicating an intricate review process.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.596516764983784,0.605,0.5357142857142857,0.8426966292134831,89.0,111.0
+756,latent_756,2851,0.005702,0.008194234,5.9364505,Evaluation of current images without comparison to prior imaging.,The examples with high activation levels require a description for images provided in the current study without utilizing prior imaging for comparison. This context implies that findings need to be evaluated purely based on the current images which indicates the absence of a historical comparison.,0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6541552232733191,0.66,0.7162162162162162,0.53,100.0,100.0
+757,latent_757,2597,0.005194,0.007532209,4.419015,References to stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference the unchanged nature or stability of certain features (like heart size, mediastinal contours, or presence of devices) when comparing the current images to prior radiographs. This pattern emphasizes the clinical interest in acknowledging stability or improvement, which holds diagnostic and prognostic value, especially when monitoring chronic conditions or recovery post-intervention.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5149878746968675,0.515,0.5151515151515151,0.51,100.0,100.0
+758,latent_758,18497,0.036994,0.0233734,7.72809,Updates in lung findings compared to prior radiographs are highlighted.,"Higher activations involve cases where there are significant observations or updates in lung-related findings between current and prior radiographs. In contrast, lower activations indicate minimal change or focus on other areas, like the cardiovascular system or tubes.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.4173228346456692,0.8153846153846154,65.0,135.0
+759,latent_759,7651,0.015302,0.015022918,5.977034,Structured comparison between current and prior radiological findings.,"The pattern shows a high activation level for examples that provide a structured format to compare current radiologic findings with prior images, frequently noting specific positions or changes in devices, opacities, or anatomical features. The detailed structured nature of the findings tailored to these comparisons suggests attempts at replicating precise clinical checks in real-time patient monitoring scenarios.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4297719087635054,0.43,0.4326923076923077,0.45,100.0,100.0
+760,latent_760,3520,0.00704,0.009423945,7.150856,Detailed tube placement descriptions in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation are linked by descriptions of tube placements, such as nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, and catheter placements. Reports highlight these insertions often with details of their positioning in relation to anatomy like the carina or stomach, signaling focused clinical interest in these features.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.627906976744186,0.27,100.0,100.0
+761,latent_761,58164,0.116328,0.054058313,3.7948956,Resolution or improvement of a condition as seen in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples demonstrate findings where comparison with previous images reveals either resolution of a prior abnormality or progression treatment-associated changes, such as catheter placement or pleural effusion improvement. The reports employ language indicating resolution or stability of certain conditions over time, emphasizing the importance of previous image evaluation to ascertain treatment effects.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4936386768447837,0.5527638190954773,0.6774193548387096,0.21,100.0,99.0
+762,latent_762,8514,0.017028,0.01089438,7.0871587,"Comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often with multiple views.","The primary pattern identified in highly activated examples is the presence of multiple medical imaging views (e.g., frontal, lateral) with explicit reference to comparisons with PRIOR imaging studies. The comparison is a consistent element in determining activation, indicating that sequential imaging analysis is emphasized. Examples with high activations often describe changes detected between these pairings.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4444444444444444,0.7727272727272727,88.0,112.0
+763,latent_763,45191,0.090382,0.04482848,3.7954674,Comparison findings indicating acute or identifiable change in status.,"These examples all involve situations where there is a description of the findings related to the presence of acute, identifiable abnormalities or changes in patient status like pneumonia, specific device placements, new opacities, or consolidated areas that require clear reference to the prior images. This suggests the activation pattern focuses on distinct radiological findings linked with short-term clinical changes, which are important for patient assessment.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5555555555555556,0.35,100.0,100.0
+764,latent_764,27566,0.055132,0.026851576,5.440012,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images to assess for changes.,"The examples consistently compare current imaging findings with prior examinations to assess for changes in conditions like pleural effusion, pneumonia, or other lung changes. This pattern emphasizes the importance of tracking images over time to monitor stability or progression of conditions.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.58,0.5533333333333333,0.83,100.0,100.0
+765,latent_765,7097,0.014194,0.021023475,5.8742595,Findings are explicitly compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation focus on descriptions and findings in the radiology study, explicitly comparing them to prior frontal images. These include detailed references to findings or equipment changes, highlighting stable or changed conditions with specific points of comparison from prior imaging. These comparison details between current and prior images is a key pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5060949978982766,0.53,0.5208333333333334,0.75,100.0,100.0
+766,latent_766,3179,0.006358,0.0049653836,9.513426,Unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette in evaluations for acute cardiopulmonary conditions.,"Examples with high activation levels involve the presence of normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and normal lung imaging findings, despite the indication of current or potential cardiopulmonary pathologies for evaluation or exclusion, which frequently include pneumonia, effusion, or other acute processes. This pattern highlights unremarkable cardiomediastinal features and unremarkable findings during evaluations.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6874684948079444,0.69,0.6122448979591837,0.7142857142857143,84.0,116.0
+767,latent_767,5737,0.011474,0.007883636,7.091638,Focus on evaluating findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often conclude with a phrase like ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" indicating a focus on summarizing or reiterating the findings related to comparison with prior imaging, which aligns with the consistent focus on findings herein.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+768,latent_768,32718,0.065436,0.05567417,5.265055,Stable cardiomediastinal structures in imaging comparisons.,"These examples show descriptions acknowledging the stability or lack of change in cardiomediastinal structures such as the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal contours, hilar contours, or devices, often compared to prior imaging. Reports where cardiomediastinal stability is noted are associated with higher activation levels.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+769,latent_769,3611,0.007222,0.012435231,6.1423674,"Requests to describe findings compared to prior imaging, assuming comparison.","High activation levels consistently occur in examples requiring a detailed description of current findings compared with prior images, despite possible absence of prior images, using formulaic language to note any comparison. These are often in situations with unspecified or absent previous timeframe comparisons, requesting description as if prior comparison were available, mimicking typical clinical workflow where historical comparison is essential even without prior data.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4615747550720213,0.515,0.50920245398773,0.83,100.0,100.0
+770,latent_770,31054,0.062108,0.03011714,5.5985923,Tracking changes in radiological findings over time due to medical interventions or known pathologies.,"The pattern involves changes observed in radiological findings when compared to previous images. Specifically, these involve consistent tracking or description of changes from prior known medical interventions or pathologies, such as placement or removal of devices like chest tubes or changes in effusions, consolidations, or opacities.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4166666666666667,0.7058823529411765,85.0,115.0
+771,latent_771,6313,0.012626,0.012028006,5.088526,"Focus on past-to-current comparison of findings or devices in radiology reports, emphasizing changes or stability.","These examples often reference comparisons to previous medical imaging, emphasizing findings consistent with either descriptions of devices (e.g., ""dual-lead pacemaker"") or conditions like pleural effusions or pneumothorax primarily when a change or stability is mentioned in relation to past radiographs. While the task includes image-based prompts, an underlying pattern is evident in textual references.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+772,latent_772,29946,0.059892,0.036520813,5.4498014,Reports highlight persistent findings amidst improvement compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples all include references to persistent findings despite resolution or improvement over time. This pattern indicates a focus on changes over time, addressing questions about ongoing versus resolved medical issues assessed in serial imaging studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,100.0,100.0
+773,latent_773,9693,0.019386,0.010432534,3.6027412,Description of changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with meaningful comparisons to prior images tend to have higher activations. These reports often focus on identifying changes or stability over time concerning findings detected during follow-up evaluations. High activation refers to finding changes, stability, or progression compared to previous images which adds significant information.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+774,latent_774,4245,0.00849,0.02223966,9.541262,Descriptions include comparative analysis with prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve providing descriptions of radiology findings that include comparisons to prior images. This suggests a pattern where descriptions require an explicit comparative analysis with previous imaging studies, often detailing changes or stability over time, to showcase interval changes or stability in medical imaging.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+775,latent_775,6017,0.012034,0.012160612,5.8793974,Comparison findings highlighting acute changes and device placements.,"The highly activated examples emphasize findings that compare certain features of the chest radiographs to previous studies, yet without a fixed technique or specific diagnosis other than acute processes. This includes discrepancies like tube placement, overall cardiomediastinal silhouette, heightened symptoms, or acute lung changes inferentially identified by radiological markers.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+776,latent_776,4075,0.00815,0.011009073,5.5307302,Comparisons using both current frontal and lateral images with prior data.,"Higher activations are present when reports mention both 'current frontal' and 'current lateral' image comparisons, and specific details or findings are discussed. It suggests thoroughness involving multiple view comparisons alongside historical data increases importance or relevance, leading to higher activations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.41,100.0,100.0
+777,latent_777,5514,0.011028,0.023432057,6.3567457,Presence of multi-view or multi-study image comparison indicating detailed changes or confirmations.,"Examples with consistent pattern include the presence of images for comparison and the use of terminology related to previous studies for assessing stability or progress of findings, frequently indicating investigation for changes such as pneumothorax or effusion, especially related to cardiac and pleural space. Examples with high activation numbers consistently highlight specific changes or confirmations based on comparison, often involving more than just clear findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4136519526496294,0.47,0.4814814814814814,0.78,100.0,100.0
+778,latent_778,4801,0.009602,0.011925469,4.963433,Instruction-driven comparisons to prior images in radiology prompts.,"These examples involve explicit instructions or context regarding comparing current images to prior ones, often mentioning the ""PRIOR_REPORT"" or directives to evaluate changes over time. This dataset focuses on following specific instructions when comparing images, often involving explicit prompts to consider prior studies.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+779,latent_779,9188,0.018376,0.019180609,5.2479634,Descriptions of interval changes in condition between current and prior images.,"Highly activated samples describe specific changes between current and prior imaging studies, usually detailing stability, worsening, or improvement of particular conditions. The reports often make explicit comparisons, highlighting changes over time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6477455716586151,0.65,0.6293103448275862,0.73,100.0,100.0
+780,latent_780,3635,0.00727,0.0076829484,4.006017,In-depth comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on interval change.,"The examples with high activations all emphasize a specific radiological finding or change when images are compared to previous studies, particularly those with 'comparison' or 'interval change' terminology. This aligns with cases where monitoring for changes in known abnormalities (e.g., pneumonia, pneumothorax) is crucial, reflecting progressive or dynamic changes present between images.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3839009287925696,0.3969849246231156,0.3571428571428571,0.25,100.0,99.0
+781,latent_781,18529,0.037058,0.022106279,7.102418,Descriptive findings without comparative interval change.,"The majority of zero-activation examples and those with low activation contain detailed descriptions of technical findings in radiographs without expressing assessments that involve evolving or interval changes between exams. They often focus on establishing the presence or absence of acute abnormalities without qualitative comparisons to previous exams, contrasting with minimal activation examples that lack comparative qualitative evaluation.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5108755979596691,0.5326633165829145,0.4848484848484848,0.3516483516483517,91.0,108.0
+782,latent_782,3208,0.006416,0.0084435595,6.4596086,Task involves direct comparison to prior radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation specifically reference the explicit task of comparing current imaging findings to a prior radiograph. This is a common component in radiology reports to identify changes over time. These examples include explicit instruction to compare, mention of previous images, or findings directly described relative to prior images.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3801070724147647,0.395,0.4198473282442748,0.55,100.0,100.0
+783,latent_783,4581,0.009162,0.011532565,4.9023466,"Evaluations based on serial changes in imaging studies, often after clinical interventions.","Examples with high activation discuss radiological findings in the context of changes over time, often indicating stability or interval change since a previous healthcare intervention, surgery, or disease progression. These assessments invariably involve explicit comparison to prior imaging.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.46875,0.45,100.0,100.0
+784,latent_784,5418,0.010836,0.0076824883,5.748335,Emphasis on confirming no significant interval change in follow-up imaging.,"The examples consistently compare current imaging with prior studies and conclude that there are no significant changes, often using terms like 'no significant interval change.' This indicates stable findings relative to previous examinations, a common need in follow-up radiology examinations.",0.6312709030100334,0.6326530612244898,0.6363636363636364,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.6716417910447762,0.45,100.0,100.0
+785,latent_785,3666,0.007332,0.009710415,5.5462813,Stable or unchanged mediastinal/hilar contours.,"Examples with high activations often describe the cardiomediastinal silhouette or mediastinal and hilar contours as unchanged, stable, or unremarkable compared to prior studies. This indicates that reports focusing on stable or unchanged mediastinal/hilar contours, as opposed to changes or abnormalities, correlate with higher activation.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7295673076923077,0.73,0.7129629629629629,0.77,100.0,100.0
+786,latent_786,5579,0.011158,0.009825111,2.9480462,Compare current and prior images for continuity or changes.,The examples with high activation levels consistently include a requirement to compare current with prior radiological images to provide a description of changes or lack thereof. The provided instructions often suggest the presence of prior and current images as part of the input. This pattern of requiring comparison with prior images is specifically prompting a description based on continuity or change over time.,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4652777777777778,0.67,100.0,100.0
+787,latent_787,7017,0.014034,0.01626311,4.477751,Comparison-based evaluation noting anatomical changes or pathological findings in chest imaging.,"These examples focus on descriptions of chest imaging findings, both current and compared to prior images, often mentioning specific anatomical features or devices. High activation examples commonly include identifiable pathologies, anatomical changes, or device placements that are evaluated in relation to previous images. In contrast, lower activation samples typically describe normal findings or routine assessments without notable interval changes or pathologies.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+788,latent_788,8465,0.01693,0.019794023,4.0113854,Requests for specific analysis or adjustments based on imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings where specific unexpected elements were noted that required further comparisons, such as intervals between observations or recommended changes based on observations (e.g., tube positioning), indicating the AI was prompted for detailed analysis beyond merely noting unchanged conditions.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,100.0,100.0
+789,latent_789,3875,0.00775,0.010488268,6.08616,"Comparative analysis with prior imaging, indicating changes or stability.","Examples with high activation consistently include references to past imaging for comparative purposes, especially indicating changes or stability in specific findings. These include specific mentions of comparison, prior images, or interim changes, reflecting a pattern of evaluating current conditions against past baselines for progression or regression.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+790,latent_790,11270,0.02254,0.021606969,4.7783694,Explicit comparison of findings to prior imaging studies.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels all include explicit comparisons to prior images or studies, showing progression or stability of findings. This reveals a linguistic pattern which often involves the description of changes, stability, or implications based on a comparison to previous imaging, using terms like 'interval change', 'compared to', or noting unchanged findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+791,latent_791,6134,0.012268,0.013932708,8.237545,Presence of interstitial abnormalities or opacities.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve observations of interstitial abnormalities or opacities, particularly in the context of interstitial edema or pulmonary conditions. This is a recurrent pattern noted in the findings or impressions, suggesting that interstitial changes are key to the notable activation observed.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6273785425101215,0.628140703517588,0.6444444444444445,0.58,100.0,99.0
+792,latent_792,31253,0.062506,0.031712797,3.240286,Comparison detailing changes or stability in imaging over time.,"Examples with higher activation mention comparison to prior imaging, noting specific observations or changes over time, rather than mere stability or absence of acute findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+793,latent_793,60218,0.120436,0.050988726,1.9118155,Focus on changes or stability in medical findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize changes or stability in findings when comparing current and prior radiological images. This pattern is typical in follow-up imaging to monitor the progression, resolution, or stability of a medical condition.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5625,0.58,0.5571428571428572,0.78,100.0,100.0
+794,latent_794,5321,0.010642,0.011784071,5.619052,Comparison with previous imaging highlights stability or change.,"The examples with higher activations use comparison against prior imaging to highlight stability or changes in conditions or structures observed in serial images. Common phrases include 'As compared to the previous radiograph', 'unchanged compared to', and 'stable since prior study', which are typical in radiologic assessments to track developments over time, particularly in complex cases or conditions where monitoring changes is critical.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5169491525423728,0.61,100.0,100.0
+795,latent_795,5793,0.011586,0.00950635,4.3917627,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+796,latent_796,4833,0.009666,0.0073704594,6.190553,Emphasis on unchanged findings or minor variations in comparison to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels detail the comparison of current and prior radiographic images and describe either stability of observed findings or minor change, such as unchanged associated cardiomediastinal findings with mention of new entities like pacemaker placement, subtle anatomical shifts, or consistent thoracic aortic features. These elements indicate an emphasis on comparing radiological stability or specific discoverable alterations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4107426153962378,0.415,0.3975903614457831,0.33,100.0,100.0
+797,latent_797,18867,0.037734,0.024382941,7.375115,Thoracic aortic calcifications or tortuosity.,"The reports with high activation levels consistently describe the presence of calcification related to the thoraic aorta, such as aortic calcifications or tortuosity. This pattern is identifiable across different evaluations of the cardiovascular silhouette and is a distinct finding often noted in various conditions associated with aging or underlying cardiovascular disease.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.6225970043637221,0.68,0.6444444444444445,0.3766233766233766,77.0,123.0
+798,latent_798,9864,0.019728,0.013291306,4.236022,Evaluation of changes in positions of tubes and medical devices compared to prior image.,"Examples show a focus on evaluating changes in monitoring or support devices between current and prior images. Radiology reports often highlight alterations in the positioning of medical devices such as tubes and catheters during comparisons, with references to previous placements.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5776581142434801,0.6,0.6851851851851852,0.37,100.0,100.0
+799,latent_799,7187,0.014374,0.017137159,5.9318357,References to atelectasis in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on findings related to atelectasis, which is often noted through words like 'atelectasis', 'linear density' or 'opacities' in association with other pathologies or changes (e.g., pleural effusion, pneumonia) when comparing current and prior images. This particular focus on atelectasis distinguishes them from lower activation examples which lack this focus.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7081320450885669,0.71,0.75,0.63,100.0,100.0
+800,latent_800,5880,0.01176,0.009255912,3.235489,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging with minimal clinical context.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where the assistant is tasked with directly comparing or finding changes between current and prior images, often without extensive specific clinical background or example input data to anchor their response and encourage analytical comparison skills in the assistant.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4552673659105076,0.4924623115577889,0.4934210526315789,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+801,latent_801,11117,0.022234,0.015914774,5.0821586,"Technical report compares to prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability of known abnormalities.","Examples with high activation levels consistently feature technical radiology reports that include detailed comparisons to previous exams, and descriptions that involve specific changes or consistently stable features of known abnormalities. This structure is typical for reports with ongoing conditions or follow-up observations, capturing a pattern where changes from prior studies or stable features of known abnormalities are emphasized.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+802,latent_802,8687,0.017374,0.009679776,4.4707437,Detailed comparative analysis using multiple view descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed reports where different views (frontal, lateral, etc.) and multiple comparison points are specifically described, often involving complex findings or technical details in the imaging process, which involve explanations beyond a simple conclusion.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+803,latent_803,4619,0.009238,0.010151544,4.085,Evaluation of tube positions and respiratory support in radiology reports.,"Most examples focus on descriptions of endotracheal or other tubes, often noting their position, such as the distance from the carina or other landmarks. These reports are common when evaluating patients post-surgical procedures or when managing acute respiratory support.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4270833333333333,0.45,0.4166666666666667,0.25,100.0,100.0
+804,latent_804,15311,0.030622,0.01942701,4.633057,Poor or lacking comparison to prior studies.,"These examples often lack explicit comparative details with prior studies despite being requested, which could reflect a case where the AI model is uncertain in generating useful differences between the current and previous imagery descriptions. The high activation ones likely provided more specifics or attempted to compare adequately, thus adhering to the study's directives and enhancing their applicability to the pattern.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4475351068704347,0.4824120603015075,0.4866666666666667,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+805,latent_805,2873,0.005746,0.0070668533,6.4424314,Presence and evaluation of cardiomegaly in radiological findings.,"These examples frequently mention 'cardiomegaly', indicating an enlarged heart. This is a specific radiological finding used to describe the cardiac silhouette as abnormally large. The pattern is clear due to repeated mentions of enlargement, stability, or change in size of the heart across these cases, using terms like 'mild', 'moderate', or 'severe cardiomegaly'.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.8518518518518519,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6713769306605324,0.675,0.7215189873417721,0.57,100.0,100.0
+806,latent_806,3688,0.007376,0.007472249,4.035301,Evaluation of chest images in comparison to prior frontal images.,"The examples exhibit radiological assessments which incorporate the evaluation of current images against prior images explicitly marked for comparison. This pattern is consistent, where the reports note findings in relation to previous imaging, indicating interval changes or stability as needed.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+807,latent_807,3383,0.006766,0.0076437276,7.2668023,Focus on stability or changes in radiological findings compared to previous studies.,"The examples with high activation values involve comparing current imaging results to prior imaging to determine stability, resolution, or changes in findings. These observations usually focus on features like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or intrathoracic devices. The emphasis on stability or change of specific anatomical findings is what the model highlights in these prompts.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.469150641025641,0.47,0.4722222222222222,0.51,100.0,100.0
+808,latent_808,4528,0.009056,0.0072272103,7.8970594,Detailed interval change assessment from priors.,"Higher activation levels are observed when directives explicitly ask for findings to be evaluated in comparison to prior images, revealing changes or stability (e.g., 'Over the last 24 hours...'). The pattern involves describing interval changes, improvements, new developments, or continued stability between current and prior imaging.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+809,latent_809,9006,0.018012,0.009154112,3.9590645,Detection and comparison of unresolved or evolving pathologies in follow-up imaging studies.,"The highest activation examples are characterized by explicit comparisons made with prior imaging studies, with a focus on identifying new, unresolved, or stable abnormalities (e.g., pleural effusions, opacities) over time. This suggests a pattern of concern for chronic conditions or monitoring of persisting findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+810,latent_810,12106,0.024212,0.013659884,4.0239673,Description of findings with 'no significant interval change' compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples demonstrate explicit mention of insignificant or no significant interval changes between current and prior imaging when describing findings, specifically in a context where comparison with previous images is emphasized. This indicates the model activation correlates with descriptions of unchanged status over time between comparative studies, which may signal stability or lack of acute change in the suggested context.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4821818181818181,0.555,0.72,0.18,100.0,100.0
+811,latent_811,3075,0.00615,0.016792381,9.30062,Comparison of pleural effusion status or pneumothorax between current and previous radiographs.,"These examples consistently involve evaluations comparing current and previous imaging studies. The primary factor influencing high activation seems to be the explicit reference to changes or stability in specific findings such as effusions, pneumothorax, or effusion-related observations, especially in regard to pleural conditions which are frequently noted and compared across different images.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4320486815415821,0.475,0.4444444444444444,0.2,100.0,100.0
+812,latent_812,16750,0.0335,0.02414159,6.9158106,Emphasis on tube and catheter position or status in imaging studies.,"The samples with high activation focus on the presence, position, and status of medical tubes and catheters (e.g., endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters) and their relation to anatomic landmarks, such as the carina or SVC, or changes between images such as 'removal' or 'unchanged'. This pattern is often critical in radiological evaluations.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7612698412698413,0.765,0.712,0.89,100.0,100.0
+813,latent_813,3739,0.007478,0.008251712,4.0809135,Explicit instruction to compare current with prior images.,"Examples with higher activations prominently include the instruction to provide a comparison with prior images. This often implies an intended narrative to track or discuss changes, typical in pre-operative or diagnostic evaluations where monitoring progress or lack of change is key. More generic comparisons or lack of comparison register less activation as they offer fewer insights into disease progress.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+814,latent_814,3194,0.006388,0.012574129,6.2886796,Sequential listing and comparison with prior images.,"Examples exhibit a sequential listing style of images, where each new image description builds upon and compares to prior images, often indicated by explicit mentions of 'compared to' or 'in comparison with'.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4024362215582624,0.415,0.4341085271317829,0.56,100.0,100.0
+815,latent_815,2841,0.005682,0.011345172,9.954875,Emphasis on comparison and interval change in findings with prior imaging.,"The examples exhibit a pattern where findings in a radiology study (chest-related typically) are given with special emphasis on comparison with previous imaging over time or interval changes. High activation examples consistently include explicit references to changes between current and prior imaging such as stability, improvement, or new findings, which aids in assessing progress or new developments in a patient's condition.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+816,latent_816,7069,0.014138,0.013398166,10.569659,Descriptions of distances from anatomical landmarks for medical device placement.,"High activation levels are associated with descriptions of the positioning of medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes or central lines, particularly their distance from anatomical landmarks like the carina. These reports often emphasize device integrity or placement adequacy, crucial in medical imaging interpretations where precise placements impact patient treatment.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7391135411173712,0.765,0.75,0.5844155844155844,77.0,123.0
+817,latent_817,8694,0.017388,0.014696987,6.450966,Comparison with prior images identifying changes specific to lung findings like pneumonia.,"Comparative analysis with prior imaging studies is highlighted in higher activation samples, especially when identifying pneumonia or other acute lung findings. Notably, these reports often address visible changes or persistence of specific findings related to pulmonary infiltrates or consolidation, contrasting with more generalized findings in lower activation samples.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4175385611045195,0.46,0.4130434782608695,0.19,100.0,100.0
+818,latent_818,56610,0.11322,0.082794175,8.361618,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images to prior frontal image.,"The examples with higher activation levels often reference the presence of multiple radiological views, such as 'current frontal image', 'current lateral image', and comparisons with 'prior frontal image'. This indicates the pattern focuses on comparison across multiple imaging perspectives and comparison with historical imaging data.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.51,0.51,100.0,100.0
+819,latent_819,6671,0.013342,0.016539196,6.840631,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Examples exhibit a pattern where comparisons to prior imaging are explicitly highlighted. These involve changes or assessments of interval changes in specific pathological or medical device findings, often requiring precision in description of alterations from past studies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3997599039615846,0.4,0.3958333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+820,latent_820,4687,0.009374,0.010913499,7.7399154,"Comparative analysis using current and prior images, including both frontal and lateral views.","The high activation levels correlate with cases using image comparisons (both frontal and lateral), explicitly involving evaluations against prior reports to interpret changes, similar to other patterns noted in previous example sets. This type of comparative analysis is consistent with a focus on changes in pathology over time, which often appears in radiological evaluations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4818181818181818,0.53,100.0,100.0
+821,latent_821,7127,0.014254,0.01121148,4.029077,Comprehensive analysis from both frontal and lateral chest images.,"The highly activated examples all involve observations made from both frontal and lateral chest images, with descriptions often involving changes noted in comparison to prior frontal images. They typically feature detailed reporting of conditions such as lung volume, heart size, and outline of the mediastinal contours. These elements likely trigger specific patterns related to thorough comparative imaging analysis in radiological assessments.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6155365371955234,0.635,0.593103448275862,0.86,100.0,100.0
+822,latent_822,4315,0.00863,0.01524788,5.920715,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on description and comparison of frontal and lateral views in combination with prior frontal images, assessing interval changes or new findings while exploring potential causes. This emphasizes a comprehensive approach in radiological analysis with comparison to previous studies.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+823,latent_823,3604,0.007208,0.0113771325,6.5819106,Emphasis on describing findings in direct comparison to prior images.,"These examples focus on evaluating the radiological findings by directly comparing them with prior images, reflecting a routine part of radiological practice where current and previous states of imagery are analyzed against each other to assess stability or changes. High-activation examples consistently emphasize comparisons, even explicitly noting differences or stabilities over time, while low-activation examples may lack such direct comparisons or focus on broader findings without special emphasis on prior comparisons.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+824,latent_824,3356,0.006712,0.0052629607,3.813688,Generate findings or impressions from minimal image details.,"The examples with higher activations include prompts for AI to generate responses based on descriptions of current and prior images, without specifying additional comparison details or changes. This implies the examples focus on addressing findings or impressions directly from minimal provided details.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.3333333333333333,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+825,latent_825,2807,0.005614,0.008620754,7.0171885,Provide findings with limited detailed comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern represents requests for descriptions of current radiological findings ""in comparison to prior"" despite minimal emphasis or availability of a detailed prior report or comparative observation. Absence of new comparisons results in high activation due to focus on standalone assessments or routine findings with implicit normalcy.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3148458403140707,0.315,0.3203883495145631,0.33,100.0,100.0
+826,latent_826,6354,0.012708,0.014237654,5.421048,Detailed comparative findings from multiple chest views.,"The examples with high activation levels mention a variety of radiographic techniques involving multiple views, typically comparing current frontal and lateral chest images with prior images. They describe findings in detail, often considering different imaging angles and prior examination results. The pattern focuses on interpreting changes or stability of identified conditions, often using comparative language.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6100164203612479,0.62,0.5909090909090909,0.78,100.0,100.0
+827,latent_827,60256,0.120512,0.075483985,7.230265,Interval changes or stability in chest findings when compared to prior imaging.,"Given the varied descriptions across flight examples, the common pattern among those with higher activation levels centers on describing interval changes, stability, or improvements in past conditions of the chest, such as pneumothorax resolution or improved pleural effusions. This is emphasized by reports comparing images against prior studies or noting resolutions/improvements specifically in aspects outside of direct machine-induced changes in support/monitoring devices. This suggests focus on specific human-analyzed changes rather than automated device position changes.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5118110236220472,0.7303370786516854,89.0,111.0
+828,latent_828,37437,0.074874,0.03698159,5.108422,Assessment of medical device positioning and changes.,"These examples often document changes or stability of medical devices (tubes, catheters, etc.) between current and prior imaging, which involves noting device positioning and determining any interval change. This pattern is consistent across reports with mentions of unchanged or changed device positions, e.g., 'unchanged position', 'new placement', 'removal', etc.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.749599358974359,0.75,0.7314814814814815,0.79,100.0,100.0
+829,latent_829,5901,0.011802,0.011693507,5.312485,Serial imaging or significant findings related to pneumonia.,"The examples describe situations involving recent pneumonia which often leads to changes that need monitoring over time through serial imaging. The elevated activation in these cases is due to the prominence of pneumonia-related findings like opacities suiting for comparison purposes, evaluation after treatment or suspected recurrence.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4861111111111111,0.35,100.0,100.0
+830,latent_830,3702,0.007404,0.007994632,7.7986956,Description of lungs as well-expanded and clear with normal cardiorespiratory contours.,"The examples showing activation relate to descriptions of lungs that are well expanded and clear, with normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, and no acute abnormalities like consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. These descriptions are detailed radiological assessments that confirm the absence of expected changes, leading to higher activation as they provide clear data for analysis.",0.8357963875205254,0.84,1.0,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.782118517392516,0.785,0.8701298701298701,0.67,100.0,100.0
+831,latent_831,2677,0.005354,0.008981942,7.3854084,Radiological findings compared to prior images for interval change assessment.,"The examples consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to prior images. This pattern is typical of reports where stability or change in clinical findings is important for the interpretation, often seen in follow-up studies or chronic disease monitoring.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3998575933272302,0.41,0.4285714285714285,0.54,100.0,100.0
+832,latent_832,18905,0.03781,0.037662297,5.123254,Comparison of current findings with prior images for stability or change.,"The emphasis in these examples is on the comparison of findings with previous imaging studies to note stability, change, or improvement. This pattern is evident in medical imaging studies where longitudinal observation is crucial for assessing treatment response, disease progression, or stability over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+833,latent_833,21834,0.043668,0.028443191,8.069066,Emphasis on interval change in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation scores involve scenarios where radiological findings indicate a change, especially notable changes compared to prior reports. These reports often describe either progression or improvement in medical conditions, focusing on explicit differences in radiographic appearance over time such as increased opacities, interval changes in effusions, etc.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.5,0.7285714285714285,70.0,130.0
+834,latent_834,3495,0.00699,0.009119554,7.589826,Heart size within normal limits amidst other imaging pathologies or changes.,"These representative samples include descriptions involving specific contrasts between heart size or mediastinal structures and other pathologies, frequently seen in radiological reports evaluating changes in the thoracic cavity. The emphasis in these reports is often on whether heart size or mediastinal contours are within normal limits, against a backdrop of prior imaging.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7941302000954031,0.795,0.7610619469026548,0.86,100.0,100.0
+835,latent_835,6196,0.012392,0.011374191,4.789504,Changes in medical devices or unexpected technology-based findings.,"The majority of high activation examples describe changes in medical devices or unexpected findings from technological medical interventions. Although some contain occasional inconsistencies, they reference specific alterations, insertions, or updates in patient care devices, which are recognized patterns leading to high activation levels in the context given.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.603448275862069,0.35,100.0,100.0
+836,latent_836,3735,0.00747,0.009539774,4.7493563,Instruction to compare current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain instructions (either explicit or implicit) for the assistant to provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior images. This is evident from phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image.', indicating that the assistant's role is to compare current and previous imaging results.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+837,latent_837,5307,0.010614,0.008178989,5.0559893,Minimal or irrelevant change in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern in these examples is the description of the current condition in relation to past examinations, with a specific emphasis on cases where no comparison is available or the comparison is made without finding significant changes. This leads to an activation pattern where descriptive comparisons are minimal or irrelevant due to lack of new findings to compare against.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54,0.54,0.54,0.54,100.0,100.0
+838,latent_838,12409,0.024818,0.012485294,7.7928424,Terminology indicating change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with references to prior comparisons show a pattern of using specific terminology to indicate changes or stability, such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'slightly improved', or 'increased'. This reflects a focus on observing changes over time in follow-up imaging, using such descriptive language to convey progression, regression, or stability in findings.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.6666666666666666,24.0,26.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.2195121951219512,0.6923076923076923,39.0,161.0
+839,latent_839,7211,0.014422,0.011136951,8.78821,Clear specified findings without further evaluation or uncertainty.,"The examples that have higher activation levels focus on the presence of direct observable signs or conditions in chest radiographs, without suggesting further evaluation or indetermination of findings. The lower activation examples highlight uncertain findings and recommendations for further assessment, which reflects that the observations are not definitive.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5444139194139195,0.5477386934673367,0.4960629921259842,0.7078651685393258,89.0,110.0
+840,latent_840,4641,0.009282,0.0073732943,3.850384,Involvement of both frontal and lateral views in imaging assessment.,"Highly activated examples describe radiology findings across different views, specifically in cases where both frontal and lateral views or comparison to a prior examination are involved, emphasizing comprehensive evaluation based on multiple imaging angles.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+841,latent_841,7240,0.01448,0.016952282,4.5574217,Unchanged or stable findings compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples describe unchanged findings or stable comparisons when evaluated against prior imaging, even if new adjustments or additions to the findings occur. The pattern is a regular part of monitoring for progression or resolution in chronic conditions, device placements, or post-surgical status. Unchanged stable status or device placement against prior imaging contributes significantly to the higher activation scores.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+842,latent_842,3460,0.00692,0.008542367,5.8172054,Stable radiological findings compared with prior images.,"These samples tend to have activation levels above zero when there are notable radiographic findings identified without new acute changes, or when the findings demonstrate comparisons to previous images without showing significant intervals of acute progression or concern. This applies often to descriptions involving stable findings or the absence of significant interval changes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4444444444444444,0.28,100.0,100.0
+843,latent_843,7517,0.015034,0.01854226,5.5333076,Detailed comparison between current and prior images focusing on specific changes.,"Each highly activated example emphasizes a detailed comparison of the current and prior images with a focus on specific changes or stabilities observed, necessitating a level of detail in description and contextual interpretation.",0.2765605622157916,0.3,0.1875,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3710855271706645,0.395,0.3278688524590163,0.2,100.0,100.0
+844,latent_844,4696,0.009392,0.011406677,6.1723857,Focus on comparison between current and prior images for changes or stability.,"The activations are associated with the presence of both current and prior images being used for comparison and a clear focus on changes or stability over time, as indicated by words like 'comparison', 'interval change', and 'previous' along with a historical or serialized context.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.4384615384615384,0.57,100.0,100.0
+845,latent_845,10907,0.021814,0.011014415,4.0183735,Instructions emphasize comparing current and prior imaging to determine changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve instructions for comparing current imaging findings with prior studies, focusing on stability or changes in pathological findings, whether improvements, no change, or resolution. The highlighted pattern ensures results are contextualized with historical data.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,100.0,100.0
+846,latent_846,3192,0.006384,0.0070361444,5.295019,Interval assessment of medical devices or specific conditions in radiology.,The pattern seen in these highly activated examples involves detailed observations about interval changes in medical devices or specific conditions observed in the radiology images. These examples often reference changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical structures between prior and current studies.,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4603492409458397,0.4623115577889447,0.4545454545454545,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+847,latent_847,107475,0.21495,0.15754703,4.9385605,Describing minimal or no changes compared to prior imaging.,"Patterns of stable findings or minimal changes between imaging studies are explicitly compared to prior images. This linguistic structure involves phrases like 'unchanged from prior', 'similar to the prior study', and 'compared to previous'. Reports focus on documenting changes or stability over time, highlighting consistency or minimal variation in this dataset.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.618080808080808,0.6180904522613065,0.6161616161616161,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+848,latent_848,4395,0.00879,0.010046284,4.3251295,Comparison of current and prior radiograph findings for changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently show the use of detailed findings and assessments based on both the current and prior images, with a focus on monitoring changes such as interval findings or stability. The pattern involves comparing chest radiograph findings over time to assess changes or stability, crucial for evaluating the progression of existing conditions or the emergence of new issues.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+849,latent_849,20256,0.040512,0.019070037,4.2045054,Radiological changes post-procedure or intervention compared to prior images.,"The high activation examples frequently contain a pattern where specific changes or improvements, particularly involving interventions like tube placements or procedures such as thoracentesis, are compared to prior images. The changes often account for intervention effects which influence future analysis.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5468117408906883,0.5477386934673367,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,99.0
+850,latent_850,2723,0.005446,0.006309294,6.6270103,Radiographic evaluation of rib fractures and their status.,"The pattern identified in these examples involves discussing fractures—typically ribs—and their status (new or unchanged). Fractures are frequently monitored through successive radiographs to assess healing or any additional trauma, highlighting their importance and frequent mention in radiology reports.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5366000171629624,0.595,0.8275862068965517,0.24,100.0,100.0
+851,latent_851,11815,0.02363,0.015660102,5.419595,Comparison with prior imaging based on clinical indication.,"Examples often include specific indications for evaluation based on medical complaints, such as pneumonia or pleural effusions which are evaluated through comparison with prior imaging. This consistent pattern concerns comparisons related to respiratory issues and pleural effusions governed by clinical indications and outcomes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+852,latent_852,6472,0.012944,0.010860058,7.1784897,Description of stability or changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Patterns in these examples reveal consistent references to changes or stability between current and prior imaging whether evaluating anatomical structures (lungs, pleura, heart, etc.) or medical devices (ET tubes, catheters). The descriptions focus on changes, stability, and intervals of anatomical findings or medical device positions contrasted with previous imagery.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+853,latent_853,2061,0.004122,0.012397221,8.951658,Requests for comparison of frontal and lateral images with prior ones.,"The pattern observed involves examples where a variety of views (frontal and lateral) are requested or provided and explicit instructions or requests to compare these with prior images. These examples tend to have high activation levels if invoked in contexts demanding detailed comparison with prior images, especially when both frontal and lateral views are utilized, though not exclusively contained to these.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5304347826086957,0.61,100.0,100.0
+854,latent_854,2457,0.004914,0.006005393,4.5177407,Examinations using frontal and lateral views with comprehensive descriptions.,"Representative examples consistently contain descriptions of findings using frontal and lateral images to assess various conditions, often suggesting comparisons to prior studies even when not specific. They generally include evaluations of cardiac silhouette, lung volumes, mediastinal contours, and common pathologies like edema, effusion, or pneumothorax. These reports provide comprehensive evaluations based on current and prior imaging data.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+855,latent_855,3553,0.007106,0.006759631,4.150109,Stability and unchanged findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly activated samples involve evaluating current radiological findings in relation to prior imaging studies using specific comparative observations. These reports often explicitly mention no significant changes, the persistence of certain findings, or absence of new findings as compared to previous images, which indicates stability in medical analysis.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4411764705882353,0.3,100.0,100.0
+856,latent_856,3521,0.007042,0.007575438,5.934565,Stable positioning of cardiac devices in comparative chest imaging.,"Examples that involve an evaluation of positioning or the presence of a device, especially pacemakers or AICD (automated implantable cardioverter defibrillator) leads, exhibit higher activation levels. The reports emphasize the unchanged or stable positioning of these devices based on comparison with prior imaging.",0.7043103448275863,0.7142857142857143,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.631578947368421,0.24,100.0,100.0
+857,latent_857,4136,0.008272,0.008436375,3.958303,Detailed instructions for multi-view image comparison against prior exams.,"Highly activated examples consistently contain detailed and explicit comparison instructions for radiologists to compare current images with multiple prior images, including specific image views (frontal and lateral). They emphasize examination through different views and provide extensive detail in directive format for comparison, often correlating findings with patient clinical history.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3809090219288261,0.3819095477386934,0.3925233644859813,0.42,100.0,99.0
+858,latent_858,4507,0.009014,0.011058698,4.2188888,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+859,latent_859,6429,0.012858,0.011660422,3.9916449,Explicit comparative language between current and prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently involve comparisons between current imaging findings and prior studies, which is a core element in longitudinal monitoring in radiology, as it helps determine changes or stability over time. The reports are structured to explicitly provide these comparative observations and related interpretations, underlining the importance of identifying changes in medical assessments.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+860,latent_860,3654,0.007308,0.007926477,6.5815306,Emphasis on image comparison without necessarily detailing changes.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activation levels consistently involves instructions or suggestions for comparing current images with prior images, regardless of the presence or absence of explicitly detailed findings. The model seems to focus on the necessity of comparison as a central task, often highlighted by phrases like 'compared to' or 'comparison' even when explicit findings might be absent.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.424,0.46,0.4733333333333333,0.71,100.0,100.0
+861,latent_861,5690,0.01138,0.011268929,4.7648625,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples involve assessing changes in imaging findings relative to prior images, specifically noting the interval changes such as resolution, stability, enlargement, or new findings in comparison to previous studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4480128462464873,0.45,0.4553571428571428,0.51,100.0,100.0
+862,latent_862,6520,0.01304,0.0104174735,6.1205764,Comparison-focused radiology report tasks.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve specific tasks of describing radiology findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. These tasks involve providing detailed descriptions of how the current scan findings relate to previous scans, which is a common practice in radiology to assess changes over time.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5175799540282073,0.575,0.5443786982248521,0.92,100.0,100.0
+863,latent_863,6282,0.012564,0.01278997,6.8539515,Detailed assessment of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples use a common radiological reporting structure that provides detailed descriptions of findings while emphasizing interval changes observed in comparison to prior imaging studies. The more representative samples contain more detailed analyses, such as specific measurements, device positions, and assessments of new abnormalities compared to prior images.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4690065681444991,0.4773869346733668,0.4666666666666667,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+864,latent_864,8690,0.01738,0.016640192,2.8367488,Comparison of current imaging studies with prior reports.,"The pattern focuses on the use of prior reports for comparison in assessing current imaging to observe changes or stability in the findings. Examples featuring this pattern among those with higher activation levels consistently have detailed comparisons mentioned in the structure of their reports, whereas those with lower activations do not.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4292395545334745,0.4422110552763819,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,99.0
+865,latent_865,5050,0.0101,0.012610745,4.622675,Interval changes in pulmonary or cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples contain comparisons of current radiological findings with previous studies, particularly highlighting changes associated with pulmonary edema or other cardiopulmonary conditions. The focus is on the interval changes noted between the current and prior images, especially in relation to pulmonary opacity, edema, heart size, or vascular congestion.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5656565656565656,0.56,100.0,100.0
+866,latent_866,3812,0.007624,0.008754203,3.416664,Comparative description of current and prior images.,"All examples with high activation mention providing a comparative description between the current and previous image, indicating a clear task of comparative assessment based on prior findings which becomes necessary when evaluating for change or stability in radiological diagnosis.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+867,latent_867,12529,0.025058,0.012998744,4.9977703,Detailed comparison with prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"Comparative analysis of findings against prior imaging is consistently mentioned in examples with higher activation, indicating that the focus is on the specific differences or similarities noted between two or more sets of images.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.5405405405405406,0.6,100.0,100.0
+868,latent_868,3497,0.006994,0.0065332907,4.556624,Availability of multiple comparison views for assessing stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve situations where multiple views (usually frontal and lateral) are available for comparison to prior images, indicating a comprehensive and stable analysis over time using consistent radiological techniques.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.375886524822695,0.395,0.4222222222222222,0.57,100.0,100.0
+869,latent_869,3622,0.007244,0.011086446,4.8247004,"Chest imaging including both frontal and lateral views, with comparisons to prior images.","Several examples describe chest imaging conducted with concurrent or sequential frontal and lateral views compared to prior imaging. This pattern is frequent in chest radiology to assess changes over time, with some reports lacking explicit prior comparisons but still following the format of analyzing sequential views.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.5904761904761905,0.62,100.0,100.0
+870,latent_870,5292,0.010584,0.015604791,4.579818,Evaluation and comparison related to medical device placement.,"Examples with higher activations often involve descriptions related to invasive procedures, such as intubation, tube placements, or thoracoscopic interventions, which are explicitly compared to previous findings. These findings often mention changes in positioning or updates since prior radiological assessments.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4202898550724637,0.29,100.0,100.0
+871,latent_871,3140,0.00628,0.011565671,5.44429,Specific indications driving detailed comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation scores involve the evaluation of current radiographic findings in relation to identified indications such as symptoms (e.g., cough, chest pain) or conditions (e.g., dyspnea, shortness of breath, pneumonia). The pattern involves specific clinical scenarios where acute or recent changes are assessed, or when specific diagnoses need consideration.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4732552349503367,0.4924623115577889,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,99.0
+872,latent_872,41475,0.08295,0.055378642,5.5445375,Reports emphasizing interval changes or disease progression compared to prior exams.,"The examples with increased activation levels include findings of interval changes or progressive disease, which involve detailed comparisons between the current and prior images to note worsening or stable conditions, substantial findings such as nodule progression, or significant clinical implications, primarily associated with pathology progression or device status alteration.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5725958516656191,0.575,0.5652173913043478,0.65,100.0,100.0
+873,latent_873,3018,0.006036,0.0072084675,5.762663,Comparison of current findings to previous same-day images.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently examine interval changes over time using images taken on the same day, indicating the model's attention on identifying changes within short time frames rather than relying solely on past reports or older comparisons.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+874,latent_874,7573,0.015146,0.011193668,5.423757,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, focusing on findings changes.","The pattern involves comparing current and prior imaging studies using frontal and lateral views to evaluate changes, despite variant indications and findings across different cases.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+875,latent_875,2577,0.005154,0.007730425,8.358921,Detailed findings comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of the radiology study findings compared to prior images, especially noting interval changes such as improvement, persistence, or stability in the condition. Multiple examples specifically ask for detailed comparison, indicating this task strongly aligns with the activation pattern.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4907407407407407,0.53,100.0,100.0
+876,latent_876,21201,0.042402,0.026925022,5.7519865,Interpretation stability in comparison to prior images.,"All examples with activations describe stable conditions or minimal changes noted through direct comparison to prior images. These references are integral to the finding of 'stability', using terms like 'previously described', 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'interval', indicating comparisons are essential to these interpretations, often indicating no acute findings.",0.3604938271604938,0.54,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5468117408906883,0.5477386934673367,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,99.0
+877,latent_877,3031,0.006062,0.0067291763,5.3501463,Mandated comparison with prior images even when there is no prior comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently contain instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images, regardless of whether those prior images actually exist or not. This pattern appears to involve mandatory comparative analysis despite prefacing about the absence of prior images or comparisons in certain cases.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+878,latent_878,14957,0.029914,0.018134305,6.6386065,Correct placement of ET or NG tubes.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe standard placement of medical devices, primarily endotracheal (ET) or nasogastric (NG) tubes, with a specific focus on their placement being in known or expected locations. This is a critical component in radiology, especially for assessing correct procedural outcomes.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5516331337438634,0.605,0.7647058823529411,0.268041237113402,97.0,103.0
+879,latent_879,4187,0.008374,0.009447879,4.8860445,Comparison and interpretation using both frontal and lateral chest views.,"The highly activated examples focus on detailed observations of changes or comparisons between multiple views (frontal and lateral) of the chest, particularly in the context of postoperative changes or evaluating for acute chest pathology. The pattern suggests that complex interpretations from different imaging angles are prioritized.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+880,latent_880,16900,0.0338,0.017467018,4.1679106,Positioning and measurements of ET tube relative to carina.,"Examples with high activation levels describe radiological findings related to the positioning and measurements of endotracheal tubes (ET tubes) in relation to the carina, highlighting whether they are appropriately positioned or require adjustment (e.g., distance above the carina). This distinct focus distinguishes them from other examples.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4857410004675082,0.56,0.75,0.18,100.0,100.0
+881,latent_881,12514,0.025028,0.01333769,3.0499282,Presentation of both frontal and lateral image views for current evaluation.,"The highly activated examples typically have both frontal and lateral images for current evaluation, even if prior images are not available for comparison. Examples with low activation often lack a complete set of images, particularly the lateral view.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4771306854416979,0.4824120603015075,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,99.0
+882,latent_882,23505,0.04701,0.02319621,5.128955,Detecting changes or stability in specific medical findings compared to prior reports.,"Examples with activation levels exhibit specific medical conditions or changes in diagnostic attributes over time, with clear comparisons to prior examinations to assess changes.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6441005802707931,0.655,0.6148148148148148,0.83,100.0,100.0
+883,latent_883,2514,0.005028,0.0076418207,5.271324,"Normal cardiomediastinal contours, lungs clear, no acute changes.","The highly activated examples consistently describe normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, along with no acute findings such as focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. These reports often highlight negative findings or unremarkable cardiopulmonary status, suggesting that the pattern may be recognizing the language structure associated with normal or slightly altered findings without acute pathology.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6697027324592133,0.67,0.6808510638297872,0.64,100.0,100.0
+884,latent_884,3456,0.006912,0.0123988455,5.3800435,Comparison to prior imaging with indication of stability or change.,"High activation levels are associated with instances where findings are compared against previous imaging, often identifying stability or change in specific abnormalities. These examples consistently include the language structure 'Compared to' or 'Comparison is made with', indicating such evaluations.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3229519295870007,0.325,0.3033707865168539,0.27,100.0,100.0
+885,latent_885,20274,0.040548,0.016716879,2.4481874,Explicit mention of imaging type and comparison details.,"Samples with higher activation levels prominently involve descriptive elements about the imaging technique, especially language focusing on the types of images used, like 'frontal image' and 'lateral image'. Additionally, there is some focus on comparison elements, distinguishing current vs. prior imaging.",0.2765605622157916,0.3,0.3529411764705882,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4068554396423249,0.4371859296482412,0.4551724137931034,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+886,latent_886,3948,0.007896,0.00983064,4.949382,Presence of a lateral image aids comparison with prior frontal image.,"Representative examples involve prompts that include at least a lateral image to evaluate the findings in comparison to a prior frontal image. This suggests the presence of both frontal and lateral views in the analysis aids in recognizing a pattern, possibly related to more detailed spatial assessment or the required technique.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.426031746031746,0.435,0.4133333333333333,0.31,100.0,100.0
+887,latent_887,55605,0.11121,0.04668679,1.9671897,Explicit comparisons to prior images in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve descriptions of the findings of chest radiographs with explicit comparisons to prior images. This involves terms like ""compared to prior"", changes, and stability. Comparisons are a routine part of radiological assessments to determine pathological progression or stability.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5296743697478992,0.5477386934673367,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,99.0
+888,latent_888,17139,0.034278,0.01570776,3.579799,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting interval changes or stability.,"The pattern involves observations derived from explicit comparison between prior and current images, often highlighting changes or stability in specific anatomical or pathological features from a recent study or past radiographs. This is a common pattern in radiological assessments that emphasizes temporal evaluation of conditions using comparison phrases or references.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.620572260193872,0.635,0.5971223021582733,0.83,100.0,100.0
+889,latent_889,9527,0.019054,0.010876199,5.704152,"Clear lungs and normal heart, no new findings.","The most activated examples typically include detailed descriptions using radiological terminology, but often have fewer reported abnormal findings or have stable findings over time. These describe clear lungs, normal heart size, and unchanged features over multiple imaging reports, often also referencing chronic conditions or post-surgical states, ensuring no acute changes or new pathologies are present.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5997816991086047,0.615,0.6885245901639344,0.42,100.0,100.0
+890,latent_890,4815,0.00963,0.010970572,7.837746,Reports focused on intervals or changes compared to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation frequently mention findings in relation to prior imaging and specific changes or stability observed over time, such as improvement, increase, or persistence of specific features. This suggests the reports with high activation focus on interval changes or stability in findings over time compared to prior exams, indicating a pattern focused on temporal comparison of findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+891,latent_891,9263,0.018526,0.018533915,6.231442,Chronic cardiopulmonary findings with mild changes over time.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention terms like 'mild pulmonary edema', 'cardiomegaly', or 'pulmonary vascular congestion' along with comparisons to prior findings indicating no significant changes or mild worsening. These linguistic patterns are associated with chronic conditions that require monitoring over time.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6350646346791395,0.645,0.6090225563909775,0.81,100.0,100.0
+892,latent_892,2710,0.00542,0.0067827334,6.753768,Comparison to prior studies with current findings.,"Examples with non-zero activations consistently reference comparisons of current radiological findings to PRIOR studies, often indicating stability or change in the findings. This involves the use of phrases like 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', or explicit references to previous images for comparison. These patterns characterize the reports as lacking comparison context, focusing instead on current findings without providing historical continuity.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3922214561148139,0.405,0.4263565891472868,0.55,100.0,100.0
+893,latent_893,26946,0.053892,0.064068325,5.30033,Comparison to prior imaging with noted changes in lung opacities or device positioning.,"High activation levels are observed when the description involves comparison to prior imaging or explicit changes or stability of changes, such as in the positioning of tubes, devices, cardiomegaly, or lung opacities. These often signify critical reevaluations in medical reports where updates or lack thereof is key.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5172413793103449,0.45,100.0,100.0
+894,latent_894,7134,0.014268,0.011001753,5.442606,Stable appearance of nodular opacities or pleural effusions.,"These examples involve the presence of nodular opacities or pleural effusions that are stable or unchanged over multiple imaging studies, often comparing findings with previous reports to confirm stability. The presence of stable findings rather than new or evolving conditions is highlighted.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5813953488372093,0.25,100.0,100.0
+895,latent_895,2915,0.00583,0.0075975284,5.5119047,Assessment for interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve radiology reports requesting or assessing changes in specific pathologies or technical aspects in comparison to prior studies. This comparison aspect, stated explicitly, is the core of the pattern in these prompts regardless of the type of finding or the patient history provided.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3905970637858528,0.395,0.4102564102564102,0.48,100.0,100.0
+896,latent_896,8618,0.017236,0.010735955,4.007392,Unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mentioned stability or lack of significant changes in findings when comparing current and prior imaging studies. This repetitive emphasis on unchanged findings seems to correlate with high activation levels, suggesting a focus on stability over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4455108359133126,0.457286432160804,0.4366197183098591,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+897,latent_897,20995,0.04199,0.027113704,7.0344357,Explicit comparison with prior images to note changes or stability.,"The pattern within these examples focuses on the explicit comparison between current imaging findings and the findings or changes observed from prior imaging studies. These examples consistently involve noting changes or lack thereof, such as 'no change', 'remained stable', or 'interval removal', emphasizing the importance of tracking progression or stability of conditions over time, typically seen in radiology reports.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6173101622500066,0.635,0.5704697986577181,0.9042553191489362,94.0,106.0
+898,latent_898,5021,0.010042,0.007402866,4.9091463,Observations related to the position or condition of medical devices with comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature the description of radiological findings related to the condition or position of medical lines, tubes, or catheters, frequently mentioning 'placement', 'unchanged', or 'complication'. These descriptions include comparisons to prior images, focused on the state of such devices.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.6,0.54,100.0,100.0
+899,latent_899,56177,0.112354,0.07165056,6.8604236,Change or interval improvement compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern here is related to the change or interval improvement documented when comparing current and prior images. These examples describe changes, whether interval improvement or new changes, using phrases like 'has improved', 'change', or 'new', which relate specifically to interval changes compared to previous imaging.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6362611747227132,0.645,0.7101449275362319,0.49,100.0,100.0
+900,latent_900,14369,0.028738,0.016153732,4.5503573,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax.","The samples with high activation levels consistently contain descriptions of normal anatomical contour or size, primarily focusing on the heart, mediastinal, and hilar contours. These examples often mention that no pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation is seen.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6594551282051282,0.66,0.6481481481481481,0.7,100.0,100.0
+901,latent_901,6209,0.012418,0.021299947,5.3426776,Detailed comparison across current and prior imaging with lateral images.,"Examples with an activation level greater than 5 often discuss specific comparisons made between current and prior imaging, including direct observations from these comparisons, such as changes or stabilities noted between images, along with relevant historical context like post-surgical changes or chronic conditions. The evaluation involves synthesizing information from multiple perspectives, particularly when current lateral images are considered alongside current and prior frontal images.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4248705958840739,0.425,0.422680412371134,0.41,100.0,100.0
+902,latent_902,3530,0.00706,0.008349395,6.2161555,Emphasis on interval changes or stability from prior imaging.,"These examples contain direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on noting any 'interval changes', which indicate changes over time noted between sequential imaging studies. Significantly activated examples emphasize changes or stability over time rather than just static findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5546218487394958,0.66,100.0,100.0
+903,latent_903,3993,0.007986,0.010258062,4.683275,Use of 'small' to describe findings in radiology reports.,"The pattern observably focuses on studies where findings are described as 'small' in comparison with previous imaging, indicating minor changes or a stable appearance. The repeated use of 'small' to describe various findings, like pneumothorax, pleural effusions, and atelectasis, suggests the model identifies patterns where changes are minimal or findings are consistently of slight significance.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7507221923971674,0.7537688442211056,0.8205128205128205,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+904,latent_904,47245,0.09449,0.07283808,5.922579,Changes or details about cardiac silhouette in imaging comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes in cardiac silhouette compared to prior imaging studies. Whether discussing stable cardiomegaly or an enlarged cardiac silhouette, the pattern focuses on providing insight into cardiac size and potential associated conditions, often suggesting further evaluation for changes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6222709073052807,0.625,0.6506024096385542,0.54,100.0,100.0
+905,latent_905,14674,0.029348,0.015930967,3.8696327,Interval changes or stability in lung and adjacent structures over time.,"These examples highlight changes in the lungs and adjacent areas over time, often detailing interval changes in lung volumes or opacities, stable pleural effusions, atelectasis, or mediastinal shifts in comparison to prior imaging. It focuses on comparing the current state with previous radiographs to note progression, stability, or removal of external devices.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+906,latent_906,23309,0.046618,0.032981016,8.051881,Detailed comparison using both frontal and lateral views.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically reference both frontal and lateral views, offering comprehensive details, while examples with lower activation levels often mention only one view or lack detailed comparison to prior images. The pattern suggests the importance of detailed multispectral comparison in enhancing model activation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.5981308411214953,0.64,100.0,100.0
+907,latent_907,13669,0.027338,0.02240295,5.6346126,Emphasis on unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings mentioning unchanged or stable conditions compared to prior imaging studies. Regardless of the type or location of condition, the emphasis is on 'unchanged' and 'stable' conditions, implying the model activation focuses on continuity without new findings.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7457023700539112,0.75,0.6984126984126984,0.88,100.0,100.0
+908,latent_908,119056,0.238112,0.2146695,7.9824286,No significant interval change in pleural effusions or findings.,"These examples reference pleural effusions with a focus on evaluation over time or with no interval change. The commonality lies in the relative consistency and unchanged status of detected findings, generally with explicit reference to prior imaging.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4273024777933614,0.51,0.5416666666666666,0.13,100.0,100.0
+909,latent_909,2870,0.00574,0.009519318,4.531094,Prompts emphasizing comparison between current and prior chest images.,"The examples with high activations consistently feature reports or prompts that include both current and prior chest imaging, with explicit instructions to provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior imaging. This pattern in prompts highlights a specific focus on comparative analysis.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,100.0,100.0
+910,latent_910,8565,0.01713,0.014272158,7.0647964,"Consistent or stable position of medical devices (e.g., catheter tips) in the SVC in comparison to previous images.","These examples exhibit high activation levels when the radiological report describes interval changes, particularly the unchanged or stable positions of medical devices such as catheters in the superior vena cava (SVC) based on a comparison with prior studies. Such comparisons highlight stability or explicit interval changes of these devices.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,100.0,100.0
+911,latent_911,22724,0.045448,0.025366189,6.063659,Focus on interval changes in severity or resolution of conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention either improvements, increased severity, or resolution of specific pulmonary or related abnormalities when comparing current imaging findings to prior ones. They focus on changes in the severity or presence of medical conditions over time, rather than stable findings or device placements.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5670103092783505,0.55,100.0,100.0
+912,latent_912,14133,0.028266,0.018694881,6.4678864,Radiological findings without explicit detailed comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings from the latest radiological exam while excluding explicit, detailed comparisons to prior studies. When examples mention only limited or general comparisons, the activation is lower or zero. This indicates the pattern is linked to omitting specific, direct comparisons.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4705882352941176,0.4,100.0,100.0
+913,latent_913,26291,0.052582,0.034294277,7.267438,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on controlled elements like device status.,"The examples exhibit low activation levels for instances even when comparisons to prior images are mentioned, if certain critical or consistent changes between successive radiographs like removal or addition of medical devices (e.g., catheters, chest tubes) are observed. These neutralize the pattern even when prior imaging is compared.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6451612903225806,0.6,100.0,100.0
+914,latent_914,3223,0.006446,0.010330399,5.5016565,Comparative imaging analysis without prior report context.,"High activation levels are related to examples where the task includes providing a description of findings by comparing current images to prior images, but without any pre-existing or reference prior reports provided. This highlights scenarios where baseline or previous conditions are unknown, necessitating a more detailed comparative description from the imaging alone.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5221786932895236,0.5226130653266332,0.5212765957446809,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+915,latent_915,109439,0.218878,0.14127229,7.055862,Text references to prior imaging or reports.,The examples with higher activation have descriptions that explicitly reference a comparison with prior imaging studies or the existence of prior reports. This indicates that the model is particularly activated by text patterns involving direct comparisons to previous examinations.,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4103078193183158,0.5,0.5,0.89,100.0,100.0
+916,latent_916,4970,0.00994,0.016397318,4.670398,Stable findings or no significant interval change in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples involve references to prior imaging for comparison, indicating findings such as effusions, tube placements, consolidations, or cardiomegaly that have remained stable or unchanged. This pattern reflects standard practice in radiology to assess for interval changes, particularly when indwelling support devices are mentioned.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5813321018062397,0.5879396984924623,0.6133333333333333,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+917,latent_917,56507,0.113014,0.074229985,5.759947,Interval changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,Examples with significant activation levels often reference specific radiological findings compared to previous studies and mention interval changes or stability in the imaging results.,0.5701754385964912,0.5918367346938775,0.5555555555555556,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6100164203612479,0.62,0.5909090909090909,0.78,100.0,100.0
+918,latent_918,4728,0.009456,0.013954152,5.383422,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral views with prior frontal image for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include findings from multiple images, specifically a current frontal image, a current lateral image, and a prior frontal image. This pattern of image comparison, especially involving multiple types of views (frontal and lateral), seems to be what the model is recognizing and highly activating on.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+919,latent_919,5479,0.010958,0.015650477,5.546911,Comparison to a prior frontal image in findings description.,"The examples with high activation levels feature a prominent use of the phrase 'description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image,' highlighting the contrast with prior studies or frontal images as a significant pattern. This indicates that the pattern includes specific instructions to compare with prior imaging studies, reinforcing the importance of change or continuity in the findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4086523498288204,0.43,0.4492753623188406,0.62,100.0,100.0
+920,latent_920,4722,0.009444,0.010677609,3.621488,Description considering current frontal and lateral images compared to prior image(s).,"Examples show instances where findings are reported after comparing images from different orientations: a frontal image with either a lateral image or prior frontal images, allowing for more comprehensive assessment of changes or abnormalities. This mentions clear descriptions despite incomplete datasets, highlighting the importance of comparisons across different imaging angles.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+921,latent_921,8169,0.016338,0.0107986685,4.053758,Evaluation of device placement and lung pathology changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include the evaluation of lung volumes, placement of medical devices, and identification of pneumonia or effusions, particularly when describing changes over time or deviations from previous imaging. This indicates a concern for changes in expected respiratory or physical status, such as atelectasis, device placement adjustments, or the appearance of effusions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6646067415730337,0.6683417085427136,0.6416666666666667,0.77,100.0,99.0
+922,latent_922,9423,0.018846,0.012639952,5.9774103,Evaluation of findings in radiology studies as compared to prior images.,"The pattern focuses on findings or conclusions in radiology reports specifically aiming at detecting changes when comparing current radiological images to previous ones. The activations correspond strongly to explicit evaluations of changes, such as 'no relevant change' or 'interval change', between new and prior studies.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5497614828949162,0.5829145728643216,0.551948051948052,0.8585858585858586,99.0,100.0
+923,latent_923,18854,0.037708,0.015655095,3.2247448,Emphasis on low lung volumes or related changes.,"The most activated examples prominently discuss changes in lung volume and related patterns, such as accentuated bronchovascular markings, patchy opacities, or basal atelectasis, which often result from or are associated with low lung volumes. This specific focus on low lung volumes seems to generate higher activations.",0.656140350877193,0.673469387755102,0.7857142857142857,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4752109704641351,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.29,100.0,99.0
+924,latent_924,10132,0.020264,0.020162655,9.778482,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"Samples with higher activation levels generally provide a clear comparative analysis of the current image with a prior one, focusing on medical devices, lesion stability, or changes in pleural effusion. The clear use of terms such as ""change from prior"" or ""unchanged"" in the context of comparing findings to earlier images appears to drive the pattern.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.4358974358974359,0.85,80.0,120.0
+925,latent_925,6806,0.013612,0.02034594,3.9974513,"Comparison of multiple views (frontal, lateral) with prior imaging.","These examples include instructions to compare multiple imaging projections (frontal, lateral) with prior images when evaluating findings. The high activation implies importance of multi-view comparison in determining changes over time across these examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,100.0,100.0
+926,latent_926,3180,0.00636,0.01015494,6.719594,Descriptions emphasizing comparison or change with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve either a detailed comparison or identification of changes between the current and prior imaging studies. These examples emphasize the specific descriptions regarding the interval changes or stability of findings, as indicated by phrases describing comparisons with prior images and mentioning observations like 'compared to prior' or 'unchanged'.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+927,latent_927,30064,0.060128,0.04755761,5.7056794,"Comparison reveals resolution, persistence, or change in specific findings.","The highly activated examples describe changes or similarities in current imaging compared with prior studies, focusing on the resolution, persistence, or worsening of specific conditions or findings such as effusions, opacities, or pneumothorax. This suggests a pattern focused on tracking the progress or stability of certain radiographic features.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.59,0.59,0.59,0.59,100.0,100.0
+928,latent_928,26333,0.052666,0.029608697,3.954646,Relatively unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,Many examples demonstrate the pattern of consistent use of language describing stability or unchanged conditions compared to previous imaging studies. They emphasize that 'no significant change' or 'unchanged' findings are common phrases indicating stability rather than progression.,0.467391304347826,0.4693877551020408,0.4642857142857143,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5858585858585859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+929,latent_929,19118,0.038236,0.026729515,8.148769,Presence of a comparative analysis with previous imaging showing unchanged or resolved findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often show a comparison or evaluation made against a prior radiographic image, particularly emphasizing either 'unchanged' findings or explicit mentions of improvements or resolutions since the prior study.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.4318181818181818,0.4691358024691358,81.0,119.0
+930,latent_930,1826,0.003652,0.005212483,8.106958,Absence of prior image comparison reference.,"Examples that are rated with high activation levels consistently lack a comparison reference in their reports. The phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' is present in both high and low activation examples, but the high activation examples definitively indicate 'Comparison: None.', meaning there's no explicit prior comparison reference. This lack of direct prior comparison is the defining criterion for activation in this context.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5653697683868346,0.5678391959798995,0.5833333333333334,0.49,100.0,99.0
+931,latent_931,3182,0.006364,0.007213814,6.1149387,Comparison to prior imaging reports or explicit comparison language.,"Samples with high activation levels all emphasize the presence of a prior report comparison or direct comparison language, making these reports typical for longitudinal analysis in radiology. They show changes or confirm stability in findings over time, an essential feature in tracking patient progress or diagnosing conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.5283018867924528,0.84,100.0,100.0
+932,latent_932,9614,0.019228,0.016651476,3.4900267,Focused comparative analysis with prior frontal images.,"These examples consistently describe the comparison of current studies with prior frontal images from the text input, which is inherent in radiological analysis for observing changes over time. The explicit reference to 'prior frontal image' or equivalent terms demonstrates this as a core pattern in the dataset.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+933,latent_933,2178,0.004356,0.0058219116,7.3761864,Comparative analysis of cardiac or thoracic changes over time.,"Most instances with high activation levels involve descriptions of cardiac or thoracic changes compared to prior imaging, often focusing on the stability or changes in conditions such as cardiomegaly, aortic tortuosity, or presence of medical devices. These reports use explicit comparative language to indicate change or stability over time.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+934,latent_934,15069,0.030138,0.018223861,4.198531,Use of 'no' to negate common pathological findings.,"The examples with higher activations all involve situations where 'no' is used to indicate the absence of certain pathologies or findings. They consistently exhibit this negation in the report's assessment of various conditions, emphasized by the term 'no' directly before medical conditions like pneumothorax or consolidation.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6061724433033804,0.628140703517588,0.589041095890411,0.86,100.0,99.0
+935,latent_935,7545,0.01509,0.011056642,5.764541,Interval changes or adjustments in findings between current and prior radiographic images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions where both current and prior radiographic images are referenced, highlighting specific interval changes such as adjustments in catheter positions or changes in clinical findings across different scans. These examine variations from a baseline to determine therapeutic or diagnostic developments.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.576,0.72,100.0,100.0
+936,latent_936,11549,0.023098,0.013999512,6.000003,Low lung volumes accentuate bronchovascular or cardiac features.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight the impact of low lung volumes on imaging interpretation, often leading to 'accentuation' of bronchovascular markings or the cardiac silhouette. This pattern indicates the model associates low lung volume descriptions with the observed activation pattern.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.624249159852875,0.645,0.7735849056603774,0.41,100.0,100.0
+937,latent_937,11274,0.022548,0.014348998,4.732478,Emphasis on cardiomediastinal and vascular details without acute pathology.,"The examples with higher activations focus on detailed descriptions of multi-view chest radiographs compared to prior images, with emphasis on stability or subtle changes in cardiomediastinal contours, aortic tortuosity, and other findings without acute pathology. They often include technical descriptors and differentiate findings across a timeline.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+938,latent_938,4587,0.009174,0.0097662425,7.4114904,"Detailed comparison with prior images, noting changes or stability.","The high activation levels are associated with examples where radiologists provide a detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images, often noting specific findings or unchanged features. This pattern reflects the emphasis on noting 'consistent', 'unaltered', or 'stable' findings in comparison to past images, as found in detailed interpretative comparisons.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3362215297306883,0.345,0.2987012987012987,0.23,100.0,100.0
+939,latent_939,25550,0.0511,0.02966179,4.979597,Describes interval changes in findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples that are activated describe changes in the findings of the imaging studies as compared to earlier studies or radiographs, capturing interval changes that indicate progression or stability of a condition. This activation pattern indicates that the model recognizes detailed updates of previous pathological findings in radiology.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5367408906882591,0.5376884422110553,0.5384615384615384,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+940,latent_940,9956,0.019912,0.011858834,5.4357715,Comparisons showing stable or unchanged findings over time against prior images.,"In these examples, there is a notable presence of terms indicating variation between current and prior images, but without specific acute findings or significant changes between images. The pattern emphasizes the mention of comparisons primarily with unchanged or stable results. This often indicates longitudinal monitoring rather than acute diagnoses.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4409609428118153,0.445,0.4337349397590361,0.36,100.0,100.0
+941,latent_941,9190,0.01838,0.01986429,6.3362274,Descriptions of changes or stability in radiology findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability in findings. This suggests that the model is responsive to descriptions that highlight continuity or difference in patient conditions over time based on radiology reports.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4297719087635054,0.43,0.4270833333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+942,latent_942,14279,0.028558,0.017112236,5.9239016,Comparison of current and prior images in radiology reports.,"These examples prominently include the presence of both current and prior imaging, often paired with a detailed comparison of findings between the images. This is a standardized reporting practice in radiology when discussing new and previous exam results, with a focus on detecting changes or stability in patient condition.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+943,latent_943,2637,0.005274,0.0058324244,5.4457636,Emphasis on detailed comparison of current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently feature detailed analysis or emphasis on comparison between current and prior radiological findings, often incorporating structured indications, techniques, and comparisons. Such examples are characterized by thorough evaluations of changes in imaging findings over time, often highlighting stability or progress of noted conditions.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.5,100.0,100.0
+944,latent_944,3424,0.006848,0.006210798,3.9560049,Low lung volumes resulting in bronchovascular crowding or accentuation.,"Examples show decreased lung volumes depicted by crowding of bronchovascular markings or low lung volumes in the findings. Reports highlight this aspect as a notable finding during radiological comparisons, often accompanying unchanged cardiomediastinal or cardiac contours.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5242836596968692,0.57,0.6842105263157895,0.26,100.0,100.0
+945,latent_945,6590,0.01318,0.011473782,5.328899,Explicit instructions to compare current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations include specific instructions to compare imaging from different times and describe any differences. Requests to provide a `description of findings in comparison` or describe findings explicitly in context to `prior` images are common throughout high activation examples, indicating a focus on change over time as a key aspect.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+946,latent_946,15180,0.03036,0.017966105,3.3580353,Focus on detecting changes in lung opacities indicative of pneumonia.,"This pattern appears in exams that tend to involve the assessment of potential or suspected pneumonia or atelectasis, especially when new or evolving opacities are mentioned. The descriptions often include terms like 'opacification', 'opacity', and 'consolidation', indicating the presence or change of these features compared to prior imaging. This suggests a focus on detecting acute changes indicative of pneumonia or similar conditions, often determined by comparing current imaging to previous images.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.6376811594202898,0.44,100.0,100.0
+947,latent_947,111090,0.22218,0.19521435,4.642555,Description of findings in current images compared to prior imaging concerning specific radiographic changes.,"The notable pattern in the examples with higher activation involves the description of findings in chest radiographs or other comparisons to prior imaging. Repeated focus on consolidation, effusion, and specific radiographic details post-intervention or in light of a clinical query seems to be emphasized.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+948,latent_948,8679,0.017358,0.011328785,5.5688596,Low activation when missing historical/comparative context (N/A or lacking detail).,"The examples show that when there is an implicit or explicit request for radiological interpretation or comparison with prior imaging, due to missing historical or comparative context (indicated often as N/A or missing details), the activation pattern is low, suggesting a difficulty or perceived incompleteness in the analysis. Reports with missing comparison context might struggle to offer accurate assessments.",0.4444444444444444,0.4897959183673469,0.4871794871794871,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4652777777777778,0.67,100.0,100.0
+949,latent_949,11594,0.023188,0.026249422,4.7099323,Description requests or findings based on comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation consistently describe, or request descriptions of, findings compared to prior images. There is a central theme around creating narratives based on prior reports and images, often reflecting stability, worsening, or improvement.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4577218728162124,0.515,0.509090909090909,0.84,100.0,100.0
+950,latent_950,2081,0.004162,0.0062567885,6.285665,"Report includes device position, often Port-A-Cath or PICC line, usually in SVC.","The presence and location of various intravascular devices such as Port-A-Caths and PICC lines are consistently reported in these examples, with specific mention of their positions relative to identified anatomical landmarks like the SVC. The references to these devices' unchanged positions or stability are recurring details that drive higher activation.",0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5195982094115078,0.56,0.6428571428571429,0.27,100.0,100.0
+951,latent_951,6184,0.012368,0.009777596,5.03796,Changes or stability noted from prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations involve comparison descriptions of current imaging findings with prior ones. The pattern often includes statements about stability, change, or new findings in relation to previous images. Examples mention some form of comparison in the radiological description, specifically analyzing changes, new developments, or continuity of known conditions over time, highlighting the temporal aspect of the diagnosis.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4228000928720687,0.4292929292929293,0.4416666666666666,0.5353535353535354,99.0,99.0
+952,latent_952,66017,0.132034,0.097149484,5.205219,Comparing current imaging results to prior images.,The examples with high activation levels emphasize radiologists providing descriptions of imaging findings by directly comparing them to previous images. Examples without such activation primarily describe current findings without relating them back to previous data. This comparative mode is a significant pattern in radiology reports for monitoring changes or stability in the patient's condition.,0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+953,latent_953,127078,0.254156,0.19583972,6.9937153,Unchanged anatomical/pathological findings or device positions compared to prior imaging studies.,"The representative examples contain detailed descriptions of specific radiological findings that have been unchanged since previous imaging, often highlighting stability in pathologies like pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or nodules, or noting unchanged positioning of medical devices like tubes and catheters over multiple studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5641025641025641,0.44,100.0,100.0
+954,latent_954,11717,0.023434,0.014499416,5.423578,"Interval changes in pulmonary findings, especially effusion or vascular congestion.","These examples involve comparing current chest radiographic results primarily focusing on changes in pleural effusion or signs of pulmonary congestion involving vascular crowding or opacification between separate imaging instances. The pattern involves the mention of effusion and either stability or change over reported intervals, with emphasis on interval contrasting conditions related to pulmonary features.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,100.0
+955,latent_955,4847,0.009694,0.0130550135,4.546264,High activation with multi-view images and comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve multiple views of radiographic images (frontal and lateral) and often involve comparison with prior imaging. This suggests a pattern where detailed multi-view image description and historical comparison together lead to higher activation, indicating these are key factors in the radiological interpretation training of the model.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4067522381620105,0.45,0.4675324675324675,0.72,100.0,100.0
+956,latent_956,30191,0.060382,0.030985273,3.0845528,Evaluation of changes by comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve evaluating radiology studies by comparing current findings with prior images, specifically noting significant changes or stability in those findings, particularly with a focal interest in comparing size or presence of specific features such as effusions, cardiac silhouette, or pneumothorax.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+957,latent_957,5883,0.011766,0.01278849,4.4258986,Descriptions involving detailed comparisons to prior imaging.,"High activation levels in these examples are associated with detailed descriptions comparing current radiological images to prior imaging. This includes references to interval changes in lung opacities, cardiac silhouette, or other noticeable radiographic features, which are often indicative of ongoing or resolved medical conditions. This pattern reflects the clinical importance of tracking changes over time through imaging.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4907407407407407,0.53,100.0,100.0
+958,latent_958,16169,0.032338,0.017696043,6.3668633,"Detailed tube or catheter positioning, compared to prior imaging.","Examples with activation levels greater than 0 but not consistently high feature explicit language about tube or catheter placement (e.g., ET tube, NG tube, PICC line) with details on their positioning, such as distance from the carina or stomach placement. These examples also include references to comparison with prior imaging findings, suggesting monitoring or significant changes since the last image.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6995238216495633,0.705,0.6867469879518072,0.6333333333333333,90.0,110.0
+959,latent_959,7666,0.015332,0.020339848,6.483617,Emphasizes detailed description of findings by comparing current and prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels often refer to 'comparison' and 'provide a description of findings'. These phrases suggest a detailed analysis approach, emphasizing changes between current and prior imaging, often focusing on specific pulmonary or pleural changes alongside generic findings.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,100.0
+960,latent_960,28538,0.057076,0.034996614,5.7480702,"Comparison of findings to prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability.","The analysis suggests that the examples that show higher activation levels are distinguished by the explicit comparison of current findings to a prior imaging study, with a focus on highlighting stability, changes, or lack thereof in specific clinical contexts. This pattern of linguistic structure likely points to a priority in identifying temporal comparisons in radiology.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5858562029828838,0.605,0.5734265734265734,0.82,100.0,100.0
+961,latent_961,3732,0.007464,0.010018404,5.767327,Reports focus on interval changes or comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve comparing findings to prior imaging where specific alterations in comparison, interval changes, stability, or the absence of prior available are described. These reports provide new insights or conclusions based on comparison, demonstrating specific patterns in radiology reporting focused on temporal changes or the presence/absence of findings in prior studies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.4428571428571428,0.62,100.0,100.0
+962,latent_962,9862,0.019724,0.014563059,4.286501,Description of interval changes involving medical devices or postsurgical status.,"This set of examples demonstrates that higher activations are associated with scenarios where direct changes compared to prior imaging, particularly in terms of device placement or postsurgical changes, are prominently described. This pattern involves an emphasis on the interval change or stability directly tied to medical procedures.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.46875,0.3,100.0,100.0
+963,latent_963,16947,0.033894,0.022717198,5.1940846,Comparison to prior imaging studies to identify changes or stability.,"The pattern involves making comparisons to previous imaging studies. The prompts, especially those with higher activation levels, emphasize identifying interval changes or stability when evaluating radiological findings with reference to prior radiographs or CT scans.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.5594405594405595,0.8,100.0,100.0
+964,latent_964,5763,0.011526,0.008689756,6.1366115,Mention of stable or changed known abnormalities on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of changes or stability in previously noted abnormal findings when compared to prior imaging. This indicates a focus on monitoring known abnormalities for signs of progression or resolution, which suggests that the pattern emphasizes stability or change in known conditions, often with specific clinical historical information like emphysema or consolidation related to processes such as pneumonia or neoplasm.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6342593752348505,0.635,0.6238532110091743,0.68,100.0,100.0
+965,latent_965,5179,0.010358,0.00806744,3.5857918,High activation with changes or updates noted between prior and current imaging.,"The pattern identified in this dataset is that activations are high when the textual input indicates changes or comparisons between consecutive imaging studies, particularly focusing on changes over time noted between two or more images. Phrases like ""+increased+"", ""+decreased+"", or mentioning direct comparisons to a previous exam are significant identifiers of this pattern which seems central to understanding the results.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.5963302752293578,0.65,100.0,100.0
+966,latent_966,3677,0.007354,0.0063001327,4.4424453,Visual comparison of current and prior images to assess changes.,"The high activation examples involve descriptions that require direct visual comparison between current and prior images to identify changes, especially with certain findings such as equipment positions or interval changes in size or position. Lower activation examples either do not involve comparison or have limited reference to significant changes.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4410270960419917,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+967,latent_967,4790,0.00958,0.012329786,4.23182,Description involves detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"The majority of these examples explicitly include descriptions that relate current findings to prior imaging studies, highlighting any changes (or lack thereof) from previous exams. This comparison-based aspect is a key feature of most reports with high activation levels, indicating the model focuses on detecting detailed temporal changes in imaging studies.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.25,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4037926801773591,0.405,0.4128440366972477,0.45,100.0,100.0
+968,latent_968,8240,0.01648,0.01342425,6.77426,Multiple view comparison against prior images for interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to assessing or comparing multiple views (frontal and lateral) against prior imaging for changes, despite specific additional question on smaller changes over a body's state or procedure status. Examples with single view or no comparisons tend to have lower activations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,100.0
+969,latent_969,39898,0.079796,0.03859792,4.653686,Attention to positioning and changes of internal devices.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on findings relating to internal devices, such as PICC lines, pacemakers, and NG tubes. These examples describe the positioning and stability of such devices or minor changes in their positioning, which are notable points of interest in clinical radiology assessments.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+970,latent_970,10040,0.02008,0.011984882,3.451594,Persistent or resolved conditions compared to prior imaging without new acute changes.,"The activation pattern closely relates to radiological studies that make comparisons to prior imaging, but importantly also note persistent or resolved conditions, previous observations, or unchanged findings over time. This shows a clear pattern of evaluating ongoing or resolved conditions as opposed to noting new acute changes.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.51728320194057,0.5175879396984925,0.5142857142857142,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+971,latent_971,8203,0.016406,0.014638259,5.853118,Comparison-driven findings with focus on stability or change.,"The pattern is the presence of detailed findings often involving changes or notable observations in comparison to previous images, including references to various medical devices, changes in patient's condition, or disease progression. This suggests the model is attentive to comparison-based findings and disease monitoring.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4206919648607569,0.4321608040201005,0.4488188976377952,0.57,100.0,99.0
+972,latent_972,15584,0.031168,0.051822532,9.846988,Changes or presence of medical tubes/lines in radiological studies.,"Examples with high activation mention the presence or changes in medical tubes or lines, such as endotracheal tubes or central venous catheters. This suggests that the model is activated by radiological findings involving the positioning or change in the status of such medical apparatus.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4736842105263157,0.27,100.0,100.0
+973,latent_973,25651,0.051302,0.02993637,5.4390492,"Ambiguous or indirect comparison with prior imaging, often without providing details of change.","This pattern distinctly involves cases where earlier or other comparison images are either referenced but not available or used without the text stating specific notable changes based on such comparisions. Many lower activation examples either provide a direct comparison noting specific differences or state that comparison is not applicable, whereas higher activations feature ambiguous indications of comparison.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4032118055555556,0.45,0.4679487179487179,0.73,100.0,100.0
+974,latent_974,33965,0.06793,0.032132026,2.7524228,Comparison of current and prior studies to assess changes.,"All examples involve analyzing current and prior images to assess changes in the observed conditions. The reports systematically describe the findings based on a comparison with previous imaging, often mentioning 'stable', 'increased', or 'improved' in relation to prior studies, indicating that the pattern is focused on changes in imaging over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+975,latent_975,7855,0.01571,0.020133544,7.709247,Findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples all make explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies or describe changes relative to past images. This pattern is commonly used to assess progress or stability of medical conditions, indicated by use of terms like 'unchanged', 'new', 'resolved', and specific references to prior exams.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+976,latent_976,5568,0.011136,0.010739419,5.4682207,Prompts focus on detailed comparison findings with prior frontal images and significant clinical indications.,"High activation levels correspond to prompts indicating a requirement to provide a detailed comparison description relative to a prior frontal image, generally involving complex clinical indications. This pattern suggests that the more focused and clinically significant the comparison request is, considering changes or specific medical conditions, the higher the activation level.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+977,latent_977,5687,0.011374,0.008304419,3.5097625,Assessment of radiological changes compared to prior images leading to stable findings.,"Examples that mention no change or stable appearance of findings in comparison with prior radiographs or imaging studies show activation, while those not emphasizing prior comparisons do not.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5194805194805194,0.4,100.0,100.0
+978,latent_978,3081,0.006162,0.010043442,5.2910852,Prompt asks for a findings description comparing current and prior images.,"The consistent element in high-activation examples is the prompt for generating a description of findings from current images directly compared to earlier images, often indicated with phrases like ""Provide a description of the findings in comparison to previous."" This differs from examples with low activation, which lack this explicit directive.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+979,latent_979,4640,0.00928,0.013035591,4.8848844,Combination of frontal and lateral images with prior image comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently contain direct comparisons between current radiographic images and prior images, typically involving multiple views, including both frontal and lateral images. These examples emphasize thorough assessment of changes or stability based on these multiple perspectives.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+980,latent_980,5516,0.011032,0.009329981,4.3930593,Detailed comparison to prior images emphasized.,"The examples indicate imaging interpretations where specific directions or requests for comparison to prior images were not performed, leading to higher activations when the comparison is explicitly detailed in the narrative or findings. When such comparison directives are included and emphasized, it signals a targeted review for interval changes or stability, contributing to higher activation values.",0.5916666666666667,0.5918367346938775,0.5769230769230769,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+981,latent_981,8235,0.01647,0.013370477,4.9758186,Comparison of current and prior chest images focused on lung evaluations.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparative descriptions of frontal and lateral chest images against prior images or reports, often associated with an explicit evaluation for pneumonia, pulmonary disease, or noting interval changes in lung conditions or medical devices.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+982,latent_982,6829,0.013658,0.032558814,5.8688254,Stable findings when comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with high activations often mention similarities or changes between current and prior radiographic images. High activation aligns with comparisons that identify minimal or no critical changes, suggesting stability, while those with findings like cardiomegaly or pleural abnormalities remain unchanged.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.42,0.3823529411764705,0.26,100.0,100.0
+983,latent_983,3477,0.006954,0.009675496,4.6649613,Normal chest radiograph with clear lungs and unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Examples showing high activation levels consistently mention clear lungs and unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouettes, while noting the absence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation. These reports detail non-acute findings using similar language, making them representative of normal patterns in imaging studies.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6921182266009853,0.7,0.7941176470588235,0.54,100.0,100.0
+984,latent_984,3334,0.006668,0.010416933,4.9556937,Presence of detailed PRIOR_REPORT and INDICATION sections.,"These examples have higher activation levels when ""PRIOR_REPORT"" sections are explicitly included, especially accompanied by informative ""INDICATION"" sections, which describe specific patient symptoms, conditions, or reasons for the imaging.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+985,latent_985,4102,0.008204,0.0076591824,7.431015,Predominantly normal findings with no acute abnormalities.,"The highest activation level examples consistently describe findings as 'normal' ('normal cardiac silhouette', 'lungs are clear', etc.) across various radiological images, with no acute abnormalities noted, making these reports standard or routine evaluations without remarkable findings.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7623078520980473,0.7688442211055276,0.7045454545454546,0.93,100.0,99.0
+986,latent_986,3206,0.006412,0.00420906,4.366094,Detailed findings and direct comparison with prior imaging requested.,"These examples show that the high activation levels are associated with both detailed findings regarding the frontal and lateral chest images and a direct call to provide a description in comparison to prior imaging. The pattern is structured around the comparison between current and prior imaging, along with specific findings from images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+987,latent_987,7573,0.015146,0.01584928,5.3555074,Detailed image comparisons and specific findings with numeric values.,"Examples with higher activation involve emphasizing changes or comparisons between current images and prior ones, often highlighting specific characteristics such as new findings, unchanged features with numeric detail, or lack of progression in certain conditions, sometimes including clear recommendations for follow-up or further investigations when abnormalities are stable or possibly worsening.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4175385611045195,0.46,0.4130434782608695,0.19,100.0,100.0
+988,latent_988,5986,0.011972,0.010675116,4.965265,"Comparison with prior imaging findings, especially cardiac and mediastinal assessments.","The pattern is identified by the presence of both current and prior imaging views illustrating radiological changes, typically with stability or slight variance in patient status, inclusive of heart size evaluations, mediastinal assessments, or vessel modifications. The phrase \'comparison to prior frontal image\' or a similar construction appears prominently in the high activation examples, but not necessarily tied only to changes or interventions.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.4477611940298507,0.6,100.0,100.0
+989,latent_989,4187,0.008374,0.007951273,4.2234335,Detailed comparison and description of imaging changes or consistency with prior studies.,"The pattern evident from the activated examples describes how the radiology findings are written explicitly detailing changes or comparisons relative to previous imaging. The high-activation examples discuss stable or unchanged findings with respect to prior images, particularly noting unchanged positioning, stable medical devices, or minor changes in the state of pathology. This theme is less about the presence of the actual medical condition or particular anatomical focus and more about the comparison process itself described within the report.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,100.0
+990,latent_990,5533,0.011066,0.014974803,3.082438,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+991,latent_991,4113,0.008226,0.008208936,6.133631,Comparative analysis between current and previous imaging results.,"Examples with high activation levels discuss radiological findings in a format where a comparison is drawn either explicitly or implicitly between current imaging and a prior study. These examples use detailed descriptions that focus on assessing whether there have been changes to specific findings over time, emphasizing stability or change in anatomy or pathology from prior imaging. This follow-up and comparative nature of imaging reports appear to drive higher activation levels.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+992,latent_992,3863,0.007726,0.008751176,4.5599594,Comparison of pulmonary edema or effusion changes in sequential imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples often show changes or stability in pulmonary edema or congestive heart failure related features, typically in comparison to prior radiographs. The comparisons assess interval changes specific to edema or pleural effusions, mentioning terms like 'improved', 'unchanged', 'not changed', or 'decrease','worsening'.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.546269360798805,0.5628140703517588,0.6065573770491803,0.37,100.0,99.0
+993,latent_993,4583,0.009166,0.017691562,6.4554877,Current frontal and lateral images with no prior comparator image.,"High activation examples consistently mention both current frontal and lateral chest images but do not include a prior frontal image; this aligns with the frequent phrase ""comparison to the prior frontal image"" in these prompts, pointing to the importance of current & lateral views without prior for detailed study descriptions, possibly indicating a pattern of discrepancies in comparisons.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5956928078017065,0.5979899497487438,0.611764705882353,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+994,latent_994,15961,0.031922,0.013757741,2.8111174,Comparison with prior images in the given prompt.,"The provided examples often reference prior imaging and explicitly ask for a description of findings relative to previous studies. The presence of specific comparisons in the details of the prompt, particularly wording and context around the comparisons, drives the pattern.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.49,0.4939024390243902,0.81,100.0,100.0
+995,latent_995,4700,0.0094,0.019735185,5.8678436,Explicit comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference both current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing the analysis of interval changes in the findings. The pattern involves detailed comparisons between current and previous images, with specific mention of findings that have changed or remained stable over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+996,latent_996,9388,0.018776,0.013903049,8.00415,Analysis and comparison of changes from prior imaging.,"For examples with higher activation, there is a recurring assessment of imaging studies and description of changes in comparison to prior imaging focusing on identifying stability, resolution, or changes in findings such as consolidations, effusions, pneumothoraces, or device positioning. The language often emphasizes recent changes or confirmations from previous states.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5361305361305362,0.5577889447236181,0.5384615384615384,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+997,latent_997,5568,0.011136,0.010933881,4.33079,Direct comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparison of current and previous imaging studies, focusing on specific changes or stability in patient findings. The reports mention comparisons to previous images, showing continuity or change in patient condition.",0.4480600750938673,0.4489795918367347,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+998,latent_998,4800,0.0096,0.009099748,6.029301,"Stable cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging, without new acute changes.","The examples with higher activation levels demonstrate descriptive analysis between images, specifically noting interval changes or lack thereof, without showing new acute changes or significant progression in pathology since the previous radiograph.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5555555555555556,0.55,100.0,100.0
+999,latent_999,7885,0.01577,0.013808137,5.1407743,Detailed comparisons with prior and current images to assess changes.,"The examples with the highest activation levels focus on scenarios where multiple views (frontal and lateral) and prior images are consistently referenced to assess changes in patient's condition, such as the presence or resolution of pleural effusions, lung opacities, or positioning of tubes. The pattern involves the examination of current images in comparison with prior ones with a detailed description of variations observed.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1000,latent_1000,4236,0.008472,0.012413701,8.054529,Updates on stability or changes in interstitial opacities or pulmonary edema.,The highly activated examples describe radiology report findings where interstitial opacities or pulmonary edema changes are included along with status updates of previously known conditions like cardiomegaly or devices such as pacemaker placement. These typically include explicit references to stability or changes in comparison to prior imaging.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.52,0.26,100.0,100.0
+1001,latent_1001,2128,0.004256,0.0074187713,8.208396,Detailed comparison and analysis of current images with prior radiographs.,"Examples with high activation scores consistently reference a detailed comparison between current imaging and previous radiographs, specifically updating or confirming changes or stability in various features of the images. Lower activation scores often relate to cases where there is no comparison available or less detailed examination regarding prior images.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4392523364485981,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1002,latent_1002,47058,0.094116,0.039365973,1.8518531,Central line or catheter positioning in imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels repeatedly discuss the presence of central lines or various catheters, especially in the context of their positioning or changes relative to previous imaging studies. These references fit into a specific and well-documented pattern of ensuring correct medical device placement in imaging reports.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5395729141859174,0.565,0.6226415094339622,0.33,100.0,100.0
+1003,latent_1003,13472,0.026944,0.030472368,6.0195503,Comparison of imaging reveals unchanged or stable findings.,"These examples feature frequent usage of comparison language between current and prior images to assess changes, especially related to pathological findings such as opacities, atelectasis, and pulmonary conditions, even in the absence of definite new or acute findings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4744006501422185,0.4773869346733668,0.4761904761904761,0.4,100.0,99.0
+1004,latent_1004,3546,0.007092,0.01263486,6.647277,Use of 'PRIOR_REPORT' directive for comparative analysis.,"All the examples with positive activation levels involve directives to compare current imaging with prior imaging, along with prior reports. The structure involves the usage of templates that explicitly mention previous studies (not just the images) for comparative analysis, often indicated by 'PRIOR_REPORT' or similar directives.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5281840637229053,0.575,0.5460122699386503,0.89,100.0,100.0
+1005,latent_1005,5615,0.01123,0.009660919,5.15723,Comparative analysis with prior imaging is evident.,"The pattern indicates a reference to comparison with prior imaging studies using phrases like 'compared to', 'compared with', or 'as compared to prior'. Many examples utilize this comparative analysis language, especially when describing changes or stability in medical conditions or devices.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3732718894009216,0.405,0.4344827586206896,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1006,latent_1006,4612,0.009224,0.013237786,8.341046,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The actively representative examples frequently include the request to compare the current and prior images to determine intervals or changes in imaging findings, such as normal or unchanged conditions, while other non-representative examples focus on describing current findings without such requested comparisons.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4668487449603329,0.4824120603015075,0.4850746268656716,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+1007,latent_1007,5281,0.010562,0.008581925,6.092512,Multi-view imaging with comparison to prior evaluations.,"The examples have high activations when multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) are given and comparison to prior images is included to assess interval changes, especially when prior reports explicitly reference details from previous examinations.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.424,0.505,0.5028571428571429,0.88,100.0,100.0
+1008,latent_1008,3826,0.007652,0.009733809,5.9830036,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings.,"The provided examples commonly describe comparisons between current and prior imaging to assess for interval changes. High activation cases frequently mention changes or stability in findings between these comparative images, indicating a focus on interval changes rather than new findings or unchanged conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5028997514498756,0.505,0.504424778761062,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1009,latent_1009,7166,0.014332,0.014687757,5.564402,Provide diagnostic evaluation without actual comparison.,"Most examples with high activation levels contain specific instructions to compare current and prior imaging, attempting comparative diagnostics without actually performing meaningful comparisons due to missing prior or alignment issues. This consistently mirrors the exploratory and limited nature indicated in many examples.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5492957746478874,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1010,latent_1010,8771,0.017542,0.013572346,8.594364,Focus on tube and catheter positioning relative to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the presence and position of tubes or catheters in the chest, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central venous catheters. This pattern of focus on tube and catheter positioning is prominent in examples where the activation is closer to 5. It involves focusing on descriptions of tube or catheter positions and changes concerning previous imaging.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6556243735704557,0.665,0.5154639175257731,0.7142857142857143,70.0,130.0
+1011,latent_1011,5127,0.010254,0.012954422,6.898228,Comparison of pulmonary changes with prior imaging.,"The explicit pattern in all the examples with high activation values is the comparison of current findings directly with those on prior imaging, focusing primarily on changes in pulmonary conditions like edema, opacities, or nodules. These comparisons evaluate the progression or stability of conditions over time, emphasizing the importance of monitoring changes for diagnostic purposes.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5419543837622933,0.5577889447236181,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,99.0
+1012,latent_1012,2549,0.005098,0.011015229,9.698475,Phrase indicating no relevant change from previous radiograph.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently use language indicating minimal or no interval change compared to previous radiographic studies, often with phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph, there is no relevant change'. This suggests the model identifies this specific phrasing as representative of the pattern.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.6285714285714286,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1013,latent_1013,21797,0.043594,0.018342346,2.4982078,Changes or updates in lung findings or devices in comparison to prior images.,"The examples featuring higher activation levels involve the description of lung conditions, mediastinal findings, or device placement changes over time, compared with prior studies. The updated content in these reports often includes specific mentions of pulmonary edema, aspiration, or consolidation, which are common terms indicating notable changes or pathology developments in chest radiography reports.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1014,latent_1014,7024,0.014048,0.013213304,4.7064166,Absence of prior imaging for comparison despite request.,"Highly representative examples mention a lack of prior imaging for comparison, a common scenario in radiology where initial examinations occur without baseline imaging. Despite the request to compare with prior imaging, such examples indicate that no previous records exist to make this comparison, highlighting the absence of prior exams as a significant point of reference.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.5590551181102362,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1015,latent_1015,6183,0.012366,0.012389957,4.1834707,Reports comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples use a particular structure and syntactic pattern consistent with the phrasing often found in medical imaging reports that provide direct comparison of findings in radiology images against prior images. They analyze interventions, stability, or changes in clinical conditions over time, which is captured through said language structure.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1016,latent_1016,4171,0.008342,0.008521876,5.363538,Finding stability or no change from prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels all include explicit descriptions of findings in the context of a comparison between current and prior imaging studies. The comparison element and stable or unchanged findings have been consistently mentioned, suggesting a pattern where stability or lack of significant change between imaging times are central concepts.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.52,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1017,latent_1017,7789,0.015578,0.011312483,5.095649,"Detailed assessment using frontal and lateral chest images, often in comparison to prior imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels prominently involve descriptions of both frontal and lateral chest images, implying that the simultaneous use of both image perspectives reveals detailed findings or changes, often in comparison to prior imaging. This pattern underlies the comprehensive evaluations provided in these examples.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4968944099378882,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1018,latent_1018,8758,0.017516,0.011210499,4.1920395,Comparison of current radiology findings to prior images.,"The descriptions repeatedly highlight a comparison between the current imaging findings and those from prior images. The pattern is evident as the examples consistently mention stable, new, improved, or persistent findings when compared to previous studies, indicating the focus is on changes or stability of findings over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1019,latent_1019,31075,0.06215,0.029922979,3.960798,Interval changes or stability noted on comparison.,"Reports with mid-range activations generally describe changes or stability across multiple imaging examinations, suggesting that explanatory descriptions involve identifying interval changes or notable stability compared to prior imaging studies, but not major new findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1020,latent_1020,47093,0.094186,0.04580935,3.9518504,Focus on specific detailed comparisons with prior imaging reports.,"Reports provide descriptions comparing current radiographic images with prior ones where they exist. Higher activation occurs when explicit comparisons to prior imaging reports are made, particularly focusing on changes over time in specific anatomical or pathological aspects, which might involve identifying consistent features or tracking changes.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5554511278195489,0.5656565656565656,0.5461538461538461,0.7244897959183674,98.0,100.0
+1021,latent_1021,9371,0.018742,0.015408434,7.041049,Descriptions of interval changes using prior and current comparisons.,"Highly activated examples include references to current and prior imaging studies, specifically highlighting interval changes or continuity over time. This often involves comparisons for assessing progression or stability of findings across time points, such as changes in effusions, consolidations, or line placements.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4778761061946903,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1022,latent_1022,6573,0.013146,0.020339705,3.911966,Evaluation of findings compared to prior images.,"This set of examples includes instances where descriptions of the findings explicitly involve a comparison with prior images. The reports show a consistent focus on evaluating changes or stability over time by comparing current imaging data against past imaging results, identifying the stability or progression of conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1023,latent_1023,21765,0.04353,0.028824463,3.7219858,Interval changes or stability compared to prior radiographs using temporal language.,"Highly activated examples consistently exhibit specific interval changes or stability in observations between current and prior radiographs. This involves language describing changes like 'as compared to previous' or 'unchanged' specifically related to devices or conditions, focusing on interval changes and evaluations across time.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6818555008210181,0.69,0.6439393939393939,0.85,100.0,100.0
+1024,latent_1024,8023,0.016046,0.013716485,6.27315,Tortuous thoracic aorta with comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally contain findings that mention tortuosity or elongation of the thoracic aorta in conjunction with a comparison to prior images, or findings of stability and interval change, particularly involving the aorta.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4009899429364104,0.525,0.7777777777777778,0.07,100.0,100.0
+1025,latent_1025,3906,0.007812,0.008475378,3.664563,"Detailed monitoring of pulmonary and cardiac status in acute conditions, involving tubes and lines.","The pattern here entails a specific set of findings centered around management and monitoring in acute medical conditions, evident from the high activation values on examples with detailed descriptions of pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, intubation, and the positioning of various support devices such as endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, and PICC lines. These scenarios frequently involve evaluating changes over time, especially in acute care settings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.6206896551724138,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1026,latent_1026,6907,0.013814,0.009419842,3.5496495,Stable or improved findings in relation to prior imaging studies.,"The common pattern in examples with higher activation levels involves comprehensive comparison to prior imaging studies, highlighting unchanged or improved conditions. Specifically, these examples stress stability or improvement in particular findings while noting no new or worsening conditions. This pattern is typical in radiological reports for patients under continuous monitoring where the status of specific findings is regularly checked for changes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4263285024154589,0.43,0.4166666666666667,0.35,100.0,100.0
+1027,latent_1027,3507,0.007014,0.011443924,6.6393557,Descriptions of tube positioning relative to anatomical landmarks from current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the presence of medical tubes (e.g., endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) and their positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or stomach. Additionally, they often describe comparisons with prior imaging to note the stability or change in the positions of these tubes.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1028,latent_1028,11225,0.02245,0.015459993,4.718497,Normal cardiac silhouette size or top-normal heart size with mild edema or vascular features.,"The pattern involves reporting findings related to the cardiovascular system. Examples with high activations refer to the cardiac silhouette size being normal or top-normal, often accompanied by vascular congestion or mild interstitial edema. This highlights a focus on cardiovascular health while potentially noting minor pulmonary findings.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.62996299629963,0.63,0.6274509803921569,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1029,latent_1029,6404,0.012808,0.01810115,7.661906,No prior report available for comparison.,"The pattern is the use of 'PRIOR_REPORT: N/A' or similar phrasing, indicating that no specific prior report or findings are available for direct comparison, yet descriptions entail analyses that assume the existence of prior knowledge or findings without explicit past comparisons.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1030,latent_1030,3765,0.00753,0.010113211,6.533918,Phrase pattern: 'Provide a description of findings' comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss diagnostic findings or techniques related to the current images in comparison to prior ones, and most notably include patterns of phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings' or 'a description of findings in the radiology study', emphasizing the act of recording observations from comparative imaging studies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5021888680425266,0.5175879396984925,0.5111111111111111,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+1031,latent_1031,3032,0.006064,0.010854119,4.7468157,Provide clinical evaluation by comparing current and prior findings with emphasis on specific pathologies.,"While imaging history and findings are provided for each example, the high activation examples prominently include requests to describe or evaluate current findings in direct comparison to prior images, along with clear involvement of specific clinical assessments regarding changes or stability in indicated conditions such as pneumonia or intrathoracic abnormalities.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3942579660083602,0.395,0.3870967741935484,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1032,latent_1032,4742,0.009484,0.021304004,6.991352,Comparison with prior imaging results to assess changes.,The examples with high activation consistently involve comparisons with prior imaging studies. This suggests that the model is highly activated when tasked with examining changes or stability in the current radiological findings relative to previous studies.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.4428571428571428,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1033,latent_1033,3634,0.007268,0.008275554,5.7675834,Cardiac silhouette size described as enlarged.,"These examples describe a comparison of radiological findings to prior images and specifically focus on mentions or descriptions of the cardiac silhouette being large or enlarged. This is typically a concern for potential underlying cardiac conditions such as cardiomegaly, which is an increase in heart size.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1034,latent_1034,7281,0.014562,0.013504338,4.2656374,Assessment for possible pneumothorax.,"Activated examples consistently refer to the possibility of a pneumothorax (PTX) being detected or assessed for in the radiology report. This specific concern or finding appears to be the pattern that the model is identifying. The focus on PTX, especially in the ""provide a description"" context, is key.",0.3813131313131312,0.3877551020408163,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,24.0,0.3922214561148139,0.405,0.3661971830985915,0.26,100.0,100.0
+1035,latent_1035,10250,0.0205,0.015989166,5.3792973,Focus on pleural effusions and changes in comparison with prior scans.,"Examples often relate to the presence of pleural effusions, atelectasis, and their stability or changes as compared to prior imaging. This pattern is indicative of focus on pathologies related to effusions and their evolution over time in successive imaging studies.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5981105978757275,0.615,0.6949152542372882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1036,latent_1036,5581,0.011162,0.013086197,3.8307872,Emphasis on detectable changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently emphasize comparison between current and prior images, specifically noting changes in the findings relative to these images, suggesting that the ability to detect changes or maintain awareness of stability over time is a key feature of interest.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1037,latent_1037,2379,0.004758,0.0059182965,11.210889,Reference to tracheostomy presence or evaluation.,"The pattern shown in examples with high activation levels involves references to tracheostomy tubes or tracheostomy care. This common medical procedure frequently requires monitoring through radiographic imaging, which describes the position and status of related devices.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.546978345564918,0.625,1.0,0.21875,96.0,104.0
+1038,latent_1038,8389,0.016778,0.021123827,6.846188,Reports emphasizing changes in medical devices or condition since prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation utilize phrases such as 'placement', 'removal', 'decrease', 'unchanged', and 'improved' related to medical devices, fluid levels, pulmonary opacities, or effusions, indicating an emphasis on changes or stability in the condition of the patient or positioning of medical devices relative to prior imaging.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5641173376086576,0.565,0.5596330275229358,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1039,latent_1039,49995,0.09999,0.04082786,2.111179,Comparison descriptions highlighting interval change or stability.,"Examples with higher activations often contain specific findings that show a meaningful change or stability when comparing current images with prior studies. This particularly includes explicit references to alterations like interval changes, stable conditions, or regression of observed conditions.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.5818181818181818,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1040,latent_1040,3451,0.006902,0.008255203,4.7752295,"Analysis using current and prior images, often including lateral views.","The examples with higher activation levels all involve using both current and prior images for comparison in the context of analyzing chest radiographs. The inclusion of terms like 'current', 'prior', 'frontal image', and often 'lateral image' highlight this comparison-based evaluation pattern focused on multi-view analysis.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4324942791762013,0.535,0.518918918918919,0.96,100.0,100.0
+1041,latent_1041,7672,0.015344,0.010114885,5.208654,Tracking interval changes or resolution of pathologies in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern in these examples tends to focus on interval changes, particularly the resolution or improvement of abnormalities. This language indicates tracking the progression or regression of previously noted pathological findings, such as atelectasis, opacities, pleural effusions, or structural changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1042,latent_1042,26028,0.052056,0.025475346,3.7088475,Stability or changes in medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples involve descriptions of new changes or stability compared to previous findings, specifically referencing the position or presence of medical devices, such as tubes or catheters. These reports often emphasize consistent findings and interval changes regarding the placement of support devices and anatomical alterations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.581081081081081,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1043,latent_1043,35617,0.071234,0.032956418,3.382661,Comparison to prior images shows interval change or stability in lung opacities and device position.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe interval changes and comparisons between current and prior images, specifically changes in lung opacities or pleural effusion. The reports highlight stable findings and describe indwelling devices or tubes.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5952380952380952,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1044,latent_1044,3695,0.00739,0.008618562,4.1366577,Reports mentioning changes or stability relative to prior imaging assessments.,"The examples with higher activation levels primarily focus on identifying changes or similarities in current imaging compared to prior images, specifically focusing on differences in pathological findings, positioning of medical devices, or anatomical structures. These reports highlight notable differences from prior findings or confirm stability, which seems to trigger higher activations in the model's responses.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4170328520611006,0.4371859296482412,0.4525547445255474,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+1045,latent_1045,5490,0.01098,0.009990444,6.0302,Detail in medical device positioning in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples include discussions of specific medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and other catheters, often with detailed information about their placement relative to body structures like the carina or SVC. This suggests that the pattern involves describing medical device placements in chest radiographs, as compared to prior imaging.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4838709677419355,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1046,latent_1046,47658,0.095316,0.042126153,3.5003889,Interval change in medical devices or opacities compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of interval changes based on prior imaging findings, particularly noting additions, removals, or stability of devices or opacities, indicative of monitoring treatment progress or device placements.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5974919093851132,0.5979899497487438,0.6086956521739131,0.56,100.0,99.0
+1047,latent_1047,3540,0.00708,0.008747808,4.477332,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette upon comparison with prior imaging.,"The consistent pattern across high activation examples involves the mention of normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes or hilar contours, alongside a comparison with previous imaging. This indicates a focus on stable cardiomediastinal findings, especially in the context of analyzing changes over time with previous comparisons noted.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5347469183668012,0.565,0.6326530612244898,0.31,100.0,100.0
+1048,latent_1048,33626,0.067252,0.038292844,4.988465,Comparison with prior images indicating interval change of findings.,"These examples frequently cite changes or consistency in the findings when compared to prior imaging studies. Descriptions often correlate with changes in pathology like pleural effusion size, mediastinal shift, lung opacities, and chest tube placement, emphasizing interval change.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6058004876066639,0.6080402010050251,0.591304347826087,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+1049,latent_1049,49095,0.09819,0.059925593,6.0888557,Stable or unchanged findings in the context of malignancy or post-operative imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention changes or comparisons that show stability or mild progression in patients with malignancy or post-operative status, often describing masses or effusions. These are generally related to oncological follow-up or evaluating post-surgical changes, signifying minor or unchanged findings rather than acute changes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5614035087719298,0.32,100.0,100.0
+1050,latent_1050,43225,0.08645,0.060062215,5.5322027,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar structures.","A pattern emerges from these examples where the focus is on the normalcy of cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar structures despite varied clinical indications and technical details. The consistency lies in the clear or unchanged appearance of these particular chest regions, indicating a reliance on these aspects to inform the overall assessment despite diverse contexts.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.7857142857142857,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6863388542931708,0.6934673366834171,0.6511627906976745,0.84,100.0,99.0
+1051,latent_1051,16355,0.03271,0.028451411,6.185365,Significant interval change noted in radiology findings.,"Samples with higher activation describe radiological findings that mention significant or moderate changes, such as interval resolution or worsening of conditions, from previous imaging studies. These findings are typically descriptive of changes over time, which often indicates the importance of assessing the progression or improvement of medical conditions.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5873015873015873,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1052,latent_1052,3395,0.00679,0.007386351,5.055433,Comparative analysis of radiologic changes from prior images with current findings.,"The highly activated examples focus on providing interpretations or comparative analyses between current and prior radiographic images, highlighting changes observed or lack thereof. This involves clear articulation of how the findings have evolved compared to earlier results, often without comprehensive prior notes, allowing the most current exam to establish new baselines or track consistent observations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1053,latent_1053,17783,0.035566,0.026728522,8.145037,"Unchanged position of lines, tubes, or catheters compared to prior images.","The reports that exhibit higher activation levels frequently mention the presence, stability, or change in positions of inserted medical lines, tubes, catheters, or support devices when compared with prior images. These findings pertain to post-operative, critically ill, or hospitalized patients who require careful monitoring through imaging.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.475,0.19,100.0,100.0
+1054,latent_1054,2966,0.005932,0.009985042,5.741303,Detailed interval change description compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples discuss findings in the radiological study relative to explicit prior imaging comparisons, emphasizing interval changes or stability. They also often include technical specifics of how images were obtained, offering a detailed comparative framework.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3850102943928982,0.425,0.3469387755102041,0.17,100.0,100.0
+1055,latent_1055,28127,0.056254,0.024188774,2.0645425,"Preparation of reports with comparison imaging focus, lacking detailed findings.","Each example with high activation levels consistently references the analysis of current and prior images without specific findings or interpretations provided. These samples follow a pattern focusing on instruction or setup without entering into medical interpretation, possibly indicating a training paradigm for learning comparison-based report preparation, rather than the content of clinical findings.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1056,latent_1056,9595,0.01919,0.014133691,5.9102573,Low lung volumes with secondary bronchovascular crowding.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe low lung volumes which result in secondary findings such as bronchovascular crowding. This pattern of low lung volumes impacting the visual interpretation of chest radiographs is crucial, as it influences the visibility and apparent density of various structures. It has significant implications for interpreting these radiographic images.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5577607593571352,0.59,0.6956521739130435,0.32,100.0,100.0
+1057,latent_1057,3127,0.006254,0.0065535842,3.5105188,Comparison of radiographic findings with prior exams.,"The examples primarily focus on changes or comparisons between current and prior radiographic findings, often looking for interval changes or stability in the presence of certain medical devices or conditions like pacemakers, PICC lines, or airspace opacities. Common phrases across activated examples include 'compared to previous study', 'provide a description in comparison', and 'unchanged'. This consistent structure and mention in the context of comparison tasks in radiological reports is why they exhibit the activation pattern.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1058,latent_1058,2722,0.005444,0.0067247543,5.046535,Tasks involving comparison of current and prior images.,The high activation examples consistently involve explicit instructions or implied tasks for the assistant to specifically provide comparisons of findings between current and prior imaging samples. This indicates the pattern is centered around actively describing or analyzing differences between findings.,0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4120307553143374,0.48,0.4880952380952381,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1059,latent_1059,11431,0.022862,0.017164407,6.2564487,Focus on the comparison with prior images to describe changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels include comparison with prior imaging studies, specifically asking for a description of findings in comparison to the previous images. This comparison aspect is central to these examples, particularly where changes or stability in medical images are emphasized.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4761904761904761,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1060,latent_1060,9803,0.019606,0.028897049,5.858456,Comparison of current and prior images is highlighted in instructions.,"Activation levels are high when there is a comparison made with prior images. This pattern is identified by instances of prior imaging being part of the task involving a pair (or multiple) of current and prior images, which increases the likelihood of activation as seen in more than half the examples.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714285,0.48,0.4875,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1061,latent_1061,2772,0.005544,0.009813539,5.0345597,High activation with prior image reference and multi-view analysis.,"The examples with high activation values consistently involve scenarios where multiple views or historical images are referenced and compared, with a focus on the historical report or indication while analyzing image changes.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4643874643874644,0.53,0.5176470588235295,0.88,100.0,100.0
+1062,latent_1062,17546,0.035092,0.01992792,4.672752,"Interval change comparison with focus on pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or device placement.","These examples consistently involve the description of interval changes in findings comparing current imaging to prior studies, particularly focusing on changes related to pneumothorax size, pleural effusions, or removal/placement of medical devices. This pattern often appears with follow-up studies in radiology reports where dynamic changes are noted over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5697674418604651,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1063,latent_1063,5095,0.01019,0.017683059,5.2246485,Radiological findings linked directly to specific medical indications or history.,"The examples with high activation illustrate radiological findings described in the context of specific medical conditions or events mentioned in the 'INDICATION' or 'HISTORY' fields, often using terms like 'status post', 'evaluated for', or specific procedures like 'CABG', 'chest tube placement', or symptoms like 'dyspnea'. These are cases where the report associates findings directly with clinical indications or patient history, preventing generic descriptions.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.475177304964539,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1064,latent_1064,3699,0.007398,0.009639054,5.8567595,Findings compared to prior images and changes in device placement.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on imaging reports that compare findings with prior studies to assess for changes. The language typically includes terms like 'comparison', 'as compared to', 'no relevant change', and describes the positioning or changes in medical devices.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1065,latent_1065,5557,0.011114,0.009487172,4.84381,Comparisons emphasizing changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve an explicit comparison between current and prior imaging studies, including detailed articulation of changes or stability in medical findings such as nodules, opacities, effusions, lines or catheter placements, across those studies. This reflects a pattern of focusing on temporal changes in radiological findings as compared to past images.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4615384615384615,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1066,latent_1066,2766,0.005532,0.0089823445,8.53358,Includes a comparative analysis with a prior image stating specific changes or confirming none.,"Examples with significant activation levels consistently include a request to describe findings in comparison to a prior image but with an expectation of including detailed comparison or explicit differences, even if none are available.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4392523364485981,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1067,latent_1067,17345,0.03469,0.01975072,3.8990164,"Enlarged cardiac silhouette, consistent with cardiomegaly, mentioned in findings.","These examples exhibit a particular pattern where cardiomegaly or an enlarged cardiac silhouette is described, often in contrast to prior imaging which showed similar cardiac enlargement. This pattern shows consistent findings related to heart size, reflecting chronic cardiac conditions or variations in imaging technique rather than acute changes.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5924955677277659,0.615,0.7169811320754716,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1068,latent_1068,3488,0.006976,0.0069804695,5.0248575,Explicit evaluation of tube or catheter position in image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically have explicit comparisons between current images and prior images, focusing particularly on changes, placements, and status of medical tubes or catheters. These key focuses include positions and changes of medical apparatus like endotracheal tubes and vascular catheters, which are often the subject of detailed comparison and could indicate a specific pattern for analysis.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.509090909090909,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1069,latent_1069,8075,0.01615,0.012489174,5.152326,Detailed comparison with prior imaging demonstrating stability or minor changes in findings.,"The consistent feature in highly activated examples is the presence of clear descriptive observation of images within the context of an available comparison—for either progress or lack thereof—with prior imaging studies. The phrasing suggests stability or changes by using terms like 'unchanged', 'relatively stable', or 'no relevant change'.",0.4338896020539152,0.4489795918367347,0.4375,0.28,25.0,24.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5070422535211268,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1070,latent_1070,9669,0.019338,0.01656188,4.9631987,Requests for comparison with non-existent or undefined prior imaging.,"Examples showing higher activation levels generally mention the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, even when no specific prior images are available for comparison. The key indication for high activation is an explicit request to compare the findings to previous images, which implies an analysis process.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4091067083767813,0.49,0.4942528735632184,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1071,latent_1071,3137,0.006274,0.008462526,4.994602,Descriptions of detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with high activations frequently contain a detailed comparison of current imaging findings to those of prior studies, describing any changes in findings, particularly observing reduction, stability, or minor changes over time. These descriptions are often detailed and involve significant analysis and comparison of features across different time points of imaging.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.416952919781774,0.4170854271356783,0.4123711340206185,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+1072,latent_1072,26765,0.05353,0.027699023,4.496565,Detailed assessment of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe interval changes or stability in cardiopulmonary findings, indicating specific analysis of progression or resolution of clinical conditions compared to previous imaging. Reports use phrases like 'interval resolution', 'unchanged', or provide specific details of changes in findings over time.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5627746390458255,0.5778894472361809,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,99.0
+1073,latent_1073,5887,0.011774,0.009687171,4.7556915,Comparison to prior imaging with unchanged findings.,"The key characteristic of high activation examples is the presence of clear references to specific findings or conditions in current imaging that are explicitly compared to distinct findings in prior imaging data, using the phrase 'unchanged since prior' or similar terms like 'compared to', 'prior study', or 'previous examination'. Such comparisons highlight stability or change in clinically relevant matters between imaging periods.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4042553191489361,0.19,100.0,100.0
+1074,latent_1074,29347,0.058694,0.04033561,6.9529138,Comparison with prior images requested through explicit instructions.,"The examples indicate a focus on the use of instructions requesting comparisons between current and prior images to evaluate changes or stability in findings, with some variability in how specific instructions or details from prior reports are included in the request or assistant response.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1075,latent_1075,4271,0.008542,0.009871407,4.121828,Emphasis on changes or stability in imaging relative to prior studies.,"Examples with high activations focus on describing radiological findings in relation to a prior or current medical context with a specific emphasis on comparison to previous radiographs. The focus appears to be the explicit verbiage involving comparison, stability, or change over time regarding the imaging findings or clinical context.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1076,latent_1076,4193,0.008386,0.010655987,3.9740064,Completing comparison narratives without explicit prior study details.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where description and instruction to compare the current radiology study with prior images are given despite lacking specific prior-related information. These examples appear to emphasize the completion of findings comparison, filling in assumed 'blanks'.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1077,latent_1077,12533,0.025066,0.018375874,5.32216,Comparison to prior image with clinical or device changes observed.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature descriptions of stability, interval changes, or comparisons of specific findings, discussed in the current image report and accompanied by explicit changes in clinical findings or positions of medical devices. This aligns with the model being more active in recognizing continuous care monitoring and the implications of alterations between imaging sessions, such as changes in medical devices' positioning (like tubes and catheters) or observable pathology changes, as compared to a baseline or prior image.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6504854368932039,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1078,latent_1078,60929,0.121858,0.070183896,6.544309,Descriptive comparison to prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation all focus on providing comparisons to prior imaging studies, noting changes or the stability of specific features. This is a common practice when interpreting radiological images to track progression, improvement, or newly identified conditions over time, often including mentions of new or unchanged findings concerning previously noted conditions.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5423728813559322,0.6666666666666666,96.0,104.0
+1079,latent_1079,3579,0.007158,0.0058686635,4.955349,Comparative analysis on pneumothorax or pleural effusion presence between images.,Descriptive comparisons related to presence or change in pneumothorax or pleural effusions between current and prior chest images appear consistently across examples with higher activation. The model may react strongly to clear comparative descriptions in regions prone to these conditions.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4615384615384615,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1080,latent_1080,3385,0.00677,0.006940758,4.1485896,Intervals show changes or placements of medical devices in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activations address changes or interventions observed between current and prior chest images, specifically focusing on the placement or modification of medical devices like catheters, lines, or tubes. This distinction may involve highlighting the stable or shifted position of these devices, reflecting the importance of monitoring such changes in patients with a history of surgical or medical interventions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5656565656565656,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1081,latent_1081,3588,0.007176,0.009512702,3.629987,Radiology reports systematically comparing frontal and lateral chest images over time.,"Most high-activation examples involve detailed descriptions comparing current and previous frontal chest images with lateral images often mentioned. Lower activation examples typically lack or have minimal comparative analysis or don't systematically compare findings. This systematic framework of current vs prior assessments indicates a focus on tracking changes over time, which is crucial in following a disease process.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4868421052631579,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1082,latent_1082,3498,0.006996,0.010341778,9.987212,Low lung volumes causing bronchovascular crowding.,"The pattern revolves around the repeated mention of low lung volumes in the radiology findings. This pattern is associated with impressions such as atelectasis or bronchovascular crowding due to low lung volumes, which is a significant consistent observation in the high activation examples.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7882851093860268,0.79,0.8536585365853658,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1083,latent_1083,42279,0.084558,0.08786762,5.1715045,Focus on endotracheal tube (ETT) or device placement evaluation.,"Examples with the highest activations frequently contain directives to interpret radiological findings with an emphasis on endotracheal tube (ETT) placement, evaluation, or status. Also, they detail abnormalities relevant to tube positioning, presence, implications, and associated pathophysiology that require repeated evaluation. The pattern reflects dataset specificity on tube positioning evaluation and medical device interpretation, especially when the focus is on possible complications like migration or alignment.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4356363636363636,0.515,0.56,0.14,100.0,100.0
+1084,latent_1084,9547,0.019094,0.011592904,5.8336596,Comparisons between current and previous images to assess changes.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero emphasize evaluation of current findings in light of prior imaging, observing for any changes or stability in previously noted conditions. The comparison text or phrases like 'as compared to' or 'in comparison with' in these examples indicate that these assessments are based on past imaging studies, highlighting a tendency toward stability or specific changes between imaging studies.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4133333333333333,0.45,0.4487179487179487,0.7446808510638298,94.0,106.0
+1085,latent_1085,33842,0.067684,0.02688098,1.8529392,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve instructions to provide descriptions of current radiological findings in comparison to prior images. This suggests that the model activates more strongly when prompted with tasks involving comparisons of current and previous state, indicating a focus on temporal comparison in diagnostic imaging.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5839368005266623,0.605,0.5724137931034483,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1086,latent_1086,7820,0.01564,0.011958516,4.0932255,Emphasis on describing changes from prior imaging.,"The pattern identified involves reports where substantial or notable changes are noted upon comparison with previous imaging, including improvements or specific unchanged findings of interest. Examples emphasize descriptions of change or stability, particularly phrased clearly rather than hidden in longer narratives.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1087,latent_1087,3846,0.007692,0.010793137,5.351026,Use of both frontal and lateral images along with prior for comparison.,The pattern these examples exhibit is the presence of both frontal and lateral images in conjunction with a prior image for comparison. This reflects the common practice of using multiple views and comparing with previous studies to assess interval change and better evaluate findings.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1088,latent_1088,28267,0.056534,0.042850584,7.592956,Comparison of imaging findings with prior frontal and lateral images over time.,"Examples with mid to high activation levels consistently involve description of imaging techniques with frontal and lateral views, followed by findings compared to prior images or studies. These samples focus on changes over time, tracking progression or resolution of identified conditions.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1089,latent_1089,4171,0.008342,0.013455243,4.941788,Evaluation or assessment for pneumothorax or ICD lead placement.,The examples with high activations often include an explicit reference to evaluation or assessment for pneumothorax (abbreviated as 'ptx') which appears in the context of the radiological examination. This pattern is not observed in examples with low activation levels.,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6688077077478924,0.67,0.6517857142857143,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1090,latent_1090,27077,0.054154,0.03850371,7.126011,"Comparison of lung volumes, opacities, or device positioning to prior imaging, indicating interval changes or continuity.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention changes or stability various aspects compared to previous radiographs, even without acute changes. When combined with device positioning, especially tubes, these descriptions form a distinct pattern in radiology reports as they facilitate tracking patient progress or ensuring precise placement.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1091,latent_1091,7984,0.015968,0.019757444,5.88193,Comparison of findings to prior imaging for interval change.,"Many of these examples refer to the observation of findings on a new radiograph in direct comparison to a prior study. This indicates a pattern of analyzing interval changes or stability in radiological findings, which is central to interpretation. However, examples with lower activations consistently highlight normal findings or lack of interval change, showing this element isn't crucial without comparative changes.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1092,latent_1092,10220,0.02044,0.011701479,3.9507859,Low lung volumes correlate with bibasilar opacities or atelectasis.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe low lung volumes accompanied by bibasilar opacities or atelectasis, which likely result from the reduced lung volumes and cause bronchovascular crowding. The reports emphasize this correlation between low lung volumes and either opacities or bibasilar atelectasis.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.6181818181818182,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1093,latent_1093,2860,0.00572,0.008754765,7.645358,Evaluation of endotracheal tube positioning and changes in lung opacity.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve assessment of the position or condition of medical devices or changes in opacity over time within the lungs, described with exact measurements from the carina. These are key radiological details that vary in importance depending on the context of patient care. Accurate description of these has heightened relevance in radiological interpretations.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6292863762743282,0.64,0.7121212121212122,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1094,latent_1094,6883,0.013766,0.009538815,7.404237,Notes on lung volume or inspiratory effort.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include specific references to lung volumes, describing them as low or decreased due to factors like positioning, patient condition, or inspiratory effort. This pattern is emphasized in various contexts including evaluations of cardiomediastinal silhouette, pulmonary congestion, or line placement.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6247847652334815,0.635,0.6103896103896104,0.5222222222222223,90.0,110.0
+1095,latent_1095,3562,0.007124,0.010233233,5.181454,Comparison to prior imaging studies indicating stability or change.,"Instances of the pattern typically involve previous radiological evaluations or comparisons to past images, and use specific indicators like 'comparison' or explicit reference to past studies to determine stability or change in findings. Despite varied organ involvement, they share the complexity of assessment typically associated with serial imaging evaluations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1096,latent_1096,4794,0.009588,0.027576031,11.579101,Explicit directive to compare current and prior images in the task.,"Examples with higher activation levels all include the directive to 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,' indicating that the pattern involves generating comparative findings between current and prior images. This implies an emphasis on the ability to interpret and explicitly articulate changes between sequential radiographic images, especially when explicitly instructed to compare.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5248078266946191,0.575,0.5454545454545454,0.9,100.0,100.0
+1097,latent_1097,5057,0.010114,0.006552286,3.7920082,Comparison of current and prior imagery for changes in findings.,"These examples often describe findings in relation to previous imaging studies to identify changes or stability. The pattern involves comparing current imaging findings to prior ones, often noting whether abnormalities have worsened, improved, or remained stable.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1098,latent_1098,43904,0.087808,0.045769133,3.871941,Descriptions of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"This pattern involves describing findings and offering comparisons to prior imaging studies, with examples often documenting both stable and changed observations across successive examinations. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'relatively stable', and specific references to previous imaging, or lack thereof, are used.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5065283400809717,0.507537688442211,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,99.0
+1099,latent_1099,102259,0.204518,0.13350223,5.781604,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation examples specifically mention changes in findings in comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing stability or minimal change over time. This suggests that the pattern relates to identifying lack of significant interval change and highlighting stability, often with expressions like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant change' when comparing images.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5899589958995899,0.59,0.5882352941176471,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1100,latent_1100,50081,0.100162,0.06824111,5.6289144,Detailed assessment of tube and PICC line placement changes compared to prior images.,Examples with high activation levels consistently detailed changes in placement or condition of tubes and PICC lines when compared to previous imaging. This focus contrasts with lower activation examples where clear or unchanged lung and heart conditions without specific tube placements or migrations are discussed.,0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6915998887737304,0.695,0.7468354430379747,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1101,latent_1101,24064,0.048128,0.026606034,4.691228,Significant changes or findings noted during comparison with prior images.,"Higher activation examples primarily involve comparisons between current and prior imaging that indicate notable changes or observations related to the findings. These include the presence or resolution of specific pathologies such as opacities, effusions, or consolidation. Lower activation examples often lack significant comparative details or document that findings were unchanged and not suggestive of acute pathology.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1102,latent_1102,45296,0.090592,0.038856454,2.9975066,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in pathological findings.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently reference previous imaging (using comparative language) while highlighting changes in pathological findings, especially focusing on pleural effusions, lung nodules, and opacities. Language such as 'new', 'increased', 'stable', or 'unchanged' captures these updates in radiological findings relative to historical images.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1103,latent_1103,7306,0.014612,0.04155195,7.6092005,Prompts requesting findings comparison with prior images without existing reports.,"Examples with high activation levels repeatedly involve providing descriptions or comparisons that highlight changes or stability over time based on different imaging views (frontal, lateral, prior). Phrases frequently indicate the existence of a prior report, 'N/A' references, and prompt for descriptions for comparison.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4740532959326788,0.55,0.5284090909090909,0.93,100.0,100.0
+1104,latent_1104,5563,0.011126,0.0110667115,5.1937428,Comprehensive image comparison where findings do not indicate acute pathology.,"Examples with significant activation levels often involve comprehensive descriptive analysis of image comparisons where observations include changes or consistencies without signs of any acute issue, even if abnormalities or non-acute findings are present. Low activation examples usually focus on technical details or lack of substantial clinical findings.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1105,latent_1105,3159,0.006318,0.0063623716,8.34802,Stable or improving findings over multiple imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels show radiological patterns that suggest stable, unchanged, or gradually improving findings over multiple imaging studies. These cases describe previously identified issues that are noted to be unchanged or mildly improved during subsequent imaging assessment.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4827217125382263,0.4874371859296482,0.4875,0.39,100.0,99.0
+1106,latent_1106,11307,0.022614,0.01165022,3.2870758,Comparative analysis of radiology findings with previous images.,"The examples demonstrate higher activations when findings are evaluated in comparison to prior imaging studies and show specific changes, either stable or new developments in the imaging findings, which require interpretation against a previous baseline.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1107,latent_1107,6789,0.013578,0.0102895545,6.2388177,"Detailed comparative analysis with a focus on stability, subtle changes, and technical nuances.","The examples consistently reference detailed findings related to the current and prior imaging with the use of specific anatomical or technical terms to describe subtle changes, stability, or comparisons, especially focusing on pulmonary and cardiothoracic structures. The activation in these examples highlights detailed and complex analyses comparing past and present imaging.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1108,latent_1108,6136,0.012272,0.022933107,3.4060721,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1109,latent_1109,42268,0.084536,0.035282616,2.3256376,Comparative analysis with prior imaging shows specific changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation involve specific comparison to prior imaging studies and focus on the status or changes in identifiable features such as pneumothorax, effusion, or structural displacements (e.g., tube placements) that involve descriptions of change or stability over time.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.590316431566908,0.592964824120603,0.5826086956521739,0.67,100.0,99.0
+1110,latent_1110,4115,0.00823,0.011530547,5.4219666,Description of imaging findings over time with emphasis on stability or interval changes.,"The examples primarily highlight descriptions that report on current imaging findings in relation to previous imaging studies, considering interval changes or stability in findings such as the position of medical lines or devices, unchanged cardiac enlargement, stability of pulmonary conditions, and certain interventions or clinical statuses post-procedures like sternotomy. The pattern reflects radiological follow-ups and documentation of patient status over time.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.404866094871346,0.405,0.4020618556701031,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1111,latent_1111,16850,0.0337,0.020438539,9.16822,Presence of pneumothorax or mediastinal shift.,"The high activation examples describe the presence of pneumothorax or significant mediastinal shift, which are urgent findings often necessitating immediate medical attention. Cases with these findings involve detailed descriptions of potential impact on surrounding structures, marking them as patterns of interest.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5588064553581795,0.715,0.375,0.2448979591836734,49.0,151.0
+1112,latent_1112,3672,0.007344,0.009810913,8.115412,Comparison to prior imaging studies to assess changes or stability.,"The majority of these examples describe radiology findings in relation to previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability over time. This pattern is common in radiology reports that use comparison to assess progress or stability of medical conditions.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5668333377897805,0.595,0.5629139072847682,0.85,100.0,100.0
+1113,latent_1113,4784,0.009568,0.015634367,4.7166777,Emphasis on findings of low lung volumes in imaging.,"Examples with a high activation level consistently mention low lung volumes, often combined with accents like atelectasis, congested bronchovascular markings, or mediastinal changes. This specific pattern of low lung volumes is a significant finding in radiological comparison and evaluation of chest images.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4007236544549977,0.47,0.40625,0.13,100.0,100.0
+1114,latent_1114,14914,0.029828,0.051017854,8.061978,Asked for comparison with prior image despite not having one.,"The examples with higher activation frequently include scenarios where the current findings are to be described in comparison to a prior study, yet explicitly state there is no prior exam available for such a comparison. This implies a focus on current findings without previous comparison, despite being asked to do so, which aligns with their activation intensity.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1115,latent_1115,14539,0.029078,0.023137037,5.735585,Comparison to prior studies highlighting interval changes.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions that explicitly compare current imaging findings to previous ones, often highlighting changes or stability over time. This pattern reflects a focus on detecting interval changes, a common task in radiology when comparing serial imaging.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4287014333021562,0.435,0.4177215189873418,0.33,100.0,100.0
+1116,latent_1116,3273,0.006546,0.0062928093,3.9824977,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on providing descriptions of findings in radiology studies and comparing them to prior imaging, even when explicit dates are not provided. They consistently use the format of analyzing current frontal and lateral images, emphasizing the comparison process with or without specific prior examination context.",0.3854515050167224,0.3877551020408163,0.3636363636363636,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4152636354471217,0.42,0.4322033898305085,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1117,latent_1117,3678,0.007356,0.008690857,5.8358397,Analysis based on comparing current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels explicitly require the AI assistant to provide a description or analysis based on comparing the current imaging with prior imaging, showcasing a pattern in how this comparative analysis is consistently requested. This is a common aspect in radiological assessments for detecting changes or stability of findings over time.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.4469696969696969,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1118,latent_1118,3110,0.00622,0.004750069,7.533433,Comparisons to prior imaging with unchanged findings or device positions.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly involve descriptions of findings in the current radiology study in comparison to prior images or studies, whilst explicitly stating the absence of changes in the conditions being assessed or continuity in the placement of medical devices.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4594594594594595,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1119,latent_1119,8482,0.016964,0.014440803,4.613078,Assessment and comparison of medical device positioning on imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently mention the presence and evaluation of medical devices such as pacemakers, catheters, and various tubes like endotracheal, feeding, or central venous lines. These reports focus on evaluating the placement, changes, or stability of such devices over time, often in comparison with prior imaging.",0.5916666666666667,0.5918367346938775,0.5833333333333334,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6619490905421428,0.665,0.7037037037037037,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1120,latent_1120,21106,0.042212,0.024794718,7.345892,"Interval changes in pleural effusions or atelectasis, referencing previous imaging or device placement.","These examples demonstrate specific references to interval changes in pleural effusions or atelectasis when compared to previous imaging studies, and describe the presence or change in position of pleural or treatment devices, like chest tubes or catheter placements. This forms a distinct pattern in analyzing the radiology reports where stability or reduction in size of effusions or improvement of atelectasis are highlighted.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6286078098471987,0.65,0.4939759036144578,0.5942028985507246,69.0,131.0
+1121,latent_1121,3262,0.006524,0.008102715,3.7747612,"Describe findings in comparison to prior images, detailing changes over time.","Highly activated examples focus on generating a description of the radiology findings by comparing current and prior images. The task emphasizes detailing the intervals and changes observed in the imaging, even if minor, over time or with treatment interventions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4361579311937197,0.4393939393939394,0.4337349397590361,0.36,100.0,98.0
+1122,latent_1122,59434,0.118868,0.06311475,5.2210984,Detailed analysis of specific changes or stability in radiographic findings over time.,"In examples with high activation levels, there is consistent mention of specific changes or stability in findings through comparative analysis with prior imaging, which involves elements like pulmonary opacification, pleural effusions, and concise comparisons of specific anatomical or pathological details across a timeframe. The pattern focuses on capturing detailed progression or resolution of pathologies over time, signaling that these factors are pivotal in the analysis for the model training.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6921182266009853,0.7,0.6515151515151515,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1123,latent_1123,11250,0.0225,0.013242511,4.0763187,Relies on comparisons between current and prior imaging reports.,"The pattern emerges in cases where previous imaging comparisons are emphasized, focusing on continuity in the evaluation over static findings. Descriptions pertain to identifying changes through active comparison with prior studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1124,latent_1124,13534,0.027068,0.014155269,5.2392955,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations frequently involve comparisons with prior imaging studies. These examples explicitly mention terms like 'comparison', 'compared to previous', 'unchanged from', along with noting changes such as 'stable', 'unchanged', 'interval change', or specific dated prior exams. These linguistic patterns tie the observed current findings to prior imaging results, which is a common, important aspect in radiological assessments.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5174503422735944,0.57,0.5389221556886228,0.9090909090909092,99.0,101.0
+1125,latent_1125,17382,0.034764,0.019928327,6.22912,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently reference interval changes in the imaging studies relative to a prior examination, with terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'again', or 'stable', indicating consistency or monitoring of known conditions or devices, rather than new findings or completely stable cases.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4996408045977011,0.507537688442211,0.4344827586206896,0.7974683544303798,79.0,120.0
+1126,latent_1126,10219,0.020438,0.017291442,5.817226,Temporal change comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern is evident in examples where findings are described as a comparison to previous imaging, highlighting intervals or changes such as stability, resolution, or improvement. These examples specifically include phrases indicating temporal assessment, like 'improved' or 'resolution'.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4310916255643414,0.455,0.4680851063829787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1127,latent_1127,3747,0.007494,0.009248529,5.6434617,Direct comparison to prior images noting changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels include text where specific findings in the current image are compared explicitly to a prior image. The references to prior images are used to evaluate current findings, whether by noting changes or affirming stability. The phrasing involves clear, direct evaluations between current and prior observations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3899389938993899,0.39,0.3877551020408163,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1128,latent_1128,33347,0.066694,0.042603053,4.320727,Concurrent analysis of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image for comparison.,"The pattern being activated in these examples relates to the inclusion of both frontal and lateral chest images being compared with prior imaging. This is evident in examples where 'current frontal' and 'current lateral' images are considered alongside 'prior frontal' images, showing how past and present imaging are both used for a comprehensive comparison.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1129,latent_1129,5280,0.01056,0.012804433,5.092663,Focus on evaluating and comparing current images to prior images.,"The highly activated examples emphasize a narrative format where there is instruction to analyze and compare current images with previous images. They often include command phrases like ""Provide a description of the findings"" in context, focusing on evaluation and comparison aspects rather than just providing findings or observations directly. This suggests that the pattern involves dealing with instructions or commands for comparative descriptive analysis.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1130,latent_1130,4135,0.00827,0.0097393235,5.4861135,Presence of current and prior imaging comparison to describe interval changes.,"The examples with high activation have scenarios where the current and prior images are specifically compared, allowing evaluation of the findings in relation to changes from previous imaging. Specifically, radiological studies are provided which allow assessment of interval changes from prior images, often utilizing technical terms and specific anatomical observations.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.3333333333333333,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4705882352941176,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1131,latent_1131,1654,0.003308,0.01068558,6.488627,Requests to compare current image findings with prior reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit requests to compare findings with a prior report, indicated by phrases like 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior'. This indicates the focus is on extracting summary or comparison information between multiple images.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.5704225352112676,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1132,latent_1132,5247,0.010494,0.014788781,4.4577785,Focus on radiographic changes or stabilities over time.,"These examples highlight an emphasis on detailed descriptions and evaluations of changes or stabilities in radiographic findings over time, as indicated by the specific language used, including terms like 'unchanged', 'interval change', 'stable', and explicit comparisons between current and prior images.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1133,latent_1133,17509,0.035018,0.015055017,4.790582,Explicit comparison with or reference to prior imaging findings or changes.,"The pattern shows that reports with explicit comparison to prior imaging findings or describing changes, improvements, or stability of specific findings are more activating. Such comparative elements are common in longitudinal assessments where monitoring progression or resolution of pathologies is crucial.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1134,latent_1134,5043,0.010086,0.009111979,6.196591,Lung field opacities or mass changes indicating potential pathology.,"Examples with higher activation describe lung opacities, patches, or mass formation, indicating possible changes in the lungs or pleural region. These examples identify specific findings such as opacities concerning for pneumonia or other patterns within the lung fields, and they imply a requirement to evaluate the new findings in the context of significant change or follow-up.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5238095238095238,0.33,100.0,100.0
+1135,latent_1135,41911,0.083822,0.03865673,4.0693803,Determination of findings or changes without available comparison images.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to detailed descriptions or instructions for examining changes when no comparison images are available. They stand out due to their emphasis on measuring differences without direct visual references, which may relate to a learning task involving describing changes based on provided textual cues alone.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4634146341463415,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1136,latent_1136,6086,0.012172,0.013430666,4.4409547,Use of current frontal and lateral images compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves utilization of multiple images, specifically both current frontal and lateral images compared to prior imaging findings. Reports consistently note the presence of both ""current frontal image"" and ""current lateral image"" in the context of comparison with prior images, forming a consistent structure of image references that influences the activation.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1137,latent_1137,4691,0.009382,0.009484067,5.039649,Comparison to prior images highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples include comparisons to prior images, specifically looking for interval changes in clinical findings, or observing stability in known conditions. Examination descriptions often note specific changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical details compared to the prior study, indicating a pattern of monitoring for changes over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1138,latent_1138,6246,0.012492,0.008787295,4.7114315,Technical comparisons documented between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples frequently include details about technical procedures comparing current imaging studies to prior ones, noting intervals and specific date references in the context of significant findings or tube placements. This pattern reflects the emphasis on documenting temporal changes or stabilities in patient status and interventions across imaging sessions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+1139,latent_1139,7221,0.014442,0.00974901,4.9475846,Description of medical tube or line placement and change from prior.,"The examples show patterns of radiological observations where the presence of medical tubes or devices and their positions, such as NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, and lines, are frequently noted. This involves identifying their locations and any changes from prior studies, a common focus in monitoring medical device placement over time.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5875,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1140,latent_1140,4586,0.009172,0.014353616,4.5723376,Interval changes or findings in comparison to prior chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often include changes or new interval findings in comparison to prior chest imaging, such as development, resolution, or persistence of pathologies. Reports frequently quantify or qualify the interval changes and their significance, particularly regarding effusions, opacities, or structural changes, indicating careful longitudinal assessment.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1141,latent_1141,20645,0.04129,0.024098527,4.4598927,Comparison of tube/device positioning in imaging reports.,"Instances with higher activation describe the interval change or stability of certain tubes or devices, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, IJ catheters, etc., in relation to prior images. This indicates that the model activates on phrases and context where imaging is used to verify the placement or positioning of medical devices compared to prior radiographs.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6694711538461539,0.67,0.6847826086956522,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1142,latent_1142,24305,0.04861,0.02510625,7.306212,Post-operative/procedural evaluation of thoracic changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels include cases of detailed descriptions of findings with comparisons made between images from the current and prior exams, especially focused on changes post-procedural or post-operative conditions, like thoracentesis or placement checks. This is indicative of images that require careful evaluation due to recent interventions or procedural follow-ups, often marked by descriptions assessing for stability or further issues like effusions, pneumothorax, or catheter placements.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6332923832923834,0.6381909547738693,0.4333333333333333,0.9285714285714286,56.0,143.0
+1143,latent_1143,11179,0.022358,0.011781214,2.888367,Higher activation with less specific history or technique details.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently lack a detailed history or indication and occasionally also technical details, indicating that brief, unspecific mandates in the input prompt garner significant activation levels. This pattern suggests that the task's focus triggers higher activation when less contextual preamble is present, resulting in more concise prompts leading to higher activation.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1144,latent_1144,73522,0.147044,0.06635494,2.6312776,Interval changes in condition or treatment in radiology findings.,"The pattern observed is that examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of interval changes from prior imaging studies or treatments. This includes mention of procedures like Dobbhoff tube placement or signs of change in conditions, which suggests a focus on dynamic changes in patient status.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.584,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1145,latent_1145,10820,0.02164,0.015991557,4.837371,Stable cardiopulmonary findings on imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of cardiac, vascular, mediastinal, or pulmonary findings that are relatively stable or unchanged over time, or demonstrate minor changes compared to previous imaging studies. This suggests the pattern is associated with stable conditions rather than acute changes.",0.4676227727075185,0.4897959183673469,0.4666666666666667,0.2916666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4393939393939394,0.29,100.0,100.0
+1146,latent_1146,7111,0.014222,0.012553502,6.7805376,Description of changes on current imaging compared to prior indicating active process.,The examples show patterns where explicit comparison to a prior imaging study reveals a change suggesting an acute process or important ongoing clinical issue. This is typical in studies focused on detailed comparison to identify clinical developments.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4807692307692308,0.25,100.0,100.0
+1147,latent_1147,54582,0.109164,0.05883565,6.6077743,Direct comparison to prior imaging emphasizing changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve an explicit mention of a current imaging study being directly compared to a prior imaging study, where the prior imaging is an immediate reference point for evaluating changes, rather than just being mentioned alongside other examinations without a clear comparative analysis.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.4685314685314685,0.8375,80.0,120.0
+1148,latent_1148,5957,0.011914,0.010521688,5.508465,Presence of PA and lateral views in imaging technique description.,"The highest activation level examples frequently include explicit phrases indicating typical radiological techniques, often stated as 'PA and lateral views', or 'CHEST (PA AND LAT)'. These typically provide a comprehensive view for evaluations and are commonly highlighted in radiological exams.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5612185417036267,0.5628140703517588,0.5585585585585585,0.62,100.0,99.0
+1149,latent_1149,2662,0.005324,0.010583658,5.660136,Comparison with prior findings or evaluations for intervals/changes.,"The high activation examples consistently refer to the prior state of the patient or previous findings, usually indicating ongoing monitoring or evaluation in response to changes. They focus on the significance of intervals and comparisons.",0.4601889338731444,0.4791666666666667,0.4705882352941176,0.6956521739130435,23.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1150,latent_1150,3482,0.006964,0.011358341,5.7762384,Comparative findings of pleural effusions or pulmonary edema status over time.,"The high activation examples feature a consistent narrative of comparative findings, especially around pleural effusions or pulmonary edema, highlighting changes or stability over a series of images or reports. These differentiate significant from insignificant changes in conditions like edema or effusions, which matches the studied pattern of evaluating progress or stability in chest imaging.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.6724137931034483,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1151,latent_1151,10678,0.021356,0.007894505,2.0521219,Interval change or improvement noted on comparison with previous images.,"The highly activated examples describe an interval change, improvement, or regression observed by comparing current images to previous ones, explicitly stating differences in findings. This comparison is crucial for assessing progression or resolution of medical conditions over time.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5424350175032387,0.585,0.717948717948718,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1152,latent_1152,35637,0.071274,0.02967819,2.6402996,Reports emphasize stability/change of chest medical devices rather than pathology.,"These examples demonstrate descriptions of radiographic findings that emphasize stability or changes when primarily focusing on the cardiac, mediastinal, and lung impressions, without mention of specific pathologies being present. Such descriptions often provide details regarding the positioning and status of chest tubes, catheters, and other medical devices, a pattern frequently seen in post-surgical follow-ups or monitoring of chronic conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5405405405405406,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1153,latent_1153,13790,0.02758,0.020231819,6.779316,Explicit instructions for detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation explicitly ask for a detailed comparison between current and previous imaging, often including instructions to explicitly describe differences or changes observed. Conversely, examples with low activation either lack specific comparison instructions or the associated summary is significantly condensed without explicit detailed changes between scans.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1154,latent_1154,64854,0.129708,0.0728876,5.582689,Significant comparison with prior imaging showing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally have alterations or comparisons to prior imaging studies, highlighting differences or stable findings without significant changes. This comparison to prior findings is an integral part of radiological evaluation to track progress or stability of medical conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1155,latent_1155,2978,0.005956,0.009951451,5.4824324,Comparison and description of findings relative to a prior specified imaging study.,"The high activation examples primarily involve a comparison between the current and a specified prior imaging study, along with detailed findings on the current examination, such as changes or stability in cardiac, mediastinal, and pulmonary aspects. The instruction to compare and describe findings relative to the prior study is present in these cases, emphasizing the relationship and rendering.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4138129712668153,0.415,0.4220183486238532,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1156,latent_1156,38395,0.07679,0.031518973,2.6954832,Comparison to prior imaging with focus on changes in pathology or medical devices.,"This set shows moderate activation in reports that highlight comparison between current and prior imaging studies, explicitly noting changes or lack thereof in findings, in particular focusing on changes in pathology, patient status, or medical devices, which are actions that align with routine check-up procedures or treatment evaluations.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.5725190839694656,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1157,latent_1157,12726,0.025452,0.019382153,4.061133,Unchanged or stable appearance of known findings compared to prior imaging.,"Analysis of these examples shows that findings with relatively high activation levels often describe unchanged or stable appearances with existing conditions, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'similar', or lack of worsening/comprehensive change compared to prior imaging.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5822394213015656,0.5829145728643216,0.5934065934065934,0.54,100.0,99.0
+1158,latent_1158,17147,0.034294,0.029057046,5.021775,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe both current and prior imaging findings using comparative terms, along with explicit or implicit descriptions about changes or stability of findings over time. This comparison to prior images or reports helps identify specific patterns of change, which is the key aspect here.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1159,latent_1159,2576,0.005152,0.007993387,8.944379,Explicit comparison to prior radiographic images.,"These descriptions consistently refer to findings or changes observed when current radiographic images are explicitly compared to prior studies. High activation levels correspond to examples where the presence of an explicit instruction or requirement to compare images against previous ones is evident, emphasizing the differences or consistencies noted over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1160,latent_1160,7214,0.014428,0.015041315,4.7670627,Reference to prior imaging with focus on medical device evaluation.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize ""prior report"" sections that include examinations and indications related to the placement or verification of medical devices, such as nasogastric tubes or similar. The presence of such interventional indications aligns with the pattern being sought, as indicated by the activation levels of these examples.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.35636586079417,0.395,0.2941176470588235,0.15,100.0,100.0
+1161,latent_1161,9310,0.01862,0.014918304,6.2078753,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison to prior imaging.,"While observations that have remained unchanged between current and prior imaging demonstrate varied medical conditions, the highly activated samples involve specific mentions of stable or unchanged findings or improvements indicating resolution. This focus shows the importance of tracking consistency or improvement between radiographic examinations to rule out acute changes or exacerbations.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1162,latent_1162,5934,0.011868,0.011096542,4.922387,Radiographs show stability with no significant acute changes.,"These examples focus on reviews of radiographs that describe mild or no change in findings and emphasize the absence of acute abnormalities, with a frequent note of normal cardiac and mediastinal contours. These exams consistently mention stability or minor variations that do not signify a major new finding or condition.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5773195876288659,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1163,latent_1163,5135,0.01027,0.009147015,5.148304,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions and findings from prior frontal images, suggesting that the presence of detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images is what the model activates on.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3849846246156154,0.385,0.3861386138613861,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1164,latent_1164,3966,0.007932,0.00844585,3.6802475,Change or assessment of pleural effusions or associated fluid-related findings.,"These examples describe interval changes in imaging findings, focusing specifically on alterations in fluid or effusions. They often reference 'pleural effusions,' changes in their size, associated atelectasis, or the presence/absence of new fluid-related features on comparison with prior images, making it central to each report's analysis.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6743405395926751,0.675,0.6923076923076923,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1165,latent_1165,19378,0.038756,0.026073255,4.6141167,Changes in lung parenchymal opacities or effusion compared to prior imaging.,The examples with high activation levels discuss changes in lung parenchymal opacities or effusions that are consistent or undergoing changes in comparison to prior imaging studies. These findings are relevant in evaluating disease progression.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5612185417036267,0.5628140703517588,0.5747126436781609,0.5,100.0,99.0
+1166,latent_1166,12955,0.02591,0.014933263,5.637132,Standard and direct radiological descriptions without extensive formatting.,"Observations of low to moderate activation levels suggest that the model focuses on recognizing explicit, straightforward descriptions of radiological findings without extensive formatting or metadata. The higher activations are associated with standard radiological description snippets, such as heart sizes and comparison phrases with previous studies, but without complex representations or extra linguistic decoration.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4388085473775092,0.545,0.2340425531914893,0.1666666666666666,66.0,134.0
+1167,latent_1167,5291,0.010582,0.019525193,6.6803493,Usage of both frontal and lateral current images for analysis.,"Examples with high activation levels involve multiple images for comparison, specifically including both frontal and lateral current images, and sometimes prior images as well. This pattern emphasizes the conjunction of multiple images in analysis, likely indicating a comprehensive view or detailed evaluation within radiological studies.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.5483870967741935,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1168,latent_1168,27067,0.054134,0.024455262,2.0330827,Incorporation of findings from multiple image views (frontal and lateral).,"In these examples, the highly activated instances typically reference imaging findings from multiple views, such as both frontal and lateral views. The pattern seems to be related to providing a more comprehensive analysis by including multiple perspectives, which is crucial in detailed radiological evaluations.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4358974358974359,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1169,latent_1169,3819,0.007638,0.01159608,5.1617756,Use of previous imaging to highlight changes or stability in current findings.,"High activation examples consistently describe imaging findings where patient history, indications for the exam, or previous imaging are employed for comparison to highlight changes, stability, or lack thereof in findings. The focus is on variations or stability in radiographic findings over time, often describing direct changes from a known baseline.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4959244959244959,0.53,0.5197368421052632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1170,latent_1170,4090,0.00818,0.013849765,4.483849,High activation involves detailed comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels contain explicit narratives requiring comparison to prior imaging studies, often mentioning changes or stability over time. Examples with low activation lack detailed comparative analysis or ""no change"" findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4836691086691086,0.4874371859296482,0.4871794871794871,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+1171,latent_1171,14506,0.029012,0.016005166,3.6282856,Contextual changes in findings compared to previous images.,"In this dataset, higher activation levels are noted for cases that include specific findings and their comparisons to previous imaging results, often revealing stability, change, or new pathologies in alignment with continuous patient monitoring, thereby reflecting a diagnostic approach that leverages temporal comparison.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1172,latent_1172,19306,0.038612,0.02516296,4.6689873,Cardiomegaly or heart enlargement observations in chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve cardiac assessments, specifically focusing on cardiomegaly or enlargement. Additional consistent observations include changes in pulmonary vasculature, pleural effusions, and descriptions of pulmonary edema, all of which are cardiac-related evaluations.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9230769230769232,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.84,0.84,0.84,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1173,latent_1173,3801,0.007602,0.008240545,5.685761,Attention to comparative imaging changes and device status.,"The highly activated examples predominantly focus on changes between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing descriptions of newly appeared, unchanged, or resolved conditions concerning device placement or structural changes in the chest cavity such as heart size or lung conditions. Radiological terms like 'unchanged', 'new', 'increased', or 'resolved' in relation to past images are key indicators.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4259381171823568,0.455,0.4689655172413793,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1174,latent_1174,5598,0.011196,0.0131094605,8.542598,Comparison between current and prior imaging for changes or stability.,"These examples frequently describe a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on interval changes or stability of findings. The pattern is characterized by transitional or change-focused language such as 'interval change', 'compared to prior', or 'unchanged'.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.4864864864864865,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1175,latent_1175,11207,0.022414,0.047108956,6.688009,Direct comparison of current and prior radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include prompt-based direct comparison of findings between current and prior radiological exams, focusing on any interval changes in structures or conditions such as changes in effusions, pneumothorax, edema, and device positions. The attention to these comparative changes aligns with high activation levels. The comparison is central to the task structure and expected output.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1176,latent_1176,5775,0.01155,0.012236414,4.692258,Expectation to describe findings in comparison with prior images.,"Most examples highlight findings interpreted from imaging studies in comparison to previous images, often indicating that there were no significant changes. This reflects a specific pattern in radiological reporting which emphasizes stability or progression of conditions over time by comparing with prior images.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4091067083767813,0.49,0.4942528735632184,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1177,latent_1177,3926,0.007852,0.017476002,4.4875355,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1178,latent_1178,16180,0.03236,0.024514493,3.449708,Comparison with prior imaging assessing stability or changes in findings.,"Activation is high for examples where a comparison is made with prior imaging, revealing changes or stability in findings, alongside descriptions of cardiopulmonary features. This pattern is characteristic of radiological assessments tracking progression or resolution of pathologies.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1179,latent_1179,7067,0.014134,0.009955816,4.268487,Presence and comparison of pulmonary edema or pleural effusions.,"These examples often involve descriptions of findings related to pulmonary edema or pleural effusions, which are common radiological observations in conditions such as heart failure or fluid overload. Such reports frequently compare the severity or presence of these fluid-related abnormalities between current and prior imaging studies.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7869318181818181,0.79,0.7338709677419355,0.91,100.0,100.0
+1180,latent_1180,69811,0.139622,0.08380615,5.157127,Focus on detecting stability or changes in findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples consistently refer to comparison with prior imaging but focus on detecting significant changes, using phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or describing specific changes such as increased or decreased findings compared to prior studies. These patterns indicate the assessments are evaluating for stability or progression in disease processes or symptoms over time.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1181,latent_1181,11512,0.023024,0.020023376,6.1506352,Focus on changes or lack thereof relative to previous images.,"Examples all incorporate analysis involving comparison to prior imaging, explicitly asking for descriptions or descriptions that emphasize differences or lack thereof compared to known previous conditions. They focus more on the interpretation of change or stability over time relative to past images.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5233659782840111,0.5477386934673367,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,99.0
+1182,latent_1182,3160,0.00632,0.006919791,4.356439,Detailed comparison and clear findings from prior imaging in complex cases.,"The examples with high activations provide explicit radiological findings in complex cases, often indicating changes over time or specific interventions, while avoiding boilerplate or vague statements seen in low activation cases. They focus on detailed changes in comparison to prior imaging, specific pathologies like aortic tortuosity, or evaluations like PICC placement all encapsulated concisely in accompanying notes or actions.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4532967032967033,0.457286432160804,0.4512195121951219,0.37,100.0,99.0
+1183,latent_1183,5793,0.011586,0.008265578,4.4465523,Focus on explicit descriptions of comparative changes between current and prior imaging.,"These examples have active mentions of providing a detailed description of current imaging findings in comparison to prior imaging, focusing specifically on the presence or absence of changes such as resolving conditions, stable findings, or progression of pathologies. The activation pattern reflects descriptions with specific prompts to compare and assess intervals in conditions or the positions of objects like tubes or devices.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4992756385817766,0.5025125628140703,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,99.0
+1184,latent_1184,4123,0.008246,0.008899728,5.844787,Assessment of changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"These examples describe the findings of a current radiology image compared to prior images, focusing on the stability or changes in conditions such as effusions, opacities, or tube placements. The examples prominently feature 'comparison' elements, with the assistant providing an assessment of findings relative to previous studies, reinforcing the notion of assessment dependent on prior exams.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1185,latent_1185,3645,0.00729,0.02592221,9.464144,Evaluation of change compared to a prior frontal chest image.,Examples with high activation levels include instructions to provide new observations based on the comparison between given current and prior frontal chest images. The context suggests a pattern that focuses on evaluating and reporting changes or stability over time using prior reports.,0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.5681818181818182,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1186,latent_1186,4920,0.00984,0.011476156,4.6090503,Evaluation of radiographic changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels often refer to the comparison of current radiographic findings to prior images, specifically evaluating for interval changes, stability, or detailed descriptions of abnormalities in the thoracic region, indicating attentiveness to progression or stability of pathologies over time.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4596774193548387,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1187,latent_1187,9064,0.018128,0.030456971,6.5885477,"Presence and evaluation of medical devices (tubes, lines) in chest imaging.","These examples illustrate reports involving placement or evaluation of medical devices such as tubes, lines, or catheters, for instance endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, or PICC lines. The examples emphasize comparisons or confirmations of placement using phrases like 'unchanged position', 'removed', or 'ends'.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5721729013329286,0.5728643216080402,0.5760869565217391,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+1188,latent_1188,4332,0.008664,0.008455821,5.9100494,Detailed findings and comparisons in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation typically involve a clear description of findings, including any changes observed, along with explicit comparisons and detailed impressions. These radiological reports involve comparing current images with prior images to note any improvements or deteriorations, especially in describing cardiac or pulmonary status changes or resolving conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4085442071053582,0.4623115577889447,0.4779874213836478,0.76,100.0,99.0
+1189,latent_1189,8323,0.016646,0.024826534,5.962836,"Comparative analysis with frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","Examples with high activation specifically require a frontal, lateral, and prior frontal image for analysis, emphasizing a comparison aspect with previous imaging. The task involves making explicit comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on changes or consistencies across such images.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.503030303030303,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1190,latent_1190,157410,0.31482,0.19797784,5.103702,"Non-cardiac critical findings (e.g., pneumoperitoneum) or device positioning without prior study comparisons.","The high activation examples focus on non-cardiac diagnostic queries such as looking for free air post-surgery (e.g., pneumoperitoneum) or positioning of devices in the absence of prior studies to make direct comparisons, suggesting the system prioritizes conditions that are critical and unrelated to cardiac observations.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.3333333333333333,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3799603174603174,0.5,0.5,0.06,100.0,100.0
+1191,latent_1191,4082,0.008164,0.013626108,4.6872993,Studies with reported interval changes or comparisons to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels commonly involve a comparison between current and prior studies, highlighting findings such as lack of significant change, or specific changes mentioned in the radiological findings. This is distinct from examples with lower activation levels where no such comparative analysis is emphasized in the text.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1192,latent_1192,4539,0.009078,0.008570933,4.9572177,Multifaceted analysis with findings suggesting several pathologies in different views.,"Highly activated examples include complex findings suggesting multiple pathologies, often involving the combined analysis of abnormal findings from different views (frontal and lateral) on chest radiographs. Reports are detailed, indicating changes in conditions or presence of multiple issues.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1193,latent_1193,4554,0.009108,0.012429991,4.9571257,Interval change or stability described compared to prior images.,"The pattern involves reports that explicitly mention comparison with previous imaging and describe findings in terms of interval change or stability. This is specific to cases where the imaged findings are used to review changes over time, showing stability or change in patient's condition, often using terms like 'interval', 'unchanged', or 'stable'.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4248705958840739,0.425,0.4271844660194174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1194,latent_1194,3723,0.007446,0.007145534,4.782282,Cardiac silhouette enlarged but stable.,"Examples with higher activation describe scenarios where heart size is mildly enlarged yet stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging, without identifying acute abnormalities despite this cardiomegaly.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4910941475826972,0.54,0.6052631578947368,0.23,100.0,100.0
+1195,latent_1195,11775,0.02355,0.014628901,5.78507,Comparison with prior images indicating interval change or stability.,"Examples with prominent activation levels frequently involve interval changes or stability in radiological findings relative to prior imaging. These observations often include terms like 'interval improvement', 'unchanged', or 'no significant change' compared with earlier dates or examinations.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1196,latent_1196,4041,0.008082,0.017301777,6.2713757,Focus on interval change in radiologic findings.,"The pattern here frequently involves comparing findings from a current frontal image to a prior frontal image, emphasizing the presence or absence of change in findings. This focus on interval change is common in situations where stability or progression of conditions are crucial to patient management.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.53125,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1197,latent_1197,2244,0.004488,0.00639423,5.734333,Clear lungs and unremarkable mediastinal contours.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on normal findings in chest X-ray images with clear lungs and unremarkable mediastinal contours, often from more than one view and comparison with previous studies, but no acute or significant pathology. This points to typical language used to describe normal chest X-rays when no significant abnormalities are detected.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5895720909021813,0.595,0.6233766233766234,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1198,latent_1198,4850,0.0097,0.013213089,4.1867537,Descriptions actively compare current to prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation involve providing descriptions of radiology findings in relation to the previous frontal image, explicitly comparing current imaging to prior images. They showcase a task of actively evaluating changes over time rather than merely stating findings.",0.28,0.28,0.28,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3699369936993699,0.37,0.3673469387755102,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1199,latent_1199,4736,0.009472,0.011061018,5.6740985,Absence of prior comparison with clear lung findings.,"Highly activated examples frequently lack prior comparison and focus on findings from current imaging, often including the frontal and lateral image without significant follow-up claims from prior reports. The description indicates clear lungs without acute disease findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5806476663819212,0.595,0.6507936507936508,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1200,latent_1200,8430,0.01686,0.012725572,4.870063,Familiar findings consistent with previous radiology interpretations.,"Prompts with higher activations have been included when referenced adjunct findings in the radiology study (such as cardiac silhouette stability, pleural effusion, and pulmonary edema) are stated as being similar or unchanged compared to past radiological findings without showing any significant improvement or abnormality. This represents continuation or a stable state without worsening.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4499385749385749,0.457286432160804,0.4634146341463415,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+1201,latent_1201,5273,0.010546,0.019470708,9.32688,Descriptive comparison of current to prior imaging findings.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that explicitly mention the examination of current images in direct comparison to prior images. This suggests that the linguistic emphasis on comparison in the radiology context, such as ""compared to the previous,"" ""as compared to the prior,"" or similar terminologies, is key to this pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1202,latent_1202,3117,0.006234,0.0055631287,5.038825,Comparing current imaging findings with prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include instructions to provide a description of the current imaging findings in relation to prior frontal images, suggesting that the task involves analyzing changes or stability in imaging over time or between different positions.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1203,latent_1203,7092,0.014184,0.012805552,4.401238,Descriptions include comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"In this pattern, examples include explicit descriptions of radiological findings compared to previous imaging exams. The presence of terms like 'comparison to previous study', 'as compared with the prior image', 'unchanged since prior exam', or specific mentions of dates of prior imaging highlights this pattern of assessing interval changes or stability.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4938181818181818,0.565,0.5371428571428571,0.94,100.0,100.0
+1204,latent_1204,6351,0.012702,0.010136617,3.6545882,Request for detailed image comparison in the prompt.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently request a detailed comparison between current and prior images in a structured radiological context. This request for comparison, often highlighted by the presence of previous imaging studies or at least a specific directive to compare, triggers a higher activation likely because such tasks require leveraging prior information for clinical decision-making.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4938181818181818,0.565,0.5371428571428571,0.94,100.0,100.0
+1205,latent_1205,5303,0.010606,0.010010226,6.080305,Comparison of findings with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve references to comparisons with prior imaging studies, changes or stability of observed features compared to previous reports, and specific phrases indicating comparison like 'as compared to prior', 'unchanged from prior', or 'in comparison with prior'. This pattern suggests a focus on comparison with historical imaging to assess changes.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.34375,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4928571428571429,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1206,latent_1206,20283,0.040566,0.025396107,7.710834,Stable findings or medical device positions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies despite not showing significant new findings, particularly noting stability in specific medical devices or conditions described in the reports. This aligns with detecting changes over time or confirming consistency in patient conditions or device states for monitoring purposes.",0.7751355861493534,0.7755102040816326,0.782608695652174,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5145631067961165,0.5408163265306123,98.0,102.0
+1207,latent_1207,12552,0.025104,0.018847639,5.198744,"Comparison of current and prior chest images, noting changes or stability.","Activations are higher when findings in current chest images are evaluated in relation to prior images, particularly noting changes or stability. This is seen where the assistant is asked to describe or analyze findings compared to previous studies, often specifying differences like growth of opacities or stability of structures.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1208,latent_1208,2448,0.004896,0.0066897203,8.17161,Comparison with prior imaging for interval change.,"These examples frequently include language indicating comparison with prior imaging studies, often asking for interval changes or improvements, such as 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior'. This pattern focuses on evaluating current images against historical data.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5060949978982766,0.53,0.5208333333333334,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1209,latent_1209,6358,0.012716,0.011494058,5.5631113,Structured radiology report with detailed findings and comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain structured radiology report formats that specify a clear indication, technique, and comparison, and provide detailed findings. These elements resemble a consistent reporting template, particularly the explicit comparison section with previous studies and the use of structured impressions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3943383805134957,0.425,0.4482758620689655,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1210,latent_1210,2681,0.005362,0.0056476966,3.31409,"Assessment of medical devices, such as tubes and lines, in comparison to prior imaging.","Higher activations are associated with scenarios where medical intervention devices and their positions are assessed in comparison to prior images. This pattern indicates the focus is on evaluating changes in the placement or presence of tubes and lines, which is a key aspect of managing critical care patients.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.29,100.0,100.0
+1211,latent_1211,7232,0.014464,0.010392064,4.9165063,Presence of 'moderate' size or severity findings.,"Highly activated examples frequently detail 'moderate' findings, whether pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary congestion, highlighting a focus on moderate-sized findings in the reports. This suggests that the consistent, moderate descriptors in radiological findings trigger significant activation.",0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.782118517392516,0.785,0.8701298701298701,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1212,latent_1212,19712,0.039424,0.019141277,4.883005,Persistent findings or unchanged support device positions in chest imaging.,"Observations with higher activation levels involve persistent changes, such as unchanged positions of lines and tubes or unchanged opacities. These stable findings often relate to interventions like tube placements, effusions, or a device's position, included in interpretations that must be reassessed for any interval changes across different studies, particularly with persistent opacities or support devices.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5454545454545454,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1213,latent_1213,4735,0.00947,0.006944887,3.8730285,"Comparison of current image findings to prior studies, noting interval changes or stability.",The examples with high activation values all involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies where specific changes or stability in findings across time are described. This pattern focuses on interval changes or assessments using multiple images.,0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1214,latent_1214,6833,0.013666,0.010195039,4.2975974,"Comparison findings noting change, stability, or resolution of conditions on follow-up imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe findings from comparing current imaging with prior studies, noting changes like stability or resolution of conditions, which indicates a focus on following up on previously observed abnormalities to monitor their progression or resolution.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5017072615524698,0.5025125628140703,0.5054945054945055,0.46,100.0,99.0
+1215,latent_1215,8471,0.016942,0.01172812,4.4999285,Interval changes in pulmonary congestion or vascular engorgement.,"The examples with higher activation levels exhibit detailed comparative language to describe interval changes seen in images, such as 'interval placement' or 'substantial improvement,' focusing on vascular congestion, engorgement or changes associated with pulmonary aspects.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5503871666065333,0.595,0.7567567567567568,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1216,latent_1216,6129,0.012258,0.0148073705,4.972353,"Emphasis on comparison with previous imaging, even if unspecified.","The pattern observed in high activation examples is the comparison with prior imaging, even when there is no previous image available or it is unspecified ('None'). These cases generally detail minor changes or stability in observations, indicating reliance on historical data or changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3956043956043956,0.45,0.46875,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1217,latent_1217,3151,0.006302,0.010355639,6.233986,"Prior imaging comparison requested, despite phrase 'comparison: none' or similar.","Examples with high activation levels consistently request comparison to prior imaging studies and focus on describing current radiologic findings without reference to past examinations. These requests direct the analysis and synthesis of findings without relying on historical comparisons to understand the pattern, establishing a prompt structure prioritizing current imaging review despite comparison options.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1218,latent_1218,5019,0.010038,0.0121337855,5.6927786,Detailed comparison to prior imaging assessing interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the explicit comparison to prior imaging and the assessment of interval changes. They often involve examining dynamic processes, such as pleural fluid changes, pneumothorax resolution, or opacification improvements, which requires detailed comparison to previous radiographs to establish stability or change in findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4495045540986888,0.45,0.4468085106382978,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1219,latent_1219,6547,0.013094,0.008538501,6.24431,Detailed comparison of pulmonary changes over time.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging, focusing on changes in pulmonary conditions such as edema, pleural effusions, and consolidation. These assessments primarily track the progression or resolution of pathologies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4761904761904761,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1220,latent_1220,24186,0.048372,0.026199333,3.4372027,Stability or lack of change in imaging findings across comparisons.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve the identification of imaging findings which are stable or unchanged, often explicitly comparing current with prior images. Phrases such as 'stable', 'unchanged', 'no interval change', or 'remained unchanged' signal assessments emphasizing lack of progression in identified findings.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5643564356435643,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1221,latent_1221,4635,0.00927,0.01628221,4.519759,Comparison of current and prior images is emphasized.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention comparing current images with prior ones, often using terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged from', or specific previous dates, indicating the core pattern is related to comparisons between current and past images. The presence of prompts to provide a description or findings based on these comparisons further supports this being the pattern.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1222,latent_1222,54099,0.108198,0.04851677,3.6600423,Detailed comparisons of sequential image changes.,The examples with higher activation levels involve articulating fine details and changes between multiple image views over time or following an intervention. These specify progress or stability of conditions relative to prior exams and may involve specialized medical procedures or equipment.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6161616161616161,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1223,latent_1223,25357,0.050714,0.03517775,3.9024975,Presence of medical tubes or catheter placements.,"The pattern emerges from references to medical tubes or catheter placements, which appear to significantly influence activation levels. Reports often include terms like 'PICC', 'central line', 'endotracheal tube', and 'hemodialysis catheter', suggesting a focus on devices in imaging studies rather than broader radiological evaluations. These examples most likely reflect analyses on how to position or monitor such medical apparatuses within the thoracic cavity.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5647058823529412,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1224,latent_1224,5929,0.011858,0.009788258,5.370557,Comparison of current images with prior ones along with clinical relevance.,"The data shows activated examples prominently referencing performing radiology study comparisons across current and prior images, involving specific lung, cardiac, or mediastinal observations. Description of imaging changes or stability in a detailed manner is indicated with certain keywords like 'comparison', 'prior', and intervals pointing to previous imaging sessions combined with pressing clinical problems, including atelectasis, pneumothorax, or opacifications.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1225,latent_1225,2041,0.004082,0.005731343,6.7690015,Structured descriptions confirming lack of acute thoracic abnormalities.,"Samples with high activation levels often have the assistant providing detailed, systematic descriptions with a focus on the absence of acute findings such as effusions, pneumothorax, or significant changes, using boilerplate concluding phrases that confirm normality across various anatomical structures with phrases like 'no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax'.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.705762987012987,0.71,0.6693548387096774,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1226,latent_1226,20443,0.040886,0.025755122,4.515321,Temporal comparisons of radiological findings.,"Examples with positive activation describe changes or stability in radiological findings over time, particularly in relation to certain conditions or treatments, using temporal comparisons such as 'compared to previous', 'from earlier in the day', 'since prior', etc. These emphasize ongoing monitoring of medical conditions over time.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.515527950310559,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1227,latent_1227,26079,0.052158,0.035183907,7.8827176,Normal heart size or unchanged cardiac condition over time.,"The highest activation examples feature explicit statements indicating the heart is either normal in size or there is no significant change in heart size compared to previous examinations. This pattern often reflects stability in cardiac condition, emphasizing a lack of acute cardiac issues despite other findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.3937007874015748,0.7936507936507936,63.0,137.0
+1228,latent_1228,3345,0.00669,0.012522741,6.373332,Complex clinical context with devices or post-procedural evaluations.,"Samples exhibiting high activation involve comparisons of images for patients with complex conditions, often involving procedures, post-surgical evaluations, or devices like tubes and catheters. Details such as placement and progress of medical equipment or conditions are emphasized in these samples.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5047236895570906,0.507537688442211,0.5087719298245614,0.58,100.0,99.0
+1229,latent_1229,10516,0.021032,0.02022681,4.2263694,Use of frontal and lateral chest images for comparative evaluation.,"These examples refer to multiple types of chest images, often combining frontal and lateral views for comparison with prior images. The examination description typically involves both imaging types together to assess changes over time, indicative of thorough assessment.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5670995670995671,0.59,0.5616438356164384,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1230,latent_1230,9200,0.0184,0.013582904,4.8988247,Calcified structures in chest radiographs.,"The identified pattern in these examples is the presence of calcified structures within the chest radiograph, such as calcified nodes, calcified aortic arches, and calcified granulomas or annular structures. These calcifications are a common finding and are mentioned consistently across the high-activation entries.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6498302207130731,0.67,0.8269230769230769,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1231,latent_1231,2482,0.004964,0.010139175,7.647642,"Current findings described relative to a prior frontal image, lacking specific indication or technique clarity.","Highly activating examples ask for a description of current image findings in relation to a single previously provided prior frontal image, often with an unclear or absent specific clinical indication and technique details, while still including a comparison which may not provide full context or narrative.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4702546296296296,0.5376884422110553,0.52046783625731,0.898989898989899,99.0,100.0
+1232,latent_1232,19878,0.039756,0.019383162,4.570608,Interval change in imaging findings linked to new or resolved pathologies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve description of interval changes in imaging findings, particularly with specific references to new or resolved pathologies identified through comparison to prior images. High activation also occurs when these changes relate to common clinical questions, like pneumonia or consolidation.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5606060606060606,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1233,latent_1233,11754,0.023508,0.015270011,6.1502256,Focus on tube placement or positioning in radiology report.,"The pattern consists of findings related to line or tube placements (e.g., Dobbhoff, Swan-Ganz, NG tube), where their positions or adjustments are the primary focus of the report, alongside stability or unchanged status of other aspects, such as cardiac silhouette or pleura. These reports emphasize the placement and management of tubes/devices rather than acute disease processes.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1234,latent_1234,5889,0.011778,0.009118097,5.515504,Detailed descriptions of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Several examples detail specific anatomical features like cardiomediastinal contours, hilar regions, and thoracic silhouette using nuanced descriptive language. They focus on assessing stability across comparisons or highlighting changes in these anatomical areas in the context of cardiopulmonary evaluations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3693418777336995,0.38,0.3378378378378378,0.25,100.0,100.0
+1235,latent_1235,10675,0.02135,0.023532897,6.619524,Comparative analysis involving frontal and lateral images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve descriptions comparing both current frontal and lateral images to a prior frontal image, indicating a more comprehensive analysis across multiple perspectives. These examples demonstrate a detailed comparison process that seems important for triggering high activation levels.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.559322033898305,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1236,latent_1236,7019,0.014038,0.04878217,5.815065,Detailed comparisons to prior images highlighting changes in lung or heart conditions.,"The highly activated examples consistently include detailed descriptions of changes in lung or cardiopulmonary conditions when compared to prior images. These descriptions focus on very specific differences, such as changes in effusions, infiltrates, or medical device positions, suggesting the pattern is about noting small but precise and clinically meaningful changes.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3887485648679678,0.3888888888888889,0.3854166666666667,0.3737373737373737,99.0,99.0
+1237,latent_1237,47500,0.095,0.043332174,4.460257,Stable or changed findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples frequently mention findings that are reported in chest images in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern involves evaluating the change or stability of radiological findings based on previous examinations and reporting improvement, change, or stability in conditions such as fluid levels, vascular congestion, or atelectasis. While not all examples are highly activated, the pattern is consistent across the activated examples.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1238,latent_1238,2724,0.005448,0.0073431507,3.9012413,Comparative analysis with reference to prior reports or images and presence of support devices like tubes.,"Higher activation levels are observed when findings involve interrelationships between current and prior images along with assessment of lines or tubes. These examples frequently contain structures like 'PRIOR_REPORT' and 'PROVIDE a description', suggesting an emphasis on comparative analysis.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3724061139791477,0.38,0.4016393442622951,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1239,latent_1239,3531,0.007062,0.008982506,4.2959113,Evaluation for acute conditions with comparison to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the process of clinical evaluation for an acute condition or concern, often involving comparison with prior imaging and mention of specific clinical indications or recent symptom changes.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1240,latent_1240,18359,0.036718,0.029244274,5.123145,"Comparison of findings with prior images or reports, noting stability or change.","The descriptions emphasize comparing current image findings with previous images or reports and particularly highlight the stability or progression of identified abnormalities. These are recurring elements across examples with significant activation, indicating that the ability to assess stability or change in pathology over time, often referencing specific medical devices or conditions like pneumonia, is critical.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5305164319248826,0.57,0.5443037974683544,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1241,latent_1241,57538,0.115076,0.06915994,7.0003076,Comparison with prior images for interval changes.,"All examples with non-zero activation contain a consistent pattern of comparison between a current image and prior images to evaluate changes. This includes wording like 'compared to', 'unchanged', or explicit temporal comparison, often assessing stability or changes in specific radiological features such as disease progression or anatomical changes.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4680851063829787,0.717391304347826,92.0,108.0
+1242,latent_1242,3773,0.007546,0.016446007,5.708425,Presence or evaluation for pneumothorax.,"High activation examples consistently mention pneumothorax either explicitly as a finding or as part of an assessment or history, highlighting its significance and possible urgency in radiological evaluation.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,0.6756756756756757,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6979829576097508,0.72,0.6428571428571429,0.99,100.0,100.0
+1243,latent_1243,4953,0.009906,0.0072325175,4.8108063,Lung volume abnormalities or alterations.,"The examples with higher activation link radiological findings with specific descriptions of lung volumes such as 'hyperinflated', 'low lung volumes', or alterations due to 'body habitus'. These terms suggest a focus on the specific radiological assessment of lung volume adjustments or emphysematous conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.52,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1244,latent_1244,7696,0.015392,0.01844707,5.156248,Mention of atelectasis in comparison to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels focus on describing changes in pulmonary opacities, specifically atelectasis, over time, compared to previous imaging. These findings are often noted in radiology reports when particular lung changes are known or expected to evolve, and such a pattern is explicitly documented in the reports.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.65625,0.67,0.7833333333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1245,latent_1245,13040,0.02608,0.016726652,9.720339,"Observations of mediastinal contour, such as widening or abnormalities.","The examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions of mediastinal contours, particularly noting widening or changes that may reflect underlying conditions. This pattern involves detailed observation of the mediastinal silhouette, often associated with lymphadenopathy, vascular distension, or other mediastinal anomalies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5661296632170418,0.695,0.375,0.2941176470588235,51.0,149.0
+1246,latent_1246,3940,0.00788,0.010778486,4.861372,"Use of current frontal, current lateral, and prior frontal imaging views for comparison.","These examples consistently indicate three imaging views being used: current frontal view, current lateral view, and a prior frontal view. This suggests a pattern involving comprehensive multi-view comparisons as a standard practice, which is crucial in detecting changes over time in radiology.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4948794093974633,0.545,0.5276073619631901,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1247,latent_1247,10012,0.020024,0.016959962,5.03839,References to interval change or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of pathologies or significant observations that contrast or highlight differences when compared to previous imaging, especially when a particular condition has shown interval change or has been stable despite an expectation for progression. The reports often highlight stabilization, resolution, or interval progression of specific conditions, and the activation is higher when a notable comparison is made that suggests clinical relevance or a change in patient management.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5454545454545454,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1248,latent_1248,4724,0.009448,0.01298975,4.4209557,Comparisons to prior imaging with stable or unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activation demonstrate radiological findings described in comparison to previous studies, emphasizing stable or unchanged states or specific changes noted in serial imaging studies.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4670468779148788,0.4898989898989899,0.4912280701754385,0.28,100.0,98.0
+1249,latent_1249,12429,0.024858,0.02057125,4.5775805,Comparison of current and prior images without explicit change detection.,"The pattern of comparison between current and previous images is crucial in identifying changes over time in radiological reports. This typically involves phrases that show differences or stabilities in conditions compared to earlier images. Cases with higher activation often exhibit clear articulation of these observations, sometimes discussing specific findings such as changes in pleural effusion or heart size.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1250,latent_1250,45491,0.090982,0.042479727,3.4937217,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging with a focus on unchanged outcomes.,"These examples involve descriptions of radiological exams focusing on comparison to prior imaging studies to ascertain interval changes, particularly noting no significant change or stability of findings. Such reports are typical in follow-up interpretations where stability or lack of significant change is noted.",0.6530612244897959,0.6530612244897959,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1251,latent_1251,34885,0.06977,0.03456767,5.2379103,Changes or intervals in the positioning of medical devices in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels feature changes or intervals related to the positioning of medical devices or tubes such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or catheters. The pattern detected involves attention to positioning, retraction, placement, or stabilization of these medical apparatus compared to prior imaging.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7032478200429673,0.7035175879396985,0.7204301075268817,0.67,100.0,99.0
+1252,latent_1252,37443,0.074886,0.036395576,3.40414,Stable or unchanged anatomical findings compared to prior images.,"More representative samples refer to a stable or unchanged status in multiple anatomical aspects such as cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours, which is a common feature in radiology reports with comparison to prior images.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1253,latent_1253,3476,0.006952,0.007517746,6.004896,Comparative analysis of current versus prior radiological images.,"The pattern involves descriptions of changes or the lack thereof between current and prior radiological examinations. The changes often pertain to anatomical findings (e.g., opacities, device positioning) and are possibly indicated by terms such as 'interval', 'as compared to', 'unchanged', illustrating progression or stability of the findings.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4985754985754985,0.56,0.5352941176470588,0.91,100.0,100.0
+1254,latent_1254,11118,0.022236,0.012926862,2.795643,Description of changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples exhibit a prominent pattern of focus on the evaluation of changes or stability of findings in the context of radiological comparison with prior imaging studies. The language frequently references improvements, stability, or new findings, emphasizing the continuity or change from preceding examinations.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1255,latent_1255,11841,0.023682,0.011363671,2.4113498,Focus on changes compared to previous imaging results.,"The identified pattern emphasizes the stability or change of findings over time, focusing on any differences or confirmations of unchanged status. This reflects the relevance of checking for changes, which is a significant part of how interpretations are made in follow-up radiology studies. This pattern is supported by frequent mentions of 'unchanged', 'interval', 'compared to previous', etc.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1256,latent_1256,13416,0.026832,0.019500231,6.4147215,Unchanged or consistent findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels discuss consistency or stability of findings between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on unchanged, stable, or increased findings from previous evaluations. This pattern emphasizes evaluative continuity in medical imaging, a common practice in radiology to monitor patient conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4705882352941176,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1257,latent_1257,10669,0.021338,0.014915132,5.6253285,Interval changes compared to prior radiograph findings.,"The higher activation levels are apparent in examples where changes or interventions from prior radiograph findings are noted. Verbiage such as 'since prior exam', 'interval improvement', and 'unchanged from prior' highlights comparison to find changes or stability in findings, driving the pattern of recognizing alterations between the studies.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6680201230879236,0.675,0.6356589147286822,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1258,latent_1258,7170,0.01434,0.034118764,6.7265286,Instructions for detailed comparison to prior image alongside description of current findings.,Examples with a higher activation level are those that prompt to provide a description of the findings in the current radiology study as well as making a comparison to the prior frontal image. This indicates these examples are depicting thorough comparisons and descriptions based on both current and prior images.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4522529971062422,0.47,0.4779411764705882,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1259,latent_1259,7414,0.014828,0.013312162,6.052282,Stable or resolving non-acute findings compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation discuss findings showing interval stability or improvement without indication of acute pathology. These examples emphasize unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes, absence of acute processes, or resolution of previous abnormalities, indicating benign or non-urgent findings compared to prior studies.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1260,latent_1260,24108,0.048216,0.020627676,3.9625404,Presence of a comparison or unchanged status in imaging description.,"Despite similarities in various findings, presentations of stability or ""no change"" across examples (except when intensity is maximum) decrease activation. Descriptions often mention unchanged aspects or constructs, and higher activations include some form of reference to ""comparison"" or lack thereof.",0.5359848484848485,0.5918367346938775,0.5476190476190477,0.9583333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.5283018867924528,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1261,latent_1261,23043,0.046086,0.02074339,3.4747698,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging to assess stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally include references to changes or stability when comparing current findings against prior imaging studies, specifically noting any significant changes or unchanged areas. This highlights a pattern of monitoring progression or resolution of conditions through comparison.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1262,latent_1262,4562,0.009124,0.011146097,8.0173,"Comparison of current and prior images, noting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current and prior images, with detailed descriptions of any changes or lack thereof between the studies. This implies the pattern is related to the recognition and description of variations over time in medical imaging.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.382528596011742,0.39,0.4098360655737705,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1263,latent_1263,92458,0.184916,0.145517,6.4954886,Explicit description of interval changes in lung pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels indicate a consistent pattern of explicitly describing changes or stability in lung findings compared to prior studies, particularly when some change in pathology is identified (e.g., new consolidation, changes in opacity). This pattern involves providing a narrative of interval change to highlight diagnostic progress.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5880959736381424,0.6,0.6515151515151515,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1264,latent_1264,5561,0.011122,0.017956382,4.7069244,Comparison of frontal and lateral image views to prior images.,"These examples emphasize the provision and comparison of images, specifically the mention of multiple image types (frontal and lateral) and their comparison to prior images. This is a common reporting pattern underscoring multi-view image analysis, noted particularly when prior images are explicitly referenced in this structured format.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1265,latent_1265,5814,0.011628,0.011958588,6.61416,Use of frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the presentation of multiple views (frontal and lateral) in conjunction with prior frontal views for comparison, emphasizing the use of comprehensive imaging approaches to detail the findings.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.5212121212121212,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1266,latent_1266,4722,0.009444,0.009621018,7.502193,Comparison with previous imaging to assess stability or changes.,"The pattern observed in the highly activated examples is the use of comparative analysis between current and prior imaging findings. This is a common practice in radiology to establish stability or changes in patient condition over time, which often involves reaffirming previous findings, indicating no new issues or confirming stable conditions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1267,latent_1267,3135,0.00627,0.0071122283,4.366525,Task is to provide findings compared to prior image.,Examples with high activation involve instructions to assess changes over time or confirm stability in conditions by comparing current images with prior radiological studies. Phrases in the prompts indicating explicit tasks like 'provide a description in comparison to prior frontal image' trigger higher activations. These instructions explicitly require temporal or treatment-related comparisons. Activation relates to monitoring progression or response to interventions via imaging.,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.418546365914787,0.42,0.4272727272727272,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1268,latent_1268,8203,0.016406,0.0136500755,5.615738,Emphasis on changes in imaging findings over time.,"The examples with high activation levels often include references to changes in imaging findings over time, such as describing an increase or decrease in opacities, effusions, or other thoracic features. This suggests a pattern of focusing on progressive changes in medical imaging, as these changes are crucial in assessing patient conditions and treatment outcomes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1269,latent_1269,4042,0.008084,0.008515403,8.201251,Tasks requiring comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation scores often include instructions to describe radiology findings compared specifically to prior imaging studies. This task highlights the radiologist's role in identifying interval changes and providing comparative analyses, and these examples consistently emphasize explicit comparison tasks to previous images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4388957468297609,0.5,0.5,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1270,latent_1270,4638,0.009276,0.009312091,9.46664,Comparison using only current frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention a single current frontal image being used for comparisons with a prior image. The text explicitly states 'Given the current frontal image only', indicating no other type of view like lateral images is considered. This specific mention of 'only' reflects a focus on comparison changes from the same view.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5017958521608157,0.57,0.3571428571428571,0.2857142857142857,70.0,130.0
+1271,latent_1271,5500,0.011,0.013805518,5.5883684,Involves comparison of current and prior imaging studies for specific evaluations.,"The pattern observed with high activation levels involves current and prior imaging for comparison, especially when there's a specific reason to evaluate possible changes, indicating the importance of comparison to assess for stability, progression, or resolution of observed conditions.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1272,latent_1272,1332,0.002664,0.0030482053,9.76428,Normal heart size and mediastinal contours in context of no acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities.,"The examples with high activation consistently describe normal heart size, as well as normal mediastinal and hilar contours, often alongside other minor findings, but predominantly without significant acute abnormal findings. These examples frequently highlight stability, unchanged findings, or lack of acute progression in the context of comparison to prior images, maintaining normal cardiac dimensions and structures as a key focus.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.749599358974359,0.75,0.7244897959183674,0.7553191489361702,94.0,106.0
+1273,latent_1273,3661,0.007322,0.008660728,4.8981733,Detection of interval changes or stability using comparison with previous imaging.,"The examples that activate the model exhibit consistent comparisons between current radiographic findings and previous imaging, focusing on specific differences or observations over time, particularly changes in conditions such as pneumothorax or pulmonary edema.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1274,latent_1274,34793,0.069586,0.029612843,2.548828,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging to identify changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to changes or comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing a detailed narrative of ""interval"" or ""stable"" findings such as ""unchanged"", ""resolved"", ""increased"", or ""newly appeared/decreased"". These descriptions highlight the importance of change analysis in radiological interpretations.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5849782366636299,0.59,0.5737704918032787,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1275,latent_1275,21275,0.04255,0.023353145,5.885976,Low lung volumes noted in radiology evaluations.,Many examples describe findings of low lung volumes or low inspiratory effort. Radiology reports often mention low lung volumes when evaluating images as it can impact the ability to visualize lung pathology and is a common descriptor during imaging analysis.,0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7431259993184975,0.755,0.75,0.6352941176470588,85.0,115.0
+1276,latent_1276,2338,0.004676,0.0069221784,6.710338,Longitudinal comparison with emphasis on stability or unchanged findings.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve references to specific prior patterns of pathology or comparisons with previous imaging, indicating stability or lack of significant change in findings such as lesions, opacities, atelectasis, or line placements. The reports emphasize continuity in findings over time, showing a clear pattern of longitudinal comparison.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.2857142857142857,0.16,100.0,100.0
+1277,latent_1277,5779,0.011558,0.017542414,6.979566,"Detailed findings on current imaging, comparing with prior studies.","Examples with higher activation levels primarily focus on diagnostic descriptions of findings in current chest radiographs. These examples include specific instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior imaging when an image is presented. These often suggest stability or progression of findings, chronicity, or changes indicative of disease stability or development.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5078125,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1278,latent_1278,5197,0.010394,0.014475004,4.643047,Lack of prior image comparison availability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize the absence or inability to conduct a comparison with prior images, using phrases such as 'no comparison available' or 'without comparison'. This lack of comparative data is noteworthy.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5069275889967637,0.507537688442211,0.5094339622641509,0.54,100.0,99.0
+1279,latent_1279,33622,0.067244,0.038494676,5.3881736,Stable findings or minor changes in chest radiographs compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels have comparisons indicating stability or minor changes in findings over time, such as stable cardiomediastinal contour, slight changes in effusions, or resolution of previous findings. This suggests the pattern focuses on noting stability or minor variance in chest findings when compared to prior imaging, often indicating non-progression or improvement of prior anomalies.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1280,latent_1280,2921,0.005842,0.012886159,10.210075,High activation corresponds to presence of detailed prior report history.,"Examples with high activation mention historical conditions from prior reporting (e.g., pneumonia, intubation, or specific medical conditions) which guides the interpretation of current findings. These have structured prior report segments with historical context that enhance the understanding of the patient's current state based on previous known conditions.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1281,latent_1281,15300,0.0306,0.031289693,4.481515,"Comparison of findings with prior images, noting interval changes.","Examples with activations above zero consistently describe comparisons with prior images, detailing findings such as change in opacities or presence of medical devices. These comparisons highlight important interval changes or stability in medical conditions, demonstrating the model's focus on these longitudinal assessments.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1282,latent_1282,8238,0.016476,0.012370569,4.687261,Low lung volumes causing accentuated bronchovascular markings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in connection to low lung volumes, which cause accentuation of bronchovascular markings or other effects on imaging. This is highlighted in various forms like 'low lung volumes leading to crowding', 'lung volumes are low', or 'accentuate the bronchovascular markings'.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4744948808553049,0.565,0.8823529411764706,0.15,100.0,100.0
+1283,latent_1283,3653,0.007306,0.006384713,4.0969768,Comparison of current study with prior imaging results.,"The examples with high activation involve observations of radiological changes over time, specifically comparing current imaging findings with those noted in previously mentioned 'prior' images. The pattern prominently features comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, alongside phrases like 'compared to prior,' often indicating changes in symptoms or conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1284,latent_1284,5872,0.011744,0.013963313,4.051719,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,Examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging findings. This pattern indicates the model heavily associates detailed interval change analysis with the sought pattern.,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5051546391752577,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1285,latent_1285,6407,0.012814,0.016940217,4.3013926,"Cardiomediastinal and hilar contour stability, often compared to past imaging.","This data showcases descriptions requiring comparison to past imaging, focusing largely on cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, or the size of the heart and mediastinal structures, as well as pleural or lung field changes.",0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1286,latent_1286,13481,0.026962,0.020025706,5.101366,Interval change or stability assessment between imaging studies.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently describe detailed comparisons of current findings with prior imaging studies. This suggests a particular focus on the concept of interval change or stability over time, requiring the comparison of sequential imaging results.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1287,latent_1287,6521,0.013042,0.020334173,6.653135,Inclusion of both PA and lateral views in chest radiograph descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention both PA and lateral views of the chest radiographs. This pattern indicates a preference or focus on the interpretation of radiographs that include multiple view perspectives, which can provide more comprehensive evaluations.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5733854180051914,0.585,0.5639097744360902,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1288,latent_1288,7662,0.015324,0.009102665,3.0209486,Chest findings in frontal and lateral views compared to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings from multiple views of the chest (frontal and lateral) and compare these to prior images, suggesting that the key pattern is the combined use of multiple views alongside previous comparisons in radiological assessments.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1289,latent_1289,3616,0.007232,0.006491173,3.898932,Focus on positioning and condition of devices or anatomical changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels all emphasize the evaluation of findings regarding the positioning or condition of medical devices or anatomical changes between current and prior studies, frequently discussing devices like tubes within patients, or describing interval changes in pulmonary or other thoracic conditions, which likely affects the activation metric.",0.5775862068965517,0.5918367346938775,0.5588235294117647,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1290,latent_1290,11836,0.023672,0.016589858,4.9600616,Comparison to previous studies with focus on intervention-related changes.,"This pattern involves radiology reports that make a comparison to previous studies alongside descriptions of intervention-related changes, such as tube positioning or extubation, in recent imaging. Both the reference to prior imaging for comparison and the presence of procedural changes or device positions together characterize this pattern.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.6,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1291,latent_1291,3703,0.007406,0.011437586,3.814877,Analysis of current image with absent indication or prior comparison information.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently prompt the assistant to provide descriptions based solely on current images and provide a comparison, but they explicitly mention the absence of indications, techniques, or prior comparison reports. These examples are focused on extracting detailed image analyses without supplemental historical context.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1292,latent_1292,86760,0.17352,0.09949731,4.866367,Noting interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"This dataset represents situations where diagnostic reports involve a comparison of the current images with prior ones. Despite having the temptation to default to comparisons, the distinguishing factor here is whether significant changes are noted between the current and the previous images, indicated by specific language about changes.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6067315304272325,0.615,0.5891472868217055,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1293,latent_1293,26585,0.05317,0.023194592,3.3725448,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels (e.g., 5.0) predominantly focus on providing a detailed comparison of current imaging findings against prior reports, emphasizing changes or stability in observed pathologies. This thematic pattern suggests that the model is focused on detecting reports that compare current imaging with previous studies, highlighting any stability or change rather than simply listing findings.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.5739130434782609,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1294,latent_1294,5045,0.01009,0.016901478,6.8531666,Focus on comparison of radiological images with emphasis on device positioning.,"The examples with high activations describe radiology findings in relation to differences observed between current and prior images, and often reference technical medical equipment like endotracheal tubes or other devices that are compared for positioning or changes. Low activation examples describe findings that do not emphasize tube placements or adjustments, even with comparative elements listed.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6940745755911633,0.695,0.6756756756756757,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1295,latent_1295,4937,0.009874,0.008011524,4.9069314,Explicit comparison between current and prior radiology images.,"The pattern involves descriptions where the report explicitly contrasts findings between current and prior radiology images to evaluate for changes, stability, or progression of medical conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4104124408384043,0.455,0.4709677419354838,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1296,latent_1296,4390,0.00878,0.011337175,4.808477,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette across imaging comparisons.,"These examples consistently feature language indicating a stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac contours while identifying other systemic changes or device placements. They involve comparisons with previous imaging to assess changes over time, often noting stability or mild changes in cardiomediastinal aspects.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6199741582427605,0.625,0.6623376623376623,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1297,latent_1297,10209,0.020418,0.012089465,4.71417,Focus on detailed assessment of findings beyond noting stability in image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve evaluation of radiological findings where a focal element is directly assessed (e.g., pleural thickening, residuals after surgery) despite the instruction to compare images, leading to more subjective analysis. The pattern captures detailed examination when the comparison is possible, specifically focusing on detailed assessment rather than simply noting stability.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,100.0
+1298,latent_1298,4300,0.0086,0.0095019275,4.3427057,Descriptions concluding with normal radiological findings.,"The highly activated examples have detailed descriptions that conclude with normal statements like ""The lungs are clear,"" ""No acute process,"" or ""The cardiac silhouette is normal."" These phrases denote normal radiological findings despite the specific techniques, comparisons, or clinical history stated.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1299,latent_1299,4542,0.009084,0.007842107,4.4985213,Presence of altered mental status or similar symptoms in radiology reports.,"Higher activations are associated with the presence of descriptions concerning patients with altered mental status or similar neurological/psychological symptoms in the context of radiological comparisons. This includes any indications or discussion related to altered mental states, suggesting a pattern focusing on neurological conditions alongside radiological findings.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4554512802687985,0.53,0.6153846153846154,0.16,100.0,100.0
+1300,latent_1300,8708,0.017416,0.011865368,4.8586493,Analysis of interval changes and findings compared to prior images.,"The examples demonstrate varied imaging techniques and indications, but the activation levels are higher for scenarios involving description of findings in comparison to prior frontal images. This suggests a focus on the analysis of interval changes and the status of conditions in comparison to past imaging studies.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1301,latent_1301,6464,0.012928,0.027757714,4.09818,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1302,latent_1302,11798,0.023596,0.018734047,4.102358,References to interval changes and specific time comparisons in radiology studies.,"Instances that referred to intervals of time between current and previous imaging, often indicating stability or change, were highly activated. This suggests a pattern involving time comparison and interval changes are processed effectively. Examples with precise time intervals (e.g., ""1 day earlier"") had higher activation.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.5277777777777778,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1303,latent_1303,16261,0.032522,0.016334012,3.368621,Evaluated radiology findings relevant to potential pneumonia changes vs prior imaging.,"The activation levels are primarily higher in examples where clinical notes specifically reference pneumonia or compare new imaging findings against prior studies, with either new or changing pulmonary opacities indicative of potential infection or other lung pathology. The pattern involves integrating patient history and comparison findings that suggest changes relevant to pneumonia diagnosis.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5421686746987951,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1304,latent_1304,4940,0.00988,0.0064520687,3.8027728,Detailed assessment of changes or stability using serial imaging comparisons.,"The high activation examples refer to findings in radiology reports that involve multiple imaging studies or comparisons to assess stability or changes in identified features. These reports often contain specific assessments over time, noting consistent or resolving features.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6410424934907354,0.645,0.6198347107438017,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1305,latent_1305,17453,0.034906,0.018506173,6.9414787,Use of comparison to prior imaging results for evaluating changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention prior imaging studies for comparison, emphasizing changes or stability in findings over time, giving a comparative analysis context.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4031946638581709,0.405,0.304635761589404,0.7666666666666667,60.0,140.0
+1306,latent_1306,19758,0.039516,0.021431638,6.1472363,"Indeterminate, unchanged, or no prior study for comparison.","Examples frequently reference indeterminate findings where further investigation is needed due to absence of definitive assessment, a lack of previous imaging for comparison, or unchanged pathology, emphasizing caution often observed in radiological interpretations.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3140842002982024,0.47,0.3622047244094488,0.6571428571428571,70.0,130.0
+1307,latent_1307,7902,0.015804,0.015603565,5.387903,Explicit reference to 'PRIOR_REPORT' or previous exam findings.,"The examples with high activation levels explicitly reference a 'PRIOR_REPORT' or findings from previous examinations to compare with current imaging, indicating that the model is focused on evaluations that involve comparisons with past reports or findings to track changes or stability over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1308,latent_1308,7107,0.014214,0.00829568,3.0597816,Comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The high activation level examples emphasize comparisons to prior imaging reports, highlighting changes or stability over time. Terms like 'comparison', 'prior image', and instructions to describe findings compared to previous images are central.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1309,latent_1309,2573,0.005146,0.008751391,5.833933,Assess interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently focus on analyzing changes between current and prior images across various indications. Importantly, they involve evaluating specific changes rather than general findings, such as 'new pathology' or 'interval change'. This suggests a focus on identifying modifications and assessing interval changes to determine alterations.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1310,latent_1310,4340,0.00868,0.010167239,10.451403,Focus on assessing interval changes in clinical or technical findings.,"The high activation levels are associated with examples that imply an evaluation or assessment of interval changes, focusing on shifts in clinical status or intervention outcomes (like tube placement). These examples often use language indicating a need to ""assess for interval change,"" look for improvements or deteriorations, or check technical placements between current and previous imaging studies, indicating a focus on comparisons that affect treatment or diagnosis plays a key role in determining the observed pattern.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1311,latent_1311,5594,0.011188,0.008713721,3.9052262,Use of comparative analysis with prior images in radiology reports.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels focus on the inclusion of current and prior images for comparison in radiology descriptions. This aligns with radiology practices where findings are often contextualized by evaluating changes from previous studies, indicated by phrases like 'in comparison with' or 'compared to prior study'.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4874827518233786,0.545,0.5269461077844312,0.88,100.0,100.0
+1312,latent_1312,15394,0.030788,0.013076864,2.4413984,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing changes in lung or device positions.","Activation is higher when there is thorough consideration of change in the lungs and mediastinal structures between current and prior imaging, with emphasis on notable alterations such as lung abnormalities or changes in the position of medical devices. This pattern is evident in the structure of the reports which start with historical context and are compared against previous images or findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5075252525252525,0.507537688442211,0.5102040816326531,0.5,100.0,99.0
+1313,latent_1313,12952,0.025904,0.020847049,5.7223377,Borderline or mild enlargement of the heart silhouette.,"The pattern relates to the presence of either borderline or mildly enlarged heart silhouettes. Reports mention heart enlargement directly or indirectly by describing the cardiac silhouette as 'mildly enlarged', 'top normal' or other similar terms, which is a common observation in radiology when assessing potential cardiomegaly without significant change between studies.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6063455362877328,0.6130653266331658,0.6575342465753424,0.48,100.0,99.0
+1314,latent_1314,5886,0.011772,0.007904063,3.865167,Findings compared to prior imaging emphasize observed changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples repeatedly reference findings in current imaging that are different from or evaluated against previous imaging results, indicating changes or stability in the pathologies observed. The pattern indicates that significant changes (such as resolving pneumonia, stable nodules, or decreasing pneumothorax) affecting patient management are highlighted in the reports.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5188679245283019,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1315,latent_1315,3115,0.00623,0.0101297805,5.4145937,Descriptive analysis of changes in findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention or describe changes in the extent or severity of specific findings when compared to prior studies. Words such as 'increased', 'decreased', 'unchanged', or specific areas of improvement or worsening are frequently highlighted. These examples emphasize the analysis of interval changes in findings over time.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1316,latent_1316,20423,0.040846,0.023020146,2.643874,Request for comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples show higher activation when there is a request for comparison against prior imaging studies, indicating a linguistic pattern where the radiology text demands evaluation in the context of changes since a previous study.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4536082474226804,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1317,latent_1317,4679,0.009358,0.008662313,5.25179,Focus on interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The samples with high activation consistently emphasize changes or comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, often indicating stability, improvement, or new developments in observed findings. This analysis of interval change is a typical feature of radiological assessments of progression or stability of pathologies.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6199741582427605,0.625,0.6016260162601627,0.74,100.0,100.0
+1318,latent_1318,3722,0.007444,0.012004635,4.5119553,Comparison with prior imaging for progression assessment.,"The examples exhibiting high activation frequently involve evaluating new findings against prior images, particularly where the current examination context is influenced by assessment for disease progression or stability, with comparison explicitly noted.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4696969696969697,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1319,latent_1319,39891,0.079782,0.041558422,5.547811,Detailed comparison focusing on unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"These examples focus on cases where findings are described in relation to their state compared to prior imaging studies, specifically the identification of stability or change in findings. Activation is high when descriptions emphasize unchanged findings, even in the presence of potential or previous anomalies.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7229986653572058,0.725,0.6923076923076923,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1320,latent_1320,2661,0.005322,0.0065734526,5.450069,Evaluation involving both current frontal and lateral images with prior comparison.,"Examples exhibit a pattern wherein multiple chest radiographs, both frontal and lateral, are provided for evaluation alongside prior studies. This setup is commonly used for detailed examination and comparison over time, often mentioned in radiology reports when assessing changes, device placement, or confirming stable conditions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1321,latent_1321,4952,0.009904,0.010329078,3.4064794,Comparison of cardiopulmonary and pleural changes against prior images.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve comparing current and prior images to identify any changes or stability in specific cardiopulmonary, pleural, or hilar contours in chest radiographs. Meanwhile, other examples lack substantial changes or are repetitive checks.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4677419354838709,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1322,latent_1322,4722,0.009444,0.013840672,12.06895,Emphasis on unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples emphasize stability or lack of significant interval change in findings across multiple imaging studies, focusing on the inclusion of comparisons with previous images and highlighting unchanged findings or devices like NG tubes or AICD.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.3780487804878049,0.382716049382716,81.0,119.0
+1323,latent_1323,4779,0.009558,0.008126417,4.962633,Explicit comparative assessments with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently emphasize the comparison details between current and previous imaging studies. These examples outline specific changes or lack thereof, using precise comparative language such as 'unchanged', 'interval change', or specific instructions or findings related to the comparison, such as device positions, fluid collections, or tube placements.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1324,latent_1324,125263,0.250526,0.17502193,6.007408,Descriptions of interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve reports discussing changes in findings or status by comparing them with prior images, capturing the same pattern as before. Lower activation examples do not emphasize comparative analysis with prior imaging.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6888799678843838,0.69,0.6696428571428571,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1325,latent_1325,30096,0.060192,0.11114402,5.586383,Use of comparison to prior imaging to evaluate heart conditions and other significant changes.,"The examples with higher activation scores frequently involve descriptions of conditions with significant findings, such as cardiomegaly or heart-related changes, and explicitly require comparison with prior imaging studies, even though not all examples have prior comparisons available. Comparison details are integral to understanding the stability or progression of findings, which increases activation.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4852404138770542,0.4874371859296482,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,99.0
+1326,latent_1326,5408,0.010816,0.008524986,2.9780433,Focus on explicit comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on phrases related to providing or requesting explicit comparison between current and prior images, inherent to radiological assessments to determine changes over time or stability. These instructions specify the process of evaluating or generating findings based on comparisons, showing a defined workflow or task focus.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4233343630933992,0.44,0.4552238805970149,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1327,latent_1327,13853,0.027706,0.019029817,10.038177,Bilateral pleural effusions present in imaging.,"The model exhibits consistent activation with examples where bilateral pleural effusions, particularly moderate to large in size, are identified. This pattern suggests that the presence of pleural effusions, especially when both sides are involved, aligns with the activations measured as significant, while other chest findings are often secondary.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.5211128425373418,0.685,0.4761904761904761,0.1612903225806451,62.0,138.0
+1328,latent_1328,5408,0.010816,0.011084329,5.087802,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1329,latent_1329,10885,0.02177,0.0117160315,3.7615252,"Model focuses on detecting notable pneumonia, effusion, or consolidation in images.","Examples with higher activation levels feature notable findings consistent with pneumonia, effusions, or consolidation, reinforcing the primary hypothesis or core interest of the model processing radiological comparisons with anomalies present. In contrast, examples yielding low activation lack notable abnormalities or represent stable conditions, which are less compelling to the model's focus.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5227272727272727,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1330,latent_1330,5416,0.010832,0.010115578,5.227601,Finding evaluations using both frontal and lateral chest views with prior comparison.,"These examples frequently refer to findings involving both frontal and lateral chest views in conjunction with prior comparisons, emphasizing comprehensive evaluations of the thorax, often in the context of post-surgical reviews or specific device placements.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4298544362874946,0.435,0.419753086419753,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1331,latent_1331,13625,0.02725,0.017927155,6.1545177,Presence of pneumonic opacity or atelectasis in images.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently refer to findings of pneumonic opacities or atelectasis. These terms indicate changes in lung tissue often associated with pneumonia or similar conditions, as opposed to normal findings which are generally disregarded.",0.4820295983086681,0.4897959183673469,0.4736842105263157,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4233389896880303,0.4422110552763819,0.4126984126984127,0.26,100.0,99.0
+1332,latent_1332,7051,0.014102,0.013340002,3.7650735,Detailed descriptions of current and prior imaging around technical criteria.,Examples with high activation levels often reference the deliberate examination of imaging techniques and prior comparisons as part of the description. Specific pattern includes technical terminology and format indicating a comparison to previous images and descriptions of the findings in terms of technical criteria.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4120958751393534,0.4673366834170854,0.48125,0.77,100.0,99.0
+1333,latent_1333,6673,0.013346,0.020501558,4.698947,Comparison of current imaging to prior with a focus on stable findings and/or medical device assessment.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings from both current and prior images, with a focus on detecting changes or inconsistencies without focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. They involve verifying the condition of a central medical device or unexpected changes, which might be fall risk mitigation or routine monitoring for known stable conditions.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4086716105526989,0.4221105527638191,0.391304347826087,0.27,100.0,99.0
+1334,latent_1334,6318,0.012636,0.016448168,5.4588895,In-depth and structured comparison of current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently emphasize detailed comparison over time, typically involving historical imaging data for identifying stability or changes in pathological findings. They include comprehensive examinations of progression or resolution of findings.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3607759819915522,0.3618090452261306,0.3516483516483517,0.32,100.0,99.0
+1335,latent_1335,4088,0.008176,0.018613828,6.414342,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve an explicit comparison between the current and prior imaging results, often using verbiage like 'compared to the previous study' or describing changes over time. This is evident regardless of the type of findings (e.g., cardiomegaly, pacemaker placement).",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1336,latent_1336,11796,0.023592,0.020051636,6.390283,Aortic tortuosity or calcification identified in chest imaging.,"The highly activated examples mention the presence of tortuosity or calcification of the aorta, along with other potential indicators such as aortic knob calcification. These specific findings appear to trigger significant activation in the model's responses.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.859775641025641,0.86,0.8913043478260869,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1337,latent_1337,7352,0.014704,0.0135117555,5.369953,Reports focus on stability or interval change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions involving interval changes, stability, or the absence of new findings as part of a comparison with prior imaging. Terms like 'unchanged', 'resolved', 'interval decrease', or 'no new' indicate this pattern, focusing on stability or resolution of findings over time.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5703324808184143,0.58,0.5615384615384615,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1338,latent_1338,5050,0.0101,0.011602819,5.838787,Blunting of costophrenic angles suggesting mild pleural effusion.,"High activation cases frequently involve detailed descriptions of mild pleural effusions, indicated by 'blunting of costophrenic angles' or similar terminology. This pattern stands out as a specific radiological finding that is not typically highlighted in low activation examples, indicating its role in characterizing the observed activation.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.532750713853076,0.595,0.8518518518518519,0.23,100.0,100.0
+1339,latent_1339,3802,0.007604,0.0073312814,4.8490534,Comparative analysis using both frontal and lateral X-ray views.,"Examples scoring higher in activation consistently describe radiology findings, including changes or comparisons, alongside a prompt structure of direct evaluation of multiple images (frontal and lateral). This setup requires correlating prior imaging to assess ongoing changes or stability, a common practice in monitoring disease progression or response to treatment.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4836691086691086,0.4874371859296482,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,99.0
+1340,latent_1340,10362,0.020724,0.015157811,4.1983438,Normal or stable cardiac silhouette in radiology descriptions.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently discuss the status of the cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac silhouette, often noting its normality or stability in comparison to previous imaging, even with other chest findings. Examples with low activation levels either highlight significant changes or don't emphasize cardiac silhouette status.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6598811254814928,0.6633165829145728,0.6386554621848739,0.76,100.0,99.0
+1341,latent_1341,14955,0.02991,0.03684526,6.0904975,Use of prior imaging for comparing findings.,"The examples describe providing radiological findings in context where there are both current and prior images available for comparison. When no prior images are used for comparison, the activation drops, implying the model recognizes the importance of comparison to prior images in identifying patterns.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4466145833333333,0.49,0.4935897435897436,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1342,latent_1342,36043,0.072086,0.046123553,6.3608127,"Comparisons with prior images, focusing on stability or normal findings.","High activation levels correspond to texts that provide detailed observations for multiple views and compare them directly to prior imaging, specifically mentioning findings such as unchanged heart size or other stable features, suggesting familiarity or normality despite complex conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1343,latent_1343,3708,0.007416,0.0072499868,5.140408,Focus on stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels mention changes between current and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on stable or unchanged findings when compared to previous radiological exams. This often involves a direct comparison which is conveyed with phrases like 'compared to', 'unchanged', or 'stable' which implies no new findings or progression.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4500105351875264,0.4619289340101523,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,97.0
+1344,latent_1344,23070,0.04614,0.027823694,5.652201,Request for description across current frontal and lateral images without prior comparison.,"The pattern indicates that the task explicitly requires a description of findings across different image views, particularly the current frontal and lateral chest images, without prior comparison available. High activations correspond to the need to compare these views without reference to older images.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4642857142857143,0.55,0.75,0.15,100.0,100.0
+1345,latent_1345,17338,0.034676,0.018603096,3.8971004,Comparative analysis with previous imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations make explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, either by referencing past dates, previous findings or maintaining similar comparative frameworks, while discussing changes or lack thereof in the current study's findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4873067063590507,0.535,0.5217391304347826,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1346,latent_1346,9685,0.01937,0.019048054,5.089172,Frequent comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The examples frequently include specific prior imaging examinations to which the current findings are compared. This pattern is consistent with radiology reports that involve longitudinal tracking of conditions, where changes over time are assessed against baselines or previous studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1347,latent_1347,4180,0.00836,0.006718728,2.5290475,Analysis involves comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe imaging findings in relation to prior images, as indicated by phrases like 'compared to the prior frontal image'. These examples often include directives to compare or note changes between images, which shows a specific pattern of analyzing radiological data over time.",0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1348,latent_1348,4396,0.008792,0.016194496,5.2620406,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings with noted changes.,"These examples feature reports with the comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, specifically noting changes (or lack of changes) between the current and previous images. This consistent reference to prior imaging matches a standard analytical approach in radiology reports related to assessing findings over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.4625,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1349,latent_1349,3324,0.006648,0.0036955774,3.2269,Descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging in chest radiographs.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve providing descriptions of findings based on specific comparisons to prior imaging, especially when detailing changes or consistency in pathological findings or device placement. Use communication cues like 'compared to prior','unchanged from', or specific pathology noted against previous data.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5203252032520326,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1350,latent_1350,4159,0.008318,0.011985746,8.839166,Comparisons to prior images noting stability or changes in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention an explicit comparison to a prior study, focusing on changes or stability in conditions such as device placement or lesion sizes. Radiology reports often highlight the importance of observing these changes over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5653697683868346,0.5678391959798995,0.5565217391304348,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+1351,latent_1351,8135,0.01627,0.009630028,3.6308885,Stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal or heart size compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels are linked to descriptions that involve a stable or unchanged cardiac silhouette or other structures (e.g., heart size), suggesting a focus on stable cardiac and mediastinal contours when compared to prior imagery.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5405405405405406,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1352,latent_1352,15614,0.031228,0.014965704,3.6413448,"Emphasis on comparisons with prior imaging, highlighting stability or changes over time.","Activations are highest when reports focus specifically on comparisons between current and prior imaging, especially when changes or stability between the images are noted. Reports which describe unchanged, stable, similar, or unchanged from a prior study are associated with high activations.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1353,latent_1353,14043,0.028086,0.03676487,5.0735974,Focus on findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation share a pattern of explicitly mentioning comparison to prior imaging studies, even when the specific details of the previous study are not provided. This involves distinctly mentioning a prior study in the description or impression of the current findings, which indicates a focus on detecting changes or assessing stability over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1354,latent_1354,3764,0.007528,0.013798557,6.9493475,Presence of garbled or truncated text.,"In the examples with high activation levels, there are missing and garbled elements in the text, with unclear information that disrupts comprehension. These cases demonstrate that garbled text with clear signs of truncated or misplaced text elements, which is absent in the low activation examples, is highly representative of the activation pattern.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,100.0,100.0
+1355,latent_1355,2359,0.004718,0.00555848,4.797621,Descriptions requiring comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically include instructions to compare recently acquired images against prior images, with the expectation to provide findings based on these comparisons. This suggests that the pattern seeks articulation of changes or stability in medical imaging findings over time, using comparison data from prior reports explicitly recorded or implicit in the given text.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3882816032341286,0.425,0.4496644295302013,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1356,latent_1356,20790,0.04158,0.022864703,4.3941517,Normal cardiac silhouette with prior image comparison.,"These examples show radiological reports indicating a normal cardiac silhouette with no remarkable changes compared to prior images. Despite being part of more comprehensive examinations, the indication of normal heart size or ""normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours"" recurs in various contexts without significant abnormalities.",0.595393307257714,0.6122448979591837,0.6666666666666666,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.6233915681556648,0.64,0.7413793103448276,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1357,latent_1357,6922,0.013844,0.013211799,5.6644382,Comparison with previous images indicating resolution or change in condition.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally contain the presence of comparative analysis with previous imaging or depict stable vs unstable findings over time. They describe technical adjustments or specific anatomical detail changes between the current and prior images. Additionally, findings like ""resolving"" or ""subtle opacities"" suggest patients' recovery or monitoring progress, which appears to be part of the pattern.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4235294117647059,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1358,latent_1358,4277,0.008554,0.0075670234,5.153784,Comparison and analysis with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation explicitly mention a comparison with a prior image and provide an analysis or detailed findings in relation to previous imaging. This indicates the pattern focuses on comparative analysis between current and previous radiological studies, likely valued for tracking progression or stability over time in medical evaluations.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1359,latent_1359,4955,0.00991,0.011242886,6.5125523,Structured task to provide comparative findings between current and prior images with AI feedback loop.,"The high activation level examples typically include detailed instructions on comparing findings with prior images, using imperative language that directs the assistant to explain variations in observations, and often feature explicit requests for an assistant feedback loop. This suggests the pattern involves a detailed comparative task with structured radiological input that prompts an AI explanation or correlation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1360,latent_1360,6076,0.012152,0.013652689,6.8342314,High technical detail and multiple comparison points in radiology descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation include descriptions of specific radiographic techniques used and mention of multiple comparison points in the radiological evaluation, showing a more detailed and technical approach to comparing current and prior images.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4332421964000911,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.83,100.0,99.0
+1361,latent_1361,14717,0.029434,0.01494489,7.5090046,Mentions of interval change or comparison to prior imaging studies requested or described.,"High activation levels correspond to examples where comparison with prior imaging is explicitly included or requested in the prompt, which often requires descriptions of interval changes, stability, or direct comparison to prior reports.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3939393939393939,0.4,0.3012048192771084,0.925925925925926,54.0,146.0
+1362,latent_1362,4941,0.009882,0.011797925,6.3439727,Descriptions of changes in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Prompts that include a detailed description of changes between current and prior imaging studies, often mentioning specific alterations like interval improvement, persistence, or resolution in radiological findings, show higher activation levels. These comparisons to prior studies are utilized to assess patient progress over time, particularly in assessing chronic conditions or post-treatment status.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1363,latent_1363,38203,0.076406,0.033359725,3.4165096,Identification of new or changed findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently identify new or changed findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. The key pattern is the identification of a change in radiological findings, such as new pulmonary nodules or opacities, indicating potential progression or new pathology.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.6266666666666667,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1364,latent_1364,15870,0.03174,0.014827018,4.468376,Comparison to prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"I noticed that all examples with non-zero activation levels include a comparison to prior imaging, indicating any changes or stability in the findings. This pattern appears to trigger activation because it provides context for current findings based on historical data, drawing attention to changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5538956323270048,0.57,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1365,latent_1365,5924,0.011848,0.01711733,6.072494,Comparative assessment with prior imaging for stability or interval change.,"These examples demonstrate detailed comparison between current and prior radiographs, focusing on identifying stability or change, often used in evaluating chronic conditions or persistent findings. Terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no change', and comparison dates highlight this comparative assessment.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4125585456854806,0.445,0.4625850340136054,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1366,latent_1366,17559,0.035118,0.02372963,7.2882767,Highlighting unchanged/stable findings or lesions in comparison to prior images.,"The examples receiving high activations are those where the radiology report findings highlight a change or stability in specific anatomical or procedural elements from the prior imaging to the current one. This includes stability of known lesions, unchanged positions of medical devices, or resolution/continuation of specific conditions. This pattern recognizes the importance of noting such continuities or changes across imaging studies.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3750798381945923,0.4070351758793969,0.2950819672131147,0.1935483870967742,93.0,106.0
+1367,latent_1367,47983,0.095966,0.06814809,7.199091,Combination of current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal image.,"The examples with higher activation levels point to the presence of images for both the current frontal and lateral views along with the request for comparison to a prior frontal view. This involves a comprehensive analysis with multiple perspectives (frontal, lateral) to compare against past images, facilitating detailed comparison over time.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1368,latent_1368,7185,0.01437,0.012606638,5.6514974,Presence of pacemaker/cardiomediastinal silhouette comparison with prior imaging.,Patterns with higher activations consistently include the presence of a biventricular pacemaker or a description of the cardiomediastinal silhouette. Comparing these factors against previous imaging also aligns with the examples. This confirms that the model has learned to recognize reports that detail pacemaker positioning or cardiomediastinal silhouettes and compare them against earlier data as part of its training.,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1369,latent_1369,4572,0.009144,0.01473251,5.664179,Comparison with prior images shows unchanged or resolved findings in heart and mediastinal appearance.,"The examples exhibit examination findings compared to prior imaging studies with an emphasis on unchanged or normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, along with comparisons indicating either stable, unchanged findings or resolution of earlier issues. These often pertain to queries about potential consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax or other acute processes.",0.2753623188405797,0.38,0.0,0.0,25.0,25.0,0.3776613167376351,0.43,0.3333333333333333,0.14,100.0,100.0
+1370,latent_1370,12777,0.025554,0.021981318,4.096576,Comparison of imaging findings with previous examinations.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions comparing current imaging findings to prior examinations. The pattern hinges on assessing any changes or stability over time, often with explicit mentions of ""prior"", ""previous"", ""comparison"", and related terms to contextualize findings.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5011724751354412,0.5326633165829145,0.52,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+1371,latent_1371,15955,0.03191,0.01490255,5.451959,Emphasis on comparative changes or stability in chest radiographs.,"Examples with higher activations feature detailed descriptions of changes or stability in specific areas (heart size, pleural effusions, tubes, pathologies) when compared to prior images. This pattern highlights the focus on comparative assessment to identify progression, regression, or stabilization, often related to ongoing conditions like pleural effusions or changes in heart size.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4486974202567035,0.4522613065326633,0.3557046979865771,0.803030303030303,66.0,133.0
+1372,latent_1372,4142,0.008284,0.008322069,6.1469946,Descriptions comparing findings with prior imaging or studies.,"The examples with higher activation consistently have a section to compare current imaging findings to previous or other imaging studies, highlighting interval changes or stability in medical conditions. This type of comparison for interval changes in reports is a common practice in medical imaging to document progress or change in patient's condition.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1373,latent_1373,25389,0.050778,0.03394716,8.400825,Detection of interval changes or lack thereof between current and prior studies.,Examples with higher activation levels explicitly mention the comparison between current and prior imaging studies to assess changes. This is a crucial aspect of radiological evaluations where detecting interval changes plays a significant role.,0.8357963875205254,0.84,0.7575757575757576,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.3467741935483871,0.8269230769230769,52.0,148.0
+1374,latent_1374,3349,0.006698,0.0102357045,6.6019087,Presence of atelectasis in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention the presence of 'atelectasis', which refers to the partial collapse of lung tissue, often found in chest imaging reports. These samples consistently identify this feature, regardless of its severity or location, indicating a pattern highly representative of this specific finding in imaging reports.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8787878787878788,0.88,0.8166666666666667,0.98,100.0,100.0
+1375,latent_1375,15965,0.03193,0.023599,6.464253,Reports focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve clear distinctions between current and prior imaging findings, specifically indicating interval changes or stability in certain conditions, making them crucial for evaluating disease progress or treatment response.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5874818568409259,0.595,0.5748031496062992,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1376,latent_1376,3727,0.007454,0.008596308,4.4206715,Provide descriptions comparing current to earlier images or without prior report.,"Examples with high activation frequently include instructions or questions with specific expectations to provide a description of findings in comparison with prior images, despite the presence or absence of a prior report. This reflects a focus on image comparison tasks that involve cross-referencing similar imaging studies.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4542297196725378,0.505,0.5031055900621118,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1377,latent_1377,15457,0.030914,0.014254786,2.6472824,Presence of 'current frontal image' or 'prior frontal image' focuses the pattern.,"The common feature among samples with higher activation levels is the presence of either a 'current frontal image' or a 'prior frontal image'. This distinction suggests the pattern is related to a specific focus on current and prior frontal images in isolation, rather than inclusion of all image types or explicit prior comparison details.",0.3150684931506849,0.46,0.4791666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,100.0,100.0
+1378,latent_1378,20897,0.041794,0.019804815,3.499105,High activation for comparisons using multiple views and prior reports.,"The examples with higher activations require the observer to integrate information from three sources: a current frontal image, a current lateral image, and a prior frontal image, while also considering the context of the prior reported information. This combination of multiple views with past reports likely requires a more complex integration of visual and historical data, explaining the higher activation levels.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4267714747864581,0.495,0.4970414201183432,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1379,latent_1379,3516,0.007032,0.0075941756,3.7995152,Comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation generally review current images alongside prior images and provide a comparison. If there is a notable absence of previous radiographs for comparison, activation appears lower, suggesting that the pattern involves explicit review and comparison to prior imaging studies.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1380,latent_1380,46053,0.092106,0.057973236,4.8854485,Radiology reports describing findings in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated reports consistently involve descriptions that compare findings with previous images, particularly highlighting changes or stability of abnormalities or devices between studies. Phrases like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', or 'since prior' are typically present, indicating a focus on interval changes.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5347469183668012,0.565,0.543046357615894,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1381,latent_1381,5243,0.010486,0.009456755,4.90112,Use of both frontal and lateral images for detailed comparison to prior.,"These examples consistently involve the use of both frontal and lateral images, or emphasize the comparison to prior imaging with mention of specific intervals or techniques. This likely represents a pattern where the inclusion of more than one image view and detailed comparison helps identify or track subtle findings or changes more accurately, which aligns with traditional diagnostic practices in radiology.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.5916666666666667,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1382,latent_1382,4235,0.00847,0.011479328,6.885219,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1383,latent_1383,16829,0.033658,0.032973908,4.4603095,Focused evaluation of device positioning in chest radiographs.,"High activation examples consistently involve detailed observation of device positioning, such as endotracheal tubes, catheters, or implants in chest radiographs. These reports tend to focus on and describe changes or stability of these devices compared to previous studies, indicating frequent detailed assessments and changes in device positioning or status.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,100.0
+1384,latent_1384,7127,0.014254,0.011588082,4.4292383,Explicit comparisons and evaluation of changes with prior imaging.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation levels focus on cases where findings such as lung opacities, cardiomediastinal appearances, and other detailed observations differ, remain stable, or revert to past states on imaging compared with prior studies. This involves the use of explicit comparison between the current and prior images and the specification of any stability or change.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1385,latent_1385,29654,0.059308,0.043345172,6.857776,Comparison to prior images with noted interval changes.,The examples with high activation levels consistently include both a reference to a prior radiology report and a specific change in findings when compared to that prior report. The existence or lack of interval change between radiographic images is a key feature in these high activation examples.,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4149602474627399,0.4221105527638191,0.3974358974358974,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+1386,latent_1386,34221,0.068442,0.03468976,3.235698,Repeated mention of stable cardiomegaly or chronic changes.,"Examples with noticeable activation involve descriptions of stable cardiomegaly, pulmonary vascular congestion, or chronic changes often paired with a comparison to prior images. The findings emphasizing unchanged or stable state often pertain to consistent conditions like cardiomegaly or persistent effusions, reinforcing the model's focus on these conditions within the context of stability or chronicity in diagnostic imaging.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5135135135135135,0.19,100.0,100.0
+1387,latent_1387,37729,0.075458,0.08090186,4.899336,"Radiologic comparison with prior images, emphasis on changes in pathology.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior images with a particular emphasis on changes or the stability of specific pathologies such as heart size, effusions, opacifications, or the positioning of medical devices. The pattern involves thorough comparison to prior imagery even when the images aren't explicitly mentioned as available in the prompt.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1388,latent_1388,3213,0.006426,0.009638647,10.171298,Focus on medical device or line positioning and comparisons.,"Examples with high activations emphasize changes or placement concerning medical devices or lines, such as catheters, tubes, and ports. These elements are frequently noted along with descriptions on how they compare to previous findings or their current state in relation to expected or problematic positioning.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7129258895520133,0.715,0.6837606837606838,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1389,latent_1389,5919,0.011838,0.013165176,7.240653,Comparison with prior studies noting changes or stability.,"The pattern in the examples with higher activation levels involves making comparisons with prior imaging studies and noting changes or stability in certain conditions. This is a common feature in radiology reports where consistency or changes in pathology are thoroughly compared to historical exams, often detailing if conditions have improved, worsened, or remained unchanged.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1390,latent_1390,5578,0.011156,0.0095069045,4.8708563,Detailed comparison with prior imaging to assess radiographic changes.,"These examples consistently refer to previous and current imaging for specific findings, especially changes in positioning or detection of conditions like pneumothorax or positioning of tubes and lines, along with mediastinal and hilar contours assessments. The higher activation corresponds to scenarios where detailed comparative analysis between past and present images is particularly emphasized, often involving diseases with observable radiographic progression or improvement and explicit instructions for comparison.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4807692307692308,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1391,latent_1391,3006,0.006012,0.012277868,6.2788577,Presence of both frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently include both frontal and lateral image inputs, which suggest a pattern where the model is asked to consider multiple vantage points or views for a more comprehensive analysis.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5625,0.58,0.5571428571428572,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1392,latent_1392,2285,0.00457,0.013688849,9.490798,Focus on changes or stability in cardiac silhouette.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize detailed descriptions of cardiac silhouette changes, such as 'mildly enlarged', 'enlarged', or 'enlargement'. These descriptions appear together with observations about pulmonary findings like effusions, edema, or stability in mediastinal features. The pattern indicates that reports noting changes or stability in the cardiac silhouette are strongly representative of the pattern we wish to analyze.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1393,latent_1393,5452,0.010904,0.011416908,5.122567,Description of radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Patterns with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of image findings compared with prior examinations, with indications of what changes persist or have developed between the two evaluations. The descriptions often highlight detected changes in pathologies or stability, using comparison as a core element in analysis.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4448829925390237,0.455,0.4645669291338583,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1394,latent_1394,3945,0.00789,0.0071063675,5.6473236,Instructions to perform comparative description of imaging findings.,"These examples include explicit instructions for the system assistant to describe differences between current and prior imaging, emphasizing a focus on comparison language. Regardless of the inclusion of prior reports, the assistant performs comparisons where possible, aligning with observed activation.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4270210409745293,0.4773869346733668,0.4873417721518987,0.77,100.0,99.0
+1395,latent_1395,4049,0.008098,0.009860251,4.049968,Documentation of interval changes in chest imaging findings.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation involve explicit comparisons of current and prior images, often noting changes (or lack thereof) in findings like opacities, cardiomegaly, or pleural effusion. This suggests the pattern focuses on documenting and communicating interval changes between imaging studies of the chest.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4876905341360318,0.4898989898989899,0.4883720930232558,0.4242424242424242,99.0,99.0
+1396,latent_1396,1797,0.003594,0.007691998,5.9932446,Explicit comparison to prior images and noting changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on analyzing current images by making explicit comparisons to prior images. This includes both the presence of the previous images and referencing 'comparison' or 'unchanged' states, indicating that the task or understanding of changes or stability between different time-point images triggers the pattern.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4757281553398058,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1397,latent_1397,4904,0.009808,0.010705479,5.303362,Comparative analysis includes both frontal and lateral images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve descriptions that compare current images with prior images, including both frontal and lateral views, and the comparison reveals changes or stability over time. These detailed comparisons often involve the presence of both frontal and lateral image analysis.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1398,latent_1398,7247,0.014494,0.017244237,4.7341385,"Comparison to prior imaging, focusing on stability of findings.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a comparison between current and prior images, with an emphasis on the stability or change of findings. This is indicated by phrases such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'unchanged', and 'normal'. Additionally, these cases often describe the cardiomediastinal silhouette or lung condition as stable or showing no significant interval change.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4473684210526316,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1399,latent_1399,3809,0.007618,0.007964321,6.306816,Changes in pleural effusions over time.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings related to or comparing changes in pleural effusions over time. These reports highlight examination of pleural effusion size and consistency, reflecting a focus on monitoring fluid in the pleural space.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6382794684280884,0.655,0.7719298245614035,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1400,latent_1400,6969,0.013938,0.015803821,3.5005198,Directive to compare findings with prior frontal image.,"Within the examples, there is a strong emphasis on generating a comparison of current radiological findings against a specific 'prior frontal image', often using the directive phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This indicates that examples are highly activated when the task demands comparing current images directly against a previous frontal image, even when specific comparison data is sometimes missing or unspecified in the report.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.55,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1401,latent_1401,7625,0.01525,0.010501391,5.500637,Explicit comparison with prior imaging included in directive.,"The examples with higher activation include both current and prior imaging studies for direct comparison in their evaluation. They explicitly contain the phrase ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior..."" indicating specific instructions for comparative analysis between current and previous radiological findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4875082968272932,0.5125628140703518,0.5104895104895105,0.73,100.0,99.0
+1402,latent_1402,5545,0.01109,0.010165479,6.172205,Detailed instructions for comparative analysis of radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed instructions to compare current radiographic findings with prior images, often directly instructing an assistant to provide descriptions. This indicates a pattern where precise or explicit comparison instructions are emphasized, likely indicating a training focus on this comparative reporting style.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5145631067961165,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1403,latent_1403,36738,0.073476,0.03262743,2.5101445,Descriptive observations of thoracic aorta tortuosity or unfolding.,"These examples include observations of aortic tortuosity and unfolding in chest radiographs. The pattern highlighted by the activation levels is the descriptive observation of tortuosity or unfolding of the thoracic aorta, using terms like 'mild unfolding', 'tortuous', and 'elongated'.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3745912828164185,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.0505050505050505,99.0,100.0
+1404,latent_1404,11466,0.022932,0.014675857,5.818912,"Description of changes against prior images, highlighting 'new' or 'unchanged' findings.","The highly activated examples consistently mention changes or stability in findings as compared to prior imaging, often highlighting 'new' or 'unchanged' features. This reflects a pattern of longitudinal assessment in radiological findings against past images, important for diagnosis and tracking of conditions.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6398559423769508,0.64,0.6346153846153846,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1405,latent_1405,4957,0.009914,0.016016277,8.054145,Focus on clinically significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples typically involve significant findings such as changes in cardiac or pulmonary status between the current and prior studies, suggesting evaluation for potential progression or clinical significance. Examples without significant interval changes or findings related to acute conditions present lower activation. The use of comparative language does not significantly contribute to activation unless tied to meaningful clinical changes.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.334448160535117,0.3969849246231156,0.2307692307692307,0.0909090909090909,99.0,100.0
+1406,latent_1406,4194,0.008388,0.010586292,5.274668,Requests to provide findings in comparison to prior images.,"The high activation examples describe evaluations of radiological studies by explicitly instructing to compare new images with prior images or reports. This often appears as an explicit request to assess changes or stability since the previous study, using language like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image'. These examples focus on review and reporting of changes or comparison descriptions.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.431162175100673,0.495,0.497005988023952,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1407,latent_1407,7079,0.014158,0.012799938,4.9927306,Lung pathology and medical devices compared to prior scans.,"These examples consistently describe lung conditions such as parametric changes in pulmonary opacification, pleural effusions, pneumothorax, etc., using comparative language with emphasis on changes and stability since prior imaging. Each radiology report emphasizes interval changes or stability regarding lung pathology or medical device placement using conclusive statements about the presence or absence of disease or positioning.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1408,latent_1408,3512,0.007024,0.012114389,4.9991565,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1409,latent_1409,16162,0.032324,0.015526738,4.7522845,Presence of prior imaging report with explicit comparison in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings where a prior image is emphasized in conjunction with details about the current and lateral images. These cases highlight a pattern of comparison made between current and previous images, particularly detailing changes or stabilities across these examinations, even when explicit comparison information (like dates) is not given.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1410,latent_1410,150381,0.300762,0.2709211,7.5883245,Significant changes or unresolved issues in radiology findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve notable changes or unresolved issues in the findings from the radiology study, often suggesting a significant clinical concern or requiring further intervention. This can include findings that impact treatment plans, like significant pathology change, worsening status, particular interventions, comparisons identifying persistence of significant pathology, or procedural outcomes like chest tube placements, NG tube positions, or effusion change.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1411,latent_1411,20466,0.040932,0.022485573,6.020321,Identification of interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions of interval changes between current and prior images, typically identifying specific changes such as tube placements, effusions, opacification, or volume changes.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6471418489767113,0.65,0.5873015873015873,0.8043478260869565,92.0,108.0
+1412,latent_1412,2978,0.005956,0.007678629,4.551173,Stable findings when comparing current and prior radiological images.,"These highly activated examples all involve comparing findings from current and prior imaging with some focus on unchanged pulmonary or cardiopulmonary conditions, and often reference specific objects or implants that remain consistent between the studies, such as MediPorts, PICC lines, or hardware. This suggests the pattern revolves around unchanged findings across imaging studies.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4411984439807301,0.4522613065326633,0.4366197183098591,0.31,100.0,99.0
+1413,latent_1413,10422,0.020844,0.020317603,4.8052287,Narratives emphasize interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"The pattern reflects comparison across radiological examinations and identification of interval changes or response to prior interventions. Reports often highlight stability or change in specific findings, like opacities or effusions, against previous exams. Discussion includes what remained unchanged or worsened, suggesting ongoing evaluation to track progression or resolution of medical issues.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1414,latent_1414,6124,0.012248,0.0090216305,8.883276,Focus on tubes or surgical device placement and changes.,"Specific reference to tubes, catheters, or surgical devices and their placement or adjustment often occur in radiology reports where the focus is on ensuring correct positioning or noting changes from prior studies. These items include PICC lines, central catheters, enteric tubes, and others that require precise identification and are usually described in detail to assess for interval changes.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.4431818181818182,0.4534883720930232,86.0,114.0
+1415,latent_1415,4588,0.009176,0.014373378,7.1470814,New or changed findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"Several examples focus on changes over time and comparisons with prior imaging studies, specifically highlighting new findings, interval changes, or stability assessments related to lines, tubes, catheters, or specific radiological findings. High activation examples do not show stable, unchanged conditions without new findings as is common in periodic clinical assessments or monitoring.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.4347826086956521,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1416,latent_1416,10963,0.021926,0.0109392945,4.689236,Comparison with prior imaging showing stability or minimal change.,"Higher activation levels are linked to comparisons with prior imaging where notable changes are described, particularly regarding stable or minimally changed findings. Lower activation levels often indicate the absence of prior comparisons or significant changes.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6451612903225806,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1417,latent_1417,2368,0.004736,0.008630913,5.2699566,Focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with activation levels close to 7 or 8 demonstrate a high likelihood of interval changes in radiological findings between the current and prior images, suggesting a focus on identifying changes or stability over time in imaging studies. Reports often include language indicating significant changes or stability after comparison to previous studies.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4811320754716981,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1418,latent_1418,3804,0.007608,0.010763072,6.2652555,Use of current frontal image with prior image comparison to assess changes.,"The pattern involves analyzing current chest images while explicitly referencing prior frontal images for diagnosis improvement or resolution. Key examples use ""Given the current frontal image"" and prior images, emphasizing comparisons to deduce stability, change, or notable findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3894505054549094,0.39,0.3962264150943396,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1419,latent_1419,8242,0.016484,0.016592197,5.7410426,Comparison to prior imaging that details changes in lung condition.,"Activation levels are higher in examples that involve comparisons to prior images and explicitly describe changes in lung conditions, either resolving or new findings, particularly related to pneumonia or other pulmonary issues.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5724756729432579,0.5728643216080402,0.574468085106383,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+1420,latent_1420,9209,0.018418,0.012816683,5.7508907,Radiology description with COMPARISON noted as 'None.',"The examples with higher activation levels often lack reference to prior imaging studies in the text, specifically stating 'COMPARISON: None.' This implies a focus on describing findings without comparative analysis, which seems to align with the desired pattern for activation. Higher activation is associated with descriptive analysis without comparison to previous studies.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7975503593481121,0.8,0.7459016393442623,0.91,100.0,100.0
+1421,latent_1421,12865,0.02573,0.024646861,7.5325184,Emphasis on changes or updates from prior assessments.,"Examples with high activation tend to include detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies or devices removed/changed since the last imaging. There is a prevalent pattern observed where the emphasis is placed on ""changes or updates from prior assessments,"" either to highlight a consistent state (stability) or changes (improvements, removals, or new placements) concerning these elements. By contrasting changes with earlier scans, particularly device/channel removals or insertions and structural stability or variation, the text draws attention to what has changed rather than what is static, embodying a motif of longitudinal comparison.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1422,latent_1422,12548,0.025096,0.012577456,3.4838223,Stable findings with no new or acute changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe scenarios without new or acute changes between the given and prior images. The descriptions emphasize that conditions are stable or unchanged compared to previous studies, suggesting a prominent pattern of stability or lack of new findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5858585858585859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1423,latent_1423,5352,0.010704,0.011884245,4.858911,Hypothesis of pulmonary pathology based on indication.,"Examples with high activation levels describe scenarios where there is an explicit mention or implication of pulmonary issues or concerns like pneumonia, atelectasis, or effusions related to the indication. Complaints of chest pain or cough often correlate with hypotheses of underlying pathological findings. The consistent use of '_', censored data, and prolonged examination seems irrelevant to the high activation, focusing more on clear hypothesis-driven descriptions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.456,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1424,latent_1424,6898,0.013796,0.016634952,8.233803,Comparative analysis with prior imaging findings.,"The higher activation levels correspond to cases where specific findings or changes are compared with prior imaging exams, even in the absence of a prior report explicitly mentioned. References to comparison include language like 'similar to previous', 'compared to prior', or 'since the previous study', highlighting the focus on assessing changes over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1425,latent_1425,3328,0.006656,0.008070578,6.405559,Evaluations of findings in radiology compared to prior chest images.,"The activation is high in instances where descriptions specify the comparison between a current and prior chest image, highlighting stability or changes particularly in findings related to medical devices, infiltrates, effusions, or opacities. Such comparisons are marked by detailed references to specific intervals or earlier results, indicating the focus on evaluating progression or stability over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4417099525013194,0.4924623115577889,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,99.0
+1426,latent_1426,5064,0.010128,0.009100189,4.77521,Presence of prior image comparison data.,"The examples with higher activation scores consistently refer to the availability of a prior image for comparison, establishing a pattern that the presence of previously taken imaging data used for comparative analysis triggers increased activation.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4600914705046381,0.4723618090452261,0.4769230769230769,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+1427,latent_1427,11219,0.022438,0.012425162,3.445787,"Explicit stability or change in findings, especially for cardiomediastinal silhouette.","The high activation examples consistently involve instances where the description provided includes a meticulous detailing of stability or changes in specific areas, like cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung conditions, or other identified medical devices, without significant uncertainties or unknowns. Lower activation is common when the findings discuss uncertainties or lack definitive statements on stability or change.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.52,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1428,latent_1428,5808,0.011616,0.008562244,4.941456,Current frontal and lateral chest images specified.,"The pattern seen in the higher activation examples correlates with the presence of current and lateral chest images being specified. Cases with this specification tend to have higher activation, indicating the model is particularly attuned to scenarios involving both current frontal and lateral chest images.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4835164835164834,0.53,0.51875,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1429,latent_1429,5663,0.011326,0.017625503,4.9513326,Comparison of current with prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples that entail providing findings in comparison to prior frontal images, indicating that the model likely activates strongly when a description is specifically directed towards evaluation in the context of comparison with previous imaging.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1430,latent_1430,4134,0.008268,0.008795461,5.673335,Detailed comparison of unchanged findings from prior images to current.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently feature detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic findings, emphasizing unchanged findings, stability, or resolution in terms of specific structures like pulmonary opacities, cardiomediastinal contours or other pathological findings, often with direct mentions of reports or clinicians involved in the assessment.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4931506849315068,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1431,latent_1431,2897,0.005794,0.0071280566,5.4048448,Focus on comparison with previous imaging reports.,"These examples all include phrases specifically requesting a description of the findings compared to prior imaging, often repeating this request in various parts of the report. This indicates a pattern of needing updates or confirmation against previous examinations and may suggest a focus on determining changes over time, despite the report stating no significant changes or acute findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5189873417721519,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1432,latent_1432,22154,0.044308,0.027023098,5.9950185,Focus on image-based comparison of findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include direct image-based comparisons or specific descriptions of current and prior findings, focusing on consistency or change. The presence of explicit directives to compare with prior images, such as in item 6 where 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' leads to higher activation. This indicates a pattern of emphasis on differentiation or consistency between consecutive examinations.",0.0909090909090909,0.1,0.0,0.0,25.0,25.0,0.1514147272225151,0.155,0.1034482758620689,0.09,100.0,100.0
+1433,latent_1433,3472,0.006944,0.008185913,6.089341,Description referencing prior studies and detailed comparison analysis.,"These examples involve detailed descriptions of radiological techniques and multiple comparison images both from the same session as well as prior sessions. They often include detailed analysis linked with the prior imaging, marked by phrases like 'prior frontal image', 'comparison' sections, and medical history/context provided in association with these images.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4274766402729332,0.4321608040201005,0.4444444444444444,0.52,100.0,99.0
+1434,latent_1434,5044,0.010088,0.0096939495,4.613642,Independent evaluation of current images without prior comparison.,"The high activation examples repeatedly involve assignments where images are given but there is no prior image or comparison stated, necessitating an independent evaluation of the current images rather than relying on previous studies for comparison.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6362611747227132,0.645,0.7101449275362319,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1435,latent_1435,3151,0.006302,0.007930018,6.3168893,Describing changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"All examples with high activation levels involve comparing current radiological findings to prior images, suggesting a change or stability in observed medical conditions. This mirrors a common radiological practice of assessing and describing changes over time, often indicating disease progression or resolution.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1436,latent_1436,15231,0.030462,0.018596468,5.7023015,Comparison to prior imaging to note changes in medical conditions or device positions.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve comparison with prior imaging, where changes or stability in medical conditions, devices, or anatomical structures are observed over time. This involves temporal changes described in a comparative context against prior images.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5733333333333334,0.6,0.5666666666666667,0.85,100.0,100.0
+1437,latent_1437,3130,0.00626,0.0099974945,5.61699,Comparison of frontal and lateral views with stable findings.,"The activations are highest when both frontal and lateral chest images are compared to prior images, and the findings use common descriptive patterns without any significant change or new diagnostic findings flagged, focusing on stable or expected radiological findings. Where prior comparison enhances the detailed understanding and no acute findings are emphasized, activations tend to be higher.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5483870967741935,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1438,latent_1438,9993,0.019986,0.013447959,4.2492895,Descriptive comparison of cardiomediastinal silhouettes or aortic features.,"The examples with higher activations frequently provide detailed findings about cardiomediastinal, hilar, or aortic silhouettes. They mention terms like 'mildly enlarged', 'tortuous aorta', 'hilar contours', or compare with prior images to detail stability or changes in the mediastinal or cardiac structures.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1439,latent_1439,4902,0.009804,0.006963061,3.8513305,Chest imaging with frontal and lateral views and comparison to prior images.,"These examples focus on evaluating current imaging findings relative to prior scans, specifically using frontal and lateral chest images. The mentions of multiple views (frontal and lateral) and explicit instructions to compare with previous images indicate that these examples emphasize comprehensive chest evaluations.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1440,latent_1440,2670,0.00534,0.0060934047,4.5417776,Detailed comparison across multiple views and prior reports.,"The examples with high activation levels all include a detailed comparison between multiple views (frontal and lateral images) and incorporate findings from the prior report within the explanation. This pattern suggests that the presence of comprehensive, multi-view comparison and inclusion of prior report findings leads to higher activation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1441,latent_1441,3882,0.007764,0.006969787,5.8160105,"Presence of central venous lines, pacemakers, or catheter placements.","Examples with higher activations consistently involve either the presence of central venous lines, pacemaker leads, or other catheter/line placements as part of the findings. Such findings are typical in patients with more complex clinical follow-ups or post-surgical recovery where the placement of these lines is crucial and frequently monitored in imaging reports.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.748686603354213,0.7487437185929648,0.7450980392156863,0.76,100.0,99.0
+1442,latent_1442,6077,0.012154,0.010309333,4.415813,Findings related to placement or status of medical support devices and pleural effusions.,"The pattern indicates updates or changes in medical devices, and the relationship of chest opacities or effusions to the positioning or removal of lines, tubes, or surgical interventions, in conjunction with pleural effusions or pneumothorax findings.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6068152031454783,0.61,0.5932203389830508,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1443,latent_1443,31132,0.062264,0.030823434,4.4552593,Changes in pulmonary edema or pleural effusion status on imaging.,"Examples indicating changes in pulmonary edema or pleural effusion often describe alterations in lung opacities, changes in cardiac silhouette due to pulmonary congestion, or alterations in pleural effusion status when compared to previous imaging. The pattern involves identifying changes in fluid status within the lungs or chest cavity.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6145048957878235,0.625,0.6865671641791045,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1444,latent_1444,5607,0.011214,0.008838864,5.035379,Descriptive evaluation of changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels notably reference changes or stability in specific radiological findings such as nodules, opacities, pleural effusions, or medical device positioning, when compared to prior images. These changes or the absence thereof in comparison to previous examinations are described using terms like 'increased', 'improved', 'stable', 'regressed', or 'unchanged'. This pattern indicates an emphasis on descriptive evaluation of changes over time, which is crucial in medical imaging diagnostics.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5538956323270048,0.57,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1445,latent_1445,43730,0.08746,0.055769954,8.099073,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize findings presented in terms of changes from prior images, particularly when stable findings or unchanged conditions are highlighted. Phrases like ""unchanged,"" ""similar compared to prior,"" or ""no significant interval change"" indicate a focus on stability over time which distinguishes these examples.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6085492836451891,0.625,0.4883720930232558,0.5753424657534246,73.0,127.0
+1446,latent_1446,4484,0.008968,0.007951539,4.5801344,Comparison analysis of current versus prior images in radiology.,"The examples with high activation levels specifically involve instructions to provide descriptions or findings based on the comparison between current and prior images, often given a frontal image, or both frontal and lateral images, to identify changes or similarities. This pattern aligns with iterative evaluation of patient progress or stability across different imaging sessions.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1447,latent_1447,4153,0.008306,0.010740973,5.9227085,Presence of symptoms like cough or fever in conjunction with imaging comparisons.,"The highly activated examples involve reports where patients present with symptoms suggesting respiratory or systemic infection, such as cough or fever, in conjunction with imaging findings that assess changes in the thoracic region over time. Lesser activated examples tend to lack this clinical context or focus on pre/post procedural comparisons unrelated to acute infection.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4321783952148625,0.485,0.4615384615384615,0.18,100.0,100.0
+1448,latent_1448,24821,0.049642,0.035069127,5.6032124,Descriptive assessment of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the assessment of interval changes observed in images when compared with prior images. Such assessments often highlight specific improvements, stable findings, or significant changes in conditions like pleural effusion, cardiac silhouette, or pneumothorax status. These changes are frequently stated in terms like 'improvement', 'increase', 'unchanged', or 'new', which are distinct from the lower activation examples that lack emphasis on notable interval changes.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6022031823745411,0.61,0.5859375,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1449,latent_1449,23591,0.047182,0.028127117,7.45963,Descriptions involving comparison to prior images.,"The instances with higher activation typically involved comparisons to previous studies or images, which aid in longitudinal assessment of changes in patient condition, such as evaluating progression or stability of abnormalities. This is a common practice in radiology, ensuring continuity and context in patient care by noting previous findings alongside current evaluations.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.7313432835820896,67.0,133.0
+1450,latent_1450,3905,0.00781,0.008410689,7.594903,Evaluation of radiology findings in comparison to prior images without acute changes.,"All examples are queries regarding findings in radiology for comparison with a prior image, with varying levels of activation based on the presence of more explicit imaging indications, historical context, or detailed technical comparisons, reflected in the higher activation levels. None show definitive acute changes.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4210917287840365,0.435,0.4057971014492754,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1451,latent_1451,14482,0.028964,0.018723106,3.4569173,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently reflect reports that provide findings from current imaging and give a comparative evaluation against prior imaging, explicitly noting changes or stability over time.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4850746268656716,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1452,latent_1452,8570,0.01714,0.013928066,3.3203893,Interpretation of findings in relation to clinical context or recent changes.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve situations where findings are interpreted relative to recent clinical events or conditions described in the indication, such as evaluating acute processes or changes in preexisting conditions like metastases, pneumonia, or tube placement. This suggests a focus on the relationship between radiological findings and clinical context.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4303733089207608,0.44,0.4523809523809524,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1453,latent_1453,5445,0.01089,0.009841692,3.992991,"Comments on changes or stability in medical lines, opacities, or effusions compared to prior studies.","The examples that show high activation typically involve descriptions of changes or stability in medical tubes, lines, masses, opacities, or effusions detected in chest imaging compared to prior studies. This is a common practice in radiology reports where changes in the condition of the patient are documented, using comparison with previous images as a reference.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.64024220313648,0.645,0.6178861788617886,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1454,latent_1454,4850,0.0097,0.0122434795,6.2759147,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"High activation levels are associated with radiology findings that describe clear lungs without abnormalities such as focal consolidations, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax, along with the presence of an unremarkable or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.6285714285714286,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1455,latent_1455,19462,0.038924,0.020237532,4.3535705,Descriptions or comparisons involving thoracic aorta tortuosity or dilation.,"The examples with higher activations mention descriptions or comparisons of the thoracic aorta, which often includes findings related to its tortuosity or dilation. Such mentions suggest a special consideration of the aorta's appearance or condition as part of the radiology report in these examples.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4324942791762013,0.535,0.7333333333333333,0.11,100.0,100.0
+1456,latent_1456,5343,0.010686,0.00975274,5.867158,Assessment of medical device placement change or stability.,"Examples with high activation report findings based on the positioning of medical devices, whether they are stable, appropriately placed, or require repositioning. This reflects the model's sensitivity to language patterns focusing on medical device placement or change thereof in radiological images.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7344622861294121,0.735,0.7155963302752294,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1457,latent_1457,7264,0.014528,0.011121384,4.7848363,PICC/catheter line evaluation and placement.,"The pattern across highly activated examples often involves specifying modifications or examinations in relation to previous reports, with particular attention to placement or condition of medical lines, devices, or major findings (like changes in effusions or opacities). The presence, change, or positioning of medical adjuncts such as PICC lines are frequently noted in exemplars with higher activations.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4139863338765474,0.4824120603015075,0.4375,0.1414141414141414,99.0,100.0
+1458,latent_1458,8257,0.016514,0.013422705,6.5879126,Mentions of mild to moderate cardiomegaly or heart enlargement.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of the heart as mildly or moderately enlarged (cardiomegaly), often mentioned with specific phrases like 'mildly enlarged', 'moderate cardiomegaly', or 'cardiac silhouette is moderately enlarged'. The presence of this descriptive language consistently correlates with higher activation levels.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.8461538461538461,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7647117719206027,0.765,0.7849462365591398,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1459,latent_1459,34484,0.068968,0.042714767,6.4989066,"References to positions or changes in medical devices (e.g., chest tubes, catheters).","Examples with higher activation levels include references to medical devices such as chest tubes, central venous lines, pigtail catheters, and their positions, changes, or stability over time. These medical devices are commonly mentioned in radiological comparisons, emphasizing their importance in patient management and outcomes.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7517164500519369,0.755,0.7073170731707317,0.87,100.0,100.0
+1460,latent_1460,7948,0.015896,0.009885904,4.27374,Detection or inference of change from prior imaging comparisons.,"Higher activation levels correspond to findings where a change from previous imaging studies is detected or inferred. These examples highlight interval changes, stability, or minor progression of conditions like cardiomegaly, edema, or other pathologies, typically derived through direct comparison with prior imaging.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5898359343737495,0.59,0.59375,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1461,latent_1461,2847,0.005694,0.0070491596,8.588763,Comparison with prior images detailing interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit comparisons with prior images, with descriptions of interval changes or stability in lung or cardiac features. These descriptions often include observed differences between current and prior states of health.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.4320987654320987,0.35,100.0,100.0
+1462,latent_1462,3826,0.007652,0.008160157,5.8279166,Stable findings or improvement compared to prior images.,The examples with significant activation consistently involve descriptions of chest imaging findings with a direct reference to previous studies for comparison. This includes details about any changes or stabilities such as normal cardiac silhouette and unchanged mediastinal contours compared to prior images.,0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3075088787417554,0.465,0.4625,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1463,latent_1463,1900,0.0038,0.0041183834,4.4514604,Prompt includes instructions to describe findings with comparison to prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation focus on instructions to describe findings, use of current images, and direct comparison to prior frontal images implying a structured prompt reflecting radiological evaluations.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1464,latent_1464,7601,0.015202,0.024822604,6.1328344,Detailed analysis relative to previous imaging study.,"Examples with high activation levels contain detailed, systematic descriptions of an image's comparison with a prior image, mentioning previous changes, evaluations, or recommendations. They often address queried medical concerns or conditions noted at the prior imaging study. Lower activated examples only describe the current image or do not systematically address prior reports.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4568965517241379,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1465,latent_1465,3970,0.00794,0.009473424,6.276558,Explicit directive to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation often specify clear and detailed instructions that require the user to compare the findings with prior images, emphasizing the importance of assessing changes over time. This use of explicit commands to compare with prior radiological studies is a key component of the pattern.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1466,latent_1466,6095,0.01219,0.025835294,6.2572417,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1467,latent_1467,6547,0.013094,0.009898244,7.3104854,Explicit reference or lack thereof to previous imaging studies and comparison findings.,"The examples that show activations tend to specifically mention the presence or absence of prior studies, or describe changes or evaluations based on current and previous images. High activation often involves presumed or explicit references to comparisons for evaluating new findings or identifying stability in findings compared to past images. Phrases like ""No prior"", ""As compared to the previous,"" or ""Provide a description...comparison..."" are noted in activated examples.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4095587648607676,0.445,0.4630872483221476,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1468,latent_1468,6073,0.012146,0.009501527,4.4210596,Description of radiographic findings compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples referencing comparison to prior images, particularly when the findings are described in the context of changes or stability over time. Even if some examples involved normal findings, the mention of comparison with older imaging is the dominant pattern that influences activation.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1469,latent_1469,9764,0.019528,0.015168844,4.519849,Comparison to prior imaging studies highlighting changes in clinical findings.,"The examples with higher activation focus on the changes noted from prior imaging studies and directly compare them with current findings. They discuss stability, resolution, or worsening of specific conditions over time, using specific language indicative of prior comparison and changes in clinical features.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.59,0.59,0.59,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1470,latent_1470,3176,0.006352,0.009097114,4.642634,Findings and impressions compared to prior imaging studies.,Examples with high activation levels contain multiple references to prior imaging reports and examinations for comparison. This pattern involves a specific instruction or template to describe findings relative to previous imaging results which seems to carry significant importance in these examples.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4745762711864407,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1471,latent_1471,3480,0.00696,0.009884211,7.890912,Absence of acute change or pathology on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with activations focus on descriptions where there is a lack of acute findings, and conditions related to stable, no-change, or normal imaging appearances as explicitly compared to prior images or examples. Key terms include 'unchanged', 'normal', or 'no significant change' in relation to prior imaging – especially concerning the cardiomediastinal silhouette or absence of an acute pathological process.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6328320485277392,0.6331658291457286,0.6285714285714286,0.66,100.0,99.0
+1472,latent_1472,2716,0.005432,0.0073672896,5.460146,Inclusion of multiple views and prior image for detailed comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically include multiple views, such as 'frontal' and 'lateral', and a prior image is given for comparison in the report context. This implies a pattern where comprehensive evaluation using multiple views and historical comparison holds higher significance.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5359888190076869,0.585,0.5515151515151515,0.91,100.0,100.0
+1473,latent_1473,4012,0.008024,0.008062563,3.107157,Comparison to prior images with missing comparison data.,"Examples with 'activation' levels of 6.0 or higher typically describe a process of comparing current images to prior studies for changes, yet also specify a lack of available prior comparison data (e.g., 'COMPARISON: None'). This highlights a focus on imagery evaluation instructions despite missing data comparisons.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4324942791762013,0.535,0.518918918918919,0.96,100.0,100.0
+1474,latent_1474,8512,0.017024,0.019877411,6.3083844,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting minor but clinically relevant changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally have findings that include clinically relevant changes or comparisons against previous radiographs that indicate stability or minor changes in condition, while examples with changes that are not deemed clinically significant have lower activation.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.51,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1475,latent_1475,61876,0.123752,0.062512815,4.169343,Comparative evaluation with prior imaging indicating stable or minimally changed conditions.,"The examples with positive activation levels all involve descriptions of ongoing evaluations that identify both current radiographic findings and comparison with prior exams, although there are explicit mentions of stability or minimal changes in findings without signaling acute or emergent concerns. Comparison to past exams is key, yet changes are not substantial or life-threatening.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1476,latent_1476,2524,0.005048,0.008482484,5.511915,Patterns requiring comparison to prior images to assess stability or changes.,"Activation levels are high for examples where specific radiological patterns or details require comparison to prior images to determine stability, progression, or regression. These findings often involve being able to identify consistent patterns or details across studies, such as catheters, effusions, consolidations, or other specific findings not rapidly changing, but requiring precise description or context.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3845500848896434,0.42,0.4459459459459459,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1477,latent_1477,6782,0.013564,0.011747373,5.222006,Emphasis on stable findings or unchanged pathology from prior imaging.,"These examples consistently present stable findings or previously noted pathologies when comparing the current and prior images. The reports describe a clear communication of stability or resolution of prior findings such as consolidations or nodules, and no new or acute issues arising, signaling the primary focus on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior exams.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1478,latent_1478,10784,0.021568,0.01563952,3.6107426,Interval changes in lung or pleural findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often focus on changes in pleural effusions, atelectasis, or other lung findings compared to prior studies, with an emphasis on interval changes since the last examination. These examples frequently include specific mentions of changes such as an increase or decrease in effusions or the persistence/resolution of lung opacities. This indicates that changes in lung or pleural pathology compared to previous studies trigger higher activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6482765551200884,0.65,0.6744186046511628,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1479,latent_1479,19694,0.039388,0.01699162,2.762701,Focus on current image findings rather than past comparison or detailed history.,"The examples with higher activations involve cases where a current set of images (frontal or lateral) is given without a detailed past history or comparison in the prompt. These examples seem to place focus primarily on direct description from the images, rather than comparing with previous data or records.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5164835164835165,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1480,latent_1480,7097,0.014194,0.037050124,6.2861176,Comparison to prior with focus on monitoring condition changes.,The particularly high activations consistently occur in examples where a specific condition is evaluated or progress monitored in comparison with recent or multiple prior imaging studies. This comparative aspect is crucial for monitoring changes in stable or unstable medical conditions and is marked by direct mention of temporal changes or ongoing assessments.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4782608695652174,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1481,latent_1481,3960,0.00792,0.012391389,8.023736,Evaluation and positioning of lines/catheters/tubes compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently include assessments of lines, tubes, or catheters and their positioning compared to prior studies. This pattern emphasizes detailed reporting of vascular access devices and other medical devices seen in chest radiography, using terms like 'Port-A-Cath', 'PICC line', 'ET tube', and locations such as 'SVC'.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1482,latent_1482,2017,0.004034,0.0040248423,9.146753,Requests for detailed findings on complex processes from multiple image views including prior images.,"The pattern involves the reference of multiple chest views (current frontal image, current lateral image, and prior frontal image) along with requests for detailed descriptions or impressions that include complex clinical findings or processes, like interval changes and specific radiological terminology, indicating intricate evaluations beyond basic comparisons.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1483,latent_1483,5120,0.01024,0.0112727815,5.627546,Comparison of current and prior radiological images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently request comparison of the current radiological findings with those of prior images. This is evident in descriptions where the findings are stable, unchanged, or involve interval improvements or examinations for differences in pathologies.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4685314685314685,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1484,latent_1484,11754,0.023508,0.014496854,5.461578,Reports discussing comparison against prior imaging studies.,"The most representative examples indicate reports that discuss a comparison with prior imaging studies, usually showing specific observations made in comparison to those previous images. This pattern highlights changes or stability over time using previous imaging data as a reference point.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4175385611045195,0.46,0.474025974025974,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1485,latent_1485,5850,0.0117,0.009515978,6.4996305,Reports with limited diagnostic details or unavailable comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to have reports where less diagnostic information is available. These are characterized by phrases indicating the absence of previous comparisons or very basic and incomplete descriptions of observations, suggesting a focus on generating descriptions without detailed historical context or thorough findings.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4080854309687262,0.515,0.5081081081081081,0.94,100.0,100.0
+1486,latent_1486,11350,0.0227,0.012730214,6.6480994,Emphasis on imaging limitations affecting clarity or interpretation.,"Examples with higher activations often explicitly mention issues related to lung volumes, constraint of imaging views, or technical limitations, which can affect diagnostic clarity. This pattern emphasizes the complexity of interpretation when these factors are present.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6072471777058499,0.6231155778894473,0.5454545454545454,0.5121951219512195,82.0,117.0
+1487,latent_1487,2887,0.005774,0.004391625,5.6216283,Descriptions of unchanged radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe the presence of unchanged clinical findings or persistent standard features across multiple imaging studies, especially cardiac silhouettes, positions of lines or tubes, or descriptions of opacities. The consistent use of 'unchanged' illustrates this stability between comparisons, which is a key observation in radiology follow-ups.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.64349376114082,0.645,0.6283185840707964,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1488,latent_1488,8379,0.016758,0.012821557,6.0393186,Reference to comparison with previous radiological images.,"The key pattern observed in these examples is the explicit reference to comparing current imaging findings with prior studies. This comparison is used to identify changes or stability in the findings, often using phrases like 'in comparison with the prior study', 'compared to previous', or 'since prior examination', which are common in follow-up radiology assessments.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4288174512055109,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.84,100.0,99.0
+1489,latent_1489,4220,0.00844,0.007623659,6.6647835,Interval changes or device placement/removal noted in imaging.,"These examples describe changes observed in radiological findings, especially when phenomena such as interval change, removal or placement of tubes and catheters, and changes in pulmonary opacities or fluid levels are explicitly compared to prior images. Key terms include 'interval change', 'placement', 'removal', and 'comparison to previous'.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1490,latent_1490,4143,0.008286,0.01464844,6.9482856,Cases without prior comparison in radiology report.,"High activation levels are associated with the absence of a prior study to compare with, as indicated by descriptions lacking any noted 'comparison' findings. This indicates that the model is identifying cases where new radiological assessments are made independently of historical data, which is explicitly contrasted with making comparisons to prior images.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5254237288135594,0.31,100.0,100.0
+1491,latent_1491,7153,0.014306,0.013365004,2.8251014,Comparisons involving multiple imaging views or modalities.,"High activation levels correlate with examples where multiple imaging modalities or views (e.g., current frontal and lateral images) are compared, indicating a pattern in technical descriptions or instructions to use a comprehensive set of comparative views/images.",0.4145220588235294,0.4693877551020408,0.475,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4552673659105076,0.4924623115577889,0.4934210526315789,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+1492,latent_1492,4710,0.00942,0.010705746,5.214781,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette on chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings related to the heart and cardiomediastinal silhouettes, specifically mentioning their stability or lack of significant change on radiographs. Several reports highlight the absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities. These are consistent phraseological patterns indicating reassurance about cardiac and mediastinal stability in radiological assessments.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1493,latent_1493,3766,0.007532,0.014153615,6.365225,Description of interval change in radiological exams.,"These examples all describe or imply a change in a patient's condition over time by referencing interval changes in findings. This often includes direct phrases like 'interval change', 'since prior', or 'compared to previous' to indicate the passage of time and the necessity of ongoing evaluation.",0.3577167019027484,0.3673469387755102,0.3157894736842105,0.25,24.0,25.0,0.3452685421994885,0.36,0.3,0.21,100.0,100.0
+1494,latent_1494,54917,0.109834,0.06600655,6.455965,"Focus on interval changes in pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or subcutaneous emphysema versus prior imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels detail changes or stability in conditions like pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, or pleural effusions through direct comparison with prior images, often emphasizing new observations relating to respiratory conditions or specific interventions (like chest tube placement). This implies focused attention on acute changes in thoracic pathologies compared to prior imaging.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7266279819471309,0.735,0.7887323943661971,0.5957446808510638,94.0,106.0
+1495,latent_1495,2899,0.005798,0.008690961,7.697238,Evaluation or placement of gastrointestinal or medical devices.,"These examples all provide findings related to the positioning, change, or evaluation of medical devices (such as nasogastric tubes, enteric tubes, tracheostomy tubes, etc.) within the body, usually with reference to gastrointestinal tract (stomach or esophagus) placement. The reports specifically mention positions like being in the 'stomach', 'duodenum', or positions relative to other anatomical markers.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6649246080368083,0.665,0.6601941747572816,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1496,latent_1496,45817,0.091634,0.03743745,1.7881608,Findings described in comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently feature findings described in comparison to earlier images or studies, noting stability or change. These patterns are characterized by phrases explicitly indicating previous evaluations, such as noting unchanged conditions or incorporating dates for prior examinations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5591956681450845,0.595,0.5605095541401274,0.88,100.0,100.0
+1497,latent_1497,9368,0.018736,0.013104041,6.8509574,Stable or improved findings compared to previous imaging.,"The pattern in these examples is that findings are presented noting stability, minor changes, or improvements compared to previous images. This suggests the involvement of comparative analysis over time to identify changes related to support devices or pathologies, using terminology indicative of stability, minor changes, or outcomes like improved or unchanged.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.648735447611401,0.65,0.6339285714285714,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1498,latent_1498,4782,0.009564,0.010906239,3.6020129,Prompt emphasizes comparison with prior frontal images.,"The higher activation examples focus on the need to compare findings to prior frontal images, often indicated with explicit mention in the prompt. This suggests that the analysis pattern recognizes setups where past images or reports are emphasized, highlighting their role in diagnostic considerations.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4095365418894831,0.47,0.4817073170731707,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1499,latent_1499,10078,0.020156,0.0095435865,5.399062,Comparison to prior imaging with recommendations for further evaluation.,"Within these examples, activation is high when there is explicit comparison of the current image to previous images and the assistant's report includes recommendations for further or follow-up evaluation.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.460301774923036,0.645,0.2068965517241379,0.1111111111111111,54.0,146.0
+1500,latent_1500,7340,0.01468,0.014882844,7.359853,Focus on acute changes or interval comparisons in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain references to the presence or absence of acute findings or interval change, particularly concerning potential pneumonia, pleural effusions, or vascular congestion, which are critical to follow-up assessments in radiology.",0.1883116883116883,0.2,0.2580645161290322,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4796747967479675,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1501,latent_1501,10663,0.021326,0.010712949,4.023078,Explicit descriptions of changes or stability between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently feature clear, specific comparisons between current and prior studies, utilizing descriptive language to indicate changes or stability in specific conditions or findings. These reports usually refer to the comparison with previous imaging to highlight stability or changes in clinical findings, rather than generic statements.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5321100917431193,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1502,latent_1502,6323,0.012646,0.009976854,4.617426,Normal or unchanged radiological findings without complications.,"The examples with higher activation levels often have clear findings without complications or changes, typically in normal radiological assessments, like clear lungs, normal heart size or unchanged findings when comparisons are made, contrary to low activations which involve more complex or abnormal findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1503,latent_1503,6874,0.013748,0.010366679,4.11433,Comparisons with prior imaging to note change or stability.,"The examples provided that have higher activation levels consistently involve presenting radiological findings alongside descriptions that involve comparing current imaging with previous studies, alongside observed changes or stabilities over time. This pattern is highly indicative of situations where comparative imaging analysis is critical.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4212484497726333,0.44,0.4558823529411764,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1504,latent_1504,8808,0.017616,0.017316459,4.8010335,Stable or normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"The examples describe imaging findings and frequently highlight the status of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, often noting their normalcy or stability. This is a common focus in radiological reports to rule out acute or significant changes in these anatomical regions when diagnosing chest conditions.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5920032639738881,0.6,0.578125,0.74,100.0,100.0
+1505,latent_1505,7333,0.014666,0.01189308,4.4831257,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior imaging in findings description.,"Examples with high activation levels involve providing a comparative analysis in the findings section by explicitly describing differences or similarities with prior imaging studies, utilizing phrases like 'as compared to', 'no significant change', or specifying increased or decreased details. This emphasis on a detailed comparison to prior images aligns with common practices in radiology.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4274277317524258,0.435,0.4471544715447154,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1506,latent_1506,7386,0.014772,0.021290878,5.298373,Analysis of significant interval changes compared to prior studies.,"Examples describe either significant findings indicating improvement, progression, or stability compared to earlier imaging studies. The focus is on changes or stability evidenced in interval findings compared to previous reports or images. This often requires identifying notable medical observations or treatments over time, such as improvements in effusion, stability of lesions, or resizing of pneumothoraces.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5079365079365079,0.32,100.0,100.0
+1507,latent_1507,61560,0.12312,0.064174876,4.026804,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images highlighting changes or stabilities.,"Examples with activation levels indicate instances where radiographic findings are explicitly compared with previous images and changes or stability are noted. The pattern involves detailed descriptions of how current imaging findings relate to past findings, focusing on interval changes or stability of certain features or pathologies, irrespective of the specific medical condition involved.",0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.6189887756152817,0.63,0.5970149253731343,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1508,latent_1508,6622,0.013244,0.0144021865,4.445087,Comparison and assessment of stability over time.,"The pattern involves describing various aspects of the current chest imaging and comparing them directly to previous images or studies. The reported findings often emphasize stability over time and use comparative language such as 'unchanged', 'slightly increased', or 'persisting'. Establishing temporal consistency is a key feature of this linguistic pattern.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1509,latent_1509,23608,0.047216,0.024415102,5.1978126,Documentation of interval change when compared to prior images.,"The common linguistic pattern across these examples is the explicit comparison of findings to previous images, often noting interval changes such as improvement, worsening, or stability. This pattern is typical in radiology where changes over time are critically evaluated, using terms like 'interval decrease', 'unchanged since prior', or specific comparisons to previous studies.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5980303487086724,0.6,0.5877192982456141,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1510,latent_1510,11858,0.023716,0.02156748,9.398604,Interpretation of findings suggestive of pathologies in image comparison.,"The examples show that activations are higher when providing descriptions involves interpreting findings suggestive of specific pathology or changes, especially those that are subtle or could be infections, and not necessarily definitive, compared to previous images.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.575,0.696969696969697,99.0,101.0
+1511,latent_1511,5929,0.011858,0.01676915,4.5296826,Noting interval change in specific findings through comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the presence of a finding requiring comparison with previous imaging. They focus on changes or stability in clinical conditions across sequential imaging studies, particularly when a specific finding like pneumothorax or existing pulmonary conditions is referenced for change over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4756097560975609,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1512,latent_1512,11817,0.023634,0.013280394,4.250192,Detailed radiological descriptions with thorough comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on providing descriptions that are more complete and include detailed radiological findings and comparisons, regardless of whether there is a significant change from prior imaging. This level of detail in the reports may involve multiple anatomical findings, device placements, or potential clinical implications that are juxtaposed against previous studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1513,latent_1513,11329,0.022658,0.021676663,6.073151,Stable appearance or no significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently include a stable appearance or insignificant interval changes compared to previous imaging, indicating consistent findings over time. Phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no interval change' describe results that have not evolved from prior exams, demonstrating a pattern of reporting stillness in imaging findings.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7971457696228339,0.7989949748743719,0.7542372881355932,0.89,100.0,99.0
+1514,latent_1514,7457,0.014914,0.014625089,8.184688,Comparison of findings with prior imaging to assess change or stability.,"All high-scoring examples have two prominent features: a direct comparison between the current and prior imaging and the identification or description of new, unchanged, or resolved pathologies. This pattern reflects how new findings are compared against prior studies to assess for changes or stability.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.589386418565971,0.605,0.5755395683453237,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1515,latent_1515,10091,0.020182,0.017924195,7.8685293,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"These examples all feature a comparison to previous imaging studies to determine changes or stability over time, explicitly highlighting the utility of evaluating multiple images for diagnostic purposes within radiology reports.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5987752085313061,0.62,0.5821917808219178,0.85,100.0,100.0
+1516,latent_1516,4279,0.008558,0.020424826,6.3602376,Descriptions of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels incorporate both current and prior image evaluations to articulate changes over time, frequently mentioning the stability or improvement of certain conditions. This focus on direct comparison to past images while noting static conditions or improvements is key.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1517,latent_1517,1946,0.003892,0.0055960035,10.645522,References to radiologic imaging techniques and views.,"These examples tend to include references to specific radiologic techniques used in the imaging process, such as 'PA and lateral views' or 'AP upright and lateral'. These techniques are typical for diagnosing chest ailments and explaining image acquisition in reports.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3736884584342211,0.515,0.5076923076923077,0.99,100.0,100.0
+1518,latent_1518,10322,0.020644,0.013939802,3.408301,Descriptions include stability or changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels incorporate comparisons with prior images and note any changes or stability in the radiological findings. These reports often mention specific measurements and compare current findings to previous imaging, indicating stability or change in previously noted conditions.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1519,latent_1519,16897,0.033794,0.02489671,4.626422,Description and comparison of current vs prior imaging findings.,"The high activation examples frequently involve a clear, concise description of radiological findings where the assistant explicitly provides a description or impression of the images with a focus on the comparison of current imaging findings against previous examinations. This clearly highlights that the pattern involves summarizing and comparing imaging results effectively.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1520,latent_1520,11313,0.022626,0.0139751565,4.302456,Mildly enlarged cardiac silhouette on imaging.,"These examples often note the size of the heart in radiology reports, frequently mentioning 'mildly enlarged' cardiac silhouette or similar terms. This description, especially when 'mildly enlarged' is used, appears to be a consistent characteristic.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7162817222697462,0.7236180904522613,0.8235294117647058,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+1521,latent_1521,10197,0.020394,0.017829532,5.95276,Focus on procedural changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"This dataset indicates prioritization of descriptions of new or notable procedural changes or placements, such as tubes or catheters, in radiology studies, when compared with prior images. This pattern aligns with clinical relevance for monitoring interventions and identifying any interval modifications such as new placements or removals noted in examples with higher activations.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5825242718446602,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1522,latent_1522,3818,0.007636,0.011909268,5.64248,"Specific requests to describe findings compared to prior imaging, often implying absence of prior report.",Activation is high when no previous report is available or when noted explicitly that there has been no change from a prior report. This likely indicates that the model is responding to gaps in data or specific requests for change/no-change confirmation rather than the presence of detailed historical comparison.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3861057137225085,0.455,0.4730538922155688,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1523,latent_1523,4767,0.009534,0.008387533,5.811996,Comparison findings show differences between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions where findings between current and prior imaging studies are compared, specifically focusing on changes or stability in certain medical conditions, devices, or anatomical structures.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4142857142857143,0.29,100.0,100.0
+1524,latent_1524,29456,0.058912,0.033382066,5.3712792,Interval change in medical devices and associated impact.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently discuss the interval placement or removal of medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, and assess for changes or complications like pneumothorax. The focus is on tracking changes in device positioning from prior studies and any associated impacts on lung aeration, effusions, or other conditions.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7068772856562373,0.7085427135678392,0.75,0.63,100.0,99.0
+1525,latent_1525,10708,0.021416,0.012056089,3.6263428,Explicit reference to changes observed from prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples emphasize findings that are described in comparison to previous imaging or a baseline, where changes are explicitly noted. These are changes, resolutions, or new findings that are directly compared with specific reference to prior findings or imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1526,latent_1526,40857,0.081714,0.07134995,5.5634093,Emphasis on unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,The examples with higher activation often contain conditions that are discussed in comparison to previous studies. The reports frequently point out that recent observations remain unchanged or are similar to those seen in prior imaging studies. This pattern suggests that the notable feature is stability or minimal change compared to prior findings.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1527,latent_1527,12115,0.02423,0.014412392,7.3260055,Providing findings based on direct image comparison without prior report data.,"These examples show increased activation levels when the task instructs to provide findings in comparison to previous frontal images, specifically when no previous report information is available or when explicit prior comparisons are made or referenced but not provided. This implies the task emphasizes reliance on direct image comparison without prior textual guidance.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.2592592592592592,0.7446808510638298,47.0,153.0
+1528,latent_1528,4006,0.008012,0.012992152,4.933991,Focus on interval change in comparison to prior imaging.,"The observed pattern indicates frequent mention of comparison between an image or radiological study and a prior study, coupled with observations of changes or stability in the condition. This pattern is common in serial radiological studies where comparative assessment over time is crucial for evaluating medical conditions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4444444444444444,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1529,latent_1529,4875,0.00975,0.009930285,4.839979,Requests comparison to prior imaging for evaluating findings.,"Examples with high activation levels demonstrate sentences that request comparisons in imaging findings, both explicitly stating this need and describing the findings in direct reference to previous images, using phrases like 'compared to prior' and specific dates of prior studies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1530,latent_1530,19056,0.038112,0.027629394,7.832951,Interval change in pathology compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation scores focus on detailed descriptions of interval changes in pathology, such as changes in opacities, effusions, or pneumothoraces, compared to prior imaging studies. These changes are critical diagnostic insights that influence patient management.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6678743961352657,0.67,0.6198347107438017,0.7894736842105263,95.0,105.0
+1531,latent_1531,6786,0.013572,0.010061515,3.6544275,Presence of past comparison imaging and detailed analysis of changes over time.,"The highly activated examples discuss the findings in detail, with specific mention of prior radiological studies, and include observations related to changes in anatomical or pathological features over time, while less activated examples lack these comparative aspects or omit detailed past or present findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4046278924327705,0.405,0.4,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1532,latent_1532,4835,0.00967,0.007889881,4.1657557,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting interval changes or stability.,"The consistent pattern across the examples with high activation levels is the mention of interval changes or stable findings in direct comparison to prior imaging studies, with conclusions drawn from comparing past and present images.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6101769796512384,0.625,0.5899280575539568,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1533,latent_1533,4139,0.008278,0.009955402,4.11743,Inclusion of interval change in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve interval changes such as worsening or improving medical findings compared to prior imaging. Descriptions mention changes in conditions like pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or cardiomegaly, highlighting dynamic changes over time, which are integral to understanding disease progression or resolution.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6301081806896203,0.635,0.6097560975609756,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1534,latent_1534,3274,0.006548,0.004321476,4.288844,Normal cardiac contours and clear lung fields on chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activations all mention findings that include normal heart size or cardiomediastinal contours, clear lungs without acute pathology (e.g., no pleural effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax), and reference chest images for comparison. Such descriptions are consistent with reports focusing on the absence of acute anomalies.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5555555555555556,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1535,latent_1535,3031,0.006062,0.007683726,6.1639743,Use of both current frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"Examples with high activation involve a combination of multiple image views (frontal and lateral) and the requirement to compare these with prior images. The pattern manifests in contexts where multiple perspectives are provided to identify and compare findings historically, which is a salient task in diagnostic imaging interpretation.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1536,latent_1536,4417,0.008834,0.018877078,6.78293,"Emphasis on comparison with prior studies, highlighting stability or minimal changes.","The examples with higher activation consistently emphasize the comparison of current imaging studies with prior ones, especially highlighting the stability or mere subtle changes across exams. This includes statements such as ""unchanged"", ""compared to previous"", or mentioning minimal changes, showcasing a linguistic pattern of evaluating follow-up or tracking stability in radiological findings.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5775862068965517,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1537,latent_1537,1924,0.003848,0.0058905142,6.0702133,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging studies related to interval changes.,The highly activated examples describe findings explicitly in comparison with prior imaging studies. This occurs in medical contexts where past radiological results are assessed against current images to note changes over time. The indication often provides a reason for evaluating such interval changes.,0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.371846359798167,0.39,0.3333333333333333,0.22,100.0,100.0
+1538,latent_1538,5143,0.010286,0.009049816,8.274625,Presence of comparative analysis with prior imaging and current findings.,"The examples in the dataset with activation levels greater than zero all involve the use of past tense language or imply temporality in some form, such as 'provide description of findings in comparison to prior'. This suggests that the pattern involves evaluating or measuring changes over time in the context of medical imaging, specifically making comparisons with previous test results or images.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4037033162464692,0.43,0.4507042253521127,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1539,latent_1539,9014,0.018028,0.010210346,5.262397,Description and positioning of enteric feeding or drainage tubes.,"Activation levels are higher in examples explicitly mentioning the placement of a Dobbhoff tube, nasogastric tube, or similar, with clear descriptions of their position, migration, or required adjustments. This suggests a focus on the placement and positioning details of enteric feeding or drainage tubes in the reports.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1540,latent_1540,10977,0.021954,0.01523323,5.0916753,Comparative descriptions of interval changes in radiological findings.,"The pattern in examples with activations involves direct description of interval changes between current and prior examinations, identifying specific alterations or unchanged findings like tube placements or opacities. These are typically presented in detailed comparative language, highlighting stable conditions despite clinical interventions or retaining prior pathological features like opacities or tube positions.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.604301948051948,0.61,0.5887096774193549,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1541,latent_1541,5007,0.010014,0.009416802,8.769733,Focus on bony abnormalities or rib fractures in comparison to previous imaging.,"These examples often highlight comparisons to prior imaging with attention to changes in bone structure, such as rib or clavicular fractures. The major pattern involves examination of bony abnormalities or fractures in reference to previous injuries or trauma that remain unchanged. Such examinations often focus on rib fractures, their stability, and repeat incidents of trauma or associated conditions.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5364088647670737,0.59,0.78125,0.25,100.0,100.0
+1542,latent_1542,9112,0.018224,0.012526113,3.2519162,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' in radiology prompts.,"High activations correspond to the mention of a prior report (PRIOR_REPORT) being included, indicating the presence of a structured format that opens with 'PRIOR_REPORT' followed by findings or indications.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4796495110499715,0.565,0.5359116022099447,0.97,100.0,100.0
+1543,latent_1543,4892,0.009784,0.0081499275,7.6561317,Reports feature interval changes and positions of medical devices.,"Given examples show that higher activations are associated with radiological reports explicitly noting the presence or change in medical devices like tubes, catheters, or lines, across multiple images for comparison, often indicating thorough analysis of interval changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4538941356246398,0.455,0.4505494505494505,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1544,latent_1544,36671,0.073342,0.03614372,2.732684,Use of specific 'prior' imaging references for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation mention imaging comparisons to a named or specified 'prior' study. In contrast, examples with lower activation have unclear or non-specific references to prior studies or conditions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1545,latent_1545,15381,0.030762,0.013451754,4.515306,Comparison highlighting interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples exhibiting a high activation share the common pattern of an increase, decrease, or stability in a radiological condition compared to a prior image. This suggests the model strongly activates when there is a clear comparison in image change over time, rather than simply noting findings without temporal comparison.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.4951456310679611,0.6623376623376623,77.0,123.0
+1546,latent_1546,10949,0.021898,0.036391556,8.000139,Patterns indicating pulmonary vascular congestion or cardiomegaly.,"Examples with increased activation levels, such as 4 or above, consistently include findings related to pulmonary vascular congestion, cardiomegaly, or other indications of potential cardiovascular compromise, which may suggest these are the patterns of interest.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3850102943928982,0.425,0.3469387755102041,0.17,100.0,100.0
+1547,latent_1547,8351,0.016702,0.01138443,5.2861595,Higher activation with image comparison and change assessment.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the model providing radiological observations and comparisons based on both current and prior images. This pattern emphasizes the importance of comparison with previous images to assess changes, which is common in radiology when determining progression or resolution of conditions. Activations are higher when prior images are referenced for direct comparison purposes.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4900662251655629,0.74,100.0,100.0
+1548,latent_1548,2821,0.005642,0.010330911,11.0643835,Generating findings comparison without explicit prior image access.,Examples with high activations predominantly feature instructions or reports that compare current imaging findings against prior imaging without explicitly noting available comparison images. This alignment of duties seems to point towards generating output without direct access to prior image data.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5319068214583808,0.5326633165829145,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,99.0
+1549,latent_1549,25729,0.051458,0.035868574,4.533905,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation consistently describe changes or consistency in findings when compared against prior or earlier studies. The reports provide detailed descriptions of findings and include terms like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', 'persistence', or 'as compared to' indicating stability or variations from previous imaging, indicative of an emphasis on change over time in these reports.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1550,latent_1550,7385,0.01477,0.013718497,5.704817,Description of specific findings or comparisons rather than absence of abnormalities.,"Examples with 
+activation values highlight reports making specific findings rather than stating absence of abnormalities. The commonality among high activation examples is the explicit request within the reports to provide descriptions of findings seen in current images compared to prior images. This is emphasized with terms like 'provide a description' followed by specific impressions or findings, even if normal, but primarily focuses on asserting evaluations over stating absence (like normal hearts with specific attention to issues). This signals high activation when there is an emphasis on summarizing based on specific, reportable findings.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3657289002557544,0.38,0.4076923076923077,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1551,latent_1551,54349,0.108698,0.062663086,5.7989836,Interval comparison with prior imaging to assess change.,"The examples with higher activation often involve situations where there's a need for interval comparison to previous images to assess for changes such as improvement, progression, or stability in findings. They include clear comparative statements following such analyses, indicating changes or no changes in the patient's condition over time, especially concerning existing pathology like opacities, effusions, or tubes/catheters.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1552,latent_1552,10314,0.020628,0.012940021,5.176362,Detailed radiographic findings without critical changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with low activation levels describe clear lungs, normal cardiac silhouette, and lack pulmonary issues but do not specifically mention any significant consolidation or changes compared to prior images. Examples with high activation levels tend to list detailed findings when tasked with comparing current and prior images, focusing on providing impressions from images with no comparison (focusing on findings without needing past context).",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1553,latent_1553,3720,0.00744,0.0070673088,5.824064,Evaluation of current frontal and lateral chest images without prior comparison.,"The examples with higher activation involve descriptions of findings from both current frontal and lateral radiographic views, where there are no prior imaging comparisons available. This suggests the focus is on evaluating new imaging findings solely from current perspectives without reference to previous studies.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4689028651292802,0.525,0.5714285714285714,0.2,100.0,100.0
+1554,latent_1554,5920,0.01184,0.013239196,2.8978655,Findings reflect stability or resolution in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples tend to describe conditions in the context of an unchanged result or comparison showing stability or resolution. Descriptions emphasize a normal appearance, absence of acute changes, or findings that are resolved, indicating a focus on stability in follow-up imaging as opposed to identifying new pathologies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5512820512820513,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1555,latent_1555,10546,0.021092,0.016563516,4.235299,Verification of recent procedural changes or interventions.,"Examples with higher activation levels have specific indications and findings that reference recent significant interventions, such as surgical procedures or placements of lines, tubes, or catheters. These reports often focus on verifying changes resulting from these interventions, such as line positioning or surgical outcomes, with explicit comparisons to ascertain effects or complications.",0.515577007459412,0.5208333333333334,0.5263157894736842,0.4166666666666667,24.0,24.0,0.5055900621118012,0.5175879396984925,0.5217391304347826,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+1556,latent_1556,4968,0.009936,0.008181214,5.213328,Detailed change or stability descriptions between current and prior images.,"The pattern observed here is a need for a description of imaging findings in relation to prior images, especially emphasizing minor or no changes between them, and highlighting specific developments or stability in medical conditions being monitored. High activation is seen when detailed comparisons are made between recent and prior images.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1557,latent_1557,9741,0.019482,0.014184458,7.0807495,Changes in device position or fluid status versus prior imaging.,"Examples with high activations involve radiology statements that specifically describe changes in medical devices or fluid status compared to prior imaging. These often include the position or adjustment of tubes (e.g., chest tubes, NG tubes) and changes in pulmonary edema or pleural effusions.",0.6938775510204082,0.6938775510204082,0.68,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6323436831104732,0.635,0.6111111111111112,0.5913978494623656,93.0,107.0
+1558,latent_1558,3418,0.006836,0.010087938,5.1171384,Reports focusing on positioning of medical devices relative to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the interval change or consistency in the positioning and status of tubes, lines, catheters, and devices within the chest. These descriptions often occur when assessing the effectiveness or complications related to medical interventions and monitoring devices.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4269847799259564,0.4723618090452261,0.4418604651162791,0.19,100.0,99.0
+1559,latent_1559,4289,0.008578,0.019645331,6.23135,"Incorporates description of multiple images, particularly front and lateral views, and comparisons to prior images.","Analyzing and comparing multiple examples of radiology report findings which juxtapose current image information with prior image observation allows the identification of patterns. The activation levels indicate that reports which involve comparing current and prior images for changes, however slight, show higher activation. This pattern aligns with the notion that identifying consistency or change between snapshots across different times is emphasized in the activation.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.503030303030303,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1560,latent_1560,7209,0.014418,0.010245259,5.9526386,Detailed comparison with prior studies on cardiomediastinal and pulmonary features.,"High activation levels correspond to examples that discuss cardiomediastinal contours, lung fields, and pathologies such as atelectasis or degenerative changes, actively referencing prior studies for stability or changes in these findings. The pattern seems to be detailed comparison with prior radiographs emphasizing cardiomediastinal and pulmonary features.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1561,latent_1561,58799,0.117598,0.07352078,6.3294983,Comparison emphasis on stability or changes in known pathologies.,"Examples with specific references to comparison with prior imaging, particularly when changes or absence of changes in conditions or pathologies (e.g., stable lesions) are noted, tend to have higher activation levels. These reports emphasize follow-up and observation of previously identified abnormal findings for monitoring stability or progression.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5643564356435643,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1562,latent_1562,3213,0.006426,0.0073084366,5.4261823,Instruction for comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"High activation examples consistently instruct to provide detailed descriptions comparing current imaging with prior imaging, often involving multiple views. This suggests the pattern focuses on instructions for detailed comparative analysis in radiology studies, which usually involve specific reference to both current and prior imaging findings.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1563,latent_1563,7416,0.014832,0.011058489,5.6397147,Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the description of cardiomegaly or enlarged heart size compared to a previous image. It seems that the focus is on identifying stability or changes in the size of the heart, indicating potential cardiac issues.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5668333377897805,0.595,0.6938775510204082,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1564,latent_1564,4349,0.008698,0.013986327,4.6710305,Comparison with prior imaging findings emphasized.,"Highly representative examples describe findings relative to comparison with prior imaging studies, notably when current conditions are unchanged from previous assessments or specify any changes. These examples involve reviewing radiological changes over time against prior reports or examinations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1565,latent_1565,26593,0.053186,0.022000149,3.249972,Use of direct imaging comparison with explicit mention of unchanged or stable findings.,"Upon examination, this set features a high activation level when the medical reports specifically involve comparison of current imaging findings to previous studies, especially focusing on stability or change of conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5342465753424658,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1566,latent_1566,2373,0.004746,0.006413629,5.040279,Comparison of current imaging to prior for changes in specific conditions.,"Patterns with high activation levels often mention findings compared to prior images that highlight changes or stability of certain features. These examples emphasize evaluation of image studies to assess presence or interval change in specific conditions or features, such as pneumonia, pleural effusion, or cardiomegaly, relative to prior imaging.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1567,latent_1567,4504,0.009008,0.013767848,5.21441,Detailed comparison to prior imaging studies and assessment of stability or change.,"These examples consistently involve detailed descriptions of imaging studies where changes, comparisons, or assessments are performed in reference to prior images, while also using terms like ""stable,"" ""unchanged,"" or analyzing devices and detailed pathologies present across imaging exams.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1568,latent_1568,10609,0.021218,0.019508211,8.081907,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging to identify changes over time.,"The pattern is evident from the frequent inclusion of phrases like 'compared to', 'compared with', 'in comparison to', and explicit citations of previous exams, suggesting a focus on identifying changes over time by comparison with prior imaging studies.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1569,latent_1569,4179,0.008358,0.0089383535,6.040827,Comparison with prior images for interval change impacting treatment decisions.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly mention changes or interpretations from prior comparative images to evaluate the current condition. They look for interval changes that impact clinical management, often with implications for treatment decisions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1570,latent_1570,70603,0.141206,0.06812093,2.7268903,Detection of interval changes or improvements due to interventions in imaging.,"Examples with lower activation levels generally involve straightforward findings without significant comparison or interval changes. Examples with higher activation mention specific changes and intervals, indicating comparisons. In higher activation examples, detailed observational comparisons, particularly those noting interval changes or improvements related to medical interventions (e.g., tube placements, reexpansion post-pneumothorax) play a crucial role.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.6031746031746031,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1571,latent_1571,1656,0.003312,0.005750389,5.045424,Comparison with prior imaging in radiological analysis.,"The examples with high activation predominantly involve comparisons with prior images, which is tied to the analysis of interval changes in the clinical scenarios described. This pattern is a staple in radiology for assessing changes in patient condition over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4938271604938271,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1572,latent_1572,12895,0.02579,0.014628873,7.420658,Explicit instruction to describe findings compared with prior images.,"These examples describe the use of phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating explicit instructions for comparison with past images. Even in cases where the outcome is new observations or changes are noted, the prompt includes a format or explicit call for comparison to previous imagery.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3924330295498481,0.395,0.3026315789473684,0.7540983606557377,61.0,139.0
+1573,latent_1573,2144,0.004288,0.005794274,4.669064,Presence and stability of medical devices or postoperative findings.,"These examples often involve the presence of previously installed medical devices or postoperative changes, such as median sternotomy wires, cardiac devices, or central lines, showing stable or slight changes in positioning across comparative studies. This is a common focus for radiological evaluations, where continuity of device positioning or post-surgical status is assessed over time.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6116504854368932,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1574,latent_1574,26242,0.052484,0.04034791,7.090038,Interval or longitudinal changes in radiology imaging.,"The high-activation examples frequently include descriptions of changes over time, specifically interval changes between current and previous imaging. These changes can include descriptions of conditions improving or worsening, such as resolution or development of opacities, effusions, or edema. This suggests that the model activates on instances where interval or longitudinal changes are noted in the reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4263285024154589,0.43,0.4180327868852459,0.5425531914893617,94.0,106.0
+1575,latent_1575,60900,0.1218,0.069969065,7.847231,Comparison of interval changes post-surgical or major procedure.,"Samples with high activation levels are typically detailed descriptions of interval changes following surgical intervention, a major diagnosis, or a significant procedure, evaluated against prior imaging. These samples highlight the change over time and implications for patient care, often related to concerns of improvement or further complication after major treatments.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6967438513530878,0.705,0.5510204081632653,0.782608695652174,69.0,131.0
+1576,latent_1576,12652,0.025304,0.016896656,3.6460304,Comparisons focusing on changes in medical devices or effusions.,"Some examples indicate stable status or subtle changes in tube placements, catheter positions, or pleural effusion extents, which are details specifically mentioned in active examples. These examples also include reference to comparison with prior images, focusing particularly on support device placements and pleural effusion changes. This suggests the pattern highlights changes in medical devices or effusions over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4262295081967213,0.26,100.0,100.0
+1577,latent_1577,5795,0.01159,0.011078259,4.989203,Explicit mention of unavailability of prior comparisons in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation mention the lack of available prior comparisons explicitly in the radiology study findings. This lack of comparison means that the current assessment must be based solely on available present data, which can be detrimental when evaluating for changes or progressions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1578,latent_1578,2192,0.004384,0.0055968203,4.734954,Emphasis on providing comparative radiologic findings.,Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve providing descriptions of comparisons between current radiologic images and prior images. The format emphasizes comparative analysis of diagnostic imaging findings over time.,0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1579,latent_1579,5046,0.010092,0.016089875,6.024457,Comparative analysis of current and prior images with descriptions of stability or change.,"The high activation examples consistently provide a description of the findings in both current and prior radiological images, but the comparison or change over time is specifically expressed. This results in an assessment of stability or change in the findings between the present and past images.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4090544871794872,0.41,0.4166666666666667,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1580,latent_1580,25053,0.050106,0.031032167,6.3152003,Comparative findings with specific interval changes from prior imaging.,"The highest activation scores are associated with radiology studies where findings are given as compared to prior imaging, and there is significant focus on detailing such findings. Examples show consistent language and detailed comparison of past and present states, usually involving follow-up of known conditions with specific changes noted over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.401849710982659,0.4120603015075377,0.3835616438356164,0.28,100.0,99.0
+1581,latent_1581,4617,0.009234,0.014116221,7.4028597,Importance of comparison to prior imaging studies for identifying interval changes.,"The examples focus on describing specific differences or similarities in the radiographic findings when compared to a prior study. Descriptive terms like 'interval change', 'compared to previous', or references to 'prior images' indicate the necessity of historical comparison in discerning changes, whether for improvement, deterioration, or stability purposes in radiological evaluations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4806201550387597,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1582,latent_1582,26748,0.053496,0.058001872,6.4677224,Detailed comparison to prior images with specific reference to stability or change over time.,"Examples show consistent language describing imaging findings with respect to changes, or stability over time, compared to prior images or studies. This includes mentions of unchanged heart size, unchanged pleural effusion, or comparison words such as 'similar', 'unchanged', etc. Examples with high activation levels provide detailed longitudinal comparisons and denote consistency or minor changes in the condition over time.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5360824742268041,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1583,latent_1583,3576,0.007152,0.0059377383,6.2256236,Reports with specific findings descriptions and comparison details.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports that include specific descriptions of image findings, comparisons with prior images, clarity in the reporting of changes (whether improvements or stabilities), and specific mentions of imaging techniques or study details such as PA and lateral views. This inclusion of structured comparison, descriptions, and explicit technical details are key metrics underlying the activation pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3918760882559318,0.415,0.4388489208633093,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1584,latent_1584,122807,0.245614,0.16257328,3.8166714,Documentation of changes in medical device or tube positioning compared to prior images.,"Examples with significant activation levels consistently reference changes in device or tube positioning (e.g., endotracheal tube, enteric tube), particularly emphasizing placement or adjustments made since prior evaluations. This pattern specifically involves descriptive language about medical hardware visibility and positioning changes in sequential radiographic imaging.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1585,latent_1585,67515,0.13503,0.074610755,4.2943482,Cardiac or catheter/tube placements with procedural context.,"Examples with high activation levels often have mentions of cardiac, catheter, or tube placements, along with observations of stability or changes since prior procedures or examinations. This implies that activations correlate with descriptions involving procedural or device placement contexts, especially when these are noted in relation to the cardiac region or mediastinum.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7044014128610436,0.705,0.6880733944954128,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1586,latent_1586,24011,0.048022,0.019549828,2.532015,Description of findings with comparison to prior images or reports.,"The high activation levels are observed in examples where there is a request for a description of the radiology findings, along with clear reference to the comparison with prior images or reports, which are integral parts of clinical radiological assessments.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5136268343815513,0.565,0.5393939393939394,0.89,100.0,100.0
+1587,latent_1587,2451,0.004902,0.008888835,6.7471385,Inclusion of 'PRIOR_REPORT' in comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include the phrase ""PRIOR_REPORT"" and emphasize radiological examination findings in direct comparison with previous images, often to track changes over time.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,0.5681818181818182,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5442877332641112,0.605,0.5606936416184971,0.97,100.0,100.0
+1588,latent_1588,4765,0.00953,0.009964917,3.5149488,"Presence of frontal, lateral, and prior images with condition-based comparison or indication.","This pattern involves providing both current and prior images along with a comparison that revolves around specific changes or points of evaluation, often referencing given indications or findings. Several examples reference the inclusion of both current and past imaging for comparison, but those with high activation levels uniquely involve specific references to provided frontal and lateral images along with procedural or condition-based indications.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3541818181818181,0.445,0.4685714285714286,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1589,latent_1589,4999,0.009998,0.010278152,4.532613,Structures reports with descriptions of findings using prior image comparison focus.,"The examples with high activation levels have a clear characteristic of providing a description of findings based on the comparison with prior images, even when no prior images are available. The focus is on whether such comparisons are structurally noted in the reports, showing an emphasis on evaluating current findings in the context of earlier images, regardless of the absence of those comparisons in the content.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1590,latent_1590,15985,0.03197,0.020457335,6.6939073,"Reports highlighting stability of certain features (e.g., heart size) with new findings.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the stability of certain features in comparison to previous images (e.g., cardiac silhouette, mediastinal contours) even when new findings or changes (like atelectasis or effusion) are noted. This suggests the model emphasizes reports detailing changes while noting specific unchanged factors like heart size or silhouette.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5213944023046224,0.542713567839196,0.3975903614457831,0.4459459459459459,74.0,125.0
+1591,latent_1591,5106,0.010212,0.014993231,4.0368385,Reports stable findings without significant interval change.,"High activation levels are observed in examples that describe a consistent disease process or findings using specific parameters that stable over time without reporting significant changes. This interpretation is consistent in the way it's articulated in the output radiology reports, emphasizing a lack of acute change.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.392,0.43,0.36,0.18,100.0,100.0
+1592,latent_1592,8036,0.016072,0.016787741,5.832133,Comparison to prior images with missing or incomplete reference details.,"High activation levels are associated with images where findings must be compared to previous images, but with missing or incomplete reference information making it challenging to provide context. Specifically, there is a frequent absence of previous examination dates or specific comparisons, requiring inference from limited information.",0.3055555555555556,0.44,0.4680851063829787,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4086339444115908,0.475,0.4850299401197604,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1593,latent_1593,9287,0.018574,0.012276508,3.5890114,Minimal or no change in findings between compared studies indicating stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings of minimal or no change in the observed features across radiological comparisons, indicating stability over time. This stability is emphasized in the reports as a significant piece of information.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5542168674698795,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1594,latent_1594,3047,0.006094,0.008243979,9.716,Comparison with prior image to describe interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the description of findings in the current radiology study compared directly with findings in prior images. This pattern can be seen in the need to use both current and prior images as reference points for interpretation, typically involving multiple views, and is a common request in radiological assessments that focus on assessing changes over time, especially when significant changes or stability of findings is the primary concern.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1595,latent_1595,2519,0.005038,0.006728189,3.9628382,Frontal image comparison as a primary focus in radiology findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the word 'frontal' at the start and focus on providing a comparative analysis of multiple images, usually involving current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal images. This focus on the frontal image comparison is critical in each observed pattern.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4232830271216098,0.4673366834170854,0.4805194805194805,0.74,100.0,99.0
+1596,latent_1596,2491,0.004982,0.008223306,5.680364,Interpreting findings relative to prior imaging results.,"These examples rely heavily on comparing findings from present to previous imaging studies indicating stability, improvement, or changes in pathology over time. This pattern is explained by the focus on evaluating conditions relative to past health, rather than assessing the current imaging findings in isolation.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1597,latent_1597,6991,0.013982,0.016964631,6.9368925,Presence of both current frontal and lateral views in image comparison tasks.,"High activation levels are associated with cases where the radiological study involves images from both the current frontal and lateral views when comparing with prior frontal images. This implies that the provision of both views is a characteristic pattern, which contrasts with lower activation cases that only involve either a frontal image or a lack of comparison views.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1598,latent_1598,3879,0.007758,0.007835706,5.7207375,Radiology findings show no acute changes or significant pathology compared to prior.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently show that the comparison mentions no acute findings, stable findings or no prior comparison available, which indicates that these might be part of typical assessment language without detecting significant change or pathology.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1599,latent_1599,98759,0.197518,0.16406031,5.6718564,Describing findings without comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve cases where radiological assessments are made in the absence of direct comparison with prior imagery. These cases emphasize evaluation based on observations of the current chest images without explicit reference to previous studies, often suggesting changes or findings based solely on current observations.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7878571428571428,0.7878787878787878,0.8020833333333334,0.77,100.0,98.0
+1600,latent_1600,5596,0.011192,0.016403142,5.1546545,"Reports on pulmonary edema, cardiomegaly, and unchanged inserted devices.","The examples that have higher activation frequently report findings related to pulmonary edema or cardiomegaly, often in conjunction with comparison to previous radiological exams. Additionally, they frequently mention lines and devices, like ETTs or vascular sheaths, that remain stable or are unchanged, indicating stability despite pathologies like edema or mild effusions.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6294070512820513,0.63,0.6413043478260869,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1601,latent_1601,14412,0.028824,0.015819388,4.439306,Observing changes in pathologies or medical device placements over time.,"These examples highlight the evaluation of changes in findings between current and prior imaging studies, with a focus on interval changes in pathologies such as effusions, opacities, or placements of medical devices, while often noting the stability or alteration in the context of medical interventions. The key pattern involves assessing what has changed or remained the same regarding specific findings.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1602,latent_1602,6811,0.013622,0.00848957,3.4858341,Emphasis on comparison showing stability or changes from prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently mention the comparison of current imaging with prior studies, providing descriptions of continuous or unchanged findings. These include explicit changes like 'interval change', 'unchanged', or 'no significant change', often referencing specific details like tortuous aorta, cardiomediastinal silhouettes, or unchanged nodules, highlighting temporal stability or change.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.584,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1603,latent_1603,6033,0.012066,0.015381586,6.870946,Focus on identifying interval changes in radiological findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve requests to identify or rule out interval changes, typically due to a patient's clinical indications that require monitoring for new or evolving pathologies. The reference to prior imaging studies is frequent, as are mentions of findings in comparison to those studies.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1604,latent_1604,27436,0.054872,0.021785459,3.963773,Comparison of findings which show stability or no significant change.,"This set of examples contains both phrasing about comparing images and phrases indicating no significant change. These examples focus on analyzing radiological images for descriptions of changes in the findings compared to prior studies, particularly focusing when there are no major changes.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5188679245283019,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1605,latent_1605,4175,0.00835,0.00845494,7.7016387,Descriptions of interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The selective references to previous images indicate a focus on changes or stability in specific radiological findings over time. These include descriptions of interval changes or stability in pathologies such as lung opacities, placement of medical devices, and cardiac conditions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1606,latent_1606,3799,0.007598,0.011280172,5.830731,Comparison of previous and current medical device placement or intervention.,"The examples with high activations consistently involve a comparison with a prior imaging study, particularly focusing on changes in positioning or presence of medical devices or tubes, and evaluating changes in the lung or mediastinal regions. This suggests a pattern centered around the documentation of changes related to medical interventions and object placements.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.6197183098591549,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1607,latent_1607,5524,0.011048,0.009975445,4.516115,Comparison with prior imaging is explicitly described.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include phrases that indicate changes or comparisons in radiological findings between current and prior images. These comparisons often highlight specific interval changes or confirm stability, signifying the importance of chronological comparison in assessing medical imaging studies.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4508196721311475,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1608,latent_1608,5152,0.010304,0.011373627,4.397132,Comparison to prior chest images to assess changes.,"These examples consistently involve providing radiology findings by comparing a current frontal chest image with a prior frontal image, indicating the stable or changed condition of specific features or objects, such as tubes, lines, or opacities. The task context consistently asks for a comparison, generally involving images, which highlights the difference or stability over time as the core pattern.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1609,latent_1609,3548,0.007096,0.010002893,5.060479,Emphasis on cardiac size or mild heart enlargement in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples given a higher activation level emphasize changes in or stability of cardiac size, explicitly noting enlargements like 'mildly enlarged'. These descriptions are often linked with mentions of cardiomegaly or heart-related findings, contrasted or stable with previous imaging studies.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.591002044989775,0.605,0.6666666666666666,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1610,latent_1610,2735,0.00547,0.009650221,7.8680725,Low lung volumes or poor inspiratory technique affecting radiographic findings.,"Highly activated examples include clear references to low lung volumes and/or technique-related observations, often noting their effects on the cardiac silhouette or other structures. These descriptions frequently involve terms like 'semi-upright' or 'poor inspiratory'. The consistent element across highly activated samples is attention to lung volume and its impact on image interpretation.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3943064809206542,0.475,0.4074074074074074,0.11,100.0,100.0
+1611,latent_1611,10030,0.02006,0.01936606,4.5526977,"Changes or persistence in pleural effusion, atelectasis, or opacities in comparative radiology.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe specific changes or consistency in findings such as atelectasis, pleural effusions, or pneumonia in the radiology findings when comparing current images to prior ones. These descriptions often mention changes in pleural fluid, atelectasis, or opacities as key findings, indicating a pattern of delicate monitoring of such conditions in comparative radiology.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7144022847817217,0.72,0.671875,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1612,latent_1612,3411,0.006822,0.009699885,4.333966,Presence of prior report/content for comparative purposes.,"These examples all involve references to a prior report or prior imaging, indicating an explicit comparison with previous imaging to guide the interpretation of the current images. This comparison is a common aspect of radiology reporting that helps contextualize findings.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,100.0,100.0
+1613,latent_1613,26681,0.053362,0.027569884,3.5687237,Focus on stable cardiomediastinal findings amidst procedural changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically report findings related to the cardiomediastinal or vascular regions that remain unchanged or stable, especially after invasive procedures or when previous conditions are noted, possibly reflecting a focus in these contexts.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5393258426966292,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1614,latent_1614,5346,0.010692,0.012050389,4.3833284,Providing descriptions using current images compared to prior images showing changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions of radiology findings with explicit comparisons to prior images, showcasing changes or stability over time which seems to be the meaningful pattern being captured rather than just referencing comparison opportunities.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3869962817807255,0.39,0.4035087719298245,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1615,latent_1615,7524,0.015048,0.012042996,2.9034758,Comparison with previous imaging for change detection.,"These examples include references to the presence of comparison studies, indicated by explicit mentioning of previous findings or comparison with prior images, often using placeholders for this info. This linguistically signifies attentive evaluation relative to historical data, aiding in detecting changes over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1616,latent_1616,14038,0.028076,0.016164843,6.592826,Comparison between current and prior chest images.,"The samples generally involve a comparison between current and prior chest images, with varying but low activation levels indicating no strong pattern related to specific anatomical findings like pneumonia, cardiomegaly, or pleural effusions. Instead, the consistent element across samples with activation is the presence of comparison between current and past imaging, suggesting the pattern involves considering changes over time or stability in imaging findings.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1617,latent_1617,5203,0.010406,0.0101187285,5.8712416,"Assess differences from prior imaging, ruling out acute findings.","The examples with higher activation levels include scenarios where findings were determined based on the comparison between current imaging and prior examinations, with explicit mentions of differences or similarities observed. There is also emphasis on identifying or ruling out acute cardiopulmonary processes or changes in pre-existing conditions, focusing on elements not evident in acute common pathologies like pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or pneumonia.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3999399939993999,0.4,0.4019607843137255,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1618,latent_1618,4828,0.009656,0.009336779,7.3323483,"Positioning of tubes (e.g., above carina) and comparison with prior images.","The examples with high activation levels focus on the positioning and stability of enteric tubes or endotracheal tubes, measured in centimeters above the carina. These examples also often reference comparison with previous exams when assessing tube position.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5876794016575702,0.5879396984924623,0.5894736842105263,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+1619,latent_1619,2579,0.005158,0.004944561,4.739925,Comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on comparisons of findings or changes between current and prior imaging studies, often pointing out stability or progression of conditions like atelectasis, effusion, opacities, or changes in lung volumes. This pattern highlights the significance placed on comparative analysis to track patient conditions over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4104124408384043,0.455,0.4709677419354838,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1620,latent_1620,12200,0.0244,0.012701904,3.0547774,Request for findings description without prior comparison.,"The examples with a higher level of activation involve reports where the assistant is tasked with describing the current imaging findings without any comparative analysis to previous images despite their availability, contrary to typical radiological practices which emphasize comparison to prior studies to assess change.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.48,0.24,100.0,100.0
+1621,latent_1621,5395,0.01079,0.010866795,4.5311933,"Use of comparison to track stability, changes, or new findings.","Examples with higher activation have specific findings that are stable, improved, or new in comparison to previous studies. This reflects a pattern of reports providing updates and changes in medical conditions over time, highlighting comparison and interval change found in radiology reports.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5577607593571352,0.59,0.5584415584415584,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1622,latent_1622,5105,0.01021,0.0096705025,4.0462823,Comparisons with prior imaging studies noting stability or changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently discuss comparisons with prior studies and note changes or stability in findings. This includes recognitions of stability or changes in radiological features across different imaging sessions, often utilizing explicit phrases like 'as compared to prior' or 'in comparison with the prior study'.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1623,latent_1623,8989,0.017978,0.015190944,6.1844234,Comparisons made with prior imaging studies.,"These examples have high activation levels when they include a prior imaging study for comparison, similar to previous examples. The pattern emphasizes reports that reference previous imaging for a comparative evaluation, a common scenario in radiological assessments to note changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1624,latent_1624,7815,0.01563,0.012276977,5.980878,Focus on assessing interval changes in imaging findings.,"High activation samples consistently feature explicit evaluation of interval changes or lack thereof. This pattern focuses on documenting stability or progression of findings compared to prior imaging, central to radiological assessments.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5536554542765723,0.585,0.5555555555555556,0.85,100.0,100.0
+1625,latent_1625,2512,0.005024,0.011520944,7.999257,Documentation of interval changes between current and prior images in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a prompt requiring comparison of current and prior images to document interval changes. This pattern highlights the importance of evaluating changes or stability in radiological findings over time, reflecting a critical task in serial imaging follow-up.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1626,latent_1626,6863,0.013726,0.011339252,4.5277777,Discrepancies or mismatches in image findings versus expected patient scenarios.,"The pattern is centered around discrepancies or mismatches between the image, its description, or the assumed scenario versus expected findings. These cases often involve unusual or unexpected findings not aligning with or contradicting the provided information or context related to the patient's situation.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.525,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1627,latent_1627,4334,0.008668,0.008430098,6.7740483,Detailed comparison of current and prior chest imaging findings.,"High activation examples consistently involve a pattern where descriptions compare current chest imaging with previous chest images, highlighting findings such as the stability or change in appearance of pathologies, positioning of medical devices, or detailed changes in lung or mediastinal conditions. These examples often include explicit mention of prior radiographs and describe differences in specific features or conditions over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5217391304347826,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1628,latent_1628,9372,0.018744,0.021637287,4.876863,Emphasis on changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The model shows higher activation levels for examples that include explicit imaging comparisons, especially when changes in condition (improvement, resolution, or stasis) are noted. The presence of specific phrases that depict changes over time compared to prior exams increases activation, reflecting familiarity with assessing changes in radiological findings over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4250546061929847,0.4292929292929293,0.4396551724137931,0.5151515151515151,99.0,99.0
+1629,latent_1629,7798,0.015596,0.017279383,6.6019297,"Comparison of current chest images to prior ones, noting interval changes.","The samples with high activation levels focus on the comparisons made between current chest images and previous ones, often indicating stability, change, or specific findings such as new opacities or stable features. This process of comparing current images to prior ones helps clarify interval changes crucial for diagnosis and treatment decisions.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3949848746218655,0.395,0.396039603960396,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1630,latent_1630,8316,0.016632,0.011801522,4.7917852,Evaluation of tube placement or change relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly describe comparison with previous imaging studies and highlight changes, or absence of change, related to tubes such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, or PICC lines. The emphasis on interval assessment or positioning of tubes is the relevant pattern here.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.714935860568628,0.715,0.7087378640776699,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1631,latent_1631,4855,0.00971,0.010248249,4.2775946,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve stable or unchanged findings between current and prior imaging, with explicit descriptions of stability over time, suggesting the model activates when identifying non-progression of certain conditions rather than acute changes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3552546744036106,0.375,0.3076923076923077,0.2,100.0,100.0
+1632,latent_1632,4058,0.008116,0.009334709,4.993763,Comparison involving current and prior frontal and lateral chest images.,"Most examples with high activation mention comparing findings between current and prior frontal and lateral chest images. This comparison often reveals interval changes such as edema, effusions, or consolidation. This specific structure of comparison, especially involving multiple views, seems to correlate with higher activation levels.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+1633,latent_1633,4088,0.008176,0.008216115,5.1038046,Detailed findings compared to prior reports with structured format and references.,"The presence of specific fields, including 'Given the current image', 'PRIOR_REPORT', a prior imaging reference, and the technique description, is notable. These examples typically have detailed comparison descriptions explicitly relating observations to prior imaging reports, which corresponds to high activation. The activation levels suggest the model strongly responds to comprehensive and structured imaging reports within these contexts, often highlighting changes or notable findings between current and prior images.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1634,latent_1634,4707,0.009414,0.011286728,7.15695,Comparisons of current and prior chest images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature the use of both current and previous images for comparison, provided most of the times as frontal and lateral views of the chest.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1635,latent_1635,5501,0.011002,0.014491877,5.225264,Unchanged or minimally changed findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where a comparison is made between current and prior imaging, indicating unchanged or minimally changed findings. They frequently highlight stability in conditions, using explicit statements about unchanged structures, conditions, or findings in the context of prior exams.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1636,latent_1636,5918,0.011836,0.015165765,10.920845,Comparison of current images to prior focusing on changes in conditions or devices.,The high activation examples often describe evaluation of changes in various conditions or positions of medical devices using explicit comparisons with prior images.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4488188976377952,0.6477272727272727,88.0,112.0
+1637,latent_1637,33977,0.067954,0.05714397,4.3589363,Comparison to prior imaging studies for findings assessment.,"The pattern observed is reports comparing current imaging findings with prior studies to note stability, changes, or specific findings over time. This pattern is consistent with radiological assessment where comparisons against previous exams are critical to evaluate progression, resolution, or stability of medical conditions.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1638,latent_1638,6027,0.012054,0.014510899,4.233279,Explicit descriptions of comparison to prior images with noted changes or stability.,"Examples showing high activation often include descriptions of detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, demonstrating specific stable changes, improvements, or worsening conditions. Activation is generally high when findings explicitly state differences or similarities to earlier examinations, indicating the importance of documenting changes over time.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3931643220742746,0.395,0.3820224719101123,0.34,100.0,100.0
+1639,latent_1639,11528,0.023056,0.01281728,6.2426605,Significant change in patient condition or medical device positioning.,"Examples with activation highlight radiological studies where there is a significant change in the patient's condition or in the status of medical devices, such as intubation, extubation, and modification of tube placement. This change prompts careful attention and triggers higher activation levels.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.3958333333333333,0.5205479452054794,73.0,127.0
+1640,latent_1640,11554,0.023108,0.018866532,6.7721167,Detailed comparison with prior findings or reports.,"All high activation examples describe a detailed comparison with multiple prior reports specifically mentioning significant findings that remain unchanged over time, often mentioning stable conditions or slight improvements. This pattern includes consistent keywords like 'unchanged', 'interval', 'improvement', and specific comparative analyses against previous examinations.",0.4897959183673469,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4411764705882353,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1641,latent_1641,4564,0.009128,0.015452603,4.677656,Interval changes or stability concerning prior conditions/interventions.,"In the examples with high activation, descriptions of radiological findings specifically relate to changes over time or interval findings linked to past interventions, diagnoses, or conditions, e.g., changes since thoracocentesis, catheter position adjustments, etc.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1642,latent_1642,7398,0.014796,0.013483708,7.975902,Presence of diagnostic descriptions comparing current and prior images.,"The examples demonstrate descriptions or observations of findings in radiology studies with a comparison made to previous or prior images, even if some comparisons are inferred as being present or left incomplete. Highest activations occur when new diagnostic descriptions are noted, suggesting that focusing on the presence of comparison even without definite prior reports still plays a role in the model's sensitivity.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4554455445544554,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1643,latent_1643,42762,0.085524,0.051972516,10.705447,Focus on interval changes or developments since prior studies.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation levels involve findings of interval changes from previous studies, such as improvements or developments in lung conditions or cardiac size, suggesting a focus on dynamic comparisons rather than static descriptions.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.2538461538461538,0.868421052631579,38.0,162.0
+1644,latent_1644,5437,0.010874,0.01710335,7.450373,Descriptions of clearly 'seen' or 'identified' features in images.,The highlighted examples all contain descriptions involving detailed interpretations of objects or conditions that are 'seen' (or observed) in the images. This is a common pattern in radiology reports when specific findings or medical devices like endotcheal tubes or pacemakers are included for identification or confirmation purposes.,0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7416287722199255,0.75,0.6838235294117647,0.93,100.0,100.0
+1645,latent_1645,95224,0.190448,0.12830673,5.9015594,Descriptive reports of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activations of 3 or higher consistently provide findings or impressions indicating stability of previously described conditions or assert that there is no significant interval change. These samples habitually compare the findings with prior images to declare stability or no new pathology, illustrating the common radiological practice of commenting on changes based on previous images.",0.67003367003367,0.673469387755102,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5876288659793815,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1646,latent_1646,30532,0.061064,0.036773086,5.4821258,Interval change in disease findings from prior imaging.,"The pattern is observed when there is improvement or worsening of disease from a prior state, often discussed in radiology reports. Keywords like 'improvement', 'resolved', 'worsened', 'new', and 'increased', along with comparisons to prior radiographs, indicate changes in the medical state of the patient as captured by imaging.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7949538646195394,0.795,0.7864077669902912,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1647,latent_1647,9313,0.018626,0.010599737,5.178447,"Focus on tube or catheter placement, comparing positions to prior imaging.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently reference the position of internal lines or medical devices, such as nasogastric tubes or endotracheal tubes, and their comparison to prior images. This suggests that monitoring or reporting changes in the location or status of these devices is a common task for the model, as it's often associated with acute care scenarios in clinical radiology.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5529411764705883,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1648,latent_1648,10058,0.020116,0.015276414,4.141408,Detailed radiological findings compared to prior images showing changes.,"The highly activated examples involve detailed changes in radiological findings expressly compared to prior imaging exams. This pattern is characterized by specific additional observations since previous imaging, such as changes in opacities, effusions, tube placements, or disease progress marked by phrases like 'new', 'worsening', 'interval change', or explicit comparisons with dates.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5866767983789261,0.5879396984924623,0.5818181818181818,0.64,100.0,99.0
+1649,latent_1649,13784,0.027568,0.012115729,3.158041,Aortic abnormalities or tortuosity in chest imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples describe findings related to the aorta, particularly tortuosity, calcification, or enlargement, sometimes in relation to other changes in heart or lung structures. These examples highlight significant observations of the aorta that affect its appearance or positioning on chest imaging.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,1.0,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4233836339099497,0.53,0.7142857142857143,0.1,100.0,100.0
+1650,latent_1650,8374,0.016748,0.02472379,4.775415,Comparison of current and prior imaging for changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve comparing current radiological images with prior studies, focusing on identifying changes or stabilities in findings. When such comparisons are emphasized or central to the analysis, the activation is higher.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1651,latent_1651,9579,0.019158,0.015324637,5.3250823,Assessment of interval change through comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples often describe findings in terms of changes or stability compared to prior imaging. Reports consistently include some form of longitudinal analysis, indicating either stability or change in the current image relative to past ones. Such comparative remarks focus on intervals, changes, or persistences in features over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4745762711864407,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1652,latent_1652,2810,0.00562,0.004867755,3.1637626,Focus on image comparison despite missing views or explicit prior data.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize the process of comparing current radiological findings to prior images, often directed by a specific indication or clinical question, typically mentioning the terms 'comparison' or 'compared to' explicitly with additional directives, even with absent lateral or prior views.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1653,latent_1653,3203,0.006406,0.009807145,5.2284327,Detailed assessment of devices and tubes in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention devices, such as pacemakers, chest tubes, or intubation apparatus, often noting their position or function. Report descriptions tend to elaborate on stability or changes associated with these devices compared to prior studies, making them indicative of the pattern.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.6075949367088608,0.48,100.0,100.0
+1654,latent_1654,6486,0.012972,0.0106087355,4.3360176,Explicit mention of comparison to prior images or studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention comparison to prior images or studies, utilizing specific language such as 'compared to', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'. When comparisons are absent or generic without specifics on previous findings, activation levels tend to be lower.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5194805194805194,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1655,latent_1655,22992,0.045984,0.034709275,6.886632,Describing findings in active comparison to prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve an element of providing a description of the findings specifically in comparison to prior images or studies. This indicates that the pattern being activated is the explicit task or instruction to describe changes or findings using reference images.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3998575933272302,0.41,0.4285714285714285,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1656,latent_1656,8404,0.016808,0.014701074,3.6283236,Attention to changes or stability in medical devices or persistent conditions.,"The examples consistently highlight radiological findings in comparison with previous images, focusing on changes or stabilities in specific medical devices (e.g., chest tubes, catheter placements) or persistent medical issues (e.g., opacities, effusions). Reports mentioning no change or checking for device placements seem to have higher activation, indicating a focus on tracking the progression of either the condition or the stability of current medical interventions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1657,latent_1657,2819,0.005638,0.010344807,7.42691,Comparative analysis with prior radiological studies.,"The examples that show high activation involve references to some prior radiological study or imaging information, where the current findings are described in comparison to previous examinations or radiographs. This pattern highlights the importance of historical context in interpreting radiological images, indicating that the model is activated by the comparative elements in these contexts.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.424,0.46,0.4733333333333333,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1658,latent_1658,6014,0.012028,0.013963136,4.9228487,Providing structured radiology findings compared to priors.,"Examples with high activation involve the task of summarizing and comparing current radiographic findings against any available prior images, even if true radiological comparison isn't provided. Thus, the high activation seems related to the structured description of radiological findings in comparison to prior images, rather than the specifics of findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4337276071022201,0.465,0.4761904761904761,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1659,latent_1659,2303,0.004606,0.009090943,6.020508,Provision of multiple images for comparison to prior imaging tests.,"The examples both mention the presence of multiple radiographic images and specify comparisons to prior imaging studies, often utilizing descriptive phrases that compare current findings to past observations. The high activation levels suggest that a pattern focusing on the comparison process across multiple images is being recognized by the model.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.443170651817884,0.49,0.4936708860759494,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1660,latent_1660,24514,0.049028,0.046953242,4.491976,Comparison with prior images highlighting consistent or resolved findings.,"The highest activation levels correspond to examples where findings from current images are explicitly characterized in relation to prior images, especially when there's improvement, persistence, absence of change, or resolution of findings like opacities or devices (e.g., lines, tubes). This involves a specific analytical comparison of the current images with past ones.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1661,latent_1661,9902,0.019804,0.020882843,9.149972,"Complex findings and interval changes noted on chest imaging, post-surgical or ongoing conditions.","Examples with high activation levels are characterized by the presence of complex descriptions of pathologies, including multiple medical devices, specific changes in chest findings, atelectasis, pleural effusion, or mediastinal shift, in conjunction with prior imaging. This often reflects post-surgical changes, chronic conditions, or interval progression, requiring detailed comparison and evaluation for such conditions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.4888888888888889,0.7252747252747253,91.0,109.0
+1662,latent_1662,4468,0.008936,0.011664569,5.404489,Comparison with prior reports or imaging given.,The pattern in these examples is characterized by the explicit reference to the comparison made to prior radiological images or reports. This is a standard procedure to assess changes in findings over time or to confirm stability of certain observed features.,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3906359189378057,0.455,0.4727272727272727,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1663,latent_1663,52583,0.105166,0.051420104,4.2742085,Interval changes in pulmonary or pleural findings compared to prior studies.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples describing interval changes in pulmonary or pleural conditions, such as effusions, atelectasis, or pneumonia, in comparison with prior studies. Descriptions of stability or minor changes tend to have lower activation.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6145277965507747,0.615,0.6236559139784946,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1664,latent_1664,34665,0.06933,0.04999528,7.9851546,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples show a pattern where radiology reports highlight a description of findings, predominantly using the current and prior imaging for comparison. This pattern is common in radiology where imaging studies are evaluated over time to assess changes in conditions or diagnoses.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5328467153284672,0.7448979591836735,98.0,102.0
+1665,latent_1665,7515,0.01503,0.016988616,5.289758,Clinical condition changes aligned with symptom progression.,"Examples with low activation explicitly involve radiograph comparison instructions focusing on changes not related to the underlying medical condition, often invoking routine or stable conditions. Examples with activation exhibit clinical conditions such as pulmonary edema or changes in lung opacities, consistently aligning with symptomology and clinical progression instructions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3759590792838875,0.39,0.3428571428571428,0.24,100.0,100.0
+1666,latent_1666,27482,0.054964,0.029335162,3.7890894,Comparison of current and prior images showing no significant changes in findings.,"The activations focus on comparisons made between current and prior radiological images, with an emphasis on analysis of stable or unchanged findings across different evaluations.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5822050290135397,0.595,0.6461538461538462,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1667,latent_1667,61539,0.123078,0.058680627,4.285226,"Descriptive comparison of current to prior radiological findings, with emphasis on changes or stability.","The more activated examples consistently involve descriptions of changes or stability in medical findings compared to previous imaging, indicating these comparisons are essential to the observed pattern. These reports often describe altered catheter/tube placements or the presence/resolution of conditions like effusions or atelectasis as they relate to prior exams.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1668,latent_1668,27464,0.054928,0.03759533,5.667831,"Changes in lung findings indicating infection or effusion, compared with prior imaging.","These examples often describe findings that indicate changes within the lung, such as opacification, nodular densities, atelectasis, or pleural effusions in comparison to previous imaging, indicating possible infection or the need to monitor changes over time. Such references to past imaging focus on changes that suggest infection or improvement/stability of previous findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6731615336266499,0.675,0.7058823529411765,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1669,latent_1669,4312,0.008624,0.013631737,6.175527,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette assessment.,"Examples 1, 31, 40, and others with higher activations discuss the assessment of the heart or cardiac silhouette, often in conjunction with a lack of acute osseous or pulmonary abnormalities. The normality or stability of cardiomediastinal contours is highlighted, regardless of the presence or absence of technical or minor limitations in evaluation.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6822617026129711,0.6834170854271356,0.6666666666666666,0.74,100.0,99.0
+1670,latent_1670,10929,0.021858,0.011944149,6.777384,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in detail between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically involve the description of changes or stability in specific details between current and prior imaging studies. They explicitly specify the intervals or stability of features, such as device positioning or nodules, between the studies.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5334352701325178,0.5376884422110553,0.3963963963963964,0.6376811594202898,69.0,130.0
+1671,latent_1671,16885,0.03377,0.024574969,5.2000933,High activation when comparing current findings to prior imaging results.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions that compare current radiological findings to prior imaging. This pattern is distinguished by the explicit use of comparative language, such as 'as compared to the prior', 'unchanged from prior', and specific differences or similarities documented over time with previous exams.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5126582278481012,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1672,latent_1672,6078,0.012156,0.010480815,5.031664,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight stable or unchanged findings when compared against previous imaging reports, which implies a particular emphasis on the consistency of observations over time. This pattern is especially focused on comparing and identifying interval changes or the stability of findings on sequential scans.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4426451758680425,0.445,0.4367816091954023,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1673,latent_1673,11162,0.022324,0.011829654,3.2658553,Findings compared to prior radiographs or exams to note change or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current radiology findings to those from prior exams, marked by phrases such as 'compared to previous examination', 'interval change from study obtained four hours prior', or 'as compared to previous radiograph'. This points to the importance of noting changes over time or stability in findings as representative of the pattern.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1674,latent_1674,3934,0.007868,0.008153395,5.346349,References to interval change or stability in findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting interval changes or noting stability in findings. This aligns with typical radiological assessments that track disease progression or resolution through imaging comparisons.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.389490148591034,0.395,0.3703703703703703,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1675,latent_1675,6617,0.013234,0.009712282,3.2060885,Detailed image findings descriptions with comparative observations.,"These examples demonstrate use of comparative language alongside detailed descriptions of findings from image analysis. The activation signals that the pattern involves the utilization of supplementary comments on findings to further explain image-based observations, focusing on chest, heart, and lung evaluations.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4019496426496957,0.4020100502512563,0.4059405940594059,0.41,100.0,99.0
+1676,latent_1676,20394,0.040788,0.018737352,5.6003613,Description or synthesis of findings across multiple image views.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions to provide descriptions or compare findings across multiple views (frontal and lateral images) or against prior images. This pattern indicates a focus on synthesizing or comparing multiple similar image sets to extract insights or detect changes.,0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4134670160647146,0.4747474747474747,0.4647058823529412,0.8586956521739131,92.0,106.0
+1677,latent_1677,65765,0.13153,0.09766977,7.425997,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior images for changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature clear directives to provide a comparative description between current and prior images. These examples explicitly include tasks like comparing the positioning of medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) to prior images or assessing changes in observed conditions relative to past imaging.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1678,latent_1678,4399,0.008798,0.008255158,4.181144,Comparative analysis of images evaluating interval changes.,"Most examples with high activation levels focus on describing findings based on comparisons between current and previous imaging. Examples often discuss stability, changes, or resolution of specific medical findings between images. This highlights the importance of comparative analysis and interval changes in medical imaging.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1679,latent_1679,8279,0.016558,0.014499826,6.946963,Invasive device placement changes in comparison to previous imaging.,"Example 10 and 15, which have the highest activations, describe interval placement or changes of invasive devices like endotracheal tubes and pleural catheters compared with previous imaging. This suggests the model is sensitive to detection or documentation of device placement changes in radiology reports.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6736210489317367,0.675,0.7011494252873564,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1680,latent_1680,3279,0.006558,0.013875786,5.419579,Focus on comparing current and prior images in reports.,"Higher activation levels are associated with the mention of both 'given the current' and 'the prior' when referring to images, indicating a focus on comparative analysis of images. This suggests that the model is identifying patterns where both the current and prior images are explicitly provided and compared in the report.",0.3055555555555556,0.44,0.4680851063829787,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1681,latent_1681,7636,0.015272,0.023708958,6.931437,Stability and lack of change in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings as being stable or unchanged over time, as compared to previous imaging. This pattern shows how radiology reports often mention lack of change in pathologies, devices, or other findings, highlighting stability over time.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6262626262626263,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1682,latent_1682,5315,0.01063,0.012783813,5.6852736,"Reports focused on interval changes, especially stability.","Examples with high activation levels frequently mention interval changes or comparisons with prior images and tend to indicate stable or unchanged states, suggesting that the model is attuned to detecting phrases about stability or minor changes rather than acute or significant findings.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6138613861386139,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1683,latent_1683,4502,0.009004,0.014470873,5.414019,Instruction to compare current images to prior images.,"The highly activated examples contain instructions to compare the findings in provided current images with prior images, emphasizing the need for comparative analysis. This pattern highlights a systematic approach to examining changes in patient condition by focusing on ""current vs prior"" imaging studies, with explicit instructions for comparison.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1684,latent_1684,40558,0.081116,0.07006254,6.700327,Mild enlargement of cardiac silhouette and tortuous aorta.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe the cardiac silhouette or heart size (e.g., 'mildly enlarged') and the aorta (e.g., 'tortuous') in the findings. This suggests that these features are central to the activation pattern being observed, indicating potential underlying conditions such as cardiomegaly or aortic abnormalities.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.584,0.61,0.72,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1685,latent_1685,4574,0.009148,0.007935813,5.155164,"Descriptions of normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","Activation levels indicate there's a pattern of normal or unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours between current and prior images, with descriptions focusing on methodological or examination consistency, observations of 'clear lungs,' or lack of significant change.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4698795180722891,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1686,latent_1686,27521,0.055042,0.030550279,6.736043,Changes in medical device placement or positioning.,"Examples with higher activation reference changes in medical device placement or associated complications, particularly those related to feeding tubes, catheters, or other invasive devices. These require careful comparison to prior images to ensure correct placement, highlighting the importance of monitoring changes over time for these devices.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7058744886226904,0.725,0.6351351351351351,0.6266666666666667,75.0,125.0
+1687,latent_1687,4975,0.00995,0.010795656,4.9917607,Stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions of findings indicating similarity or stability between current and prior imaging, especially using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'no significant interval change'. The comparison of images is explicitly called out, and findings are often evaluated in light of previous examinations.",0.3631027253668763,0.3673469387755102,0.35,0.28,25.0,24.0,0.3475821394086484,0.375,0.288135593220339,0.17,100.0,100.0
+1688,latent_1688,18336,0.036672,0.022685695,2.9080844,Mild cardiomegaly with potential related thoracic findings.,"The representative examples involve findings of mild cardiomegaly on radiologic images and suggest possible related conditions, such as pulmonary vascular congestion or pleural effusions. The pattern involves identifying mildly enlarged heart size and often correlating with other thoracic pathologies or considerations.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5839368005266623,0.605,0.6909090909090909,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1689,latent_1689,24294,0.048588,0.02454484,5.702673,Comparison with prior imaging studies detailing interval changes.,"The majority of samples exhibiting the pattern discuss the presence or absence of findings in relation to historical or comparative imaging studies, highlighting interval changes or stability in specific pathologies. The reports emphasize either worsening, improvement, or unchanged status comparing current images to prior examinations.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.4873949579831932,0.6666666666666666,87.0,113.0
+1690,latent_1690,26013,0.052026,0.050500315,4.9162173,Explicit comparison with prior imaging and associated changes or stability.,"This pattern highlights examples where there are specific comparative observations made between the current and previous imaging studies, reflecting changes or stability in the findings, often with specific clinical implications.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1691,latent_1691,4593,0.009186,0.008915335,6.2127566,Comparison with prior images and detailed interval change assessment.,"Radiology reports often use detailed comparative analysis with prior examinations to assess changes. This pattern includes evaluations of interval change, direct comparisons to previous findings, or mentions of stability against past studies. Images and descriptions are incomplete for low-activation examples, suggesting they lack these comparative details.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4851485148514851,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1692,latent_1692,1943,0.003886,0.006336797,6.7534733,"Interval changes and comparisons with prior images, describing progression or resolution.","Highly activated samples routinely contain descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging, emphasizing either progression or resolution of findings. These descriptions include specific medical observations about alterations in the state of the patient as seen in imaging.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5786587076860283,0.5829145728643216,0.5666666666666667,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+1693,latent_1693,36030,0.07206,0.036598407,4.5742087,Improvement or resolution of findings in image comparison.,The model shows higher activation when reports indicate improvement or resolution of prior abnormalities on imaging comparisons. This suggests a pattern that emphasizes the clinical progression or resolution of findings as significant.,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4501178318931657,0.51,0.5294117647058824,0.18,100.0,100.0
+1694,latent_1694,16904,0.033808,0.0175524,5.2461185,Presence of comparison details with prior imaging studies.,"The examples that display higher activation levels consistently make comparisons with previous studies, such as noting new or changed findings, or describing the stability of certain elements like opacities or effusions. This indicates a pattern where the presence and detail of comparison to past imaging is emphasized.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1695,latent_1695,12092,0.024184,0.013890595,5.5066423,Findings unchanged or stable in comparison to prior imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels all involve radiological evaluations where findings are stated in terms of being unchanged or not showing significant interval changes compared to prior images. This indicates a pattern of stability in the imaging findings through explicit comparison and stability assertions.,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6147592245153221,0.615,0.6095238095238096,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1696,latent_1696,6974,0.013948,0.009235601,4.6143074,Critical interval changes or acute findings in comparison with prior images.,"The samples with higher activation levels involve a comparison between current and prior images but emphasize acute changes or critical differences in findings between them. Higher activations often include specific acute processes like pulmonary edema, pneumonia, pleural effusion, or changes indicating severe conditions.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4716981132075472,0.25,100.0,100.0
+1697,latent_1697,17757,0.035514,0.045089208,7.0253468,Significant reported changes or instructions in relation to previous images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings in comparison to a prior report while having either updated indications, techniques or findings, indicating a focus on cases where there is meaningful change noted relative to past reports or special instructions like post-procedure confirmation, rather than findings that remained unchanged or where no prior comparison is noted.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1698,latent_1698,7622,0.015244,0.0137978,5.5264072,Right apical or hilar opacifications or obstructions.,"The pattern involves right apical, lung base, or hilar findings which are described with terminologies indicating possible obstruction or space-occupying concerns like opacification, nodular appearance, or foreign bodies. These findings often require more detailed investigations or considerations of anatomical obstructions.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3730407523510972,0.5,0.5,0.05,100.0,100.0
+1699,latent_1699,5899,0.011798,0.011575003,8.92216,"Interval changes in lung, pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or device positioning.","These examples often note the presence of atelectasis, pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or changes in medical devices, reflecting conditions that require close monitoring. Reports typically document changes or constancy since previous compared studies, highlighting significant findings such as interval changes in pleural effusions, device positions, or lung opacities, especially in acute settings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5428571428571428,0.6129032258064516,93.0,107.0
+1700,latent_1700,6624,0.013248,0.009281066,6.8241816,Stable findings post-procedural or device-related interventions in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight changes or stability of findings explicitly compared to previous examinations. Though many examples mention comparison, those with higher activation particularly focus on unchanged findings or absence of acute changes regarding tubes, pneumothorax, and other common radiological findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5409836065573771,0.33,100.0,100.0
+1701,latent_1701,15935,0.03187,0.014174251,3.8058546,Changes relative to prior chest imaging.,"Activation is high when current and prior chest images are compared, especially when changes or stability in patient conditions, cardiomediastinal contours, or placement of medical devices are reported. The reports with activation often involve specific findings compared against previous images.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1702,latent_1702,4918,0.009836,0.018952928,4.82124,Descriptive comparison with prior radiographs to assess interval change.,"These examples all request a description of new radiographs compared to previous ones, showcasing an emphasis on longitudinal monitoring in radiology reports. Most examples highlight how changes in medical status, such as after a procedure or to assess pathologies, are documented through comparative analysis over time.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1703,latent_1703,6603,0.013206,0.02389269,6.1101203,Explicit directives for comparison with prior imaging studies results.,"Highly activated examples typically include clear instructions to compare the current and prior imaging findings, with a focus on describing interval changes or stability. The pattern involves the explicit use of words such as 'comparison', 'prior', and specific directions for examining differences, even if the findings are stable. This comparison framework is systematically followed in higher activation examples, irrespective of the result of the comparison.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1704,latent_1704,16997,0.033994,0.016247949,3.678336,Evaluating change or stability through comparison to prior images.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels typically contain descriptions of comparisons between current imaging findings and previous images, highlighting either stability or change. This focus on interpreting imaging findings in the context of previous imagery suggests a pattern of analysis that evaluates changes or stability over time.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.5661764705882353,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1705,latent_1705,26925,0.05385,0.037157133,6.953845,"Attention to technical imaging factors (e.g., lung volumes, rotation) affecting anatomical appearance comparisons.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently contain intervals or changes compared to prior imaging with specific focus on technical factors such as lung volume, rotation, or position affecting the apparent size or shape of anatomical structures. Lower activations lack emphasis on these technical details significantly impacting the interpretation of current findings compared to previous ones.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6429918290383407,0.645,0.5669291338582677,0.8181818181818182,88.0,112.0
+1706,latent_1706,15746,0.031492,0.016865117,5.3600473,Complexity involving medical devices or detailed comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation tend to involve complex medical devices or findings, such as placement of tubes, catheters, or surgical changes, which require detailed comparison to prior images. These frequently necessitate provider assistance to understand or verify specific findings.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4649545211342964,0.525,0.5149700598802395,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1707,latent_1707,11622,0.023244,0.01167603,2.39967,Reports explicitly compare current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern across these examples is that they specifically involve comparisons of current radiological findings with prior images. The activation level is driven by the presence of explicit language indicating comparison between current and previous imaging studies, often leading to interpretations of stability or changes (e.g., 'unchanged', 'improved', 'new').",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5080645161290323,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1708,latent_1708,4085,0.00817,0.006107243,3.7253926,Need for detailed comparison with prior imaging due to complex or chronic conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels typically describe imaging studies where there is a requirement to compare the current images with prior ones. They often involve complex conditions such as chronic diseases or require monitoring for subtle changes, thereby necessitating detailed observations and longitudinal comparison.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1709,latent_1709,4740,0.00948,0.009473924,5.2481766,Interval changes in acute or chronic conditions or medical device placement.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve making comparisons between current and prior radiographs, specifically focusing on interval changes in acute or chronic conditions such as cardiopulmonary markings or the positioning of medical devices, rather than routine findings like normal contours or absence of pathology.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.425287356321839,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1710,latent_1710,13525,0.02705,0.021016773,3.6250243,Comparisons to specified prior imaging reports or exams.,"Examples with high activation levels involve specific prior imaging reports or exams indicated by placeholders like ""PRIOR_REPORT"" or ""COMPARISON:"" followed by prior examination details. This suggests a pattern where the analysis includes predefined prior imaging findings for comparison.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1711,latent_1711,12254,0.024508,0.012659184,7.7711487,Stable or interval changes compared to prior images.,"These examples show stable findings or changes over time based on comparison with prior images, notably descriptions of stability in pleural effusions, opacities, or in interval changes within the lung fields. Language such as 'compared to prior' or specific reference to prior images is used.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.246031746031746,0.7560975609756098,41.0,159.0
+1712,latent_1712,4015,0.00803,0.009452531,10.538098,Explicit requests to compare current findings with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to include a clear directive to provide a comparison with a prior imaging study, often noted explicitly in the prompt's instruction or within the technical details (""COMPARISON"" field). These comparisons are integral to understanding the progression or status quo of a medical condition, which aligns with the observed pattern of high activation involving explicit instructions related to comparison.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4590358704719533,0.465,0.4556962025316455,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1713,latent_1713,8346,0.016692,0.011110537,4.2979546,Explicit description of large or significant pleural effusions.,"This set of examples highlights situations where there is an explicit mention of pleural effusion, particularly when classified as large or with significant compressive effects. These references tend to indicate serious consideration for clinical decision-making and necessitate close monitoring for changes in respiratory status or treatment adjustment.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3503118503118503,0.5,0.5,0.02,100.0,100.0
+1714,latent_1714,4268,0.008536,0.010249239,6.7913175,Request for comparison without referenced prior image/study details.,"The pattern shows high activation levels when the prompts instruct comparison of current frontal and lateral images to prior frontal images or reports, despite lacking explicit ""comparison"" data. The comparison request becomes the focus, suggesting the presence of managing non-comparable datasets is the pattern.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1715,latent_1715,43297,0.086594,0.03855633,3.6862175,Changelessness or improvement in condition on imaging compared to prior study.,"The explanations involve either unchanged or improved conditions on imaging when compared to prior studies, with a valid comparison indicating a thorough evaluation of current images against previous ones, often highlighting stability or resolution of certain issues. This is a common theme in radiology reporting, emphasizing stability or change of identified pathologies over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1716,latent_1716,4564,0.009128,0.009264054,4.2619724,Presence of pacemaker or implanted cardiac devices.,"The presence and description of pacemaker devices, often with accompanying leads, are consistently highlighted in the highly activated examples, indicating that the model is attentive to mentions of pacemakers or similar devices in the imaging studies.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5766488413547237,0.62,0.8333333333333334,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1717,latent_1717,5170,0.01034,0.020130727,5.305133,Emphasis on comparison with PRIOR reports or images.,"The pattern is characterized by the explicit comparison with prior reports, often using the word 'PRIOR'. The high activation examples either request comparison to prior images or emphasize findings with respect to the prior status, displaying a recurring reference or need to relate current findings to past reports.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1718,latent_1718,2465,0.00493,0.008844475,8.797493,Description involves both current frontal and lateral views for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels involve providing descriptions that involve both frontal and lateral views, often with explicit or implicit instructions to identify changes or findings seen in comparison to prior imaging. The activation decreases when it's explicitly stated that no prior imaging is available or if the focus is on a specific current event rather than comparison.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4946160097521332,0.4974874371859296,0.4956521739130435,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+1719,latent_1719,7837,0.015674,0.010877351,6.8181725,Comparative analysis with prior images to assess stability or changes.,"The main pattern observed is the emphasis on comparing current imaging findings with prior images or reports to note stability, changes, or interval developments. This direct comparative analysis highlights the importance of monitoring progression or resolution of medical conditions over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1720,latent_1720,16121,0.032242,0.017430436,5.3418713,Changes in pathology compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation typically include instances where findings on current imaging are described in direct comparison to previous images, showing interval improvement or worsening of past conditions. High activation is noted particularly when there is a change from a pathologic to a non-pathologic state or vice versa, indicating clinical relevance through temporal comparison of changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6777327935222672,0.678391959798995,0.6666666666666666,0.72,100.0,99.0
+1721,latent_1721,6882,0.013764,0.010771176,5.3070774,Structured comparison of findings between current and prior images.,"The examples that exhibit high activation consistently involve describing radiological findings in explicit comparison to a prior image, often with technical or indication notes provided in the prompt. This pattern focuses on detailing interval changes or the stability of findings in a structured comparison format, typically involving sentence structures directly contrasting current and past image observations.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1722,latent_1722,16686,0.033372,0.014518275,3.2188969,Comparison between current frontal and lateral vs. prior image.,The dataset seems to highlight instances where a direct comparison between a frontal and lateral view of current imaging as well as a prior image is provided. Examples with higher activation levels may indicate a focus on a specific observation in these circumstances.,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1723,latent_1723,2876,0.005752,0.0076008607,6.1083035,Stable or unchanged findings between current and prior images.,Examples with high activation levels feature findings or components described as 'unchanged' or 'stable' between current and prior images. This suggests the model strongly activates when there is a clear comparative analysis with a conclusion of no significant interval change.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1724,latent_1724,3324,0.006648,0.010720537,8.39092,Assessment of interval changes in tube or line positioning in intubated or post-operative patients.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize evaluating changes from prior imaging, involving typical radiological assessment of tubes, lines, or devices (e.g., endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) in intubated or post-operative patients, highlighting potential interval changes or stability of such placements.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4727272727272727,0.26,100.0,100.0
+1725,latent_1725,34188,0.068376,0.03572342,4.8240895,Comprehensive analysis using multiple radiographic views and comparisons.,"Examples with activations greater than 2.0 mention multiple radiographic perspectives (frontal and lateral images) and involve detailed comparisons with prior imaging. This pattern suggests a comprehensive approach to evaluating changes over time in the context of specific clinical questions, often with complex findings interpreted across multiple views. High activations emphasize detailed comparative diagnostics using more than one image perspective.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.539894512400404,0.59,0.5542168674698795,0.92,100.0,100.0
+1726,latent_1726,51171,0.102342,0.05705421,5.485963,Assessments or descriptions lacking clear comparisons or changes related to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with moderate activation levels often lack reference to specific findings from prior imaging, contain vague impressions, or fail to address intervals or changes compared to prior films clearly. This is different from highly activated examples that provide clear comparative analysis related to new findings or changes in conditions as assessed in comparison to former imaging.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4366197183098591,0.31,100.0,100.0
+1727,latent_1727,4792,0.009584,0.008840949,5.240195,Request for stable findings or changes in comparison to prior images.,"These examples focus on providing a description of the radiological findings and their comparison to prior images where possible to assess for stability, change, or specific findings. The comparison element is critical for detecting diseases staging, treatment efficacy, or progression, hence consistent across the more activated examples.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.44,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1728,latent_1728,6459,0.012918,0.008388638,6.7280245,Comparison with prior images focusing on unchanged findings.,"These examples consistently prompt the model to compare current images with prior images, often using the current and previous studies to evaluate changes or consistencies over time. Although comparisons with prior images are mentioned, the key pattern of interest seems to involve reporting on whether certain indications align with prior images without any noteworthy interval changes or new findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.3648648648648648,0.28125,96.0,104.0
+1729,latent_1729,11306,0.022612,0.015901625,7.8279805,Assessment and positioning of endotracheal tubes.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve findings related to the position of endotracheal tubes, specific distance from the carina, and recommendations for repositioning these tubes, which indicates attention to detailed placement assessments typically requested in these scenarios.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7986449348317053,0.815,0.7910447761194029,0.6973684210526315,76.0,124.0
+1730,latent_1730,2797,0.005594,0.00907764,6.708059,Focus on interval changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the use of comparative language such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'no relevant change', indicating a focus on the interval change or lack thereof between images.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6286078098471987,0.65,0.6013513513513513,0.89,100.0,100.0
+1731,latent_1731,3285,0.00657,0.009493669,6.137106,"Mediastinal observations and comparisons, focusing on cardiomediastinal silhouette and heart size.","This pattern highlights the presence and findings of abnormalities primarily located in the mediastinum, such as heart, mediastinal contours, vasculature, and surgical artifacts. Common elements include stable or normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, heart size variations, and mediastinal changes, whether stable, unchanged, or newly identified. These findings are frequently compared with prior imaging when available, but focus remains on the heart and mediastinal evaluation. Cases involving similar descriptions even in the absence of direct comparisons also show high activation values.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1732,latent_1732,7606,0.015212,0.015206598,7.0184364,Presence of current frontal and lateral images prompts simple pulmonary findings.,"The pattern observed is that when both current frontal and lateral images are provided, descriptions usually focus on findings pertinent to lung volumes or simple pulmonary findings, without involving complex comparison or prior history details. This indicates these scenarios are likely intended for general rather than specific comparative assessments.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1733,latent_1733,3609,0.007218,0.011652014,6.87946,Interval changes in findings compared to previous images.,"The examples generally highlight interval changes, i.e., the progression or regression of findings on current imaging compared to prior studies, especially focusing on any interval improvements or new findings. This pattern is common in radiology reports that evaluate how a patient's condition has changed over time using the most recent and prior images for context.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4216867469879518,0.35,100.0,100.0
+1734,latent_1734,129549,0.259098,0.21181686,5.8734217,Image comparison details between current and prior studies.,"The given examples highlight patterns where findings from current radiographic images are compared either to prior images or noted to have no prior comparisons available. Presence or absence of prior comparisons significantly affected activation levels. Higher activation corresponded to explicit comparisons or absence of comparisons, while examples without such specifications had low activation.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1735,latent_1735,8164,0.016328,0.011981565,8.031991,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with other abnormal findings present.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the presence of a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette alongside abnormal findings elsewhere in the chest or body. This points towards a pattern where findings indicate stability or normality in cardiac structures while noting potential issues in other regions, aligning with the examples given where the mediastinum remains unchanged despite other findings.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.3833333333333333,0.2839506172839506,81.0,119.0
+1736,latent_1736,9319,0.018638,0.012579319,6.1254406,Explicit comparison of current findings against prior images.,"Examples with activation levels indicate reports where the current study's findings are explicitly compared to prior images, often discussing findings' stability or changes over time. This includes phrases like 'compared to the previous radiograph' and explicit details on how features have changed or remained the same over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5112781954887218,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1737,latent_1737,5446,0.010892,0.012653762,5.764225,Comparisons indicating change in patient condition or intervention outcomes.,"Examples with high activation focus on radiological comparisons either of significant pre-existing conditions, interventions, or acute changes requiring immediate attention, often including a detailed comparison of current and previous images. Key identifiers include terms such as 'progression,' 'evaluate for,' 'remove,' or 'change,' indicating a process of monitoring over time.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4705882352941176,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1738,latent_1738,38550,0.0771,0.031186858,2.1651351,Presence of both current and prior images requiring comparison description.,"Activation patterns arise where both current and prior images are present and specifically require comparison, emphasizing findings or changes over time, even if explicit prior comparisons aren't noted in the findings. This suggests a learned significance of comparison-focused prompts.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4388957468297609,0.5,0.5,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1739,latent_1739,3335,0.00667,0.009509671,4.4240685,Presence of 'PRI [[OR]] _REPORT' pattern in the text.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently initiate with the phrase 'PRI [[OR]] _REPORT', indicating a specific structural pattern in the text, potentially used to highlight or index certain reports within the dataset.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5208041140719962,0.59,0.5511363636363636,0.97,100.0,100.0
+1740,latent_1740,3815,0.00763,0.008794961,5.1917005,Changes noted between current and prior imaging studies.,"Episodes with high activations often involve comparisons between current and prior images showing changes like improved or unchanged findings, commonly noted in radiological assessments.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.5590551181102362,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1741,latent_1741,3196,0.006392,0.010184401,5.938678,Comparison with prior image showing persistent or unchanged findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve requests for a comparative analysis where prior radiographic findings are explicitly referenced, emphasizing persistent or unchanged conditions, or newly identified changes that do not include any acute or immediate intervention. This compares findings from current images with prior images to note consistency or minor modification without urgent implications.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4583333333333333,0.33,100.0,100.0
+1742,latent_1742,1612,0.003224,0.0041367947,6.823282,Multiple views without prior imaging comparison available.,"The high activation examples explicitly mention two imaging views (frontal and lateral) and a lack of prior images for comparison. This pattern emphasizes examining multiple images but highlights the absence of historical imaging for a comparative analysis, which could relate to a challenge in assessment when previous data is not available.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6402729332688342,0.6432160804020101,0.6790123456790124,0.55,100.0,99.0
+1743,latent_1743,8158,0.016316,0.015944928,4.076543,Focus on changes or stability in radiological features and device positions compared to prior images.,"These examples primarily discuss the comparison between current and prior radiological findings, particularly focusing on stability or changes in key structures or devices such as cardiomediastinal silhouette, Lordotic views, aortic tortuosity, pneumothorax assessment, and placement/correction of tubes or leads, with many explicit discussions of their positions and movements.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1744,latent_1744,9587,0.019174,0.02210742,5.6221814,Comparative analysis of multiple lung views showing change over time.,The samples with higher activation levels describe comparative analysis involving distinct lung compartments and show changes between current and previous images. This is supported by inclusion of qualitative language indicating clear comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1745,latent_1745,4456,0.008912,0.0077222185,3.9277132,Clear lung fields with stable cardiac/mediastinal silhouette.,"The activation levels are high when there is a description of lung fields as ""clear"" and the cardiac or mediastinal silhouette is considered ""unchanged"" or ""normal"". These phrases are indicative of stable findings and no immediate concern for acute cardiopulmonary pathology, corresponding to the high activation levels observed.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.22,100.0,100.0
+1746,latent_1746,18459,0.036918,0.023775551,5.854645,Description of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activating examples consistently involve cases where findings are specifically described as unchanged or stable relative to previous images, emphasizing lack of change in pathology.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4487179487179487,0.35,100.0,100.0
+1747,latent_1747,10177,0.020354,0.013901552,4.735338,Reference to changes or stability compared to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels specifically refer to either interval changes or stability in the conditions being observed, often mentioning explicit improvement or stability in phrasing related to the prior studies and current findings, specifically where comparisons are made to previous imaging, indicating progression or resolution of findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1748,latent_1748,3393,0.006786,0.012283552,6.1079493,Task: Compare current to prior frontal chest radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently require descriptions that compare a current image to a prior frontal image, often with explicit prompts directing this comparison. These descriptions are consistent with tasks related to radiology, which often involve monitoring changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1749,latent_1749,36100,0.0722,0.04123098,3.8722274,Focus on stability or change in imaging findings with comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern in these examples involves reports that frequently reference specific imaging findings, especially related to devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) or signs of change (e.g., interval increase in opacity, unchanged positioning) in the context of comparison to previous imaging studies. It highlights continuous monitoring or evaluation for changes or stabilization in clinical findings.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6216897856242118,0.64,0.5972222222222222,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1750,latent_1750,17922,0.035844,0.025149312,5.387036,Detailed device placement or osteophyte formations with thoracic curvature changes or cardiomegaly.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention specific technical findings such as device placements and osteophyte formations, combined with mentions of cardiac silhouette enlargement, pleural effusions, or notable changes in thoracic curvature. These involve detailed descriptions that highlight changes or specific conditions over time or against previous images, which are prominent in radiology comparisons.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5584102769971899,0.56,0.5681818181818182,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1751,latent_1751,3832,0.007664,0.009154196,5.118884,Presence of cardiomegaly in chest imaging reports.,"The examples that show activation feature descriptions related to cardiomegaly, which is an enlarged heart. Reports often highlight this finding as significant due to its potential implications on health and need for further investigation.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5925209542230818,0.605,0.6615384615384615,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1752,latent_1752,4659,0.009318,0.009736019,5.1476517,Presence of probable or potential pneumonia-related findings like opacities.,"Examples with higher activation predominantly exhibit findings with low lung volumes or opacities that may imply consolidation in imaging reports, suggesting possible concern for pneumonia or similar pathologies. Mentions like 'opacities', 'possible pneumonia', or 'probable opacities' are consistently present in high activation examples.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4249131944444444,0.47,0.4318181818181818,0.19,100.0,100.0
+1753,latent_1753,6335,0.01267,0.011868995,5.103339,"Description or impression of findings compared to prior image, regardless of change.","Higher activation levels are consistently found in examples that describe or provide impressions of findings in relation to a prior image, suggesting that explicit comparison to past images, even when no specific findings are changed, is the key pattern being activated.",0.2765605622157916,0.3,0.3529411764705882,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1754,latent_1754,6110,0.01222,0.008555212,3.714117,"Description of radiologic findings by comparison with prior images, emphasizing changes or stability.","These examples contain a specific instruction to provide findings in comparison to a prior image, with a focus on analyzing changes or stability in the latest image compared to a previous one. This can involve assessing improvements, deteriorations, or stability in the radiologic findings, such as tube placements, fluid changes, or structural modifications, which is a common task in longitudinal patient monitoring.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3615510925855753,0.3618090452261306,0.3541666666666667,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+1755,latent_1755,10868,0.021736,0.019060591,5.251203,Radiological findings showing stability or minimal change.,"These examples that are highly activated frequently describe findings in a series of radiology images where specific anatomical features, such as the cardiomediastinal outline, cardiac silhouette, or lungs, remain stable or show little change compared to previous images. This suggests that the pattern being identified involves descriptions of stability or minimal change in radiological findings when compared to prior imaging studies.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4443192911316362,0.445,0.4408602150537634,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1756,latent_1756,5368,0.010736,0.010135129,5.6182184,Stable or unchanged findings in radiology comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions where a radiological study is given and compared with a prior study, often involving repeated or unchanged findings such as stable lesions, unchanged heart size, or persistent lung changes. However, unlike previous tasks, these also include cases where changes are highlighted as ""stable,"" ""unchanged,"" or ""resolved.""",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5053683536194746,0.5125628140703518,0.5131578947368421,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+1757,latent_1757,13223,0.026446,0.012911058,3.972812,Instructions for image comparison with a prior image.,"Examining the cases with higher activation levels, these examples involve instructions for comparing new radiographic images with previous ones, often with explicit reference to prior examinations. This highlights the model's ability to identify and use instructions relating to comparison with prior studies in reporting findings, rather than focusing solely on the current findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1758,latent_1758,44474,0.088948,0.0467042,7.1453247,Unchanged or stable findings when compared to prior imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate findings described as unchanged or stable when compared with prior imaging studies. This stability suggests a lack of progression in the condition and therefore aligns with the pattern of interest.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.3555555555555555,0.5,64.0,136.0
+1759,latent_1759,7462,0.014924,0.021518137,6.560433,Reports contain explicit comparisons detailing changes or stabilities between current and prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit high activation generally involve a direct comparison between current and previous imaging studies, specifically highlighting differences or stability in medical findings from these comparisons. This indicates that the pattern focuses on comparative analysis between imaging results over time.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4426451758680425,0.445,0.4367816091954023,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1760,latent_1760,9016,0.018032,0.012243092,5.875615,Descriptions highlighting interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern found in these examples involves providing detailed evaluations of current imaging alongside a prior study, focusing on identifying interval changes or stability in specific anatomic and pathological features. The key linguistic elements include comparison with prior imaging and emphasis on changes observed over time.",0.4897959183673469,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1761,latent_1761,6358,0.012716,0.009017824,3.4624662,Comparison of lungs for interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on comparison or interval change in lung conditions between current and prior images, often with improvement or stability in conditions like aeration, effusions, and nodules. This is highlighted in phrases like 'no significant change', 'stable', 'improved', 'same day', or 'no focal' and a clear emphasis on the changes observed in lung conditions compared to previous observations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1762,latent_1762,4555,0.00911,0.010638492,4.1558275,Comparison of prior and current images showing changes or stability in findings.,"The examples that have higher activation levels typically involve descriptions that compare current and prior imaging while noting the stability or specific interval changes in certain conditions or devices like pneumonia, pleural effusions, atelectasis, or placement of medical tubes. The reports effectively communicate the progression or stability of findings over time through comparison.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1763,latent_1763,3641,0.007282,0.011575403,6.2410336,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' and structured radiology report format.,Examples with high activation levels predominantly feature a structured reporting format with 'PRIOR_REPORT' and detailed indented text sections. This suggests that the activation pattern is linked to a specific formatting style common in these examples.,0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4880952380952381,0.57,0.5388888888888889,0.97,100.0,100.0
+1764,latent_1764,22363,0.044726,0.032874964,6.3040595,Reports detailing direct comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Higher activation levels are associated with reports that provide a direct comparison to prior imaging studies. This comparison format is prevalent in radiology as it helps identify progress or stability of identified conditions, a critical aspect of patient management and diagnosis.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1765,latent_1765,5056,0.010112,0.010548745,7.4172635,"Prominence of hila, cardiac silhouette, or vasculature in comparison findings.","The model highly activates when there is reference to findings that relate to the prominence of anatomical structures, notably the hila, cardiac silhouette, pulmonary vasculature, or mediastinal contours, in comparison to prior images. Prominence is often considered in interpreting stable or unchanged prominent findings over time.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5813953488372093,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1766,latent_1766,12428,0.024856,0.017032504,3.7529304,Identification of atelectasis in comparison to prior images.,"The consistent element across these examples is the identification of atelectasis or streaky opacities often suggestive of minor atelectasis or scarring, frequently found in radiology reports where these findings are noted in comparisons with prior images.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6129302228266555,0.63,0.7241379310344828,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1767,latent_1767,7046,0.014092,0.01583473,5.723274,Assessment of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to findings that compare the current and prior imaging studies, indicating either stability or specific interval changes like the appearance or resolution of pathology or medical devices. This includes new developments like procedures, medical devices, or significant comparisons about layer opacities or pleural effusions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1768,latent_1768,5502,0.011004,0.0113270525,5.906336,Interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on descriptions of interval changes or consistency between current and prior imaging studies. Unique findings like unchanged lung consolidation, persistent effusion, but with some conditions remaining constant from previous films are mentioned. This pattern emphasizes the description of new changes or stability in clinical imaging findings over time.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5752212389380531,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1769,latent_1769,20285,0.04057,0.025798302,5.561439,Unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The representative examples include reports where images are compared with prior studies, detailing specific stability or changes in any findings over time. The common pattern highlighted in these examples is the reference to an unchanged status, emphasizing the stability of the condition or lack of significant findings compared to previous imaging.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5244174113288779,0.525,0.5268817204301075,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1770,latent_1770,2650,0.0053,0.008135497,5.643469,Comparison with prior images for interval change.,"Highly activated examples consistently provide the description of radiological findings with a comparison to prior images, indicating a contrast with previous findings or stating 'interval change'. This pattern is shown with phrases like 'compared to the prior study', 'no significant change', 'marked improvement', or 'unchanged'.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1771,latent_1771,31549,0.063098,0.04026332,5.187363,Emphasis on interval changes with procedural or device evaluation.,"The pattern indicates a consistency with image comparison and focuses on findings that either remain stable or show progression over time within a short interval context. High activation is seen when there is mention of changes (or lack thereof) post interventions like thoracentesis or chest tube adjustments, often evaluating device positioning, effusions, or cardiac changes.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1772,latent_1772,88512,0.177024,0.114334434,7.973287,Description of changes or stability of diagnostic features compared to prior imaging.,"These examples involve descriptions of findings that mention changes or stability in diagnostic features from prior imaging studies. They focus primarily on cardiomediastinal silhouettes, effusions, atelectasis, and interstitial markings, using comparative expressions like 'unchanged', 'slightly more pronounced', or 'improved'.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.514041514041514,0.5175879396984925,0.4225352112676056,0.8108108108108109,74.0,125.0
+1773,latent_1773,16928,0.033856,0.030351272,6.0691395,Focus on current frontal and/or lateral image views for comparison.,"The highly activated examples frequently mention 'Given the current frontal image' or 'Given the current lateral image.' This phrasing implies that the assistant is expected to identify and assess current radiological images by comparing them across current and prior frontal or lateral views, emphasizing these particular views for comparative analysis.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4134897360703812,0.505,0.5027932960893855,0.9,100.0,100.0
+1774,latent_1774,12928,0.025856,0.016388418,4.6420746,Comparison of device position and fluid status in serial radiographs.,"The pattern consists of evaluating and comparing current imaging findings against prior studies to determine any changes in medical devices and overall findings such as fluid changes, consolidation, and cardiomegaly. Reports often mention devices like pacemakers and central venous lines, focusing on their unchanged stability or movement, a key determinant in these examples.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+1775,latent_1775,5764,0.011528,0.011231893,5.1185274,Utilization of both current frontal and lateral images for comparison to prior images.,The examples with higher activation scores frequently involve the analysis of current frontal and lateral images in comparison to a prior frontal image. This seems to add value in the context of detecting changes over time by cross-referencing multiple image orientations.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1776,latent_1776,4601,0.009202,0.00926521,5.0902143,"Emphasis on unchanged positions of lines, tubes, or support devices.","The pattern highlights imaging studies where detailed descriptions of various lines, tubes, or support devices (e.g., catheters, PICC lines, tracheostomy tubes) are provided and often noted as unchanged from a previous position or state. This reflects a focus on monitoring placements of medical devices during follow-up imaging.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5666666666666667,0.17,100.0,100.0
+1777,latent_1777,6318,0.012636,0.013508377,4.447887,Reports mention aortic tortuosity or calcification in imaging.,"These examples involve descriptions of current imaging findings compared to prior images, with a specific focus on the aorta's appearance. Terms such as 'tortuous', 'calcified', 'mildly enlarged', or 'normal contours' are used to describe the aorta across various studies.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5574731718110411,0.6,0.7631578947368421,0.29,100.0,100.0
+1778,latent_1778,3371,0.006742,0.011281875,6.3101096,Comparison with prior studies highlighting stability or change in findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention comparison between the given radiographic images and previous studies, emphasizing stability, resolution, or other changes in disease presentation. This reflects a linguistic pattern used when evaluating patient progress or clinical significance of findings over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3794414973476128,0.38,0.3867924528301887,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1779,latent_1779,2479,0.004958,0.008432247,7.837875,Limited or no prior imaging comparisons.,These examples predominantly emphasize absence of detailed or explicit comparison with previous imaging studies which is common in baseline or initial reports where no prior examinations are available. This lack of prior comparison sets a baseline for future evaluations.,0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7152545882840206,0.725,0.6642335766423357,0.91,100.0,100.0
+1780,latent_1780,8797,0.017594,0.04483795,6.167869,Instruction for 'assistant' to describe study findings and compare to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions for technicians, labeled as 'ASSISTANT', which focus on findings interpreted in conjunction with prior image reports and instructions about comparing the images. The request for providing a description with these aspects appears to be what triggers high activation.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1781,latent_1781,2934,0.005868,0.008799523,4.821587,Frequent comparisons to prior images with unchanged findings.,"The examples with higher activation involve descriptions of radiological findings with explicit comparison to previous images, often discussing unchanged findings or interval changes. This pattern emphasizes continuity or changes in imaging over time, indicating stability or progression, which is common in follow-up studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4582815762349023,0.4824120603015075,0.4655172413793103,0.2727272727272727,99.0,100.0
+1782,latent_1782,7800,0.0156,0.012315836,6.3892384,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve comparative analysis with prior studies, focusing on specific findings such as stability, improvement, or changes over time. These examples frequently include phrases describing findings as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improved', 'increased', or 'worsened' compared to previous imaging.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6309675407365056,0.645,0.60431654676259,0.84,100.0,100.0
+1783,latent_1783,18635,0.03727,0.026202297,6.022739,Comparison of medical device placement or status between images.,"Examples with descriptions of the position, change, or status of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or other catheter placements in comparison to prior imaging show high activation. These radiological comparisons often focus on ensuring the correct placement and status of these devices, as evidenced by phrases about measured distances or stability.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6814884097171314,0.685,0.6528925619834711,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1784,latent_1784,3212,0.006424,0.010868178,5.3719816,Structured radiological report mentioning pathological findings or changes.,"Examples with high activation contain structured radiological reports that provide a systematic description of the findings in the current radiology examination, specifically mentioning notable pathological findings or changes observed compared to prior images, even if some fields like COMPARISON are missing or undefined.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.42,0.42,0.42,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1785,latent_1785,7429,0.014858,0.013735095,6.1035,Emphasis on comparative analysis with previous imaging.,"In highly activated examples, there is often a reference to both current and prior imaging, with emphasis on comparative interpretation. This includes using phrasing that explicitly refers to comparing current and prior images, as well as the presence of prior reports and instructions to describe findings based on comparison.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1786,latent_1786,29801,0.059602,0.03806659,5.030635,"Chronic or stable changes, not acute pathology, are emphasized.","Examples with higher activation levels describe minor abnormalities or stable post-surgical or chronic findings such as atelectasis, nodules, cardiomegaly, or other chronic changes. The reports discuss past medical history or status to explain present imaging findings, which are characterized by stability or chronicity rather than acute changes.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5804864864864865,0.6080402010050251,0.5695364238410596,0.8686868686868687,99.0,100.0
+1787,latent_1787,3304,0.006608,0.0060798377,3.8075788,"Radiology descriptions comparing current to prior studies, noting changes or stability.","Highly activated examples describe a radiology study in comparison to a prior imaging study, focusing on changes in features such as atelectasis, effusion, and opacities. This comparison is central to reports where the aim is to reflect on progression or stability of certain findings across time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1788,latent_1788,7718,0.015436,0.010318383,5.8190117,Presence of pleural effusion and atelectasis.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings of pleural effusion and atelectasis, which commonly occur together due to compression and volume loss in lung areas. This pattern can be due to fluid buildup compressing lung tissue or indicative of an underlying condition affecting both.",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.6691729323308271,0.67,0.6888888888888889,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1789,latent_1789,8480,0.01696,0.020287922,5.2476196,Comparison of current and prior images to note changes in clinical status.,"The highly activated examples focus on detailed changes in radiographs when comparing current images with prior ones, emphasizing alterations such as effusion or cardiac silhouette changes. Many mention specific comparisons to previous imaging or surgical outcomes, often with extrapolation about stability or changes in clinical context, such as pleural effusion status, thoracic interventions, and cardiac enlargement.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1790,latent_1790,5435,0.01087,0.00965413,7.2280583,Explicit request for comparison with prior images.,"Cases with high activation explicitly reference a comparison to prior imaging findings, demonstrating consistency or change in findings based on historical imaging data. This suggests a pattern where clear instructions or queries about comparing new images to prior ones trigger high activation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5288082083662193,0.5326633165829145,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,99.0
+1791,latent_1791,4140,0.00828,0.008486884,3.075906,Presence of both current and prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels feature the presence of both current and prior imaging descriptions explicitly within the same context. This emphasizes the comparison process, which is a standard practice in radiology to assess the progression or stability of certain conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1792,latent_1792,51727,0.103454,0.048886426,2.8660424,Description of findings in current imaging compared to prior for interval change.,"The representative examples all describe findings in current imaging compared to prior images, highlighting interval changes or stability using phrases such as 'the previous radiograph', 'compared with study of', and explicit dates for comparison. There is emphasis on noting whether there is interval change but not necessarily a diagnosis.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,100.0,100.0
+1793,latent_1793,4327,0.008654,0.020198883,8.428032,Comparison indicating unchanged or stable findings across images.,"Examples with high activation (e.g., examples 1, 4, 12, 18, 32, 50) consistently describe a comparison of the current image with a prior image without specifying substantial changes. They highlight stability or minor changes, often with an indication of an unchanged status or consistent with previous findings, and lack of significant new findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3596358921436321,0.395,0.3018867924528302,0.16,100.0,100.0
+1794,latent_1794,4148,0.008296,0.011063662,8.047077,Detailed findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently include detailed descriptions of findings from current images with explicit comparative assessments against prior images, often using phrases like 'comparison to prior', describing changes or stability over time, which emphasize tracking changes.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4653465346534653,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1795,latent_1795,4840,0.00968,0.007164515,6.2059703,Descriptive comparison with prior images in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings in relation to a prior image, highlighting comparisons or observations of stability, changes, or improvements over time. This pattern emphasizes the role of temporal comparison in image interpretation.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1796,latent_1796,12288,0.024576,0.017457614,3.3216174,Low lung volumes or atelectasis.,"The examples with high activation levels mention low lung volumes as a significant finding. This pattern is consistent with cases of atelectasis or other processes causing decreased lung expansion, which is often included in reports to elucidate potential underlying issues.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5652173913043478,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1797,latent_1797,18948,0.037896,0.019834675,4.264689,Description of findings in comparison to prior image.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently use the phrase 'in comparison with the prior' or similar descriptors, referring to a direct comparison between the current and previous imaging studies to assess stability, change, or persistence of findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1798,latent_1798,13365,0.02673,0.012117247,3.3203912,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention stable or unchanged findings from prior imaging, indicating a focus on identifying consistency or stability in radiological characteristics over time. This suggests that this is the main pattern or feature the model is recognizing as representative.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1799,latent_1799,7589,0.015178,0.016007138,4.5098867,Chest images being evaluated in comparison to prior images.,The highly activated examples consistently refer to a diagnostic radiology practice of comparing current chest images (frontal and/or lateral views) to previous images to assess changes or stability in findings. There is a clear mention of providing descriptions based on comparisons with prior images and findings given current clinical indications.,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.363619348110912,0.405,0.4370860927152318,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1800,latent_1800,9462,0.018924,0.018776482,5.7466187,Comparative interpretation of current imaging against past studies.,"High activation examples consistently ask for a description of current findings in comparison to a prior structure, often directly requesting a summary or impression based on images flagged for significant changes or observations. Activations are driven by the task of providing comparative assessments, which implies reliance on AI's generated narrative over direct report replication.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3513623943410199,0.365,0.3953488372093023,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1801,latent_1801,7840,0.01568,0.016220922,6.380561,Use of both current frontal and lateral images in conjunction with a prior image for comparison.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently describe scenarios involving a comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior imaging studies, regardless of findings described in these reports.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5841584158415841,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1802,latent_1802,21511,0.043022,0.036128197,7.3634915,Focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The pattern revolves around the identification and reporting of interval changes, such as new findings or stability compared to prior imaging. Examples frequently mention changes in medical devices or anatomical observations between current and previous images, highlighting the importance of tracking these variations in radiological studies.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6027944111776447,0.6130653266331658,0.5833333333333334,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+1803,latent_1803,7811,0.015622,0.012692791,5.314853,Focus on findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation specifically focus on the description of findings by comparing the current images to prior images, which is a critical component for understanding changes in medical imaging. This is highlighted by the repetitive mention of descriptions provided 'in comparison to prior', indicating the model's sensitivity to the task of comparing current and previous findings.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4076171004691882,0.435,0.4545454545454545,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1804,latent_1804,30693,0.061386,0.036772996,3.5946417,Focus on describing correct placement and monitoring of tubes and lines.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the presence and necessary evaluation of tubes and lines (e.g., ET tubes, PICC lines, NG tubes) in chest radiographs, highlighting the importance of evaluating line placements and related findings in these images. Specific chairing like 'PICC', 'ET tube', and 'pleural catheters' are mentioned in these examples.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.6375,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1805,latent_1805,4693,0.009386,0.015058557,3.656192,Analysis of current images with explicit comparison to prior images.,"These examples explicitly request the assistant to provide a description or findings that include or stem from a comparison between frontal and lateral chest images and prior imaging, indicating a reliance on direct visual analysis and historical comparison to decipher the changes or current state.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4233343630933992,0.44,0.4552238805970149,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1806,latent_1806,26726,0.053452,0.034621008,5.7175884,Description of interval change related to specific radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation frequently mention 'comparison to prior imaging' or 'interval change' with specific focus on direct radiological findings such as opacities, consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, or atelectasis. This illustrates the linguistic pattern of evaluating changes over time in specific radiological findings.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6016949152542372,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1807,latent_1807,10797,0.021594,0.013860309,4.6144257,Descriptions noting interval changes in imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels primarily deal with descriptions of image comparisons where either changes (interval improvements or deterioration) are noted along with specific indicators like consolidations, effusions, or changes in medical devices or masses.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3860708534621578,0.39,0.369047619047619,0.31,100.0,100.0
+1808,latent_1808,56797,0.113594,0.06669907,6.445401,Interval change in the placement or condition of tubes/lines in comparison to previous images.,"Examples with activations closer to zero often don't describe interval adjustments or changes in line/tube placements, while examples with higher activations describe interval changes, particularly placement of medical devices (PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, etc.) compared to prior images. This involves documentation of the patient's condition in terms of these devices as seen in radiological assessments.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6750136091453457,0.6834170854271356,0.7647058823529411,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+1809,latent_1809,37396,0.074792,0.031881146,4.399776,Precise description using comparison to prior images.,"High activation examples frequently describe findings in precise comparison to prior imaging, often using explicit references to previous studies, dates, or techniques that assist the comparison, such as 'compared with', 'since prior', 'unchanged', or 'less/more than prior'. This comparative language is prevalent in radiological assessments to determine progression or stability of findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6098401357959008,0.615,0.5934959349593496,0.73,100.0,100.0
+1810,latent_1810,45314,0.090628,0.055902973,6.4965816,Explicit interval changes or findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with more significant activation levels consistently include references to interval changes or findings compared to prior imaging, using specific language to indicate alteration such as 'unchanged position', 'improved aeration', 'no significant interval change', or 'new findings'. These diagnostic comparisons indicate change over time.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6938021328265231,0.71,0.6438356164383562,0.94,100.0,100.0
+1811,latent_1811,9746,0.019492,0.012172525,3.4500027,Focus on stability or change compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels discuss findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, which suggests a primary focus on stability or change in identified anomalies such as pulmonary opacities or pleural effusions. This comparative analysis is a typical feature of follow-up examinations to assess progression or resolution of known conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1812,latent_1812,5880,0.01176,0.008601123,4.4322925,Focus on comparative analysis in the context of current and prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels focus on comparisons between current and prior imaging, using phrases like 'in comparison with' or referring to an unchanged or stable status in specific findings, notably when describing pulmonary opacifications, cardiomediastinal contour, or device positioning. Examples with less detailed comparison or lacking explicit comparative contexts have lower activation.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1813,latent_1813,15086,0.030172,0.02012073,4.446087,"Absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, and pneumothorax.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention the absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or other acute findings, effectively confirming the patient's stability regarding these aspects. This specific language pattern of ruling out acute pathological findings seems to trigger the model's recognition.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1814,latent_1814,7592,0.015184,0.012461788,7.1990285,Unchanged findings when comparing current to prior imaging.,"Examples show comparisons of current imaging features with prior studies, specifically highlighting unchanged structural features or recurrent findings. This pattern is typical in reports assessing for interval changes or stability in medical conditions.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6848030018761726,0.685,0.6761904761904762,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1815,latent_1815,4382,0.008764,0.010466274,6.7133975,Check for pneumonia or consolidation with fever or respiratory symptoms.,"The examples exhibit a focus on finding pneumonia or related consolidations when evaluating imaging studies, often when fever or respiratory issues are present. Reports come with a history of fever, cough, or other symptoms that prompt a check for acute respiratory issues such as pneumonia.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.6,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1816,latent_1816,32288,0.064576,0.025217371,1.6440593,Stated stability or unchanged position of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is the usage of specific descriptors indicating unchanged medical equipment positioning in comparison to prior images, often with mention of specific medical devices like PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, or monitoring support devices being stable. Reports highlight unchanged positioning as a critical diagnostic point and the status of these devices is regularly documented.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5555555555555556,0.25,100.0,100.0
+1817,latent_1817,17225,0.03445,0.017592562,5.6721344,Low lung volumes affecting radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve descriptions of low lung volumes, which could accentuate or affect other findings such as size impressions or vascular markings. This pattern consistently appears in the sections concerning lung volume descriptors being specifically mentioned.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4658213730151742,0.545,0.4444444444444444,0.1839080459770115,87.0,113.0
+1818,latent_1818,4867,0.009734,0.015479828,4.0105066,Comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize that observations are made based on comparisons with prior imaging studies. The pattern indicates engagement with a temporal element, i.e., previous and current states of findings to assess any changes.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5063291139240507,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1819,latent_1819,9381,0.018762,0.011615719,4.1045613,Comparison of current and prior images highlighting changes.,"High activation levels correspond to the presence of descriptions that include comparison of current to prior images, observations of changes or stability, and assessment for progression. These commonly occur in reports evaluating chronic or stable conditions, often indicating a longitudinal study component.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5794380684553216,0.585,0.5691056910569106,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1820,latent_1820,15990,0.03198,0.02363268,4.43046,Comparative analysis of changes in radiology reports.,"The activation levels are high when reports explicitly compare current images to prior images, especially emphasizing changes or stability over time in multiple anatomical areas, including pathologies, devices, or anatomical structures. They often mention specific measurements or statuses relative to prior exams.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4621848739495798,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1821,latent_1821,3990,0.00798,0.008494217,3.794222,Stable mild vascular congestion or cardiomegaly in comparison studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently provide findings about vascular congestion or mild cardiomegaly within the context of comparing images over time, especially when indicating stable or unchanged areas of interest, despite some technical changes or acquisition differences.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4956649326397225,0.5226130653266332,0.5471698113207547,0.29,100.0,99.0
+1822,latent_1822,7792,0.015584,0.011893872,5.241723,Detailed description and comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The highest activation levels are associated with cases where a detailed explanation or comparison of radiological findings is required or emphasized in the report, especially when the current findings' significance needs to be weighed against previous or expected findings. These reports often highlight changes, stability, or provide a clear distinction based on past comparisons, shown by elevated activation when descriptions involve comprehensive comparisons or differential diagnoses based on imaging.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1823,latent_1823,14494,0.028988,0.019501077,7.089043,High activation with frontal and lateral images plus comparison to prior study.,"The activation levels rise when an examination uses both frontal and lateral chest images for comparison and a prior image is also provided. This pattern allows for a comprehensive evaluation, showing increased detail and reference points for identifying and describing changes in findings over time.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.4496644295302013,0.8271604938271605,81.0,119.0
+1824,latent_1824,7142,0.014284,0.017204365,3.8370318,Description of findings in radiology study relative to previous imaging.,"These examples frequently involve descriptions of imaging findings related to changes or intervals between current and prior studies. Reports often include terms like 'comparison to prior', 'interval change', and specific mentions of previous studies, indicating a pattern of evaluating changes over time.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5116279069767442,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1825,latent_1825,365761,0.731522,1.4006078,8.7832985,Stable findings despite changes in imaging studies when compared to prior exams.,"In these radiology reports, there is a repeated theme of comparing current imaging studies against prior ones to determine changes, but the crucial aspect of those with high activation is the emphasis on stable findings despite changes. The persistence of certain conditions or lack of acute changes in comparison is the pattern.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6689669221562986,0.675,0.7397260273972602,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1826,latent_1826,27139,0.054278,0.022369381,3.3026779,Focus on stability or no interval change in image comparison.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions of comparison with a prior image, emphasizing unchanged or stable findings over time. This pattern is a common feature in radiology reports where continuity or stability of prior pathological conditions is a key focus, helping to rule out new developments or progression of disease.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5951007186962243,0.6,0.6282051282051282,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1827,latent_1827,7631,0.015262,0.018534882,5.599613,Unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette with low lung volumes causing exaggeration.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around radiology reports that provide descriptions comparing current imaging findings with prior imaging, where low lung volumes lead to exaggerated cardiac silhouette, stable mediastinal contours, or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette. Various references to lung conditions such as atelectasis are noted, but without significant consolidation or pleural effusion.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3771391569794332,0.495,0.4615384615384615,0.06,100.0,100.0
+1828,latent_1828,31076,0.062152,0.05025015,3.3218071,Focus on pleural effusions or positioning of medical devices in chest X-ray analysis.,"The examples that triggered high activations emphasize findings of pleural effusions and/or identification of medical devices such as tubes or central lines clearly positioned on chest X-rays. These reports focus on specific positional assessments or changes in lines or effusions, which are critical aspects in many clinical scenarios requiring close monitoring.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.44,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1829,latent_1829,3113,0.006226,0.0056602666,6.221498,Technical issues in chest X-ray reports involving low lung volumes affecting interpretation.,"These examples show high activation when reports concurrently describe technical details, analysis of tube placements, and comparisons with prior findings where applicable, but explicitly note low lung volumes impacting visibility or evaluation. Despite presenting complex clinical scenarios, these reports emphasize changes or stabilities evaluated against the technical challenges of low lung volumes.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3927182950708022,0.465,0.3870967741935484,0.12,100.0,100.0
+1830,latent_1830,3133,0.006266,0.008826197,5.850774,Emphasis on providing a description of findings relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations often include explicit directions to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging, indicating the pattern's focus on direct comparisons in the report narrative. It involves directly prompting a conclusion based on analysis against previous imaging.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4150864871894915,0.4321608040201005,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,99.0
+1831,latent_1831,26613,0.053226,0.02204418,4.3012986,Detailed comparison of interval change with previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often provide a detailed quantitative or qualitative description of changes in pathology or medical devices relative to prior imaging studies. Cases where specific changes or stability are noted, whether involving lung appearances, device positioning, or pathological features, show higher activation. This suggests the pattern is related to changes observed or described as comparisons to previous imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1832,latent_1832,28993,0.057986,0.035551112,4.0294137,Comparison of interval changes in radiological findings.,"These examples focus on interval changes in imaging findings, commonly assessing stability or variations in disease manifestations like opacities, pleural effusions, and lung volumes over time. This captures the pattern of comparing current findings against previous images to determine improvement or deterioration.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1833,latent_1833,7810,0.01562,0.02175999,4.4147444,Comparison and stability of imaging findings over time.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings by comparing the current image to past radiographs, emphasizing the stability or change in specific features. They often use terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', or explicitly refer to past examinations to contextualize current findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.4424778761061947,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1834,latent_1834,4256,0.008512,0.010673811,4.258449,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior radiology findings.,"The example samples with high activation levels frequently include explicit instructions to compare current images to prior images, accompanied by phrases such as 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior' and containing '_', suggesting a focus on identifying changes relative to previous studies, even when a comparison study is not available.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3775287892934952,0.4,0.427536231884058,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1835,latent_1835,11023,0.022046,0.012041484,3.895349,Descriptions highlighting interval changes in pneumothorax between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples discuss the comparison of the cardiorespiratory system findings based on current images with those observed in prior images, using specific terminologies such as 'comparative reduction or consistency' in adverse findings (like pneumothorax), indicating a radiological evaluation considering progression, stability or resolution of conditions over time.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.486575458306907,0.575,0.9411764705882352,0.16,100.0,100.0
+1836,latent_1836,4362,0.008724,0.011302142,5.0614395,"Thorough documentation of examination, findings, and technique in imaging.","These examples consistently involve detailed examination, indication, and technique related to monitoring existing conditions or for establishing baselines. They emphasize thorough documentation of procedural and observational details rather than a focus on comparisons or singular abnormalities.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3083104465466382,0.32,0.3571428571428571,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1837,latent_1837,17364,0.034728,0.019822845,3.4818048,Detailed descriptions of unchanged findings in comparison to previous images.,"The pattern here appears to correlate with the presence of detailed descriptions in radiology reports which focus primarily on the stable or unchanged nature of specific findings, often in comparison to previous images. High activations are linked to reports describing the comparison explicitly. Reports with low activations don't emphasize or contain detailed narratives specifically about the findings' stability or unchanged nature.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.6206896551724138,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1838,latent_1838,18665,0.03733,0.021490535,3.1792269,Stable findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activations exhibit a consistent pattern of describing stable findings or comparing current and prior images without noting any significant change. These reports typically conclude with phrases indicating no acute or significant changes since previous examinations, suggesting typical or unremarkable findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4106716985087926,0.4321608040201005,0.3934426229508196,0.24,100.0,99.0
+1839,latent_1839,1881,0.003762,0.007862747,6.549856,Unremarkable findings or normal chest imaging compared to prior.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve clear descriptions of normal chest imaging findings, specifically detailing unremarkable lungs or cardiomediastinal contours, often in comparison to prior images. This suggests a focus on the repetitive nature and specific language associated with 'normal' findings in radiology reports, especially when comparing new and prior images and noting no acute changes.",0.6287878787878788,0.6326530612244898,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.6749268585431722,0.675,0.6699029126213593,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1840,latent_1840,5396,0.010792,0.013113851,7.0135207,Analysis of interval changes by comparing current with prior images.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve descriptions comparing current imaging with prior imaging to assess interval changes. This pattern is used in radiological practice to monitor progress, changes, or stability in patients' conditions over time.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5125824913058956,0.555,0.5345911949685535,0.85,100.0,100.0
+1841,latent_1841,3643,0.007286,0.009203419,4.5351124,Detailed comparisons to previous imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations show thorough descriptions of previous imaging, detailing comparisons between current findings and changes or stability noted in prior studies. This is crucial in radiology to track the progression of diseases or procedural outcomes over time, marked by specific language around image comparisons and findings.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1842,latent_1842,7519,0.015038,0.011985535,5.5161266,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images along with prior frontal image for enhanced comparison.,Examples with higher activation explicitly include both frontal and lateral images in addition to a prior frontal image for comparison. This suggests that the pattern involves utilizing additional imaging angles or views in conjunction to previous images to enhance diagnostic comparison or assessment.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1843,latent_1843,3182,0.006364,0.011685165,7.301425,Comparison across multiple views and interval change in clinical context.,"Examples with high activation levels involve a change over time that is confirmed through the comparison of multiple views including frontal and lateral images, or where specific findings have a notable interval change. Reports often mention a historical context like previous examinations or specific findings that have evolved over time, emphasizing the significance of new alterations or the stability of observed features.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3801070724147647,0.395,0.4198473282442748,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1844,latent_1844,17945,0.03589,0.019909307,3.2360764,Descriptions of stable or unchanged findings in imaging comparisons.,"The presence of relatively unchanged findings or stable appearance across images, identified by the frequent use of phrases like 'unchanged', 'as compared to the previous radiograph', and the presence of consistent imaging features over time, correlates with the examples that have higher activation levels. This suggests that the pattern is related to the description of stable findings in follow-up imaging comparisons.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6080795899909557,0.61,0.627906976744186,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1845,latent_1845,3508,0.007016,0.009099631,10.498196,Investigation of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,These examples often have explicit mentions or suggestions of changes when comparing current images to prior ones or discuss interval changes related to specific procedures or conditions. The language used indicates not only spatial comparisons but also temporal assessments of change.,0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1846,latent_1846,13957,0.027914,0.016164495,3.2456644,Emphasis on changes or conditions post-treatment/intervention.,"The radiology reports with higher activation focus on findings or conditions post-treatment, procedural placement, or those requiring follow-up. There seems to be an emphasis on observations that point out changes post-intervention or due to treatment over time, such as wires placements or changes due to medical devices or tubes.",0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.5263157894736842,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1847,latent_1847,6694,0.013388,0.009833808,5.6388307,Findings of change or abnormality in comparison to prior images.,"Each example with high activation contains descriptions of findings indicating changes, abnormalities, or areas of concern present in the frontal images when compared to prior images, either introducing newly observed issues or persistently problematic features. The focus is on capturing the differences and progression requiring attention in the context of the current clinical assessment.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.6238621831038893,0.625,0.6404494382022472,0.57,100.0,100.0
+1848,latent_1848,38329,0.076658,0.04736425,3.9315202,Detailed descriptions of changes or stability in chest findings compared to previous images.,"These examples focus on the presence of comprehensive comparisons with prior frontal images (rather than just mentions of past studies) and include detailed changes or stability in specific chest findings. The reports include phrases indicating direct comparison to previous images and describe interval changes or lack of changes in findings, showing both stable and altered conditions in chest views.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.4509803921568627,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1849,latent_1849,16821,0.033642,0.020865386,4.386703,Comparison with prior images highlighting interval changes or stability.,"All examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions that explicitly refer to or compare with findings of a previous image. This pattern indicates that these higher-activated examples specifically have interpretations relating to changes or stability compared to prior imaging, providing a context or progression over time which is closely examined in these analyses.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5555555555555556,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1850,latent_1850,3644,0.007288,0.010833233,12.767667,Positioning and assessment of support devices relative to carina.,"The pattern revolves around findings related to the positioning of support devices such as endotracheal tubes and lines, and comparisons to prior imaging. Specifically, highly activated samples focus on describing the position of these devices relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina, and often involve recommendations for repositioning or acknowledge stability compared to previous images.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6665872826863539,0.685,0.8490566037735849,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1851,latent_1851,6957,0.013914,0.010351298,4.9768057,Use of both frontal and lateral chest views in image comparison.,"This data includes examples of radiology reports comparing current imaging findings to prior images, but specifically those with distinct mentions, descriptions, or comparisons involving frontal and lateral chest views. The emphasis is on utilizing multiple imaging projections ('frontal', 'lateral') to assess findings, rather than just frontal, which aligns with representative high-activation examples mentioning both views, whereas many low-activation examples lack this.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4768253968253968,0.485,0.488,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1852,latent_1852,2926,0.005852,0.00766137,5.8959284,Reports utilize current frontal and lateral images without prior frontal comparisons.,"These examples describe findings using dual views (current frontal and lateral images) in the absence of a prior frontal comparison image or without readily available prior reports, which is a distinct pattern among these examples. The common point is the exploration and notation of cardiomediastinal features and lung conditions in multiple view contexts, lacking explicit comparison.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5918367346938775,0.29,100.0,100.0
+1853,latent_1853,27573,0.055146,0.025540654,3.567419,Evaluation using both frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"These examples include both frontal and lateral images in the comparisons, suggesting that the presence or evaluation of findings from lateral images plays a role in the activation levels. Examples with findings described in both the frontal and lateral images tend to have higher activations.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4918283963227783,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.6,100.0,99.0
+1854,latent_1854,59692,0.119384,0.06677284,6.1002836,Observations of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior reports.,"Examples with an activation level of 0 typically focus on findings or technical information without notable changes relative to prior images or reports. Whereas those with higher activation include specific interval changes between current and prior images or mention stability, particularly in abnormal conditions or expected changes.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5148313693620479,0.5175879396984925,0.5175438596491229,0.59,100.0,99.0
+1855,latent_1855,7391,0.014782,0.016080357,7.027963,Use of multiple views or comparisons with previous images to report interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels commonly involve describing or comparing multiple views and/or prior image comparisons, often emphasizing changes or stabilities in specific findings, such as pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or opacities from multiple images over time.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4541900093370681,0.5276381909547738,0.5144508670520231,0.898989898989899,99.0,100.0
+1856,latent_1856,8752,0.017504,0.010750719,5.76701,Requests for descriptions based on prior comparison without significant changes or prior context.,"In these examples, low activation levels are paired with requests to provide descriptions based on comparisons with prior imaging, even when no prior images are available or the examples describe no significant changes from non-existent prior findings. This indicates that the pattern involves requests for comparative analysis in situations with no comparative context or findings.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1857,latent_1857,6824,0.013648,0.010853656,6.305818,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing device positioning or intervention-related changes.,"Examples activate highly when there is a specific focus on the comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes related to medical interventions or complications. The presence of devices or specific structural changes, particularly involving major tubes, lines, or interventions, appears critical in differentiating these from other patterns.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5951007186962243,0.6,0.6282051282051282,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1858,latent_1858,8461,0.016922,0.02190988,6.4072165,Evaluation of findings using both current and prior imagery.,"The activating examples involve prompts that provide radiological evaluations based on imagery which explicitly states both the current images and prior images for comparison. These references imply a need to evaluate changes in the current state against the prior state, using previous studies.",0.2643968053804119,0.3,0.3611111111111111,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5064935064935064,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1859,latent_1859,4571,0.009142,0.011968818,7.0709877,Interval change in pulmonary conditions or device placements.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe changes over time or comparisons with prior images, focusing on specific improvements or deterioration of pulmonary conditions or device placements. These reports evaluate interval changes in pathologies such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, or opacities.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+1860,latent_1860,4749,0.009498,0.0142752165,4.6666565,Instruction to compare findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the instruction to provide descriptions of radiological findings while explicitly indicating comparison with previous images. This pattern appears as a routine in radiology evaluations to ascertain changes or stability over time, with comparisons often marked in the prompt itself.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1861,latent_1861,8511,0.017022,0.0102647785,4.4984508,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1862,latent_1862,51208,0.102416,0.09380875,6.6671076,Descriptive focus on radiological findings without historical emphasis.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions of imaging findings, including new opacities, masses, or well-detailed anomalies, without emphasis on a comparison with previous results or significant historical assessment. Rather than highlighting interval changes or histories, these examples prioritize detailing present radiological features.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4507042253521127,0.32,100.0,100.0
+1863,latent_1863,2798,0.005596,0.016204791,6.718424,Description and comparison of findings against prior radiology images.,"These examples contain repetitive references to providing a description of the radiology findings in comparison to a prior frontal image, despite the comparison sometimes noted as not being available. The entries with high activation emphasize tasks related to finding discrepancies or changes between current and prior images.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4337292781621198,0.4522613065326633,0.4632352941176471,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+1864,latent_1864,4214,0.008428,0.011695015,5.114631,Evaluation of changes in specific findings between images.,"The pattern observed in high-activation examples appears related to the mention of findings compared between the current and previous images and remarks on changes regarding specific locations or conditions, such as consolidations, opacifications, or interventions like lines or tubes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3869191919191919,0.3869346733668342,0.3838383838383838,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+1865,latent_1865,5518,0.011036,0.008735379,3.9093351,Stability or unchanged status of findings across imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation levels generally involve descriptions that include a stable or unchanged status of certain features such as cardiac contour, equipment positions, or previous findings compared to prior or concurrent images. This repeated stability or unchanged status of features across different reports reflects a pattern the model has learned to recognize.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5125,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1866,latent_1866,4326,0.008652,0.011088323,7.2352886,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention the presence of comparison with prior imaging, and specifically include terms like 'comparison with prior', 'compared to previous', or note changes in specific findings since the last study. This suggests that the pattern involves evaluating changes or stability of findings in current images against a previous imaging baseline.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3903532365070826,0.405,0.4274809160305343,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1867,latent_1867,4061,0.008122,0.008411176,4.450784,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours; no acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities.,"These examples describe normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as well as absent acute cardiopulmonary processes. This indicates stable findings upon review, essentially capturing clear thoracic structures without significant changes in course or new pathology developing.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7098839535814325,0.71,0.71875,0.69,100.0,100.0
+1868,latent_1868,6515,0.01303,0.0112514105,5.9408107,Thoracic spine abnormalities affecting cardiac or lung findings.,"Samples with high activation levels describe side effects such as distorted lung appearance due to marked kyphosis, increased pulmonary edema, and stable moderate cardiomegaly as indicators of potential complications or underlying structural changes when comparing current and prior thoracic images, pointing towards thoracic abnormalities affecting radiological interpretation.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3923611111111111,0.51,0.5833333333333334,0.07,100.0,100.0
+1869,latent_1869,25467,0.050934,0.0306461,7.017565,Descriptions involving interval changes or detailed interventional findings.,"The activation levels are higher when there is a noted change or comparison in findings, or detailed descriptions of new or ongoing interventional processes, such as tube placements or subcutaneous emphysema, which require monitoring of progression or treatment. This pattern emphasizes the significance of changes in comparison to prior images, emphasizing stable versus evolving clinical situations.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.4354838709677419,0.675,80.0,120.0
+1870,latent_1870,9065,0.01813,0.009600217,4.30519,Detailed findings comparison with prior images.,"Samples with higher activation levels typically involve the description of findings from provided imaging along with references to prior images for comparison. They include specific mention of the findings and how they have or have not changed compared to previous images, often using explicit comparisons or follow-up details in the findings and impression sections.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1871,latent_1871,37189,0.074378,0.030843368,2.69118,Detailed descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels exhibit comparisons of findings across multiple chest images or modalities focusing on changes like size variations in consolidated areas, effusions, or indications of chronic conditions in comparison to prior imaging studies. Specific details about these comparisons rather than generic findings are highlighted.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6386993175431553,0.64,0.6590909090909091,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1872,latent_1872,4019,0.008038,0.009149615,4.7198577,Current and prior imaging highlighted for comparison.,"These examples highlight the presence of both current and prior imaging for comparison, with a focus on identifying interval changes, stability, or resolution of findings. This is a common pattern in radiology where interpretations emphasize changes over time to assess progression or improvement of conditions.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4048716260697828,0.435,0.4551724137931034,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1873,latent_1873,6570,0.01314,0.010802157,7.0255837,Finding description in comparison to prior images.,"Prompt structures often follow patterns, especially diagnostic imaging prompts. The higher activation samples consistently involve image inputs and a specific finding noted for comparison with prior images. This suggests the pattern is not just technical details or findings, but rather emphasizes comparison and analysis of changes over time.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5454545454545454,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1874,latent_1874,4234,0.008468,0.007740663,6.7825494,Comparison of lung volumes or cardiomediastinal contours with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples describe findings with references to changes in lung volumes compared to prior imaging studies, often relating to positions such as AP, PA, and lateral views of the chest radiographs.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3513513513513513,0.355,0.3294117647058823,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1875,latent_1875,4938,0.009876,0.015342402,5.531865,Comparison of current and prior frontal and lateral images.,"Examples with high activation involve prompts specifying both current and prior images, including frontal and lateral views, indicating a focus on image comparison and comprehensive evaluation.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4461032388663967,0.4472361809045226,0.4537037037037037,0.49,100.0,99.0
+1876,latent_1876,4290,0.00858,0.009765256,5.488848,Lung volume description impacting thoracic evaluation.,"The pattern involves descriptions related to lungs being either well expanded or noticeably low in volume, often impacting the interpretation of other thoracic structures such as bronchovascular crowding. The pattern often emphasizes lung volumes in relation to finding or excluding cardiopulmonary issues.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.637060187518903,0.64,0.6707317073170732,0.55,100.0,100.0
+1877,latent_1877,9435,0.01887,0.023184525,6.124487,Detailed comparison and assessment relative to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to focus on detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often indicating specific changes, stabilities, or improvements in clinical conditions. This includes findings about the position or changes of tubes and catheters, stabilization or change of lung conditions, or cardiopulmonary structures.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1878,latent_1878,41787,0.083574,0.06700891,3.8229518,Current findings compared with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation feature current radiographic findings that are clearly compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern emphasizes the use of comparative language to discuss changes or stability over time when describing radiological findings, especially where prior images are directly referenced for comparison.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1879,latent_1879,4964,0.009928,0.012321683,3.9789495,Prompt explicitly requests comparison-behavior descriptions.,Highly activated examples consistently involve requests for descriptions of findings along with explicit calls for comparisons with prior image studies. The pattern is distinguished by its structure with prompt instructions similar to 'Provide a description in comparison to the prior image'. This request for narrative comparison is crucial.,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1880,latent_1880,6316,0.012632,0.015063564,3.7484543,"Comparison to prior images, even if prior not detailed.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve requests to compare the current imaging findings with prior ones, often explicitly stating the reference to a prior image, even if the specifics of the prior comparison are not available or noted explicitly in some cases.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.49,0.4939024390243902,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1881,latent_1881,11275,0.02255,0.018955225,4.421022,Description of findings in comparison to previous imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve assessing current imaging findings against prior studies, indicating interval changes or stability over time. This pattern emphasizes comparison with previous data in medical imaging assessments.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5470085470085471,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1882,latent_1882,22494,0.044988,0.019191673,3.9605408,Focus on comparison of findings to prior imaging.,"The examples with activations mostly feature providing descriptions of current imaging findings and then explicitly compare these to prior studies, often identifying specific changes or stabilizations. The distinction arises between those that outline explicit comparative changes or not.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1883,latent_1883,3643,0.007286,0.009182226,5.181285,Reports highlight changes or stability in lung or mediastinal findings with prior image comparison.,"Examples with high activation scores describe specific pulmonary or mediastinal findings, sometimes related to medical hardware or procedural changes, particularly when the prior radiological comparison results in a notable change or confirmed stability in the presence of certain conditions. Descriptions often discuss changes in pulmonary findings such as atelectasis, opacities, or other conditions in comparison to prior images.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+1884,latent_1884,16205,0.03241,0.018451568,4.042131,Detailed comparison with prior imaging noting specific changes or stability.,"The examples often reference changes observed in radiological findings between current and previous imaging. High activation levels are associated with detailed comparisons between the current images and one or more prior scans, particularly noting changes or stability in specific pathological findings.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4952380952380952,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1885,latent_1885,5318,0.010636,0.009522766,4.2365875,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes.,"These examples describe comparisons between current and prior radiographic images, with detailed observations on changes or stability in pathologies. This pattern shows consistent language for assessment of temporal changes in imaging to evaluate treatment response or progression of conditions.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5543293718166383,0.58,0.5540540540540541,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1886,latent_1886,3866,0.007732,0.010897042,9.32864,Objective descriptions of findings without etiology assessments.,"The examples with higher activation identify imaging studies that predominantly offer descriptions of observed findings, focusing on the presence or absence of unusual or pathological imagery, without assessing etiology or subjective judgment about the conditions shown. Reports with objective descriptions of findings without significant comprehensive evaluation exhibit the pattern.",0.482903981264637,0.5208333333333334,0.5135135135135135,0.7916666666666666,24.0,24.0,0.4332421964000911,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.83,100.0,99.0
+1887,latent_1887,3786,0.007572,0.008667621,4.3220816,Comparison with prior imaging without detailed findings.,"The pattern observed involves prompts with explicit references to comparison with a prior image, and each prompt is characterized by an emphasis on AP portable chest X-ray technique for evaluation, often without a clear indication of findings. This likely reflects the typical nature of these reports where imaging findings are reviewed relative to past images.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5822050290135397,0.595,0.5703703703703704,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1888,latent_1888,2472,0.004944,0.008503299,6.4407077,Explicit requests for comparative analysis with details from prior reports.,"The high activation examples consistently compare current imaging findings with prior images, specifically pointing out any differences or stating stability, and explicitly provide a comprehensive update or summary based on this comparison. These descriptions explicitly highlight changes or stability in imaging findings over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4197633643633794,0.425,0.4369747899159664,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1889,latent_1889,5753,0.011506,0.010699543,6.3500986,Significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently indicate significant findings on current images compared to prior, such as interval changes, new pleural effusions, or progression of opacities. These are often highlighted to suggest progression of a disease or an acute process, thus capturing attention in the context of monitoring radiological changes.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.6119402985074627,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1890,latent_1890,22884,0.045768,0.021115793,3.6852853,Focus on stability of findings in radiology comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on stability comparisons within imaging reports, indicating the unchanged status of specific findings despite the presence of notable chronic or acute conditions—like unchanged effusion or cardiomediastinal contours.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1891,latent_1891,3959,0.007918,0.0069759083,4.62625,Requests for detailed image comparison without a prior report available.,"Highly activated examples include requests to provide a description or findings from current images compared to prior images, often without a prior report available. This implies a detailed comparison and assessment is required.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1892,latent_1892,5221,0.010442,0.0137845,3.469332,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide descriptions that compare current imaging findings with prior images, explicitly noting changes or stability in the observed conditions. These descriptions typically reference 'interval changes', 'stable since', or describe a variance in medical conditions based on prior imaging studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,100.0,100.0
+1893,latent_1893,2418,0.004836,0.0054832203,6.537594,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These examples emphasize the comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies and the identification of stable or unchanged conditions. Reports that specify comparison techniques and describe stable findings often use phrases like 'unchanged' or 'no worse than before', showing a radiological pattern of stability in pathology.",0.3853046594982078,0.4285714285714285,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,24.0,0.4190268700072621,0.44,0.4032258064516129,0.25,100.0,100.0
+1894,latent_1894,3177,0.006354,0.009428986,5.7528715,Comparison to previous studies indicating changes or stability in lung/cardiovascular findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparisons with prior imaging studies indicating observed changes, like improvement or stability, in specific lung or cardiovascular findings. These examples use this comparison to assess the current state against the historical data, looking for interval changes or lack thereof.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4648795979095296,0.465,0.4639175257731959,0.45,100.0,100.0
+1895,latent_1895,1742,0.003484,0.0041188495,5.3518615,Descriptions focus on image comparisons without clinical context.,"The examples with high activation levels involve the request to compare the current frontal image with prior imaging reports, without explicit clinical findings, thus focusing on observational comparison rather than clinical interpretation.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1896,latent_1896,18594,0.037188,0.01883999,4.646393,Presence of detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Higher activations in these examples are associated with descriptions involving comparisons between current and previous images, which is indicative of assessing changes over time, a critical aspect in radiology reporting. Such comparisons are used to evaluate progression, stability, or resolution of a condition, which the model identifies as a significant pattern.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.5882352941176471,0.7,100.0,100.0
+1897,latent_1897,13028,0.026056,0.018901553,4.1545296,Significant changes or alterations noted in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels clearly involve comparison of current imaging findings to previous images, but specifically focus on significant changes, improvements, or alterations noted between the images, often suggesting implications or requiring follow-up actions. Descriptions reference changes in pathology such as significant interval variations in findings like opacity, atelectasis, effusions, pneumothorax, or tube positions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5416666666666666,0.26,100.0,100.0
+1898,latent_1898,47721,0.095442,0.038515136,1.8198643,Evaluative comparison between current and prior images noting stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently discuss comparisons to prior images, noting changes or stability in medical conditions or features like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or medical devices, while considering technical inconsistencies or modality differences, demonstrating decision-making or evaluative synthesis of information across images.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.5692307692307692,0.74,100.0,100.0
+1899,latent_1899,179211,0.358422,0.2937495,5.781952,Emphasis on changes or consistencies in comparison with prior images.,"The patterns in the examples with higher activation levels often feature descriptions of specific changes or consistencies when compared with prior radiological studies, indicating differences or similarities observed in sequential imaging. This comparison involves a focus on changes specific to medical equipment placement, lung or cardiac condition, or specific pathologies.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5817245817245817,0.61,0.5723684210526315,0.87,100.0,100.0
+1900,latent_1900,3334,0.006668,0.01561468,8.0668,Generate descriptions highlighting uncanged findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve generating descriptions of findings in current studies that specifically retain consistency with previous examinations or unchanged findings. The mention of 'prior' or 'comparison' is common, indicating a focus on radiological continuity over time, often involving pathologies such as heart silhouette or lung fields.",0.2748414376321353,0.2857142857142857,0.2105263157894736,0.1666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.3483240738302746,0.3686868686868687,0.296875,0.1919191919191919,99.0,99.0
+1901,latent_1901,6209,0.012418,0.009312854,4.182632,Increased opacification in chest imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to increased opacification or opacity findings in the current radiology study, particularly focusing on changes in opacity in lung areas which could suggest pathology like atelectasis or effusion that might require clinical correlation to exclude pneumonia or other conditions. This pattern highlights the focus on opacification in chest imaging findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.475290432058478,0.4924623115577889,0.484375,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+1902,latent_1902,21646,0.043292,0.018521065,2.2626436,Normal or unchanged chest imaging findings.,"Highly representative activations show a pattern of normal or unchanged findings from standard chest imaging perspectives (e.g., PA and lateral) without acute pathology, such as pneumothorax or pleural effusion, along with clear cardiomediastinal silhouettes and previously stable lung conditions upon comparison.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5793269230769231,0.58,0.5740740740740741,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1903,latent_1903,4505,0.00901,0.009846066,8.230096,Explicit requests and instructions for image comparison with prior studies.,"High activation levels are associated with requests to compare the current images explicitly with prior images, specified in the instructions, prior report, or findings. These examples often utilize terms suggesting comparison or change over time, which is necessary for tracking disease progress or healing.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1904,latent_1904,3620,0.00724,0.017936159,7.6537304,Focus on interval or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison with prior imaging, focusing on interval or unchanged observations, often in relation to devices or anatomical structures. This pattern highlights the significance of monitoring changes over time in radiological assessments, a frequent requirement in clinical context.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6085492836451891,0.625,0.5886524822695035,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1905,latent_1905,4583,0.009166,0.010469394,4.70036,"Comparison of current findings to prior images, noting changes or stability.","These examples tend to include imaging studies where comparisons are made with prior images, noting either an interval change or lack thereof. Moreover, they often delineate the specific observations or findings in terms of enlargement, signs of infiltration, or stability, which is typical of radiological summaries when assessing disease progression or resolution.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4242424242424242,0.43,0.4416666666666666,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1906,latent_1906,51983,0.103966,0.04340063,1.845382,References to interval changes or evolution in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels include references to both comparison with prior imaging and identification of interval changes. Phrases such as 'interval improvement', 'slight increase', or 'newly appeared' indicate a dynamic state, highlighting the evolution of findings over time compared to previous imaging studies.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1907,latent_1907,59618,0.119236,0.08683071,7.187169,Evaluation of anatomical or pathological changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention changes over time or evaluations in comparisons to prior images, often noting alterations in anatomical or pathological conditions, such as 'interval improvement' or 'increasing size'. This suggests a focus on temporal changes rather than on stable features.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4171502256608639,0.435,0.4518518518518518,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1908,latent_1908,73918,0.147836,0.09807518,6.773373,Presence or mention of heart enlargement or silhouette instability.,"Examples with activation levels above zero incorporate findings of heart enlargement (cardiomegaly) or changes in heart silhouette stability. This suggests the model focuses on detecting abnormalities related to heart size or shape in chest imaging, as these descriptions consistently accompany higher activation scores.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.6376811594202898,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1909,latent_1909,5586,0.011172,0.008717871,6.170353,Comparisons indicating interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations significantly mention findings compared to prior examinations, specifically noting interval changes such as increase or stability in pathologies like opacifications, effusions, or cardiopulmonary statuses. The prompt emphasizes the comparative aspect to previous studies.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6698412698412699,0.675,0.64,0.8,100.0,100.0
+1910,latent_1910,19461,0.038922,0.021066917,3.731202,Changes in presence or position of medical devices on imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes in the presence or position of medical devices, such as catheters or tubes, compared to prior exams. This is significant for monitoring treatment progress or complications in patients.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.6190476190476191,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1911,latent_1911,5465,0.01093,0.009670754,3.805434,Pulmonary and cardiac condition evaluations in chest imaging reports.,"High activation levels are associated with the presence or evaluation of pulmonary nodules, cardiac silhouette analysis, and description of lung conditions such as pulmonary edema or pleural effusions. These correspond to common clinical indicators noted in imaging reports when detailed evaluation of changes in chest structures is required.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5392856151647193,0.585,0.5521472392638037,0.9,100.0,100.0
+1912,latent_1912,10687,0.021374,0.018682273,4.8212333,Comparison for stability in device positioning or procedural details without acute changes.,"Highly activated examples involve findings of intubation, medical device positioning, or subtle interventional-related details that require temporal comparison to prior images for establishing stability or changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3421909032671364,0.3517587939698492,0.3026315789473684,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+1913,latent_1913,9198,0.018396,0.024298225,5.169781,Description or comparison of findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activations often involve prompts asking for a description or comparison of findings from current and prior images, or including explicit references to prior reports along with indications or techniques. The frequent mention of relative dates or conditions for comparison suggests the pattern.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3956043956043956,0.45,0.46875,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1914,latent_1914,6007,0.012014,0.01012603,7.0009584,Mild abnormalities or findings in radiological reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe the presence of mild abnormalities such as mild interstitial edema, mild cardiomegaly, or mild calcification/separation, suggesting that the pattern is focused on detecting reports that emphasize slight or minimal findings rather than significant changes or acute abnormalities. Phrases like 'mild enlargement,' 'mild interstitial edema,' and 'mild prominence' frequently appear in higher-activation examples.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7359633454997282,0.745,0.6788321167883211,0.93,100.0,100.0
+1915,latent_1915,3533,0.007066,0.008088085,4.3126364,Descriptions of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels show a clear pattern of differentiating imaging findings from prior studies, often noting specific changes or stability in the patient's condition over time. Commonly used phrases like 'in comparison with', 'interval change', 'similar position', and 'unchanged' are recurrent in these descriptions, highlighting the importance of tracking progression or stability in radiologic evaluations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4865841073271413,0.4974874371859296,0.4961240310077519,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+1916,latent_1916,10367,0.020734,0.01597554,4.444291,"Absence of prior images for comparison, report based on current images only.","The examples with high activation levels consistently lack prior images for comparison, focusing instead on findings from the present images alone. This pattern indicates the importance of situations where no relevant historical data is available to contrast current observations for creating more detailed reports.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5588235294117647,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1917,latent_1917,12440,0.02488,0.02170753,6.353467,Lung volume changes and their radiological effects.,"These examples show features often identified under conditions of low lung volumes or changes in lung volumes due to underlying conditions or interventions. Features such as ""crowding of bronchovascular markings,"" ""atelectasis,"" ""opacities,"" ""cardiac silhouette accentuated due to low volume,"" and ""flattened diaphragms"" are associated with these patterns. Locations and types of changes described are markers of lung volume-related patterns, indicating atelectasis or effusions.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5998399359743898,0.6,0.6041666666666666,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1918,latent_1918,17298,0.034596,0.018338315,5.125103,Reports detailing precise medical tube placement.,"Instances of findings regarding the location and position of medical tubes like endotracheal tubes (ETT), nasogastric (NG) tubes, etc., are frequent in the examples with higher activation. The recordings frequently involve precise tube placement concerning anatomical landmarks such as the carina or stomach.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7236180904522613,0.7236180904522613,0.7272727272727273,0.72,100.0,99.0
+1919,latent_1919,2573,0.005146,0.010298501,7.3813868,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes in findings.,"These examples contain references to detailed radiological findings in the context of prior imaging, emphasizing changes over time. Patterns include stability or alterations (e.g., size change, new findings) when compared with previous studies, illustrating a focus on longitudinal assessment of imaging features.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1920,latent_1920,10000,0.02,0.021898145,5.335136,Focus on comparison of current findings to prior reports or images.,"High activation levels are associated with references to prior imaging or reports, indicating that the model is sensitive to patterns where findings or observations are compared to historical data as part of the evaluation process. This pattern of comparing current findings with previous ones is frequently used in medical imaging to assess changes or stability in a patient's condition.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4873417721518987,0.77,100.0,100.0
+1921,latent_1921,2543,0.005086,0.0088016065,5.2908,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging with emphasis on stability or device position.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels describe radiology reports that involve explicit comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on changes in medical devices' positions or confirming minimal or no changes in pathological findings. These descriptions often include stable comparisons of heart size, device location, or lack of new findings, emphasizing the continuity or minor adjustments of previous findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3915776241357637,0.395,0.3764705882352941,0.32,100.0,100.0
+1922,latent_1922,6572,0.013144,0.009077338,5.5760107,Detailed comparison between current and prior images highlighting new or unchanged findings over time.,"Highly representative samples consistently reference both the 'current' and 'prior' images, suggesting that a comparison between past and present imaging is integral to the pattern. This comparison often includes findings that are new, unchanged, or improved, highlighting changes over time as an important focus in the interpreted results.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4839550088930083,0.485,0.4835164835164835,0.44,100.0,100.0
+1923,latent_1923,3974,0.007948,0.009857951,5.615988,Description of current radiological findings in direct comparison to prior images.,"Across the data, there is a consistent pattern where comparisons are emphasized, even though they may mention no significant changes or using language that explicitly requires reviewing current images against prior ones. It’s apparent that the data is generated around scenarios necessitating description in terms of a prior imaging counterpart, whether there are changes or not, compared with comparisons lacking.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4096722924392643,0.415,0.4285714285714285,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1924,latent_1924,35982,0.071964,0.0463175,5.0656238,Instructions emphasize image comparison or change assessment.,"Examples exhibiting activations describe instructions involving comparison between current and prior images to assess changes, often related to specific features or pathologies. High activations entail explicit procedural language focusing on image comparison tasks.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4540888743312589,0.5,0.5,0.79,100.0,100.0
+1925,latent_1925,6620,0.01324,0.008906893,5.1504226,Presence and evaluation of pleural effusion or pulmonary edema.,"These examples with higher activations typically included findings of pleural effusions or pulmonary edema alongside cardiomediastinal assessment, often noting inchangements or stable features potentially linked to heart conditions.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.64024220313648,0.645,0.6178861788617886,0.76,100.0,100.0
+1926,latent_1926,6778,0.013556,0.01150763,5.587899,Interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels all describe findings in the context of comparing current imaging to prior studies, reflecting interval changes or stability over time, a typical approach in medical diagnostics to assess progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7011873869623338,0.715,0.6503496503496503,0.93,100.0,100.0
+1927,latent_1927,14160,0.02832,0.014707598,4.056372,Emphasis on tube or line placement and positioning.,"Activations are high in cases where findings involve positioning and placement of tubes, lines, or catheters within the body. This focus aligns with scenarios often leading to high clinical significance, such as assessing the positioning of medical devices for functionality and safety.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6901408450704225,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1928,latent_1928,6958,0.013916,0.01108366,4.2050395,Technical description and comparative analysis of changes over time with imaging.,"These examples frequently discuss findings and changes over time by comparing current images with old ones, emphasizing technical aspects like sequential radiographs or specific techniques used. They often assess changes in device positioning, lung or cardiac conditions across a timeline, and highlight slight or no changes or stability, focusing on medical devices or improvements/stability in pathologic conditions. The pattern involves short descriptions that highlight significant or lack of changes over time, often mentioning unchanged elements and technical aspects of the imaging process.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4785828206880839,0.5376884422110553,0.5240963855421686,0.87,100.0,99.0
+1929,latent_1929,12706,0.025412,0.011425252,3.8029954,Changes or positioning of medical devices relative to prior imaging.,"The cases with higher activation levels show reports focused on the positioning and changes concerning medical devices and procedural changes, such as tubes, catheters, or surgical modifications, compared to prior imaging. These details are prevalent in monitoring clinical interventions' impacts over time, which is why these examples are associated with higher activation.",0.5353448275862069,0.5510204081632653,0.6,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.6119402985074627,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1930,latent_1930,19426,0.038852,0.02246105,3.2262928,Changes in medical device or tube placement between images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide a description of changes in medical devices or tubes between the current and prior images, such as tubes being added, removed, repositioned, or remaining unchanged, as well as specific assessments of positioning relative to anatomical landmarks. These comparisons are detailed and focus on changes in device placement or status.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,100.0,100.0
+1931,latent_1931,3903,0.007806,0.006935392,4.152316,"Significant findings or changes related to pulmonary opacities, pneumo/metabolic adjustments.","Highly activated examples frequently emphasize findings related to potential infectious processes or structural changes like opacities or pneumothorax when compared to prior imaging, often in settings of critical clinical changes or observations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4217473287240729,0.425,0.4117647058823529,0.35,100.0,100.0
+1932,latent_1932,3993,0.007986,0.009778811,6.932402,Compare current findings with prior images.,"Higher activations are associated with requests to describe the current radiology findings in comparison to prior images. The pattern involves an explicit requirement to compare present findings with past imaging, often indicated by specific phrases related to comparing images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4177029196484449,0.465,0.4777070063694267,0.75,100.0,100.0
+1933,latent_1933,2811,0.005622,0.006546277,7.008061,Instructions to compare current images despite lacking prior comparisons.,"The highly activated examples contain instructions to compare current imaging findings with a prior frontal view, even when no prior imaging is available for actual comparison. The structure explicitly includes a directive to describe differences or provide a comparison, which is repeated even when not applicable. This pattern emphasizes task-driven reporting without necessarily having comparative data.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+1934,latent_1934,13412,0.026824,0.017295321,4.2329597,Focus on unchanged status of findings or devices compared to prior images.,"In radiology studies, comparisons to prior images are common when assessing changes in pathology or device position. This set of data reflects that pattern, emphasizing unchanged status of either pathology or device, confirmed by statements such as ""unchanged position"", ""no significant interval change"", ""essentially unchanged"", or direct phraseological comparisons using 'since', 'compared', or an unchanged observation in structures like tubes or infiltrates from prior studies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,100.0
+1935,latent_1935,10523,0.021046,0.03075826,6.6416483,Describing changes between current and prior chest images.,"The examples show higher activation levels for responses that clearly state changes in a patient's condition or medical devices when comparing current and prior images. These descriptions include specific changes in opacities, effusions, lung consolidation or placement of medical devices, indicating a focus on interval developments between imaging sessions.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4172937093055661,0.425,0.4390243902439024,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1936,latent_1936,27651,0.055302,0.026533337,5.78611,Evaluation of tube or device placement compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations involve reports of tube placement evaluations or other medical devices mentioned in relation to prior images. This points to the model focusing on comparing current and prior evaluations to ascertain changes, particularly concerning tube placement or medical devices, while low or zero activations appear in more general scanning without direct device-related focal points or changes.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6901408450704225,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1937,latent_1937,3599,0.007198,0.009965026,6.3268924,Mention and comparison of cardiomegaly in radiology reports.,"These examples demonstrate a pattern of describing and evaluating changes in cardiomegaly, often with references to prior imaging. Cardiomediastinal descriptions are frequently noted alongside other findings like effusion or pulmonary issues, which are compared to previous examinations, using 'mild', 'moderate', 'persisting', 'unchanged', or exact size metrics.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6145833333333333,0.63,0.7166666666666667,0.43,100.0,100.0
+1938,latent_1938,5783,0.011566,0.011358231,4.2343683,Streaky bibasilar opacities indicating atelectasis.,"Observations of streaky bibasilar opacities, often noted as indicative of atelectasis, appear repeatedly across prompts with higher activation levels. This pattern is used to describe subtle changes in lung bases, often interpreted from pulmonary imaging studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5164835164835164,0.56,0.65,0.26,100.0,100.0
+1939,latent_1939,15277,0.030554,0.02079029,6.611142,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe findings using instructions that explicitly mention providing a description of findings in comparison to a prior image. This implies a pattern of tasking the assistant to articulate observations by directly contrasting with previous imaging, which the examples convey, complete with real observational details.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.503946821769838,0.5175879396984925,0.5112781954887218,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+1940,latent_1940,7100,0.0142,0.024191407,6.9688826,Comparison of radiological findings between current and prior images.,The highly activated examples involve descriptions of findings in radiology studies where comparisons are made to previous or concurrent images. Comparisons aided in identifying changes in anatomical or pathological features over time or between different views.,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1941,latent_1941,2739,0.005478,0.0105764,7.827393,Detailed but unremarkable findings in chest X-ray reports emphasizing normalcy.,"The examples with high activation levels describe a comprehensive analysis of frontal and lateral chest radiographs while noting that there is low lung volumes or normal findings overall. They often conclude with no acute abnormal findings, or indicators of stable findings like 'no pneumothorax' or 'silhouette is normal'. This seems to represent a pattern of providing detailed non-acute findings in a formatted radiology report where there is a focus on stability or normality.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6196576919227305,0.62,0.6276595744680851,0.59,100.0,100.0
+1942,latent_1942,13127,0.026254,0.012804518,3.9182403,Detailed comparison with prior imaging focused on specific findings.,"The prominent patterns in these examples involve specific instructions or contexts provided along with references to prior imaging for comparison. However, examples with the highest activations emphasize radiological stability or changes in specified structures based on comparison with previous similar imaging, often providing precise details on medical apparatus or conditions (e.g., pulmonary edema, cardiomediastinal silhouette). These alignments indicate a specific, detailed comparison-oriented approach is representative of the desired activation pattern criteria.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5353535353535354,0.53,100.0,100.0
+1943,latent_1943,4277,0.008554,0.015017355,6.292192,Describing findings in relation to unchanged prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation contain explicit instructions to describe findings in relation to previous imaging, particularly if no significant changes or stable conditions are noted. This creates a pattern of stable imaging comparisons across different radiological examinations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3955555555555555,0.405,0.3733333333333333,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1944,latent_1944,3755,0.00751,0.011005341,5.2505803,Detection of cardiopulmonary condition stability or minor variations using prior comparisons.,"These examples focus on finding changes or confirming stability in particular conditions based on past reports, particularly for cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, pulmonary congestion, and associated conditions, comparing current and prior imaging to assess minor variations in cardiopulmonary status.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1945,latent_1945,13276,0.026552,0.015900895,7.026593,"Comparison with prior findings, especially focusing on heart size, opacities, and tubes.","Activations are generally high when there is direct or explicit comparison between current and previous images, focusing particularly on changes in parenchymal opacities, heart size exaggeration due to low lung volumes, and tube placements. These are common scenarios in follow-up radiological evaluations where changes in anatomical presentations or medical device adjustments are highlighted based on prior images.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.4265734265734265,0.782051282051282,78.0,122.0
+1946,latent_1946,4862,0.009724,0.017257137,4.235738,Mentions of bilateral lung abnormalities compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels specify the presence of bilateral pleural effusion or other bilateral lung involvement, such as pulmonary edema, in the context of comparison with prior images. This pattern highlights the model's focus on identifying reports that compare bilateral findings over time.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.2222222222222222,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4745762711864407,0.28,100.0,100.0
+1947,latent_1947,3612,0.007224,0.009655243,5.2788363,Stable thoracic findings in sequential radiographic comparisons.,"The pattern seen in examples with high activation values involves providing both current and previous radiological images, specifically focusing on chest (PA and LAT) or AP views, along with detailed comparisons emphasizing stable findings or slight changes without acute abnormalities. This type of pattern is typical in medical reports that aim to provide reassurance of steady medical conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4615384615384615,0.3,100.0,100.0
+1948,latent_1948,25980,0.05196,0.026332144,4.0390587,Describing changes in lung or pleural findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on comparing current and prior imaging to describe changes or stability in lung or pleural conditions, tube placements, or presence of opacities. This suggests a pattern where stability or recurrence in specific thoracic findings in comparison to prior reports is important to the model.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5584102769971899,0.56,0.5535714285714286,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1949,latent_1949,5000,0.01,0.011283954,4.785324,"Comparisons with prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a comparison of new radiological findings against prior imaging, using explicit mention of previous studies and assessments of stability, change, or absence/presence of new findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4426451758680425,0.445,0.4513274336283185,0.51,100.0,100.0
+1950,latent_1950,3933,0.007866,0.006846933,4.029342,Detailed descriptions of current radiology findings compared to prior images.,Most of these examples explicitly require or make reference to the need for a direct description or comparison of radiological findings with prior or current imaging. This is evidenced by phrases like 'provide a description of the findings' and requests for comparison. This use of language indicates an expectation for precise description requirements in these sets of instructions.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4392523364485981,0.47,100.0,100.0
+1951,latent_1951,4417,0.008834,0.0065819807,5.800588,Observation of medical devices and significant changes compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently include references to changes in medical devices, significant findings, or deterioration compared to prior imaging studies, such as unchanged mediastinal clips, hemidiaphragm elevation, or newly noted areas of opacity. These observations can indicate progressive disease or stable post-surgical condition, which is crucial in radiological analysis.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5858585858585859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1952,latent_1952,4690,0.00938,0.010644766,6.0322294,Comparative stability or mild changes from prior imaging findings.,"Reports with high activation often detail stable findings compared to prior radiographs, use precise comparisons to indicate little or no significant change in findings such as heart size or lung opacities, and mention unchanged common medical devices.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5576923076923077,0.58,100.0,100.0
+1953,latent_1953,5462,0.010924,0.01124992,5.1682744,Prompt requests a description of findings compared to prior images.,The pattern in these examples revolves around using the phrase 'provide a description of the findings' to solicit a comparison between the current images and prior imaging studies. This format requests an explicit interpretation and comparison in radiologic terms.,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5234599089497645,0.542713567839196,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,99.0
+1954,latent_1954,5644,0.011288,0.008165351,4.387083,New or changed findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve cases where new findings are noted in comparison to prior images, particularly indicating changes in pathology or new evidence of disease progression such as pneumonia or consolidation. The inclusion of lateral views along with frontal images in evaluating changes tends to have a higher activation, suggesting the model is identifying significant comparative findings between current and prior images, especially concerning.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,100.0,100.0
+1955,latent_1955,10746,0.021492,0.011672637,3.7572768,Detailed descriptions of opacities in lung fields indicating potential infiltrates or atelectasis.,"The examples with higher activations focus on the presence and precise description of opacities, especially in locations like the lung bases or hemithorax, and are linked often to potential infiltrates, pneumonia, or atelectasis, which are specific signs looked at in chest radiography for diagnosing respiratory conditions.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.604301948051948,0.61,0.6447368421052632,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1956,latent_1956,31085,0.06217,0.03422849,6.985427,Narrative or assistant-generated feedback on radiological findings.,"Examples with activation levels above zero frequently describe consultation findings using direct text addressing ('PAST_REPORT' or 'ASSISTANT'}, indicating the assistant's feedback or generated report. But they specifically include these findings as a key component. These cases thus reflect more radiological data analysis present and descriptive comparisons made to past images were expected but excluded.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.4035087719298245,0.6133333333333333,75.0,125.0
+1957,latent_1957,8595,0.01719,0.010693582,7.0281706,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1958,latent_1958,4976,0.009952,0.010812374,5.194253,Description of stable or unchanged findings relative to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve changes in cardiopulmonary structures thorough comparison with prior imaging, indicating that active change or stability in key internal elements attracts the specific activation pattern.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4814814814814814,0.39,100.0,100.0
+1959,latent_1959,12460,0.02492,0.012123107,4.546282,Generation or request for detailed comparison with incomplete clauses or missing info.,Examples with higher activation frequently involve the generation of comparative descriptions of radiological findings with an emphasis on language variations or incomplete sentences but still convey adequate detail. These descriptions are also frequently coupled with higher specificity in the indicated radiological history or rationale.,0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.423007573025604,0.52,0.5081967213114754,0.9393939393939394,99.0,101.0
+1960,latent_1960,5200,0.0104,0.016913114,3.6947062,Comparison of current imaging with prior for evaluation of clinical changes or device placement.,"The examples with higher activation levels mostly focus on providing specific instructions to compare current and prior radiological images in terms of particular clinical indications or findings. Requests usually pertain to status changes, often with specific techniques like 'portable X-ray' or 'PA and lateral views.'",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,100.0
+1961,latent_1961,6558,0.013116,0.0074393046,4.646246,Evaluation or adjustment of endotracheal tube placement.,"The high activation levels are associated with examples where evaluation is focused on the position and adjustments of endotracheal tubes in patients, typically following intubation. The commonality among these cases is the attention to specifics of tube placement or adjustment for optimal positioning, which indicates the model is detecting a specific procedure-related focus.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3867201320910485,0.48,0.4090909090909091,0.09,100.0,100.0
+1962,latent_1962,5074,0.010148,0.013516618,4.4133,Comparative findings indicating changes between current and prior images.,Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions that use comparative analysis between current and prior images to identify changes in specific conditions like opacities or cardiomegaly.,0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4225603173407647,0.425,0.4336283185840708,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1963,latent_1963,15268,0.030536,0.019410467,6.26153,Detailed tube positioning and anatomical landmarks in imaging.,"Examples with higher activations involve descriptions of tube positions, particularly enteric tubes, and their positions in relation to specific anatomical landmarks, emphasizing the need for precise placement or adjustment.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7882851093860268,0.79,0.7457627118644068,0.88,100.0,100.0
+1964,latent_1964,15435,0.03087,0.017265588,4.0562515,Descriptions of pleural effusions or opacities with comparison to prior findings.,"High activations are linked to the descriptions of interval changes or stability of pleural effusions or lung opacities, especially in the context of underlying conditions like pulmonary edema, effusions, or pathologies evaluated between current and prior images. These observations are frequently seen in tracking respiratory conditions in radiology comparisons.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4308359264874065,0.465,0.4313725490196078,0.22,100.0,100.0
+1965,latent_1965,13354,0.026708,0.014645579,4.2932177,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe radiological findings as being unchanged or stable from previous examinations using explicit phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant change'. This emphasis highlights the pattern of reporting consistency over time, often reassuring concerning findings are not worsening.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6539532084555781,0.655,0.6396396396396397,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1966,latent_1966,17561,0.035122,0.01860231,5.0737185,Technical variation affecting radiological comparisons.,"These examples focus on the description and comparison of radiological findings, particularly related to image artifacts and technical challenges, such as variations in positioning affecting assessment. Keywords like 'rotated positioning' and 'allowing for differences in technique and positioning' highlight the pattern, emphasizing the impact of technical aspects.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5934065934065934,0.54,100.0,100.0
+1967,latent_1967,10441,0.020882,0.014853515,6.1565256,Focus on comparing current and prior frontal and lateral images.,"Examples with higher activations focus on the comparison between current and prior frontal X-ray images along with lateral images, emphasizing changes over time. These examples consistently involve interpretation that includes both frontal and lateral views to assess progression or stability in findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+1968,latent_1968,7609,0.015218,0.01406705,4.356813,Activation increases when explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging findings are described.,"The examples show increased activation levels for reports that describe clear comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, with activation decreasing when comparisons are absent or generic. The explicit use of comparison phrases and previous imaging references is key to activation levels.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+1969,latent_1969,29599,0.059198,0.05160026,6.6056848,Comparison to prior imaging focusing on changes or stability.,"The most representative examples consistently use language that compares current findings with previous imaging studies, highlighting interval changes and stability, whether it's improved aeration, unchanged positions of medical devices, stable cardiomegaly, or ongoing pleural effusion. These linguistic markers, particularly those indicating comparisons with past studies or explicit changes over time, are indicative of the pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.5190839694656488,0.68,100.0,100.0
+1970,latent_1970,5080,0.01016,0.009431486,4.139691,Detailed comparisons of current and prior imaging findings.,"The activation pattern correlates with structured comparison of current and prior imaging findings, often describing changes, stabilities, or direct comparisons between the two sets. The reports detail specific differences or consistencies with previous studies, usually leading to a final impression or conclusion, which gives them distinct analytical importance.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4049851246281157,0.405,0.4059405940594059,0.41,100.0,100.0
+1971,latent_1971,4647,0.009294,0.01136586,5.2437444,Prompt requests immediate comparison with prior image.,"Examples with higher activation consistently feature image analysis requests offering descriptions that prompt direct comparisons with prior or baseline images, ignoring any attempts to fill in missing or unclear prior comparisons.",0.5596919127086007,0.5714285714285714,0.5454545454545454,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+1972,latent_1972,2490,0.00498,0.004509449,4.601307,Assessment of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The pattern in high activation examples involves analysis and commentary on interval changes in radiographic findings when prior imaging reports are available. These examples consistently draw comparisons with previous imaging to assess changes, employing terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'increased', or 'decreased', often focusing on stability or progression of specific conditions or findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,100.0,100.0
+1973,latent_1973,6433,0.012866,0.014692604,6.0374527,Detailed examination prompted by specific condition or acute process.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly feature specific instructions to compare findings with prior images and involve scenarios that require detailed examination, often due to specific underlying conditions provided in the indication. These conditions or acute processes encourage detailed comparison and monitoring of changes.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+1974,latent_1974,5638,0.011276,0.014867494,5.876363,Interval changes or specific findings compared to prior images.,"The activation level is higher in cases where explicit detailed descriptions or specific findings in current and prior images are provided, indicating a focus on interval changes, progression, stability, or specific comparisons of imaging details. These examples frequently mention terms like 'increased', 'progressed', 'unchanged', etc.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4715015321756894,0.4773869346733668,0.4793388429752066,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+1975,latent_1975,6532,0.013064,0.011036142,4.081763,Focus on descriptions of imaging findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with activation levels significantly above zero consistently involve an evaluation or description of the radiology study performed, specifically providing a description comparing the current imaging study to a prior study. This narrative structure is distinct, as it focuses on providing a written assessment or comparison, and these instances often lack additional find-supported impressions that are common in other examples.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1976,latent_1976,3482,0.006964,0.010349747,5.4519224,Unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern is that examples with references to 'comparison' or previous imaging, alongside findings of unchanged or stable conditions, tend to have higher activation levels. This reflects a common pattern in radiology reports when stable or unchanged findings are significant in longitudinal patient monitoring.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5117737815211069,0.5125628140703518,0.5164835164835165,0.47,100.0,99.0
+1977,latent_1977,7624,0.015248,0.017439557,4.225937,Persistent medical device positioning in radiology images.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe findings regarding appropriately positioned medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) especially after procedures or placements (e.g., chest tubes, sternotomy wires). These descriptions often include terms like 'unchanged position' or describe unchanged positioning over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.44,0.22,100.0,100.0
+1978,latent_1978,4559,0.009118,0.012301313,6.3800983,In-depth comparison of current and prior radiological findings.,"All examples that have higher activation levels involve descriptions compared with previous images where interval changes or stable findings are noted. Reports mentioning comparison with prior imaging and documenting specific changes or stability tend to use certain phrases that indicate consistency or change over time, reflecting accurate medical observation and diagnosis.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6550324675324675,0.66,0.6290322580645161,0.78,100.0,100.0
+1979,latent_1979,3814,0.007628,0.00862159,3.386948,Description of radiologic findings in comparison to prior frontal images.,"The highly activated examples consistently require descriptions of radiologic findings compared to prior imaging, with specific emphasis on comparing the current radiologic image to previous ones, typically using the current and prior frontal image(s). The specific findings observed in the images appear to be secondary to the focus on image comparison.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+1980,latent_1980,67272,0.134544,0.088880226,7.3408885,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies in findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently discuss the presence of prior imaging studies for comparison. These examples highlight findings in current imaging that are assessed relative to previous images, using explicit phrases for comparison like 'compared to previous radiograph', indicating a pattern where comparative analysis is specifically emphasized.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4771306854416979,0.4824120603015075,0.4202898550724637,0.7160493827160493,81.0,118.0
+1981,latent_1981,8131,0.016262,0.026547719,4.2247605,"Recurring detection of pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pulmonary changes, with assessments of interval change.","The data shows a pattern where there is consistent identification of certain pathological findings such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, pulmonary edema, or changes in effusions, often with expressions indicating comparison to previous imaging studies to assess any changes or persistence of these conditions over time.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6161616161616161,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1982,latent_1982,3718,0.007436,0.011060081,6.582213,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1983,latent_1983,21549,0.043098,0.028741634,5.7421207,Existence of observable interval change or stability in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve scenarios where specific changes in medical devices (e.g., tubes) or medical conditions (e.g., opacities, effusions) are observed and compared with previous states, indicating a focus on detecting or describing changes over time relative to prior investigations, excluding detailed image evaluation without comparison to a prior report.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4480389869611426,0.4623115577889447,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,99.0
+1984,latent_1984,16806,0.033612,0.015044431,3.1483626,Task focuses on current images without needing prior images for comparison.,The examples with higher activation levels involve instructions or tasks that require only current images without any reference or explicit mention of the requirement or use of prior images for comparison. This contrasts the typical medical imaging examination requiring previous images for comparison to assess changes over time.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4267714747864581,0.495,0.4838709677419355,0.15,100.0,100.0
+1985,latent_1985,4295,0.00859,0.0115499105,6.231,Low lung volumes or hyperinflation affecting radiographic interpretation.,The activation levels are high for examples where radiographic findings include descriptors like low lung volumes or hyperinflation that can accentuate or affect the appearance of other features such as cardiac silhouette or bronchovascular structures. These descriptors suggest non-pathological factors influencing radiographic interpretation.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.6111111111111112,0.33,100.0,100.0
+1986,latent_1986,11208,0.022416,0.023239102,5.141379,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the direct comparison of current imaging findings against a prior image, with emphasis on stability or change in findings. This pattern reflects the significance of temporal comparison in radiological assessments where stability or lack of new findings is noted.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4046232300484067,0.425,0.4452554744525547,0.61,100.0,100.0
+1987,latent_1987,11273,0.022546,0.014564124,2.7483296,Comparison of current and prior images for changes or stability.,"Examples with activations associated with providing comparison details about changes between current and prior images, indicating updates or stabilization of specific medical conditions, are seen in these samples. The necessity of comparison with previous imaging results is integral to assessing disease progression or stability, which appears well-engrained as a pattern evaluated by this model.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4336319637524456,0.45,0.4626865671641791,0.62,100.0,100.0
+1988,latent_1988,19727,0.039454,0.034406025,5.013742,Detailed observations without significant changes from prior images.,The prompt focuses on descriptions based on current observations without substantial changes or comparisons to prior images. This suggests the pattern revolves around detailed descriptions of current images being notable even when previous reports are given for context.,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.651541682527598,0.6532663316582915,0.631578947368421,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+1989,latent_1989,4558,0.009116,0.011560279,5.9761763,Use of current and prior frontal images for comparative evaluation.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve a prompt format that includes both current and prior frontal images, along with an analysis of changes over time. These examples emphasize the comparative evaluation aspect, which seems significant to the activation pattern.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+1990,latent_1990,10083,0.020166,0.01103009,2.7200847,Explicit verbal comparisons of current and prior images.,"The pattern shows high activation scores for cases with specific comparisons noted in reports where previous images are explicitly compared to the present findings, using phrases like 'as compared to', 'changes since', or specific past dates, particularly when narrative comparison is required across multiple views or marked changes are documented.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3709415584415584,0.38,0.4032258064516129,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1991,latent_1991,13989,0.027978,0.014164787,4.0122485,Persistent pulmonary opacities or effusions with intact device positions.,"The model consistently shows increased activation for samples involving persistent or worsening opacities and pleural effusions, often with device placement, like ET tubes, being unchanged. Comparisons to prior imaging are regular, but the emphasis on persistent findings and their progression, particularly moderate pulmonary edema and structural abnormalities, aligns with the high activation.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.6666666666666666,0.5,100.0,100.0
+1992,latent_1992,14753,0.029506,0.023553398,5.1742425,Recognition and description of interval changes in thoracic imaging findings.,"The high activation examples often involve the identification and description of changes or stability in certain thoracic radiological findings when compared to prior images. This includes changes in pleural effusions, pneumothorax, opacities, and other thoracic conditions. The model seems to focus on identifying interval changes over time with repeated imaging findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6694711538461539,0.67,0.6574074074074074,0.71,100.0,100.0
+1993,latent_1993,6394,0.012788,0.018401537,4.1132474,Task-oriented instructions or requests in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe the text as instructions or requests for specific evaluation or comparison tasks, often asking for details or assessments related to prior and current imaging, reflecting task-based language. These instructions include explicit language directing an assistant or comparing findings, indicating a task-oriented approach, even with severe pathological findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+1994,latent_1994,2895,0.00579,0.0074665784,6.513613,"Describe stable findings compared to prior images using multiple view types (frontal, lateral).","The highly activated examples involve descriptions of radiographic findings that remain consistent with the prior images. Additionally, these narrations involve multiple types of views (frontal, lateral) and mention comparisons with prior images, but they specify unchanged or stable findings, which might imply a routine follow-up or surveillance.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5104166666666666,0.49,100.0,100.0
+1995,latent_1995,7051,0.014102,0.010762021,12.248201,Updates or changes in the placement of medical devices.,"Samples with activation levels higher than 0 focus on updates or changes to monitoring and support devices, such as tubes or lines, in comparison to prior images. This reflects a pattern in medical imaging where device placements or adjustments are commonly reported, indicating an emphasis on equipment positioning and patient intervention.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8095238095238095,0.7391304347826086,23.0,27.0,0.6540167865707434,0.7085427135678392,0.4246575342465753,0.6595744680851063,47.0,152.0
+1996,latent_1996,5025,0.01005,0.0125285685,4.188899,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+1997,latent_1997,5845,0.01169,0.008264437,5.542756,Analysis and description of current and prior images for interval changes.,The entries that have higher activation levels are those that specifically mention providing a description based on both current and prior frontal images or radiographs. These examples tend to include direct comparison of current findings against past images and emphasize providing descriptions derived from this comparison.,0.4086206896551724,0.4285714285714285,0.4411764705882353,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4126666493411991,0.435,0.4532374100719424,0.63,100.0,100.0
+1998,latent_1998,7151,0.014302,0.010029823,5.8198276,Reports focus on positioning of thoracic medical devices over time.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently feature the presence and evaluation of medical devices, particularly catheters and tubes, in the thoracic region—specifically noting their positioning or stability over different time points. This correlates with instances where medical device position is a focal point of comparison, especially across multiple imaging studies.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7898108297467721,0.79,0.7735849056603774,0.82,100.0,100.0
+1999,latent_1999,4888,0.009776,0.010027546,4.2132006,Radiological comparisons over time with focus on condition changes.,"High activation levels are associated with images or descriptions that involve comparison with prior images, particularly radiological changes over time such as improved or worsened appearances after prior interventions or conditions like pneumothorax, edema, or tube placements. The tasks are often complex, requiring careful assessment of changes, hence the higher activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2000,latent_2000,7020,0.01404,0.010414016,4.2994266,Presence or absence of comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently describe reports involving the consideration of current images against past images and mention the presence or absence of comparison studies. The comparison may or may not involve historical data, but several examples highlight the statement 'comparison: none'. This suggests a focus on comparisons as an element triggering activation.",0.25,0.28,0.3428571428571428,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2001,latent_2001,3715,0.00743,0.009332802,6.122103,Descriptions of stable imaging findings or unchanged conditions over time.,"The highly activated examples predominantly include cases with certain imaging findings that are consistent with specific or potentially stable conditions over time. These reports often mention stability or unchanged findings when comparing current images to prior images, and also contain language typical of stable conditions, e.g., stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or unchanged bilateral contours.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4466722787683987,0.4522613065326633,0.4375,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+2002,latent_2002,5143,0.010286,0.010055536,3.529491,Instructed comparison of current images with prior studies.,"The activation is high in examples with language that emphasizes frontal and lateral imaging present but focuses on comparison with prior studies without providing detailed comparative descriptions. The instruction to provide a description likely cues for a pattern of identifying key similarities or differences, eliciting the activation.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5644107445349681,0.595,0.5620915032679739,0.86,100.0,100.0
+2003,latent_2003,5396,0.010792,0.0132784685,5.0814962,Low lung volumes or density implications in lung imaging.,"Examples rated with higher activation consistently involve descriptions indicating low lung volumes or increased density within the lungs, accompanied by their implications or impacts on the interpretation of imaging results. This suggests that the specific focus of the dataset is on detecting or noting the implications of low lung volume in chest imaging.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3449066491975106,0.4,0.2619047619047619,0.11,100.0,100.0
+2004,latent_2004,15863,0.031726,0.020747473,3.9452465,Description of interval changes from prior imaging.,"These examples involve evaluating radiological changes over time with specific reference to interval changes since prior imaging, using explicit date references or description of the previous state. They often describe a specific pathology or device as stable, changing, or unchanged compared to prior imaging.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.545800365185636,0.5477386934673367,0.5398230088495575,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+2005,latent_2005,78682,0.157364,0.07546502,2.0995915,Focus on device/tube position changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions of changes in medical devices or indwelling tube positions, with explicit comparisons to prior images. This suggests the model responds to diagnostic contexts where interpreting changes in internal medical support device positions is critical.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5776581142434801,0.6,0.6851851851851852,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2006,latent_2006,5699,0.011398,0.0124093965,4.765149,Comparison of current and prior frontal (and lateral) chest images.,"These examples focus on the detailed analysis of the available current and prior frontal and sometimes lateral chest images to specifically assess changes or stability over time. Terms like 'provides description in comparison', 'comparison', and 'compared to previous studies' are key indicators of this pattern, which is the emphasis on evaluating interval changes in radiological findings, particularly in critical cases or medical conditions.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2007,latent_2007,5029,0.010058,0.018740611,5.947794,Stable chest findings relative to prior exams with no acute change.,"More representative examples tend to describe the state of chest findings relative to prior examinations, utilizing terms like ""unchanged,"" ""resolved,"" or ""similar,"" and generally report no acute findings or changes. Additionally, they include aspects of patient history and image comparison.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5483741469289443,0.55,0.5568181818181818,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2008,latent_2008,4831,0.009662,0.010442181,6.5268345,Emphasis on changes or positions of medical devices in imaging reports.,"The key pattern in these examples is the presence of specific anatomical changes or medical devices, such as tubes, catheters, or lines, along with explicit reference to their position or status (e.g., 'new', 'stable', 'needs adjustment'). These are critical aspects of certain radiology reports, where monitoring or placement confirmation of such devices is prioritized over other findings. The activation patterns suggest the model highlights these instances as important.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4503335417969564,0.4673366834170854,0.4461538461538462,0.2929292929292929,99.0,100.0
+2009,latent_2009,15772,0.031544,0.023610454,5.4198422,Evaluation of interval change in comparison to prior radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight findings in direct comparison with prior radiographs, mentioning interval changes or stability over time. This pattern suggests the importance of dynamic changes or stability when evaluating radiographic findings, often in the context of managing chronic conditions, interventions, or monitoring disease progression.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.423728813559322,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2010,latent_2010,4016,0.008032,0.012591,5.2916055,Decreased lung volumes accentuate cardiac silhouette and bronchovascular markings.,"Highly activated examples consistently include decreased lung volumes, which accentuates cardiac silhouette size and bronchovascular markings. Low lung volumes are a notable finding in radiology that impacts interpretation of cardiothoracic structures, leading to a specific focus in these activated reports.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5059809608392773,0.555,0.6486486486486487,0.24,100.0,100.0
+2011,latent_2011,3854,0.007708,0.009708791,6.3385234,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2012,latent_2012,19429,0.038858,0.019324824,3.6478117,Subtle interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently use comparison with prior radiographs to identify subtle interval changes, such as removal of tubes, progression of edema, or unchanged conditions. The focus is on nuanced changes rather than overall descriptions or stable findings.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6572235104345197,0.66,0.6951219512195121,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2013,latent_2013,8310,0.01662,0.0150125725,6.184087,Stable mediastinal and hilar contours or normal heart size.,"The examples with high activations consistently refer to the status of the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, particularly noting stability or normalcy even when other findings might be changing.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3924330295498481,0.395,0.3793103448275862,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2014,latent_2014,3672,0.007344,0.012232325,4.030794,Detailed interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The activation pattern suggests a focus on cases where there is a detailed comparison with prior imaging findings, especially emphasizing stability in conditions or changes in devices or anatomical structures. This includes specific mentions of interval changes, stable or unchanged findings, or new insertions/removals of medical devices in comparison with previous studies.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.562539283469516,0.565,0.5764705882352941,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2015,latent_2015,19085,0.03817,0.021589214,5.3289466,Assessment of changes in pneumothorax or pleural effusion between current and previous images.,"The highest activation level examples consistently involve descriptions of changes or assessments performed between the current and previous imaging studies, often with a focus on the presence or evaluation of pneumothorax or pleural effusions. These often involve interpretation of positional or insertions like catheters or tubes relative to previous images.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5184038527691779,0.545,0.5849056603773585,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2016,latent_2016,2949,0.005898,0.009318142,6.8787637,Radiological comparisons highlighting change or stability in the context of specific pathologies or device placements.,"The examples with activations closer to 9 highlight cases with detailed comparisons between current and prior images, with emphasis on changes or stability in pathologies or instruments (e.g., changes in effusions, consolidations, device placements, stability of conditions). Lower activations often lack such detailed comparisons or evidence of change.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2017,latent_2017,39700,0.0794,0.04318601,6.8480268,Stable lung or heart findings without acute change.,"The examples with activation show stable findings that are not acute concerning for pneumonia, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, and often describe unchanged heart size or mediastinal contours. These are typical phrasing in reports that denote a non-urgent or chronic condition with minimal change compared to prior imaging in relation to acute pathology.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4520399141088796,0.4522613065326633,0.3282442748091603,0.671875,64.0,135.0
+2018,latent_2018,2922,0.005844,0.0092239855,5.414533,Interval changes or stability in comparison to previous images or reports.,These high-activation examples specifically involve comparison between current and prior radiological images or reports and focus on changes over time. They highlight instances where there is explicit mention of interval changes or stability of findings between different time points.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2019,latent_2019,4106,0.008212,0.010937293,5.67578,Prompt requires comparison with prior images to describe changes.,The examples with high activation levels explicitly focus on providing a description or analysis of new and current radiological findings by comparing them against prior or previous imaging studies or references specific earlier studies. The pattern observed involves the intent to compare and evaluate changes or stability over time.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2020,latent_2020,20249,0.040498,0.019323777,3.7342134,Changes in internal support device positions compared to prior images.,"These examples describe changes in positions of support devices like endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes compared to prior imaging, which is a notable aspect of radiology reports focusing on internal device evaluations. The pattern emphasizes interval assessments and device shifts.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6088528972403491,0.6231155778894473,0.7049180327868853,0.43,100.0,99.0
+2021,latent_2021,6082,0.012164,0.015410645,4.410973,Comparison between current and prior frontal images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve both current and prior frontal images, with a specified need for comparison between them. This implies the importance of having a relevant historical point of reference to assess changes in the findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4270833333333333,0.45,0.4642857142857143,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2022,latent_2022,5597,0.011194,0.016201166,5.406565,Multiple prior studies referenced for comparison.,"In this dataset, higher activation levels are linked with reports that explicitly mention multiple prior imaging studies for comparison. These examples indicate an in-depth comparison approach, using words like 'comparison', 'multiple chest radiographs', or dates of previous studies to evaluate current findings over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4782209634699604,0.4873096446700508,0.4861111111111111,0.3535353535353535,99.0,98.0
+2023,latent_2023,4601,0.009202,0.01170088,3.8410182,Comparison with prior imaging shows stability or changes over time.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels involve descriptions of imaging studies compared with prior studies, with specific mention of alterations or stabilities such as unchanged pacemaker position, interval stability, continued bilateral opacifications, improvement of lung structure volumes or opacities, etc. These reports often have detailed relative statuses of the findings from previous exams, which is a structured manner of radiological reporting emphasizing longitudinal assessment.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2024,latent_2024,5330,0.01066,0.010889432,6.7353177,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette with minimal unspecified changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often highlight changes in imaging findings compared to prior unlabeled images without providing intricate details related to patient diagnosis or history. They involve common scenarios in radiology such as unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette, mild changes in lung volumes, or stable cardiac size.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5416666666666666,0.26,100.0,100.0
+2025,latent_2025,3487,0.006974,0.0105878785,5.0783815,Comparison of current images with prior images and emphasizing changes or stability over time.,"In the examples with high activation levels, there is a pattern where findings are clearly described in terms of comparisons to prior imaging, specifically focusing on changes or stability observed in current images relative to prior ones. This comparison often includes specific dated references, or mentions of prior studies, contrasting them with current findings. The descriptions also include explicit directives to compare, monitor changes, or evaluate specific conditions based on individual patient histories or concurrent clinical indications. This pattern of language indicates the purpose of the report to evaluate continuity or changes in medical conditions over time via consecutive imaging studies.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3926510780443365,0.4,0.4180327868852459,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2026,latent_2026,14724,0.029448,0.018425254,6.589115,Comparison with prior films showing distinct findings or progression.,"The pattern demonstrates that activation is higher when there is a combination of comparing current findings to prior films and both being different from a clear diagnosis, with notable changes or characteristics discussed.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.5,0.5384615384615384,91.0,109.0
+2027,latent_2027,7059,0.014118,0.013604391,5.592056,Correlation with specific medical indications or scenarios.,"These samples emphasize imaging findings in relation to specific medical indications and scenarios rather than findings alone, such as pain, fever, or potential complications like pneumonia or pleural effusion. The indications are detailed in each report.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4835267743125514,0.545,0.5266272189349113,0.89,100.0,100.0
+2028,latent_2028,4998,0.009996,0.012629238,3.2217114,Description in comparison to prior without acute changes noted.,"These examples indicate a pattern where findings from the current radiologic study are explicitly compared against prior images, often specifying lack of prior report, or absence of acute changes, and include an imperative for further description, often underscored by specific findings or lack thereof.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3458132045088566,0.35,0.3214285714285714,0.27,100.0,100.0
+2029,latent_2029,45244,0.090488,0.06318496,7.794662,Descriptions emphasizing stability or chronicity in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated samples indicate findings descriptions with references to prior images for stable conditions characterized by unchanged complexity or chronic conditions, often involving comparisons to previous imaging. The most activated samples describe detailed descriptions seeking to confirm stability of existing medical conditions or interventions, rather than acute changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.388235294117647,0.4125,80.0,120.0
+2030,latent_2030,7847,0.015694,0.010257624,3.9418721,Use of frontal and lateral radiographs in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation focus on using both frontal and lateral radiographs for analysis, and they often reference abnormalities such as low lung volumes, unchanged monitors or devices, and specific pulmonary or cardiac findings reviewed in series compared to prior imaging. This dual view approach with explicit comparisons highlights the pattern.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2031,latent_2031,16954,0.033908,0.015091117,3.5906854,Detailed comparison with prior chest images including views changes or stability.,Samples with high activation repeatedly refer to chest images that involve comparing a current image with a prior frontal image and often providing a detailed description that includes changes or the stability of various lung and cardiac features. These comparisons and the examination of details highlight a pattern of thorough examination and illustration of progression or stability over time.,0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2032,latent_2032,16367,0.032734,0.01678042,3.3136387,Descriptions of interval changes or comparisons from prior exams.,"The examples showing activation contain language explicitly describing changes or comparisons with prior exams, emphasizing observations of interval changes in medical devices, pleural effusions, opacities, or other radiographic findings. These examples often use phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'interval removal', or list interval changes in certain conditions, which is crucial for clinical decision-making in radiological evaluations.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4912648497554158,0.545,0.5272727272727272,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2033,latent_2033,11240,0.02248,0.017654756,7.073208,Stability or unresolved changes noted when comparing current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations describe observations made by comparing current patient images with previous ones, with emphasis on stability, unchanged conditions, or explicit mention of interval changes. These reports consistently use comparative language to assess the progression, stability, or resolution of clinical findings between imaging dates.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2034,latent_2034,15220,0.03044,0.018968157,4.843477,New or worsening pathological findings on image comparison.,"Each highly activated example involves the comparison of current images with prior ones, but specifically highlights new or worsening pathological findings such as pleural effusions, opacities indicating possible pneumonia, or signs of heart failure that have changed in severity or presentation since the prior imaging.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4266688410524027,0.4673366834170854,0.4347826086956521,0.2,100.0,99.0
+2035,latent_2035,45089,0.090178,0.040225115,2.417144,Comparison with prior imaging studies highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly involve descriptions of current imaging findings compared to prior studies, particularly noting interval changes in conditions like pneumonia resolution or stable findings such as unchanged opacities or devices. These are typical radiological patterns indicating continuity of care and monitoring of specific pathology changes over time.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.5669291338582677,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2036,latent_2036,18264,0.036528,0.017900035,3.7053192,Presence of detailed comparative findings between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings from current images in relation to prior imaging. These examples specifically ask for descriptions of interval changes, use language indicating comparison, and outline findings such as stability, worsening, or resolution of conditions, which are key aspects of comparative radiology reporting.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4874242424242424,0.4874371859296482,0.4848484848484848,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+2037,latent_2037,3971,0.007942,0.01125626,4.735064,Use of current and prior images with a request for follow-up analysis.,"These examples all exhibit a structured sequence that includes images for comparison, often with a PRIOR_REPORT indicated, and requested descriptions or instructions for a follow-up analysis. High activations generally occur in cases where there is a combination of current and prior images with explicit inquiries or instructions to evaluate changes, typically involved in follow-up clinical decision-making.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4907407407407407,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2038,latent_2038,3822,0.007644,0.0073231873,5.1934843,Comparative analysis between current and prior images emphasizing changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve reports that interpret findings by directly comparing current images with prior images and include descriptions of changes or stability in findings. The focus is often on any new or persistent abnormalities discerned through this comparative analysis, indicating a pattern that emphasizes changes over time within the same imaging modality.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4508196721311475,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2039,latent_2039,8139,0.016278,0.029385323,7.734462,Reports highlight increased cardiac size or cardiomegaly.,"High activation examples consistently describe findings involving increased cardiac size, such as ""mildly enlarged"" or ""enlarged"" cardiac silhouette, often related to conditions like pulmonary congestion or decreased lung volumes. This consistent pattern of emphasizing cardiac enlargement or related changes contributes to their high activation scores.",0.650733752620545,0.6530612244897959,0.6666666666666666,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5791933167993735,0.592964824120603,0.6507936507936508,0.41,100.0,99.0
+2040,latent_2040,11009,0.022018,0.016702276,5.5368514,Findings description requested in comparison with a prior frontal image.,"Examples consistently emphasize the provision of findings descriptions in comparison to a prior frontal image, highlighting the pattern of requesting and comparing current and previous imaging results. This format ensures that the model anticipates such input and identifies this as a key activation feature.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.4450867052023121,0.9506172839506172,81.0,119.0
+2041,latent_2041,4374,0.008748,0.011028547,5.8130054,Comparison and interval assessment of sequential radiological images.,"The more representative cases contain clear instructions to compare current and prior images, often focusing on changes or stability over time, reflecting on specific intervals or immediate prior studies. This pattern emphasizes analyzing progression or regression of findings by examining sequential images.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2042,latent_2042,29871,0.059742,0.033141606,4.4007277,Descriptions of stability or change in findings relative to prior imaging.,"Many of the examples describe a comparison between the current and prior imaging, often noting stability or changes in opacity and other findings. This comparison stringently emphasizes stable appearances, changes in nodules, masses, or pleural conditions across examinations, which are integral to assessing progression or stability of conditions.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5619881244881244,0.5678391959798995,0.5528455284552846,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+2043,latent_2043,3389,0.006778,0.0060025323,4.4680266,Comparison of current to prior imaging with particular emphasis on interval changes or stability of findings.,"These examples highlight findings compared to prior images, focusing on stability or changes such as resolution or persistence of pathologies. They often include descriptors of unchanged conditions or new observations compared to previous radiographs, and explicitly indicate evaluations for interval change in conditions or the stability of findings.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6028368794326241,0.615,0.5851851851851851,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2044,latent_2044,4743,0.009486,0.012333301,5.405039,Comparisons of current findings to prior images or examinations.,Higher activation levels consistently appear in examples that include comparison of the current imaging findings to previous images or examinations. These comparisons often highlight changes or stability over time and are crucial in evaluating disease progression in radiology studies.,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3951612903225806,0.43,0.4527027027027027,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2045,latent_2045,5840,0.01168,0.011800675,5.2324023,Assessment of new or significant changes in pathology via comparison with previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically reference comparison with prior images or studies but focus on identifying significant changes or new findings related to specific medical indications like pneumonia, pleural effusion, or atelectasis. The pattern centers around assessing new or evolving pathological findings in comparison to past imaging.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5510204081632653,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2046,latent_2046,4070,0.00814,0.009918984,6.1956406,Bilateral pleural effusions or pulmonary opacities with comparison to prior images.,"This pattern involves the description of bilateral pleural effusions and/or bilateral pulmonary opacities, often with comparisons to previous radiographic studies. The examples reflect findings like 'bilateral pleural effusions' and 'bilateral opacities' along with stability or slight changes against prior studies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6613300492610837,0.67,0.75,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2047,latent_2047,7786,0.015572,0.010182618,2.9417665,Radiology assessments in absence of prior comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels often feature assessments made despite the absence of prior comparison images, which suggests that the pattern may involve evaluating defaults in the absence of comparison, focusing purely on current findings and general observations.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2048,latent_2048,10769,0.021538,0.022883914,3.7938688,"Comparison of current radiology findings to prior images, focusing on stability or changes, and device placements.","Examples with high activation consistently involve a description of current radiological findings compared to prior imaging and often mention device placements or medical interventions. This includes consistent highlighting of stability, changes, or observations regarding medical devices from one imaging to another, as indicated by explicit mentions such as 'compared to prior', 'interval placement', and monitoring findings over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5555555555555556,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2049,latent_2049,5822,0.011644,0.015114839,4.4399214,Focus on medical device placement or status compared to prior image.,"Activation to indicate descriptive findings of monitoring, tubes, and apparatus visibility/comparison is common in these examples. Descriptions focusing on medical devices such as tubes (NG tubes, chest tubes) in relation to anatomic landmarks, intervals, or changes seem to trigger higher activations.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4626865671641791,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2050,latent_2050,5552,0.011104,0.013301951,4.9359365,Emphasis on interval change or stability in findings compared to previous studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on changes over time in respiratory or cardiopulmonary function or relevant features that persist unchanged from prior studies, in the context of continuous or interval assessments for acute conditions, recovery, or successful interventions. Low activation examples do not significantly focus on serial comparisons of findings or interval changes.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5344827586206896,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2051,latent_2051,14039,0.028078,0.01201993,3.470668,"Explicit comparison to prior radiographs, often with stability or follow-up context.","Highly activated examples contain more explicit interaction and mention of previous imaging studies when making comparisons. References to equivalent prior study timestamps or dates are included, emphasizing a historical comparison to assess changes or stability in radiological findings. Observations are explicitly referenced as stable, unchanged, or improved from prior assessments.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2052,latent_2052,4399,0.008798,0.009112168,5.2756605,Definitive interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples showing high activation levels involve descriptions where changes (improvements or worsening) in lung and chest features are definitively compared to prior imaging, a common radiological practice when monitoring of progressive disease or treatment effects is needed.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5454545454545454,0.55,0.5625,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2053,latent_2053,5977,0.011954,0.00814939,4.3537035,"Changes in cardiac size, pulmonary edema, or pleural effusion in comparison to prior images.","The pattern seems to involve a strong focus on describing changes in cardiac size, pulmonary edema, or pleural effusion on chest X-rays, in comparison to prior images, with activation levels mostly increasing when there are notable changes in these specific features and comparisons are explicitly stated. These are common features monitored in patients with heart-related conditions or fluid overload.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5939451568965075,0.605,0.6567164179104478,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2054,latent_2054,5557,0.011114,0.011119416,5.618695,Documented changes or confirmations of medical device positions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include assessments of medical devices, such as pacemakers, chest tubes, PICC lines, or endotracheal tubes, describing changes or confirming their positions. This suggests the focus is on identifying changes in medical device position across imaging studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.3666666666666666,0.22,100.0,100.0
+2055,latent_2055,14810,0.02962,0.014720477,3.3599048,"Comparison with prior images, report unspecified.","Examples exhibit a pattern where current imaging findings are requested to provide a description compared to prior images, especially when the prior report information is unspecified (e.g., 'N/A'). These prompts emphasize the importance of directly contrasting the new imaging results to unspecified or minimally specified previous images, showing specific interest in ensuring constant or identifying changes without detailed prior context.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4652553819013754,0.515,0.5093167701863354,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2056,latent_2056,4091,0.008182,0.008959777,5.5912905,Detailed comparison with specified prior images.,"Examples with non-zero activations include requests for comparisons between current images and specifically mentioned prior images, often with findings or impressions that include detailed changes based on careful observation, such as device placement or parenchymal changes. The pattern emphasizes detailed comparison using specific time-related image data rather than broad, non-specific assessments.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2057,latent_2057,2321,0.004642,0.008286978,7.122678,Detailed comparisons with prior images in radiology reports.,"These examples are centered around providing detailed descriptions of radiology study findings, with a strong emphasis on comparisons with prior image findings using specific descriptive changes or stabilities in medical findings. Key terms like 'in comparison with', 'compared to prior', and 'remain unchanged' are frequently utilized.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5121192973587767,0.5125628140703518,0.5094339622641509,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+2058,latent_2058,4793,0.009586,0.01271403,7.6093664,Absence of comparison with prior imaging noted in reports.,"The pattern here is the explicit comparison of current imaging findings with a prior imaging study, particularly when there is an absence of a comparison. When prior images are absent, the descriptions focus solely on current findings, often highlighted by the phrase 'No comparison available'. This implies the inability to demonstrate changes or stability of findings across studies due to a lack of previous imaging to reference against.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2059,latent_2059,11764,0.023528,0.023954155,3.8686337,Comparison of current radiological findings with prior images to evaluate changes.,Examples with high activation levels consistently include statements comparing current imaging findings with previous studies to evaluate changes or stability of conditions over time. This indicates that the model likely focuses on identifying and interpreting changes in radiological findings through comparisons with prior images.,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2060,latent_2060,4721,0.009442,0.009540338,4.6038494,Evaluates current images by comparing with prior images for change or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve current imagery being compared to prior imagery, with deliberation on changes or stability in radiological findings. The language focuses on comparative evaluation, with the current and prior images being part of the analysis, indicating continuous tracking of patient data over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4714285714285714,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2061,latent_2061,40573,0.081146,0.046927992,4.4602404,Description of interval change or stability in radiology findings.,"The activation patterns indicate that the model highly associates descriptions that explicitly note changes (e.g., 'interval removal', 'persist') or stability over time (e.g., 'unchanged', 'no relative changes') when comparing current images with prior ones. This approach aligns with radiological evaluations that often focus on progression or improvement in condition compared to past imaging studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5951007186962243,0.6,0.5819672131147541,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2062,latent_2062,4564,0.009128,0.010829385,7.832438,Assessment based on comparison of current and prior image views in radiology.,"The examples consistently involve radiological reports that include specific views (e.g., frontal and lateral) along with comparisons to prior images. The pattern is likely to focus on diagnostic assessment based on multiple image views and comparisons over time, aiming to observe changes in findings such as opacities, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or device positioning.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2063,latent_2063,3836,0.007672,0.0061672013,4.602401,Detailed comparison with previous imaging records.,"Examples with an activation level tend to involve detailed descriptions and comparisons with prior examinations. This suggests the pattern involves highlighting any deviations, changes, or stability from previous records, which is a prominent feature of many radiology reports that provide a longitudinal assessment of the patient's condition based on sequential imaging.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4217473287240729,0.425,0.4347826086956521,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2064,latent_2064,6158,0.012316,0.010555528,4.291638,No prior image comparison and normal findings in radiology reports.,"The examples predominantly highlight reports where the findings state 'normal' or 'unremarkable' with no prior imaging for comparison, frequently combined with the pattern of using structured radiological language in descriptions. Such reports often generate high activation due to their routine and standard nature.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5395729141859174,0.565,0.6226415094339622,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2065,latent_2065,10567,0.021134,0.018387742,6.1713934,Description of longitudinal changes on imaging studies.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently describe specific changes over time between current and prior imaging studies, often noting stability or unresolved findings, and occasionally reporting new developments. This pattern highlights longitudinal evaluation through direct image comparisons, using terms like 'unchanged', 'new', 'improved', or 'decreased'.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4471084585305618,0.457286432160804,0.4682539682539682,0.59,100.0,99.0
+2066,latent_2066,12433,0.024866,0.0134724835,5.608968,Presence of comparison instructions or indications with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently feature potential or actual comparisons with previous imaging studies to identify any interval changes, while those with lower activations tend to lack such comparisons or specify 'None' in the comparison sections within the text. The emphasis is on reevaluating findings with previous examinations explicitly referred or omitted.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.45368492224476,0.495,0.4873417721518987,0.7938144329896907,97.0,103.0
+2067,latent_2067,13448,0.026896,0.014107183,5.448779,Comparison of current and prior chest images noting changes or stability.,"The examples that receive high activation levels frequently include a comparison between current and prior images, specifically noting which changes are observed or absent. This indicates that discussing changes or stability between sequential images is central to the pattern observed by the model.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.642773938029044,0.655,0.5957446808510638,0.875,96.0,104.0
+2068,latent_2068,13810,0.02762,0.018325957,3.4952114,Observations of interval change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples showing high activation levels commonly describe an interval change in radiological findings, especially with reference to prior images or reports. They often suggest changes in fluid or density, like pleural effusions or atelectasis, are significant in these cases. The pattern involves identifying and comparing features that evolve over time, indicating a dynamic pathological process or stabilization.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5545454545454546,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2069,latent_2069,3908,0.007816,0.010352101,7.4421473,Frequent use of the term 'compared to prior' to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently emphasize analyzing current findings with reference to previous imaging. This is a common structure in radiology reports, where assessing changes over time facilitates the understanding of a patient’s progress or lack thereof.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5542168674698795,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2070,latent_2070,5800,0.0116,0.013682345,4.2157183,Mentioning differences due to imaging technique or view changes.,"There is an emphasis on describing differences between imaging techniques or views within the reports. This pattern concerns how findings may appear distinct or require clarification due to differences in the type of imaging performed, like 'AP vs PA' or 'positional effect', highlighting the significance of technique differences.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2071,latent_2071,11458,0.022916,0.016783502,6.547929,Comparison to prior images with noted interval changes or findings.,"Examples activate when they contain direct comparisons to prior imaging studies and document changes, specifically when a new finding or interval change is identified, as highlighted by Example 17 (activation 5.0) and other similar instances. High activations generally follow this pattern.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5874818568409259,0.595,0.5748031496062992,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2072,latent_2072,5516,0.011032,0.01331531,5.64846,References to frontal and lateral chest images with prior image comparisons.,"The highly activated examples specifically indicate the presence of frontal and lateral chest radiographic images being referenced together with prior imagery, often to assess stability or change over time in relationship to previous examinations. ",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4829963235294117,0.55,0.5290697674418605,0.91,100.0,100.0
+2073,latent_2073,5006,0.010012,0.019561457,5.8456497,Inclusion of current and prior radiographic images for comparison.,"The pattern in the activations indicates high activation when both current and prior radiographic images are provided, especially when the wording suggests a thorough comparison is anticipated or ongoing. These reports often include contextual information like technique and indication and dive into more comprehensive comparatives.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4820217917675544,0.5678391959798995,0.5388888888888889,0.97,100.0,99.0
+2074,latent_2074,16605,0.03321,0.017135523,3.7949734,Both frontal and lateral images compared with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly involve both frontal and lateral chest images in conjunction with a prior frontal or lateral image, emphasizing comprehensive comparison across different view angles. These scenarios typically indicate a full evaluation of thoracic structures from multiple perspectives, slightly more complex cases often analyzed in this manner.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2075,latent_2075,20777,0.041554,0.02959466,4.702083,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The consistent pattern among the examples with higher activation is the specification or clear description of stable findings or comparisons to prior imaging. Higher activation correlates with the clear specification of unchanged or stable conditions across intervals of observation, especially in the context of changes in imaging or procedure placements.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2076,latent_2076,6731,0.013462,0.021951994,6.25376,Detailed comparison to prior imaging emphasizing subtle changes.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve a detailed analysis and description of current imaging findings in relation to prior radiological exams. There is a focus on identifying subtle changes, stability of lesions, evaluation of pneumonias, or consolidation and comparing these findings to past reports or images, even in the absence of overt acute symptoms.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.5581395348837209,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2077,latent_2077,18176,0.036352,0.023087366,6.928315,"Focus on the positions and changes of tubes, lines, or devices in the body.","The examples with high activation levels consistently describe detailed findings about tubes, lines, drains, or devices in the body. This includes descriptions of endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, central venous lines, Dobbhoff catheters, etc., and emphasizes any changes in their positions compared to previous imaging studies.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2078,latent_2078,19765,0.03953,0.021189256,3.3911943,Detailed interval comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The observed examples with high activation levels consistently discuss specific comparisons with a prior imaging study, noting any lack of significant change or interval improvement/worsening in pathological findings. They often explicitly mention interval changes or stability in findings versus previous imaging.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5435779816513762,0.5477386934673367,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,99.0
+2079,latent_2079,3234,0.006468,0.009627296,5.37363,Referenced previous imaging studies for comparative analysis.,"Despite various findings and conditions, high activation scores are linked with instances where previous imaging studies are explicitly referenced for comparison, which helps highlight changes or stability of findings over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2080,latent_2080,13165,0.02633,0.01377352,3.5553904,Detailed radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve either detailed descriptions of chest radiographs including cardiomediastinal assessment, pleural effusions, or specific radiographic indicators (e.g., external devices or conditions like atelectasis) in the context of comparison to previous findings. These reports frequently use detailed medical jargon and comparison to previous imaging to inform stability or changes in findings.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2081,latent_2081,4795,0.00959,0.017025847,4.8731127,Detailed multi-image comparison and description in radiology studies.,"Examples with high activation utilize detailed radiological descriptions and case-specific information, potentially referencing multiple images like frontal and lateral views, prior comparisons, or specific evaluations, indicating rigorous analysis and comprehension of detailed scenarios.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.477124183006536,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2082,latent_2082,20087,0.040174,0.024656301,4.251696,Low lung volumes affecting assessment of findings.,"Many examples discuss findings of low lung volumes or similar evaluative limitations that affect the ability to assess other structures effectively, which is a frequent issue in radiology due to patient position, effort during inspiration, or pathological conditions, affecting the clarity of lung and cardiovascular structures.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.6829268292682927,0.28,100.0,100.0
+2083,latent_2083,9432,0.018864,0.011001492,4.733054,Details about changes or stability in cardiac silhouette size.,"Highly activated examples frequently involve describing changes or stability in the cardiac silhouette or heart size. This involves comparison with previous images to note whether the cardiac silhouette is unchanged, enlarged, or altered in some way, reflecting ongoing observation of potential heart-related issues.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2084,latent_2084,34907,0.069814,0.03341629,2.8158617,Comparison with prior imaging using explicit references.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include direct comparisons by referencing prior imaging studies explicitly in their reports, even when they are descriptive of abnormalities seen in both current and prior reports. The pattern involves using exam comparisons with prior specific details or reports incorporating dates or previous findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2085,latent_2085,3782,0.007564,0.011195837,6.2537136,Detailed patient indication with specific comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include radiological documentation based on specified indications, often including patient history or reason for imaging, and clearly comparing current observations to previous ones. The presence of detailed clinical context and explicit comparison with prior studies is essential in these examples.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2086,latent_2086,5629,0.011258,0.0073602647,5.7775965,Presence of detailed evaluation and description of medical device position or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe comparisons to previous imaging but also detail explicit changes, positions, and placements of medical devices, such as catheters and tubes, indicating their crucial role in the pattern. Lower activations often lack these detailed device evaluations or alterations in comparison.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6028368794326241,0.615,0.6111111111111112,0.4731182795698925,93.0,107.0
+2087,latent_2087,22002,0.044004,0.03335461,5.8750653,Interval significant or stable changes in imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples indicate either stable or significant interval changes in imaging findings when compared to previous studies. These examples often explicitly mention changes or stability in medical devices, pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or lung opacities, while low activation examples do not highlight such changes.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6010404770968152,0.6030150753768844,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,99.0
+2088,latent_2088,6775,0.01355,0.026936563,6.575106,Comparison of current with previous imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation involve prompts to describe changes in medical imaging when reference to a previous or baseline image is made, indicating a focus on comparison and interpretation of imaging changes or stability over time. High activations are notably provided when there is specific language about comparing images and detailing findings based on those comparisons.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2089,latent_2089,3992,0.007984,0.011962229,6.801917,"Stable or unchanged pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis on follow-up imaging.","These examples often mention pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, and atelectasis. Frequently, comparisons to previous imaging reports show these conditions are stable or have not changed significantly since prior exams. Although interpretations differ slightly, the common element is tracking interval changes over time in these competing thoracic conditions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.586606035551881,0.6,0.65625,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2090,latent_2090,19859,0.039718,0.03403578,5.529926,Prompt involves comparing findings with prior imaging.,"The pattern here involves prompting the model to compare the current radiology findings with a prior study. Examples with higher activation levels often explicitly mention the need to describe current findings in relation to prior imaging, particularly using phrases like 'comparison to the prior frontal image'. The presence of this requirement to compare new findings with older reports seems to trigger the pattern more strongly.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2091,latent_2091,7058,0.014116,0.0114125265,3.9564614,"Comparison of current and prior radiographic findings, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels frequently involve providing interpretations and findings from current radiographs in comparison with one or more prior studies, particularly noting any changes or stability. This pattern often involves detailed descriptions of subtle changes involving lung fields, effusions, medical devices, or opacities.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4405452141186044,0.45,0.4603174603174603,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2092,latent_2092,5060,0.01012,0.011975781,3.8263376,Findings compared to prior images to assess changes.,"Highly activated examples frequently involve radiological comparison with prior images to note interval changes, which is a critical aspect of radiology to evaluate disease progression, treatment response, or stability of findings. These examples explicitly describe or imply examining previous images.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2093,latent_2093,10011,0.020022,0.015194987,6.2052217,Endotracheal tube placement in context of prior imaging comparisons.,"Highly activated examples focus on tube placements, particularly endotracheal tubes, in the context of prior imaging comparisons. These frequent references indicate that the model detects a pattern involving the presence and assessment of tube placements across different studies.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5534606797320765,0.595,0.7435897435897436,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2094,latent_2094,3521,0.007042,0.009969503,5.9929504,References to radiological interventions and changes compared to previous assessments.,"Samples with high activation commonly refer to specific radiological interventions or changes noted compared to previous assessments. This reflects a pattern where previous reports are referenced to identify changes, status updates, or direct impacts from interventions like positioning tubes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3926510780443365,0.4,0.4180327868852459,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2095,latent_2095,8373,0.016746,0.012700202,3.3344269,Stable imaging findings with both frontal and lateral views.,"In these examples, activation is typically high when descriptions involve both frontal and lateral view image assessments, as well as prior comparisons with no major interval changes observed.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2096,latent_2096,10404,0.020808,0.011216602,4.23604,Changes or findings compared to a prior frontal image.,"The pattern of increased activation is associated with descriptions that involve a prior frontal image comparison but still show changes or findings in the latest image. The activated samples tend to have specific findings such as effusions, opacities, or changes, as opposed to stable, unchanged findings in the lungs or comparison being unavailable in the low activation ones.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2097,latent_2097,8581,0.017162,0.010172548,4.2313576,Comparisons with prior imaging showing unchanged findings or slight progression.,"These examples have explicit mentions of changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies where specific features are described as unchanged, stable, or slightly progressed. Reports often include such comparisons to reassure clinicians about the stability of findings despite patient symptoms.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5806451612903226,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2098,latent_2098,5142,0.010284,0.007946708,4.3160405,Assessment of changes in radiology findings as compared to prior images.,"This set of examples highlights the consistent narrative structure focusing on description of changes based on prior imaging studies, where specific imaging findings, such as size, position, or presence of pathologies, are evaluated against previous reports. It often includes direct comparative language indicating stability, improvement, or new findings.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2099,latent_2099,71757,0.143514,0.10237345,5.7440314,Provision of comparison to prior imaging findings or conditions.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve providing a specific comparison with prior radiological findings or images, often noting differences or lack of change in medical devices or patient conditions, emphasizing the role of temporal comparison in the analysis.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.5328947368421053,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2100,latent_2100,5475,0.01095,0.013509373,8.299999,Descriptions include direct comparison to prior imaging findings.,The examples with higher activation levels contain references to previous imaging studies either directly or indirectly through phrases like 'in comparison with study of...'. They often note changes or stability in findings when compared to prior imaging.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4172937093055661,0.425,0.4390243902439024,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2101,latent_2101,3654,0.007308,0.0075031705,8.328821,Mentions of specific tube placements or associated procedures.,"Several examples denote the presence of 'conversion tube' (e.g., Dobbhoff, esophagus-related) within the text, which refer to feeding or drainage tubes being present in the images. These types of tubes are specifically referenced in examples with higher activation. The pattern pertains to the determination and correct placement or stability of such tubes when compared to prior images.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5003138731952291,0.5175879396984925,0.532258064516129,0.33,100.0,99.0
+2102,latent_2102,12793,0.025586,0.019147513,3.7789016,Reports emphasizing interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"High activation levels are connected with descriptions that follow a structured template of comparing current radiographic images with prior studies to assess interval changes. This often involves phrases around specific interval changes or stability evaluations, such as 'as compared to', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'. These reports explicitly mention the previous imaging, highlighting a systematic and repeatable approach to evaluation.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3579210799059632,0.365,0.3291139240506329,0.26,100.0,100.0
+2103,latent_2103,12529,0.025058,0.030874351,6.3717656,Descriptions of heart size or cardiomegaly in imaging reports.,"These examples consistently emphasize the presence of cardiomegaly or heart size descriptions in radiology reports, particularly when describing the size or enlargement of the heart in combination with other thoracic findings such as edema or vascular congestion. This is a consistent theme in these reports.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5576923076923077,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2104,latent_2104,42057,0.084114,0.06924569,6.8375874,Description or comparison to prior image findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the task of describing or comparing the findings in the radiology study to a prior image, specifically mentioning the need to evaluate changes or stability over time. This is a frequent practice in radiology to assess disease progression or treatment response.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2105,latent_2105,18907,0.037814,0.027539024,5.971402,Descriptions of normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Compared examples feature descriptions of normal or unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours. This pattern highlights the frequent radiological description of these contours being within normal limits or unchanged, even in the presence of other findings.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5333333333333333,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2106,latent_2106,3980,0.00796,0.008083521,3.6934114,Findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently provide a comparative analysis between the current and previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stabilities in findings. They are descriptive in contrasting current findings with prior reports, as opposed to simply describing current observations without comparative context.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2107,latent_2107,6551,0.013102,0.012246024,7.4632483,Extensive descriptions of normal findings across multiple components.,"Examples that have high activation levels contain extensive descriptions involving normalcy across multiple components like heart size, mediastinal contours, lung appearance, no effusions, or pneumothorax seen. This language conveys a stable or unchanged condition upon comparison from prior imaging regardless of cited pathology, suggesting high model signal for 'normal' as a comprehensive finding subset in radiological studies.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6578099838969405,0.66,0.6904761904761905,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2108,latent_2108,7690,0.01538,0.012072112,4.7956734,Comparison to prior imaging assessing for change.,"The pattern in these examples includes the presence of at least a prior frontal image or radiographic study for comparison, and analysis of changes or stability in the current findings compared to this past image. Radiology reports mentioning such comparisons describe changes over time or stability of findings, marked with explicit 'comparison to prior' recalls or updates in findings relative to older images.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4084784751889583,0.415,0.4297520661157025,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2109,latent_2109,3470,0.00694,0.010660085,4.5487432,Lack of prior imaging studies for comparison.,"Most high activation examples include the lack of prior studies, often specified by the phrase 'comparison: none'. This indicates that the lack of previous imaging for comparison is a significant pattern observed in these cases, emphasizing the study's role as a baseline or initial assessment.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.550561797752809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2110,latent_2110,11880,0.02376,0.012183169,3.8374717,Detailed interval change in radiological findings described.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on cases where there is significant interval change or detailed comparison to prior studies, especially involving specific clinical interventions or notable findings. These changes or interventions prompt detailed discussions about stability and progression, which likely triggers the pattern of interest.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6096486838154338,0.61,0.6170212765957447,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2111,latent_2111,17006,0.034012,0.020620944,4.6340795,Comparison to prior imaging for stability or change; use of specific temporal references.,"Most examples with non-zero activation levels describe changes or comparisons between current imaging and prior imaging studies, noting specifics such as stability, change, or findings in the context of previous images. This linguistic pattern is characterized by phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from previous', 'no interval change', and explicit mentions of imaging history.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4418604651162791,0.445,0.4521739130434782,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2112,latent_2112,32809,0.065618,0.04652384,8.857568,Reports with direct comparisons to previous radiological findings.,"Activation is higher when there is specific mention of a prior report or direct comparison to previous images, often indicating a change or stability in conditions like pneumonia, pleural effusions, or atelectasis.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.474025974025974,0.8021978021978022,91.0,109.0
+2113,latent_2113,4119,0.008238,0.0118468385,5.282077,Comparative analysis of current vs. prior frontal images.,"High activation examples consistently request comparison between current and prior frontal images to describe radiological findings, emphasizing a pattern of focusing on interval changes over time. These examples involve explicit direction to make comparisons, often without specific initial findings or complete prior reports provided, which suggests the task is centered around detecting and interpreting changes between the current state and the prior images.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4891237127261971,0.525,0.5163398692810458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2114,latent_2114,3105,0.00621,0.0056784274,4.5062613,Use of multiple current images for comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels involve using multiple images (both frontal and lateral) for comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or changes over time. These reports frequently reference the comparison of current findings against prior studies, highlighting changes or stability, which is a recognized practice in radiological assessments for conditions requiring serial imaging.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3903532365070826,0.405,0.4274809160305343,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2115,latent_2115,3548,0.007096,0.009677958,5.308253,Mentions of cardiomegaly paired with additional findings in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently report on cardiomegaly or a large heart in the context of other diseases or conditions visible in the radiological images. Example descriptions frequently use terms like 'cardiomegaly', 'enlarged heart', or similar variations while referencing other concurrent findings related to lungs or devices.",0.7112794612794613,0.7142857142857143,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5904146386871991,0.615,0.7254901960784313,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2116,latent_2116,7641,0.015282,0.013421168,4.726301,Interpretation of frontal and lateral chest images for complex conditions.,"Highly activated examples involve the mention of multiple views of chest imaging (frontal and lateral), addressing conditions needing detailed interpretation such as post-operative changes or complex pathologies.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2117,latent_2117,3775,0.00755,0.008556057,3.8785818,"Comparison of current findings against prior imaging results, indicating stable conditions.","The examples typically refer to comparisons with prior imaging that highlight consistent or stable findings across different time points, using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or indicating findings in comparison to previous studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4848484848484848,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2118,latent_2118,3253,0.006506,0.008535335,7.7061114,Comparative analysis with prior reports highlighting changes.,"Examples with higher activations frequently involve references to previous reports and focus on comparisons between current and prior observations. They likely emphasize changes or stable findings over time, which suggests that ongoing monitoring of patient conditions through comparative imaging may be a key aspect of the pattern.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4149853746343658,0.415,0.4158415841584158,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2119,latent_2119,5038,0.010076,0.011320201,4.9177294,Standard template prompts without notable findings.,"The examples with higher activation focus on instances where findings are provided in the context of a standard template prompting comparison of current radiology views (frontal, lateral, or prior) without any notable findings or explicit impressions, often marked with placeholders or absent indications/techniques.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6010230179028133,0.61,0.5846153846153846,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2120,latent_2120,5717,0.011434,0.011070281,4.0997157,Emphasis on evaluating and comparing findings to prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve explicit directions to evaluate current radiographs against prior images. These descriptions prioritize identification of changes or stability by expressly comparing imaging over time, often indicating if adjustments or evaluations of changes are required.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2121,latent_2121,2731,0.005462,0.007420438,8.049547,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation involve a comparison to prior imaging, often with detailed changes noted or remarks on stability from the prior report available (e.g., 'there is', 'as compared', 'remains', 'unchanged', 'improvement', 'worse'). The lower activation examples lack either a comparison or significant changes noted, often indicating no prior measure to contrast against.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5072266019809986,0.507537688442211,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,99.0
+2122,latent_2122,45258,0.090516,0.05542906,7.6033072,Reports describe interval change in comparison to prior imaging.,"The activation values are high when the report explicitly describes changes in the radiological findings compared to prior images, indicating stable or resolved clinical interpretations like decrease in effusion size, unchanged nodules, or resolved consolidation. These descriptions often point to interval changes or the absence thereof, relative to prior imaging.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.613831841319993,0.615,0.4786324786324786,0.7777777777777778,72.0,128.0
+2123,latent_2123,3300,0.0066,0.005747023,9.152981,Comparison to prior imaging studies indicating interval changes.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve the comparison of current imaging findings with those from preceding similar studies, emphasizing terms such as 'comparison with', 'compared to', or 'next preceding similar study'. These comparisons often yield findings about consistencies or changes over time, which could explain the heightened model activation.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.57,0.57,0.5135135135135135,0.6404494382022472,89.0,111.0
+2124,latent_2124,2339,0.004678,0.009768288,5.9113245,Incomplete findings focusing on comparison and analysis requests.,"The pattern here is that samples with high activation involve reports that lack detailed, specific findings and instead focus on comparing current and prior images, often indicating a request for a verbal description or further analysis without providing complete observational data. The reports emphasize guidance for additional assessment and maintaining a certain style of documentation across samples.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3989662219016709,0.5,0.5,0.91,100.0,100.0
+2125,latent_2125,6996,0.013992,0.010927618,3.744537,"Reference to the presence, placement, or unchanged position of tubes, catheters, or medical devices.","The examples with higher activation values consistently refer to the presence and location of catheters, tubes, or similar medical devices (like ETT, NG tube, IJ catheter) noted as terminating at specific anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina, SVC). These reports highlight interval placement or unchanged positions of invasive medical devices, which is a common focus in radiological assessments of hospitalized patients with ongoing intensive medical interventions.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.67499187479687,0.675,0.6767676767676768,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2126,latent_2126,3285,0.00657,0.007231661,3.7962756,"Descriptions often involve detailed comparisons to prior images, emphasizing changes or stability.","The examples provided show activation for descriptions where findings are explicitly compared against prior imaging studies, with detailed context given to assess any changes or stability of medical conditions. This pattern signifies the model's emphasis on detecting comparative evaluation across studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4143260930457589,0.425,0.4409448818897638,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2127,latent_2127,13622,0.027244,0.02657729,6.5924096,Comparisons and evaluation of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"These examples consistently involve providing descriptions or comparisons of given images, both current and prior, with a focus on identifying changes or stability over time, often linked to continuous interpretation of findings through ongoing image comparisons.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4580152671755725,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2128,latent_2128,3562,0.007124,0.013723158,6.4647818,Comparison and evaluation between current and prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve a specific pattern of linguistic presentation whereby the prompt includes explicit request for comparative analysis involving current and prior images, and the expected response involves detailed comparative image interpretation to elucidate changes, if any.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2129,latent_2129,3126,0.006252,0.015787115,6.8632035,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with clear lungs on chest radiograph.","The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in chest radiographs, indicating no acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities while describing clear lungs and other unaffected structures. These findings are common in routine chest radiographs and emphasize normality in the absence of acute issues.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7387197266606371,0.74,0.7790697674418605,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2130,latent_2130,2094,0.004188,0.006622097,7.5229883,Descriptions of line or tube placements and positions.,"The examples with significant activation focus on descriptions related to line or tube placements, including nasogastric, endotracheal, PICC, and other similar lines. These examples involve detailed descriptions of the positioning, adjustments, and statuses of these tubes, possibly indicating a pattern related to the clinical importance of tube and line placements in radiology reports.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7983789260385006,0.7989949748743719,0.7727272727272727,0.85,100.0,99.0
+2131,latent_2131,7082,0.014164,0.012151321,6.3946805,Interval development or change in findings from prior imaging.,"The pattern revolves around changes, placements, or intervals relevant to clinical queries or interventions, often phrased as ""interval development"", ""interval improvement"", ""interval placement"", etc. These changes often address clinical questions or describe interventional outcomes compared to prior studies.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6698679471788715,0.67,0.6770833333333334,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2132,latent_2132,15268,0.030536,0.043656446,5.176028,Patchy lung opacities indicative of non-acute structural changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions where chest imaging reveals patchy opacities, often attributed to atelectasis, interstitial disease, or other structural abnormalities without a clear acute process like infection or effusion. This pattern is a typical finding in radiology reports focusing on non-acute structural changes in the lungs.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4679481678537716,0.535,0.6206896551724138,0.18,100.0,100.0
+2133,latent_2133,12936,0.025872,0.024401713,3.7425237,Provision of prior image comparison in radiology assessments.,"The pattern of including prior imaging for comparison, such as referencing previous studies or changes relative to prior findings, is characteristic of radiology review processes. The examples with higher activations often include direct comparisons to prior images, indicating a focus on continuity of care and evaluation over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5003567936147157,0.5226130653266332,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,99.0
+2134,latent_2134,14200,0.0284,0.018035598,8.5860815,Monitoring of medical device placements or adjustments in imaging.,"The higher activation examples often describe changes in tubular or catheter placements within the images relative to previous images, indicating monitoring or progression of medical interventions such as new placements or adjustments (e.g., PICC lines, endotracheal tubes), which hints at a pattern of close observation of such interventions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.3116883116883117,0.375,64.0,136.0
+2135,latent_2135,3860,0.00772,0.0074425023,7.6599264,Positioning and assessment of internal device placements.,"The highly activated examples involve discussion of devices placed inside the body (e.g., endotracheal tubes, PICC lines) with a focus on their positioning relative to anatomical landmarks or compared to previous positions. This pattern emerges as such findings are critical in radiological assessments to ensure correct placement and function of these devices.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6114937309215671,0.615,0.6419753086419753,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2136,latent_2136,2963,0.005926,0.008389934,8.396181,Comparison with prior imaging and stable findings emphasized.,"Patterns with high activation scores consistently make references to comparisons with prior radiological images and emphasize findings that are stable or unchanged. These tend to document chronic conditions, ongoing treatment impacts, or evaluations for new or interval changes.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4388129123587553,0.445,0.430379746835443,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2137,latent_2137,37378,0.074756,0.033412986,2.7554114,Comparison of current image findings with prior imaging.,"This set of examples consistently shows references to comparisons with prior imaging studies, similar to the previous set. The descriptions involve evaluating the current radiographic findings relative to previous images from various dates, a fundamental practice in radiology for assessing changes over time.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2138,latent_2138,4182,0.008364,0.008590535,4.3117213,Describing interval changes or stability in radiology findings compared to prior imaging.,The examples with higher activations seem to focus on describing findings in current radiology studies while explicitly noting any interval change or stability from prior imaging.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5350877192982456,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2139,latent_2139,8562,0.017124,0.013268731,4.239957,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe radiology evaluations with stable findings, such as unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette or stable cardiomegaly, in the absence of acute or significant interval changes. This reflects a pattern of assessments ensuring normalcy or stability, often without any alarming changes observed.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3906359189378057,0.455,0.3714285714285714,0.13,100.0,100.0
+2140,latent_2140,9551,0.019102,0.013992965,11.580307,Comparative descriptions of images without detailed impressions.,"The examples with non-zero activations mention findings based on a frontal image being compared to a prior frontal image, but lacking detailed comparative observations like changes in the positioning of medical devices or clear identification of stable versus evolving changes in the cardiopulmonary system. This indicates descriptions that rely heavily on direct visual comparison without explicit medical conclusions about changes.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3877960658370132,0.39,0.286624203821656,0.8181818181818182,55.0,145.0
+2141,latent_2141,7118,0.014236,0.015546972,5.5002418,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in imaging findings.,"These examples frequently describe findings that explicitly indicate the normality or unchanged status of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, often with no significant findings or abnormalities. The reports emphasize this aspect, commonly in the context of describing or ruling out abnormalities elsewhere, thus indicating this specific reported focus.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7463474025974026,0.75,0.7016129032258065,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2142,latent_2142,6587,0.013174,0.013705963,6.0047417,"Language indicating stability and normalcy, often through comparison.","The high activation examples typically use language indicating a stable condition, involving words like 'normal', 'unchanged', 'stable', or descriptive assessments that confirm normal structures without significant changes. Such phrasing is common in radiological assessments where reassurance or lack of change is documented, often utilizing comparative analysis with previous examinations or images.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2143,latent_2143,4862,0.009724,0.0094137015,4.7703195,Comparison with prior image for descriptive findings.,"The highlighted examples specify a task to provide a description of findings in a study that includes both images from a current series and a prior frontal image, emphasizing comparing and contrasting findings for diagnostic evaluation. This pattern involves providing a comparison, even when prior reports are not available.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4896551724137931,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2144,latent_2144,5785,0.01157,0.012010893,4.736428,Descriptions focusing on comparative assessments with prior images.,"Examples with high activation focus on providing descriptions of current images in explicit comparison to prior images. Words or phrases indicating comparison, such as 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,' highlight the emphasis on comparing changes over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2145,latent_2145,6114,0.012228,0.011887904,4.570712,Requires comparison with prior imaging to assess changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit directions or requests to compare current radiological findings with previous images to assess changes over time, focusing on detection of new developments, resolution, or stability of known conditions, or confirmation of previous assessments.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4824516717162238,0.5125628140703518,0.5067567567567568,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+2146,latent_2146,17382,0.034764,0.019726712,3.9137022,Emphasis on interval change or stability in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions and comparisons of changes, typically reductions in pathology or improvement due to interventions like chest tube placement or thoracentesis. These examples focus on demonstrating interval improvements or stability of conditions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.56,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2147,latent_2147,18875,0.03775,0.028729992,5.039426,"Given current and prior images, providing a description of findings but often without substantial changes noted.","Examples with references to a prior frontal image, but not necessarily providing detailed comparisons or state changes, likely due to the lack of specific findings or notable differences from previous exams, resulting in lower activations. High activation correlates with details of changes or new findings.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2148,latent_2148,4803,0.009606,0.017760007,7.911772,Comparative analysis using prior images for reference.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images. The type of view (frontal, lateral, or both) and presence of prior images are explicitly defined, indicating a focus on assessing changes over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2149,latent_2149,7115,0.01423,0.012515933,3.232682,Multi-view chest imaging compared to prior studies.,Each example with higher activation includes multi-view imaging (frontal and lateral views) while those with lower activation often reference single views or lack specific anatomical focus. Multi-view imaging allows for a comprehensive evaluation that aligns with the pattern of interest.,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2150,latent_2150,6458,0.012916,0.011591996,3.8307416,Evaluation of medical lines or interventions with focus on stability or changes.,"The examples with high activation predominantly refer to changes or evaluations of diagnostic interest, often in the context of different types of lines or medical interventions such as catheters. The text mentions stability versus interval changes in findings, especially focusing on various devices or interventions in radiographs, suggesting that the model focuses on recognizing and evaluating changes in these contexts for a higher activation score.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5584623323013416,0.5678391959798995,0.6,0.42,100.0,99.0
+2151,latent_2151,4261,0.008522,0.010014829,4.546068,Imaging studies compared with prior studies to assess changes.,"These examples consistently involve analyses where current imaging findings are compared with prior studies to assess changes or stability, a common practice in radiology reports. The relationship between current findings and those from previous imaging is central.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2152,latent_2152,4384,0.008768,0.012639511,5.470562,Comparison descriptions without new acute findings.,"The examples with higher activations involve descriptions of current findings relative to prior imaging in similar clinical situations while not providing new or acute findings. The explicit notation of technique and/or history influences description outcomes when nothing new is detected, implying stable or unchanged findings.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5346534653465347,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2153,latent_2153,9315,0.01863,0.0146876415,5.9578085,Discrepancy between stated comparison availability and findings which reference prior images.,"Highly activated examples exhibit specific descriptions of radiographic findings explicitly comparing the current image to a prior image, despite a stated absence (""N/A"") of a direct comparison. This pattern involves contradictory or unclear comparison indications but still references changes or stability relative to prior images.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2154,latent_2154,12062,0.024124,0.012376704,4.213276,Description of radiology findings without explicit prior comparison.,"Examples with non-zero activations often involve the description of findings and changes between current and prior studies despite some lacking direct previous comparisons. In these cases, comparison or description of changes is key to assess progress or status, even when explicit prior data is missing or limited.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4503335417969564,0.4673366834170854,0.453125,0.29,100.0,99.0
+2155,latent_2155,3888,0.007776,0.010014529,4.0494647,Detailed comparison of current and prior images in findings.,"Examples with high activation values provide detailed descriptions of radiographic findings in relation to prior images, often noting interval change, placement of medical devices, or posture correction. These detailed processes of comparing current and prior images require careful analysis and often result in significant diagnostic insights, which the model must identify and explain. Low activation examples lack such detailed analysis or omit the comparative aspect.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.5,0.5,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2156,latent_2156,3787,0.007574,0.006488146,6.241198,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with prior comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe a normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette in the presence of prior comparison radiographs, indicating a pattern where the presence of prior comparison and a normal cardiac outline are important.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5686274509803921,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2157,latent_2157,2570,0.00514,0.011144294,7.0322447,Enlargement of the cardiac silhouette or heart size.,"These examples frequently describe the 'enlargement' of the cardiac silhouette or heart size, suggesting that this is a common finding in the analyzed reports. It is a recurring feature irrespective of other findings, indicating its significance in interpreting chest images.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.9523809523809524,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7549448625940837,0.755,0.7628865979381443,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2158,latent_2158,2963,0.005926,0.008324611,5.4564695,Repetitive phrase indicating unchanged condition from prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels describe unchanged conditions in follow-up radiology findings, particularly using phrases such as 'unchanged from prior'. This repetitive phrasing signifies stability in conditions compared to previous records or images and is indicative of ongoing monitoring.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4693877551020408,0.23,100.0,100.0
+2159,latent_2159,4391,0.008782,0.010895123,4.366595,Stable mediastinal contours and cardiac silhouette on chest radiograph.,"Most examples discuss changes in chest radiograph findings with a focus on the descriptions of cardiopulmonary structures. The examples specifically detail stability or changes in ""mediastinal contours"", ""cardiac silhouette"", and ""lung opacities"" in comparison to historical radiographs, indicating that this pattern emphasizes assessments of chest radiography involving mediastinal and cardiac findings.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.6,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2160,latent_2160,5389,0.010778,0.009440068,4.458694,"Interval changes in cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours.","The highly representative samples frequently describe comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on stability or changes in cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, heart size, or presence of devices. There is a common assessment of interval changes or lack thereof, often mentioning mild pulmonary abnormalities such as effusion, edema, calcified nodules, or aortic tortuosity.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,100.0,100.0
+2161,latent_2161,2808,0.005616,0.0058970368,4.0524287,Explicit comparative evaluation of changes in chest imaging.,"The consistent element in examples with high activation is the detailed comparison of the current study with prior imaging, noting specific changes or stabilities in the findings. The pattern indicates a preference for explicit comparisons where both improvements and unchanged conditions are evaluated, showcasing the importance of follow-up and monitoring based on previous records.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2162,latent_2162,28452,0.056904,0.025195552,3.0828125,Observation of low lung volumes in chest images.,"The description of findings often includes the observation of 'low lung volumes,' which recur in different samples and is highlighted more when these findings are compared to prior studies. This subtle change of low lung volumes usually affects the interpretation of other detailed elements such as bronchovascular crowding or linear opacities.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5365853658536586,0.22,100.0,100.0
+2163,latent_2163,4248,0.008496,0.010376834,4.8404617,Phrase 'as compared to the previous radiograph' indicating stable findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently showcase the wording 'as compared to the previous radiograph,' indicating a direct comparison to assess changes in radiological findings without significant interval change, which is a common practice in clinical radiology reporting.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3897923516691844,0.485,0.4285714285714285,0.09,100.0,100.0
+2164,latent_2164,6767,0.013534,0.01666763,3.972177,Comparison leading to confirmation of stable or unchanged findings.,"These examples focus on interpreting diagnostic images, comparing findings to prior studies, strongly relying on positional changes or descriptors related to anatomical findings that are unchanged or stable over time. The examples indicate there's an emphasis on comparison, size stability, unchanged position, and anatomically normal status despite the prior.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.2,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4354838709677419,0.27,100.0,100.0
+2165,latent_2165,6359,0.012718,0.024071349,5.307473,Detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve detailed assessments of previous and current medical images, often highlighting changes or stability in conditions. This pattern signifies the importance of comparative analysis and detecting changes over time in a clinical context.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.5925925925925926,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4873206708425944,0.4874371859296482,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,99.0
+2166,latent_2166,5118,0.010236,0.01114437,4.709472,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours amidst findings.,"These examples often identify normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes or hilar contours in the presence of new findings and frequently include reference to past medical interventions or anatomical features (e.g., mediastinal changes, cardiophrenic angle) suggesting stability or mild change. They don’t characterize acute pathology and note absent findings like pneumothorax and pleural effusion.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6147592245153221,0.615,0.6095238095238096,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2167,latent_2167,15199,0.030398,0.01703337,7.627812,Tortuous or calcified aorta.,"The examples, particularly those with higher activation, highlight findings of a mild tortuosity or calcification of the aorta. This pattern suggests the model is detecting the presence of these vascular features as a notable characteristic.",0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6749341600826749,0.7537688442211056,0.5909090909090909,0.4561403508771929,57.0,142.0
+2168,latent_2168,36870,0.07374,0.030120984,2.3220978,Identification of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examined examples are reports on radiographic studies that identify changes or stability of specific conditions or features between the current imaging study and prior imaging studies. Phrases often reference direct changes, stability, or comparison with previous reports, noting stability, improvement, or progression.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6688077077478924,0.67,0.6517857142857143,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2169,latent_2169,23959,0.047918,0.021540236,4.342435,Unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar structures in comparison images.,"The pattern emerges when both current and prior radiographic images are used to describe stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, often alongside other findings such as unchanged masses, atelectasis, or effusions. These examples consistently use detailed comparisons to indicate minimal or no interval changes in known conditions or findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5352112676056338,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2170,latent_2170,2562,0.005124,0.006730026,5.109732,Use of both frontal and lateral images in comparison to prior frontal images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature references to both frontal and lateral images and previous frontal images, indicating a comparative analysis in radiological evaluation, which is a critical aspect of these samples.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2171,latent_2171,2245,0.00449,0.0075305356,8.094462,Explicit request for comparative description with prior imaging.,Higher activations correspond to reports that explicitly outline instructions for findings' descriptions in comparison to prior images or other modalities. This implies a pattern where assistance is requested explicitly to compare images or identify changes.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5334201388888888,0.57,0.5448717948717948,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2172,latent_2172,2948,0.005896,0.005098599,3.8238642,Explicit description of radiological changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The high activation examples consistently mention a macroscopic description of the findings in relation to prior imaging, even when noting no relevant change. They typically detail radiographic observations over time and communicate comparisons explicitly within the narrative, regardless of significance or change.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4473684210526316,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2173,latent_2173,42014,0.084028,0.04583792,3.9863915,Narrative of interval improvement or worsening in pathologies.,"These examples focus on documentation of interval changes in pathologies, often describing improvements or deteriorations since the previous examination. The comparison highlights whether findings such as opacities, effusions, or consolidations are stable, improved, or worsened.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2174,latent_2174,6042,0.012084,0.008945359,4.5735,Detailed analysis and communication of complex or acute findings from current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed engagements with images and findings, including descriptions of previous and current imaging studies. They focus on complex, acute, or emergent findings, like pneumothorax or tension phenomena, and emphasize notification or detailed comparisons to prior images.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2175,latent_2175,4184,0.008368,0.005914197,3.0330381,Monitoring of support devices and tube placements in radiology.,"The high-activation examples often mention changes or findings in devices, tubes (like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes), or comparisons in terms of placement or movement, while low-activation examples lack such specifics. This pattern indicates interest in monitoring support/tubing position over time.",0.7141666666666666,0.7142857142857143,0.6923076923076923,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2176,latent_2176,7213,0.014426,0.007264631,3.0214436,Request for description comparing current to prior images.,"The pattern focuses on comparing findings from the current imaging to previous studies. High activation examples prominently feature explicit requests for descriptions of findings relative to prior images, underscoring the importance of continuity and comparison in radiological assessment.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4276736617663562,0.49,0.4939759036144578,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2177,latent_2177,33211,0.066422,0.05377607,5.7987323,Emphasis on stability or change in condition from previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize changes over time by comparing current findings with previous radiographic images, particularly noting improvements or stability. This pattern often describes the stability or absence of changes in medical imaging findings, especially concerning, unchanged, or improving conditions.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.5818181818181818,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2178,latent_2178,9946,0.019892,0.016373456,4.7288747,Examination of interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing specifically on interval changes or the lack thereof. This kind of analysis often provides insights into pathologies or the stability of previously identified findings, which is crucial in longitudinal patient assessments.",0.4863731656184486,0.4897959183673469,0.4827586206896552,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4096722924392643,0.415,0.4285714285714285,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2179,latent_2179,17141,0.034282,0.023350013,5.134889,Descriptions emphasize interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature detailed descriptions of changes in findings over time or between different studies, often interspersed with specifications of the condition or disease progression between current and previous imaging. This suggests that the model activates more strongly with reports emphasizing sequential changes in imaging findings over time compared to a prior image.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4793388429752066,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2180,latent_2180,6527,0.013054,0.016088938,8.162753,Detailed evaluation of subtle changes or assessment of new findings in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include fine evaluation of subtle radiological changes, detailed descriptions of the presence or absence of certain clinical details, and frequently indicate potential new findings with implications for the patient's clinical management, such as suggesting follow-up or correlation with clinical history. They also often note specific medical devices or interventions and their post-placement evaluations or comparisons with prior imaging results. However, reports solely describing unchanged conditions or a lack of significant interval changes trend towards lower activations, possibly due to the lack of new or decisive findings.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2181,latent_2181,4571,0.009142,0.010889482,5.0801477,Comparison and analysis against previous imaging studies.,"These examples consistently focus on providing descriptions of radiological findings specifically in comparison to those from prior reports. They make explicit mentions of 'comparison', 'prior report', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2182,latent_2182,4740,0.00948,0.010131418,3.5027025,Descriptions or requests for findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports that describe or request descriptions about radiology studies in comparison with prior images. These comparisons often detail the radiological findings noting any changes or stability, leveraging the language pattern of providing the report's findings as a comparative analysis.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4052294916395466,0.47,0.4819277108433735,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2183,latent_2183,4139,0.008278,0.008706232,5.227966,Unchanged or mildly enlarged heart size or tortuous aorta in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples describe radiological findings that include an unchanged or mildly enlarged heart size and/or tortuous aorta, along with other non-severe pathological findings compared to a prior study. Terms such as 'normal', 'mildly enlarged', 'not engorged', and 'tortuous' are frequently used in these descriptions indicating continuity or minor change in condition.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2184,latent_2184,47488,0.094976,0.051523972,4.654906,Persistent or slightly changed pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"The moderately high activation scores suggest a focus on subtle changes in pulmonary findings when comparing current and prior images, especially when these changes relate to persistent or slight progression in conditions like pulmonary opacities, consolidation, or cardiac enlargement, and where heart silhouette or other important structures remain comparatively stable despite presumed technical differences.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2185,latent_2185,7993,0.015986,0.020371754,11.12498,Detailed comparative evaluation of imaging over time.,"The highly activated examples often refer to specific aspects of diagnosing or reassessing conditions through detailed image comparison and associated changes in clinical status, incorporating terminology like 'comparison', 'prior exam', 'interval', and specifying technical details about the imaging technique used in follow-up diagnostics.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.43,0.4363636363636363,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2186,latent_2186,19546,0.039092,0.031306457,5.241303,Imaging findings compared to prior studies with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve instances where there is a comparison to prior imaging findings, with detailed descriptions of changes or stability over time. The pattern emphasizes follow-up through imaging for tracking medical conditions or interventions, often indicating changes or stability between studies.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2187,latent_2187,3149,0.006298,0.012730071,7.5328016,Presence and stability of sternotomy wires post-surgery.,"Many examples describe the identification and appearance of sternotomy wires, which are surgical artifacts left in patients who have undergone heart surgery. This pattern involves repeated mention of 'sternotomy wires' in the context of unchanged or persistent appearances associated with past heart surgeries.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5403636363636364,0.605,0.92,0.23,100.0,100.0
+2188,latent_2188,6607,0.013214,0.009583443,4.4663033,Identification and description of changes compared to prior images.,The examples with higher activations emphasize comparison between current and prior imaging while highlighting any significant change or stability of findings. Contrast with unchanged or comparison not made cases which have lower activations. This pattern recognizes the focus on interval change assessment in radiological evaluation to determine clinical significance.,0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6494391025641025,0.65,0.6388888888888888,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2189,latent_2189,3647,0.007294,0.0073249643,4.8578396,Presence of cardiomegaly or an enlarged heart size in radiology reports.,"The highly activated examples consistently demonstrate cardiomegaly or an enlarged heart, which is a common radiological finding associated with various cardiac pathologies. This finding is frequently mentioned in imaging reports, often evaluated in conjunction with other thoracic findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4613399169565705,0.52,0.5588235294117647,0.19,100.0,100.0
+2190,latent_2190,185650,0.3713,0.30806974,7.8034163,Progression or improvement of specific findings in sequential or prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation often describe changes in sequential or prior radiographs, contrasting specific findings like tube positions, opacities, or other radiological features over time, while references to new or unchanged features without comparison result in lower activation.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6892230576441103,0.69,0.7111111111111111,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2191,latent_2191,1893,0.003786,0.0088718515,6.2368984,"Findings described comparing with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels include findings described in comparison with prior imaging studies, in the context of new pathological findings or changes noted, often detailing worsening or improvement of the condition described. The comparison phrasing, along with descriptive language delineating change, is what's being highly activated.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2192,latent_2192,5154,0.010308,0.0081635,3.2903104,Comprehensive comparison of imaging findings with prior examination.,"The highly activated examples each provide a detailed comparison of current imaging findings with those from a prior examination, critically evaluating changes in certain anatomical or pathological aspects, often with a conclusion on stability or progression based on the comparison.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4749868746718668,0.475,0.4752475247524752,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2193,latent_2193,33618,0.067236,0.04196313,4.7998667,Reports highlight changes relative to prior imaging.,"Higher activations indicate cases where changes between current and prior images are highlighted, irrespective of the pathological significance, often discussing size, density, or presence of features compared to a previous state. Lower activations show reports without comparative analysis noted.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.5547445255474452,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2194,latent_2194,4025,0.00805,0.01009905,4.173787,Comparison highlights stability between current and prior images.,"Examples that exhibit high activation involve explicit reference to stability or change when comparing current and prior radiological images. This includes phrases like 'no change', 'unchanged', 'stable' or referencing improvements or unchanged aspects of underlying pathologies between imaging sessions.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.4098360655737705,0.25,100.0,100.0
+2195,latent_2195,2712,0.005424,0.0084609315,5.842841,Temporal or sequential comparison of imaging findings to assess changes or stability.,"The consistent pattern among examples with higher activation levels is the description of the radiological findings in comparison to a prior study, which indicates the use of temporal or sequential comparison to assess changes or stability in the patient's condition.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5321448737597806,0.565,0.5424836601307189,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2196,latent_2196,18935,0.03787,0.01987437,5.118967,Detailed comparisons highlighting interval changes or interventions between images.,"Examples with higher activation scores focus on specified comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes in conditions or interventions, such as removal of lines, changes in lesions, or interval placement/removal of medical devices.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5377358490566038,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2197,latent_2197,14837,0.029674,0.016250018,4.9666705,Focus on tube/catheter placement or position within chest.,"The pattern pertains to the position or change in position of medical tubes or lines within the chest, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, etc. Examples with higher activation focus on these changes or placements, even in absence of other significant findings.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7,0.7,0.7,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2198,latent_2198,21952,0.043904,0.02862564,4.337773,Analysis of changes between current and prior chest radiographs.,"The dataset involves examining patterns in chest x-ray images and comparing them to prior images. This often involves evaluating subtle radiological changes over time and is a crucial aspect of radiology to assess stability or progression of findings like effusions, atelectasis, or device placements.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2199,latent_2199,7088,0.014176,0.012024688,3.9349349,Focus on interval changes or stability between serial imaging.,"Most samples with comparison involve detailed, stable descriptions between current and prior images, ensuring close monitoring over time, often with unchanged findings or specific magnitude of change (e.g., improvement, resolution, stability). Such language exemplifies systematic tracking of changes over intervals.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2200,latent_2200,2164,0.004328,0.0038013228,5.232221,Comparison between current and previous imaging findings.,High activation examples consistently describe the need for comparison between current and prior images. This suggests that the model is activating on the theme of making interval comparisons where past and present imaging findings are explicitly examined to note any changes.,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2201,latent_2201,3735,0.00747,0.009725417,5.092817,Comparison of images without specified prior abnormality.,"Examples with high activation often include instructions to compare current imaging findings to either the prior study or state that no prior comparison is available. The comparisons often utilize at least one specified view like PA, lateral, or AP. This reflects a pattern of comparing new radiological findings against previous ones to assess for changes over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2202,latent_2202,22952,0.045904,0.022028629,4.2715573,Detailed comparison highlighting changes in imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include a detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies, highlighting any changes in identified abnormalities, such as pleural effusions, tube placements, opacities, and other stability assessments over time. This reflects a specific emphasis on detecting change over stability in clinical findings between imaging exams.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5793269230769231,0.58,0.5869565217391305,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2203,latent_2203,5206,0.010412,0.008754387,3.5289896,Comparison to prior images with noted changes or stability over time.,"The examples with high activations consistently include references to specific findings or descriptions made in comparison to prior images, such as changes or stability in specific conditions over time, despite sometimes missing explicit prior exam data. This implies the model is activating on the presence of tangible findings or changes noted compared to a stated or implied baseline, rather than a lack of findings.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4705882352941176,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2204,latent_2204,5329,0.010658,0.011625181,5.280483,Instruction to describe findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include instructions directly instructing to describe differences and changes between current and prior imaging studies, typically using verbs like 'provide a description of the findings' or 'assess for change' which indicate an explicit comparison request.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.420197345674087,0.455,0.4697986577181208,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2205,latent_2205,4382,0.008764,0.009681765,8.467267,Prompts request comparison between current and prior images.,The samples with high activation predominantly feature instructions to provide a comparison of radiological findings between current and prior images. They often include a prompt to note any significant changes or the lack thereof. This is indicative of the model’s pattern recognition focus on comparative analysis in imaging studies.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.441513246519982,0.4974874371859296,0.4969325153374233,0.8181818181818182,99.0,100.0
+2206,latent_2206,30412,0.060824,0.03356507,4.0300245,Description of findings with explicit comparison to prior images noting changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on describing radiological findings in the context of a comparison between the current image and a prior image to note any changes or intervals since the previous study. They particularly highlight the presence and adjustments in any hardware or structures, stability, or changes in existing pathologies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2207,latent_2207,2337,0.004674,0.005448759,4.9723835,Comparison of current radiographic findings with prior images.,"These examples involve the comparison of current radiographic images to prior studies. Many examples provide detail on the stability or changes in specific medical devices, anatomical structures, and pathologies, showcasing the critical need for referencing prior reports or images to make informed medical evaluations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2208,latent_2208,3268,0.006536,0.01240295,6.410185,Presence of frontal image comparisons without necessity of lateral image.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve both a current and prior frontal chest image, but they don't require a lateral image for significant findings. These comparisons specifically mention changes or stabilities in findings, suggesting the model is particularly attuned to evaluating serial changes in chest x-rays when a frontal comparison is present but not necessarily a lateral one.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.2352941176470588,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.2962056303549572,0.31,0.2361111111111111,0.17,100.0,100.0
+2209,latent_2209,3170,0.00634,0.0059192237,3.6766999,Assessment of acute changes with comparison to prior imaging in complex cases.,"Highly activated examples involve radiograph analysis focused on acute findings in patients with complex histories or multiple clinical concerns. These reports often contain detailed comparisons to prior studies and involve the assessment of ongoing or potential pathological developments, such as the positioning of medical devices, pulmonary and cardiac changes, and other critical findings relevant to acute care.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.567391304347826,0.5778894472361809,0.5572519083969466,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+2210,latent_2210,6419,0.012838,0.009922072,3.4920442,Evaluations requiring image comparison against prior radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently feature radiological interpretations made in context of direct comparisons between current and prior images. The significant radiological findings or conclusions are often discussed in the framework of stability, change, or the absence/presence of new developments, usually in context of provided historical reports and direct image comparison.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4104159842777596,0.46,0.4746835443037974,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2211,latent_2211,3108,0.006216,0.0072043533,8.987997,Comparison with prior imaging for interval change in findings.,"A prevalent pattern in these examples is the comparison of findings to prior imaging studies, often in response to specific clinical indications such as changes in medical device placement, pneumothorax evaluation, or assessment of changes in pathology like atelectasis or pulmonary edema. The pattern includes referencing previous examinations or describing interval changes, using terms like 'compared to', 'increased', 'decreased', and 'unchanged'.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4959349593495935,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2212,latent_2212,4041,0.008082,0.009913133,4.197683,High-level activation when explicitly comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"The most representative examples describe findings based on a direct comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting changes over time in the patient's condition. Phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged to slightly decreased', or 'decrease in small right-sided pleural effusion' are commonly used, indicative of comparative analysis over multiple imaging studies to assess stability, progression, or improvement in findings. Examples activate at a high level when this comparison is central to the description and assessment.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2213,latent_2213,6344,0.012688,0.029400535,4.5568695,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2214,latent_2214,6950,0.0139,0.020609539,7.802509,Absence or overlook of prior comparative analysis in radiological description.,"The examples with the highest activation show a consistent trend where the assistant fails to identify prior comparison even when present, or indicates several views and techniques while noting 'no comparison'. These examples typically involve terms indicating absence of significant findings or overlap verbal elaborations with [[,]] [[ab]] normalities, often leading to speculative diagnosis like atelectasis or pneumonia, or routine monitoring after known pathologies without comparison.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2215,latent_2215,7103,0.014206,0.011298259,2.7042735,Comparison of current images to prior images to evaluate findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a prompt to describe findings in current images compared to a prior image. These examples specify an explicit comparison to the prior frontal image, emphasizing the evaluation of current findings in the context of historical imaging data.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4246260069044879,0.45,0.4647887323943662,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2216,latent_2216,2553,0.005106,0.006607505,5.3123903,Patterns in findings descriptions with explicit comparison requirements.,"The highest activations are for examples where the findings require a description in comparison to prior imaging, along with technical details of the approach used in the examination. This combination indicates a specific request for thorough evaluative reporting against known or prior baselines.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4358356164383561,0.4747474747474747,0.4834437086092715,0.7373737373737373,99.0,99.0
+2217,latent_2217,13320,0.02664,0.014559631,3.3154125,Interpretation of interval change via comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples highlight cases where a comparison to prior imaging data is explicitly made but also include instances where this comparison reveals changes, stabilities, or updates in the patient's condition, device placement, or pathology evaluation. The pattern emphasizes the provision of both current and prior imaging comparisons and subsequent interpretations noting interval changes.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4705882352941176,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2218,latent_2218,14342,0.028684,0.02644274,7.1296864,Detailed analysis of changes or stability compared to prior radiology findings.,"The common element among the examples with higher activation levels is the emphasis on changes or stability in radiological findings through specific comparisons between current imaging and detailed descriptions from prior studies, even when the specifics of the findings vary widely. This entails explicitly analyzing intervals or differences as documented in previous reports.",0.4889445139758031,0.4897959183673469,0.4814814814814814,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2219,latent_2219,5134,0.010268,0.011447889,5.143111,Directive to compare findings with prior images.,Examples with high activation levels consistently mention 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison' indicating a directive to describe findings explicitly in relation to prior images. This suggests the emphasis is on comparing the current radiographic findings with past images.,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2220,latent_2220,4510,0.00902,0.008521248,3.033497,Provide description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve tasks to 'provide a description of findings', especially focusing on variations and comparisons between current images and prior images, suggesting that the pattern focuses on interpretive tasks of comparing and describing radiological findings from images.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3899389938993899,0.39,0.3877551020408163,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2221,latent_2221,89610,0.17922,0.10272341,3.9849586,Descriptions include precise locations of medical devices in imaging.,"These examples involve the inclusion of medical devices (tubes, catheters, etc.) and their positions described in radiology reports, often in relation to previous images. Devices such as PICC lines, ET tubes, etc., are consistently mentioned across the activated samples, indicating that their presence and positioning are key features in these activations.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5857142857142857,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2222,latent_2222,9868,0.019736,0.01356755,5.5143256,Stable or unchanged pleural effusions or pulmonary edema on comparison imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of changes or stability in pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, atelectasis, and other similar conditions when comparing current imaging to prior studies. These findings often relate to patient management, monitoring progression or stability of conditions.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5985243055555556,0.63,0.7954545454545454,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2223,latent_2223,16088,0.032176,0.022002688,5.1216354,Comparisons with prior imaging for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the comparison with prior images in the context of evaluating radiological changes. This pattern indicates the importance of comparing current findings with previous imaging to determine stability or change, which is a common practice in monitoring medical conditions.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4615384615384615,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2224,latent_2224,30623,0.061246,0.042197324,5.0858264,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern is characterized by redundant or unchanged findings on repeated imaging, which may indicate stability or lack of significant interval change. Examples reference unchanged structures, persistent conditions, or stable medical devices, indicating either resolved or consistent medical conditions compared to prior imaging.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5227272727272727,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2225,latent_2225,3977,0.007954,0.0076572243,5.545326,Focus on recurrence or resolution of prior issues in comparison reports.,"These examples illustrate an important pattern where there is a comparison of current radiological findings with a previous study, and specifically highlight changes or lack thereof in recurring issues such as atelectasis, effusions, vascular congestion, or device positioning. They frequently mention resolution or persistence of issues and provide overall stability assessments in relation to previous reports.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2226,latent_2226,76348,0.152696,0.09330742,9.231879,Examples with specific clinical indications or findings have higher activation.,"Activations show that examples noting technique as ""N/A"" and an explicit request to describe findings with comparison to a prior image have a lower activation, whereas descriptions involving specific conditions or indications have higher activations, even if comparison is noted. It seems that instructive or procedural texts with less specific clinical content have lower relevance to the pattern.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2758620689655172,0.8888888888888888,54.0,146.0
+2227,latent_2227,11140,0.02228,0.014268568,6.353234,Identification of interval changes in lung pathology compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention changes or comparisons with prior imaging, but specifically focus on new or increased consolidations, effusions or other lung pathologies, suggesting the model is sensitive to changes in lung conditions over time when compared with past images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.515625,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2228,latent_2228,11392,0.022784,0.016571458,6.190182,Decreased lung volumes accentuating cardiac silhouette size.,The higher activation levels correspond to descriptions of decreased lung volumes which lead to accentuation or apparent enlargement of the cardiac silhouette. This observation focuses on the radiological impact of lung volume changes on cardiac size perception in imaging.,0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679197,0.555,0.6666666666666666,0.22,100.0,100.0
+2229,latent_2229,5112,0.010224,0.012840369,4.4910274,Task involves comparing current image findings with prior image findings.,"This pattern involves tasks where the model is instructed to compare described findings in the current image with those of a prior image. Activations are high when such descriptions explicitly mention comparison with prior images, indicating a focus on monitoring changes over time in radiological examinations.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2230,latent_2230,11491,0.022982,0.013436553,4.087021,Comparison with prior images indicating an interval change.,The highly activated examples refer to findings described in comparison to previous radiographs and use a structured format that acknowledges prior indications or findings.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4459459459459459,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2231,latent_2231,10094,0.020188,0.0111242365,6.528818,Descriptions focusing on unchanged or resolved conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally revolve around describing findings or subtle changes in radiographic images and often point to specific observations like ""unchanged from prior"" or ""resolved/unchanged condition."" The focus tends to be on whether there is a change or resolution in the context of previous findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.4390243902439024,0.4137931034482758,87.0,113.0
+2232,latent_2232,3541,0.007082,0.009947502,5.3215885,Interval change evaluation in comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently refer to descriptions of findings derived from comparisons to prior imaging, with references to interval changes. This is demonstrated in explicit language discussing stable findings, unchanged conditions, and evaluations of recent alterations compared to previous presentations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2233,latent_2233,1885,0.00377,0.006477175,6.7021194,Comparative evaluation using both current frontal and lateral images with prior studies.,"The highly activated examples require both current frontal and lateral images alongside a comparison with prior images, focusing on evaluations of changes or stability over time. These findings are typically comprehensive, involving comparative assessment of both current and past conditions.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2234,latent_2234,5599,0.011198,0.00934088,5.350492,Explicit request for comparison with and description based on prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing or requesting explicit descriptions of imaging findings in comparison to prior imaging, involving comments on the change or stability of conditions between current and previous studies, thus overlaying a diagnostic consideration on temporal changes.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2235,latent_2235,4280,0.00856,0.016477559,6.8880043,Comparison of current and prior imaging with explicit directives for description.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a direct comparison between current and prior images, with specific reference to changes or considerations across different views or time points. This pattern involves explicit directives in the prompt to generate findings in the context of previous images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2236,latent_2236,2424,0.004848,0.006034381,7.666195,Findings described in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels contain findings from comparative imaging studies, specifically using explicit comparisons to prior images with terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and references to previous examinations for description and confirmation of findings. This establishes the pattern of using comparisons to prior studies for assessment in radiology reports.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2237,latent_2237,12965,0.02593,0.015261361,5.7216115,No change or stability in cardiomediastinal silhouette or pulmonary opacities.,"Most examples show stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes or unchanged pulmonary opacities when compared to prior imaging, suggesting the pattern is about finding stability or no progression in comparison to previous studies.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2238,latent_2238,6175,0.01235,0.009156738,4.2664165,Description focuses on stability or normalcy of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation consistently provide findings or impressions comparing current findings against prior images, focusing on unchanged or normally sized cardiac silhouettes or pulmonary structures, and identifying no acute pathologies such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax. These are typical signs of a stable observation over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6026538607354985,0.6030150753768844,0.6,0.63,100.0,99.0
+2239,latent_2239,6201,0.012402,0.013034901,4.4447036,Presence of mild to moderate cardiomegaly or heart enlargement.,"The examples with high activation levels describe conditions of mild to moderate enlargement of the cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly in the context of thoracic imaging. This pattern suggests that the model is reacting to descriptions of heart size changes, specifically enlargement, which may indicate underlying cardiac conditions or relate to other chest pathologies.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.9411764705882352,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5649405772495755,0.59,0.6730769230769231,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2240,latent_2240,11519,0.023038,0.01940585,5.705675,Evaluation for acute cardiopulmonary process.,Examples with higher activation levels often mention the presence or absence of acute cardiopulmonary processes or abnormalities. This indicates that the pattern being observed relates to the identification or ruling out of acute processes when comparing current and prior images.,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5420408621463852,0.5879396984924623,0.5555555555555556,0.9,100.0,99.0
+2241,latent_2241,4515,0.00903,0.00972692,6.432724,Emphasis on unchanged abnormalities from previous imaging.,"The main recurring pattern among highly activating examples involves the reinforcement of stability or lack of change in specific abnormalities compared to prior imaging. This focus on consistent features amidst changing patient contexts, as opposed to new or acute findings, drives the activation.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.46875,0.3,100.0,100.0
+2242,latent_2242,8628,0.017256,0.010349516,4.320242,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"These examples involve descriptions comparing current imaging findings with previous imaging examinations, particularly emphasizing changes or stability over time. This pattern is consistent with radiological assessment processes where comparison to prior images is critical for identifying any notable changes.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2243,latent_2243,2831,0.005662,0.007843764,6.8685637,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images in analysis.,"The pattern involves detailed examination of both frontal and lateral views of chest imaging, often including prior images for comparison. It's typical in cases where multiple views are required to clarify complex or persistent conditions, indicated by referencing these multiple perspectives.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2244,latent_2244,2986,0.005972,0.008865321,6.9778314,Presence of both frontal and lateral chest radiographs.,Highly activated examples consistently mention both a frontal and a lateral chest radiograph. The examples with zero activation either lack the mention of lateral views or involve different types of studies unrelated to chest radiography pairs.,0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4923076923076923,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2245,latent_2245,3137,0.006274,0.013007006,5.5220866,Include both current lateral and frontal images for comparison.,The examples with high activation levels focus on providing both lateral and frontal chest images compared to previous frontal images for a thorough evaluation. This pattern likely emphasizes the importance of using multiple views for complete assessment and context in radiology reports.,0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6510673234811166,0.66,0.6212121212121212,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2246,latent_2246,4360,0.00872,0.010187124,4.6795273,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"This pattern reveals references to clear comparisons with prior images or studies, which is a key linguistic feature in radiology reports as it provides a context to evaluate changes over time. The presence of phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or dates of prior exams is consistently noted.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3724061139791477,0.38,0.4016393442622951,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2247,latent_2247,5824,0.011648,0.010932835,5.5636983,Specific radiological technique views and equipment status.,"Examples tend to specify technical details of imaging views, especially in comparison with prior studies, with various imaging techniques like PA, AP, portable, and lateral views, and status of medical interventions or tubes displayed in these views. Patterns include explicit notation of imaging view type for clarity in radiological interpretations.",0.3694852941176471,0.4285714285714285,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.4587384259259259,0.5276381909547738,0.5176470588235295,0.88,100.0,99.0
+2248,latent_2248,33030,0.06606,0.041997816,3.7599833,Explicit comparison with prior studies identifying stability or change.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe radiological studies that explicitly compare current imaging findings with prior data, including observations of stability or changes over time, often noting specific anatomical features or pathologies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2249,latent_2249,41483,0.082966,0.059163984,6.717287,Comparison to previous imaging to assess stability or change.,"The presence of previous imaging for direct comparison is a common theme in radiology analysis as it helps to assess interval changes. However, these examples particularly highlight the usage of radiological examinations where 'findings' or 'impressions' are described by comparing current images directly with prior images. This pattern is linked with tracking stability or change over time, a frequent diagnostic practice.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2250,latent_2250,5591,0.011182,0.022106182,3.6077092,Directive to compare to prior image or study.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently include directives to provide a description or analysis in comparison to a prior image or study. This pattern highlights the importance of comparison in radiological assessments, which is a critical skill in identifying changes or stability in medical diagnoses over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4850746268656716,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2251,latent_2251,3332,0.006664,0.0061905878,3.5068731,Mentions of pleural effusion or its status.,"The consistent feature across most examples with high activation levels is the presence of pleural effusion, varying from mentions of its stability, presence, or improvement, even as a minor detail within complex diagnoses. This analysis captures the significance of pleural effusion across diverse contexts in radiological evaluations, while low activations often relate to studies not highlighting this finding.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2252,latent_2252,5494,0.010988,0.013241179,5.032962,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2253,latent_2253,1872,0.003744,0.004241084,5.0464315,Assessment of pacemaker presence or lead placement.,"These examples describe the presence and assessment of pacemakers or their leads, often with confirmation of their unchanged or expected positions on follow-up imaging. This pattern in radiology reports can include specific related findings such as lead courses, device positioning, related indications, or other cardiac assessments.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.95,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6548376658397153,0.68,0.8913043478260869,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2254,latent_2254,8402,0.016804,0.01106569,4.1280766,Multiple frontal and lateral images with historical comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the presence of frontal and lateral images combined with prior frontal images, suggesting a comparison or analysis that integrates multiple views along with historical data. This could imply a pattern where the system recognizes and processes these combinations of imaging data as particularly significant or informative.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2255,latent_2255,2616,0.005232,0.013570721,9.050866,Presence of current lateral and frontal imaging with prior reports.,"The most representative examples consistently include both lateral and frontal views of current imaging alongside prior imaging reports. Additionally, these examples do not have N/A or lack of previous comparison, indicating that the existence of current lateral imaging, a history section, and prior comparisons contribute to higher activation.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,100.0,100.0
+2256,latent_2256,3614,0.007228,0.00944838,5.7958355,Emphasis on comparison to prior images and interval change.,"Most examples involve descriptions comparing current and prior imaging studies, indicating whether changes are relevant or notable between exams. Activation is higher in detailed narratives focusing on changes and comparisons, suggesting interest in identifying intervals and modifications over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4290865384615384,0.43,0.4351851851851852,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2257,latent_2257,3162,0.006324,0.009516154,6.2068663,Comparison with prior imaging studies and assessment of interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels all feature comparisons with prior imaging studies, which is a common practice in radiology reporting to assess interval changes or stability. These reports focus on imaging intervals and identifying changes or continuities over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4125178880771258,0.415,0.4247787610619469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2258,latent_2258,31674,0.063348,0.032668486,6.3354573,Slight interval changes or stable findings compared to prior study.,"The main pattern among examples with high activation is the reference to slight changes or stability in findings when comparing current imaging with prior studies. These reports often mention consistency or minor changes in the context of comparison, indicating a stable condition or minor interval changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.4554455445544554,0.5679012345679012,81.0,119.0
+2259,latent_2259,24341,0.048682,0.040164344,4.4006596,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often compare current findings against previous studies, noting changes or stability in the images. The presence of explicit comparisons to prior images or exams, especially in the context of evaluating present conditions against historical baselines, influences activation levels significantly.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2260,latent_2260,5331,0.010662,0.020887611,7.201325,Findings described in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples all involve providing descriptions of current imaging findings in comparison to a previous study. They include phrases that refer to differences noted over time such as changes in lung opacities, effusion size, etc., often found in radiology reports to evaluate progression or resolution of pathology.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4390044879640963,0.45,0.4609375,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2261,latent_2261,4044,0.008088,0.0071801622,4.789562,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette amidst findings like effusions or nodules.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize stability or unchanged aspects of the cardiomediastinal silhouette while identifying findings such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pulmonary nodules. The reports often include a comparison to a prior study to highlight these unchanged features in the presence of ongoing or new pathologies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2262,latent_2262,4189,0.008378,0.008154012,4.6446013,Findings discussed in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"All examples with activations involve descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging studies, even if some comparisons state no prior records are available. This highlights an expected pattern in radiological reports where findings are assessed in relation to previous states to ascertain changes or stability.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2263,latent_2263,21969,0.043938,0.021987833,3.8379986,Absence of prior comparison images for chest examination.,Examples with high activation primarily involve situations where a frontal chest image comparison is made but without available prior images for comparison or indicating 'None' available. It reflects the model's sensitivity to the absence of comparison rather than the data extracted from image comparison.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6374493927125506,0.6381909547738693,0.6296296296296297,0.68,100.0,99.0
+2264,latent_2264,33843,0.067686,0.03560239,7.621389,Reports referencing positioning adjustments for enteric or central lines.,"Examples with activation levels higher than zero consistently refer to either recommended adjustments in the positioning of tubes (e.g., nasogastric, Dobbhoff, etc.) or observations concerning central line positioning relative to specific anatomical landmarks. This aligns with procedural follow-up radiological checks where precise positioning within the body is critical.",0.5250205086136178,0.78,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7261904761904763,0.77,0.7254901960784313,0.5362318840579711,69.0,131.0
+2265,latent_2265,4035,0.00807,0.0077530886,3.6296618,Comparison focuses on positioning or changes in medical devices/tubes.,"The common indicator in these examples is the presence or concern regarding the positioning of medical devices or tubes, often after a physical change or procedure (like extubation or catheter insertion). This highlights the need for radiographic evaluation to confirm the placement or change in medical devices compared to prior imaging, often following clinical assessments like respiratory issues or following surgical interventions.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4310344827586206,0.25,100.0,100.0
+2266,latent_2266,3784,0.007568,0.006065645,6.876985,Radiological findings suspicious for malignancy or serious lung pathology.,"Examples with higher activations (4 and above) consistently describe a clinical context indicating possible lung cancer or serious differential diagnosis due to significant findings such as unexplained opacities, nodules, or effusions coupled with related clinical symptoms or histories. They often include considerations for malignancy, pneumonia or ongoing evaluation for significant disease processes.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5388245388245388,0.57,0.6458333333333334,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2267,latent_2267,5214,0.010428,0.009761773,4.7643743,"Comparison of current with prior imaging, noting interval change or stability.","These examples describe the comparison of current imaging findings to earlier ones, often using precise terms like 'interval change', which indicates deviation or stability from the prior exam. High activations are associated with phrases that suggest incremental analysis, such as 'compared to prior radiographs' or 'no interval change since previous study'.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2268,latent_2268,3714,0.007428,0.0065731215,4.173027,Descriptions of medical device positioning and changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions that include the assessment of medical devices, such as pacemakers, chest tubes, or endotracheal tubes, in conjunction with identifying changes or stability when compared to prior images. These descriptions often specify device positioning, stability, or changes, reflecting detailed observations necessary for device monitoring.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5729166666666666,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2269,latent_2269,5011,0.010022,0.007895856,3.3580751,Comparison to prior imaging indicating changes or intervals.,"In these examples, high activation levels are associated with descriptions that involve changes or intervals in comparison to previous images. The reports frequently mention findings in the context of changes identified when comparing current to prior imaging, highlighting interval alterations or stability over time.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2270,latent_2270,5197,0.010394,0.007126188,4.5769405,Comparison with prior imaging studies indicating change or stability.,"Examples with higher activations consistently reference comparison to prior imaging, which aligns with patterns in radiology reporting where findings are evaluated for changes or constancy. Several reports explicitly discuss stable or changed conditions based on prior imaging, which correlates with the activation when such comparisons are present.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2271,latent_2271,15777,0.031554,0.01881921,5.7456236,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include specific comparisons between previous imaging findings and current status, emphasizing stable findings, regression of changes, or unchanged conditions over time. Phrases like 'stable appearance', 'again noted', 'unchanged', or 'as before' indicate repetition or reaffirmation of past findings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6161616161616161,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2272,latent_2272,3427,0.006854,0.011645509,5.421774,Simultaneous comparison with current and prior images to assess changes.,The examples with high activation levels describe concurrent evaluations utilizing both current imaging and prior frontal or lateral images. They frequently refer to changes or evaluations based on comparisons with these prior images.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2273,latent_2273,15109,0.030218,0.046087332,5.3230176,Comparative analysis of findings against previous images.,"The highly activated examples contain detailed descriptions of changes over time, specifically quantitative or qualitative assessments of findings in relation to prior images. They often document stability, improvement, or new developments compared to previous exams. This pattern underscores the importance of tracking progression or static nature of certain medical conditions as evidenced by radiographic changes.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2274,latent_2274,50342,0.100684,0.045216985,4.2787147,Evaluation of changes in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern in the samples revolves around explicit comparisons of findings to prior imaging studies, often describing stability or mild changes in conditions such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, and lung volumes. These comparative evaluations are common in radiological assessments where baseline changes are crucial for patient management and follow-up.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6129302228266555,0.63,0.5915492957746479,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2275,latent_2275,14593,0.029186,0.017086249,6.0271735,Detailed historical comparison or analysis in radiology descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation levels detail technical details, specific historical references, or other specific analytical elements, differing from those found in other examples. These instances often focus on providing rich historical context or detailed analysis of changes or comparisons, while low activation examples often only provide brief or highly generalized descriptions with less specificity or contextual background.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2276,latent_2276,13503,0.027006,0.025602026,6.1090636,Emphasis on comparison with prior radiographs and any interval changes.,"The pattern focuses on the presence of a comparison of current imaging studies with prior radiographs, particularly emphasizing any changes or lack thereof in findings (e.g., device placements, lung opacities, heart size). Since radiology reports commonly use previous images to evaluate current conditions, the key activated pattern here relates to studies where such comparisons are inherently made, indicating a strong reliance on comparison for interpreting changes or stability in medical conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4048716260697828,0.435,0.4551724137931034,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2277,latent_2277,12556,0.025112,0.021063957,6.6495905,Interval changes in imaging findings and tube placement.,"These examples describe changes, either improvements or worsening of radiological findings, when compared with previous scans, especially focusing on alterations in tube placements, opacities, or effusion sizes, which is indicative of typical progression tracking in radiology.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7341959427267484,0.735,0.7117117117117117,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2278,latent_2278,14622,0.029244,0.020192586,5.552549,Reports describing changes in previously identified conditions or new placements have higher activations.,"Activations are lower for reports focusing on routine post-procedure follow-ups and monitoring of stable conditions without notable findings or interventions, while cases describing resolution or change in previously noted pathologies and specific placements tend to have higher activations.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5892549084038445,0.625,0.5786163522012578,0.92,100.0,100.0
+2279,latent_2279,10037,0.020074,0.015276051,7.0271025,Descriptions indicating unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to the unchanged status of findings or devices in comparison to prior imaging studies, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'remain stable', 'no interval change', or similar expressions. This pattern indicates stability or lack of progression in findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6038014995360967,0.605,0.6043956043956044,0.5612244897959183,98.0,102.0
+2280,latent_2280,5723,0.011446,0.013864888,5.9013753,Minimal interval change in critical findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples primarily feature scans where some aspect of the imaging findings is unchanged or shows minimal interval change compared to prior imaging, despite serious conditions or interventions being noted. This type of language is typical when ensuring stability of critical findings in medical imaging reports, often referencing 'unchanged', 'stable', 'unchanged position', 'no interval change', etc., underscoring progress or lack thereof over subsequent evaluations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2281,latent_2281,7120,0.01424,0.013379483,4.903879,Detailed interval changes compared to prior reports in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels include detailed systematic comparisons of current findings to prior imaging reports, while those with lower activations lack such detailed comparative analysis. The pattern emphasizes detailed descriptive language about interval changes from prior images, indicating stability or change in findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5353535353535354,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2282,latent_2282,6786,0.013572,0.015395913,6.5309978,Inclusion of current and prior images in study evaluation.,"Activation levels are higher when multiple images, including prior ones, are provided for comparison and analysis. The presence of prior reports or images for comparison alongside current images increases the detail and depth of analysis in findings.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.472733197073373,0.555,0.5307262569832403,0.95,100.0,100.0
+2283,latent_2283,4740,0.00948,0.009180116,5.059868,Focus on stability or changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize descriptions that compare the current radiological findings with previous ones, specifically noting stability or changes in the findings over time. This pattern is critical in monitoring the progress or stability of known conditions or findings.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4937932437932438,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.58,100.0,99.0
+2284,latent_2284,40945,0.08189,0.068424866,4.652868,Reference to unchanged or stable findings from prior study.,"This pattern includes references to stable or unchanged findings from a previous study, or no new changes except for minor adjustments that do not alter the overall impression of stability, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'appears normal', and 'grossly stable'. These terms are commonly used in radiology reports to indicate consistency over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5454545454545454,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2285,latent_2285,17813,0.035626,0.016422432,1.6612353,Combination of current and prior images in analysis.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference a combination of current images (frontal and lateral) and prior images, and instructs to provide findings based on this comparison, suggesting that this pattern relates to considering the evaluation of multiple views where both current and prior images are involved.",0.1717171717171717,0.18,0.2333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4374864100891498,0.4773869346733668,0.4836601307189542,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+2286,latent_2286,3559,0.007118,0.008212564,6.850566,Detailed comparison of radiological findings over time.,The examples with high activation levels tend to reference detailed comparative changes between current and previous examinations of the same patient or findings in the context of changes over time. This often reflects in more active monitoring and discussion about stability or progression of findings observed in prior reports.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4199419941994199,0.42,0.4215686274509804,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2287,latent_2287,8080,0.01616,0.01871784,5.924017,"Comparison with specific prior images, notably prior frontal view.","Many high activation examples include a prior frontal view and often compare findings to a specific previous study, emphasizing the prior images' involvement in the diagnostic process. This pattern is consistent with the practical workflow of radiologists, who assess changes and stability in images by using prior studies.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4412702739539321,0.4824120603015075,0.487012987012987,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+2288,latent_2288,4316,0.008632,0.0081723295,4.036299,Explicit or implicit comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention or imply a comparison to a prior image when describing the findings, although not all make direct references to imaging techniques or comparison dates, focusing instead on changes observed or lack thereof in the current versus prior state.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.4782608695652174,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3973698290670496,0.465,0.4790419161676646,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2289,latent_2289,29918,0.059836,0.042711984,4.9942236,Presence of unchanged or stable features compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe stability or unchanged condition of certain features in comparison to previous radiological studies, with keywords like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'similar', or 'appear similar'. This pattern represents the linguistic structure used when emphasizing minimal or no change from previous imaging results.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6986301369863013,0.702020202020202,0.6722689075630253,0.8,100.0,98.0
+2290,latent_2290,4763,0.009526,0.015808042,3.3193257,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2291,latent_2291,7246,0.014492,0.009835627,5.1678443,"Detailed findings with comparison to prior imaging, mentioning multiple views.","Examples with higher activation levels involve detailed textual description of both current imaging findings and their comparison to prior imaging, where a complete assessment is made by comparing multiple views, including frontal and lateral views. The mention of 'comparison' along with precise descriptions characterize these examples.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4068188620717803,0.455,0.4713375796178344,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2292,latent_2292,4740,0.00948,0.015211764,4.695652,Explicit comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the use of prepositions and details regarding image comparison phrases such as 'As compared to the previous radiograph', which is an explicit prompt for comparative analysis inherent in radiological assessments. These high activation examples involve detailed analyses about changes or consistencies noted from the current and prior images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2293,latent_2293,6266,0.012532,0.021300115,4.463149,Comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe situations where there is a need to compare current findings to a prior imaging study, even considering specific clinical histories or treatments. This pattern involves the linguistic prompt to provide comparative conclusions between current and prior imaging, often within the context of ongoing patient conditions or interventions.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5265434954150907,0.565,0.5414012738853503,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2294,latent_2294,6101,0.012202,0.007943225,7.705109,Description of placement/adjustment recommendations for tubes and catheters.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently discuss evaluation of placement for support and monitoring devices, often suggesting adjustment for optimal seating, positioning, or advancement in relation to anatomical landmarks such as the carina or the GE junction. This implies a focus on procedural details related to the positioning of tubes and catheters in radiology reports.",0.7043103448275863,0.7142857142857143,0.8125,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.6765827612509534,0.735,0.6458333333333334,0.4626865671641791,67.0,133.0
+2295,latent_2295,10239,0.020478,0.026522513,5.2537255,Detailed comparative interpretation of current vs. prior imaging findings.,"Activations are associated with scenarios where the assistant provides a detailed comparative interpretation of current versus previous imaging, beyond the mere restatement of similarities and differences, indicating a deeper analytical description of observed changes.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2296,latent_2296,34193,0.068386,0.027596962,2.4951835,Explicit changes or stability in clinical findings relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels show comparisons of new radiological findings to prior studies, focusing specifically on changes or stability of conditions like pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, and cardiac silhouettes. Stability or changes in these areas relative to previous imagery tend to suggest ongoing or resolved clinical problems, and explicit statements about these comparisons using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'persistent', and 'similar' characterize the pattern.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6578053576444751,0.665,0.627906976744186,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2297,latent_2297,3304,0.006608,0.016814701,6.532382,Lack of prior imaging for comparison (no comparison available).,"The examples with higher activation explicitly mention 'no comparison available' or indicate an absence of prior imaging for comparison. This suggests that the activation pattern is sensitive to the lack of progressive comparison, indicating the model activates more when confronted with fresh, uncontextualized findings.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7325865940109488,0.735,0.6974789915966386,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2298,latent_2298,6552,0.013104,0.011520638,5.4411173,"Presence or evaluation of PICC line, Port-A-Cath, or catheter placement.","Examples with non-zero activation consistently involve specific vascular and mediastinal structures, particularly the presence or evaluation of a PICC line, Port-A-Cath, or other catheter placements. Such specifics of vascular devices and their placements are essential findings in certain chest X-rays and have distinct patterns in reports.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3975205654037771,0.48,0.4230769230769231,0.11,100.0,100.0
+2299,latent_2299,8286,0.016572,0.01464311,4.328304,Focus on stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples consistently mention unchanged findings from prior studies, indicating a focus on stability or lack of interval change, which is crucial for monitoring chronic conditions or reassuring about benign findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5678282828282828,0.5678391959798995,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,99.0
+2300,latent_2300,12375,0.02475,0.013615377,6.203196,Explicit description of unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples often note clearly what has changed or remained stable between the current examination and previous imaging, using specific phrases like 'unchanged', 'as compared to', or 'has increased'. This explicit comparison, particularly when findings are stable or unchanged, is a consistent linguistic pattern in these examples.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.4698795180722891,0.4382022471910112,89.0,111.0
+2301,latent_2301,4987,0.009974,0.00785581,3.8639727,Transcription errors or incomplete text within the findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature complex linguistic patterns or broken phrases often due to transcription errors or incompleteness, suggesting the pattern being analyzed relates to such inconsistencies.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,100.0,100.0
+2302,latent_2302,12902,0.025804,0.015728444,5.6023335,Comparison to prior frontal chest images with description of interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include language describing comparisons to previous frontal images of the chest, often noting whether there have been changes in findings such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, tube placements, or consolidations. These references to interval changes over time connote close monitoring of patients' conditions, which seems to be the focus of the activation pattern.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5172413793103449,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2303,latent_2303,3460,0.00692,0.0054135444,4.8979683,Significant interval changes or findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations consistently involve cases where comparison between current and prior imaging has revealed significant findings or interval changes, particularly with reference to emergent or critical conditions like new lung opacities, effusions, and pneumonia, or discussions of size/stability of cardiomediastinal silhouettes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4464285714285714,0.25,100.0,100.0
+2304,latent_2304,6224,0.012448,0.012403648,4.002341,Detailed comparison with prior images indicating interval changes.,"The examples demonstrate consistent use of phrases indicating comparison to prior imagery, particularly highlighting changes (or lack thereof) found in the current image relative to the previous one. The consistent theme across high activation examples is the thorough documentation of stability or change since the last report, often with specific reference to previous interventions, devices, or known medical conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4698795180722891,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2305,latent_2305,39638,0.079276,0.032404393,2.2468512,No significant interval change in imaging findings.,"These examples involve descriptions of radiological findings where the comparison to prior images does not reveal any significant changes or is stated as 'no significant interval change.' This description pattern suggests stability of the findings over time, with a focus on unchanged aspects of the results.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5757575757575758,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2306,latent_2306,12483,0.024966,0.014873572,4.882271,Comparison with prior imaging for assessing changes.,"The examples that show higher activation levels focus on detecting and describing changes or stability in various conditions by comparing current findings to previous imaging studies. These examples often use terms like 'unchanged', 'interval increase/decrease', or specific comparisons to prior dates or studies, to reflect a continuation or change in patient's condition over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5102040816326531,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2307,latent_2307,4962,0.009924,0.008820186,4.5014997,Reports noting significant interval change in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve a description of changes in findings, especially when there is a notable interval change in a specific feature (e.g., pleural effusion, pneumothorax, support devices, or anatomical structures), indicating significance in medical follow-up.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3753784617093969,0.4321608040201005,0.3333333333333333,0.13,100.0,99.0
+2308,latent_2308,4647,0.009294,0.0121705625,5.857482,Presence of bibasilar opacities in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe the presence of bibasilar opacities, indicating bilateral involvement at the base of the lungs, which often corresponds to atelectasis and is noted across varying conditions in radiology studies. This recurring pattern seems to trigger higher activations when it is noted in reports.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7362012987012987,0.74,0.8157894736842105,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2309,latent_2309,2741,0.005482,0.0066356068,5.0262613,Mentions comparison or comparison to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels often specify comparison with prior images or explicitly state 'comparison' in the example prompt, regardless of whether they state findings or changes, indicative of focusing on a comparative analysis with previous imaging. This emerges as a pattern that triggers greater model activations.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3940074065761418,0.46,0.4759036144578313,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2310,latent_2310,21593,0.043186,0.025354112,5.660746,Analysis of interval changes against previous imaging studies.,"These examples show that the pattern involves describing findings as observed in the current and prior imaging where findings include interval changes or comparisons between prior and current images, often indicating interpretation based on changes or stability over time.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2311,latent_2311,5058,0.010116,0.0071309805,5.078156,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include both current and prior images, indicating a focus on directly comparing the findings of the two. This likely aligns with the model's pattern of understanding, which emphasizes changes or stability of findings over sequential imaging studies.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2312,latent_2312,41150,0.0823,0.05159668,6.5841584,Comparative findings noted against prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations often mention specific findings in comparison to prior imaging. This indicates that the instances are characterized by comparative analysis, typically noting changes or the stability of conditions over time, contrasting with examples focused purely on the current state without reference to comparative findings.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2313,latent_2313,5214,0.010428,0.023943335,4.338414,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2314,latent_2314,4365,0.00873,0.00958226,4.1302724,Cardiac silhouette enlargement with pulmonary vascular congestion.,"Highly representative examples consistently mention characteristics of the cardiac silhouette, such as moderate or mild cardiomegaly, and descriptions of pulmonary vascular congestion or transformation in the shape or size of lung volume and bronchovascular markings. These features appear alongside evaluations of prior imaging, indicating changes or stability over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4977617643847581,0.54,0.5952380952380952,0.25,100.0,100.0
+2315,latent_2315,4228,0.008456,0.013553724,5.9550505,Emphasis on comparative evaluation of findings with prior images.,The examples either lack a comparative analysis (activation levels are low) or explicitly provide descriptions of current findings in the context of previous images or examinations (activation levels are high). This suggests a pattern emphasizing the identification and description of stability or changes in findings when compared to prior imagery.,0.4444444444444444,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.5703324808184143,0.58,0.5615384615384615,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2316,latent_2316,24954,0.049908,0.023812186,4.9252887,Comparative findings emphasizing specific changes without improvement.,"The more representative examples have detailed descriptions of changes between current and prior images, focusing on specific pathologies or positioning changes without a focus on improvement or normal status. Less representative examples focus on normalization or lack of significant findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.589607149222191,0.592964824120603,0.6172839506172839,0.5,100.0,99.0
+2317,latent_2317,31040,0.06208,0.041566122,5.031204,Descriptions emphasizing minimal or slight interval changes in imaging findings.,"The pattern observed is that these samples frequently involve descriptions or findings that persist, change, or remain stable relative to previous observations, but they often include notable ""minimal changes,"" likely to emphasize monitoring subtle shifts in patient status, which requires close observation rather than only dramatic alterations.",0.6435601198117245,0.6530612244897959,0.7058823529411765,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5721744471744472,0.5778894472361809,0.6052631578947368,0.46,100.0,99.0
+2318,latent_2318,4369,0.008738,0.010320234,4.144171,Descriptive instruction to compare current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently prompt the assistant to describe findings in a specific manner, indicating the instruction pattern of asking for 'description of findings' after 'given the current ... and prior ...'. These examples possibly follow a template of description where the assistant's task involves comparing current images to prior ones despite differences in other findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2319,latent_2319,10284,0.020568,0.018713899,6.182783,"Detailed front and lateral chest image analysis focusing on cardiomediastinal silhouette, consolidation, and pneumothorax.","Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of findings in frontal and lateral chest images, with attention to cardiomediastinal silhouette, consolidation, and pneumothorax. The level of activation indicates importance in determining new or changed findings upon comparison to prior images, particularly examining cardiopulmonary issues.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.475,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2320,latent_2320,3159,0.006318,0.0084458245,5.8957076,Requests to compare current with prior imaging results.,"The examples with high activations consistently involve instructions or request prompts to provide a comparison of current images with prior ones and often reference frontal and lateral chest views, specifically indicating dates, techniques, or patient indications, suggesting a structured diagnostic outcome based on comparison with prior imaging.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5296743697478992,0.5477386934673367,0.5323741007194245,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+2321,latent_2321,55387,0.110774,0.06570258,8.305352,Significant interval changes between current and prior radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe findings that reflect the resolution or emergence of parenchymal opacities, effusions, or other changes between the current and prior imaging studies. The common theme here is the explicit commentary on interval changes in the pleural space, lungs, or associated structures based on these comparisons, such as resolution of pneumonia or emergence of an effusion. Descriptions are oriented around comparative assessments of these pathologies, notably differences between past and current imaging.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6323529411764706,0.67,0.4320987654320987,0.6363636363636364,55.0,145.0
+2322,latent_2322,4308,0.008616,0.007820614,6.9358406,Persistent low lung volumes or stable opacities on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings such as low lung volumes or opacities in the lung bases that appear unchanged or analogous to previous imaging studies. The consistent terminology suggests an established pattern of identifying stable or unchanged opacities, often reflective of conditions like atelectasis, as a representative finding.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5205479452054794,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2323,latent_2323,2532,0.005064,0.0075306008,7.8020735,Low lung volumes affecting image interpretation.,"These examples frequently reference features relating to lung volumes being low, which often leads to diagnostic challenges including obscured cardiac silhouettes and accentuated appearances of the heart or mediastinum, generally presenting a pattern observed in AP-view chest radiography reports where lungs appear under-inflated due to patient positioning or technique.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4835164835164834,0.53,0.575,0.23,100.0,100.0
+2324,latent_2324,11943,0.023886,0.013052055,5.380829,High activation linked to absence of prior comparison images.,"The examples with high activation describe situations where no prior images or reports are available for direct comparison, rather than cases where comparison is made but findings are unchanged. In these instances, there's an emphasis on assessment without direct comparison to a baseline, which shows the required detailed individual examination might be linked to higher activation levels.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.2916666666666667,0.4444444444444444,63.0,137.0
+2325,latent_2325,21254,0.042508,0.025190484,5.4462237,"Repeated use of ""again noted"" for unchanged or persistent findings.","The phrase ""again noted"" frequently appears in these examples, indicating the presence of a condition or characteristic already noted in prior examinations. This suggests the theme of identifying unchanged observations in comparison to earlier studies, emphasizing stability or persistent findings across time points.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4658213730151742,0.545,0.6956521739130435,0.16,100.0,100.0
+2326,latent_2326,4352,0.008704,0.009462306,5.518026,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2327,latent_2327,6160,0.01232,0.010865848,5.1375356,Frequent use of comparison with prior radiological findings.,"Analyzing prior reports or images for comparison is crucial in radiology to determine stability, progression, or resolution of findings. This set of examples consistently includes references to such comparisons, often noting changes or stability of the findings, using terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4728756092392456,0.4974874371859296,0.4965034965034965,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+2328,latent_2328,15204,0.030408,0.01777259,5.9893517,Changes in tube or catheter placements compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations include descriptions detailing changes in tube or catheter positions between the current and prior images. Such details may include new placements, removals, or remaining positions of medical devices like chest tubes or central lines, indicating significant interval changes.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5544022437157611,0.575,0.631578947368421,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2329,latent_2329,4596,0.009192,0.009962447,5.439456,Minimal context with imaging and multiple views without historical comparison.,"A common theme among the higher activation examples is the rapport between images obtained and comparison with prior imagery, particularly with mention of multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) but without comparison to historical studies, in scenarios where context (indications, technique) is missing, minimal, or preferably indicated.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2330,latent_2330,8880,0.01776,0.01008837,5.5212784,Detection of significant changes in imaging findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve notable changes in radiological findings over time, particularly changes indicative of a disease process or condition progression, such as consolidations, pleural effusions, nodules, or opacifications. This suggests that the pattern the model is sensitive to involves identifying tangible changes in imaging findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4727272727272727,0.26,100.0,100.0
+2331,latent_2331,3605,0.00721,0.011145187,6.093202,Reports emphasize interval changes and comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on changes over time using comparisons between current and prior imaging studies to assess interval changes, particularly in the context of specific patient conditions or treatment statuses. High activations correspond to reports with detailed changes in pathology or treatment status, primarily referencing previous states of tubes, catheters, or lung pathology in comparison to earlier scans.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2332,latent_2332,41326,0.082652,0.053045474,4.9023614,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizes interval changes or removal of devices.,"High activation samples consistently involve comparison to prior imaging, highlighting interval changes, stability, or removal of medical devices such as chest tubes or catheters. The focus is on describing either improvements, removal of devices, or unchanged pathology.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2333,latent_2333,7932,0.015864,0.008899304,3.9481075,Presence and assessment of pleural effusions in chest imaging.,"Many examples highlight either bilateral or unilateral pleural effusions found in the chest imaging. These reports frequently note the presence, size, and stability of pleural effusions, often in association with other lung or cardiac conditions, making them notable and recurrent findings in these samples.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6547842401500938,0.655,0.6476190476190476,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2334,latent_2334,8529,0.017058,0.0108401915,8.190077,Low lung volumes causing bronchovascular crowding.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention 'low lung volumes' leading to 'crowding of bronchovascular structures.' This is a specific observation often noted due to inadequate inspiration during imaging, which might lead to misinterpretation of cardiac or pulmonary conditions.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6830048745476839,0.735,0.6111111111111112,0.5076923076923077,65.0,135.0
+2335,latent_2335,2683,0.005366,0.009639464,5.3767323,"References indicating changes or stasis in cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, or thoracic pathology in imaging comparisons.","The highly activated examples (activation 6.0 and above) consistently reference evidence of cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, or thoracic pathology seen or unchanged since prior imaging, even when comparison complexities like unchanged devices or silhouette enlargement are present. These particular aspects seem to trigger strong activation.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2336,latent_2336,13150,0.0263,0.031708688,6.8591723,Radiological comparisons indicating stability or change in findings.,"The examples consistently describe comparisons between the current and prior radiographs, identifying either resolution or persistence of specific findings. They often detail the presence, change, or stability of pathologies like pleural effusions, opacities, or device placements, using phrases like 'as compared to previous', 'no relevant change', 'similar position', and 'minimal improvement'. These phrases highlight whether changes have occurred relative to past images.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2337,latent_2337,4979,0.009958,0.01524908,4.839426,Prompt asks for comparison to prior frontal image.,"The highly activating examples consistently contain the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.', indicating a shifting focus from detailed observational findings to concise comparative analysis with prior images.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5697297297297298,0.5979899497487438,0.5666666666666667,0.85,100.0,99.0
+2338,latent_2338,5234,0.010468,0.010516831,4.581336,Requests for descriptive comparison between current and prior images.,"The majority of the high activation examples explicitly involve instructions or prompts about comparing findings to a prior image, and many demand a verbal description of the comparison for an assistant or audience. These requests for an actual narrative or description form a distinct pattern focusing on human interpretation or verbalization of differences.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4800509337860781,0.51,0.5067567567567568,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2339,latent_2339,15222,0.030444,0.021251034,4.167686,Active directive to compare current with prior images and report interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include a directive to actively compare new radiological findings with previous images, typically through explicit instructions or questions about interval changes or findings. This suggests focused analysis of interval changes or stability and providing clear descriptions in comparison to prior imaging.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.4298245614035088,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2340,latent_2340,5623,0.011246,0.020120546,4.2008824,Abnormalities or changes assessed against prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations involve situations where abnormalities or changes are explicitly compared with prior imaging studies, allowing assessment of progression or stability over time. Language indicative of interval changes or direct comparison with previous studies exemplifies this pattern.",0.4405919661733615,0.4489795918367347,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2341,latent_2341,4627,0.009254,0.008132063,5.6807094,"Description of interval changes in findings between current and prior images, specifically regarding cardiopulmonary conditions.","Examples with high activation mention changes that occurred between the current and prior image related to respiratory failure or pneumonia-like conditions, using comparison language. These examples highlight interval changes in the condition or appearance of the lungs, cardiac silhouette, or other notable radiological features between current and previous images.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4634146341463415,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2342,latent_2342,7972,0.015944,0.020523913,3.6349914,Detailed prior image comparisons highlighting unchanged conditions.,"Higher activation levels correspond to detailed observations regarding the stability or changes in findings when comparing current images with prior ones, especially when these comparisons point out similarities such as stable conditions or unchanged findings. These descriptions often highlight unchanged devices, positionings, or pre-existing conditions in comparison reports.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4403970013726111,0.47,0.4444444444444444,0.24,100.0,100.0
+2343,latent_2343,5662,0.011324,0.008558065,5.528938,Focus on changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"These examples have higher activations when findings are discussed in the context of being compared or unchanged relative to prior images, particularly in identifying changes or lack of change. The emphasis is on stability or change in findings compared to previous images, often indicating a disease progression or response to treatment, which is important in radiological assessments.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2344,latent_2344,6892,0.013784,0.014275404,3.739401,Direct comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"Examples with higher activation all demonstrate phrases like 'As compared to', 'compared to', or 'no significant interval change', showcasing direct or indirect comparison between the current and prior radiological images, whereas others lack this comparative context or directly compare findings without a defined prior report or comparison.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4729434981304528,0.4874371859296482,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,99.0
+2345,latent_2345,18808,0.037616,0.016752174,3.5772748,Comparison using current and prior frontal images.,"Examples with high activation levels mention the use of both current and prior frontal images for comparison, indicating a focus on assessing radiological change over time within the same view or context, compared to those without specific time-based comparatives or where both lateral and frontal are current.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2346,latent_2346,38434,0.076868,0.03531109,3.2398076,Detection of interval changes in imaging findings over time.,"The pattern is related to highlighting significant changes in imaging findings over time, such as interval changes, worsening, or unchanged conditions. High activation examples include discussions of specific temporal changes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6138613861386139,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2347,latent_2347,4864,0.009728,0.009817014,4.782682,Prompt format involving current and prior image comparison with placeholders.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve a format of input prompts specifying current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal image analyses, often with placeholders for certain details. These prompts prioritize the elemental format involving comparison with prior images but lack specific comparative findings due to missing reports or limited placeholders.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4590695997115038,0.55,0.5274725274725275,0.96,100.0,100.0
+2348,latent_2348,9901,0.019802,0.016301619,7.5438566,Analysis emphasizes comparison with prior images for changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include references to comparing the current findings with prior images to check for changes, particularly focusing on changes in opacities, effusions, or devices, suggesting these phrases or patterns trigger the intended activation.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2349,latent_2349,18048,0.036096,0.02641349,5.4385266,Emphasis on changes in the condition over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate a pattern of reference to changes over time in specific aspects of a patient's condition, often highlighting progression or stability compared to prior imaging. These changes are explicitly noted in the findings or impression sections of the radiology reports.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4660474716202271,0.4773869346733668,0.4806201550387597,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+2350,latent_2350,3404,0.006808,0.008335762,6.0254974,Requests to describe findings in comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels all request a comparison between current and prior images, indicating a need to evaluate changes over time. This is especially emphasized by prompts explicitly asking for ""a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" This request for temporal comparison is consistent across the examples with the highest activations, suggesting this phrase or request pattern is key to the observed activation.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2351,latent_2351,4530,0.00906,0.009956654,6.0951214,Presence and positioning of medical tubes or lines in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involved the presence and positioning of tubes, catheters, or lines such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, Swan-Ganz catheters, or central lines, with emphasis on their placement, either confirming stability or noting changes. These reports capture real-world clinical concerns of proper medical device placement over the course of patient care and are detailed in their comparison to prior images to ensure medical device positioning remains correct and safe.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6932746700188561,0.695,0.7294117647058823,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2352,latent_2352,10832,0.021664,0.012498457,7.2077775,Continuation prompts emphasizing comparative analysis between imaging studies.,"Examples with increased activation all involve continuation prompts requiring detailed comparative analysis between previous and current imaging findings. This setup seems to guide the assistant to form a comprehensive comparison, suggestive of training or modeling biases towards generating summary outputs.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4025974025974026,0.8157894736842105,76.0,124.0
+2353,latent_2353,5396,0.010792,0.00850281,8.946209,Normal findings in cardiopulmonary and mediastinal evaluations.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently mention clear or unremarkable lungs, cardiomediastinal silhouette within normal limits, and clear findings without pathological abnormalities. In particular, several mention no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, indicating a pattern of identifying normalcy or stability in cardiopulmonary structures.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.4672897196261682,0.7352941176470589,68.0,132.0
+2354,latent_2354,4769,0.009538,0.009289643,5.1366644,Presence of frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activations specifically involve the presence of both frontal and lateral chest images along with references to prior images. This indicates the focus is likely on a comprehensive comparative analysis in the context of radiology, where full image sets are reviewed for detailed comparison against previous studies, often to assess the presence or progression of a condition.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4835164835164834,0.53,0.51875,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2355,latent_2355,4272,0.008544,0.009405282,4.7762384,Direct comparison of current radiological findings with prior reports.,"The examples that show high activation are those which involve direct comparisons between current and previous radiological findings, indicating developments or stabilizations in findings specifically based on prior reports. This involves a deeper level of analysis and complexity in reporting findings compared to past results.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2356,latent_2356,18754,0.037508,0.031610843,5.9477015,"Comparative assessment focusing on interval changes or stability, despite categorization or technique variability.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on providing comparative assessments between current and prior images despite occasionally missing full prior associations, with emphasis on detecting changes or stability in clinical findings, both subtle and explicit, such as minor interval changes or condition stability, and often irrespective of any unusual categorizations or exceptional techniques potentially influencing image quality.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4216720779220779,0.43,0.4435483870967742,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2357,latent_2357,8490,0.01698,0.011090662,7.672508,Changes or monitoring in the position of tubes or catheters compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss interval changes on imaging, particularly focusing on the placement or positioning of tubes (such as pleural or Dobbhoff tubes) and how these positions or the associated findings have changed since prior imaging, suggesting an emphasis on tracking changes in patient management or condition.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5518339426819201,0.62,0.46,0.3194444444444444,72.0,128.0
+2358,latent_2358,5032,0.010064,0.011114461,3.5813305,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in imaging comparisons.,"These highly activated examples seem to focus on detailed, explicit imaging comparisons described within the reports, where specific interval changes or stabilities are noted between current and prior images.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.4,0.3,100.0,100.0
+2359,latent_2359,5540,0.01108,0.010373743,5.4662366,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in comparative imaging.,"Higher activations are linked to radiology cases repeatedly noting stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, signaling these aspects remain unchanged across comparative studies, even when other factors vary such as heart size or lung condition.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5135135135135135,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2360,latent_2360,10350,0.0207,0.013019777,3.6487489,Inclusion of 'prior report' content addressing historical findings.,"Examples with higher activations involve the use of 'prior report' content provided as context, where historical information or previously noted conditions in the radiology report are being particularly addressed. This suggests the model's activation is influenced by the presence of prior findings explicitly noted in relation to current images and findings for comparative analysis.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.498663101604278,0.55,0.5304878048780488,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2361,latent_2361,13809,0.027618,0.011893249,3.8155818,Evaluation or description related to comparison with a prior image.,Examples with an activation level higher than zero consistently include references for evaluation or comparison between a current and prior frontal image or some explicit request to provide findings in comparison to a prior image. This indicates that the pattern of interest is related to comparing current radiology findings to previous imaging for changes or stability.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2362,latent_2362,4589,0.009178,0.009816912,4.2753563,Description of findings relative to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference prior image comparisons explicitly, suggesting that the main focus is on describing findings in comparison to previous imaging exams. This approach aligns with typical radiology workflows where interval changes are assessed by comparing to prior studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2363,latent_2363,4819,0.009638,0.01606075,4.2036166,Specific instruction to compare current with prior images.,"Prompts with a high activation level contain specific instructions related to comparing current and prior images to note changes such as pulmonary edema or condition progression. There is a consistent use of specific phrases referring to comparison and discrete events related to the prior image or conditions, which is less specific in low-activation examples.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5555555555555556,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2364,latent_2364,3552,0.007104,0.012616531,4.9493413,"Detailed descriptions from current and prior images, highlighting clinical changes or persistent findings.","Examples with higher activations primarily focus on providing descriptions from given images, detailing abnormalities or notable findings. The purpose is to evaluate changes or persistent features from previous images, indicating a clinical process or event. Examples with lower activations are focused just on standard or unchanged observations, lack of details or comparisons.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4566929133858268,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2365,latent_2365,12155,0.02431,0.014676538,7.6334066,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve explicit comparison to previous X-rays or CT scans, particularly noting stable, unchanged, or minimal changes in lesions, tubes, or opacities, reflecting a pattern of monitoring or tracking medical conditions over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.3595505617977528,0.463768115942029,69.0,131.0
+2366,latent_2366,1639,0.003278,0.0059421365,8.576962,"Detailed comparison of current and prior images, often stating stable or unchanged findings.","Examples with low activation often have clear findings like 'normal contours' or 'lungs clear' but lack descriptions of specific abnormal findings or comparisons that would imply change. In contrast, descriptions characterized by more detailed evaluation procedures, such as comparing the current image to a prior one or specifically stating stable or unchanged pathology, show higher activation since the task focuses on detecting and describing these comparisons and changes over time.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2367,latent_2367,71348,0.142696,0.066834,3.0460114,Persistent or unchanged findings on comparison with prior images.,"Examples with activation levels above 2.0 often have specific mentions of findings being evaluated through comparison with prior images or show persistent or unchanged conditions, albeit not always directly comparing specific cases. These examples emphasize stability or changes in clinical context over time, especially when evaluating technical procedural details or pathologic features within a similar imaging context.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2368,latent_2368,5702,0.011404,0.008087736,5.9904428,Detailed changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Activations indicate a pattern relating to descriptions that involve specific comparisons to previous imaging studies, particularly cases where detailed changes from prior findings are noted, suggesting progression or stability of imaging findings seen. These are articulated clearly with terms regarding changes since prior exams, such as 'increased', 'redemonstrated', 'unchanged', or 'compared to prior'.",0.4041928721174004,0.4081632653061224,0.4,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4731182795698925,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2369,latent_2369,46072,0.092144,0.048268624,3.969424,Reports emphasize interval changes or temporal evolution.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve findings that denote changes over time, including the presence or progression of certain conditions or devices, compared to prior imagery. This pattern is most evident in reports that describe interval changes and suggest follow-up actions based on observed differences, emphasizing temporal evolution.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6294266551841123,0.645,0.6028368794326241,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2370,latent_2370,6611,0.013222,0.012416175,6.4664135,Focus on medical device positioning on frontal chest images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on findings related to the positioning or changes in medical devices (e.g., tubes) on frontal chest images, particularly in ICU settings, while lower activation examples often lack this focus.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.609375,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2371,latent_2371,4379,0.008758,0.007792291,4.135586,Descriptions focused on comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples predominantly involve descriptions that include references to comparisons with prior imaging studies, especially in assessing changes in medical devices (catheters, tubes) or existing conditions (like masses or effusions). The comparison across time helps assess stability or progression, using language indicating no interval change or minor changes in position or size, which is a common practice in radiology.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2372,latent_2372,3051,0.006102,0.007119372,4.565356,Instruction to compare current imaging to prior imaging findings.,"These examples frequently instruct the assistant to provide findings from a current image, comparing it specifically to a prior image, and focus heavily on comparisons between current and past imaging. The presence of a 'comparison' with prior studies and the directive to describe findings builds this pattern.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2373,latent_2373,5788,0.011576,0.010328131,6.598199,"Comparison of current radiographs with prior ones, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activations consistently involve comparisons of radiographic findings across multiple time points, especially instances that clearly note either unchanged or interval changes relative to prior imaging. These findings often involve evaluation of treatment progress, complication resolution, or the assessment of inserted medical devices.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5470085470085471,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2374,latent_2374,3044,0.006088,0.007737013,4.8489356,Unchanged findings across imaging studies.,"These examples often include direct comparison to previous imaging studies in the findings and impressions sections, yet the activation levels appear random. The most representative examples for higher activation often include specific details about unchanged elements across subsequent observations, suggesting a pattern related to stability or minor changes noted across subsequent observations.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4129487012139407,0.4321608040201005,0.390625,0.2525252525252525,99.0,100.0
+2375,latent_2375,3431,0.006862,0.008911018,3.7135746,Direct request to compare current image findings with prior ones.,The highly activated examples focus on providing descriptions explicitly comparing the findings from the current image to those from prior images without requiring an assistant's interpretation. These examples often use direct prompts to compare relative changes between images.,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4895104895104895,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2376,latent_2376,38039,0.076078,0.057619598,7.8611355,"High activation when reports mention comparison to prior images, regardless of detailed comparative findings.","The pattern indicates that the model activates in response to descriptions where a current image is being compared to a prior image with explicit mentions of findings, despite often missing critical details or comparisons labeled as 'N/A'. The descriptions that explicitly state being compared, even if detailed comparison data is absent, still trigger high activations.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.431162175100673,0.495,0.497005988023952,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2377,latent_2377,3605,0.00721,0.012027241,6.781433,Explicit evaluation requests or indications in the report.,"The pattern is predominantly characterized by the presence of a prior report indication and explicit comparison wherein a specific condition or status is noted, aligned with terms like ""eval for"", ""evaluate for"", or ""please eval for"", in combination with specific exam indications.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.5308641975308642,0.86,100.0,100.0
+2378,latent_2378,11787,0.023574,0.016520258,3.887604,"Significance of comparison with prior images focusing on cardiac or lung features, tubes, or catheters.","These examples consistently involve radiology reports comparing current findings to prior images with specific focus on cardiac or lung features, usually indicating slight changes or stability of opacities, effusions or structural details like torsion. Notably, there's mention of devices (tubes, catheters) with attention to their unchanged or adjusted positions over time. Activation highlights scenarios where previous reports are accorded substantial focus regarding interpretation of change.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2379,latent_2379,4744,0.009488,0.011758775,4.1240134,"Comparison between current and prior imaging, especially with multiple views indicated.","The examples that triggered high activation involve a comparison between current and prior imaging, explicitly requiring identification of changes or stability. This process often involves comparing findings across different views (frontal and lateral) or across different temporal instances (current vs prior). The pattern being activated likely centers around the complexity of the comparison task when multiple views are involved.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4175824175824176,0.47,0.48125,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2380,latent_2380,26219,0.052438,0.025604857,4.9554453,Focus on subtle or interval changes noted over time in imaging.,"Examples with higher activations highlight subtle or subtle-noted changes in radiographical comparisons over time, especially related to specific intervals like 'worsened', 'increased', or 'not improved'. These examples emphasize dynamics in findings comparing old and new imaging.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.5692307692307692,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2381,latent_2381,10503,0.021006,0.013403975,6.3297796,Evaluation of interval changes between current and prior images.,"These examples consistently reference evaluation for interval changes between current and prior radiographic images, using specific descriptors to document stability or improvement in positioning or pathology, indicating a pattern where tracking changes over time is a critical aspect of the assessments.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6068255091609656,0.625,0.5874125874125874,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2382,latent_2382,20116,0.040232,0.01788551,2.4110339,Focus on unchanged findings in interval imaging comparisons.,"The pattern in these examples involves descriptions that refer to unchanged findings over time when comparing current imaging with previous studies. Examples with high activation focus on unchanged conditions or intervals of stable appearance, especially involving specific features like organ contours or medical devices.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5714285714285714,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2383,latent_2383,3883,0.007766,0.009195577,5.043253,Stable or unchanged findings in chest radiographs.,"This pattern highlights the absence of significant findings or changes in chest radiographs/images, emphasizing stability compared to prior studies with no acute issues detected. The language often includes terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'no focal consolidation', 'no pleural effusion', and similar expressions indicating normalcy or minor, insignificant findings in the imaging.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3698609083224468,0.385,0.3333333333333333,0.23,100.0,100.0
+2384,latent_2384,5959,0.011918,0.012049145,6.7927313,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation consistently include descriptions of current images being compared to prior images, focusing on changes such as stable existing conditions, or highlighting changes specifically referred to in connection with a prior report or a known history. They often mention 'unchanged', 'stable', and interpretations made against a history of prior conditions or findings.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4230769230769231,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2385,latent_2385,5623,0.011246,0.011986067,4.1659274,Limited comparison capability due to inadequate prior comparison or image limitation.,"The pattern in these examples involves a lack of sufficient and direct comparison or the difficulty in finding changes due to limitations in image view, opacities, or previous comparison history. These issues may hinder a clear assessment of changes from previous images, indicating a challenge in providing comprehensive interpretations of the findings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4763814616755793,0.53,0.5182926829268293,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2386,latent_2386,2684,0.005368,0.0062212306,4.8303103,Mention of no prior images for comparison results in high activation.,"When there is a direct comparison to prior imaging or explicit mention of no prior images available, the activation is high. The presence of the phrase 'comparison: none' or similar phrases denoting the absence of prior imaging leads to a higher activation score, indicating the focus is on current findings without historical context.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6153846153846154,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2387,latent_2387,2772,0.005544,0.0032732312,4.1886234,Detailed comparison with prior images noting consistent or changed findings.,"The samples with high activation refer to thorough comparisons between current and prior images to assess changes or consistency in the findings, often in relation to medical devices or specific conditions like atelectasis or fluid levels. These are followed by structured impressions summarizing these comparisons.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5344827586206896,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2388,latent_2388,6379,0.012758,0.014373963,6.7108536,Comparison with prior studies noting stability or change.,"The activation levels are high when there is an explicit mention of a radiological finding compared to a prior examination, especially when changes or stability in findings are described. This involves reports that effectively compare the current imaging with one or more prior studies, noting specific changes or confirmations of stability.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4125178880771258,0.415,0.4022988505747126,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2389,latent_2389,5076,0.010152,0.011327364,5.3709702,Reference to prior reports or examinations.,"The examples with high activations consistently refer to the existence of prior reports or examinations, signifying a historical context for the current observation. This emphasizes the model's sensitivity to language structures that involve previous data comparisons as part of the medical examination process.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4140625,0.49,0.4941860465116279,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2390,latent_2390,24696,0.049392,0.03162732,6.077536,Presence of stable medical devices or findings across imaging comparisons.,"Examples are more representative when complex medical devices or findings have consistent positioning, with minimal or no significant changes between current and previous imaging. The descriptions highlight persistence or stable positioning of objects like tubes or catheters, reflecting checked stability of known conditions or post-surgical states.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2391,latent_2391,12878,0.025756,0.012891893,4.6541314,Interval changes in device placement or pleural effusions on chest radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve instances where there is an interval change or placement of devices, such as tubes or catheters, as well as changes in pleural effusions or lung conditions, with specific intervals or actions noted for comparison to previous imaging.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6634026927784578,0.67,0.7361111111111112,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2392,latent_2392,6456,0.012912,0.0093976585,4.946865,Reports with detailed change descriptions between current and previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, often indicating new or changing findings related to pathology (pleural effusion, opacities, cardiomegaly, etc.). This pattern shows the model's focus on comparative and change detection aspects in radiology reports.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5697674418604651,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2393,latent_2393,1766,0.003532,0.00912366,8.731414,"Multiple image views analyzed, including frontal, lateral, and prior images.","These examples predominantly refer to simultaneous analysis of current and prior images, comparing current frontal and lateral images with previous imaging to assess interval changes in findings. This emphasis on comparison is central to understanding progress or alteration in clinical status.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4779018941233608,0.57,0.5380434782608695,0.99,100.0,100.0
+2394,latent_2394,16226,0.032452,0.02221978,6.371977,Detailed findings comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings in relation to prior imaging studies, which may or may not include specific details about comparisons of conditions observed over time, such as 'unchanged', 'improvement', or 'stable'. The key factor is the emphasis on detailed comparison descriptions rather than just mention of 'comparison'.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.2692307692307692,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2395,latent_2395,3256,0.006512,0.011209379,6.0006137,Direct reference to 'PRIOR_REPORT' in radiology analysis.,"The consistent pattern in highly activated examples involves direct referencing of 'prior report' or comparison with prior imaging studies, as designated in the introduction lines where 'PRIOR_REPORT' or similar explicit reference to a previous report is highlighted.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5352586010480747,0.5879396984924623,0.5508982035928144,0.9292929292929292,99.0,100.0
+2396,latent_2396,3644,0.007288,0.0074250703,4.3905735,Analysis of current and prior frontal images in radiological studies.,"Examples with high activation levels include phrases and examinations that prominently feature comparisons with 'prior frontal images'. The distinct mention of analyzing both current and prior frontal benchmarks, especially in the context of lung and cardiac assessment, aligns these samples with the pattern being investigated.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4615747550720213,0.515,0.50920245398773,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2397,latent_2397,3852,0.007704,0.008596113,7.431298,"Detailed interval changes compared to prior images, often post-procedural.","These examples heavily involve the description and evaluation of findings in comparison to a prior image. The ones with higher activation focus on detailed and specific intervals or comparisons indicated for evaluating changes, especially related to intervals such as post-surgical or post-procedural changes, and the progress/new development of findings like opacities or effusions compared to multiple prior studies.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4925373134328358,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2398,latent_2398,2817,0.005634,0.008600276,8.399141,Presence of 'PREAMBLE' in radiology text.,"Examples with higher activation consistently contain the term 'PREAMBLE' as part of their text. This keyword seems to be a specific pattern of interest that is consistently highlighted in samples with elevated activation scores. Other reports don't feature this term, lending to a low activation score.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.568547082299644,0.6,0.717391304347826,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2399,latent_2399,4937,0.009874,0.01289485,5.863418,Stable findings compared to previous imaging.,"These examples often describe the presence of radiographic findings as being unchanged from prior imaging, emphasizing stability over time of various features, particularly when recent imaging or assessments are absent.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,100.0,100.0
+2400,latent_2400,7306,0.014612,0.013834634,3.3599079,Detailed comparison of lung and cardiac changes with prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation discuss interval changes, improvements, or comparisons in lung conditions regarding previous imaging, like pneumothorax adjustments, atelectasis evaluation, and pulmonary edema changes. These descriptions often involve reevaluation of conditions like cardiomegaly or vascular congestion based on a comparative analysis.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5685059054615953,0.5728643216080402,0.5583333333333333,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+2401,latent_2401,3060,0.00612,0.0070882034,4.3695803,Detailed radiological comparison between current and prior images.,"The high activation examples consistently emphasize detailed radiological comparisons with explicit findings when presented with current and prior medical images. This involves comparing specific anatomical structures or conditions for any changes or stability over time with references like unchanged contours, device positions, or specific pathologies.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.4424778761061947,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2402,latent_2402,4049,0.008098,0.009094011,8.12479,Mentions of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations specifically involve descriptions of interval changes that imply stable or unchanged findings when compared to previous images or reports. Key linguistic patterns in these activations include terms like 'unchanged', 'no change', 'remained stable', or 'remains' to signal comparison relative to prior findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5461627162075593,0.5527638190954773,0.5657894736842105,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+2403,latent_2403,6736,0.013472,0.011839299,5.375325,Focus on medical device placement or tube positioning.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference changes in medical instrumentation or tube placement, emphasizing the interval changes or stability in the position of these medical devices since the prior imaging study. Such details are crucial in clinical settings, where the accurate and timely placement of tubes and devices is imperative for patient care, hence the model's higher activation for these patterns.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2404,latent_2404,8272,0.016544,0.013380667,4.601138,Mild to moderate cardiomegaly on comparison imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve findings of mild to moderate cardiac enlargement (cardiomegaly) in comparison to previous images. This pattern is indicated by terms like 'mildly enlarged', 'stable enlargement', and 'moderate cardiomegaly' appearing in these comparison reports.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5334201388888888,0.57,0.6590909090909091,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2405,latent_2405,7273,0.014546,0.01989361,6.6102276,Explicit instructions for comparison with prior images without stating 'Comparison: None'.,"Activations are high when there are explicit instructions or prompts indicating direct comparison to prior studies, as seen in examples with 'comparison to prior frontal image' and lacking 'comparison: none'. This indicates that inclusion of comparative analysis language between current and prior images triggers higher activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2406,latent_2406,2659,0.005318,0.0056742635,5.873763,Stable or specific catheter/tube positioning in radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve detailed descriptions and positions of central venous catheters, ET tubes, or port-a-caths, typically referencing stable or specific placement positions such as the SVC or cavoatrial junction. These terms and details indicate a pattern of interest, likely because they help monitor and manage patient care.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5606060606060606,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2407,latent_2407,30514,0.061028,0.044694867,4.636523,Focus on interval change or stability in image comparison.,"Samples with higher activation levels involve explicit comparisons between current and prior images, highlighting interval changes or the lack thereof. They focus particularly on stability, resolution, or progression of conditions, usually indicating either reassurance or clinical stability of the condition noted.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6175523349436394,0.62,0.603448275862069,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2408,latent_2408,6047,0.012094,0.012233691,6.2991233,"Requests for comparison with prior images, regardless of presence of such images.","Higher activation levels correspond to instances where a current radiology study is being directly compared to a previous image for interval change, even if a prior image is unavailable or not used. The prompt ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" appears in these examples, suggesting repetitive requests for comparative analysis strongly influence activation.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4864864864864865,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2409,latent_2409,2867,0.005734,0.009762052,7.1195436,"Assessment of findings relative to prior imaging studies, noting stability or changes.","Examples with comparison to prior imaging studies often highlight changes over time, regardless of whether findings are constant or evolving. This involves assessing consistency in specific findings observed in sequential images, often cited as ""no change"" or ""interval improvement/worsening.""",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4444444444444444,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2410,latent_2410,4487,0.008974,0.010206543,4.252044,Low lung volumes causing bronchovascular crowding or accentuated cardiac silhouette.,These examples describe chest radiographs with observations of low lung volumes which lead to crowding of bronchovascular markings or exaggerated cardiac silhouette. This is a particular finding in radiograph interpretations that affects visual interpretations due to compromised lung inflation.,0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.491180461329715,0.55,0.65625,0.21,100.0,100.0
+2411,latent_2411,5990,0.01198,0.016890831,9.187192,Involvement of a prior frontal image for comparison.,"The examples that activate strongly all mention comparisons between a current frontal image and a prior frontal image. This suggests that the critical pattern involves assessment relative to prior imaging, which often happens in radiology to detect changes over time, although sometimes a comparison is not available, still indicating reference to comparison is the critical aspect.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4873417721518987,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2412,latent_2412,6195,0.01239,0.009400058,5.5302725,Comparison of lung findings between current and prior imaging for respiratory issues.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that include the evaluation of lung fields for pneumonia, edema, or pleural effusion in the context of dyspnea or shortness of breath, which involve detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings, typically highlighting changes in opacities or effusions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4678899082568807,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2413,latent_2413,8217,0.016434,0.014581146,6.6540623,Use of 'PRIOR_REPORT' to indicate comparison with previous findings.,"The examples with high activations use 'PRIOR_REPORT' in their text, suggesting it marks cases where the description of findings is linked to or compared against findings from a previous report, making it pertinent for longitudinal evaluation of changes in patient conditions as indicated in their history or indication for imaging.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.5578231292517006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2414,latent_2414,11311,0.022622,0.013865104,3.3824492,Significant change or stability in findings relative to prior imaging.,"The highly activated reports feature a detailed comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing significant changes or stability in findings. These examples suggest that the model identifies a pattern where analysis focuses not only on the presence of findings but their evolution over time relative to previous images.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5376767676767678,0.5376884422110553,0.5408163265306123,0.53,100.0,99.0
+2415,latent_2415,10311,0.020622,0.015100093,6.38133,Findings noted as stable or changed compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation scores consistently involve detailed comparisons with previous imaging studies, focusing on stability or changes in pathological findings across different exams. This pattern is consistent with tracking medical conditions over time, implying the importance of longitudinal assessment in radiology.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5999738937475525,0.6130653266331658,0.5808823529411765,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+2416,latent_2416,22274,0.044548,0.03618885,10.517975,Detailed descriptive comparisons of interval changes on repeat radiographic studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels highlight the pattern of providing detailed differential comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, focusing on specific changes or the lack thereof in cardiopulmonary structures or pathologies (e.g., tube placements, cardiomediastinal stability).",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4963570825983587,0.5025125628140703,0.3421052631578947,0.6190476190476191,63.0,136.0
+2417,latent_2417,3378,0.006756,0.006764625,4.432723,Comparisons of changes in thoracic radiological findings over time.,"These examples all involve the reporting and comparison of radiological findings specifically between a current and prior study. They emphasize changes over time in pleural effusions, lung edema, cardiac silhouette, and other thoracic structures. When these examples note comparisons, they emphasize changes like enlargement of structures, new opacities, and similar trends over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2418,latent_2418,35157,0.070314,0.028523669,2.5040123,Inconsistent patterns in radiology comparisons and findings.,"The low activation levels suggest the model does not detect a significant pattern across these examples. Each entry is focused on detailed findings and comparisons related to prior images yet lacks a consistent, recognizable pattern or diagnostic focus, leading to an overall diffused pattern of findings across examples.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5157232704402516,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2419,latent_2419,3605,0.00721,0.008797028,5.525996,Evaluation of interval changes through comparison with prior images.,"High activation examples consistently involve assessments for interval changes identified by comparison with prior studies, specifically focusing on alterations like new opacities, unchanged effusions, or stable/unchanged findings over time, often indicating stability or monitoring of chronic conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2420,latent_2420,2434,0.004868,0.0060328874,7.2695637,Focus on positions of medical devices relative to anatomical landmarks in comparative evaluations.,"The examples with higher activations describe comparative evaluations focused predominantly on the positions of medical devices such as tubes and catheters across different images, often specifying their proximity to anatomical landmarks like the carina or diaphragm. These findings are relevant in ensuring correct device placement and are frequently described in radiological comparisons.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6384100226630338,0.645,0.6986301369863014,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2421,latent_2421,6896,0.013792,0.010400774,6.2777343,Findings described in reference to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the findings by comparing them to prior or previous images, often using explicit past image references or discussing changes from historical studies.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.5477707006369427,0.86,100.0,100.0
+2422,latent_2422,3196,0.006392,0.0073213414,4.89971,Comparisons of current imaging findings with prior reports assessing stability or changes.,"These examples exhibit a pattern where current imaging findings are compared to a prior report using explicit comparisons of specified features, often looking for stability, change, or new manifestations, frequently related to determining whether a particular condition has progressed, remained stable, or resolved.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2423,latent_2423,10364,0.020728,0.025706941,5.579987,Use of frontal and lateral image views for comparison in chest assessments.,"The pattern involves describing findings using multiple views of the chest, particularly both frontal and lateral images, and noting similarities or changes upon comparison with prior images or studies. This is a typical methodology in radiology to provide a comprehensive assessment of thoracic structures from different angles.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.5454545454545454,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2424,latent_2424,10122,0.020244,0.029386831,6.904436,Tasks involve multi-view comparison with prior frontal images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve a directive to ""provide a description of the findings...in comparison to the prior frontal image"" combined with the presence of both current frontal and lateral imaging alongside the prior frontal image. This implies that these examples require a thorough multi-view comparison with historical imaging, which requires a more comprehensive analysis, thus triggering higher activation levels.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2425,latent_2425,4457,0.008914,0.019155279,5.9515514,Dynamic adaptive image interpretation from prior reports.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to specific interpretations, interval changes, and stability findings from previous radiology reports concerning procedures, devices, or distinguishing features in both current and prior images. These examples prompt dynamically generated comparisons and findings based on existing medical context while providing adapted descriptions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2426,latent_2426,2802,0.005604,0.008879601,6.5175967,Absence of prior imaging for comparison.,"High activation levels are associated with reports lacking comparison to prior imaging. Many examples with high activation explicitly mention 'COMPARISON: None.' or do not reference prior images, suggesting the absence of comparison is the salient feature for this pattern.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2427,latent_2427,121158,0.242316,0.2194828,8.431061,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings that reference stable or unchanged appearances compared to prior imaging. These typically indicate chronic or non-progressive findings. This pattern reflects the importance placed on stability and comparison in radiology.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5945032665014642,0.595,0.6021505376344086,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2428,latent_2428,28898,0.057796,0.03284971,4.7782793,Evaluations highlighting stability or changes versus a prior report.,"The observed activation patterns suggest that the presence of a prior report and a specific focus on detailing changes or stability in comparison to a previous image influences the level of activation. Instances where stable conditions or unchanged findings in comparison to prior reports are noted tend to result in higher activation levels, possibly because of the clarity and emphasis on comparative evaluation.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4878048780487805,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2429,latent_2429,3835,0.00767,0.013753103,4.770195,Incomplete reports with placeholder text and minimal findings description.,"In the examples with higher activation levels, there is a notable lack of detailed description or identification of specific radiological findings, often using placeholder text (e.g., N/A) and incomplete phrases, emphasizing the absence or limited data in reports.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3866020984665052,0.525,0.5128205128205128,1.0,100.0,100.0
+2430,latent_2430,2584,0.005168,0.0058376165,4.451254,Presence of both frontal and lateral chest images analyzed.,"Cases with higher activation levels consistently involve reports that mention the presence of both frontal and lateral images, suggesting the pattern recognizes the comprehensive imaging approach in chest X-ray analysis when both views are available.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6136646291445054,0.635,0.5918367346938775,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2431,latent_2431,6354,0.012708,0.012644301,4.057128,"Description of current findings in relation to prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability.","The pattern in these examples arises when radiology studies describe the findings in comparison to prior studies, often indicating whether there is a change or not. Common phrases indicating such comparisons include 'unchanged from', 'similar to prior', 'no change', and 'compared to the prior'.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3908472479901051,0.3908629441624365,0.3861386138613861,0.4020618556701031,97.0,100.0
+2432,latent_2432,5830,0.01166,0.011030237,3.487493,Descriptions of interval changes based on comparison with prior radiologic studies.,"The examples exhibit descriptions of radiological findings in comparison with prior images, often noting stability or minor changes in pulmonary or cardiomediastinal features between current and previous examinations. Descriptions involve use of terms like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', or explicit comparison to prior dates, highlighting an emphasis on evaluating interval changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4245283018867924,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2433,latent_2433,4493,0.008986,0.01301698,4.009136,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2434,latent_2434,5964,0.011928,0.015268547,4.898889,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings that highlight a lack of significant or new abnormalities or changes since prior x-rays, specifically noting stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours. This pattern suggests a focus on confirming stability or the lack of acute processes, often in the context of providing reassurance in radiological interpretations.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.4347826086956521,0.2,100.0,100.0
+2435,latent_2435,3726,0.007452,0.011051349,7.1260133,Comparison of fluid collections over time in chest images.,Examples with high activation reference fluid collections (pleural effusions or pulmonary congestion) and assess their changes over time in radiographic reports. These findings highlight the significant aspect of respectively assessing these fluid-related pathologies in successive imaging studies.,0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,100.0,100.0
+2436,latent_2436,17733,0.035466,0.022779921,6.0340714,Direct comparisons or changes from multiple prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons or descriptions of changes based on multiple prior imaging studies, using explicit language like 'compared to', 'interim', and specific dates or examinations to highlight changes or stability.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5614035087719298,0.57,0.5546875,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2437,latent_2437,7723,0.015446,0.036766242,6.2572227,Request for comparison without available prior image.,These examples consistently ask for a description of current image findings compared to prior images but indicate that no comparison images are available. This pattern highlights the presence of expected comparative analysis in radiological evaluation but states the absence of a previous study to compare with.,0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6107080563209384,0.615,0.5950413223140496,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2438,latent_2438,2815,0.00563,0.009524786,5.986856,Focus on interval change or stability in comparison with prior imaging.,"The higher activation examples consistently include phrases such as 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'previous study', and 'comparison,' indicating the priority given to evaluating changes over time or in relation to previous imaging. This implies the model is triggered significantly by the context of ongoing assessment of radiological findings against a baseline or track record found in prior reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5555555555555556,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2439,latent_2439,3166,0.006332,0.0070522265,6.969741,Text prompts instruct model to compare current and prior radiological images.,"Each prompt begins with a directive to describe findings based on current and prior radiological images, highlighting the pattern of comparison being a core aspect of these prompts. The instructions repeatedly direct the assistant to analyze changes over time or stability of findings across images in various contexts, such as acute chest processes, pneumonia checks, or device placements.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4016410438697829,0.495,0.4972067039106145,0.89,100.0,100.0
+2440,latent_2440,12759,0.025518,0.015743842,5.020157,No prior imaging comparison available.,Examples where radiological findings are evaluated in absence of previous imaging references or often indicate 'no comparison' exhibit higher activations. It suggests a focus on generating thorough reviews with notable conditions despite limited or absent comparative analysis.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2441,latent_2441,4382,0.008764,0.007908799,5.534833,Stable findings when comparing current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels primarily involve a task description requesting a comparison between a current imaging study and a prior one, indicating stable or unchanged findings over time. They often include the term 'provide a description' specifically for comparison, even when certain parts are redacted or only outlines are based on the content present.",0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.6190476190476191,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4943820224719101,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2442,latent_2442,13107,0.026214,0.019166179,3.4624867,Formatted image descriptions as primary guide for findings comparison.,"The pattern corresponds to explicit utilization of provided image descriptions to deduce findings, which might include observations about lines, tubes, or anatomical structures from radiological images. However, crucially, this pattern illustrates the importance of framing findings within a detailed comparative context, reliant on multiple projections or views to confirm observations.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4842767295597484,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2443,latent_2443,7225,0.01445,0.008612749,5.8712025,"Focus on respiratory status changes, often involving dyspnea or low oxygen sats.","The higher activation examples emphasize findings related to changes of respiratory status, such as dyspnea or oxygen saturation issues, often involving terms like 'evaluate for', 'history of low oxygen sats', or assessing pulmonary hemorrhage. These descriptions suggest a focus on acute interventions or adjustments based on respiratory distress or management in radiology studies, thus driving activation.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.3859649122807017,0.2528735632183908,87.0,113.0
+2444,latent_2444,7143,0.014286,0.011939264,7.4138246,Comparison of device placement or lung infiltrate changes in radiology studies.,"The representative samples feature findings described in relation to a prior frontal image and concern situations where changes related to medical devices (like tubes or catheters) or specific infiltrates like pneumonia or nodular lung opacities are compared. High activation examples often mention positioning or changes of devices and infiltrates, while low activation examples focus on unchanged findings or have non-specific queries.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3894505054549094,0.39,0.3829787234042553,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2445,latent_2445,12744,0.025488,0.014835402,3.4329102,Comparison of current findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to include a clear 'comparison' statement indicating the findings in both current and prior images, essential for evaluating changes or stability over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2446,latent_2446,3355,0.00671,0.0069095003,5.7630744,Comparison of findings with prior imaging studies indicating interval change or stability.,"High-activation examples involve comparison with prior imaging studies, showing changes or stability over time, often following interventions or underlying conditions, whereas low-activation examples lack such context or detail.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4199419941994199,0.42,0.4215686274509804,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2447,latent_2447,18525,0.03705,0.021005128,3.35474,Detailed comparative findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involved detailed comparative findings from current and prior imaging studies, highlighting new or worsening conditions such as opacities, effusions, or other structural changes in radiology reports.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2448,latent_2448,21276,0.042552,0.021846348,4.8025303,"Descriptions of pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or vascular congestion.","Samples with high activation levels consistently describe findings of pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or pulmonary vascular congestion. These are indicative of potential fluid collection in the pleural space, either directly due to effusions or indirectly as a result of pulmonary issues such as edema or vascular congestion.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.64024220313648,0.645,0.6883116883116883,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2449,latent_2449,7322,0.014644,0.011383903,5.4905605,Influence of prior imaging and external factors on current interpretation.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe the findings in relation to prior imaging, focusing on changes in presentation, but importantly highlight comparisons where clinical interpretation is influenced by external factors or evaluations beyond the images themselves, such as the presence of specific medical devices (e.g., PICC lines) or suggestions for further procedural assessments, indicating comprehensive evaluations.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3910845588235294,0.47,0.4825581395348837,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2450,latent_2450,26420,0.05284,0.03379548,7.2545323,Evaluation or status of medical devices in chest imaging.,"Reports with higher activation often involve the presence, evaluation, or changes in the placement or status of medical devices (e.g., pacemaker or catheter) visible in chest imaging studies, and their comparison with previous images or studies.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6854707792207793,0.69,0.5377358490566038,0.8142857142857143,70.0,130.0
+2451,latent_2451,4582,0.009164,0.009844504,6.6951394,Detailed technical description and assessment of radiologic technique adequacy.,"Examples with non-zero activation feature consistent elements noted in the radiographs such as placement and stability of devices, cardiomediastinal silhouette assessments, and observations on the mediastinum or cardiac structure, but the determining feature appears to be the adequacy of the radiological technique or completeness of the description even in presence of minor findings like tortuosity or mild cardiomegaly.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4882755811289049,0.4924623115577889,0.4915254237288136,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+2452,latent_2452,4721,0.009442,0.010127296,5.5324283,Tasks requiring comparison with prior imaging for unchanged findings or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels feature detailed comparisons to prior imagery, focusing on findings and results of comparisons (e.g., 'no change', 'unchanged', 'similar to prior'). They often include explicit requests or tasks to compare current findings with previous imaging studies or reports, signifying the importance of recognizing unchanged conditions or stable features across exams.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5087719298245614,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2453,latent_2453,23146,0.046292,0.028732464,4.864148,Specific interval changes or stability noted between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently compare findings from current and previous imaging studies, indicating interval changes or stability between them. The directive ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"" appears in all examples, but actual direct comparisons (i.e., specific mention of changes or stability) are more frequent in those with higher activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2454,latent_2454,10762,0.021524,0.011716838,4.081908,Focus on stability and unchanged findings compared to previous radiographs.,"The selected examples highly rated for activation consistently describe radiological findings using comparative language, noting 'no significant change' or stable findings compared to prior images, alongside ensuring cardiopulmonary silhouettes or parameters are mentioned as normal or unchanged. This emphasis on stability and normalcy, despite being provided in a comparative context, is a key feature of highly activated reports.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.3902439024390244,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2455,latent_2455,46139,0.092278,0.04679281,6.5165453,Comparison without explicit task instruction.,"Most examples with low activation levels have the assistant sections that compare observations with those from previous studies despite no such task being explicitly specified. High activation levels correspond to instructions requesting comparison or mentioning prior images without specific comparisons, ensuring a pattern focusing on finding changes related to past imaging for consistency.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.3900709219858156,0.7534246575342466,73.0,127.0
+2456,latent_2456,2705,0.00541,0.010375627,6.027544,Comparative description of radiology findings.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing a description of findings in radiology studies that incorporate or suggest a comparison between the current and prior images.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.456,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2457,latent_2457,3583,0.007166,0.00902773,5.9919157,Comparison of current radiological findings with prior studies.,"The high-activation examples repeatedly emphasize the comparison of current images with prior studies, a common practice in radiology to highlight any changes or stability over time. These comparisons include direct notes on previous findings or imaging dates and specific terminology related to changes observed since the prior evaluation.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2458,latent_2458,3288,0.006576,0.014130704,8.8241,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and absence of significant pathology.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and lack of acute changes, while noting the absence of significant pathology like consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. These findings suggest expectations of normalcy in routine checks where no acute disease processes are identified, especially when no prior comparison is available.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.606360316494218,0.6080402010050251,0.627906976744186,0.54,100.0,99.0
+2459,latent_2459,12569,0.025138,0.012468463,5.5301595,Heart size at upper limits of normal or mildly enlarged.,"Examples with higher activation involve the description of the heart size, specifically indicating it as being at the 'upper limits of normal' or 'mildly enlarged', often without significant change in prior studies. This pattern is consistently highlighted across multiple higher activation examples, indicating the model's focus on noting borderline or slightly enlarged heart size as a key finding for this pattern.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.539894512400404,0.59,0.490566037735849,0.3209876543209876,81.0,119.0
+2460,latent_2460,7858,0.015716,0.01187187,8.009063,Adjustment or positioning of medical lines and tubes in images.,"The samples with higher activations often involve discussions around the presence, functionality, or adjustments of medical lines and tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and central venous catheters, which are frequently noted or adjusted between imaging sessions.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5757575757575758,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2461,latent_2461,5922,0.011844,0.017551675,7.063861,"Detailed comparison to previous imaging results, often mentioning devices or specific anatomical changes.","The pattern involves providing a detailed comparison of current imaging findings against those of prior images, with descriptive assessments often involving specific medical devices or pathological states, emphasizing 'comparison' as a distinct section. This is a standard approach in radiological evaluations, especially when monitoring for changes or stability in medical conditions or post-procedural states.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4330805178886079,0.445,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2462,latent_2462,5979,0.011958,0.011154462,8.32428,Pneumothorax presence or change in size.,"These examples focus on cases showing presence, change, or size of pneumothorax, often in relation to interventions like chest tube placement. Patients with pneumothorax or interventions for it, like chest tubes, are prominently discussed, with changes or no change in pneumothorax status compared to previous imaging.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6968004468203941,0.715,0.9215686274509804,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2463,latent_2463,30933,0.061866,0.028337695,3.9728844,Evaluation of current findings against prior imaging for changes or stabilities.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where the key element is the recognition of new or stable clinical findings when comparing current imaging results to previous studies. This pattern is indicative of the model's ability to identify developments or stabilities over time in a clinical context, thus focusing on assessing new or unchanged findings from a prior state.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2464,latent_2464,4176,0.008352,0.0125126615,4.6281533,Provide findings based on image comparison without prior report details.,"The examples with high activation levels all reference the task of providing a description of radiology findings by comparing the frontal image to a prior image or previous studies. They typically involve scenarios where no prior report is given, emphasizing a need for a comparative description on current reading alone.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5012531328320802,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+2465,latent_2465,6277,0.012554,0.013569601,5.482438,Inclusion of prior imaging comparison to assess interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature the presence of prior comparison imaging, which allows for an evaluation of changes over time. This is a key pattern as these reports specifically rely on temporal changes between current and past imaging findings, even when they state no changes have occurred. This contrasts with other examples where such comparison is not possible or not mentioned.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2466,latent_2466,6047,0.012094,0.01408509,5.5380554,Comparison indicating changes or stability in heart size or cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Examples that are activated have comparisons made with prior studies, specifically highlighting changes in the heart size or stability of cardiomediastinal silhouette amidst other findings. Examples with activation 0.0 often have no relevant past studies for comparison or focus on unchanged findings without highlighting differences in these specific areas.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4498074985142503,0.4623115577889447,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,99.0
+2467,latent_2467,4879,0.009758,0.0076166675,4.3175817,Detailed comparison of current imaging to prior studies noting stability or change.,"The pattern is the frequent reference to comparative descriptions of current imaging findings relative to previous studies. Almost all examples with high activation levels note specific comparisons, explicitly mentioning changes in findings or stability over time by using comparison points, such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or specifying change in a pathology. Examples with a lower activation often lack such comparative analysis.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2468,latent_2468,3569,0.007138,0.010501435,6.0371914,Comparison using both frontal and lateral chest images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention a frontal and lateral view of the chest image for comparison, indicating that having both views is crucial to understanding or detecting the pathology in context. This suggests the relevance of multi-view comparisons in assessing radiological changes or findings.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2469,latent_2469,3410,0.00682,0.011971159,4.87939,Omissions or placeholders in the comparison data.,"Highly activated examples lack explicit comparison dates and often feature placeholder brackets, suggesting missing or obscured dates in the data. However, they inherently depend on comparing current and prior images, which remains a consistent pattern in the dataset, but less explicit in comparison dates.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3784880771182141,0.51,0.5052083333333334,0.97,100.0,100.0
+2470,latent_2470,5287,0.010574,0.00908381,6.480492,Alterations in pathology or medical devices via comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples either demonstrate changes in medical devices, structural alterations like pleural effusions, atelectasis, pneumothorax, or cardiac growth over time. These alterations are noted through explicit comparison with prior imaging, an important feature to identify progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4016341923318667,0.405,0.417391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2471,latent_2471,11791,0.023582,0.012869214,4.230117,Detailed findings or impressions from comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"These entries where activation levels are higher frequently involve explicit mentions of detailed findings and clear impressions of the radiological images provided. This tends to occur more in entries where comparisons are drawn with prior images, leading to clear impressions or observations related to changes or stability over time. The compared-to feature and definitive impressions are key in these examples.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4646464646464646,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2472,latent_2472,30065,0.06013,0.049876716,8.519316,Detailed diagnostic comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with activation levels generally detail a more extensive comparison between current and prior imaging, discussing not just image findings but also evaluating changes in device placements, opacities, or anatomical structures over time, despite artifacts like image blurring or poor technique. This contextual comparison of changes reflects a nuanced analysis typical in follow-up or ongoing treatment evaluations.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2473,latent_2473,9099,0.018198,0.012435399,3.5969925,Evaluation or monitoring of medical device placement over time.,"Examples with high activation involve careful examination or placement observation of medical devices or tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, central venous lines, or support devices. These samples discuss changes or maintenance of these devices or tubes between current and prior imaging studies.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,100.0,100.0
+2474,latent_2474,7141,0.014282,0.008939716,4.530636,Medical device placement or procedural intervention.,"The instances with higher activation consistently involve scenarios of medical interventions such as changes in device positioning, new central line placements, pacemaker lead movements, or pleural effusions in procedural contexts, where these details are pertinent to the patient's clinical management and prognosis.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2475,latent_2475,11692,0.023384,0.015400725,5.3751497,Precise positioning or placement of medical devices in radiological reports.,"All examples with significant activation levels include references to the precise placement or position of medical devices, such as catheters, tubes, and lines in the body, indicating their presence or changes in position. This specific language pattern denotes attention to detailed device positioning in radiological reports, which is crucial for patient management.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8268325143325144,0.8291457286432161,0.7642276422764228,0.9494949494949496,99.0,100.0
+2476,latent_2476,1881,0.003762,0.005573826,8.474484,Comparison of current and prior frontal images with focus on changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a current frontal image that is explicitly compared to a prior frontal image, with an emphasis on observing differences or stability of medical conditions over time. The use of comparison and assessment of changes relative to previous imaging is a key factor.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2477,latent_2477,10956,0.021912,0.014718944,12.044521,Changes in pleural effusion and pulmonary edema compared to prior image.,"The pattern in highly activated examples focuses on findings of changes or stability in conditions related to pleural effusion and pulmonary edema. These findings often include new opacities, pleural effusions, and changes in pulmonary conditions when explicitly compared to prior images, indicating either progression or new developments.",0.5337995337995338,0.68,0.3333333333333333,0.2307692307692307,13.0,37.0,0.5282162946833605,0.74,0.1666666666666666,0.2916666666666667,24.0,176.0
+2478,latent_2478,3792,0.007584,0.0060509765,3.2586124,Presence of direct instructions to compare current image findings with prior images from multiple views.,"High activation is consistently associated with descriptions involving direct analysis or instruction to compare multiple images, especially when these comparisons occur alongside additional views like lateral or prior images. This pattern indicates a focus on assessing change over time or from different angles, which is critical for accurately identifying disease progression or stability in clinical reports.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5229357798165137,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2479,latent_2479,3828,0.007656,0.007840081,5.729833,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies emphasizing notable changes or stability.,"Patterns in radiology reports that trigger higher activations emphasize comparison between current and prior images or exams, incorporating new findings or stability of previous conditions. Examples with high activation often highlight significant changes or stability from prior reports, with detailed descriptions of findings such as cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, and lung opacities, alongside comparison terms like 'compared to prior' or 'unchanged'.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5084745762711864,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2480,latent_2480,8889,0.017778,0.01550174,5.5630455,Comparison of imaging findings emphasizing specific pathologies or interventions.,"Examples with higher activations prompt comparisons with prior imaging while focusing on findings like cardiopulmonary changes, specific pathology resolution, or sensor placements. Relevant findings like pleural effusions, chest tubes, pulmonary congestion, or structural changes like pleural effusions or consistent cardiac features are mentioned against previous records. These details drive the activation pattern as they underscore significant radiological insight.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5039955910719206,0.505,0.5045871559633027,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2481,latent_2481,4554,0.009108,0.010089873,7.977717,Comparison of surgical implants or post-procedural status with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of implanted devices or post-surgical findings being evaluated in comparison to previous imaging, often noted alongside cardiopulmonary architecture assessments. This suggests that the model is particularly tuned to detect patterns involving surgical implants or post-procedure status when compared with historical data.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6635786196680977,0.665,0.6896551724137931,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2482,latent_2482,4897,0.009794,0.011568784,4.3623013,Comparative analysis with prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions based on comparisons with prior imaging, with emphasis on documenting changes or stability of pathologies or conditions in chest images, often detailing specific observations such as changes in pneumothoraces, effusions, opacification, or device placements.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4245283018867924,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2483,latent_2483,12404,0.024808,0.012535332,3.3722334,Changes/stability in medical devices and cardiomediastinal structures.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in certain medical devices (like tubes, catheters, pacemakers) and cardiomediastinal structures, sometimes involving pleural effusion or lung changes. This reflects a pattern of monitoring medical devices and associated anatomical structures for modifications or stability over time.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6046511627906976,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2484,latent_2484,7950,0.0159,0.0134113105,6.514803,Comparison of current and prior imaging for changes or stability.,"Activated examples focus on providing comparative analysis of sequential imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability in radiographic findings. The pattern highlights comparative elements such as measured changes between current and prior images, and may involve observing improvements or persistence of pulmonary or other thoracic features beyond mere static descriptions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2485,latent_2485,12506,0.025012,0.01532268,6.5855703,Comparison indicating stable or unchanged appearance relative to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples describe normal findings or stable previous abnormalities in the context of a direct comparison to prior radiographs. The reports suggest continuity or no interval change in findings, emphasizing stability. They also generally lack identification of new acute pathology, focusing on unchanged contours and features from prior studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4385964912280701,0.25,100.0,100.0
+2486,latent_2486,12346,0.024692,0.016664324,4.490769,Presence of multiple imaging views and prior reports for comprehensive comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight the presence of multiple imaging views and prior reports being available, providing a comprehensive assessment. This approach supports detailed evaluation and tracking of any changes or stability in findings, aiding clinical interpretation.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5030674846625767,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2487,latent_2487,9251,0.018502,0.018761894,5.785492,"Notable image findings compared to prior studies, especially post-intervention changes.","These examples often detail specific changes or consistencies in imaging findings between current and prior studies, particularly after surgical or medical interventions or in chronic conditions, highlighting changes over time. This includes observations of the cardiomediastinal contours, lung volumes, and presence of new or resolved pathologies, which are assessed through side-by-side image comparisons in radiology.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3840291325269866,0.4020100502512563,0.3484848484848485,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+2488,latent_2488,10638,0.021276,0.011681747,3.4240313,Specific comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Examples exhibiting higher activations show specificity in the description of findings when they are compared to prior imaging studies. Reports that provide precise comparative analysis mentioning stability, changes, or specific findings related to patient's condition tend to demonstrate the pattern.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2489,latent_2489,38043,0.076086,0.03854166,3.4878724,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette with low or hyperexpanded lung volumes.,"The samples with higher activation involve descriptions of hyperexpanded or low lung volumes and stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes without acute changes. This pattern is indicative of chronic conditions like emphysema, rather than acute changes.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.54,0.27,100.0,100.0
+2490,latent_2490,2972,0.005944,0.007560404,4.9615726,Reports noting 'low lung volumes'. ,"Examples with high activation frequently mention ""low lung volumes"". This phrase is indicative of a consistent pattern that increases activation level, as it's linked to a particular finding or observation in many radiology reports, highlighted specifically by the term ""low lung volumes"".",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5414346544382574,0.58,0.6904761904761905,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2491,latent_2491,27767,0.055534,0.03798052,11.252404,"Comparison of radiographic findings to prior studies, noting stability or changes.","The examples with activations indicate assessments where direct comparisons are made to prior radiography findings, often noting similarities or changes. Phrases like 'unchanged appearance', 'stable', or 'no substantial change' compare current radiographic findings to past results to evaluate interval changes.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.3076923076923077,0.88,50.0,150.0
+2492,latent_2492,39565,0.07913,0.041808177,5.352184,Stability or change in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of imaging findings that demonstrate stability over time or changes relative to previous studies. This comparative analysis typically includes references to unchanged positioning or stability of observed features, whether devices or anatomical findings, frequently suggesting continuous observation or management.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2493,latent_2493,4148,0.008296,0.008361645,5.8202686,Stable cardiomegaly across imaging comparisons.,"The pattern identified here is the interpretation and identification of stable cardiomegaly (enlarged heart) in comparison to prior images. While the activation levels vary, those with higher activations often focus on mentioning stability or no significant changes in cardiomegaly along with associated findings, reflecting the model's sensitivity to recognizing repeated findings of an enlarged heart that are explicitly reported as unchanged.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5413333333333333,0.57,0.64,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2494,latent_2494,5144,0.010288,0.0087696975,7.0848722,Explicit notes of a 'PRIOR_REPORT' in the radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often explicitly reference comparison with a prior report, indicated by terms like 'PRIOR_REPORT', showing an awareness of past information or evaluation in the findings, distinct from those without such notes or comparisons tagged with 'None'.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4721757144073327,0.535,0.5207100591715976,0.88,100.0,100.0
+2495,latent_2495,8907,0.017814,0.009735686,5.8797283,Assessment of interval changes in comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples focus on findings compared to prior images, especially those discussing stability or change over time in specific radiological findings, regardless of the patient's state, the radiological technique used, or the conditions being monitored. The key is the comparison and noted changes over time in the radiological appearance.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4673232323232323,0.4673366834170854,0.3931623931623931,0.5679012345679012,81.0,118.0
+2496,latent_2496,3095,0.00619,0.008225062,5.298147,Comparison with prior images to assess changes or stability.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings or observations made by comparing or checking changes against prior images. This suggests a focus on describing changes over time or confirming stability through comparative analysis with previous imaging.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3903532365070826,0.405,0.4274809160305343,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2497,latent_2497,37854,0.075708,0.04116595,6.724257,Comparison reveals unchanged or stable abnormalities from prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels show instances where previous findings, particularly abnormalities such as of lung opacities or cardiac changes, are compared and found to be stable or unchanged over time, suggesting benign or non-progressive etiology, or slight worsening consistent with chronic conditions. This specific pattern of stability or mild change often triggers the language model due to its clinical significance.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5054945054945055,0.55,0.3333333333333333,0.3846153846153846,65.0,135.0
+2498,latent_2498,22325,0.04465,0.026551679,6.32129,Comparing current with prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention and provide descriptions of findings by comparing current imaging findings with prior imaging. This often involves detailed comparative analysis to assess changes or stability in size, position, or presence of pathologies like lesions, tubes, or opacities.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.4897959183673469,0.7346938775510204,98.0,102.0
+2499,latent_2499,17865,0.03573,0.019642368,4.308619,Comparative findings in radiology compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the comparison of findings on current imaging modalities with prior images, specifically focusing on stability or change in findings over time. The comparison element is integral to the narrative structure, indicating its relevance to the pattern detected.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2500,latent_2500,13084,0.026168,0.0146614,6.651223,Description of interval changes in anatomy or devices from prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on presenting detailed radiological findings and changes by explicitly comparing differences observed between current and prior images. This includes anatomical features, placement of tubes and catheters, opacities, and other landmarks, with a clinical background.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6395839769333744,0.65,0.6119402985074627,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2501,latent_2501,3315,0.00663,0.008702161,5.76931,Presence of specific imaging technique descriptions with comparison.,"These examples describe comparisons between current and prior radiographic studies, focusing particularly on the imagery acquisition techniques in the reports, such as PA and lateral views, portable or upright AP views. This is a typical pattern where the focus on technique may indicate ongoing evaluation in a clinical setting.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2502,latent_2502,12562,0.025124,0.01689507,3.2964504,Comparison of current imaging with prior to note changes in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to emphasize the detailed stability or change in medical findings by explicitly comparing current imaging to prior reports or images. This pattern of reference provides a deeper analysis of the patient's condition over time, which is emphasized in training datasets.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4685314685314685,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2503,latent_2503,338671,0.677342,1.1083039,8.663101,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently mention imaging findings in terms of stability or change relative to previous images, often noting specific details such as effusions, opacities, pulmonary edema, or cardiac silhouette stability. Stability or change in clinical findings is the primary focus, common in follow-up imaging reports where interval change of conditions is evaluated.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.688371388159224,0.6884422110552764,0.6862745098039216,0.7,100.0,99.0
+2504,latent_2504,3689,0.007378,0.007872546,4.55199,Comparisons mention stability or minimal changes.,"These examples highlight cases where a comparison with prior imaging or lack of comparison is specifically mentioned, yet no significant change or notable abnormalities are identified compared to previous studies. It relies heavily on language patterns referencing stability or minimal changes upon comparisons.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4230769230769231,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2505,latent_2505,3133,0.006266,0.008163924,4.564044,Evaluating unchanged conditions alongside procedural variations from prior imaging.,"The activation pattern reveals strong references to descriptions that involve evaluating photographic images alongside previous reports, emphasizing the importance of comparison to prior imaging. However, the pattern specifically highlights cases where no additional findings beyond previous reports are noted, often focusing on unchanged conditions or intervals with minor procedural variations.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.43,0.4222222222222222,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2506,latent_2506,5949,0.011898,0.010821881,7.7172804,Discussion of anatomy in terms of normal limits or standard measures.,"Higher activations are associated with cases where the findings are described with respect to normal limits or within normal limits, particularly the heart, mediastinal, or hilar contours. Phrases like 'within normal limits', 'normal size', and 'normal contours' are frequently present in higher activation examples.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.634771732332708,0.635,0.6421052631578947,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2507,latent_2507,7994,0.015988,0.009706561,5.311799,Comparison of tube or device placement in sequential studies.,"Examples with a higher activation consistently refer to changes in the placement or presence of medical tubes or devices when compared to prior images. This includes specific references to intervals or changes in devices like endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and nasogastric tubes. These comparisons highlight the importance of monitoring such interventions in clinical practice.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5981105978757275,0.615,0.640625,0.431578947368421,95.0,105.0
+2508,latent_2508,4057,0.008114,0.01107252,5.132725,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2509,latent_2509,5888,0.011776,0.010393143,5.2811465,Comparison of imaging findings between current and prior studies; assessment of stability or changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently include the comparison of observations and findings between current and prior imaging studies, a crucial aspect of radiological interpretation. This linguistic pattern indicates an evaluation based on stability or changes in specific attributes across imaging series.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2510,latent_2510,8769,0.017538,0.02169287,4.96797,Unchanged findings compared to prior radiological studies.,"Higher activations correlate with descriptions of unchanged status of devices, medical conditions, or anatomical configurations compared to the previous radiological exams. This suggests the pattern recognizes stability or lack of significant change in certain findings across sequential images.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2511,latent_2511,13100,0.0262,0.014238644,3.4762437,Interval changes or stability indicated by comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples exhibiting the pattern involve references to previous imaging for comparison while specifically describing changes or stability in the context of a medical condition, device status, or interval development like pulmonary conditions. This clarifies patterns in the evolution of certain conditions over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6323891625615763,0.6381909547738693,0.608,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+2512,latent_2512,1860,0.00372,0.0056223017,7.18891,Presence of pleural effusion or costophrenic angle blunting.,"Highly activated examples frequently mention pleural effusions or blunting of the costophrenic angles, often suggesting pleural fluid presence or related findings as a common denominator present in some format across different reports.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5413333333333333,0.57,0.64,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2513,latent_2513,22917,0.045834,0.03650258,4.1522603,Radiology findings described relative to prior images to note changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels tend to describe the imaging findings by explicitly comparing them to prior images, indicating changes or stability. This comparison is a key characteristic that likely activates the pattern, as it provides detailed observation of changes over time, which is essential in tracking patient progress.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2514,latent_2514,25097,0.050194,0.021280527,3.0411355,"Findings discussed in relation to prior imaging, focusing on interval changes or stability.","The activated examples here involve scenarios where there has been a clear discussion of findings in relation to previous radiographs with specific focus on interval changes, stability, or improvements in medical conditions. This pattern of language relates to documenting medical progress or stasis over time as seen in radiological comparisons.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2515,latent_2515,5524,0.011048,0.0060415477,5.245811,Focus on changes in medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples focus on the comparison or evaluation of medical device placements, such as Swan-Ganz catheters, nasogastric tubes, and central venous lines, where changes in their position or status are significant. These reports use explicit mentions of the positioning or adjustments of these devices specifically comparing with prior images.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4854203345070422,0.5276381909547738,0.5581395348837209,0.2424242424242424,99.0,100.0
+2516,latent_2516,4166,0.008332,0.010784215,6.348042,Comparison with prior imaging showing stable cardiomediastinal contours despite other findings.,"Cases with high activation levels include comparisons to prior imaging and findings of a normal cardiomediastinal contour, despite descriptions of other abnormalities (pleural effusion, atelectasis). Reports consistently note stability or improvement in conditions while emphasizing unchanged cardiomediastinal contours against prior imaging.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5245901639344263,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2517,latent_2517,10233,0.020466,0.011309313,3.961513,Detailed findings in comparison with prior images.,"High activation levels correspond to cases where changes, stability, or significant findings are specifically described in context of comparing current radiology images to prior images. Reports with notable findings such as new conditions, unchanged status of known abnormalities, or stability of findings are marked with higher activation.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2518,latent_2518,29524,0.059048,0.02481626,3.5333738,Comparative description of radiological findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation values consistently ask for the description of findings in radiological studies with a direct comparison to a prior image. They involve identifying changes or stability in certain conditions compared to previous images, using verbs such as 'has increased', 'unchanged', 'improved', and refer to 'prior images'. This pattern reflects an emphasis on comparing sequential images to assess progression or stability of a condition, which is a common task in clinical follow-up and monitoring.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2519,latent_2519,4146,0.008292,0.009599506,5.9932327,Mention of calcifications in cardiovascular structures.,"High activation levels are observed in reports that explicitly mention calcifications, particularly in vascular structures like the aorta, heart, or mediastinum, either with qualifiers such as 'moderate', 'dense', 'severe', or just a simple presence of such calcifications. These calcifications are a ubiquitous finding in radiology reports and seem to be the distinctive aspect in reports with high activation levels.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,1.0,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5442877332641112,0.605,0.8888888888888888,0.24,100.0,100.0
+2520,latent_2520,16733,0.033466,0.016662607,4.322248,Focus on device positioning changes or recommendations in radiographic studies.,"The pattern identified is that there is a specific focus on catheter or device positioning, changes, or recommendations for adjustments. This involves mentioning devices like endotracheal tubes, central lines, or catheters and their positions in the context of comparison to prior studies.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.6170212765957447,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2521,latent_2521,13698,0.027396,0.017075395,5.2833247,Comparison of current and previous imaging for pneumothorax evaluation.,The pattern here involves explicitly noting either the absence of pneumothorax or confirming the stable presence or change in size of a pneumothorax when comparing current imaging to previous studies. This finding is a critical aspect of managing thoracic interventions and following post-procedural conditions.,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5238095238095238,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2522,latent_2522,4212,0.008424,0.009878353,5.6540556,"Focus on comparison findings related to pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or atelectasis.","The high activation examples consistently discuss findings compared to previous imaging, indicating changes or stability over time while focusing on the progression and comparison of pulmonary or pleural conditions. These examples highlight the importance of tracking changes or stability, especially in pleural effusion, atelectasis, or pneumothorax.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3311389071757735,0.365,0.2545454545454545,0.14,100.0,100.0
+2523,latent_2523,4528,0.009056,0.007372329,2.5124316,Focus on specific image views (frontal/lateral) in analysis.,"The examples with high activation levels generally specify the image views utilized in radiological comparison, such as 'frontal' or 'lateral', often enclosed in brackets like '[[<image>]]'. This pattern suggests emphasis on explicit mention of specific imaging perspectives that are crucial for detailed analysis.",0.3150684931506849,0.46,0.4791666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4077122104803765,0.525,0.5132275132275133,0.97,100.0,100.0
+2524,latent_2524,35643,0.071286,0.030498879,2.8678896,Calls for further investigation or correlation due to uncertain or changing findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve explicit steps for further evaluation based on current findings, such as compatibility with clinical history, need for repeat or additional imaging, or correlation with other tests. This indicates a pattern where there's uncertainty or progression that requires follow-up action.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6323436831104732,0.635,0.6626506024096386,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2525,latent_2525,2169,0.004338,0.0062204534,6.6676717,Detailed comparison with previous imaging findings.,"The activated examples emphasize a comparison between current and previous imaging reports and describe findings in detail in terms of stability, changes, or new appearances. This is crucial in radiology to track disease progression or stability over time.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3748593433522542,0.375,0.3711340206185567,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2526,latent_2526,12653,0.025306,0.017355667,5.1915836,Reports focus on specific observations and detailed comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often include prior reports and descriptions of the current radiographic findings in direct comparison to previous images, even when the changes are subtle or require detailed comparative evaluation.",0.2835622507753655,0.3265306122448979,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4549513765237639,0.4873096446700508,0.4897959183673469,0.7346938775510204,98.0,99.0
+2527,latent_2527,4316,0.008632,0.009057179,3.755412,Changes in findings or medical devices between current and prior images.,"In these examples, activations are high when reports detail changes in medical devices or anatomical changes over time when compared to prior imaging. The presence or removal of lines, tubes, or significant changes related to past interventions are highlighted by high activation patterns. This suggests a focus on evaluating procedural changes between current and past images is key.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2528,latent_2528,4084,0.008168,0.010625912,5.2413993,Chest imaging with no acute findings using frontal/lateral views.,"The activation pattern shows examples where findings are described in diagnostic imaging without a historical report comparison, often using current frontal or lateral images and indicating a lack of acute pathology or changes from previous exams. The technique commonly applied here is a direct examination without finding significant new information.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2529,latent_2529,4456,0.008912,0.013216845,4.3456774,"Evaluation of interval change in radiographic studies, often pneumothorax.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the evaluation of changes, often pneumothorax or other thoracic changes, using multiple sequential radiographic images. The pattern involves contextual comparison with prior images to assess interval changes like the resolution or progression of conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5934065934065934,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2530,latent_2530,4199,0.008398,0.007986935,3.5372155,Focus on comparing current and prior radiology images.,"The most consistently activating examples include phrases that prompt detailed comparison or description of medical imaging findings against a prior frontal image, explicitly guiding the assistant to describe changes, similarities, or elaborate on certain features between current and prior views. This involves directive phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior image'.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2531,latent_2531,27962,0.055924,0.06342521,6.1057563,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours.,This collection of examples from radiology reports highlights that descriptions include findings related to the cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours. The reports emphasize stability or subtle changes in these features despite the presence of other potential pathologies.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5913978494623656,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2532,latent_2532,19861,0.039722,0.031798903,8.951936,Unchanged or stable imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels share a frequent mention and description of specific imaging findings in the context of stability or change when compared to previous imaging studies, largely focusing on certain unchanged conditions such as atelectasis, pleural effusions, heart size, or device positions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.4942528735632184,0.4574468085106383,94.0,106.0
+2533,latent_2533,2991,0.005982,0.010636987,9.422977,Comparison of current and prior chest imaging for assessment of interval changes.,"The pattern is recognized by repeated use of current and prior imaging comparisons in chest radiographs, typically involving assessments of changes in conditions like effusions, pneumothorax, or opacities, often using verbiage like 'compared to prior', 'interval change', 'decreased', or 'stable', indicating monitoring over time or response to treatment.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2534,latent_2534,3580,0.00716,0.008646225,3.7377386,References to comparison with prior imaging focusing on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation compare current imaging findings to previous imaging in radiology reports, specifically mentioning the presence or absence of changes in the condition being evaluated.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2535,latent_2535,3646,0.007292,0.016716307,7.3325334,Structured image comparison instructions in radiology studies.,"The activation patterns suggest cases with high activations focus on radiology studies that involve matching current images to previous ones, frequently formatted to extract and compare specific image identities. This highlights common instructions to the model regarding examination setup and preparation for detailed analysis over time, notably underlining the absence of initial image comparisons, discrepancies in imaging techniques, and contrasts in conveyed data.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2536,latent_2536,30643,0.061286,0.039234377,4.531225,Comparison between current and prior images showing interval change.,"Highly representative samples involve a pattern of imaging comparison over time, with changes in findings across consecutive radiographs and descriptions of previous states of the patient’s condition. These examples often include recognition or resolution of past findings using explicit comparisons.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5998399359743898,0.6,0.5961538461538461,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2537,latent_2537,2859,0.005718,0.00734058,5.5092535,Requests for detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic images.,"The pattern across these examples involves a heavy emphasis on detailed comparison between current and prior images, often explicitly noting that such comparison is made or that prior reports are referenced. The presence of significant specific instruction or requests for comparison with historical data highlights this pattern.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2538,latent_2538,9338,0.018676,0.01141453,5.3025,Significant observations in device positioning or anatomical changes between imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations generally involve descriptions that emphasize changes or stability in medical devices (e.g., PICC lines, chest tubes, endotracheal tubes) or anatomic features across different imaging studies. These descriptions frequently highlight the explicit state or modification of these devices compared to prior images. This pattern likely reflects the model's emphasis on specific observations where positional or device-related changes are significant.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2539,latent_2539,10305,0.02061,0.03244048,8.317217,Focus on tube or line evaluation and their positioning.,"The pattern identified here involves the use of specific terminology indicating the evaluation, placement, or change in positioning of tubes or lines (e.g., endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes) within the patient, as expressed by terms like 'advanced', 'position', 'placement', and 'tip'.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2540,latent_2540,21387,0.042774,0.040105652,5.182502,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels describe a consistent pattern of either unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to previous imaging or descriptions of similarities in pulmonary or mediastinal structures when compared to prior studies. This indicates the emphasis on stability or lack of significant change in cardiomediastinal structures is a key activation pattern.,0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5714285714285714,0.24,100.0,100.0
+2541,latent_2541,3283,0.006566,0.011758694,6.2904434,Detailed comparisons and specific technical details in radiologic descriptions.,"The presence of detailed and explicit descriptions comparing current radiology images to prior images, along with specific radiographic findings, create activation patterns between 5 and 9. These examples often include technical details such as catheter placements and specific changes in patient’s radiographic studies, indicating a complexity in both content and structure.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4781418402927869,0.542713567839196,0.5266272189349113,0.89,100.0,99.0
+2542,latent_2542,6359,0.012718,0.0084106065,3.7252655,Analysis of current versus prior radiographic findings.,"The most representative examples focus on providing descriptions of current radiological findings in comparison to prior images. In these cases, the goal is explicitly to compare current images against past ones, analyzing changes or consistency over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2543,latent_2543,5854,0.011708,0.012087309,6.7183895,Comparative analysis of current and prior chest images showing interval changes in effusions or opacities.,"High activation examples consistently describe comparative assessments of current chest imaging with past imaging, highlighting interval changes in pulmonary and pleural conditions. The change could be in size or density of pleural effusions or pulmonary opacities between current and prior studies, often indicating pathology evolution or treatment response.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2544,latent_2544,5307,0.010614,0.015084697,4.0153866,Impression statement provides explicit interval change comparison.,"Examples that exhibit higher activation levels frequently involve findings that are evaluated in the context of prior imaging for interval changes, mentioned directly in the IMPRESSION section, and documenting specific findings like consolidation or effusion, along with commentary on their stability or progression.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5377510967444008,0.5404040404040404,0.5476190476190477,0.4646464646464646,99.0,99.0
+2545,latent_2545,5988,0.011976,0.0134028625,3.2003658,Detailed comparison of changes in specific findings across imaging views.,"Highly activated examples all involve commentary on changes or stability in specific details across multiple imaging views, such as changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax since previous imaging. These often mention observations about the cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung volumes, and presence or absence of acute changes in comparison to baseline imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2546,latent_2546,5774,0.011548,0.012771537,7.693392,Detailed observations on lateral image comparisons or specific equipment position in reports.,"The data shows higher activation levels when the examples include detailed descriptions of both frontal and lateral chest X-ray images. These examples compare current findings with prior imaging explicitly or provide detailed observations on lung conditions or placement of medical equipment, indicating a radiological assessment involving more complex evaluations.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.5496688741721855,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2547,latent_2547,4539,0.009078,0.008195,3.4061108,Focus on describing findings relative to prior imaging.,"Analysis of these examples shows they often request a description of findings in current radiology studies compared to prior images, demonstrating the use of temporal comparison to gauge changes in conditions like cardiomegaly or lesions.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2548,latent_2548,5807,0.011614,0.007404395,3.205142,Comparison of findings with previous imaging studies for changes.,"The examples that activate strongly regularly detail changes in radiographic findings by comparing the current images with prior studies. This pattern involves detecting any new developments or stability, commonly used in radiology to note progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2549,latent_2549,14676,0.029352,0.017660886,5.70921,Detailed comparison with prior imaging showing change or device position.,"The pattern in high activation examples relates to detailed descriptions of changes in patient condition, location or position of medical devices, or complications over time within the radiology findings. Reports often mention comparison times, specific changes in health markers or devices, and interpret these within clinical contexts.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2550,latent_2550,5104,0.010208,0.007944586,6.4510956,Change in pulmonary opacities or consolidation.,"The examples include comparisons to prior radiographs, focusing specifically on the presence or absence of changes in pulmonary opacities, patterns of lung consolidation, and impressions like 'atelectasis' or 'opacity'. The activation is high when the descriptions indicate changes in lung findings, such as an increase in opacity or new signs of possible infection, correlated with the clinical indication of evaluating lung conditions like pneumonia.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4320486815415821,0.475,0.4444444444444444,0.2,100.0,100.0
+2551,latent_2551,11487,0.022974,0.012139006,6.143731,Explicit comparison of findings with prior radiologic images.,"Examples with higher activations often contain explicit references to direct comparisons with prior imaging, describing changes, progress or stability in specific pathologies or scenarios such as tube placements or lung conditions over time. The key distinction from low activation examples is the explicit emphasis on imaging comparison to discern changes.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4248366013071895,0.8333333333333334,78.0,122.0
+2552,latent_2552,59197,0.118394,0.07382579,7.6303453,Interval changes in clinical findings comparing current images to prior ones.,"These examples involve radiology reports with descriptions of changes in findings compared to prior images, such as tube placements, effusions, and lung conditions. They provide a comparison with previous exams, highlighting either stability or changes such as improvements, removals, or new findings across different examinations.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.614448051948052,0.62,0.5103448275862069,0.9367088607594936,79.0,121.0
+2553,latent_2553,5162,0.010324,0.008743186,3.664137,Comparison with prior or current imaging for findings.,These examples highlight the use of comparison with prior or current imaging to assess for changes. The descriptions include intervals of medical device placements or their stable positions with respect to previous imaging. The pattern signifies the model's focus on identifying such mentions of comparison with prior or current images for evaluation.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4608845048727746,0.545,0.5251396648044693,0.94,100.0,100.0
+2554,latent_2554,11160,0.02232,0.0120758265,4.5109663,Reports with reference to significant medical history or chronic conditions.,"Examples with high activation involve patient history or indications that suggest potential serious or high-risk conditions, such as cardiothoracic interventions, ongoing chronic illnesses, or conditions that have historically required extensive medical attention. These examples focus on noteworthy current findings or changes that directly relate to significant patient history or complex clinical scenarios, suggesting such attention triggers specific activation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2555,latent_2555,9098,0.018196,0.017795991,5.071058,Describing new or stable findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels generally describe changes or comparisons to prior images, indicating either changes in condition like new findings or stable/improved previous conditions, even when pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or atelectasis are mentioned.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2556,latent_2556,6593,0.013186,0.009758425,4.9983597,Highlighting interval changes or specific findings from current to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve changes, lack of prior comparisons, or specific radiological features highlighted between the current and prior imaging. This suggests the pattern revolves around detailed comparisons, identifying interval changes, or stated lack of prior and their implications, noted distinctly in contrast with other findings.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6068255091609656,0.625,0.5874125874125874,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2557,latent_2557,2834,0.005668,0.0104362415,5.9879265,Explicit details or comparisons involving prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples explicitly refer to the presence of a 'prior frontal image' and involve detailed descriptions or comparisons of changes in findings, often indicating maintenance or minimal alternations from previous states.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.477124183006536,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2558,latent_2558,4038,0.008076,0.009016921,4.6279254,Cardiac size described as 'top normal' or mildly enlarged without acute findings.,"This specific pattern identifies findings that are common in routine imaging where the heart size is described as 'top normal' or borderline enlarged, combined with context indicating an absence of acute, significant pathology, such as in post-operative scenarios or with chronic conditions. The activation levels suggest it focuses on these particular report patterns involving cardiac size assessment without acute findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.570999570999571,0.6,0.7083333333333334,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2559,latent_2559,2918,0.005836,0.006582276,7.97665,Reports showing interval changes or re-evaluations post-interventions.,"The pattern involves reporting on changes over time in images, often with medical devices remaining unchanged or indicating positions. Common indicators include evaluation for pneumothorax, consolidation, and changes due to interventions (e.g., catheter repositioning). This includes discussion of sequential changes or interventions rather than initial findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5576923076923077,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2560,latent_2560,9679,0.019358,0.015046171,4.8873067,Comparison of positions of medical devices with prior imaging.,The pattern observed is the specific evaluation concerning the stability or change in the position of medical devices and anatomical structures across imaging studies. Reports often describe whether these devices or structures remain in unchanged positions or describe changes compared to prior images. This focus on device positioning is evident in highly activated examples.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4769414575866189,0.5025125628140703,0.509090909090909,0.28,100.0,99.0
+2561,latent_2561,4554,0.009108,0.00859447,4.6516256,Close comparison of current and prior images for clinical changes.,"The examples with high activation feature detailed comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on interval changes or the lack thereof in clinical findings such as lesions, opacities, or device positions, often mentioning the comparison explicitly within the description.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2562,latent_2562,8229,0.016458,0.011852405,3.5791526,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies with specific interval changes.,"Reports with high activation levels include detailed descriptions of comparison with prior studies, often with historical changes or specific findings such as placement of devices, interval changes notating differences in lung opacities, sizes, or status of medical conditions. This consistent theme is thorough comparative analysis between new and prior imaging, providing continuity in patient history and status.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3277943588502594,0.375,0.2340425531914893,0.11,100.0,100.0
+2563,latent_2563,5406,0.010812,0.011596132,5.7547274,Tubes or catheter comparison with prior images for changes.,"The activated samples often involve a specific observation or adjustment of tubes, catheters, or lines, suggesting that these comparisons often focus on medical device placement or changes relative to previous images.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.7083333333333334,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2564,latent_2564,12686,0.025372,0.013099653,1.7088552,Requests for standalone radiologic findings without comparative analysis.,The examples with high activation scores often provide a task that involves a standard radiologic interpretation without requesting explicit comparison to previous studies. These examples focus only on the description of the current scans without performing differential analysis based on prior images.,0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2565,latent_2565,7566,0.015132,0.011075988,4.4259276,Descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to prior images.,"Many examples involve radiological studies compared to prior images, highlighting stability or changes in previously identified abnormalities. These often use phrases like 'compared to prior', 'same as previous', or mention past images explicitly, which is a common diagnostic practice to track progression or regression of pathological findings.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4519170333123822,0.455,0.4608695652173913,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2566,latent_2566,12430,0.02486,0.014829274,6.7166953,Unchanged linear opacities (scarring/atelectasis) on comparison with prior images.,"The reports often highlight comparison with prior imaging to assess unchanged or stable findings. The descriptions frequently specifically reference scarring or atelectasis as unchanged findings. Phrases like 'unchanged scarring', 'unchanged atelectasis', and 'persistent' are recurrent, indicating stable chronic conditions.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6071428571428571,0.67,0.574468085106383,0.3698630136986301,73.0,127.0
+2567,latent_2567,8006,0.016012,0.012695092,5.3134236,Comparison of current imaging to prior studies showing interval change or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of findings across different chest views (frontal and lateral) with noted changes from previous radiographs or CT scans. These examples make direct comparisons with prior studies to indicate stability or changes in the pathology, including assessments for pneumonia, pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, etc.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2568,latent_2568,6357,0.012714,0.012695945,8.18516,References to thoracic interventions or postoperative changes.,"The key pattern across highly activated examples is the reference to thoracic abnormalities like thoracentesis or thoracoscopic changes, often associated with postoperative evaluations. These patterns highlight interventions or prior medical procedures as significant radiological findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5405405405405406,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2569,latent_2569,24067,0.048134,0.03754782,3.2670453,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging.,"Higher activation is elicited when findings or descriptions from current images are compared to prior imaging, indicating radiological analysis over time. This frequently involves language elements like ""+on comparison"", ""similar findings on prior"", or explicit mention of differential analysis between old and new images.",0.2452060383516932,0.26,0.3125,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3880048959608323,0.4,0.421875,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2570,latent_2570,5577,0.011154,0.010752914,4.790486,Detailed assessment of interval changes or device positioning.,"High activation is associated with findings that detail changes over time or interval changes when comparing images, particularly emphasizing changes in positioning of medical devices (e.g., tubes) or anatomical changes due to medical conditions. These examples all describe detailed changes involving devices or pathological findings as compared to previous images.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2571,latent_2571,5121,0.010242,0.021020588,4.2468567,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2572,latent_2572,6390,0.01278,0.014183724,5.7154746,Changes or stability in findings between current and past imaging.,"The highly activated examples use phrases that latch onto comparative assessment between current and previous imaging studies, often highlighting changes or lack thereof in specific findings. This pattern involves explicitly noting changes, stability, or interval alterations which signify the importance the model places on such longitudinal comparison in radiology.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3748593433522542,0.375,0.3786407766990291,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2573,latent_2573,1876,0.003752,0.004596767,6.243691,Inclusion or mention of comparison with prior images or noting absence of such comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference a comparison with prior imaging or state that there is no comparison available. This linguistic pattern is crucial as it denotes an expectation of comparison in the report context, even when it states 'None' or 'N/A', indicating a missing comparison opportunity rather than omitting it altogether.",0.2857142857142857,0.4,0.4444444444444444,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3859344224307728,0.47,0.4827586206896552,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2574,latent_2574,4634,0.009268,0.009415943,3.902872,Emphasis on slight interval changes or detail in comparison studies.,"The examples with low activation involve acute or normal findings, while those with high activation focus on additional details or interval changes between radiographs, particularly changes in small pleural effusions, atelectasis, and cardiopulmonary features. This relates to the content that cues detailed evaluation between comparative studies.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2575,latent_2575,7424,0.014848,0.019273084,4.307152,Use of multiple image views and detailed comparison with prior reports.,"The examples with higher activations involve multiple images provided for description, often involving both frontal and lateral views, and require a comparative assessment against prior reports. This suggests a pattern focused on multi-view imaging and complex comparative analysis.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2576,latent_2576,16007,0.032014,0.020277392,6.0785713,Mild cardiomegaly with reference to unchanged or slightly altered pulmonary vascularity/mediastinal contours.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels are characterized by two attributes: mentions of cardiac enlargement (typically mild cardiomegaly) and references to alterations in pulmonary vascularity or mediastinal contours (often unremarkable despite some mild changes). These patterns are less focused on acute issues and instead note moderate, unchanged features across comparison reports.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5577607593571352,0.59,0.6956521739130435,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2577,latent_2577,10747,0.021494,0.012061796,3.856729,Stable or unchanged findings highlighted in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly involve the comparison to prior findings that specifically highlight changes or stability in medical conditions. These samples often refer to a patient's previous medical history or an interval change in their condition, particularly in the context of attention to consistent findings over time, like stable cardiopulmonary conditions or unchanged opacities.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2578,latent_2578,12308,0.024616,0.020372268,5.6594443,Detailed findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, with consistent inclusion of observations like unchanged or stable findings, improvements, or new developments (e.g., new opacities or stable lesions). These comparisons enable assessment of stability, progression, or resolution of conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2579,latent_2579,3201,0.006402,0.00783561,5.3089666,Presence of multiple views and prior study comparison.,Examples with higher activation involve multiple views (frontal and lateral) along with references to comparison with prior studies. This complexity and reference to previous images may indicate patterns typical in evaluations requiring comprehensive assessments and comparisons over time.,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4904458598726114,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2580,latent_2580,3269,0.006538,0.0067564286,4.3283744,Focus on indwelling devices and their placements in imaging context.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently feature patient monitoring devices like endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, and other indwelling devices in their findings, indicating a pattern focusing on the presence and placement of supportive and monitoring equipment, possibly post-surgical or critical care contexts.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.3857142857142857,0.27,100.0,100.0
+2581,latent_2581,5444,0.010888,0.01504334,4.5140705,Instructions or prompts emphasizing comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels involve discussions or instructions regarding the comparison between current and prior imaging studies. These instructions and contexts highlight the importance of such comparisons, which closely aligns with consistent patterns observed in radiology regarding the assessment of changes over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4104159842777596,0.46,0.4746835443037974,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2582,latent_2582,2005,0.00401,0.0022977123,2.035576,Mismatch between requirement for prior comparison and availability or explicit mention of prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels mention comparing current imaging to prior images yet state that no prior comparisons are available or none are made explicitly, creating an apparent contradiction or incomplete data scenario. This mismatch suggests a crucial element of the task was unmet, likely triggering higher activation.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2583,latent_2583,6538,0.013076,0.022151046,11.685097,Comparison to prior imaging findings and longitudinal analysis.,Highly activated examples consistently focus on the use of prior images for comparison and highlight specific observations or judgments based on longitudinal changes or stability over time. This pattern shows that the neural model is drawn to descriptions involving analysis relative to former states or conditions as captured in past imaging studies.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4678005990586221,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.73,100.0,99.0
+2584,latent_2584,27966,0.055932,0.032270692,8.421014,References to stability or changes compared to prior radiographic images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently have findings indicative of changes or developments compared to a prior radiographic image, often using words such as 'interval', 'unchanged', or descriptions of changes such as 'worsening', 'improvement', or 'increase in'. This indicates a regular pattern of evaluating against a prior baseline to note stability or changes in medical conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4290865384615384,0.43,0.3197278911564626,0.7704918032786885,61.0,139.0
+2585,latent_2585,4033,0.008066,0.013527442,7.285804,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently contain two current images (frontal and lateral) compared against a prior frontal image. This pattern indicates a focus on comparing radiographic findings against the specific baseline of the frontal view from prior studies.,0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6254681647940075,0.63,0.6065573770491803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2586,latent_2586,5336,0.010672,0.008989157,5.8188424,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings with noted changes.,"Examples with mid to high activation levels mention detailed comparisons from prior imaging studies, reflecting any changes in patient condition such as resolution, stability, or progression of findings. Reports using language like 'as compared to previous', and noting specific observations of change or stability indicate the examined pattern, while examples without such comparisons were generally low activation.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2587,latent_2587,85863,0.171726,0.11001235,7.0748153,Emphasis on changes seen in the interval comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels predominantly discuss comparisons to prior imaging and describe changes, often detailing improvements or resolutions of specific conditions like effusions or consolidations when compared to previous images. Emphasis is placed on describing interval changes.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6269785260610949,0.63,0.6101694915254238,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2588,latent_2588,2668,0.005336,0.0060300175,4.213034,Descriptions comparing current to prior images focusing on normal findings or lack of acute process.,"High activations occur when there is a request to provide a description or analysis of current images compared to prior images, with a noteworthy focus on normal findings or negative results that align with ""no acute process."" These comparisons typically involve reviewing radiology images to identify any changes over time, ensuring stability or highlighting new findings. The distinction between presence of notable findings in current versus previous images appears crucial.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4302325581395348,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2589,latent_2589,32134,0.064268,0.025235035,1.524688,Detailed interval changes in pathology or device position between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of interval changes in findings between current and prior imaging, especially concerning alterations in specific pathologies or positioning of medical devices. These reports emphasize changes over time, often indicating the stability, progression, or resolution of conditions.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6028546166477201,0.6030150753768844,0.6041666666666666,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+2590,latent_2590,6575,0.01315,0.016147224,6.306532,Comprehensive imaging with both frontal and lateral chest views.,"The observed pattern is that descriptions include both frontal and lateral radiographic views in the examination findings, indicating comprehensive imaging that assesses different planes of the chest for a thorough evaluation. The use of frontal and lateral images improves diagnostic accuracy by providing multiple perspectives.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2591,latent_2591,38593,0.077186,0.034723528,3.6149204,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe imaging findings compared to prior studies, focusing on describing stability or change in previously identified abnormalities such as effusions, consolidation, atelectasis, or medical device positioning. This mirrors common practice in radiology reporting where known changes are tracked closely.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5012531328320802,0.5025125628140703,0.5056179775280899,0.45,100.0,99.0
+2592,latent_2592,3716,0.007432,0.0069169505,4.869496,Stable cardiomediastinal and pulmonary structures without new acute findings.,"The examples have high activation when there is evidence of subtle indications or changes in cardiopulmonary structures, primarily involving stable findings with certain changes or conditions that might not present acute abnormalities but require attention. This includes stable yet enlarged cardiac silhouettes, absence of new effusions or consolidations, and known conditions or devices being unchanged.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4851485148514851,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2593,latent_2593,6657,0.013314,0.012911774,5.3824954,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging and interval changes.,"Samples demonstrating high activation consistently highlight the findings in comparison to previous studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability and use explicit language indicating comparisons like 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'increased'. This is typical of radiology reports where observations are benchmarked against prior imaging to assess progression or resolution.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5626666666666666,0.59,0.56,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2594,latent_2594,4847,0.009694,0.012911241,4.8933535,Comparison focused predominantly on single current frontal image.,"The examples with high activation often involve the presence of a single or current frontal image without additional lateral images and focus on describing findings in terms of comparison with prior images. The mention of a single frontal view suggests a restriction to basic or essential evaluations, potentially related to system constraints or rapid assessments needed.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5675675675675675,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2595,latent_2595,11701,0.023402,0.019720232,8.16292,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior frontal images.,"The highly activated examples all contain both 'Given the current frontal image' and 'prior frontal image' with explicit language comparing findings to that prior image, even as a placeholder with missing data.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4599459945994599,0.46,0.4607843137254901,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2596,latent_2596,3776,0.007552,0.013645364,4.8664675,Frontal images compared to prior images with findings description.,"Highly active samples consistently involve descriptions where the frontal image is compared to a prior image, referencing the priors explicitly, indicating that descriptive findings are expected when making comparisons over time. They often focus on interval changes or stability of specific findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2597,latent_2597,89008,0.178016,0.13410117,5.5729246,"Reports emphasize comparison with prior imaging, analyzing changes over time.","These examples feature explicit instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images. The reports that do activate often highlight specific changes or stability, with detailed analysis requested by a prior report, emphasizing temporal changes of medical conditions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2598,latent_2598,5944,0.011888,0.0121104885,5.111863,Current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal image.,"This pattern primarily involves evaluating changes between radiological studies, especially focusing on images that include distinct lateral views alongside frontal views. The consistent descriptive technique across activated examples emphasizes the importance of lateral images for comprehensive analysis.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.496,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2599,latent_2599,15397,0.030794,0.018263552,5.2895474,Assessment and documentation of medical tube placements in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently provide detailed descriptions of medical tubes and their placements, such as enteric tubes, nasogastric tubes, and endotracheal tubes, in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina or diaphragm. This specific focus on the assessment and documentation of tube placements is a distinguishing factor in these examples.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7939490365431725,0.7939698492462312,0.7959183673469388,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+2600,latent_2600,4884,0.009768,0.0095979525,3.7133505,Analysis of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings in relation to changes or stabilities identified from previous imaging studies, such as improvements, deteriorations, or stable features over time. The presence of phrases indicating interval changes or comparisons to prior studies is what triggers high activations.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4864864864864865,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2601,latent_2601,5501,0.011002,0.01650313,5.3973746,Square brackets used for referencing prior frontal images.,Highly activated examples consistently involve a specific linguistic pattern of referencing the prior frontal image explicitly with square brackets in conjunction with a frontal or lateral image and indicating a prior report or history for comparison. This pattern appears to be indicative of comparative image analysis with specific emphasis on continuity and referencing prior available images in a specific format.,0.8357963875205254,0.84,0.7575757575757576,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7522687631133245,0.755,0.7107438016528925,0.86,100.0,100.0
+2602,latent_2602,6946,0.013892,0.02067613,6.4741483,Current and prior frontal image comparison pattern.,"Examples with high activation consistently utilize a pattern of receiving both a current frontal and a prior frontal image, emphasizing the comparison between the two. This reflects a specific methodology in radiological examination where prior images are directly compared to assess changes or stability over time.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2603,latent_2603,4312,0.008624,0.008181713,4.4833584,Requests for comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly involve a request to provide a description of the findings in the current radiology study in comparison to prior images. The focus is on the linguistic structure requesting comparative evaluation between the current and a prior image, along with specific clinical indications like evaluating for pneumonia or pleural effusion.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2604,latent_2604,19040,0.03808,0.03112754,8.243517,Comparison of current frontal and lateral chest images with prior frontal images.,"Examples with high activation reference both frontal and lateral chest images along with comparisons to prior frontal images. This findings from multiple angles is an essential pattern that helps in diagnosing changes by comparing current and past imaging and typically provides a clearer understanding of chest anomalies such as opacities, pleural effusions, or atelectasis.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4595135622059854,0.46,0.4257425742574257,0.4623655913978494,93.0,107.0
+2605,latent_2605,4524,0.009048,0.00728948,3.6255498,Comparison to prior images with unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size.,"Examples with higher activation mention comparisons to prior imaging studies alongside descriptions involving cardiomediastinal silhouette, heart size, and hilar contours as unchanged or normal, which stands out from those with zero activation that still make comparisons and lack specific descriptors.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5263157894736842,0.3,100.0,100.0
+2606,latent_2606,2706,0.005412,0.008916104,5.0861263,Evaluation of findings in comparison to prior imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation levels often mention comparisons to prior imaging reports and highlight a specific interest in assessing changes over time, specifically with terms like 'comparison', 'prior report', and 'provide a description of the findings in comparison'. This suggests a focus on evaluating interval changes or stability of findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2607,latent_2607,3340,0.00668,0.009872005,8.89967,Explicit focus on detailed findings and comparison to prior images.,"High activation examples focus on the detailed descriptions and direct comparisons with prior images, emphasizing the importance of providing a new assessment in light of previous findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4171502256608639,0.435,0.4518518518518518,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2608,latent_2608,5352,0.010704,0.008449467,3.7771392,Detailed image description and comparison across multiple views.,Examples with high activation predominantly require detailed image descriptions (both frontal and lateral) and evaluate findings in comparison to prior images. The pattern focuses on the comprehensive evaluation across multiple views and their comparison to earlier studies.,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4013334417432311,0.4422110552763819,0.4605263157894737,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+2609,latent_2609,21647,0.043294,0.02088909,3.696262,Detailed evaluation comparing current to prior images with interval changes noted.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed discussion of imaging findings, comparison to previous studies, and often recording the presence or absence of interval changes or specific alterations such as new opacities, effusions, or devices. These examples emphasize identifying, documenting, and analyzing changes over time in radiological assessments.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2610,latent_2610,62289,0.124578,0.0898011,3.5459135,Radiographic evaluation for observed or anticipated procedural changes.,"These examples denote instances where a specific change or reevaluation is requested after a procedure or observation, especially when there's a change in the radiographic appearance or intervention like the insertion/removal of tubes or catheters. The change or reassessment is prompted by altered clinical indications needing follow-up imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5698924731182796,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2611,latent_2611,12775,0.02555,0.01771342,4.733573,Emphasis on interval changes from prior images.,"The consistent element in the examples that have higher activation levels is the reference to changes observed between the current imaging and prior reports, especially focusing on adjustments in medical devices' placement or changes in medical conditions. The emphasis on comparative language in highlighting interval changes or stability from prior examinations is the pattern detected.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6114937309215671,0.615,0.5966386554621849,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2612,latent_2612,16906,0.033812,0.019687023,4.807246,Significant interval changes in imaging findings with timely communication of results.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe changes or intervals in imaging findings, such as differences between current and prior radiographs, and often detail specific device placements like tubes. Moreover, high activation examples include the timely notification of findings to a healthcare professional, suggesting these reports are marked by significant changes warranting expeditious communication.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5644107445349681,0.595,0.7021276595744681,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2613,latent_2613,7368,0.014736,0.009945101,3.6668277,Explicit comparison to prior radiology images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparison with prior radiographs, highlighting changes or stability in current findings, whereas those with low activation lack such comparison. Presence of explicit comparison language is a distinct pattern in high activation samples.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2614,latent_2614,5645,0.01129,0.01178347,3.453036,Generation of findings comparing current and prior radiology images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve generating or assisting with descriptions of radiology findings for current images in direct comparison to prior images, reflecting specific changes or stability over time. The task often involves accounting for the context set by given images, a common requirement in follow-up views for monitoring progression or stability of detected conditions.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2615,latent_2615,40009,0.080018,0.042918067,4.0519404,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare the current radiographic findings to prior imaging, involving explicit instructions to describe or note changes. This comparison is a common task in sequential radiological assessments where changes over time are evaluated, useful in situations like monitoring disease progression or treatment response.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2616,latent_2616,15189,0.030378,0.022103665,3.5939703,"Presence of pulmonary opacities, effusions, edema or atelectasis along with unchanged cardiac/mediastinal features.","Examples with prior imaging and comparison show instances where additional pulmonary conditions, such as effusions, edema, or volume loss, are present alongside unchanged cardiac or mediastinal features, or situations like diffuse changes affecting pulmonary space or added devices which may interact with or cause changes in pulmonary dynamics. These elements seem to contribute to the activation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5989974937343359,0.6,0.5909090909090909,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2617,latent_2617,6146,0.012292,0.013368374,5.381256,Evaluation of changes in vascular structure or intervention status compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions that incorporate deviations, evaluations, or changes in vascular structures, pulmonary status, or device placements compared to prior imaging. There is consistent language evaluating vascular congestion, the status of lines, or pulmonary changes between current and previous exams.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5614035087719298,0.57,0.5972222222222222,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2618,latent_2618,6757,0.013514,0.014644148,4.9975133,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly feature both views: current frontal and lateral images compared to prior images, or lack of comparison imagery specified as none. This focus on multiple imaging perspectives (frontal and lateral) aligns with radiological assessments regarding changes across different planes, which is indicated by the explicitly supplied comparison instructions, demonstrating a typical scenario where radiologists routinely contrast current observations with prior records.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2619,latent_2619,6044,0.012088,0.010681127,4.0923586,Explicit evaluation of interval changes from comparison with prior images.,"Most examples with high activation involve explicit requests to compare findings with prior studies, especially assessing interval changes in the findings. These descriptions often use terms like 'compared to' or discuss whether conditions such as opacities, effusions, or other significant radiological findings have changed over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.4864864864864865,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2620,latent_2620,8516,0.017032,0.01665773,6.830378,Changes in medical device or lesion positioning as compared to previous images.,"Examples with higher activation frequently discuss specific changes in medical devices or intervention placements, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, or pleural effusions, when compared to prior images. The focus is on clinical recommendations or actionable findings related to these changes based on the comparison with previous studies.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6145277965507747,0.615,0.6236559139784946,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2621,latent_2621,2689,0.005378,0.009806616,13.072453,Reports include comparison of current and prior images with findings stated in comparison to the prior study.,"The high activation examples frequently involve the presence of both current and prior images with findings stated in comparison to the prior study. These comparisons specifically note stability, resolution, or no significant changes in conditions or devices. This pattern involves managing cases through longitudinal observation, often indicated in chronic situations or the evaluation of procedural interventions.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4232553474259635,0.425,0.4157303370786517,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2622,latent_2622,50969,0.101938,0.07963897,5.5881467,Detailed interval change comparisons to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include detailed observations of interval changes compared to prior film, often specifying improvements, worsening conditions, stable findings, or new developments.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5527186403010329,0.5527638190954773,0.5544554455445545,0.56,100.0,99.0
+2623,latent_2623,10891,0.021782,0.022249281,4.479835,Reports emphasize changes between current and prior imaging.,"The pattern observed involves reports containing explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging, focusing on interval changes or lack thereof. High activation examples often highlight improved or resolved conditions over time, while unchanged or new findings drive the activation scores, as they inform clinical decision-making.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2624,latent_2624,17887,0.035774,0.022235893,6.4163833,Described interval changes or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation often describe radiological studies where changes are noted between the current and prior images, with emphasis on intervals or comparison over time. They tend to have detailed descriptions like an increase or decrease in opacities, or changes in devices or catheters.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.567391304347826,0.5778894472361809,0.5140845070422535,0.8295454545454546,88.0,111.0
+2625,latent_2625,19119,0.038238,0.038364947,6.1341867,Descriptive comparisons with prior images to assess change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current imaging findings with previous images, emphasizing changes or stability, which is a key component in ongoing patient evaluation. The prompts repeatedly mention 'comparison,' 'prior,' or describe interval changes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2626,latent_2626,4339,0.008678,0.008609209,5.7981057,Assessment of interval changes in chest imaging comparing current to prior images.,"The pattern here shows a consistent examination of the present chest radiographs in relation to previous images, often noting changes over time or stability in findings. These reports focus on interval changes, stability or improvement of conditions noted in the patient's history based on comparison with prior studies, which is a central aspect of radiological imaging evaluation.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4705882352941176,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2627,latent_2627,24648,0.049296,0.024836816,2.993336,Comparison indicates significant change or findings.,"Higher activations occur in examples where comparisons between current and prior radiological images reveal changes or highlight specific findings, indicating the model is sensitive to updates or alterations in patient pathology over time. This pattern differentiates significant observations from those that report stability or lack of change.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2628,latent_2628,6242,0.012484,0.010021294,4.0538983,"Emphasis on stability or slight interval change with reference to prior imaging, often noting device placements.","This sequence emphasizes consistent comparisons with prior imaging studies to assess changes over time, often referencing device placements such as tubes or lines, or stability of findings like pleural effusions or lung opacities. Examples specifically note unchanged findings, indicating a focus on stability rather than new pathologies.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2629,latent_2629,5776,0.011552,0.011828347,4.649619,Hyperinflation or hyperexpanded lungs noted in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly report findings of hyperinflation, lung hyperinflation characteristics like flattening of the diaphragms, and are typically mentioned in conditions such as COPD or emphysema. These findings are considered significant in recognizing and evaluating pulmonary diseases.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5623386825272135,0.61,0.8235294117647058,0.28,100.0,100.0
+2630,latent_2630,22480,0.04496,0.046723124,5.425207,Unchanged findings from previous imaging studies.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels focus on descriptions of existing conditions in patients, such as cardiomegaly or aortic tortuosity, that are presented as unchanged when compared to prior images. The pattern detects narratives of stability and mild systemic changes rather than acute alterations or findings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5632183908045977,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2631,latent_2631,13453,0.026906,0.014644375,3.5982015,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples all involve making comparisons with prior imaging, where there's a significant emphasis on stability or lack of significant change in findings over time. This is evident from frequent mentions of stability, unchanged positioning of medical devices, and consistent descriptions of previously identified conditions without new findings, indicating a focus on chronic or persistent findings rather than new acute changes.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5167062913822634,0.5226130653266332,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,99.0
+2632,latent_2632,2690,0.00538,0.007292003,5.6427555,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"The activation pattern targets descriptions of radiological findings in terms of their changes over time or in comparison to prior imaging, aligning with the task narrative to observe evolution or stability of certain conditions across imaging sessions. Descriptions often involve specific comparison statements pointing to significant or unchanged findings against previous studies.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4404761904761904,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2633,latent_2633,4176,0.008352,0.0108610215,4.8879614,Detailed interval change assessment compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels contain explicit language for evaluating interval change compared to prior images, often noting worsening or improvement of specific pathologies. They provide detailed findings with quantified changes, which is essential for radiological assessments.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.504950495049505,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2634,latent_2634,3237,0.006474,0.0077500134,5.991074,Comparison of current radiology images to prior images to evaluate changes.,"The pattern involves tasks where current findings in a radiological study are compared against previous images to assess changes or stability over time. The task prompts comparison to pre-existing conditions or interventions, suggesting a temporal evaluation in radiological reporting.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.515527950310559,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2635,latent_2635,8672,0.017344,0.01186075,3.9404514,Comparison with prior imaging to assess change or stability.,"Prompts with slightly higher activations often refer to descriptions derived from multiple views compared against previous images, indicating a pattern of comparison with earlier studies to assess stability or change in findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5327868852459017,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2636,latent_2636,4836,0.009672,0.011139819,3.5571983,Task requires comparing current and prior images in radiology.,The examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions of findings in radiology studies that include both current and prior images. This suggests that the task of comparing current and previous images is integral to these examples.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4983323685878883,0.545,0.5279503105590062,0.85,100.0,100.0
+2637,latent_2637,110017,0.220034,0.16111831,6.496763,Description of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves a description of stable findings, typically emphasizing unchanged observations compared to prior imaging studies. This includes stable sizes or positions of structures, devices or observed pathologies, with some examples noting modest changes such as mild interval decreases or stable opacities.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2638,latent_2638,6161,0.012322,0.016085528,6.126399,Emphasis on stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation make frequent use of phrases confirming the lack of acute findings, abnormalities, or changes from prior imaging, often emphasizing ongoing stability by stating unchanged conditions, like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'normal', etc. compared to the low activation ones, which focus more on acute occurrences.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4010088272383354,0.43,0.375,0.21,100.0,100.0
+2639,latent_2639,40342,0.080684,0.03895909,3.523696,"Comparison of current chest radiograph with prior imaging, highlighting interval changes.","Examples with higher activation levels involve comparing findings on current chest radiographs with prior imaging, specifically noting changes or stability in abnormalities like effusions, cardiac silhouette, and tube placements. Increased attention to interval changes or comparisons is a distinctive feature of these examples.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2640,latent_2640,6260,0.01252,0.013118514,5.865155,Interval changes noted based on explicit comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions of interval changes compared to previous imaging, such as changes in effusions, atelectasis, and catheter placements, coupled with clear documentary statements indicating stability or changes from prior findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5604395604395604,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2641,latent_2641,21419,0.042838,0.040658083,4.4535613,"Emphasis on changes compared to prior imaging, examining interval changes.","These examples emphasize the process of comparing current imaging findings with prior studies, explicitly asking for a description of interval changes. Reports frequently mention comparison, detailed changes, or stability since prior imaging, indicating clinical interest in tracking progression or resolution of findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2642,latent_2642,31855,0.06371,0.051737692,7.7434983,Incremental changes between current and prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are correlated with incremental changes or variations observed between the current and prior imaging studies, as indicated by descriptions in the findings. This includes terms such as 'new', 'unchanged', 'Interval change', and similar language describing changes since previous imaging.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.537583350171752,0.5376884422110553,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,99.0
+2643,latent_2643,4579,0.009158,0.008733998,2.9546492,Direct instruction to compare current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activations reflect cases where there is a direct requirement or instruction for a detailed description or comparison between the current and prior imaging studies, specified clearly in the prompt by phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image.'",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2644,latent_2644,3944,0.007888,0.009048721,4.407657,Reports focus on comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern represented by these examples involves the explicit directive to compare current imaging results with prior images, which is central to radiology reports when assessing change over time. This is evident from the instruction to 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior image'.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.34375,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2645,latent_2645,16826,0.033652,0.01882222,4.2288895,Detailed comparison of interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve providing comparative analyses between current and prior radiographic images, with a focus on evaluating interval changes in findings or device positions. This suggests that reports providing detailed observations on variations from previous studies are considered more representative of the pattern.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5164835164835165,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2646,latent_2646,3582,0.007164,0.0063465172,5.4508777,Details focus on unchanged/stable findings compared to prior images.,"These examples often include both a specified comparison to previous imaging studies and a detailed description of interval change or lack thereof. The pattern indicates a focus on identifying stable or unchanged findings, reflecting no acute alteration detected over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2647,latent_2647,5655,0.01131,0.006476373,4.599417,Comparison of current and prior images for interval change assessment.,"The data show activations where there's a directive or context suggesting the AI model needs to generate findings by interpreting a current image and comparing them to a prior one. Higher activation is linked to requests for interval assessment, signifying a need to analyze changes or stability over time by comparing images in reports.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2648,latent_2648,2785,0.00557,0.006722317,3.920873,Complex findings necessitating detailed analysis and notification.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve complex cases where the radiological findings are nuanced and require detailed interpretation. This necessitates comprehensive descriptions, often including notification to another clinician regarding the findings. Comparisons with previous imaging are often mentioned, demonstrating the impact of changes that are significant, requiring urgent communication.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5165991902834008,0.5175879396984925,0.5137614678899083,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+2649,latent_2649,4884,0.009768,0.01280124,4.2139525,Comparison prompts lacking prior study details.,"Examples with higher activation levels indicate a specific text structure focusing on comparison language despite missing prior images, using phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', without details from prior studies.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4118014947309171,0.5202020202020202,0.5136612021857924,0.94,100.0,98.0
+2650,latent_2650,3174,0.006348,0.013847677,4.8765535,Identification and description of thoracic pathologies and processes.,"These examples involve descriptors for abnormal findings in the lungs, pleura, mediastinum, or other thoracic structures, showing focus on identifying and describing specific pathologies or processes such as opacities, effusions, consolidations, or silhouette changes. The pattern highlights detailed examination of pathological findings irrespective of prior comparisons, especially with descriptors like 'atelectasis', 'pleural effusion', 'nodule', and 'opacity'.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.545442098633588,0.585,0.5534591194968553,0.88,100.0,100.0
+2651,latent_2651,9185,0.01837,0.014809459,6.6163826,Focused on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples scoring high in activation levels describe radiological findings by explicitly comparing them to previous images and focusing on changes or stability in pathological features. Descriptions highlight intervals of stability, progression, or resolution of conditions or devices since prior imaging.",0.64349376114082,0.68,0.6097560975609756,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.5661764705882353,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2652,latent_2652,26382,0.052764,0.029376525,6.9593773,Interval change in position or placement of medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe radiological changes compared with previous images, specifically involving the interval placement, removal, or repositioning of devices, tubes, or lines. These examples emphasize changes due to interventions like tube or catheter adjustments, which are a central focus of the reports.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7357536764705883,0.77,0.6721311475409836,0.6119402985074627,67.0,133.0
+2653,latent_2653,2929,0.005858,0.007284276,6.9852138,Provide findings description in comparison with prior images.,"The examples consistently involve detailed descriptions of imaging findings or procedures, often with references to previous imaging for comparison. The repeated pattern is the inclusion of a specific comparison process in the text ('Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'), showcasing the report's task of comparing current images with prior studies in medical imaging analysis.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4358974358974359,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2654,latent_2654,20939,0.041878,0.036299396,6.152872,"Normal, stable, or unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","The pattern focuses on findings related to the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours reported as normal, unremarkable, or stable in chest imaging. These specific terms are common in radiology findings that emphasize the absence of significant changes or abnormalities in these areas.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6846709388668497,0.69,0.6507936507936508,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2655,latent_2655,10538,0.021076,0.012119245,3.968355,"Evaluation of support device placement, especially tubes, with respect to prior imaging.","The pattern observed in the high activation examples is a focus on evaluating the placement of tubes and other support devices in relation to a prior imaging study. These examples assess intervals in tube placement like endotracheal tubes or gastric tubes, which indicates medical management of support device placement conditions over time or across studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6597938144329897,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2656,latent_2656,14264,0.028528,0.028123682,7.3954043,Explicitly refers to comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparisons or descriptions of findings from the current images with those from prior images. The prompt requests this comparison be made in the output, aligning with activation values.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2657,latent_2657,13842,0.027684,0.016721237,6.1898837,Comparison of current and prior images showing stability or change in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently compare current chest images with prior ones, highlighting the stability or change of findings, notably using phrases like 'no significant change' or 'unchanged' for stable reports or indicating specific interval changes.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.3900709219858156,0.7534246575342466,73.0,127.0
+2658,latent_2658,11113,0.022226,0.012951843,4.6862793,Detailed findings with recommendations for further evaluation.,"Higher activation levels are associated with radiology reports that provide detailed descriptions of findings with explicit directions for further evaluation or treatment. Common language includes precise locations of abnormalities, measurements, specific findings interpreted with possible medical implications, and recommendations for further imaging studies or interventions.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3714721586575133,0.485,0.4,0.06,100.0,100.0
+2659,latent_2659,2740,0.00548,0.010732423,5.638868,Direct request to compare current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe scenarios where a description is requested based on both current and prior images, often indicating a required comparison in the outcome expectations. These prompts usually lack or have minimal associated comparison descriptions or follow comparison-focused instructions.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.5190839694656488,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2660,latent_2660,3070,0.00614,0.011190891,7.4285283,Reports highlighting lack of comparison with prior imaging.,The examples with high activation levels typically indicate either no comparison available or explicitly include 'comparison: None.' This suggests the pattern is focused on reports highlighting current findings without referencing previous comparisons.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6221614642667275,0.6231155778894473,0.6146788990825688,0.67,100.0,99.0
+2661,latent_2661,8162,0.016324,0.02987172,6.3787546,Interval changes or stability in support devices or pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently compare current radiology findings to prior studies and emphasize any interval changes or stability of the findings, often mentioning removal, placement, or assessment of support devices or tubes. The pattern primarily deals with monitoring changes in device positioning or pathology over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2662,latent_2662,46099,0.092198,0.04736977,5.1122074,References to decreased or low lung volumes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often reference low lung volumes, which is a distinctive radiological finding that can be important to the diagnosis.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.6041666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2663,latent_2663,9543,0.019086,0.021727297,3.5614061,Descriptive comparison to prior imaging without definitive conclusions.,"Examples with high activations consistently focus on generating descriptions of the current radiology findings, particularly emphasizing changes or comparisons to prior imaging, without specifying any particular medical condition or concluding disease state. This reflects a pattern of interpreting imaging data in relative terms rather than absolute diagnostic conclusions.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4081632653061224,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2664,latent_2664,6278,0.012556,0.013452497,5.5072927,"Symmetrical lung findings such as atelectasis or opacities, often prefixed by 'bi-' or 'basil' terms.","The examples with higher activations frequently mention terms like ""bilateral"" or ""bibasilar atelectasis"" and describe symmetrical lung conditions, regardless of whether opacities, effusions, or atelectasis is present. This suggests the model is sensitive to descriptions of symmetrical patterns in pulmonary findings.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6688077077478924,0.67,0.6931818181818182,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2665,latent_2665,10442,0.020884,0.022441523,4.5480957,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation primarily involve detailed comparison of current imaging with prior studies, often including specific dates or observations about changes or stability in findings over time, which is a common pattern in radiology reporting.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.46875,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2666,latent_2666,3963,0.007926,0.011322748,4.2998576,Reports highlighting absence of acute cardiopulmonary changes.,"Examples with relatively high activation levels describe findings that indicate no acute abnormalities, with clear lungs, normal cardiomediastinal contours, and no effusions or pleural effusions present. They typically conclude with impressions of no acute processes. This pattern is likely indicative of reports that focus primarily on the absence of acute changes, rather than significant findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.623953013278856,0.628140703517588,0.6083333333333333,0.73,100.0,99.0
+2667,latent_2667,6613,0.013226,0.010456993,8.225596,Reports emphasizing detailed comparison with prior studies.,"The pattern closely aligns with scenarios where comparisons to prior imaging are explicitly requested or noted, involving changes (or stability) in a variety of conditions, particularly concerning cardiac, vascular, or respiratory aspects. Higher activations occur when there's an explicit approach to comparing the current with prior studies, often assessing stability or change in medical devices, effusions, consolidations, or other discernible anatomical changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2668,latent_2668,19476,0.038952,0.025469888,6.9098716,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior reports.,"The examples with high activation levels systematically reference prior X-ray findings and note changes or stability, such as unchanged or resolved conditions, in comparison to previous recordings. This pattern captures the radiological practice of long-term monitoring and provides context for current images.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2669,latent_2669,14759,0.029518,0.017277308,9.170879,Atelectasis mentioned with potential pneumonia development in the right clinical context.,"Examples with higher activations typically mention a prior or present-lived observation that could indicate uncertainty or potential for diagnostic change, particularly the presence of atelectasis and possible progression to pneumonia, making clinical context a key focus on whether findings indicate one or the other.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.3478260869565217,23.0,27.0,0.6662816069824156,0.74,0.4655172413793103,0.5625,48.0,152.0
+2670,latent_2670,24685,0.04937,0.024393637,2.504417,Comparison with past studies emphasizing changes in radiological features.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide findings in direct comparison to a prior study, highlighting changes (or stability) in specific structures, such as nodules, effusions, and other radiographic features. The consistent aspect across these examples is the emphasis on comparison to previous imaging.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2671,latent_2671,8172,0.016344,0.016028933,8.09953,Focus on changes in placement of medical devices compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples are centered around evaluating changes in the placement of medical lines or devices (like ETT, central lines, catheters) when compared to prior images. This pattern highlights the focus on the positional stability and any interval changes concerning medical apparatus in radiology studies, important in emergency and critical care settings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4227320675105485,0.4472361809045226,0.4067796610169492,0.2424242424242424,99.0,100.0
+2672,latent_2672,6883,0.013766,0.010329931,8.589069,Reports using current and prior frontal image comparison to detail changes.,"Examples with higher activation often describe findings seen on frontal images with references to comparison with prior images, emphasizing specific changes or stability in the radiographic findings. The radiographic assessment is detailed, highlighting new or resolved findings compared with the prior study, providing more clinical insight.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4202898550724637,0.6823529411764706,85.0,115.0
+2673,latent_2673,5385,0.01077,0.013783664,5.704423,Usage of both frontal and lateral views in comparison with prior imaging.,"In these examples, the use of multiple imaging views, such as 'frontal' and 'lateral', in conjunction with comparative analysis against prior images is prevalent. This suggests a pattern where multi-view radiological comparisons are key.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2674,latent_2674,4462,0.008924,0.008975682,3.1032379,Explicit instruction to describe image comparison outcomes.,"Examples with high activation (5.0+) consistently request descriptions comparing the current images to prior images explicitly, often mentioning 'description', and show a focus on image comparison over detailed findings.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2675,latent_2675,7522,0.015044,0.013906949,5.772632,Emphasis on comparing imaging findings with prior exams to note stability or changes.,"The samples that have higher activation levels all emphasize comparing the current imaging findings to prior exams, often mentioning stable conditions or interval changes in specific findings, such as nodules or other lesions, over clearly stated previous dates or non-acute changes.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2676,latent_2676,22155,0.04431,0.020715743,3.8414724,Comparison imaging highlighting stability or interval changes.,"The pattern focuses on radiology examples where comparison with prior images highlights stability or specific interval changes in findings, supporting interpretations such as stability, resolution, or diagnostic clarification. This typically includes mention of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6161427533976553,0.63,0.5942028985507246,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2677,latent_2677,4219,0.008438,0.012382576,4.4777246,Comparison with prior imaging and detailed analysis of stability or change over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed comparisons of the current imaging with prior studies, often using specific terminology to denote stability or change in the appearance of findings. Descriptions of findings frequently employ structured language and explicitly refer to prior reports or dated comparisons.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.584070796460177,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2678,latent_2678,9253,0.018506,0.012240482,4.4226875,Comparisons of aortic tortuosity or elongation when analyzing images.,"These samples often describe the presence of a comparison with prior images, particularly emphasizing stability or changes in the tortuosity or elongation of the aorta, as well as the use of devices such as tubes or catheters in providing care – these factors in radiology studies are frequently compared to track the progression or stability of certain conditions.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,100.0,100.0
+2679,latent_2679,27819,0.055638,0.033368938,4.415286,Reports comparing changes or stabilities with prior imaging.,"Higher activations are associated with reports discussing the comparison to prior imaging and noting specific changes, especially in the context of identifying abnormality or improvement in pathology like pneumonia or pleural effusion. Details about mediastinal contour, cardiac silhouette, and lung base aeration are often provided, indicating careful observation for changes over time.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4601248976248976,0.4673366834170854,0.4715447154471545,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+2680,latent_2680,8884,0.017768,0.017386062,7.7357497,Description of changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Most of the representative examples describe specific changes in the observed findings in comparison to prior imaging. These changes include updates such as no relevant change, improvement, or new development of conditions like effusions, opacities, or pulmonary edema.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6882782424001062,0.7035175879396985,0.6433566433566433,0.92,100.0,99.0
+2681,latent_2681,11049,0.022098,0.013496133,4.5533442,Comparison focused on tube or catheter placement and changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of medical equipment placement, particularly feeding tubes or other catheter placements, with comparisons to prior images to assess changes and outcomes. Terms like 'Dobbhoff' or descriptions of endotracheal tube positions are often present in these high activation cases and relate to procedures or interventions being captured in the imaging comparison.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4528301886792453,0.24,100.0,100.0
+2682,latent_2682,6419,0.012838,0.012275452,5.7097645,Comparison and stability assessment between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels (5, 6, and 7) consistently include phrases that indicate a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, typically noting stability or interval changes in findings. These reports explicitly request descriptions of the radiological findings in relation to prior images, which is a key feature distinguishing them.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4388129123587553,0.445,0.4545454545454545,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2683,latent_2683,12980,0.02596,0.015416699,6.3802857,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,Multiple examples use phrases indicating comparison with prior imaging studies combined with descriptions of either a lack of significant change or stable findings. This suggests the pattern is related to the analysis of stability or minimal change in findings across comparable images.,0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.531480215690742,0.5326633165829145,0.5217391304347826,0.4948453608247423,97.0,102.0
+2684,latent_2684,7729,0.015458,0.019510344,5.33448,Stable findings with comparison to prior radiographic images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention comparisons to prior studies or the absence of acute changes, indicating a focus on stable findings or minimal changes in radiographic images over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2685,latent_2685,18319,0.036638,0.016469551,2.6699126,Structured comparison to prior images with standardized reporting templates.,"Examples with higher activation involve explicit instructions to compare current and prior imaging, often accompanied by standardized or formalized reporting templates denoted by text such as ""PRIOR_REPORT"" or ""INDICATION"". This signifies structured instructions to reference previous examinations when analyzing current images.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.42,0.4393939393939394,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2686,latent_2686,3944,0.007888,0.01191546,4.67505,Analysis of change or stability in pulmonary findings between current and prior chest radiographs.,"Higher activation levels correspond to examples where the radiologist provides a description of findings based on the current and prior chest radiographs, often noting changes or stability in pulmonary conditions. The pattern revolves around the analysis of changes in lung conditions over sequential imaging.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2687,latent_2687,6008,0.012016,0.010091032,3.8782694,Evaluation of changes over time using comparison with prior images.,"These examples show a strong focus on changes over time in the patient's condition or imaging findings, often contrasting the current image with prior observations. The reports consistently utilize phrases like 'in comparison with', 'unchanged from prior', and explicitly mention changes or improvements relative to previous exams.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2688,latent_2688,47123,0.094246,0.06257751,5.534615,Explicit comparison to prior images noting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation relate to the use of explicit comparisons to a previous image or exam, noting significant interval changes, assessments, or stability of conditions. The pattern revolves around evaluating changes, stability, or the absence of changes relative to past imaging, rather than just evaluating present conditions.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.607487922705314,0.61,0.5948275862068966,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2689,latent_2689,17555,0.03511,0.018365908,4.646602,Changes in lung findings affected by patient positioning or radiograph technique.,"The examples with higher activations focus on descriptions of changes or findings in the lungs, particularly concerning the presence of infiltrates, effusions or pneumonia, and how these are evaluated in the context of patient's rotation, positioning or technique factors affecting the radiograph.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5915435139573071,0.5979899497487438,0.6266666666666667,0.4747474747474747,99.0,100.0
+2690,latent_2690,2510,0.00502,0.0059798653,6.4419494,Interactions requiring descriptions without prior reports.,"Examples with high activations consistently mention findings from new images compared to prior ones while explicitly stating no prior reports are available (""PRIOR_REPORT: N/A""). It indicates emphasis on identifying intervals or changes without pre-existing detailed radiological interpretations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4567901234567901,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2691,latent_2691,3445,0.00689,0.010325253,4.870453,Comparison of current images to prior imaging studies.,"These examples demonstrate a pattern where the report involves explicit reference to prior imaging reports or studies and notes any changes or stability compared to those previous images. Phrases like 'compared to', 'PRIOR_REPORT', and specific dates indicate this comparison-based practice.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.2857142857142857,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2692,latent_2692,3601,0.007202,0.008245571,5.319802,Use of current and prior frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"The high-activation examples consistently include both current and prior images for comparison, emphasizing the review process of different views, particularly the 'frontal' and 'lateral' images along with prior comparisons. This context focuses on information used to assess changes over time in radiological evaluations.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2693,latent_2693,9890,0.01978,0.02511954,9.14582,Description of interval changes when comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation all contain specific relative changes or comparisons made in reference to prior imaging studies, describing notable differences or confirmations of stasis in findings such as equipment positions, effusions, or opacities as compared to previous images.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5643564356435643,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2694,latent_2694,11718,0.023436,0.013553887,3.8841977,Task-based comparison between current and prior images without detailed findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve specific instructions or tasks related to directly comparing current images with prior images. The focus is on the procedural aspect of performing such a comparison, often without an existing prior report or specific changes to note.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2695,latent_2695,4531,0.009062,0.009862631,4.299867,"Comparisons across multiple image views with a focus on lung, cardiac, or pleural conditions.","These examples frequently contain descriptions or references to multiple images viewed together (frontal, lateral, and sometimes prior images), and often describe findings that are consistent or unchanged across those images. Patterns in the language suggest an emphasis on identifying changes or stability, entwined with terminology related to changes in lung, cardiac, or pleural conditions specifically. This indicates an overarching focus on detailed comparative analysis involving multiple imaging views.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4181017535582291,0.445,0.4615384615384615,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2696,latent_2696,3660,0.00732,0.008632013,4.801084,Comparison with prior imaging showing stable or minimally changed findings.,"The examples show similar linguistic patterns where findings are described in relation to previous images or examinations, with frequent mentions of unchanged or mildly changed conditions. This pattern indicates radiology reports framing current observations in terms of stability or change over time through prior comparisons, which is typical for monitoring chronic conditions, device positions, or subtle changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5989974937343359,0.6,0.6111111111111112,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2697,latent_2697,3578,0.007156,0.012701613,7.0347486,Detailed longitudinal comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include phrases describing detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, often using specific medical terms, detection of changes, or confirming stability. This pattern identifies the model's focus on change detection in longitudinal radiological assessments.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4880952380952381,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2698,latent_2698,4381,0.008762,0.0066929776,7.139517,Diagnostic comparisons to prior radiology images involving anatomical or pathological changes.,"The examples with non-zero activations contain explicit directives to compare given radiology images to prior images. The pattern highlighted refers to radiology prompts that involve making diagnostic assessments based on comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, specifically noting changes or stability over time, which is a common practice in radiological evaluations.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.4477611940298507,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2699,latent_2699,3702,0.007404,0.0073224464,6.81685,"Reports changes in interval imaging studies, with emphasis on unchanged findings.","The examples consistently report interval changes between current and prior radiographic studies, particularly highlighting findings that are unchanged or stable across time. Comparison language and unchanged descriptions are repeatedly noted in higher activation samples, suggesting stability is a recognized pattern.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2700,latent_2700,4145,0.00829,0.0086710565,7.443205,Description of interval changes in imaging findings.,These examples primarily involve the discussion of interval changes in the findings on imaging when compared to previous studies. The reports focus on whether there are changes (or stability) in aspects of the condition being monitored.,0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.25,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4056875545101356,0.4321608040201005,0.3793103448275862,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+2701,latent_2701,15879,0.031758,0.016833086,4.7225246,Findings are described in direct comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently include the concept of performing and reporting on direct comparison with previous imaging studies. The phrase 'compared to prior' or similar terminology is frequent in these examples, highlighting the importance of temporal analysis in radiological assessment.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.5416666666666666,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2702,latent_2702,37368,0.074736,0.042646263,6.8166814,Significant changes or new interventions since prior imaging.,"Samples with high activations tend to involve cases where there is a significant or notable change in the findings as compared to previous imaging. These involve new interventions, significant condition changes, or clear positional adjustments that are meaningful in clinical contexts.",0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4769230769230769,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2703,latent_2703,5062,0.010124,0.008030216,5.184913,Changes in imaging findings or device placements compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve specific mentions of changes or comparisons with prior imaging, indicating the presence or absence of new findings and how they compare to previous studies. Additionally, they often involve assessing devices or monitor placement and their positions relative to anatomical landmarks, such as tubes in relation to the carina.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2704,latent_2704,7266,0.014532,0.00605971,2.0212443,"Detailed comparison to a previous imaging study, emphasizing interval changes.","Several examples feature phrases that clearly reference previous imaging and describe interval changes, such as 'interval improvement' or 'unchanged.' They focus on specific features like pneumomediastinum, pleural effusion or consolidations, in both the current and prior images, highlighting changes over time compared with the prior study.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4903846153846153,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2705,latent_2705,3305,0.00661,0.011850858,5.587126,Frontal and lateral views with prior image comparison in radiology findings.,"The pattern highlighted involves evaluating radiological findings by referencing multiple viewing angles (frontal and lateral views) AND prior imaging studies for comparison, often in the context of follow-up or assessing interval change.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4725620020199753,0.53,0.5180722891566265,0.86,100.0,100.0
+2706,latent_2706,4614,0.009228,0.01226868,4.0049186,Emphasis on comparison to prior images for stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons of the current imaging findings to prior images, particularly focusing not just on the presence of descriptive elements of findings but also on confirming stability or changes in findings such as contours, silhouettes, or placed medical devices.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4068343004513217,0.425,0.4444444444444444,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2707,latent_2707,58968,0.117936,0.06070848,3.5882847,Pleural effusion presence and status in radiological comparison.,"The radiology reports with higher activation levels frequently mention the presence and status of pleural effusions, either unilateral or bilateral, and their stability, change, or role in associated conditions like atelectasis, pneumonia, or other pulmonary issues. Lower activations typically lack this detailed focus on pleural effusions.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5963408560719248,0.615,0.7017543859649122,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2708,latent_2708,8640,0.01728,0.016174326,2.6020463,"Request for comparison to prior imaging, whether or not the priors exist.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently ask for a comparison with previous imaging, regardless of whether a prior exists or not. This implies that the task of referencing or attempting to compare with previous images is a pattern heavily activating the model.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2709,latent_2709,17956,0.035912,0.020776164,5.8281455,Descriptions of interval change in imaging findings in current and prior studies.,The examples show references to both current and prior imaging studies and emphasize interval changes or stability. Activation is higher when interval changes like new opacities or removal/addition of chest tubes are described.,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5904507100226384,0.5979899497487438,0.5793650793650794,0.73,100.0,99.0
+2710,latent_2710,3879,0.007758,0.0121349245,5.418291,Detailed comparison with prior images and description of changes.,"The described high activation examples consistently involve the model being instructed to compare the current images with previous imaging and provide detailed descriptions of changes or lack thereof. These examples highlight the focus on direct comparison between current and prior images, particularly with explicit emphasis on differences noted during comparative analysis, using detailed phrases like ""as compared to"" and ""interval change.""",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4168797953964194,0.43,0.4,0.28,100.0,100.0
+2711,latent_2711,2115,0.00423,0.009547009,9.303411,Stable anatomical devices or lines across imaging comparisons.,"This pattern involves radiology reports that describe anatomical devices such as pacemakers, PICC lines, or catheters, and their placement. The positions or presence of these devices are stable and consistent in the comparison to prior images. High activation levels indicate that describing the presence or status of such devices is the pattern being recognized.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3614973262032085,0.4120603015075377,0.2954545454545454,0.1313131313131313,99.0,100.0
+2712,latent_2712,42808,0.085616,0.06643699,5.7415624,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activations often involve comparative descriptions where new findings are evaluated in relation to changes from prior images, emphasizing stability or changes over time. These cases revolve around identifying stability, interval change, or absence of new findings relative to past images, which aids in tracking progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2713,latent_2713,22697,0.045394,0.024862003,6.0192866,Changes in positioning or presence of devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention the addition, change, or positioning of medical devices between the current and prior images, highlighting their appearance or adjustments over time. These changes are the focus of comparison, suggesting the pattern for high activation is descriptions detailing changes in device positioning or presence in comparison with prior imaging.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.64996499649965,0.65,0.6530612244897959,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2714,latent_2714,6642,0.013284,0.020446144,4.760076,"Direct comparison with prior imaging studies, noting changes over time.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the analysis of new imaging findings in the context of direct comparison with prior imaging studies. These high-activation examples explicitly note changes (or stability) over time, strongly suggesting the model is focused on longitudinal assessments of medical imaging to track disease progression or stability.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4864864864864865,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2715,latent_2715,18901,0.037802,0.022360153,3.9711545,Radiological findings compared with prior imaging results.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally involve the interpretation of radiological images with explicit references to prior imaging for comparison of findings. These comparisons often indicate stability or changes over time, which are important assessments in radiological protocols.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2716,latent_2716,3471,0.006942,0.008746504,4.920054,Comparison of current radiograph findings to prior images.,"These examples discuss the evaluation of findings on current chest radiographs with respect to prior imaging studies, even when no prior images are available, which is a common linguistic pattern in radiology reports. The focus is on describing the findings consistently in relation to old studies.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4566929133858268,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2717,latent_2717,7876,0.015752,0.023119967,6.1171346,Absence of prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly emphasize the absence of prior studies for comparison, explicitly stating ""None"" or ""No prior"". This indicates a specific focus on cases where no previous radiological baseline is available for assessing changes.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4861824782064063,0.4924623115577889,0.4935064935064935,0.38,100.0,99.0
+2718,latent_2718,8015,0.01603,0.025155075,6.4714346,Presence of pleural effusion and related conditions in radiological findings.,"Examples with a higher activation level consistently report findings of pleural effusion and related complications, such as atelectasis or fluid overload. Even when assited directives include instructions to provide changes compared with prior images, when pleural effusions are present, they are highly activated.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.7083333333333334,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2719,latent_2719,4713,0.009426,0.008569317,4.0782433,Mention of interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with positive activation levels consistently highlight interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging that indicate stability or changes in pathologies, often noting unchanged status as suggestive of benign conditions or stable pathology.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2720,latent_2720,17558,0.035116,0.018355586,4.5860476,Presence of previously identified findings with minimal change.,"The predominant pattern in the examples revolves around the presence of previously identified findings, such as lines or tubes (PICC lines, pacemakers) and known radiological abnormalities (pulmonary opacities, cardiomediastinal contours) described in comparison to previous images. This reveals that the activation pertains to reports emphasizing previously noted findings with minimal or no change.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5322380892202705,0.5326633165829145,0.5319148936170213,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+2721,latent_2721,11425,0.02285,0.03322607,5.5328627,"Focus on comparison with prior images for changes or stability, concerning specific clinical indications.","The pattern reflects a propensity for descriptions that focus on providing a comparative analysis of current imaging findings to previous ones, needing to identify changes, stability, or specific conditions such as pneumonia or effusion based on the images compared.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3873152709359606,0.3969849246231156,0.416,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+2722,latent_2722,10172,0.020344,0.015207494,6.3585105,Constant or unchanged insertion-related devices in chest imaging.,"Examples exhibiting high activation frequently describe comparisons with previous imaging that highlight changes related to tubes in the chest, specifically involving the positioning or behavior of feeding tubes, endotracheal tubes, or related devices. The findings focus on unchanged or correctly positioned devices and incidental observations concerning these tubes.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4411764705882353,0.3,100.0,100.0
+2723,latent_2723,17373,0.034746,0.021685315,4.2806063,Radiology reports evaluating stability or interval change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention interval change, stability, or status evaluation in radiology studies by comparing current images to prior ones. This pattern involves assessing changes over time and is often seen in reports evaluating the progress of known conditions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5689655172413793,0.58,0.5606060606060606,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2724,latent_2724,3609,0.007218,0.0104735,8.627793,Absence of prior image comparison in radiological evaluation.,"The examples with high activation scores indicate that the radiological report lacks comparison with prior studies. The reports explicitly state ""comparison: none"" or ""comparison not available,"" highlighting the absence of prior images, which is unusual and noteworthy in radiological evaluations that commonly involve comparisons to previous results for context.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4924646417806631,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+2725,latent_2725,5370,0.01074,0.008330232,5.0423503,Evaluation for pneumonia or infection in radiology report findings.,"Highly activated examples tend to involve instructions related to the evaluation of potential pneumonia or airspace disease in radiographs, especially when identifying or confirming signs of infection or inflammatory process in the lungs. The presence of explicit query for 'pneumonia', 'infiltrate', or evaluation for infection aligns with higher activation scores.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2726,latent_2726,3629,0.007258,0.00484143,6.219203,Description of findings emphasizing stability or change compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference a direct comparison between current and prior imaging to assess changes in findings such as heart size, pulmonary opacities, or aortic contours. They focus on the stability or change of specific features over time contrary to those without specific comparison details.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4599459945994599,0.46,0.4607843137254901,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2727,latent_2727,29487,0.058974,0.048213452,5.6003947,Findings discussed in light of changes from previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe findings in relation to previous images or reports, indicating stability, change, or comparison, particularly emphasizing the consistency or improvement of certain conditions or abnormalities over time.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+2728,latent_2728,26664,0.053328,0.022079233,2.662091,"Tasks compare current and prior imaging, often noting stability or changes in findings or device placement.","The examples with non-zero activations feature tasks where the completion involves providing a description of radiological findings compared to prior images, with particular focus on changes or lack thereof in medical devices or common pathologies. The role involves observing patterns that imply direct comparison, especially with changes in indications or device positioning.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2729,latent_2729,21228,0.042456,0.020719541,3.5927327,Discrepancies or notable findings compared to previous images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a discrepancy, change, or notable finding in current radiology images when compared to previous images. These often suggest considerations or hypotheses for underlying conditions, differentiated from prior studies, unlike lower activation examples that merely state stability or similar findings without adding interpretative weight.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5058823529411764,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2730,latent_2730,6582,0.013164,0.010665888,3.4874027,Multiple views (frontal/lateral) correlated with prior images for diagnostic updates.,"In these examples, multiple image views are present (frontal and lateral), and each case often includes a comparison with prior images, focusing on updates or changes in diagnosis or condition. This pattern suggests a comprehensive study correlating different perspectives (frontal/lateral) to evaluate changes between current and prior states.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5789911380233373,0.595,0.5683453237410072,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2731,latent_2731,13858,0.027716,0.015564183,4.274989,Emphasis on interval change or stability assessment compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations often describe observations over time, indicating interval changes or stability in the findings directly compared to prior imaging studies. This can be observed in language such as 'compared to,' 'from prior studies,' etc., focusing on assessment of stability or change in conditions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5997536945812808,0.61,0.5833333333333334,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2732,latent_2732,147476,0.294952,0.16961524,2.9518206,Radiographic description of cardiomegaly or unchanged heart size.,"Despite multiple imaging examples, there is consistently low activation. This indicates the pattern does not correspond to the presence or absence of prior comparisons, specific findings, or unique radiographic features. Therefore, the common link among higher activation examples is radiographic descriptions of cardiomegaly, an unchanged heart size often described in the context of examining for potential heart failure or related cardiac issues.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5689655172413793,0.58,0.6176470588235294,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2733,latent_2733,7651,0.015302,0.0129278535,3.2481468,Description of radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples consistently reference a description of findings in relation to prior images, even when no specific findings are given, using common radiological language for comparative analysis.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3445903689806129,0.345,0.3368421052631579,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2734,latent_2734,29158,0.058316,0.04069548,5.4942985,Assessment of endotracheal tube placement relative to the carina.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve assessments of medical device placements in relation to the carina, particularly focusing on endotracheal tube placement. The comparison of these device placements to previous positions is a common task in radiology reports for monitoring accurate tube placement and preventing complications.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7195099362282025,0.735,0.9433962264150944,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2735,latent_2735,41527,0.083054,0.03416695,1.943365,Changes in pleural effusion or catheter placement in serial imaging.,"The highly activated examples often mention the presence or change of pleural effusions or the placement of medical devices like catheters with adjustments or interventions over time, typically illustrating changes in the patient's condition or treatment. These examples highlight concerns related to fluid management in the thorax or involve significant procedural changes in serial imaging.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.6274509803921569,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2736,latent_2736,13558,0.027116,0.019708464,7.8635216,Comparison to prior images amidst stable findings or lack of acute changes.,"The pattern here is linked to the presence of both current and prior images, where the responses focus on comparing and contrasting findings relative to a previous reference, as well as lacking explicit indicators of acute abnormalities. The imaging studies often have no acute changes or highlight stable conditions compared to the prior set when previous images are available.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4230769230769231,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2737,latent_2737,2016,0.004032,0.00805349,5.4339123,Emphasis on comparison of radiological changes over time using prior images.,"These examples consistently mention both current and prior images, along with detailed assessments of changes in specific radiological findings over time. The high-activation examples specifically note conditions like effusions, cardiomegaly, or nodules that are tracked for stability or improvement by comparing to prior images.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2738,latent_2738,9317,0.018634,0.0147261005,8.147264,Descriptions emphasizing changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of interval changes or similarities in specific features between the current and prior imaging studies. This pattern highlights the model's focus on recognizing updates, stability, or progression of findings using comparative language.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.4117647058823529,0.7368421052631579,76.0,124.0
+2739,latent_2739,3661,0.007322,0.012047597,5.415757,Complexity in findings and changes when comparing current images to prior.,"Samples with activation levels closer to zero often include descriptions where comparison to prior imaging is performed but new acute findings are absent or unchanged; whereas examples with higher activations are more complex, noting new or changing findings. The pattern indicates complexity in findings and required descriptions of changes.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2740,latent_2740,3294,0.006588,0.008217837,3.8932137,Emphasis on stability or no relevant change across comparisons.,"The activation levels are high when instructions emphasize description based on both current and prior images, particularly if explicit reference to comparison stating ""there is no relevant change"" or similarly worded conclusions are present. This reflects a focus on stability and lack of significant findings in sequential imaging.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4935064935064935,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2741,latent_2741,7904,0.015808,0.01208476,4.859826,Comparisons of detailed tube positions with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate detailed technical descriptions of tube placements in relation to expected anatomical landmarks and changes between two imaging events. This often involves noting the position of tubes relative to anatomical structures such as the carina or stomach, and comparing with prior imaging to note changes or confirmation of positioning, which is a common feature in post-operative or intensive care evaluations.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2742,latent_2742,5147,0.010294,0.010925621,4.7595267,Radiology description without true visual comparison.,"These examples involve descriptions relying on images for comparison but reference comparisons and image modalities inconsistently. The radiology findings lack specific comparisons, often stating 'None', indicating that the comparison requested is not truly available, reflecting a pattern where comparison was not made despite instructions to describe similarities or differences.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2743,latent_2743,6394,0.012788,0.01436795,4.632851,Comparison of imaging findings to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a pattern of providing observations and findings in the context of comparing current imaging results to prior studies. The text references specific changes or absence of changes and evalutes findings in context of those comparisons, indicating a focus on monitoring progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2744,latent_2744,5202,0.010404,0.0084587,6.2317843,Stable cardiomegaly and mild pulmonary congestion or edema.,"These examples describe findings that include various forms of pulmonary congestion or edema, cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, and other indicators of cardiopulmonary issues. They focus on comparison with prior images to identify changes, but the key pattern is the recurrence of mild-to-moderate signs of pulmonary issues along with stable cardiac features.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6027318984517428,0.635,0.813953488372093,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2745,latent_2745,6333,0.012666,0.009538086,3.9284506,Explicit comparison of radiological findings to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior images, whereas non-activated examples often lack such explicit comparative language or omit mention of prior imaging but do not detail changes or stability of findings compared to prior studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4896551724137931,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2746,latent_2746,19510,0.03902,0.02737364,6.288296,"Short-interval changes or positional monitoring of tubes, lines, or other devices.","Examples with higher activation levels include detailed changes over short intervals in radiological findings, specifically related to monitoring positions of tubes, lines, or devices, as well as changes in pneumothorax, effusions, or pulmonary findings, noted in conditions frequently requiring frequent or continuous monitoring.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6884735202492211,0.69,0.7209302325581395,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2747,latent_2747,10264,0.020528,0.016526552,7.299971,Emphasis on detailed comparison with prior images or reports.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently contain explicit instructions to provide descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior imaging. These examples involve tasks that require specific comparison with previous reports or images, indicating a strong pattern associated with comparative analysis in radiology reports.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2748,latent_2748,10114,0.020228,0.013749622,4.3953147,Stable cardiomegaly or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in comparison to prior imaging.,The most representative samples of this pattern include descriptions of cardiomegaly or changes in the cardiomediastinal silhouette that are stable when compared to previous examinations. This stability and observation of cardiomegaly without other acute changes seems to trigger the pattern strongly.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5961538461538461,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2749,latent_2749,8380,0.01676,0.019268978,7.763024,Detailed comparative findings indicating interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation feature detailed explanations of radiological findings in comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes or stability of conditions. These comparisons provide a clear image of the progression or resolution of medical conditions which is essential in radiographic examinations.",0.2573263749498193,0.26,0.2272727272727272,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3037662070384853,0.3165829145728643,0.25,0.18,100.0,99.0
+2750,latent_2750,5369,0.010738,0.01204443,4.694476,Interval changes or findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention explicit interval changes or comparisons, using phrases like 'compared to prior' or 'interval change.' This shows an emphasis on identifying changes across different temporal images.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.464665415884928,0.465,0.4666666666666667,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2751,latent_2751,42993,0.085986,0.061315194,6.6880264,Reports include detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations involve descriptions comparing current chest imaging findings with prior imaging studies. These reports focus on noting interval changes, stability, or progression of findings such as masses, effusions, or nodules.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5433070866141733,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2752,latent_2752,3873,0.007746,0.008474947,5.6620297,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging for changes or stability.,"Samples with high activation scores consistently mention comparisons to previous imaging results, specifically comparing the current and prior imaging findings in terms of changes or stability. This pattern indicates a focus on image-to-image comparison to evaluate stability or changes in pathological processes.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.45368492224476,0.495,0.4967741935483871,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2753,latent_2753,15385,0.03077,0.02056579,6.982107,"Clear lungs with normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","The examples describe findings that include a clear lungs without pleural effusion or pneumothorax, along with references to cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours being normal or unchanged. This pattern is identifiable as a common radiographic description where normality or lack of acute changes is emphasized, particularly relating to the heart and mediastinal regions.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7636706473915776,0.765,0.8117647058823529,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2754,latent_2754,2795,0.00559,0.007007673,7.1548724,Reports include degenerative changes in the spine.,"The examples demonstrate a pattern where reports describe degenerative changes, often in the thoracic spine, which is a common incidental finding noted in radiology reports. These changes are frequently mentioned without being the primary focus of the report, aligning with higher activation scores where such descriptions appear.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.9166666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7107328805137828,0.7236180904522613,0.8793103448275862,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+2755,latent_2755,2849,0.005698,0.0069521987,4.8305078,High activation occurs when there's no prior comparison available for the radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight instances where the radiological report has no previous comparison available, focusing on the current examination findings. This lack of historical data is crucial as it challenges the evaluation based solely on current presentation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5064935064935064,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2756,latent_2756,13594,0.027188,0.014190591,3.9468222,Comparison of findings over time showing stability or unchanged states.,"The pattern focuses on the stability or change in findings across given images, often incorporating specific comparison details, such as features like opacities or devices, seen across different time points. High activation levels are tied to comparing recent frontal images with earlier studies, indicating stable or unchanged states, while lower levels lack these specific details.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2757,latent_2757,3172,0.006344,0.00972954,6.148975,Detection of unchanged features or findings compared to prior images.,Examples with high activation prominently include descriptions of images as either matching unchanged states from a prior image or possessing specific unchanged structural features. Radiology reports often focus on this observation to guide clinicians that there's been no notable progression or new developments.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5244174113288779,0.525,0.5268817204301075,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2758,latent_2758,2515,0.00503,0.0068288166,6.5298395,"Clear lungs and normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","Highly activated examples consistently describe clear lungs without pleural abnormalities, combined with normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours. These examples also often describe a lack of change in critical pathologies despite comparisons to past results or the presence of minor indicators, focusing on an overall normal cardiac and pulmonary appearance.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7185858585858586,0.7185929648241206,0.72,0.72,100.0,99.0
+2759,latent_2759,2277,0.004554,0.008778751,7.385286,Requested analysis comparing current and prior imaging studies.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that specify a comparison of the current imaging study to prior images, and particularly highlight changes or stability in the findings. Many high activation examples explicitly ask for descriptions of imaging findings in comparison to previous images, often referencing intervals of stability or nuances in changes observed over time. Examples not featuring this comparative analysis and lacking explicit prior comparisons tend to have lower activation levels.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2760,latent_2760,6673,0.013346,0.01235421,3.6900764,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2761,latent_2761,2725,0.00545,0.01108042,5.56314,"Structure ""Given the current...and prior...image"" for interval change assessment.","These examples emphasize the presence of both current and prior imaging comparisons using the phrase ""Given the current...and prior...image"" followed by an indication of the clinical context. This structure signals a focus on evaluating interval changes via comparative analysis in a medical imaging context.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5286724273369993,0.58,0.5481927710843374,0.91,100.0,100.0
+2762,latent_2762,3890,0.00778,0.013476576,6.4697394,Low lung volumes affecting radiological interpretation.,"These examples consistently highlight reports where low lung volumes are noted, a radiological finding that affects the appearance of other structures, often leading to emphasis on borderline size of cardiac silhouette or other structural changes related to decreased lung expansion.",0.6933667083854819,0.6938775510204082,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.7314484051582174,0.735,0.8051948051948052,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2763,latent_2763,6708,0.013416,0.009850265,3.9692576,Descriptive changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The high activation examples involve descriptions comparing new findings with previous radiological studies. Specifically, high activation is noted when changes from prior exams are observed and explicitly described, such as pneumothorax developments, pleural effusion changes, or position alterations in cardiac or thoracic structures.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2764,latent_2764,5174,0.010348,0.013271557,7.629807,High activation with procedural context or tube positioning in chest radiographs.,"The highly activated examples frequently pair the analysis of image changes with simultaneous mention of procedural elements like nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, which indicates integration of results from imaging with procedural context or technical aspects, specifically often mentioning tube placements and associated findings in chest radiographs.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2765,latent_2765,14800,0.0296,0.012983778,3.8703895,Comparison of current and prior images in multiple projections (frontal and lateral).,"The pattern across the examples with non-zero activation involves the presence of an explicit statement about using both current images and prior images to derive the findings. This often entails listing both the current frontal and lateral images along with a prior frontal image, and documenting changes or stable findings over time across multiple images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2766,latent_2766,9735,0.01947,0.015687967,6.496287,Reports emphasizing interval changes using prior image context and medical interventions.,"Examples with high activation specifically detail comparison between current and prior imaging, emphasizing changes (or lack thereof). Most high-activation examples also describe specific changes in lung opacities, pulmonary structures, or insertions/removals of medical devices. This indicates reports that focus on interval changes with context from the patient's medical interventions likely drive the pattern.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5321100917431193,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2767,latent_2767,4676,0.009352,0.011326616,4.703662,Focus on comparison to prior imaging due to serious medical history or condition.,"In these examples, the highest activation levels are associated with cases where a significant past medical history or current severe health event necessitates careful comparison to prior images. Key terms like 'comparison' and 'changes since' indicate this need to track or rule out progression, often involving acute conditions or substantial medical interventions such as aneurysm repair or pleural effusion.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2768,latent_2768,4196,0.008392,0.009074572,7.5775995,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2769,latent_2769,27635,0.05527,0.02954683,4.592089,Descriptions focus on stability or minimal change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation show adjustments in imaging findings from prior studies, either showing minimal interval changes or no significant changes, but always mention these aspects comparatively. These reports involve descriptions of stability or changes over time, using comparisons with previous images as the primary focus rather than radiological abnormalities themselves.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.587929292929293,0.5879396984924623,0.5858585858585859,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+2770,latent_2770,20924,0.041848,0.05600747,7.5462623,Explicitly stated task to compare current with prior image findings.,"Activation is high when the request for comparison with prior images is explicitly stated as a task, often involving detailed changes or stability over time. This includes instructions to compare current and prior images, often to evaluate specific changes such as device positioning or subtle findings.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2771,latent_2771,3626,0.007252,0.0070457985,6.231437,Comparison to prior imaging with detailed change analysis over time.,"The highly activated examples frequently include comparisons to prior imaging and describe specific changes or consistencies over time, often indicating stability or notable differences in findings, particularly with regard to cardiorespiratory or pulmonary changes, presence of devices, or opacities. These examples provide date identifiers or explicitly mention 'unchanged' or 'stable' conditions indicating reliance on past imaging for context.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4925373134328358,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2772,latent_2772,3903,0.007806,0.013147971,5.1652145,Comparison of frontal and lateral current images often noted as 'comparison none'.,"The pattern with high activations involves providing descriptions of current imaging compared to prior images, specifically when requested to provide descriptions using both frontal and lateral current imaging with results usually marked as 'comparison none,' even when prompted with a comparison request, indicating analysis despite non-availability of comparable prior images.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4923076923076923,0.5151515151515151,0.5357142857142857,0.3,100.0,98.0
+2773,latent_2773,8370,0.01674,0.018290956,6.462055,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and absence of lung abnormalities on standard chest views.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly involve normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung appearances on both the frontal and lateral chest views, often with additional comments confirming the absence of pleural effusion and pneumothorax, even in the context of prior images and medical indications.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7144022847817217,0.72,0.8055555555555556,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2774,latent_2774,4282,0.008564,0.00824291,7.906502,Evaluation and reporting of tube or line placements in radiology images.,"The examples with higher activation consistently mention issues or findings related to tube placements, such as endotracheal tubes or other line placements, and their positions. This suggests a pattern focused on evaluating and reporting the position and adjustments of medical tubes or lines in radiology reports.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.75,0.75,0.75,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2775,latent_2775,4123,0.008246,0.008495481,4.717522,Comparison and description of findings relative to prior imaging.,"Instances with higher activations frequently involve requests to provide findings in comparison to prior imaging. This suggests that patterns of evaluating changes or stability in patient conditions over time are being captured, reflected by documentation of elements that remain unchanged or changes in radiological findings from previous studies.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2776,latent_2776,26766,0.053532,0.023052908,2.8778949,Detailed comparison of current images with prior images noting specific changes or stability.,"The pattern among activated examples is the presence of detailed comparative analysis between current images and prior images, where specific changes or stability are noted within the findings. Unactivated examples often lack this level of detail or do not engage in comparative analysis.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2777,latent_2777,34232,0.068464,0.027540805,3.1443143,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting stability or interval change.","The examples with higher activations focus on comparisons between current and prior imaging, particularly noting stability or changes in clinical conditions or device positions. These examples detail interval changes or stability in the context of patient management and ongoing conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5584102769971899,0.56,0.5535714285714286,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2778,latent_2778,4615,0.00923,0.009160406,3.5633273,Focus on comparison and assessment with prior imaging.,"The pattern in the data indicates that examples with explicit references to prior imaging and comparison thereof tend to have higher activation. This suggests that the model is recognizing patterns where report content is primarily focused on longitudinal assessment rather than standalone findings, which are prevalent in radiology for monitoring changes over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3770457185091331,0.41,0.4383561643835616,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2779,latent_2779,13626,0.027252,0.015509729,4.471355,Description of unchanged positioning of medical devices in images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe images with identifiable medical devices (e.g., Endotracheal tube, PICC line, pleural catheter) in unchanged or stable positions compared to previous imaging studies. This pattern is present in reports where monitoring the positioning of devices in follow-up imaging is crucial.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5402298850574713,0.575,0.6666666666666666,0.3,100.0,100.0
+2780,latent_2780,4863,0.009726,0.010170344,4.5115566,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where the findings describe stability or unchanged observations, often in the context of comparing current imaging to previous studies. These use terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'no change' to emphasize the lack of significant difference over time, suggesting that observations of stability trigger stronger activations.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5516316042631833,0.5527638190954773,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,99.0
+2781,latent_2781,16810,0.03362,0.029506413,6.76423,Comparison with prior imaging studies indicating change or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability over time. This pattern suggests the model detects this comparative frame as indicative or important, as it often appears in radiological assessments to track changes in a patient's condition.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4409609428118153,0.445,0.452991452991453,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2782,latent_2782,4538,0.009076,0.010735473,4.204161,"Comprehensive, active comparison with prior imaging findings.","High activation examples involve specific radiological findings or comparisons based on direct inspection of current images with prior images and often include the assistant's or radiologist's active role. The high activations often contain detailed comparisons or reductions in pathology findings between current and previous imaging, suggesting their engagement in providing descriptions consistent with requested evaluations or directives.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5024623077505872,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+2783,latent_2783,11087,0.022174,0.0143538425,5.7668743,Descriptions involving interval change assessments in radiological findings.,Many examples with higher activation levels involve instructions for comparing current imaging to previous ones to assess changes in the radiological findings. The presence of terms aimed at explicitly evaluating for interval changes indicates the pattern sought by the model.,0.399154334038055,0.4081632653061224,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5505392716660322,0.5527638190954773,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,99.0
+2784,latent_2784,5842,0.011684,0.012354273,5.678372,Comparison with prior imaging studies.,"These examples show radiology reports that emphasize comparisons with previous imaging studies, often using descriptive terms indicating changes or stability, such as 'remains in place,' 'no interval change,' and 'improved.' This indicates a focus on assessing changes over time in patient's imaging findings.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4501504305425874,0.47,0.4782608695652174,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2785,latent_2785,10247,0.020494,0.009871677,3.066182,Focus on stability or change in device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Examples consistently involve changes or stability in medical device positioning as compared to prior imaging, such as lines, leads, tubes, or pacemakers. High activations are present in reports describing consistent or stable device placements across assessments, indicating the model focuses on changes or confirmations in device status.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2786,latent_2786,6742,0.013484,0.013893793,5.7402554,Detailed comparative analysis with current and prior images involved.,"The pattern indicates that examples with reference to prior images are more representative of the activation pattern, regardless of specifics. Given the structure and focus of radiology reports, references to prior images suggest comparative analysis, but this pattern's specificity lies in the consistent comparative context, especially when additional images are involved and detailed comparisons are made.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2787,latent_2787,3842,0.007684,0.008482117,7.2521586,Detailing potential acute cardiopulmonary findings or their evolution.,"Examples that show a higher activation level tend to highlight specific conditions that could be acute cardiopulmonary processes. Descriptions focusing on stability, unchanged presentations, or eliminating acute findings are less representative of the pattern.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2788,latent_2788,6328,0.012656,0.017300101,5.520132,Prompt mentions comparison between current and prior images.,"The pattern is characterized by elements of the prompt explicitly involving multiple images, both current and prior, with a specific reference to comparisons being drawn between these images. This focus on comparison suggests the pattern relates to scenarios where comparison between current and previous imaging is crucial for analysis and decision-making.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4577218728162124,0.515,0.509090909090909,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2789,latent_2789,5684,0.011368,0.009743974,3.9631448,Comparison reports highlighting cardiac size or pulmonary status.,The provided examples highlight evaluations based on comparisons with prior imaging specifically focusing on underlined words related to cardiac size or pulmonary findings. These highlighted comparisons are used to understand if changes are related to the natural variance in imaging or indicative of a significant finding.,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+2790,latent_2790,3738,0.007476,0.013522851,4.196169,Stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette in follow-up comparisons.,The examples with high activation levels highlight the stability or lack of change in structures like the cardiomediastinal silhouette despite indications of being evaluated for potential acute changes or presence of pathologies in comparison with prior imaging. This indicates a pattern focusing on non-acute or stable findings when compared to previous assessments.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5452845866223515,0.5577889447236181,0.5909090909090909,0.39,100.0,99.0
+2791,latent_2791,14846,0.029692,0.016181068,4.237005,Evaluation for acute cardiopulmonary processes or possible infection.,"Examples with high activation frequently focus on the evaluation of acute cardiopulmonary processes, assessing possible acute conditions like infection, consolidation, or pneumothorax. These situations often require a detailed description of changes in the imaging study, particularly of acute conditions linked to specific symptoms.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+2792,latent_2792,5082,0.010164,0.010126252,6.1433034,Utilization of both frontal and lateral images in analysis.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparing multiple views of the same modality or adding extra views to the analysis, like a lateral view to a frontal view, potentially providing comprehensive information about changes or stability in the condition observed across different perspectives.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5564516129032258,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2793,latent_2793,14300,0.0286,0.015343667,6.9623756,Presence of aortic or thoracic calcifications.,"The examples demonstrating higher activations consistently include reports of calcification, often of the aortic knob or arch. This suggests that the model is identifying calcification of the aorta or other major thoracic structures as a key pattern in these radiology reports.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5629897528631707,0.71,0.52,0.2203389830508474,59.0,141.0
+2794,latent_2794,7419,0.014838,0.021983914,10.494705,Presence of fragmented phrases or placeholders indicating missing information.,"These examples commonly contain fragmented instructions or incomplete sections with placeholders, often representing missing information or anonymized data, which is especially highlighted in the samples with higher activation levels. These sections often include underscores or symbols like '[[' to indicate missing details.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3551783129359126,0.51,0.5050505050505051,1.0,100.0,100.0
+2795,latent_2795,3346,0.006692,0.009748636,4.2818017,Comparative analysis of current and prior images in findings description.,"All examples with high activation describe the process of comparing current and prior radiological images, often highlighting changes or stability in findings. These descriptions consistently instruct to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', which indicates the importance of comparative analysis in these scenarios.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2796,latent_2796,13477,0.026954,0.026719417,4.5987678,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference the use of lateral images alongside a frontal image, specifically mentioning 'current lateral image' in addition to the 'current frontal image'. This suggests that the inclusion of both frontal and lateral views in the context of imaging evaluation is a strong indicator of the pattern being observed.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2797,latent_2797,2853,0.005706,0.008828861,6.6280484,"Descriptions of tube or line positions in relation to anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina).","The most representative examples consistently involve the mention of medical devices such as tubes or lines, and these are often described in relation to their tip position (e.g., distance from the carina). This is a specific pattern appearing in the descriptions of chest radiographs where the focus is on the placement and position of such devices.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6010532195005187,0.625,0.7450980392156863,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2798,latent_2798,4508,0.009016,0.012420151,5.3746676,Presence of prior imaging comparison with noted stability or changes in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the presence of previous chest radiograph or imaging comparisons to assess for changes or stability in findings, usually within the context of ongoing clinical concerns such as pneumonia or chest pain.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5048543689320388,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2799,latent_2799,9835,0.01967,0.01602633,6.630117,Unremarkable chest radiograph findings.,"These examples consistently describe findings from PA and lateral views of the chest radiographs that are unremarkable, with phrases like 'no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax' and 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette'. The indicative factor is the absence of acute or concerning radiographic findings.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.6119402985074627,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2800,latent_2800,8848,0.017696,0.010010795,3.722966,Stability or adjustment of medical device placement compared to prior exam.,"Regardless of the type of device or other findings, examples with higher activations consistently describe status or position of medical devices such as pacemakers, catheters, or tubes within the body and offer a comparison with prior exams to verify stability. This pattern highlights the importance of monitoring invasive devices, checking unchanged status, or documenting placement adjustments in serial imaging reports.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5087719298245614,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2801,latent_2801,11726,0.023452,0.012453782,3.219432,Description of chest findings without substantial comparison data.,"The pattern is characterized by the presence of specific indications, technique descriptions, and sometimes a focus on mechanical devices in chest imaging without substantial comparison data provided. These reports utilize concise documenting styles where detailed findings may not be compared with prior imaging.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5131578947368421,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2802,latent_2802,4425,0.00885,0.007989835,4.6686416,Focus on the recognition and reporting of medical devices (lines and tubes) in chest imaging.,"In most examples, lower activation scores correspond to the presence of various medical devices, primarily lines and tubes (e.g., chest tubes, PICC lines, endotracheal tubes), with verification of their placement being part of the report. These examples emphasize the recognition and reporting of medical devices, rather than the primary pathology.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5128205128205128,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2803,latent_2803,7510,0.01502,0.020745955,5.8386626,"Examples exhibit detailed comparative findings, technical terms, and structured impressions typical in radiology reports.","The examples with higher activation levels contain specific medical phrases and structured text often seen in radiological reports that emphasize detailed description of findings derived from image analysis. They include description comparison to prior reports and specific technique names, discussion of findings with associated probabilities, impressions, or considerations for further investigation or treatment. Lower activated examples tend to just present findings without sugggestive language.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3484680009883865,0.4673366834170854,0.483695652173913,0.89,100.0,99.0
+2804,latent_2804,15778,0.031556,0.025755318,7.0925307,Emphasis on stability or no significant interval change in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe a benign or stable clinical presentation across serial imaging follow-ups, indicating controlled long-term conditions. These reports typically confirm that there are no 'interval changes,' suggesting that the previous condition is stable, often emphasized in patient management to reassure stability over time.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2805,latent_2805,4096,0.008192,0.011969417,7.239939,Detailed comparisons with previous imaging in radiological reports.,"The activation levels are high when descriptions include detailed assessments comparing current and past images, particularly focusing on specific diagnostic information or treatment implications such as 'comparison' sections. Instances with enhanced activation levels often have phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'unremarkable changes compared to prior', reflecting an emphasis on observed changes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5463917525773195,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2806,latent_2806,32259,0.064518,0.035019763,6.2447357,Diffuse parenchymal changes in lung fields.,"The commonality among the activated examples is the mention of diffuse parenchymal changes in lung fields. These models are set to detect when lung pathologies are widespread, which can significantly affect breathing and require close monitoring or intervention, such as in cases of pneumothorax, atelectasis, or extensive pulmonary fibrosis.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.6068255091609656,0.625,0.7192982456140351,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2807,latent_2807,16846,0.033692,0.019715667,3.7483175,Detailed analytical prompts indicating comparison with prior images.,The examples with high activation levels all include instructions or prompts for assistants to provide detailed comparative explanations of chest images using specific linguistic constructions. These instructions often involve comparisons with prior images but without explicit instruction on other formats.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3820066906713654,0.395,0.4186046511627907,0.54,100.0,100.0
+2808,latent_2808,6891,0.013782,0.017403923,6.169607,Explicit comparison requests between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to comparisons with prior imaging studies, highlighting the changes or stabilities over time in the patient's condition. Moreover, the instructions often explicitly ask for descriptions or comparisons with previous images. These aspects make the notion of prior comparison a key factor in the pattern observed.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2809,latent_2809,3239,0.006478,0.0065263235,7.6430254,Changes in radiology findings over time compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern in this dataset is centered around the comparison of findings on current radiological exams to previous images. Some of them describe progression, improvement, or stability of findings over time, indicating an emphasis on tracking changes, even without explicitly stated prior exams in the comments. The comparisons often focus on nodules, lung opacities, or stability of known conditions, suggesting it's about comparing changes over time.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2810,latent_2810,30331,0.060662,0.028597098,3.3107946,Descriptions of interval changes or stable findings in serial imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of notable interval changes or evaluations of improvements versus previous imagery, indicating a focus on monitoring progression, resolution, or persistence of specific conditions over time.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6265172735760971,0.64,0.6014492753623188,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2811,latent_2811,2885,0.00577,0.009630201,6.3528385,"Focus on lung aeration, heart and mediastinal contour stability, and absence of acute changes.","The examples frequently make a transition from explicitly comparing current imaging to prior reports to confirming stability, measurement, or description without new notable changes. The language used focuses on stating current findings, often mentioning normals such as 'heart size', 'mediastinal contours', or 'hilar contours' while saying no pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation. The focus is on providing assessment without notable prior comparisons.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6571521863350658,0.685,0.6178343949044586,0.97,100.0,100.0
+2812,latent_2812,4525,0.00905,0.010553871,4.1779203,Mandated comparison of current and prior images without detailed prior report (N/A).,"The high activation levels coincide with inputs that mandate or request a clear comparison of current and prior images, although many instances specifically lack detailed prior reports ('PRIOR_REPORT': N/A). Despite this, the assistant is prompted to provide comparisons, which is key when no prior data is available, likely triggering high activation due to a need for comprehensive assessment based on visual data and contextual clues.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2813,latent_2813,3242,0.006484,0.009943561,5.7002897,Comparison using both current frontal and lateral views with prior imaging.,"High activation is associated with the presence of both frontal and lateral current images being available for direct comparison with prior frontal images. This specific setup likely provides a richer context or more thorough assessment of change, influencing activation readings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4013798701298701,0.41,0.3815789473684211,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2814,latent_2814,8245,0.01649,0.011981928,4.7209163,Low lung volumes as a primary finding in image comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe low lung volumes as a key finding. These reports consistently note how reduced lung volumes affect the interpretation of other structures, like accentuating cardiac or bronchovascular markings, which is a distinctive pattern.",0.8569044639132248,0.8571428571428571,0.8461538461538461,0.88,25.0,24.0,0.7517164500519369,0.755,0.8311688311688312,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2815,latent_2815,5023,0.010046,0.0128705455,4.526211,Tasks involve comparing current and prior images.,"The pattern is the presence of both current and prior imaging references in the prompts, often specifying a description or comparison between them. This linguistic pattern is indicative of radiology tasks that involve assessing changes or consistencies over time by referring to both current and previously obtained images.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2816,latent_2816,3178,0.006356,0.008220348,9.248226,Task involves detailed comparison against prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels feature requests for descriptions comparing current images to prior radiographic images where specific findings are stated to evaluate changes, using patterns such as 'stable from prior', 'unchanged since prior', and consistencies in reports indicating thorough evaluation against previous imaging.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2817,latent_2817,4580,0.00916,0.009218273,5.036781,Unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples show examination findings in direct comparison with prior images. High activations are often associated with unchanged or stable findings, highlighting an emphasis on continuity or stability compared to prior studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2818,latent_2818,17575,0.03515,0.028671319,3.5581515,Consideration of interval changes in patient condition via imaging.,"These examples all involve a direct comparison with prior imaging, particularly focusing on changes in previously noted pathologies or stable conditions over time. This is a common approach in radiology where differences or similarities in sequential images are assessed to manage or diagnose patient health conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2819,latent_2819,6411,0.012822,0.008392318,3.8045087,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with noted interval changes.,"Reports with higher activation levels consistently include significant detail about changes from prior studies, describe stable versus changed conditions, improvements, or unchanged states that provide evidence of prior assessments being addressed or considered.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4647887323943662,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2820,latent_2820,8219,0.016438,0.0134626515,4.484317,Reports describing findings without prior image comparison.,"The examples that have higher activation levels either have no specified prior radiograph for comparison or explicitly mention 'no comparison'. This suggests that the examples focus on reports where findings are described without the benefit of comparing to previous images, requiring the radiologist's assessment on the current images alone.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5476190476190477,0.23,100.0,100.0
+2821,latent_2821,25042,0.050084,0.027464017,8.347824,Changes or issues in medical tube or line placement.,"The pattern identified involves describing changes in the position or condition of medical tubes and devices such as nasogastric or orogastric tubes, endotracheal tubes, and lines like PICC and central venous catheters, often notifying medical staff about these findings. These examples provide detailed descriptions of tube placement, coiling, misplacement, and re-positioning, which is crucial in clinical contexts to ensure patient safety and effective treatment.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.7058823529411765,0.5,24.0,26.0,0.5311936530833032,0.61,0.3448275862068966,0.3333333333333333,60.0,140.0
+2822,latent_2822,3033,0.006066,0.011036311,5.358918,Assessment of positioning or status of tubes and medical devices.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports indicating the presence of changes or assessments of internal medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, pacing wires) or tubes (e.g., nasogastric tubes) based on comparisons with prior images. This mirrors a common radiological focus on post-procedural or post-operative assessments.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3839144728326991,0.405,0.3492063492063492,0.22,100.0,100.0
+2823,latent_2823,6782,0.013564,0.014325407,4.531988,Directional and moderating terms in radiology reports.,"The pattern in these examples is the usage of directions and qualifiers such as left, right, moderate, mild, etc., that specify and moderate findings in radiology reports. These qualifiers help to precisely describe the changes or features observed compared to the previous imaging and are employed in regular diagnostic language for medical imaging.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2824,latent_2824,18289,0.036578,0.018099468,4.152759,Stable positioning of medical devices and monitoring equipment across images.,"Examples show a pattern where radiological evaluations are made in explicit comparison to prior images, despite referencing specific equipment or apparatus positioning. Phrases like 'unchanged position', 'stable cardiomegaly', 'consistency of atelectasis', or 'equipment location' reflect ongoing monitoring, rather than acute diagnoses.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6161427533976553,0.63,0.7096774193548387,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2825,latent_2825,13128,0.026256,0.016353942,5.395087,Reports compare findings to prior images for stability or change.,"The pattern here involves reports that use comparisons with prior radiographic images to establish stability or changes in findings, particularly regarding atelectasis, consolidation, heart size, effusions, or specific pathologies such as opacities and foreign body positioning. These comparative references often include phrases like 'in comparison to the prior' and note what remains 'unchanged', implying a focus on temporal stability or change in specific features.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+2826,latent_2826,5823,0.011646,0.016948475,3.7984312,Utilization of both frontal and lateral chest images with prior image comparison.,"Examples with high activation consistently include frontal and lateral chest images combined with prior images for comparison. This setup uses comprehensive image sets and reference previous images to assess changes or stability, making the findings more detailed and context-rich.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.514018691588785,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2827,latent_2827,3000,0.006,0.0057222154,5.3474655,Comparison of imaging findings to prior studies to assess changes or stability.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide an interpretation or comparative statement regarding specific changes or features observed in current and prior imaging studies. The pattern focuses on identifying or confirming changes based on past and present imaging data.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2828,latent_2828,9311,0.018622,0.015525323,5.977179,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest imaging views together.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve a description and comparison of radiological findings that include both frontal and lateral views simultaneously, reflecting the examination perspective rather than single-view evaluations. This differentiation possibly accounts for the notable activation in certain examples.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4680851063829787,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2829,latent_2829,3681,0.007362,0.0066731907,3.595865,Stable findings or minimal interval changes in comparison to prior studies.,"The most representative examples highlight stable findings over time and specific intervals where change comparisons are made to previous records, indicating this pattern strongly correlates to stable findings or minimal interval changes noted across multiple examinations. These samples use a consistent language describing unchanged findings and stability in various conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5108695652173914,0.47,100.0,100.0
+2830,latent_2830,4060,0.00812,0.009276425,5.835211,"Findings of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, compared to prior studies.","Highly representative samples often describe findings of pleural effusion or pneumothorax in radiographic imagery of the thoracic region. This pattern is evident in radiology reports, showing or resolving effusion or pneumothorax, particularly when juxtaposed to prior studies. Examples clearly point to pleural effusion with coexisting findings such as atelectasis or pneumothorax, involving comparative imaging assessments.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.62,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2831,latent_2831,2988,0.005976,0.010960672,6.2748575,"Emphasis on absence of pleural effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax.","The majority of highly activated examples are instances where the findings are clearly stated as being within normal limits, emphasizing that there is no pleural effusion, no pneumothorax, no focal consolidation, or opacification seen. These reports provide a description of clinically significant negative findings relevant in the context of the patient's symptoms or queried diagnosis, often concluding with reassurance about stability or normalcy.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6625620105260508,0.665,0.6410256410256411,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2832,latent_2832,5694,0.011388,0.015862027,4.534071,Generate descriptions from current single image only.,"Highly activated samples focus on the task of generating descriptions from image data, specifically mentioning just the 'current image' rather than multiple view or accompanied reports. This reflects a focus on immediate visual assessment without auxiliary clinical inputs.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5953937130407718,0.61,0.6774193548387096,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2833,latent_2833,9107,0.018214,0.012650764,4.4018726,Tasks request detailed findings based on comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation involve tasks that request a comparison of findings between distinct images, specifically looking for change or stability in pathologies, such as consolidation, effusion, or heart size changes. The pattern focuses on tracking changes over time by comparing new and prior images, without introductions or unrelated details.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4269949066213922,0.46,0.4729729729729729,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2834,latent_2834,7938,0.015876,0.014078769,5.4312057,Use of frontal and lateral imaging techniques with comparisons.,The few examples with positive activation levels appear to involve the use of frontal and lateral chest radiographs with comparisons between images to identify abnormalities or lack thereof. References to technique or specific imaging angles (frontal/lateral) are notably more common than in non-representative examples.,0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4734008577424947,0.5628140703517588,0.5359116022099447,0.97,100.0,99.0
+2835,latent_2835,8891,0.017782,0.012193299,3.671011,Evaluation of interval changes from prior radiographic examination.,"These examples consistently describe findings in radiology studies by evaluating them for interval changes from a prior radiographic examination. This is evident in descriptions like 'unchanged since prior', 'mild interval decrease', and 'stable appearance', which highlight the comparative analysis of current and previous medical imaging.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4543754003843689,0.4623115577889447,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,99.0
+2836,latent_2836,5467,0.010934,0.009693949,3.847492,Inclusion of multiple views in chest radiographs.,"These examples refer to the presence of multiple views in radiological examination, emphasizing thoracic imaging conditions in chest radiographs with frontal and lateral views. The pattern reflects specific imaging techniques designed to provide a comprehensive analysis of the thoracic area using multiple perspective views.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2837,latent_2837,13890,0.02778,0.017367888,4.6271963,Explicit comparison highlighting stability or unchanged features.,"Many examples with higher activation revolve around the explicit comparison of findings from current images to prior images, emphasizing continuity and stability. Statements providing explicit comparisons about features remaining stable or unchanged signify a radiological pattern concerned with monitoring for changes over time.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4511746680286006,0.457286432160804,0.4430379746835443,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+2838,latent_2838,10444,0.020888,0.008901274,2.85061,Assessment of nasal-gastric tube placement in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the analysis of nasal-gastric tubes (NG tubes) and their placement when comparing current and prior radiographs. This pattern is observed where clarity in NGT positioning, its tip location relative to anatomical landmarks, or changes since prior studies are highlighted, as opposed to other findings.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.3333333333333333,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.25,0.04,100.0,100.0
+2839,latent_2839,4812,0.009624,0.011723602,5.479041,Requests to compare current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels contain explicit instructions to describe current radiological findings in relation to prior images, indicating this is a key feature causing the high activation. The presence or explicit instruction of comparison between images appears necessary for high activation.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2840,latent_2840,6296,0.012592,0.009663349,3.5018377,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation ratings often have more robust evidence of prior comparisons being available and being explicitly used to inform the interpretation, whereas low-activation examples frequently lack prior comparisons or fail to leverage them, instead depending more on immediate descriptions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2841,latent_2841,4587,0.009174,0.011772154,6.72758,Comparisons highlighting unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to involve comparisons between current imaging and prior studies, focusing particularly on unchanged findings. Phrases like 'no change', 'unchanged from prior', and 'stable since previous' feature prominently, indicating that reports addressing the consistency and stability of findings between current and prior images are key to the pattern.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.361857934930432,0.39,0.3103448275862069,0.18,100.0,100.0
+2842,latent_2842,15404,0.030808,0.02395132,6.0310855,Specific tasks for image comparison or evaluation.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve specific instructions to compare multiple images or verify findings, often in the context of evaluating acute symptoms, interval changes, or performing a specified evaluation task on image comparison. They highlight cases where the evaluations are explicitly renewed or modified from prior examinations.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4685662596110357,0.53,0.5178571428571429,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2843,latent_2843,6533,0.013066,0.010482361,5.6058383,Radiology reports emphasize imaging comparison and emphasize interval change.,"The samples demonstrate a pattern of using comparisons to previous or interim imaging studies, emphasizing changes in radiological findings, or stability in patient conditions, contrasting them with prior or baseline conditions, further supplemented by recommendations or technological artifacts noted as part of the radiological report.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+2844,latent_2844,3115,0.00623,0.0070746555,4.0389304,Comparative analysis of chest imaging findings to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the explicit description of frontal and lateral chest imaging findings, frequently compared to prior frontal images. The presence of comparative analysis is marked in examples with high activations.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.371846359798167,0.39,0.417910447761194,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2845,latent_2845,2829,0.005658,0.006480931,5.3983107,Description of findings without prior image for comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels often lack relevant prior imagery for comparison and require a description of findings based on the current images alone. This entails evaluating current findings without the typical comparison used in radiology reports, which aligns with observed higher activation levels when prior comparison is not factored in.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2846,latent_2846,3571,0.007142,0.015572886,8.176861,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples demonstrate reports that involve descriptions based on images, where the findings from current images are compared with prior images regardless of whether comparison is explicitly stated. These reports identify changes or stability in clinical findings over time.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4005994005994006,0.415,0.4351145038167939,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2847,latent_2847,7018,0.014036,0.010380145,4.598703,Focus on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight radiological studies that compare current imaging findings to previous studies, focus on ongoing changes, and often mention stabilization or lack of new findings. Reports consistently use terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant interval change', or mention the persistence of certain conditions in comparison with prior radiographs.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4665861513687601,0.47,0.4642857142857143,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2848,latent_2848,30362,0.060724,0.034640837,6.735207,Changes in cardiomediastinal or lung findings compared to previous images.,"The pattern in highly activated samples shows a focus on changes between current and prior imaging studies, especially when findings such as enlargement, displacement, or alterations in structures like the cardiac or mediastinal silhouette are reported. This aligns with radiological practices of monitoring pathologies like cardiomegaly or thoracic changes over time through comparisons.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5295766189570613,0.53,0.4210526315789473,0.7671232876712328,73.0,127.0
+2849,latent_2849,17863,0.035726,0.015872385,3.1472807,Interval change or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"Patterns with high activations refer explicitly to intervals between current and prior states, or changes over time detected in radiographic images. In narratives where prior and current states are compared, specific descriptions of 'improved', 'resolved', 'unchanged', or 'removed' findings are frequently articulated, indicating stability or progression.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3742334359590498,0.375,0.3655913978494624,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2850,latent_2850,35920,0.07184,0.033826154,3.7565272,"Detailed comparison of current imaging with prior, focusing on pleural effusions.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe imaging findings compared to prior images, and also explicitly describe pleural effusions or chest pathology in detail. Examples with lower activation levels describe the chest radiographs and mention pleural effusion less frequently or with less emphasis.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.5281840637229053,0.575,0.7027027027027027,0.26,100.0,100.0
+2851,latent_2851,1340,0.00268,0.004530276,5.724473,Heart size is normal with unremarkable findings or stable comparisons.,"The samples with high activation levels focus on descriptions of radiology findings predominantly stating 'heart size is normal' along with other clinical parameters being 'normal' or 'unchanged'. Despite different clinical contexts, they primarily focus on this aspect of findings being unremarkable or without significant change.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6940745755911633,0.695,0.6756756756756757,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2852,latent_2852,12497,0.024994,0.019091956,6.584831,Interval changes or positions of medical tubes and lines in images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes in the positioning or status of medical tubes or lines (such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, or central venous lines) between different imaging sessions. This indicates the pattern focuses on interval changes of these medical devices as observed in the images.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7049926248156204,0.705,0.7070707070707071,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2853,latent_2853,5133,0.010266,0.011501643,4.833177,Explicit comparison highlighting changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly involve the requirement of specific instructions to directly compare current and prior images, with noticeable differences such as new or changed medical devices, or explicit adjustments in patient condition. Typically phrases like ""compared to previous exam"" or ""significant interval change"" are used, indicative of observational importance of differences between current and prior findings, rather than simply mentioning unchanged conditions.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5238095238095238,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2854,latent_2854,8044,0.016088,0.012078264,4.7580233,Changes or stability compared to prior images in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels contain comparisons with prior radiological images that address changes or stability in conditions. This is particularly evident through explicit references to increased or decreased sizes or extent of specific findings such as effusions, opacities, or lesions observed over time.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2855,latent_2855,10693,0.021386,0.018205373,5.3156133,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies for interval changes.,"Examples with activation levels closer to 5.0 contain explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, which is a common pattern in radiology to assess for interval changes and monitor disease progression, often using language like 'compared to', 'interval', 'unchanged', etc.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6450050968399592,0.6482412060301508,0.6218487394957983,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+2856,latent_2856,7953,0.015906,0.008710973,3.5075886,Instruction to compare current images to prior ones.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a prompt or instruction to compare current imaging findings against prior images, using phrases like 'comparison to prior' or instructions to describe findings in relation to a previous image. This reflects an instruction-based element focusing on comparing past and current imaging.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+2857,latent_2857,3292,0.006584,0.012004792,5.3289127,Task involves comparing current to prior imaging for detailed assessment.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve direct instructions or questions to provide detailed descriptions or assessments based on comparing given images, often specifying to consider previous images or reports in the evaluation. The task-oriented structure triggers higher activation to prompt a detailed, comparative analysis.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2858,latent_2858,5104,0.010208,0.011925229,10.139209,Positioning or changes in medical devices based on comparison with prior images.,"These examples feature discussions of medical devices, such as tubes or lines, with a specific focus on their positions in relation to previous images. This suggests an interest in monitoring those devices' placement and alignment over time, commonly seen in imaging where device positioning is crucial.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.578125,0.37,100.0,100.0
+2859,latent_2859,5065,0.01013,0.011194532,6.149414,Structured format comparing current and prior frontal and lateral chest images.,"Most highly activated examples consistently involve a structured format where multiple types of chest images (typically frontal and lateral views) are being compared to prior studies, though the activation pattern is not related to findings themselves. This uniformity suggests a pattern tied to the structure rather than specific clinical findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2860,latent_2860,53829,0.107658,0.06970327,8.753275,Comparison of lateral and frontal chest views with prior imaging.,"These examples all refer to the use of lateral and/or frontal views of the chest in conjunction with comparison to prior imaging. Indication fields often relate to pulmonary conditions, procedures, or device placements, highlighting the importance of visualization that provides different perspectives for assessment.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.42,0.5384615384615384,78.0,122.0
+2861,latent_2861,49075,0.09815,0.07124136,10.058066,Mentions of atelectasis in radiology reports.,"The provided examples with higher activation levels contain explicit mentions of atelectasis. This finding is often closely examined and noted in radiology reports as it can be indicative of various underlying conditions, while the examples with lower activation levels lack this mention.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5315442561205272,0.5477386934673367,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,99.0
+2862,latent_2862,16801,0.033602,0.018701024,5.8636684,Description of interval changes using comparison with prior images.,"The extracted key feature from the examples with high activation involves providing a description or analysis of interval changes in radiology studies, usually across specific findings and conditions, often with explicit comparisons to prior imaging. Language indicating comparison to prior studies and assessment of interval changes are identified as strongly activated.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.62,0.6090909090909091,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2863,latent_2863,11614,0.023228,0.014682333,6.2803555,Comparison with prior images to assess changes over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature a common pattern where findings from current images are directly compared with prior images or reports, laying emphasis on changes, stability, or lack of findings. This comparative aspect is noted by direct references to prior studies and evaluation for interval changes.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2864,latent_2864,4065,0.00813,0.021792239,9.189051,"Use of current frontal, lateral, and prior images for comprehensive analysis.","The high activation examples consistently involve situations where a comprehensive set of images (frontal, lateral, and prior images) is provided for analysis, indicating a more complete contextual comparison, which seems to be the targeted pattern.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5170825122810913,0.565,0.5398773006134969,0.88,100.0,100.0
+2865,latent_2865,3932,0.007864,0.013820759,7.034514,Unchanged findings in random comparison order of frontal and lateral views.,"Highly activated examples describe findings from chest radiographs by comparing randomly ordered frontal and lateral views, often featuring unchanged condition within random comparisons. This includes conditions like 'unchanged appearance', 'stable silhouette', or 'no significant change'. This pattern emphasizes comparisons without significant findings, sometimes appearing in predefined order.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4390243902439024,0.18,100.0,100.0
+2866,latent_2866,3285,0.00657,0.008407634,5.8682294,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasized.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include direct instructions to provide findings or descriptions of current imaging in relation to prior imaging, focusing on the comparative analysis element 'COMPARED TO' inherent within the instruction, which implies an analysis or change related to two states.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4394955459913923,0.44,0.4361702127659574,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2867,latent_2867,9054,0.018108,0.018043147,3.9464471,Description comparison between current and prior frontal/lateral chest images.,"The pattern here involves providing descriptions of the findings from chest images and comparing them explicitly to prior imaging, often including both frontal and lateral views. Specifically, this involves acknowledging visible changes, consistency, or comparisons, even if no differences are identified, showing the visual process is fundamentally oriented around image comparison.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3964194373401535,0.41,0.4307692307692308,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2868,latent_2868,4229,0.008458,0.008963605,5.063493,Stability in cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"These examples that show activation emphasize the stability of cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours even in the presence of other findings or when referring to multiple prior comparisons. This stability, often conveyed with words like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'normal', likely indicates a focus pattern where unchanged or stable features are noted despite other changes.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7118228468869283,0.715,0.6776859504132231,0.82,100.0,100.0
+2869,latent_2869,8882,0.017764,0.008888145,3.4292986,Unresolved or persistent changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Reports with higher activations involve interval changes or comparisons indicating either stable or unresolved changes in lung or cardiac conditions. These indicate persistent or unresolved findings from previous imaging, which tend to engage the model more.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5444444444444444,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2870,latent_2870,60584,0.121168,0.070081845,5.397199,Descriptive comparisons highlighting changes or stability relative to prior images.,"The pattern occurs when providing the description and findings in radiology studies with emphasis on comparison. Patterns with higher activation level included references to comparison to prior images which explicitly highlight changes or stability, showcasing the diagnostic assessment using terms like 'unchanged', 'redemonstrated', or 'similar', while noting previous conditions or findings.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2871,latent_2871,4033,0.008066,0.011006125,4.7970767,"Use of both frontal, lateral, and prior images for comparison.","In the provided examples, high activation levels correlate with specific mentions of comparing multiple views or images, specifically both current frontal and lateral views, alongside at least one prior frontal image, or multiple prior images. This comprehensive examination across different aspects (frontal and lateral) and timelines (current and prior) seems to be representative of the observed activation pattern.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2872,latent_2872,3180,0.00636,0.0076993196,6.693528,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images showing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing findings in the current radiology images in comparison to prior images or known baselines, particularly noting any new findings or changes in clinical context. This encompasses identifying changes, or stability of certain medical conditions or interventions over time.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.4819277108433735,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2873,latent_2873,18763,0.037526,0.018822758,6.1040406,Stable or minor interval changes in comparison to previous imaging.,"Reports with high activation often include references to stability or minor changes in findings compared to previous imaging. The focus is on consistency or lack of significant change in pulmonary or cardiac conditions, along with details about structures comparative to prior studies, even if the comparisons are vague or incomplete.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4827217125382263,0.4874371859296482,0.3451327433628318,0.582089552238806,67.0,132.0
+2874,latent_2874,4753,0.009506,0.012039633,5.158796,Assessment of interval stability or change compared to previous imaging studies.,"The examples that show high activation include explicit mentions of comparison to previous imaging studies, language indicating stability or change over time, and descriptions of intervals without changes. The model activates significantly with prompts that include comparison with prior studies, descriptions of unchanged or persistent findings over time, or interval assessments.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2875,latent_2875,5658,0.011316,0.011998977,3.39995,Detailed clinical context and multiple medical conditions mentioned.,"The examples with high activation scores mention detailed clinical histories and indications alongside the imaging findings, often involving complex or multiple medical conditions. These scenarios require careful comparison and analysis by medical professionals to understand the patient's condition holistically, which might be why the specific language trigger such activations.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.332982271370897,0.335,0.3513513513513513,0.39,100.0,100.0
+2876,latent_2876,5379,0.010758,0.010225326,3.8530674,Documentation of interval changes in findings between current and prior images.,"Analyzing the activated examples, it's apparent that high activation is linked to detailed analysis of specific findings in terms of interval changes, including documentation of both normal and pathological changes in relation to previous studies. The presence of these interval changes and comparisons seems crucial for the detection of this pattern.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6612654516039334,0.665,0.6363636363636364,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2877,latent_2877,46816,0.093632,0.04844276,5.082238,Interval change assessment in diagnostic imaging.,"These examples prominently feature direct comparisons with prior imaging studies and focus on identifying interval changes or confirming stability. The descriptions often include stable appearances or changed conditions, indicating a core pattern of comparative assessment.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6601791782514674,0.67,0.6268656716417911,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2878,latent_2878,21990,0.04398,0.025606968,6.1212463,"Stability or resolution of conditions on imaging, with no new developments.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on mentioning stable conditions or no significant changes seen over multiple imaging comparisons, specifically emphasizing a static nature of identified conditions, such as unchanged cardiomegaly, persistent features, or resolved issues without new developments. These terms reflect stable or resolved clinical findings upon comparison with previous images, therefore indicating a stable clinical condition.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6199619961996199,0.62,0.6224489795918368,0.61,100.0,100.0
+2879,latent_2879,2807,0.005614,0.007253581,6.4539905,Lungs clear without focal consolidation or notable pathology; no prior comparison.,"The distinction between whether there is a comparison to previous images and whether specific pathological findings are mentioned seems key. Examples with higher activation levels often lack explicit pathological findings or declare that lungs are clear, indicating a pattern of inattention to pathological findings in reports without prior comparisons.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4821818181818181,0.555,0.72,0.18,100.0,100.0
+2880,latent_2880,26086,0.052172,0.03152162,4.716708,Comparison with previous imaging indicating change or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include changes or stability in findings when compared to prior radiological examinations, particularly focusing on specific anatomical details such as lung opacity, effusion, or other notable alterations. This indicates that the pattern being recognized is the explicit mention of comparison and changes in imaging findings.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+2881,latent_2881,13351,0.026702,0.020870522,6.0600853,Normal findings in reports that compare to prior images.,"The pattern observed is a consistent description of normal, clear, or unremarkable findings in the presence of an explicit comparison to either a prior report or previous imaging. The pattern mentions comparing current findings to prior exams to establish persistency or normalcy without identifying new significant issues.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6424164589156657,0.645,0.6746987951807228,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2882,latent_2882,7161,0.014322,0.009510067,6.100867,Unchanged conditions or findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples exhibit findings that reference stable conditions or unchanged features when compared to prior imaging, indicating the pattern focuses on reassurance regarding unchanged elements over time that do not suggest acute changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5393258426966292,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2883,latent_2883,45007,0.090014,0.055897564,5.931668,Changes or stability in pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum over time compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels include specific abnormalities such as pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum and their stability or changes over time, particularly when compared to prior imaging studies. The pattern suggests that persistent abnormalities or their evolution over time, especially those that are serious like pneumothorax, contribute to higher activation.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7566721027154357,0.765,0.9206349206349206,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2884,latent_2884,4055,0.00811,0.010700779,6.0531645,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"Despite varied contexts, highly activated examples consistently describe findings in radiological studies that involve evaluating changes over time by directly comparing previous and current imaging studies. This pattern emphasizes assessing changes, stability, or progression of findings, often linked with conditions like atelectasis, pneumothorax, or cardiopulmonary status.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+2885,latent_2885,13819,0.027638,0.014336045,5.123551,Emphasis on no significant interval changes in findings.,"Most examples with non-zero activation include expressions indicating no significant change or stable findings based on a comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern reflects an emphasis on stability or absence of change over time, often seen in radiology reports to convey consistency in the patient's condition.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.489278913817369,0.5326633165829145,0.5714285714285714,0.2424242424242424,99.0,100.0
+2886,latent_2886,7338,0.014676,0.011702816,3.287734,Complex comparisons between current and multiple prior imaging findings.,"High activation examples consistently involve complex descriptive tasks where the radiologist is tasked with comparing multiple prior imaging findings with current images, often indicating overlap, subtle changes, stability, or differential diagnoses based on these detailed comparisons.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.5375,0.43,100.0,100.0
+2887,latent_2887,5791,0.011582,0.020151969,7.1539683,Radiological findings stable or unchanged compared to prior study.,"These examples have stable or unchanged findings compared to a prior study, often using terminology such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'persistent'. Reports highlight this stability explicitly, which is a key linguistic pattern in radiology when there is no significant interval change.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6596825396825396,0.665,0.632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+2888,latent_2888,11578,0.023156,0.014580579,7.685012,"Comparison of current and prior radiological changes, focusing on alterations or stability in imaging findings.","The examples with higher activation levels involve changes in imaging findings between current and prior studies, specifically noting aspects like resolution, stability, or change in features such as tubes or opacities. These patterns are frequent in follow-up radiological assessments where patient management decisions are guided by such interval observations.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.4104477611940298,0.7534246575342466,73.0,127.0
+2889,latent_2889,5692,0.011384,0.010249025,3.2751021,Patterns of stability or lack of acute change in radiological findings.,"The examples with high activation levels feature findings that indicate a lack of acute or significant change in radiological observations. They describe observations such as stable cardiac contours, unchanged equipment placements, or persistent but stable pathological findings, pointing towards a pattern of noting stability or lack of significant change in the patient's condition.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5753715498938429,0.595,0.5664335664335665,0.81,100.0,100.0
+2890,latent_2890,18212,0.036424,0.024107987,5.9350142,No distinct pattern discernible from examples.,"These examples are not strongly representative of any particular pattern in radiological reporting. The activations are inconsistent across scenarios involving previous imaging evaluations and follow-ups, possibly indicating a lack of distinctive pattern. The activation values are low, suggesting a weak theme or technique structure in positioning or descriptions in comparison to prior studies.",0.367032967032967,0.5,0.5,0.0416666666666666,24.0,24.0,0.3681495809155384,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.05,100.0,96.0
+2891,latent_2891,15336,0.030672,0.025104566,5.4498973,Interval change or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain explicit comparisons of aspects of the imaging findings, highlighting changes or stability from prior studies. These mention interval changes explicitly, denoting how the condition has evolved or remained stable over time.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5646621896621897,0.5678391959798995,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,99.0
+2892,latent_2892,6467,0.012934,0.009281505,3.2481933,Specific description of interval change between studies.,"Each sample with high activation levels involves a direct and specific comparison with previous studies, including references to specific changes since those previous studies. This pattern is important for documenting stability or change over time, as indicated by comparisons such as 'unchanged since prior study' or 'compared to previous.' The pattern focuses on changes identified against the baseline of earlier exams, using direct language to describe the interval change or lack thereof.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+2893,latent_2893,5326,0.010652,0.011115708,8.807873,"Description of findings compared to prior images, highlighting changed or unchanged status.","The examples consistently describe findings and changes of existing conditions detected on radiographic images, specifically focusing on comparisons made with prior imaging studies, as indicated by words like 'comparison', 'prior', 'unchanged', and 'compared to previous exam'. The descriptive pattern is typical in reports where changes or stability of findings are evaluated against prior exams for tracking medical conditions or treatment outcomes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2894,latent_2894,6858,0.013716,0.011502011,4.6258106,Findings described in context of comparison to prior images.,"The samples with high activations consistently describe findings in the context of comparison to previous images, indicating a focus on stability, changes, or follow-up comparisons typical of radiology reports. This pattern is evident in the repeated references to comparative evaluation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4651162790697674,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2895,latent_2895,4333,0.008666,0.007650538,8.5498,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples show the presence of either new findings, interval changes in pathology, or stability in findings across sequential examinations of chest radiography. Terms such as 'new,' 'interval placement,' and 'unchanged' are prevalent in activated examples, highlighting the identification of changes or lack thereof in radiological observations over time.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6382802811078958,0.65,0.6102941176470589,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2896,latent_2896,4548,0.009096,0.008279124,5.0857506,Consistent radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation involve descriptions that emphasize the presence or absence of significant changes compared to prior radiographs or other imaging studies. They explicitly mention findings being 'unchanged', 'little change', or 'varying degree of change' against previous records.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5516316042631833,0.5527638190954773,0.5555555555555556,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+2897,latent_2897,13657,0.027314,0.020017648,6.2660913,Assessment of medical devices or interval changes in imaging.,"Cases with activations depict situations where image findings, indications, or comparisons are related to specific tasks like evaluating medical device placement or assessing interval change. Non-activated responses do not establish a clear connection with these specific tasks.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2898,latent_2898,2048,0.004096,0.0071828556,5.370423,Presence of atelectasis in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently reference 'atelectasis' in the findings, either as a primary or secondary observation. The presence of atelectasis, which refers to the partial collapse or incomplete inflation of a lung, is a common finding across these examples, consistently paired with observations such as pleural effusion or opacities, contributing to the pattern recognized by the model.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8295739348370927,0.83,0.8,0.88,100.0,100.0
+2899,latent_2899,23193,0.046386,0.033628095,4.3749576,No consistent pattern correlates with high activation.,"There is no consistent pattern of language or findings correlating with high activation scores. Examples with varying findings and techniques all show different activation levels, suggesting a lack of coherent pattern for high activation.",0.3150684931506849,0.46,0.0,0.0,25.0,25.0,0.3778502612424874,0.485,0.4117647058823529,0.07,100.0,100.0
+2900,latent_2900,6822,0.013644,0.015627265,3.7890055,Detailed comparison of current images with prior images for evaluation.,"The activated examples often contain a structured format requiring a side-by-side comparison description of current image findings with prior imaging, explicitly or implicitly asking for interpretations that leverage historical image data, which demands more contextual understanding.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2901,latent_2901,15432,0.030864,0.018629864,4.944938,Requests for comparative interpretation with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit instructions to provide comparative interpretation between current and prior images, indicating 'comparison', 'prior reports', or noting 'interval changes'. These cases emphasize using prior records for assessing changes which is pivotal in serial imaging evaluations.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+2902,latent_2902,45791,0.091582,0.051666304,6.16354,Descriptions emphasizing interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examination of activation levels indicates that descriptions which include intervals, comparisons, and changes over time between multiple imaging studies are associated with higher activation scores. The changes or stability in findings between the current and previous studies suggest the ongoing clinical relevance, leading to highlighted mentions in radiology interpretation.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5163934426229508,0.7241379310344828,87.0,113.0
+2903,latent_2903,2142,0.004284,0.005220573,4.7042656,Emphasis on comparison with specific prior studies or changes.,"The highly activated examples describe radiological findings with a specific focus on comparing current images to prior ones. This pattern is emphasized by explicit mentions of prior images, comparative terms like 'compared to', and specific indications for reassessment, which are absent or less emphasized in low-activation examples.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2904,latent_2904,20313,0.040626,0.045080803,10.664822,"Description of placement, position, or changes of indwelling medical devices.","Samples with activation levels of 4.0 or higher involve changes, assessments, or stability checks related to indwelling devices (e.g., tubes, catheters), while samples with activation levels below 4.0 focus on lung and cardiac conditions without much emphasis on such devices. Radiology reports often discuss the positions of medical devices, especially after procedures or during changes, addressing any clinical concerns that arise due to these devices.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2905,latent_2905,13903,0.027806,0.023433525,4.343904,Detection of interval changes in recurrent conditions or findings.,"The examples with high activation levels make explicit references to changes or findings in the current chest radiograph, often compared with prior studies, where specific changes in medical devices, pleural effusions, pneumonectomy status, etc., are highlighted in the context of respiratory or cardiac conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5131498470948013,0.5175879396984925,0.525,0.42,100.0,99.0
+2906,latent_2906,6785,0.01357,0.008533999,3.5062127,Comparison of current imaging to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where images are compared to prior studies using phrases like 'in comparison to prior' or 'as compared to the prior exam'. This comparison aspect is crucial to identify changes over time, which is a central part of the pattern represented in these activations.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4170967138158774,0.455,0.4701986754966887,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2907,latent_2907,3645,0.00729,0.011134357,6.527305,Direct comparison of current to prior images for clinical changes.,"The pattern appears to involve imaging assessments where explicit references to current and prior images are both considered to determine stability or changes in a specific finding, such as size, location, or presence of devices like ETT or catheters. The focus is often on assessments requiring direct image comparisons to characterize findings accurately.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5055900621118012,0.5175879396984925,0.5114503816793893,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+2908,latent_2908,5486,0.010972,0.011462661,5.2904606,"Use of prior image comparisons and detailed follow-ups with emphasis on stability, change, or improvement.","All the examples with higher activations include a comparison with a prior image to assess stability or improvements, mention specific findings from a previous report, and correlate these with the current findings. This pattern highlights a focus on tracking changes over time in radiologic examinations.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4473684210526316,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2909,latent_2909,14412,0.028824,0.021052841,3.9939106,Comparison with prior imaging detecting abnormalities like pneumonia or pleural effusion.,"Samples with high activation include instructions to compare current imaging with prior, or they involve the identification of abnormalities such as pleural effusions or pneumonia that are detailed within the reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5857142857142857,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2910,latent_2910,8021,0.016042,0.01693644,5.8283873,Comparison shows significant interval change in findings.,"Examples with higher activation values describe instances where a frontal image is compared against a prior image, demonstrating significant interval changes in clinical findings. This pattern suggests the importance of demonstrating changes over time using image comparison.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.2857142857142857,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3928872359589738,0.4723618090452261,0.4074074074074074,0.11,100.0,99.0
+2911,latent_2911,4740,0.00948,0.0147767,5.4350348,Emphasis on comparing current images to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference 'comparison with prior images' or 'comparison to a prior radiograph', establishing that the pattern is about assessing images against previous studies to note changes or consistencies, even if the prior image is not explicitly available for comparison in the AI prompt context.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4774193548387097,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2912,latent_2912,5271,0.010542,0.015739737,5.3415713,Stable findings with comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern here revolves around the presence of comparison with previous imaging studies explicitly mentioned as finding stable conditions or insignificant changes, such as 'no new focal consolidation', 'unchanged', 'no acute osseous abnormalities,' and references to previous dates or studies showing stability and no new conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4084784751889583,0.415,0.3924050632911392,0.31,100.0,100.0
+2913,latent_2913,14463,0.028926,0.019294929,5.01018,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels are associated with findings explicitly comparing the current and prior imaging, where similar descriptions of findings are provided in each, even in the absence of acute changes. The focal point is the unchanged status between the images rather than the presence of a medical condition or procedure.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,100.0,100.0
+2914,latent_2914,15353,0.030706,0.028361548,4.8776298,Detailed comparative analysis with previous images requested.,"Examples with high activation levels specifically involve comparative analysis where specific instructions request comparing current images with prior ones. This involves assessing changes or stability in clinical conditions such as pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or infiltrates, using explicit instructions to provide a comparative description.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2915,latent_2915,225251,0.450502,0.44827446,5.505094,Detailed medical imaging findings with interval changes compared to prior exams.,"These examples often involve extensive descriptions of technical language in the report and consistently describe findings in relation to prior imaging comparisons, emphasizing the interval changes or stability of conditions over time in a detailed medical context.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.60984393757503,0.61,0.6057692307692307,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2916,latent_2916,4769,0.009538,0.010420417,3.7803857,Request for comparison of current images to prior images focused on stable findings over time.,"The pattern involves requests for a comparison between current images and prior images, specifically referring to characteristics like consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, etc., providing descriptions based on imaging comparisons for ongoing evaluation of medical conditions. The requests frequently involve displaying findings using terms common to radiological comparisons, such as 'no acute process', 'is unchanged', or 'stable', indicating a consistent style of evaluation across various conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5454545454545454,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2917,latent_2917,5511,0.011022,0.009267805,4.068078,Instructions to compare findings with non-existent prior images.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently request a description of findings in the current observation in reference to a prior image despite no actual prior image being available or no noted comparison, highlighting the focus on establishing a consistent pattern of comparison with no actual basis.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2918,latent_2918,2821,0.005642,0.0069580292,7.328143,Comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Reports with higher activation levels consistently include statements to compare current imaging findings with prior images, even if no significant change or abnormal findings are noted. This suggests that the model is identifying references made in relation to past studies as significant.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2919,latent_2919,34529,0.069058,0.033907354,4.1358633,Descriptions noting interval changes or stability vs prior imaging.,High activation levels in these examples involve clear descriptions of interval changes in patient condition as compared to prior imaging studies. These differences highlight specific new findings or resolutions that are clinically relevant and demonstrate active monitoring and assessment of ongoing medical conditions.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.5454545454545454,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2920,latent_2920,30503,0.061006,0.033562273,5.4515495,"Focus on stable, unchanged findings in comparison to prior studies.","The examples with activations focus primarily on reports that detail absence of acute or significant interval changes in findings, pointing to stability or unchanged findings over time. This appears as a common theme in radiology reports contrasting findings between current and prior images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5888888888888889,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2921,latent_2921,6084,0.012168,0.009565104,5.0382056,Tortuous aorta and stable cardiomediastinal silhouette continuity.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature observations of unchanged or stable aortic tortuosity, similar to previous radiographs, alongside normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes. This suggests the pattern involves radiological descriptions emphasizing continuity in findings regarding vascular structures.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3836765827612509,0.495,0.4666666666666667,0.07,100.0,100.0
+2922,latent_2922,16547,0.033094,0.030433139,6.857662,Radiographic findings described with temporal comparisons and implications.,"Examples with high activation demonstrate descriptions of findings using radiographic comparisons and changes over time, with insights into whether findings are stable or worsened, often suggesting implications or recommendations for next steps.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.485047352274243,0.5125628140703518,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,99.0
+2923,latent_2923,13481,0.026962,0.013155225,3.1669464,Comparisons indicating changes over time or conditions removal/improvement.,"Examples with high activation include findings changing slightly over time such as removal or improvement of certain conditions, and compare those changes to prior images. Text indicates contrast or action results between images over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5656565656565656,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2924,latent_2924,7990,0.01598,0.045055572,7.278899,Comparison to prior imaging studies highlighting changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently make comparisons based on specific previous imaging studies within their descriptions. The pattern involves evaluating the current findings in light of changes or stability since a previous study, often mentioned explicitly with date differences or specific imaging procedures.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4338535534457276,0.435,0.4403669724770642,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2925,latent_2925,2613,0.005226,0.008368145,5.7221923,Comparative analysis between current and prior images in radiology.,"All highly activated examples include radiology text referring to both current and prior images, using phrases like 'comparison with prior' to describe findings over time, rather than findings solely based on the current imaging. This specific pattern showcases a diagnostic approach using historical imaging contrast.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3924415611162599,0.41,0.4328358208955223,0.58,100.0,100.0
+2926,latent_2926,10251,0.020502,0.012352602,3.3782334,Instruction to compare current image findings with prior radiology images.,"Examples with significant activation levels use the phrase ""in comparison to the prior frontal image"" along with the instruction to provide a description of the findings from a current set of images against prior images, indicating a task involving image comparison.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+2927,latent_2927,4817,0.009634,0.007948516,4.7079315,Comparison of cardiopulmonary conditions with previous studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involved instances of pulmonary edema, identification of cardiomegaly, or other specific cardiac and pleural findings that are compared against previous images to assess changes. These findings indicate a focus on evaluating cardiac and pulmonary conditions using prior comparisons.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2928,latent_2928,4708,0.009416,0.010213136,4.981684,Direct comparison and description of changes from prior imaging.,"These examples frequently contain a directive or question to 'provide a description' of findings or changes between the current and prior images, emphasizing comparison over initial evaluation. This imperative to articulate differences aligns with the pattern exhibited in high-activation examples.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2929,latent_2929,5110,0.01022,0.007904102,4.4460573,Detailed descriptions of stable or unchanged radiographic features compared to prior images.,"Examples with comparisons mention specific radiological findings, focusing on unchanged features such as contour stability or noting no new significant changes from prior studies. These reports typically contain detailed descriptions of the radiologic appearance and comparison with previous images.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2930,latent_2930,8998,0.017996,0.010369094,6.130339,Focus on technical evaluation or change over time.,"Examples with lower activation levels focus less on technical assessment or description regarding comparison with prior studies, and rather emphasize new findings or changes in clinical interventions and device placements not directly related to interval change analysis.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4893017522232984,0.565,0.536723163841808,0.95,100.0,100.0
+2931,latent_2931,6233,0.012466,0.019863615,4.7002387,Comparative analysis of current and prior images with detailed findings.,Examples with high activation levels involve detailed comparisons with prior images and descriptions that indicate specific changes or stability in the findings compared to previous studies. They involve reference to both new and old images for comprehensive evaluation.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2932,latent_2932,5820,0.01164,0.010223892,8.691087,Mentions of interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples show a consistent use of comparison language regarding radiographic changes over multiple images, with prominent mentioning of formations like pleural effusions, opacities, or consolidation. The pattern includes mentioning changes over time, and findings stable or altered compared to prior examinations noted in different formats, including where only frontal or both frontal and lateral images are involved.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4710260499734183,0.4723618090452261,0.4666666666666667,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+2933,latent_2933,10914,0.021828,0.01928349,4.0852003,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation contain descriptions of specific findings from radiological exams, but there is no single consistent finding or theme across the examples exclusively with high activation scores. The commonality present is that these descriptions often make reference to conditions such as changes compared to prior images or stability over time, indicating a focus on interval changes and ongoing medical issues.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5684464070654356,0.57,0.5795454545454546,0.51,100.0,100.0
+2934,latent_2934,10487,0.020974,0.022535458,5.5851235,"Comparison with multidimensional imaging views (e.g., frontal and lateral).","The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the use of multiple comparison points, such as side-by-side comparison of current and previous images, or other views like lateral and frontal images. This indicates a detailed, multi-dimensional comparative approach beyond just comparing a single view or image with a previous one, leading to more precise interpretations of changes or stability among findings.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4611064944222004,0.465,0.4700854700854701,0.55,100.0,100.0
+2935,latent_2935,2940,0.00588,0.008338873,4.4558964,Comparison to prior image without available prior report.,"Examples with high activation levels involve explicit prior image reference indicating a comparison or continuation from the prior study, especially when no previous report is directly available for comparison in the system. This pattern involves ensuring consistency and continuity in imaging evaluation without relying solely on prior reports.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5429001640181765,0.575,0.5490196078431373,0.84,100.0,100.0
+2936,latent_2936,3302,0.006604,0.007464563,4.2522597,Stable or unchanged condition compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels feature comparison to prior imaging studies and discuss stable or unchanged findings, suggesting low variability or stasis in disease processes or interventions. The pattern involves mentioning unchanged or stable conditions following interventions or medical history, frequently noting persistence of known medical devices like PICC lines, tubes or catheters, and stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4253452969049299,0.43,0.4146341463414634,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2937,latent_2937,2974,0.005948,0.008047963,9.590797,Stable findings or unchanged positioning of medical devices on comparison studies.,"The examples with high activation levels feature descriptions of imaging findings that emphasize the unchanged or stable positioning of medical devices or anatomical structures across multiple imaging studies. Additionally, such examples often detail comparisons of abnormal findings, indicating potential issues, and use phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'as compared to' with specific anatomical or device references.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5699732455237703,0.5778894472361809,0.6027397260273972,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+2938,latent_2938,11987,0.023974,0.012892965,3.6846921,Provide description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples indicate significant differences in activation, where those with higher activation levels specifically mention 'comparison' to prior images or reports. This pattern focuses on the comparison of current findings with previous imaging or clinical data, emphasizing an analysis over time.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2939,latent_2939,6292,0.012584,0.017258603,4.621555,Comparison of findings between current and prior images.,"These examples describe findings in the context of comparison between current and prior radiological images, explicitly referencing either frontal or lateral views. The presence of specific phrases that mention 'current' and 'prior' images indicates an assessment involving these temporal comparisons.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4748201438848921,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2940,latent_2940,13265,0.02653,0.01467647,4.2523603,Describing findings from current frontal and lateral images without reference to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve tasks where findings from multiple images need to be described without direct comparison to prior radiographic findings, and notably include descriptions of current frontal and lateral images together, emphasizing multi-view analysis for current findings.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.6744186046511628,0.29,100.0,100.0
+2941,latent_2941,2927,0.005854,0.0062436145,5.963186,Comparison with previous images assessing interval change.,"Despite the presence of various radiological elements in these examples, the key pattern is the direct comparison made to previous images or reports involving descriptions of changes or lack thereof, and associated indications. High activation levels consistently accompany sections that emphasize changes noted over time between images using successive techniques like PA, lateral or AP, especially around observed lung, cardiac, or mediastinal changes. These references are a cornerstone for clinicians to assess progression or regression of clinical conditions.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.397832195905259,0.4,0.4107142857142857,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2942,latent_2942,36661,0.073322,0.058940973,8.163173,"Stability or minimal change in radiographic findings over time, often referencing devices or post-op status.","The pattern involves descriptions of findings presented in a way that directly correlate with past studies or imaging, pointing out unchanged conditions or minimal differences over time. This often includes similar descriptions of devices or patient conditions like chest tubes or effusions that remain consistent, reflecting stability or non-progressive cases.",0.6435601198117245,0.6530612244897959,0.625,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.6797117405665098,0.68,0.6698113207547169,0.71,100.0,100.0
+2943,latent_2943,4833,0.009666,0.012693835,6.820329,Comparison of current and prior imaging views in radiology reports.,Examples with high activation levels consistently reference the presence of both current and prior imaging when describing radiological findings. This pattern emphasizes comparative analysis between multiple imaging views over time to assess changes.,0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5174503422735944,0.57,0.5421686746987951,0.9,100.0,100.0
+2944,latent_2944,8566,0.017132,0.011907955,4.6061845,"Specification of changes or stability in devices like tubes, catheters, or lines.","Examples with higher activation levels (4.0 and above) involve descriptions and comparisons of multiple elements related to tube placement, line positioning, and device adjustments, reflecting attentiveness to device positioning and changes over time. This is consistent with examining device stability or changes in position as part of the diagnostic process.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6055226824457594,0.615,0.6666666666666666,0.46,100.0,100.0
+2945,latent_2945,18708,0.037416,0.01696292,3.040328,Comparison and evaluation of interval changes from prior imaging.,"The examples consistently reference a comparison between current imaging and prior studies, specifically focusing on changes or stability of certain findings. High activations occur in examples where there is a detailed comparison with prior images, highlighting stable or changed conditions, and suggesting actions or evaluations based on those findings. The pattern is linked to the evaluation of interval changes over time in patient imaging.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+2946,latent_2946,4223,0.008446,0.011522152,5.066304,High activation when comparisons to prior images are synthesized or reconstructed.,"Examples with high activation levels contain explicit comparisons or references to a prior imaging study, despite instructions indicating non-availability of comparisons or explicit requests to provide comparisons. This reflects a pattern where the task requires synthesizing current findings with previous results, focusing on stability or changes in findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2947,latent_2947,27629,0.055258,0.02203711,2.0340583,Instructions require comparison with prior image findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently instruct the user to provide a description comparing findings from current images to prior images. This indicates the focus on comparisons to assess changes in patient condition, utilizing prior reports as part of the instructions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+2948,latent_2948,21667,0.043334,0.031232323,7.023109,Use of frontal and lateral views for comparing current and prior radiographic changes.,"Each example with high activation describes findings in current chest radiographic images using a frontal and lateral view, often in relation to previous images. This suggests patterns in the data where comprehensive chest radiography using multiple views allows for detection and comparison of changes over time, highlighting evidence of progression or resolution of conditions like pneumonia, atelectasis, and pleural effusions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4918178027934126,0.507537688442211,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,99.0
+2949,latent_2949,4177,0.008354,0.012212291,5.5629406,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiographs noting interval changes.,"Highly activated examples detail comparisons between current and prior chest radiographs, noting specifics in changes or consistencies over time. Particularly, the language reflects observations of stable or increased abnormal findings across radiographs over time, emphasizing interval change or constancy in aspects like catheter placement, pleural effusions, atelectasis, and pulmonary congestion.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,100.0,100.0
+2950,latent_2950,4086,0.008172,0.014978323,6.3577204,"Descriptive comparisons with prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability.","The examples showing high activation levels generally include reports that detail comparisons with previous imaging, highlighting either changes or stability in specific thoracic findings, such as cardiac size, mediastinal contours, and aortic tortuosity. This detailed comparative reference seems to be a strong pattern in reports with higher activation scores.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4595135622059854,0.46,0.4622641509433962,0.49,100.0,100.0
+2951,latent_2951,3298,0.006596,0.0075755403,6.8330846,Detecting and describing interval changes in radiology findings.,"The selected examples frequently involve descriptions of interval changes, stability, or new developments in medical imaging findings, often in association with recent or multiple prior imaging studies. This focus on changes over time is common in follow-up evaluations where pathology tracking or procedural impact assessments are paramount.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4444444444444444,0.4,100.0,100.0
+2952,latent_2952,3395,0.00679,0.006630965,4.598381,Comparison indicating stability or minor changes in radiographic findings.,"Highly activated examples reference small or no change between current and prior images, indicating a stable or unchanged radiographic finding despite potential underlying conditions. Phrases suggesting stability, like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'otherwise clear', or minor findings are prominent.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.53,0.53,0.53,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2953,latent_2953,6423,0.012846,0.016159397,4.886515,Emphasis on comparison with prior images focusing on changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples always refer to the detailed description and comparison of findings with prior images, specifically emphasizing changes or stability. This pattern is evident in how these examples are structured around using wording like 'compared to', 'since prior', 'no significant change', 'new findings', or stating 'interval change'. These comparative language elements create distinct content structures that trigger higher activation.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4648795979095296,0.465,0.4639175257731959,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2954,latent_2954,12525,0.02505,0.017625371,5.9510584,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging for changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference direct comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, with an emphasis on identifying changes or stability in medical findings. This comparison between old and new images aligns with the pattern seen in previous task results.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5776581142434801,0.6,0.5684931506849316,0.83,100.0,100.0
+2955,latent_2955,6031,0.012062,0.010080283,3.6111987,Stable findings with comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern indicates radiology studies where the findings are reported as stable or unchanged with respect to prior imaging, often mentioned explicitly or implied by the use of terms like 'compared to prior.' This stability or lack of change could indicate a lack of acute issues or reinforcement of a stable chronic condition, hence leading to higher activations.",0.2747252747252747,0.34,0.1,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3327123695976155,0.3668341708542713,0.2592592592592592,0.14,100.0,99.0
+2956,latent_2956,3354,0.006708,0.0072321882,5.5171266,Assessment of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on the evaluation of current chest radiograph findings in relation to prior imaging, often using comparative language to highlight stability or changes over time. This indicates that the pattern focuses on comparison across imaging studies.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4597285067873303,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+2957,latent_2957,26645,0.05329,0.03635145,6.244007,Evaluation of tube placement and changes over time in radiological images.,"These examples involve positioning of medical tubes (e.g., nasal gastric or endotracheal tubes) and demonstrate attention to changes or positions in comparison with prior images. The consistent focus on tube placements and their descriptions indicates a pattern of tube evaluation and comparison over time.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.8275862068965517,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.804172629359042,0.805,0.7699115044247787,0.87,100.0,100.0
+2958,latent_2958,5058,0.010116,0.019006178,13.469897,Frequent mention of atelectasis in radiologic findings.,"Highly activated examples involve references to atelectasis, either bibasilar or specific to lung regions, often in conditions where lung volumes or overlays like tools and tubes might affect the visualization. This pattern triggers the model's activation likely because atelectasis is a common finding in many pathologic or mechanistic discussions in radiology, and such findings are frequently documented in these contexts.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7213622291021672,0.7222222222222222,0.75,0.6666666666666666,99.0,99.0
+2959,latent_2959,8388,0.016776,0.010222094,4.7189617,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+2960,latent_2960,37675,0.07535,0.04624636,4.693092,Reports noting improvement or interval change from prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently highlight changes or improvements in previously documented conditions, emphasizing comparative evaluation of radiographs. These include improvements in pulmonary edema, resolution of pneumonia, or interval changes in lung structures, indicating how patients' conditions have evolved or improved.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.6181818181818182,0.34,100.0,100.0
+2961,latent_2961,3374,0.006748,0.008483858,5.890818,Portable/AP chest imaging focusing on acute changes or device positioning.,"Examples show consistent references to portable or AP chest imaging along with mentions of conditions or devices like consolidation, pleural effusion, tubes, and changes in lung opacities or lung volumes. The pattern suggests a focus on evaluating acute changes or device positioning in severely ill patients.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.468671679197995,0.47,0.4666666666666667,0.42,100.0,100.0
+2962,latent_2962,5638,0.011276,0.014641621,4.7827716,"Findings in current images compared to prior images, addressing medical indications.",The examples with high activation levels describe findings in radiology reports that involve comparisons of current and prior images while discussing specific medical indications or conditions. High activation corresponds to reports that provide detailed findings relevant to the indications.,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4931506849315068,0.72,100.0,100.0
+2963,latent_2963,2459,0.004918,0.010601923,7.19929,Description of findings in comparison to prior image.,"Examples with high activations describe the presence of images, both current and prior, in the prompt with a specific mention of providing a radiological study description in comparison to prior imaging findings. The comparison aspect tied to radiological imaging is a recurring feature among these high activation examples.",0.4412280701754386,0.4693877551020408,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4672131147540984,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2964,latent_2964,3775,0.00755,0.0118641695,7.1121454,Detailed comparison of current and prior images in radiology reports.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve detailed comparisons between current and prior images, explicitly stating changes or stability in medical findings. This suggests that the model is particularly attentive to the linguistic patterns that describe longitudinal observations and conclusions in radiology reports.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4648795979095296,0.465,0.4660194174757281,0.48,100.0,100.0
+2965,latent_2965,13583,0.027166,0.017168483,6.993658,"Interim imaging findings with focus on improvement, stability, or unchanged pathology.","High activation examples consistently show a pattern of narrative regarding interim imaging findings, describing changes over time, suggesting improvements or stability, or noting the absence of specific pathologies. This reflects a common linguistic pattern in radiology reports concerned with comparing disease progression or regression over sequential studies with terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'interval changes'.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.4150943396226415,0.6027397260273972,73.0,127.0
+2966,latent_2966,10133,0.020266,0.018213373,4.447161,Comparison findings with prior imaging indicating stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve a direct comparison to prior imaging studies, highlighting stability or change in findings over time. These reports often explicitly mention the lack of change or stable appearance of certain medical conditions compared to prior examinations, providing context for the current findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+2967,latent_2967,4927,0.009854,0.012303364,5.833898,Clear documentation of comparison findings between current and prior imaging.,"Activated examples consistently involve comparison of findings across different imaging modalities or between current and previous examinations, emphasizing stability or changes in conditions and devices such as catheters, effusions, and lung abnormalities.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+2968,latent_2968,4875,0.00975,0.010950506,4.5521,Direct imperative comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"Activation levels are higher for examples that include explicit instructions or scenarios where report findings must be directly compared with prior images, often with the imperative to ‘provide a description’. This suggests greater engagement with examples where the task involves detailed comparison with previous imaging to ascertain any changes or stability.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4245283018867924,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2969,latent_2969,2508,0.005016,0.014472028,8.911416,Request to compare current and prior images even when prior is unavailable.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve situations where a current image and a prior image are explicitly compared, even when previous images are not available. This comparison request, despite the lack of a comparison image, seems to be a key feature of the most activated examples.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2970,latent_2970,7946,0.015892,0.014953032,5.1861444,Observations of unchanged findings in comparison to previous images.,"The examples with activations have phrases like 'no change' or 'unchanged', focusing on stability over comparison for clinical management. Such observations emphasize the lack of new pathology or change in current detected conditions since the prior exam, which is crucial for ongoing patient management.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.335088699167531,0.375,0.2549019607843137,0.13,100.0,100.0
+2971,latent_2971,7006,0.014012,0.009432217,4.2405233,Presence of explicit comparison with prior images in descriptions.,"The most highly activated examples document a comparison of current radiographic findings to prior images or reports. The key pattern involves noting both current and past images, with explicit reference to comparisons and descriptions of findings in relation to these previous studies.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4748201438848921,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2972,latent_2972,2976,0.005952,0.012079711,7.7930064,Comparison between current and prior chest images.,"Samples exhibit a pattern of providing current radiology findings in context with a prior image comparison, specifically referencing multiple views (either frontal and/or lateral) for the chest and comparing them to past imaging for dynamic evaluation. The description often includes recent updates or changes since the prior comparison, which is critical in tracking clinical progress or interventions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3282348077718065,0.35,0.3897058823529412,0.53,100.0,100.0
+2973,latent_2973,5894,0.011788,0.01183615,6.9487786,Use of 'interval' or 'increased' to describe changes in imaging.,"The examples with high activation often involve terms indicating changes or stability over time, such as 'interval' and 'increased'. These terms are used to describe variations or constancy in findings between current and prior imaging studies, which suggests dynamic assessment of radiological findings.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6572441742654509,0.6582914572864321,0.6741573033707865,0.6060606060606061,99.0,100.0
+2974,latent_2974,11429,0.022858,0.020151462,5.2066083,Significant changes in medical devices or anatomical findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation focus on specific mentions of significant changes in medical devices or anatomical changes between current and prior images. Descriptions often include details about the removal, placement, or change in position of life-supporting devices or specific alterations in anatomical structures.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.4098360655737705,0.25,100.0,100.0
+2975,latent_2975,3803,0.007606,0.010201374,5.966942,Detailed comparison with immediate prior frontal images using assistant-generated descriptions.,"Examples with high activation values consistently mention the technique, comparison to immediate prior images, and assistant-generated descriptions of images, a pattern frequently requested in radiology studies focusing on detailed comparative analysis of frontal views to identify any pathologic changes.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.39324197091746,0.42,0.3620689655172414,0.21,100.0,100.0
+2976,latent_2976,4269,0.008538,0.008400933,5.3328366,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on specific condition changes.,"The pattern observed is that highly activated examples involve description or comparison between current imaging and prior or historical imaging to identify changes or stability in the condition, but with a focus on specific medical conditions or indicators such as cardiomegaly, pleural effusion changes, or bilateral lung conditions.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4216867469879518,0.35,100.0,100.0
+2977,latent_2977,9317,0.018634,0.015706226,5.3260517,Directive to describe findings in comparison to prior frontal image.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons with prior images. They include a specific request or directive to 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This repeated instruction seems to trigger distinct activation.,0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4071204249948636,0.495,0.4971751412429379,0.88,100.0,100.0
+2978,latent_2978,41271,0.082542,0.034619655,1.9964494,Emphasis on changes or stability compared to prior images in findings description.,"High activation examples typically call for providing a radiology study description in comparison to a prior image, indicating importance on dynamic changes between imaging exams instead of isolated observations. This approach emphasizes the clinical context of change over static description, aligning with examples that mention modifications or stability in reference to prior studies.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+2979,latent_2979,3891,0.007782,0.013038858,5.177823,"Evaluation of findings against prior imaging studies, noting stability or interval change.","These examples emphasize the comparative evaluation of radiological findings with prior images or studies, using language of stability, unchanged appearance, or interval change. The reports highlight observations against previous studies, making them highly representative of radiological patterns that focus on assessing changes over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3699369936993699,0.37,0.3673469387755102,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2980,latent_2980,8731,0.017462,0.010402536,3.804266,Focus on the positioning and status of medical devices in imaging results.,"The examples with higher activation levels detail the positioning and status of medical devices like endotracheal tubes, central venous lines, or other support devices. This indicates that the model is attuned to changes or status of such devices in imaging reports, which might be critical in acute and intensive care settings, leading to higher activations.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6880562297734628,0.6884422110552764,0.6792452830188679,0.72,100.0,99.0
+2981,latent_2981,10711,0.021422,0.014463161,4.190663,Comparison to prior images and identification of interval changes.,"Examples frequently ask for findings in comparison with prior radiological studies, indicating a focus on identifying changes between current and previous images or confirming stability of findings. This pattern is crucial in radiological evaluation to monitor disease progression or stability, often using terms like 'comparison', 'compared to', and referring specifically to previous imaging.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5048543689320388,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2982,latent_2982,24392,0.048784,0.031872462,5.5206056,"Changes or stability in specific findings (e.g., pleural effusion, pneumothorax) compared to prior images.","Examples with higher activations describe changes or stability in specific findings, such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax, using comparative language. They emphasize direct observation of changes from prior imaging, particularly relating to notable findings that are not generalized or benign.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5915435139573071,0.5979899497487438,0.5806451612903226,0.72,100.0,99.0
+2983,latent_2983,7691,0.015382,0.02503207,6.019877,Thorough comparative imaging and structured findings report.,"The examples with higher activation levels almost all involve both current frontal and lateral images compared to prior images, alongside a structured description including indication, technique, and comparative findings. The pattern appears to emphasize thoroughness in imaging comparison, detail in anatomical description, and the use of a report structure with specific language indicating changes or stability over time.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+2984,latent_2984,7861,0.015722,0.01204001,4.0504394,Unchanged cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes among different pathologies.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of normal or unchanged cardiac silhouettes and stable mediastinal structures while also having various other pathologies, suggesting that the model activates on consistent representation of heart stability amidst other imaging findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6349908747718693,0.635,0.6363636363636364,0.63,100.0,100.0
+2985,latent_2985,4564,0.009128,0.015239465,5.5249815,Discussion of tube or device placement with relation to anatomical landmarks.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss the position and placement of medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, PICC lines) with respect to anatomical landmarks like the carina, including expressions like ""above the carina,"" or mention adjustments of these devices. These contexts provide instructional formatting and specific alignment details involving medical procedures.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5850191928623301,0.6,0.6612903225806451,0.41,100.0,100.0
+2986,latent_2986,23461,0.046922,0.01905917,2.3226109,Changes in or the presence of medical devices or tubes between imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention various medical devices or tubes' presence, change, or positioning between current and prior images. This indicates a focus of analysis on such changes specifically in relation to given clinical contexts beyond the static findings.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5921052631578947,0.45,100.0,100.0
+2987,latent_2987,5254,0.010508,0.016444512,5.9444513,"Descriptions compare current findings against prior images, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to descriptions of the current radiological findings in the context of comparing them against prior images, highlighting changes or stability over time and often involving lateral imaging. This pattern focuses on identifying changes in one or more variables between distinct time points or perspectives, a common task in radiology for assessing patient progress, intervention outcomes, and diagnosis refinement.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4758064516129032,0.59,100.0,100.0
+2988,latent_2988,62801,0.125602,0.094571896,4.457304,Stable vs. changed radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These examples frequently reference changes in findings compared to prior images to identify stable aspects or subtle changes in conditions. Common descriptions include unchanged positions of tubes or catheters, stable cardiac silhouettes, or mild progression of conditions like atelectasis, emphasizing the assessment of stability or slight progression in findings, especially in postoperative contexts.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.5826771653543307,0.74,100.0,100.0
+2989,latent_2989,26906,0.053812,0.029061772,2.719701,Focus on changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"These examples describe radiological findings that compare current imaging to prior studies, often focusing on stability or changes of identified features. High activation is associated with detailed evaluation of findings with phraseological markers like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'compared to previous', or 'as seen on prior' suggesting close examination of evolution or consistency in imaging findings over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5263157894736842,0.7,100.0,100.0
+2990,latent_2990,10010,0.02002,0.01824385,3.965,Significant left-sided pleural effusions and associated findings.,"The pattern in these examples involves significant left-sided pleural effusions and associated changes such as atelectasis, volume loss, or other signs of left lung involvement. This is indicated by the frequent mention of left-sided findings in the provided descriptions, which are accompanied by high activation levels.",0.4715686274509804,0.5510204081632653,0.8,0.16,25.0,24.0,0.4574831937728505,0.54,0.6818181818181818,0.15,100.0,100.0
+2991,latent_2991,3210,0.00642,0.007114033,5.830718,Detailed findings from PA and lateral chest views without prior comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to include comprehensive descriptions of findings from both anterior-posterior and lateral views, without comparison to prior studies, indicating a focus on initial detailed assessments when no historical imaging is available.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5561378646487873,0.585,0.673469387755102,0.33,100.0,100.0
+2992,latent_2992,1180,0.00236,0.0038945258,7.058726,Identification of surgical clips or alterations in imaging studies.,"The high activation examples consistently involve the identification of mediastinal or surgical clips, median sternotomy wires, or other surgical alterations on chest radiographs. These findings indicate the presence of prior surgical interventions, which are significant in radiological interpretation.",0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6807743795695603,0.69,0.7878787878787878,0.52,100.0,100.0
+2993,latent_2993,2061,0.004122,0.007170207,6.4082055,Use of current frontal and lateral images with prior images for detailed comparison.,"The high activation examples focus on providing detailed descriptions from multiple image views, often combining frontal and lateral chest images, to assess changes or details in comparison with prior images. These examples display comprehensive evaluation of images in sequence or combination, possibly indicating different perspectives contribute to detecting subtle or specific changes not captured by single view evaluations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+2994,latent_2994,7958,0.015916,0.008335467,5.941298,Radiological findings comparison focusing on post-operative or clinical intervention changes.,"The pattern involves providing a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior images, specifically after certain medical interventions, surgeries, or clinical changes. This pattern appears in cases where follow-up imaging evaluates progression post-operative changes or other clinical interventions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5733333333333334,0.6,0.4268292682926829,0.5147058823529411,68.0,132.0
+2995,latent_2995,4599,0.009198,0.010227255,8.42069,Device positioning changes between current and prior frontal images.,Multiple examples have notable activation levels when describing changes associated with the position or condition of medical devices like PICC lines or pleural drains between current and prior frontal images. This pattern involves both the direct mention of device positioning and the assessment of other conditions like effusions or pneumothorax that can accompany such placements.,0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5265434954150907,0.565,0.6511627906976745,0.28,100.0,100.0
+2996,latent_2996,2361,0.004722,0.0055121956,7.0554504,Comparison of positions or changes in medical apparatus on imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels show comparison between current and prior images, highlighting changes in medical apparatus position, such as catheters, endotracheal tubes, or tracheostomy tubes. Reports that describe stable or unchanged positions, new placements, or slight adjustments generally align with this pattern.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+2997,latent_2997,29892,0.059784,0.034804773,5.067642,Focus on specific imaging views and anatomical positioning in chest X-ray descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally involve cases where there is a clear specification of the anatomical orientation or positioning of the chest X-ray image, including comments on views like 'lateral' or 'AP upright', and often comparisons such as 'compared to prior'. This indicates that the focus is on the imaging view details and comparative descriptions between current and previous imaging.",0.3055555555555556,0.44,0.4680851063829787,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3836765827612509,0.495,0.4972972972972973,0.92,100.0,100.0
+2998,latent_2998,3874,0.007748,0.0111394385,7.1503153,Explicit comparison and change evaluation in image descriptions.,"These examples have higher activations when there is a direct comparison between current images and a prior image, with a focus on changes in findings. Descriptions explicitly mention comparisons and changes are noted, contributing to a higher activation despite incomplete technical details.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+2999,latent_2999,8240,0.01648,0.011509811,4.3580613,Recognition of aortic tortuosity description in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention aortic tortuosity, which is evident in several radiological findings in these samples. The pattern is likely focused on recognizing the term 'aortic tortuosity' or closely related terms as a significant finding within the given context.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5325392132015432,0.585,0.7575757575757576,0.25,100.0,100.0
+3000,latent_3000,3762,0.007524,0.009653311,3.7432775,Emphasis on changes or evaluations over serial images in the findings.,"Highly activated examples identify differences or changes over a temporal sequence of images, demonstrating an emphasis on assessing progress or resolution in findings rather than static comparison reaching identical conclusions. This includes variations like resolving conditions, persistent abnormalities, or progressions, using specific language describing change such as 'improved', 'unchanged', or 'increased'.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3001,latent_3001,4808,0.009616,0.008521425,6.7403207,Recent imaging findings with minimal historical comparisons.,Examples at higher activation levels often lack specific comparisons to earlier radiograph indications. There is more focus on current imaging details without the historic comparative context. This suggests the prompt structure emphasizing findings from current images while reducing historical comparisons triggers higher activation.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3002,latent_3002,3789,0.007578,0.00754862,5.559075,Explicit task requests for interval change descriptions.,"Examples exhibiting increased activation consistently involve explicit requests or requirements to provide a description comparing current and prior imaging studies, with an emphasis on identifying interval changes. This pattern suggests that the presence of a task or request related to comparison, expressed directly as part of the prompt, is a key factor.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4696969696969697,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3003,latent_3003,3202,0.006404,0.0067568836,5.399447,Findings in chest images compared with prior imaging.,"These examples with high activation levels describe findings in the chest radiograph that are compared to a prior `image`. This common pattern in radiology reports evaluates the stability or change in patient condition, often noting specific areas like pleural effusions or pneumothorax with reference to any previous imaging.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3004,latent_3004,2495,0.00499,0.009233766,5.3683105,Reports structured with 'Given the current frontal image' and 'PRIOR_REPORT'.,The examples with high activation levels consistently use the phrase 'Given the current frontal image and the prior frontal image' followed by a 'PRIOR_REPORT'. This pattern indicates that the high activation is related to reports containing both current and prior imaging comparisons specifically described by this structure.,0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3633056133056133,0.51,0.5051020408163265,0.99,100.0,100.0
+3005,latent_3005,6182,0.012364,0.012354238,4.393286,"Reports comparing current findings to prior imaging, noting specific changes or stable findings.","The examples with high activation levels refer to radiological reports where specific changes, considerations, or conditions (like atelectasis, consolidation, pleural effusion, or device placements) are explicitly described in contrast to prior imaging studies. These observations require precise interpretation and significant clinical relevance, which likely drive the high activation.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3006,latent_3006,4598,0.009196,0.0077886744,5.5594506,Evaluation or description of bilateral pleural effusions.,"The pattern focuses on radiological findings involving the reference and comparison to pleural effusions, especially bilaterally or changes in effusion status. Frequent references are made to the size, progression, or regression of bilateral pleural effusions in the context of various clinical indications and imaging comparisons.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3007,latent_3007,16471,0.032942,0.026045188,5.284615,Normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouettes with stable findings.,"The analyses with higher activation levels consistently describe cardiac and mediastinal structures as being normal or unremarkable, often noting no significant cardiopulmonary changes or anomalies. This indicates a pattern focusing on the stability or normalcy of the cardiomediastinal silhouette and its consistency with prior imaging.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.65,0.65,0.65,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3008,latent_3008,36154,0.072308,0.09207322,4.8800187,Radiology comparisons to prior images to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels contain statements emphasizing evaluation or comparison to prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability in medical findings over time. This pattern suggests the model is triggered by the presence of such comparative descriptions between current and previous imagery.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,100.0,100.0
+3009,latent_3009,6238,0.012476,0.013020214,5.14521,Unchanged findings following comparison with prior images.,"The pattern involves a description of unchanged findings of any kind upon comparison with previous imaging studies. This is signaled by terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no change compared to prior', and often involves structures like cardiac silhouette, atelectasis, pleural effusion resolving, etc., indicating no significant progression or new findings.",0.3919554985023534,0.4081632653061224,0.375,0.24,25.0,24.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3010,latent_3010,5477,0.010954,0.007869572,6.776592,Presence of thoracic scoliosis in comparison studies.,"Examples with activation values of 3 or higher consistently mention scoliosis in the thoracic spine as a notable finding. This pattern appears prominently compared to other findings in these examples, suggesting scoliosis's strong influence on activation levels.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5400400990682863,0.61,1.0,0.22,100.0,100.0
+3011,latent_3011,1562,0.003124,0.009283108,8.299922,Comparative study requests in radiology without detailed findings.,"The examples with high activation include comparisons to prior images in the context of current radiology report requests or indications, without requiring detailed findings, often marked with '[PRI]OR_REPORT: N/A'. The emphasis is on the procedural aspect rather than acute findings.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7011873869623338,0.715,0.6503496503496503,0.93,100.0,100.0
+3012,latent_3012,4460,0.00892,0.0066620414,6.137247,Description of stable or improved findings compared to previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples are characterized by observations of unchanged or improved findings compared to prior imaging, indicating stability or positive changes in the clinical situation.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3013,latent_3013,5015,0.01003,0.012141624,4.680476,Analysis of radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples mention a detailed analysis of radiological findings in the context of comparisons to prior images. They often describe changes or continuity over time, suggesting the pattern is related to the presence of serial comparisons.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4966887417218543,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3014,latent_3014,8700,0.0174,0.019151097,7.1883564,Unchanged or stable assessment of cardiomediastinal or hilar structures in imaging comparison.,"The examples with high activations often illustrate cases where there is a description of listed conditions in the current imaging and their comparison with previous imaging findings, highlighting unchanged states or minor changes in known findings across these images. High activations are noted when the cardiomediastinal or hilar contours and alignment are explicitly described as unchanged, consistent, or stable, often alongside other technical comparisons to previous state descriptions.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6229632436528989,0.6231155778894473,0.6213592233009708,0.64,100.0,99.0
+3015,latent_3015,20710,0.04142,0.033692237,5.269746,Task: Describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"Cases with high activation levels include the directive to compare, or explicitly mention comparison between current and prior examinations by readers or AI assistants in the form of requests to describe or evaluate findings in the current study relative to previous ones, unlike low activation cases that lack such designated comparative tasks.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3016,latent_3016,2606,0.005212,0.010638165,6.9519777,Detailed comparison of current and prior images for interval changes.,"Higher activation levels occur when the analysis focuses on describing imaging findings in close relation to prior images, specifically when interpreting changes or stability in observed features over time. This involves comparisons with prior imaging using phrases like 'compared to previous','unchanged', 'similar to prior', or noting new findings since the last images.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3853968253968254,0.395,0.36,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3017,latent_3017,2233,0.004466,0.0069749644,5.134643,Presence of bilateral pleural effusions in chest imaging.,Highly activated examples consistently include bilateral pleural effusions in their descriptions. This observation aligns with the details in the findings and impressions provided. Radiology reports often highlight effusions explicitly as they are a critical clinical finding.,0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7359633454997282,0.745,0.8888888888888888,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3018,latent_3018,2680,0.00536,0.005310473,4.201853,"Comparison to prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability.","These examples consistently involve a comparison of current radiological imaging findings with prior images, with significant attention to changes or stability in specific features such as pulmonary opacities, effusions, cardiac size, and device placement. The pattern is rooted in evaluating changes over time or confirming stability.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.5634920634920635,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3019,latent_3019,10761,0.021522,0.012268929,4.0333023,Device positioning or intervention with noted stability or absence of acute changes.,"The examples with similar activation levels often involve change or the absence of acute changes as described in radiological findings. The reports often include commentaries on device positioning such as pacemakers, catheters, or lines, and emphasize stability or comparison to a previous image. Furthermore, in these examples, there is a significant emphasis on description of persistent or resolved changes within the body, especially related to the chest or lung area while indicating the stable or unchanged nature of these features over time, with new findings or interventions highlighted.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5512820512820513,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3020,latent_3020,4024,0.008048,0.009053669,4.859605,Reports emphasize absence of abnormalities and reassure through recommendations.,"The pattern identified in these examples is the presence of minimal or no significant abnormal findings in the radiology reports, typically followed by generic reassurances or recommendations. The reports mainly emphasize the absence of critical findings such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or significant cardiopulmonary abnormalities, reflecting a focus on standard diagnostic processes without highlighting severe pathology.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5024458420684835,0.555,0.6571428571428571,0.23,100.0,100.0
+3021,latent_3021,17936,0.035872,0.024989579,5.859796,"Concurrent use of current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently specify the current images to be of both current frontal and lateral, along with prior frontal images. This pattern relates to the structured wording of input data for multi-view analysis, compared against prior data, reflecting a setup for radiological comparison reviews that cater to detailed examination.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4170879021178422,0.4321608040201005,0.4503816793893129,0.59,100.0,99.0
+3022,latent_3022,6932,0.013864,0.010161581,4.5227036,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations frequently mention providing a description or comparison of findings between given current and prior images, indicating a pattern of longitudinal evaluation in radiology reports. Specific attention is paid to changes in imaging features over time, expressed mainly through descriptions of changes observed between study intervals.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3023,latent_3023,3805,0.00761,0.0077165877,5.012491,Focus on placement and positioning of medical devices or tubes in imaging.,"The given examples with high activation levels frequently center around the presence or alteration of medical devices or tubes, such as endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, within the body. These examples contain specific findings and comparisons to prior images focusing on positioning or changes in these devices, emphasizing their importance in the analysis.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5540540540540541,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3024,latent_3024,6516,0.013032,0.009891637,3.886817,Comparison of findings to prior report with clear lung and cardiac silhouette analysis.,"The examples with high activation typically include a frontal and lateral view image, a prior report, and detailed comparisons related to lung and heart findings. Low activation examples lack comprehensive comparison or use terms like 'indication' or 'comparison: none'.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4392523364485981,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3025,latent_3025,13383,0.026766,0.018444544,3.8660734,Reports comparing current imaging to prior with emphasis on medical device or anatomical changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve evaluating changes in medical devices, lung pathology, or anatomical features over time by comparing current imaging with prior radiographs, highlighting discrepancies, updates, or stabilities.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.5572519083969466,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3026,latent_3026,12656,0.025312,0.018364366,7.839552,Previous findings and changes post-intervention or new placement in imaging comparisons.,"The pattern identified in the examples with higher activations is consistent with reports that compare findings against prior imaging studies. Although many examples mention prior imaging, those with higher scores seem to have specific radiographic changes noted, particularly procedures or interventions that may influence these comparisons, like Dobbhoff placements or chest tubes and their positioning. The procedural aspects appear to be crucial for higher activations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4777777777777778,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3027,latent_3027,52396,0.104792,0.061634105,10.470869,Comparative analysis of current and prior images with focus on stability or changes over time.,"The examples displaying higher activation levels consistently reference intervals or comparisons related to iterative processes or reviews across time spans noted by time differences or noting stability, changes, or unaffected findings from prior imaging.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3784461152882206,0.38,0.2129032258064516,0.9428571428571428,35.0,165.0
+3028,latent_3028,4029,0.008058,0.009843441,4.2720175,Emphasis on comparative analysis with previous images.,"The pattern is manifested by the consistent use of comparison to prior imaging studies to identify changes or stability in findings, which is a common practice in radiological assessments. High activation occurs in examples where there is significant explicit comparison to earlier exams, focusing on stability or changes in imaging features.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3029,latent_3029,2923,0.005846,0.0066727605,5.034495,Comparative imaging indicating stable or unchanged findings.,"In these examples, there is an explicit mention of comparing either frontal or lateral images to prior imaging. However, higher activations are particularly associated with cases that emphasize comparisons in the absence of acute findings, whereas lower activations involve new findings or significant changes compared to prior images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5238095238095238,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3030,latent_3030,209319,0.418638,0.40256357,5.6691995,Changes in thoracic interventions or devices alongside imaging observations.,"The examples showing positive activation consistently involve complex cases with interspersed device placements or intervals of treatments like thoracocentesis, feeding tubes, or surgeries. This pattern suggests the focus is on tracking medical interventions effects or device statuses alongside radiological findings.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.6049382716049383,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3031,latent_3031,9665,0.01933,0.013074205,6.284794,Changes in medical device placement or condition compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on the evaluation of interval changes compared to prior imaging, particularly noting specific changes in medical devices such as catheters or tubes. This aligns with radiological interpretations often specifying placement and changes over time, indicating potential need for clinical or procedural intervention.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5344827586206896,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3032,latent_3032,6231,0.012462,0.009821113,4.3248677,Reports highlight comparison of imaging for interval changes over time.,"This pattern considers reports featuring detailed descriptions of current imaging in direct comparison to previous imaging to identify interval changes or stability, without consistently pointing out new or worsening conditions but focusing on understanding changes over time. This often involves monitoring the position and effects of devices or treatment outcomes with illness.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4690834902699309,0.4874371859296482,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,99.0
+3033,latent_3033,3851,0.007702,0.011740694,4.561474,Comparison involves both frontal and lateral images against prior images.,"These examples describe cases where findings are explicitly compared to prior images across different type of projections, with a special emphasis on concurrent inclusion of current frontal and lateral images. The pattern involves assessing multiple views (both frontal and lateral) against previous studies, highlighting changes or stability that might not be visible on a single projection.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6280561729642352,0.628140703517588,0.6288659793814433,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+3034,latent_3034,1663,0.003326,0.005162846,5.6290026,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in radiological comparisons.,"These examples often feature comparison to prior images, with specific focus on identifying unchanged conditions, typically using phrases like 'there is no significant change', 'remains unchanged', or 'no relevant change'. The pattern involves establishing stability in findings over time.",0.467391304347826,0.4693877551020408,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5735294117647058,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3035,latent_3035,40587,0.081174,0.036019612,4.5593276,Abnormal positioning or documentation of medical devices/tubes in chest radiographs.,"The activation pattern is indicative of atypical findings related to the positioning or integration of medical devices and tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, or PICC lines, within the thoracic cavity. These examples highlight situations where these devices are noted during the evaluation.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4750656167979002,0.545,0.6666666666666666,0.18,100.0,100.0
+3036,latent_3036,25263,0.050526,0.036067463,6.1959577,Comparison of current image findings with prior ones concerning interval changes in medical devices.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention interval changes in medical devices, such as chest tubes and drains, that are visible on radiographs. They require description and comparison to prior images to assess their positions, changes, or any complications arising from insertion or positioning, which is crucial for appropriate management of patient treatment.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5983935742971888,0.61,0.6666666666666666,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3037,latent_3037,25498,0.050996,0.02906953,4.0917826,"Descriptions of medical device positioning relative to anatomy, often compared to prior images.","Examples with high activation levels detail specific devices (e.g., nasogastric tube, endotracheal tube, PICC line) and their placement relative to the body's anatomy (such as SVC, gastroesophageal junction, carina) often in comparison with prior images. This suggests the pattern is focused on positional description of inserted medical devices.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8383838383838383,0.84,0.7833333333333333,0.94,100.0,100.0
+3038,latent_3038,3111,0.006222,0.014169864,7.697571,Comparison required but prior details often unspecified or marked as 'N/A'.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently provide a comparison with prior imaging but lack explicit dates or precise prior comparisons, implying the act of comparison is expected but not detailed. The instructions across these prompts frequently lack complete details by indicating 'N/A' or providing limited historical context, which is a pattern these higher activation levels share.",0.3106617647058823,0.4,0.4418604651162791,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4600183823529412,0.53,0.5174418604651163,0.89,100.0,100.0
+3039,latent_3039,5760,0.01152,0.012234932,7.9763093,Comparison of current and prior images with stable findings.,"The highly activated examples involve a sequence of images (current and prior), where findings are evaluated in relation to previous ones and often reflect observations of stability or change (or lack thereof) of specific structures or devices, such as cardiomediastinal silhouettes, or major pulmonary structures. These findings also typically relate to chronic conditions or ongoing assessments rather than acute findings.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4642857142857143,0.26,100.0,100.0
+3040,latent_3040,4507,0.009014,0.010269848,7.5531225,Comprehensive detailing of findings with multiple image views and clinical indications.,"Examples with higher activation levels detail multiple imaging perspectives in combination with explicit indications or medical history which inform the evaluation (like tube placement, pneumonia evaluation, etc.), highlighting importance of comprehensive reporting in complicated clinical scenarios.",0.2869875222816399,0.36,0.4146341463414634,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4129979035639413,0.475,0.4848484848484848,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3041,latent_3041,25854,0.051708,0.028131705,6.6814885,"Comparison of imaging findings to prior studies, especially noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels involve documentation of findings by comparing current images to prior ones, often noting resolution or stability of previous conditions, as well as describing devices, lines, and tubes in relation to patient anatomy. This pattern indicates a focus on continuity and evaluation of change over time in patient imaging data.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.3834586466165413,0.7611940298507462,67.0,133.0
+3042,latent_3042,5085,0.01017,0.012758237,6.395428,Mild or minimal changes or findings in cardiac or aortic structure.,"The consistent feature in highly activated examples is the mention of findings that are 'mildly enlarged', 'mildly tortuous', or have 'minimal' changes, referring specifically to the heart, aorta, or associated structures, suggesting a subtle abnormality or stability in certain structures or markers.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6854707792207793,0.69,0.75,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3043,latent_3043,6171,0.012342,0.016807357,6.7488413,Presence of moderate cardiomegaly and associated pulmonary findings.,"Samples with high activation levels tend to describe moderate cardiomegaly alongside other findings such as pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis. This combination of findings, described with terms like 'moderate cardiomegaly', 'pleural effusion', and 'pulmonary edema', reflects a pattern of non-acute cardiopulmonary processes often observed in certain chronic conditions.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5314093552744013,0.575,0.6923076923076923,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3044,latent_3044,3417,0.006834,0.0063599185,8.964944,Descriptions emphasize changes from prior images or significant new findings.,"Examples with high activation all provide detailed descriptions of findings in the context of a change from prior images or mention significant new findings (e.g., opacities, fluid levels, changes post tube placement). They emphasize the interpretation of evolving pathology or alterations in imaging findings due to recent clinical conditions or interventions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3045,latent_3045,4582,0.009164,0.0055627753,3.6877146,Substantial changes or interventions between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve significant changes or interventions between current and prior images, such as substantial interval changes in conditions, placement, or removal of equipment, or emergent pathological findings. This pattern focuses on substantial and critical changes between compared images.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5653697683868346,0.5678391959798995,0.5764705882352941,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+3046,latent_3046,47114,0.094228,0.051957887,5.6411552,References to comparison with prior imaging showing changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference a comparison to prior imaging studies, specifically indicating changes or stability in certain medical findings. This pattern is common in follow-up radiology reports where comparison allows monitoring of progression or regression of conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3047,latent_3047,5713,0.011426,0.009501967,6.9647117,Stable findings when compared to prior imaging.,"Overall, the highly activated examples generally refer to findings that are stable or unchanged from comparison to prior imaging studies, indicating no new abnormal developments. This pattern involves tracking changes over time and defining the stability or lack of change in clinical contexts.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3048,latent_3048,7060,0.01412,0.010497814,5.496917,Comparison between current and prior frontal images using textual hints.,"Patterns with high activation levels involve prompts requiring the model to execute tasks involving the comparison of current studies to prior imaging while explicitly indicating which images are available for comparison. Activations are lower when the task does not specify comparing with a prior image or the comparison is not made between similar imaging positions. Presence of prior image comparison without lateral image comparison shows highest activation, indicating a focus on cross-referencing current frontal images against prior frontal images.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4026666666666667,0.44,0.46,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3049,latent_3049,2728,0.005456,0.00745085,5.447087,Low lung volumes leading to bronchovascular crowding or other secondary changes.,"The high activation examples mention low lung volumes, which lead to secondary changes such as bronchovascular crowding, atelectasis, etc. This is a specific pattern in radiographic interpretation where low lung volumes have consequential effects on visibility and interpretation of other structures in the chest image.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5602745602745602,0.59,0.6875,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3050,latent_3050,5041,0.010082,0.010390751,4.354629,Comparative evaluation of imaging findings over time.,"These examples primarily involve using current radiological findings to provide a comparative assessment of changes over time, often in the context of evaluating stability or progression of a medical condition, particularly when specific pathologies or treatments are monitored via imaging.",0.2359932088285229,0.28,0.3513513513513513,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4175385611045195,0.46,0.474025974025974,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3051,latent_3051,7166,0.014332,0.011128298,8.702486,"Detailed comparisons with prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples with high activation include descriptions with detailed comparisons to prior images, often with indications of specific changes or stability in findings. The pattern includes explicit mention of unchanged or stable status in conditions over time, or specific interval changes, further indicating that the model is detecting a pattern involving detailed analysis referencing previous states.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.4301075268817204,0.4597701149425287,87.0,113.0
+3052,latent_3052,6323,0.012646,0.016187562,2.8948336,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3053,latent_3053,8280,0.01656,0.011102507,4.6766977,Comparison to prior study's findings with specific interval changes.,"These examples consistently include radiological findings or changes being described in comparison to a specified prior study, a pattern focusing on the interval changes observed over time. The examples generally articulate stability, progression, or improvement in imaging findings with reference to prior imaging dates.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6647904940587868,0.665,0.6736842105263158,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3054,latent_3054,4247,0.008494,0.012148678,3.3899922,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3055,latent_3055,10760,0.02152,0.01146441,3.9530976,Description of radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include phrases indicating descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to a prior image. This includes expressions such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 're-demonstrated', and stability or change in findings over time.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3056,latent_3056,4319,0.008638,0.021423588,7.3056927,Focus on comparison to prior images with assessments of cardiomediastinal silhouettes and lung findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels regularly include descriptions of findings across both current and prior images. They convey stability, changes, or normal findings in terms of specific anatomical insights like cardiomediastinal silhouettes and lung analysis, without acute pathologies highlighted.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3057,latent_3057,21197,0.042394,0.023225168,3.375744,Interval change or stability exams in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve radiological descriptions that explicitly denote ""interval change"" or ""unchanged"" status in relation to a previous imaging study. This pattern highlights the examination's focus on comparing intervals to detect any developments or stability that are crucial in managing acute conditions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5132743362831859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3058,latent_3058,80966,0.161932,0.09378649,4.905562,Interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior examinations.,"These examples focus on changes (or lack thereof) in the imaging findings when compared to prior studies or images. This is reflected through recurring terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'compared to prior', and 'new' findings which primarily discuss interval changes in conditions or positioning of medical devices.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3059,latent_3059,9859,0.019718,0.016418248,4.8877306,Comparative imaging analysis emphasizing stability or interval changes.,"These examples highlight a comparative analysis of current findings against previous imaging, with attention to changes or stability in medical devices, abnormal lung findings, or other noted conditions, emphasizing clinical stability or change.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4473684210526316,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3060,latent_3060,3438,0.006876,0.008587507,4.5030622,Instructions to compare current images with prior ones in radiological contexts.,"Examples with high activation rates predominantly involve the explicit instruction to compare current frontal and lateral images with prior ones, emphasizing the comparative study to assess changes. This is a key task in radiological assessments to determine progression or stability of conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3061,latent_3061,7148,0.014296,0.012016995,7.598097,Comparison to a prior image focusing on stability of cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"The examples with higher activations prominently include a description of findings in comparison to a prior image, specifically focusing on the stability or change in the patient's condition over time. This involves assessment of the heart, mediastinal and hilar contours, indicating no acute changes despite potential background issues.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4583333333333333,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3062,latent_3062,8769,0.017538,0.012998826,6.070344,"Interval change in devices, pleural effusions, or opacities compared to prior images.","The examples show a pattern where changes in devices such as tubes or lines, pleural effusions, and opacities in the lungs are noted between current and prior imaging studies. The radiology reports highlight interval changes or stability in these features as compared to previous imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.64996499649965,0.65,0.6530612244897959,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3063,latent_3063,6114,0.012228,0.01628547,5.9934225,Detailed imaging analysis without comparison to prior studies.,"Highly activated examples contain detailed examination of the patient's chest based on present radiological images, demonstrating thorough analysis while considering factors like heart and mediastinal contours. Responses are more comprehensive and accurate, lacking comparison with prior imaging. This differentiates analysis focus in current imaging versus drawing conclusions with historical comparison.",0.4895833333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,24.0,0.5242836596968692,0.57,0.6842105263157895,0.26,100.0,100.0
+3064,latent_3064,8372,0.016744,0.010652023,5.3105664,Comparison to prior imaging is explicitly required.,Examples with higher activation levels require a comparison to prior imaging studies as part of the interpretation. The need for comparison with previous images or reports to assess stability or change of radiological findings identifies these samples as distinct.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3065,latent_3065,2772,0.005544,0.006176425,3.780182,Lack of comparison with prior imaging study.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently lack a comparison study, indicating that the activation pattern is linked to the lack of prior imaging comparisons. They emphasize findings without supportive analysis against previous studies, unlike examples with low activation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3066,latent_3066,20758,0.041516,0.026428502,5.065835,Explicit comparison with prior frontal images and identification of changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation describe findings in frontal images that are explicitly compared to prior frontal images, indicating changes or stability in the current radiologic appearances, using languages or formatting that consistently denote past report comparisons being made, often with findings labeled as 'unchanged' or 'new'.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5203252032520326,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3067,latent_3067,4380,0.00876,0.009038372,5.064234,Evaluating changes against prior radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on findings and observations made specifically in the context of comparison with previous radiographs or studies. This includes mention of changes (or stability) of imaging results such as atelectasis, consolidation, and device positioning in comparison to prior images, even when no adequate explicit comparison is stated in some example reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3068,latent_3068,8927,0.017854,0.015646473,8.8287735,'Low lung volumes' in radiology description.,"The samples with high activation explicitly describe or mention 'low lung volumes', a radiological finding often used as a key observation in both normal and pathological reports. These descriptions are consistent across examples with high activation, notably using either direct phrasing or observations related to low inspiratory effort.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6789727126805778,0.715,0.6909090909090909,0.4871794871794871,78.0,122.0
+3069,latent_3069,7569,0.015138,0.009818657,4.534419,Comparison of current and prior images to describe findings.,"The examples show a consistent pattern of providing a description of the current radiology study in comparison to a prior study based on image data, regardless of the varied medical indications and specific findings. Comparison is made specifically against a prior image, as highlighted by the model's emphasis on providing a comparison description.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3693418777336995,0.38,0.4047619047619047,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3070,latent_3070,13239,0.026478,0.0159621,4.8928576,Changes in pulmonary edema or lung opacities relative to prior imaging.,The highly activated examples describe changes in pulmonary edema or lung opacities with explicit mention of either improvement or worsening when compared to prior imaging studies. The pattern involves documenting specific changes over time in lung conditions such as edema or opacities in the radiological findings.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.6031746031746031,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3071,latent_3071,4302,0.008604,0.014296252,4.5523195,Description of findings with specific mention of comparison to prior reports or images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve situations where explicit comparisons between current and previous frontal radiographic images are made for updated evaluation. These comparisons are often used to assess stability, improvement, or progression of certain conditions and are clearly highlighted in these reports.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3072,latent_3072,3964,0.007928,0.009868277,5.7564754,Bibasilar atelectasis or linear opacities.,"Examples often highlight atelectasis, especially in the lung bases or bibasilar regions. The reports focus on descriptions such as 'bibasilar atelectasis', using terms like 'linear opacities' and indicating unchanged patterns over time or as chronic findings.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.6716417910447762,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3073,latent_3073,15523,0.031046,0.018559089,5.034801,Interval changes or specific device placements noted in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe changes in imaging that require comparison to prior images or cases involving manipulations (e.g., tube placements) where specificity in findings and attention to variations from prior studies are crucial.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.5959595959595959,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3074,latent_3074,11818,0.023636,0.013565829,3.5799353,Recognition of unchanged findings with new or notable changes from prior imaging.,"These examples consistently refer to observations on current imaging contrasted with prior, often emphasizing new or resolved findings, yet the remaining findings are unchanged, indicating stability except for new/notable changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4952380952380952,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3075,latent_3075,8892,0.017784,0.014513133,3.6111667,Emphasis on stable positioning of medical devices.,"These examples consistently refer to existing medical devices like pacemakers, PICC lines, catheters, etc., noting their position and context in the imaging study. The activation is high when such details are emphasized and unchanged in subsequent imaging studies.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5901639344262295,0.61,0.6964285714285714,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3076,latent_3076,5515,0.01103,0.01523267,6.686779,Explicit detailed comparison with findings from prior studies.,"Examples with high activation utilize a description of the findings in the current studies directly compared to prior imaging, with explicit comparisons to past medical examinations. This indicates the model is recognizing patterns involving evaluations based on changes over time between different imaging studies.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3077,latent_3077,14803,0.029606,0.021504361,5.6520104,Detailed imaging comparisons emphasizing cardiopulmonary findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide detailed comparative descriptions of current and prior frontal images, emphasizing changes and stability of cardiopulmonary findings, such as effusions, radiological techniques, and specific pulmonary or cardiac issues. These expressions of change against prior status are the key features driving high activation.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6057682332192136,0.62,0.5869565217391305,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3078,latent_3078,101119,0.202238,0.13198446,5.4132743,Ambiguity or inconsistency in comparing current to prior radiological findings.,The examples with mid-level activation levels describe scenarios where there is inconsistency or ambiguity in interpreting radiological changes compared to previous studies. These include wording indicative of uncertainty or potential evolution of findings which are still being monitored or evaluated for change.,0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4071204249948636,0.495,0.4971751412429379,0.88,100.0,100.0
+3079,latent_3079,8132,0.016264,0.010162246,5.311732,Interval change or stability in imaging findings between prior and current images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on comparing current images to prior images specifically regarding interval changes. The presence of any relevant changes, monitoring devices, or unresolved issues in these comparisons seems to drive the activation.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3080,latent_3080,4377,0.008754,0.010866159,4.009939,Current lateral image compared without prior lateral image.,"The pattern involves a discrepancy between the given technique and actual images used. Examples with high activation specify comparison with prior images, but use both current frontal and lateral images despite comparisons that indicate the presence or absence of prior frontal images without lateral images. This creates an inconsistency in the comparison logic.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.25,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.382773777237445,0.505,0.5454545454545454,0.06,100.0,100.0
+3081,latent_3081,7955,0.01591,0.014424603,5.6980486,Focus on interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation all describe findings or changes observed in radiological images relative to prior examinations. This pattern involves substantial attention to any differences or interval changes over time, due to the clinical relevance of monitoring progression or stability of medical conditions through comparative imaging studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.51995199519952,0.52,0.5196078431372549,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3082,latent_3082,3792,0.007584,0.0072387145,6.1619368,Inclusion of detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies across multiple views.,"Examples showing high activation levels often include both a reference to prior imaging for comparison and detailed, often specific analysis of multiple view types (e.g., 'frontal and lateral views'), suggesting that detailed comparative analysis boosts activation.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3548548423395263,0.355,0.3592233009708738,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3083,latent_3083,41023,0.082046,0.034160092,2.045769,Describing interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"Higher activation levels correspond with mentions of interval changes or stability in findings when compared to prior images, indicating the importance of documenting changes over time. This is a typical focus in radiology follow-ups to assess progression or resolution.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3084,latent_3084,65675,0.13135,0.07542246,4.337563,Evaluation of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe identifying specific interval changes or stability in findings between current and prior imaging studies. This pattern indicates a focus on evaluating changes over time, rather than solely detecting current pathologies.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6085492836451891,0.625,0.5886524822695035,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3085,latent_3085,3474,0.006948,0.020139342,8.431595,Detailed evaluation of findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe imaging studies where detailed findings, including pathologies or device placements, are compared to prior imaging to evaluate presence or stability of specific conditions (e.g., opacities, mediastinal changes, device positions) rather than just mentioning the comparison.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5324821246169561,0.5376884422110553,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,99.0
+3086,latent_3086,2797,0.005594,0.009104903,5.566624,Detailed interval changes in imaging findings and device placement.,"The examples with high activation describe changes (or absence of changes) over time between a current and prior imaging report, focusing on interval changes in medical devices like tubes or catheters, small changes like atelectasis or opacities, and technical aspects of radiological examinations. They include specific findings about the technical placement and assessment for changes over time using comparable prior studies.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3449387491940683,0.365,0.2923076923076923,0.19,100.0,100.0
+3087,latent_3087,10350,0.0207,0.015243271,4.8775673,Attention to omitted or missing comparison information in reports.,"High activations are consistently seen when there is either lack of prior comparison information or explicitly missing comparison details, indicated by placeholders such as '_'. This suggests attention to details regarding comparison information is critical.",0.4121022430881585,0.5306122448979592,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,24.0,0.3824243355354125,0.4924623115577889,0.4972677595628415,0.91,100.0,99.0
+3088,latent_3088,4156,0.008312,0.008387825,5.9169416,"Comparative analysis with prior imaging, detailing cardiac size or vascular features.","The common factor among high activation samples is the presence of both current and prior imaging for comparison, with detailed descriptions focusing on changes in conditions or features, particularly cardiac or vascular features, which shows up frequently as 'mildly enlarged heart' or similar findings. This suggests the model is activating significantly on reports that have comparative analysis of such findings.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5978260869565217,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3089,latent_3089,89829,0.179658,0.12180096,5.8331366,Limited comparison capability due to study limitations.,The pattern involves references to allow assessment and description of findings compared to prior images or studies combined with limitations in the current study that hinder accurate comparisons or determination of changes.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4405452141186044,0.45,0.4603174603174603,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3090,latent_3090,29329,0.058658,0.03617537,5.922576,Detection or evaluation of pulmonary pathologies in prior vs. current imaging.,"The description and findings of radiological studies in these examples show considerable changes or stability in findings compared to prior studies. High activation levels are consistently associated with findings related to the development, reduction, or detection of pulmonary pathologies like effusions, pneumothorax, or nodules in comparison to prior studies.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.532051282051282,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3091,latent_3091,9218,0.018436,0.015084593,5.200062,Comparison with prior imaging showing minor changes or stability.,"The examples show a pattern where reports emphasize evaluation or comparison with prior reports, specifically indicating changes or stability over time, but often lack acute or definitive findings, leading to a situation where more nuanced changes or subjective interpretation are noted. This is often found in monitoring scenarios or chronic conditions without drastic changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3092,latent_3092,20629,0.041258,0.021662379,7.7008433,Interval change in lung or thoracic condition compared to prior imaging.,"The distinguishable pattern involves the interval change, improvement, or worsening of pulmonary or thoracic conditions, explicitly stated compared to prior studies. This pattern is commonly used in radiology reports to track the progression or resolution of conditions over time using terms like 'interval', 'improved', 'worsened', or 'stable'.",0.88,0.88,0.88,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6246350223508437,0.6331658291457286,0.4285714285714285,0.8421052631578947,57.0,142.0
+3093,latent_3093,29268,0.058536,0.031754434,4.4282646,Presence and analysis of both current frontal and lateral chest images in conjunction with prior frontal images.,"The dataset examples highlighting high activation levels often exhibit descriptions that involve frontal images along with lateral images being present and analyzed in conjunction with past imaging, typically providing a more comprehensive view, enabling more thorough comparisons.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4448750968968017,0.445,0.4432989690721649,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3094,latent_3094,4431,0.008862,0.008534629,3.5660782,Comparison of radiological findings to prior imaging for assessing stability or changes.,"The examples showing higher activation scores often involve observations of masses, lines, tubes, or devices in specific positions with comparisons to previous images to assess changes or stability. These elements are significant for evaluating patient status, particularly when monitoring post-operative changes or treatment outcomes.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3095,latent_3095,5183,0.010366,0.019045413,6.0440693,Tasks requiring comparison with prior images for evaluation.,"These examples consistently involve performing or simulating a task where comparison to prior images is required to assess changes or abnormalities, emphasizing the task's goal of interpreting image differences over merely describing current findings without reference.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3777360850531582,0.3969849246231156,0.4253731343283582,0.57,100.0,99.0
+3096,latent_3096,4311,0.008622,0.010375491,9.795361,"Comparison of current and prior imaging in correlation with symptoms, especially chest pain.","Examples with high activation involve descriptions or patterns that involve radiological comparison reports, especially when coupled with the mention of specific symptoms like chest pain or historical medical conditions. The comparisons are made to prior images, highlighting any changes or lack thereof in the context of symptomatic evaluations.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5714285714285714,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3097,latent_3097,10151,0.020302,0.014106047,3.5638885,Noticeable interval change in imaging findings compared to prior radiograph.,"The data shows activation levels are higher when there is a comparison between current and prior images where changes (or lack thereof) in specific pathologies are highlighted, indicating a focus on interval changes in imaging findings. This is a common practice to monitor disease progression or stability, often referred to in managing patient conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,100.0,100.0
+3098,latent_3098,3868,0.007736,0.010319621,7.3963475,Detailed radiological changes with explicit comparison to prior findings.,"Examples with higher activations focus on specific radiological descriptions of lung, heart, or vascular changes, particularly mentioning interstitial changes, pulmonary congestion, effusions, or specific device positioning, often contrasted with prior findings. These details are crucial for focused assessments and comparisons with historical images to gauge stability or progression.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3099,latent_3099,15006,0.030012,0.018303027,4.430287,Changes or positioning of lines/tubes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation often involve descriptions that include an increase or change in size, positioning, or other noteworthy features compared to previous imaging, particularly focusing on lines (e.g., PICC lines), tubes, and the cardiac silhouette. This likely suggests a pattern recognizing changes or specific positioning related to implanted lines or devices.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.532258064516129,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3100,latent_3100,88331,0.176662,0.14763747,7.4829574,Comparison of current and prior imaging with emphasis on interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare current images with prior images and explicitly describe changes between these studies, emphasizing differences over time using terms like 'interval', 'unchanged', 'increased', or 'resolved'. The task consistently emphasizes assessing changes from past imaging.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3101,latent_3101,2353,0.004706,0.0059530353,4.663926,Explicit comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern observed in samples with high activation levels involves explicit comparison between current and prior imaging studies to identify stability or changes in findings. This approach is common in radiological reports where the focus is on assessing progression or stability using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'stable', and dates of previous imaging studies.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4006698395910453,0.405,0.4188034188034188,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3102,latent_3102,6717,0.013434,0.010486454,4.7787085,Mentions of frontal and lateral chest views.,"The examples show a pattern where descriptions reference a frontal view or frontal and lateral views of given chest images. These views are a standard procedure in radiology to offer a comprehensive assessment of thoracic structures, often prompting comparisons in the reports.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4670374232418027,0.54,0.5229885057471264,0.91,100.0,100.0
+3103,latent_3103,8249,0.016498,0.013313333,7.4715157,Comparison with prior imaging showing stability or improvement.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently make references to findings observed in comparison to prior radiographic imaging studies and indicate either improvement or stability of the noted condition or feature. This repeats the pattern of referencing prior imagery but emphasizes the stability or improvement aspect.,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5977011494252874,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3104,latent_3104,32953,0.065906,0.040408943,3.421394,Unchanged monitoring and support devices compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves noting that monitoring and support devices have remained unchanged compared to previous chest imaging. This is consistently reported across several examples, indicating stability in their placement despite other changes in the patient's condition.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4423076923076923,0.23,100.0,100.0
+3105,latent_3105,5188,0.010376,0.018708626,4.4401236,Description of findings based on prior images results in high activations.,"Based on the provided examples and activation levels, descriptions including both current and prior image references activate strongly while straightforward descriptions based solely on current images, especially without a prior comparison, tend to have lower activations. This pattern suggests value arising from examining serial changes or prior examination alignment when specifying findings.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3106,latent_3106,4938,0.009876,0.014364001,5.4582453,Detailed comparison to prior images in conjunction with patient indications.,"Examples with high activation include descriptions with specific techniques and comparisons to prior imaging, as well as indications for evaluation. These typically involve detailed assessment of changes or consistencies over time, often with a focus on particular areas of interest concerning patient history or indications such as pneumonia, pneumothorax, or cardiopulmonary processes. These examples appear more detailed and structured in reporting findings and assisting tasks, reflective of a pattern where detailed comparative analysis and clinical correlation are emphasized.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5584623323013416,0.5678391959798995,0.5546875,0.71,100.0,99.0
+3107,latent_3107,5299,0.010598,0.008183281,6.0947747,Comparison with prior imaging for changes in clinical findings.,"The pattern involves descriptions that compare current imaging findings with prior images, particularly focusing on changes such as improvements or deteriorations. This is a common practice in interpreting patient progress or stability over time, recorded through specific phrases that emphasize stability, change, resolution, or persistence of findings over intervals.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3108,latent_3108,1928,0.003856,0.005910709,4.899852,Focus on interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging.,"The high activation levels are associated with scenarios where an explicit comparison is made between current and previous radiology images. These examples specifically mention evaluating changes or stability in findings between prior and current imaging, indicating an interval change or lack thereof. This is a key narrative in medical imaging reports to monitor progression of a condition or response to treatment.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4100294985250737,0.42,0.4365079365079365,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3109,latent_3109,5225,0.01045,0.011372845,6.9433684,Presence of PA and lateral chest imaging in findings.,"The examples consistently describe radiological findings alongside information about the imaging technique used, specifically PA and lateral views, which is typical for comprehensive chest examinations. This reflects a pattern where the radiology report specifies both the type of views obtained and associated comparative findings in the imagery.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3110,latent_3110,4538,0.009076,0.01286033,6.2803717,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior reports to assess changes or stability.,"These examples include radiological reports that highlight either changes or stability between consecutive imaging studies. Common linguistic cues such as 'unchanged', 'improved', 'decreased', and specific mentions of comparison with prior reports, indicate examinations that identify progression, regression, or stability of certain conditions between images.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+3111,latent_3111,14925,0.02985,0.01778003,4.2996545,Emphasis on stable or changing findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include direct or indirect references to changes over time, particularly in the context of comparison to previous reports or images. Terms like 'stable', 'interval removal', 'unchanged', or 'decreased/increased' are commonly used to indicate a follow-up or assessment of progress in the patient's condition, which seems related to monitoring changes or stability of findings over the course of multiple imaging evaluations.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3112,latent_3112,3576,0.007152,0.008290143,6.6736054,"Reference to specific medical status, procedure, or history in radiology report comparison.","The majority of examples with higher activation levels involve scenarios where the history or findings indicate a specific medical status or procedure, such as status post surgery or intubation, that may influence radiological evaluations. This is characterized by detailed textual descriptions preceding the image comparing the current and prior findings, with attention to procedural elements.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4171685493047653,0.475,0.4846625766871165,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3113,latent_3113,7908,0.015816,0.012722401,7.0460835,Required description comparing current and prior radiological images.,"Higher activations are found in reports explicitly requesting or mentioning a need to provide a description of findings in comparison to a prior image, indicating an emphasis on comparative analysis between current radiological findings and prior studies, regardless of other details such as specific findings or abnormalities.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4287014333021562,0.435,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3114,latent_3114,5151,0.010302,0.011350397,4.4071164,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"The pattern shows references to both current and prior imaging studies, with an expectation of detailed descriptions and comparisons concerning findings. This is indicative of a need for consultants to evaluate changes relative to prior examinations, enhancing decision-making for ongoing medical conditions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3115,latent_3115,6677,0.013354,0.009417875,6.558577,Emphasis on stability with phrases like 'no significant interval change' in comparison reports.,"These examples contain descriptions that detail changes or the lack of significant change in reported findings when comparing current and previous medical imaging. This pattern is indicative of frequent follow-up in radiological evaluations where stability or progression of conditions is monitored, such that the reports emphasize ""no significant interval change"" or similar phrases.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5632352941176471,0.6060606060606061,0.7631578947368421,0.2959183673469387,98.0,100.0
+3116,latent_3116,6564,0.013128,0.0111886775,3.6361027,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation levels above 5.0 consistently describe changes in imaging findings by explicitly comparing them to prior studies, indicating an interval change or stability in specific pathological features. This pattern often involves complex clinical scenarios where changes over time are critical to patient management, thus activating the model more strongly.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3117,latent_3117,5542,0.011084,0.009716878,5.562399,Emphasis on comparison with prior images for assessing changes.,"The examples with higher activations typically involve direct requests for descriptions or evaluations that include a specified comparison with prior radiological studies. This is evident in instructions that require comparison for evaluation of progress, stability, or change, along with notations of images as current versus prior, and providing targeted findings.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3118,latent_3118,5142,0.010284,0.017081471,6.741489,Comparison to prior images assessing device position or edema status.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involved comparisons to prior imaging studies to assess continuity or change in medical conditions, especially involving monitoring of devices or slight image adjustments for idiopathic or pulmonary edema. These comparisons are a standard part of radiological evaluations.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6228786926461345,0.625,0.6086956521739131,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3119,latent_3119,3809,0.007618,0.009143454,4.8388877,Comparison of current frontal and lateral chest images to prior study.,"These examples engage with both current and prior chest imaging, specifying frontal and lateral views for detailed comparison assessment with prior studies. Lateral views provide additional spatial context in three dimensions, which is crucial for accurate comparisons in radiological assessments.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3120,latent_3120,77072,0.154144,0.09703003,6.449033,Stable findings or unchanged hardware positions from prior imaging.,"Prompts with mid-range activations frequently involve descriptions of unchanged equipment positions or stable findings in comparison to prior imaging, such as catheters, tubes, or cardiomegaly remaining stable. Higher activation examples typically mention stable findings without significant changes, focusing on the stability rather than specific pathologies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3121,latent_3121,7805,0.01561,0.01440954,4.3927526,Description includes comparison of current chest radiographs to prior images.,"Many of the examples involve descriptions involving the comparison of current radiographs to prior images, specifically emphasizing chest images and comparisons to assess for changes or stability in the findings over time. This pattern of comparing imaging over time is typical in monitoring disease progression or stability.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3122,latent_3122,7629,0.015258,0.014639241,4.867515,Comparison of current and prior radiological findings.,"These examples frequently contain explicit instructions or templates directing an assistant or practitioner on how to produce radiological findings compared to a prior exam from given images, often including placeholders for indeterminate data. This pattern suggests the use of structured guidance to assist in drafting or comparing current and past radiological evaluations.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3123,latent_3123,1736,0.003472,0.011092216,8.328523,Use of both frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior imaging.,"The key pattern here is the presence of descriptions involving multiple imaging views including both frontal and lateral images in combination with reference to prior frontal images. The notable observation is dual-view comparison, strongly correlated with higher activation values indicating the pattern of cross-sectional imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5741376286981137,0.575,0.5688073394495413,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3124,latent_3124,6802,0.013604,0.011843566,5.1909494,"Detection or evaluation of pulmonary conditions like effusion, atelectasis, or pneumothorax.","Examples with higher activation levels tend to mention specific terms related to conditions and findings such as 'pleural effusion','atelectasis','consolidation','pneumothorax', and 'pneumonia'. They generally involve evaluations or comparisons indicating changes or stability of specific pathologies in the chest.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3125,latent_3125,14993,0.029986,0.022103274,7.163901,No explicit prior image for comparison.,"Instances where no explicit comparison is available with prior images tend to have higher activation levels. This suggests that the pattern is about the absence of comparison data, which seems to trigger a positive detection of the pattern in reports.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3126,latent_3126,5345,0.01069,0.007854281,3.5739982,Describing changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging studies to identify changes over time, with particular emphasis on indicating stability, improvement, or progression of pathologies. This is emphasized by consistent use of terms like 'comparison', 'as compared to', and detailed mention of changes in specific features such as catheter positions, pulmonary structures, or the presence of opacities.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5028997514498756,0.505,0.504424778761062,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3127,latent_3127,2474,0.004948,0.008412612,8.27351,Requests for detailed finding comparisons relative to past images.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions or actions intended for comparison between current and prior findings, or comparisons with alternative imaging techniques. The comparison is detailed in terms of technique, findings, or specific requested descriptions, which forms a recurring pattern.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4580152671755725,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3128,latent_3128,6898,0.013796,0.016256262,4.949673,"Radiological evaluation using current frontal, lateral, and prior images.","The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the presence and analysis of multiple image viewpoints, typically the current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images, indicating the significant importance of this comprehensive comparison in the radiological analysis process.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4589090909090909,0.535,0.52,0.91,100.0,100.0
+3129,latent_3129,31402,0.062804,0.026668567,2.2828813,Structured comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often include a direct, structured comparison of findings on the current radiographic images to those on prior images, specifically highlighting changes or stability in various pathological or anatomical features based on previous imaging. The explicit mention of imaging comparisons contextualizes the findings.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5718433263343443,0.5829145728643216,0.5606060606060606,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+3130,latent_3130,8131,0.016262,0.011884018,3.9857106,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Primarily high activation examples describe comparing two radiographic studies and highlighting interval changes or stability, indicating comparison is a key feature in these reports.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5350467289719626,0.5376884422110553,0.5304347826086957,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+3131,latent_3131,9034,0.018068,0.010782906,5.139107,"Focus on tube, line, or device placement and stability compared to prior imaging.","The identified pattern revolves around noting the positions and stability of various tubes, lines, and devices within the chest, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and Dobbhoff tubes. These reports highlight whether their position has changed or remained stable compared to prior imaging, which is crucial for monitoring the status of these medical devices in patients.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3132,latent_3132,6078,0.012156,0.00922329,5.36296,Focus on changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the comparison between current and prior images, indicating changes or stability in findings. This is a common focus in radiological evaluation, particularly in longitudinal assessments to track patient condition or treatment outcomes.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4907407407407407,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3133,latent_3133,9555,0.01911,0.010384474,4.5430384,Evaluation and comparison of tube placements in imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels involve evaluation of tube placements, such as endotracheal or gastric tubes, as essential findings needing verification and comparison, which stands out in radiology reports when assessing airway and digestive tract interventions.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,100.0,100.0
+3134,latent_3134,4964,0.009928,0.011624202,4.6690845,Radiology prompts containing placeholders and requiring comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels include prompts that reference the comparison of new radiographic findings to prior imaging, specifically marked with placeholders or incomplete sections for searches. This structure of prompting using placeholders or incomplete sections suggests it is focusing on requests for updated observations based on comparison, which is relevant in radiological evaluation.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3952429938589108,0.515,0.5079365079365079,0.96,100.0,100.0
+3135,latent_3135,8075,0.01615,0.039027367,5.5691977,Comparison requested without an available prior report.,"The examples with high activation mention a clear pattern where the reports request descriptions of imaging observations, specifically directing comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, but notably in cases where no 'PRIOR_REPORT' was provided or was marked as unavailable (""N/A""). This indicates a pattern of engaging in comparative analysis without previous reports explicitly recorded.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4895104895104895,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3136,latent_3136,4918,0.009836,0.009962261,3.6269243,Detailed descriptions comparing current and prior imaging results.,"Presence of detailed comparison descriptions from imaging findings with ""provides a description... in comparison to the prior"" and explicit referencing to the prior frontal image with additional pathology findings, indicating systematic evaluation and changes noted in sequential imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3137,latent_3137,2211,0.004422,0.008229457,5.894902,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently have explicit prompts that combine current and prior imaging for comparison, using terms like 'prior image' alongside 'current image'. This pattern emphasizes the juxtaposition of past and present imaging studies in the analysis.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,100.0,100.0
+3138,latent_3138,17104,0.034208,0.020174194,4.8004045,Documentation of interval changes or stabilities in follow-up imaging comparisons.,"The patterns with highest activations involve descriptions of comparisons to prior imaging with explicit mention of observed interval changes or stability over time. These changes, whether progression, improvement, or stability, are emphasized in the findings, often with specific observations noted as unchanged or altered since the last examination.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.596516764983784,0.605,0.5813953488372093,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3139,latent_3139,2464,0.004928,0.0054725786,4.9875073,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The samples with higher activation levels heavily reference comparison to prior imaging studies, which provide context for stability or changes in radiological findings. The presence of comparisons indicates common radiological practice to assess disease progression or stability.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.4298245614035088,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3140,latent_3140,26967,0.053934,0.027746512,3.3176198,Unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette despite other changes.,"The examples with higher activation describe normalized, unchanged, or stable cardiomediastinal sillhouettes often in conjunction with unchanged findings. This reflects a pattern of detection when the cardiac silhouette is unremarkable, even when there are changes or abnormalities elsewhere in the imaging, like tubes or pleural changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3141,latent_3141,35977,0.071954,0.031173162,3.3759649,Comparison with prior imaging noting interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe findings in relation to past changes, such as new developments, improvements, or stability, all specifically compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern reflects the common radiology practice of longitudinal analysis and highlights changes over time using terms like 'compared', 'change', 'unchanged', 'improvement', 'interval'.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3142,latent_3142,5554,0.011108,0.015514387,3.618607,Descriptive comparison with prior images despite comprehensive current images.,The examples with high activation levels frequently feature a pattern where radiological studies are described using comparisons to prior studies despite having complete data from current study comparisons. The key focus is the comparison basis provided between current images and prior references without apparent relevance to the current complaint.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3143,latent_3143,5138,0.010276,0.017831689,5.9614778,Stability or minor changes in findings without acute details.,"Highly activated examples predominantly provide descriptions of findings without specific indications or detailed directives for further action, often focusing strictly on the stability or minor changes seen in comparison to previous imaging. These reports are mostly clinical observations ensuring no significant change or acute process.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3144,latent_3144,3694,0.007388,0.008274478,5.360148,Comparative analysis emphasizing pulmonary or cardiovascular changes and devices.,"Examples with high activation describe detailed comparisons of current imaging with prior ones and focus on changes in pulmonary and cardiovascular findings, particularly where lines, tubes, and pleural effusions are mentioned. This includes context about PICC lines, pleural effusion changes, and stable or altered heart size or silhouette.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5797760578738796,0.605,0.5704697986577181,0.85,100.0,100.0
+3145,latent_3145,20507,0.041014,0.028286314,6.8826036,Reports detailing changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports where there is a notable change or stability in a finding when compared to previous images. These comparisons often highlight conditions such as new opacities or stable conditions that require monitoring.,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5429001640181765,0.575,0.5490196078431373,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3146,latent_3146,5408,0.010816,0.010955158,6.742907,References to support/monitoring device placement in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently reference medical support or monitoring devices' placement, such as endotracheal tubes or central venous catheters, providing specific positional information. These identifiers relate to clinical significance in radiologic interpretation, often found in contexts requiring devices and their placement verification.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6694711538461539,0.67,0.6574074074074074,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3147,latent_3147,3678,0.007356,0.011637693,5.995348,Focus on specified findings in imaging reports with technical details.,"Examples with high activation levels contain structured data inputs and outputs that emphasize specified technical details or observations related to radiographic findings, often including null, incomplete, or anticipated comparison data entries that require detailed reporting. Such inputs ask for specific analysis to be provided based on image data.",0.2869875222816399,0.36,0.4146341463414634,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5276898734177216,0.5477386934673367,0.5319148936170213,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+3148,latent_3148,1010,0.00202,0.0038895682,4.6052027,Stable cardiomediastinal findings.,"Stable cardiomediastinal findings are a common observation and often highlighted in radiology reports. They describe consistent cardiac and thoracic structures over time when the heart size, mediastinal, and hilar contours appear unchanged between imaging observations. Reports stating 'normal' or 'unchanged' indicate non-acute processes are continually evident, thus forming a pattern. In many higher-activation examples, this is paired with phrases about prior images or reports, solidifying a stable yet notable pattern.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6683333333333333,0.6683417085427136,0.67,0.67,100.0,99.0
+3149,latent_3149,8928,0.017856,0.012122636,6.2823677,Assessment of interval changes via comparison to prior imaging.,"Activations are higher when the findings involve comparison to prior imaging, especially when there are notable changes or stability observed in the patient's condition. The consistent theme here is the comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies to assess changes in a medical condition, often indicating stability or progression.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,100.0,100.0
+3150,latent_3150,14513,0.029026,0.019923806,5.310109,Detailed comparison of medical device positioning between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to positions and changes in medical devices like ET tubes, PICC lines, or NG tubes as compared to prior radiographs. These examples focus on evaluating the placement, change, or stability of such devices in relation to previous imaging, which aligns with the pattern desired.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,100.0,100.0
+3151,latent_3151,5716,0.011432,0.013023203,4.969628,Describes changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Patterns of stability, change, or specific comparative analyses between current and previous imaging findings are emphasized. Reports generally relate changes such as 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'improved' which suggests that the pattern focuses on progression, resolution, or maintenance in radiological findings over time.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.2893604243819437,0.29,0.2765957446808511,0.26,100.0,100.0
+3152,latent_3152,2897,0.005794,0.007245866,5.1095657,Presence of moderate cardiomegaly.,"The pattern indicates identification of moderate cardiomegaly, which is a consistent observation across various examples in the dataset with high activation scores. The phrase 'moderate cardiomegaly' is particularly common across multiple samples and serves as a primary finding in these cases, suggesting this is the pattern the activations are indicating.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.44234099380705,0.525,0.6086956521739131,0.14,100.0,100.0
+3153,latent_3153,5844,0.011688,0.016851377,6.0798974,Radiographic comparison to prior images to assess changes.,"These examples focus primarily on evaluating radiographic findings in the context of comparison with prior images. This involves noting changes, stability, or regression in observed conditions over time, which is a central aspect of diagnosis and management in imaging studies.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4902097091878113,0.56,0.5344827586206896,0.93,100.0,100.0
+3154,latent_3154,6804,0.013608,0.014943643,5.337933,Comparison to prior imaging with specific findings or devices.,"These examples consistently involve a detailed comparison between the current imaging findings and previous images, but notably some of the activation levels suggest that presence of this comparison isn't sufficient alone to trigger the pattern strongly. Instead, the presence of certain conditions or alterations such as tubes, catheters, or opacities, especially around the lung bases or mediastinum, may contribute to the activation level. Therefore, while many examples have low activation despite these comparisons, higher activations seem related to the presence of certain specific findings or changes, often involving medical devices or potential respiratory complications.",0.4691666666666666,0.4693877551020408,0.48,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4443192911316362,0.445,0.4408602150537634,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3155,latent_3155,14361,0.028722,0.01718851,4.987021,Comparison of current and prior chest images highlighting stability or change.,"These examples center around providing radiological interpretations that compare current image findings with previous images, particularly in cases where changes are noted such as persistent, resolved, or unchanged conditions. The focus is primarily on matching continuity and variance over time as seen in imaging follow-ups to deduce stability or progression of specific physical conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.5144927536231884,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3156,latent_3156,71707,0.143414,0.07268737,4.576547,Imaging findings stable or unchanged from prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations review sequential radiographs or studies and describe either a lack of change or stability in the patient's condition, focusing primarily on comparisons of structures like cardiomediastinal silhouettes, opacities, and typed placements. This pattern highlights stable or unchanged imaging findings compared to prior studies rather than acute changes.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3157,latent_3157,6306,0.012612,0.016680464,7.6868467,Comparative analysis of frontal and lateral chest images.,Examples with high activation levels predominantly feature chest images where findings are compared between current and prior studies using frontal and lateral views. This explicitly fits a radiology report format that includes both comparison of images and detailed analysis of frontal and lateral views.,0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6980676328502415,0.7,0.6724137931034483,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3158,latent_3158,29741,0.059482,0.03295249,8.04426,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies in findings section.,The examples with higher activations involve the description of findings or changes in current radiographs by specifically comparing them to prior radiographic studies and documenting this comparison explicitly.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4368697262811278,0.4472361809045226,0.2719298245614035,0.5344827586206896,58.0,141.0
+3159,latent_3159,8581,0.017162,0.019645842,5.2063594,Presence of 'Provide a description' in the prompt.,"The highly activated examples often include explicit instructions to provide a description or analysis of the findings with reference to prior images. These examples frequently utilize the phrase ""Provide a description"" as part of the instruction.",0.1948470209339774,0.2,0.1428571428571428,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.2390422077922078,0.25,0.1710526315789473,0.13,100.0,100.0
+3160,latent_3160,4847,0.009694,0.007608031,3.5283651,"Comparison of current findings with prior imaging, noting stability or change.","The examples with high activations often describe findings in the current image while comparing them to prior images or studies, noting either stability or changes within the radiological context. This comparative assessment is a common radiological practice that helps assess disease progression or response to treatment, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or 'new'.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6173101622500066,0.635,0.5944055944055944,0.85,100.0,100.0
+3161,latent_3161,4607,0.009214,0.0086712865,7.85733,Comparison with prior images to assess changes in specific conditions.,"The representative examples contain specific requests to compare current images with prior images, especially in cases assessing for pneumonia, pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary conditions. These reports often list detailed comparative assessments with dates or mentions of previous exams as part of the evaluation process. The non-representative cases either lack comparison discussions or focus on other findings such as detection of new conditions without comparison.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3162,latent_3162,36927,0.073854,0.043873213,4.7080398,Imaging findings unchanged or stable in comparison to prior reports.,"Higher activation is noted in examples that involve comparison with prior imaging, especially when earlier findings are unchanged or stable. Examples emphasize comparison language like 'unchanged', 'similar', or direct references to previous studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5802469135802469,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3163,latent_3163,16586,0.033172,0.01607655,3.225793,Stability or unchanged findings in follow-up comparisons.,"Examples with a focus on the follow-up or comparative imaging often involve similar or unchanged findings compared to prior radiographs or other studies (like CTs). Activations seem associated with noting stability or unchanged conditions even when terminology like ""similar to prior"" or ""stable appearance compared to prior study"" is used, indicative of a passive but consistent finding in radiological follow-up studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3164,latent_3164,23314,0.046628,0.026297042,4.7641797,Reference to interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with activation levels above zero often involve a comparison to prior imaging studies, featuring interval changes in a patient’s condition such as detection of pneumonia, atelectasis, changes in pleural effusion, or tube positioning. These reports typically include direct reference to comparison with previous reports and focus on changes or stabilities since the prior imaging.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.5864661654135338,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3165,latent_3165,5403,0.010806,0.008977494,5.4045815,Stable lung and cardiac findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on findings of the bilateral lung fields or the cardiomediastinal silhouette and assess these with clear descriptions of stability or change compared to prior images. The presence of specific respiratory findings such as pleural effusion, atelectasis, or pneumothorax tends to be stable or unchanged, highlighting consistent radiology report patterns.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5333333333333333,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3166,latent_3166,4938,0.009876,0.011114988,6.4627533,Current image analysis referencing prior reports and findings.,"The highly activating examples involve cases where a prior report is referenced to evaluate current images in context, with the current analysis providing a description of findings in the comparison. This pattern of observing changes or stability in a condition over time aligns with the documentation style and data structure seen in these examples. The language references frontal and lateral images along with current and prior reports, indicating a focus on documentation practices in reporting findings over time.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3167,latent_3167,13153,0.026306,0.015559688,4.3464546,Complexity and interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"The activation level is based on the complexity and diversity of findings and changes, as well as how these are presented in comparison to prior studies. Higher activations (3.0 - 7.0) occur when there is notable interval change, multiple device placements or removals, or significant clinical interpretations that require comparison with past imagery. Lower activations (0.0 - 1.0) tend to be associated with reports indicating minimal or no change from prior images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.5634920634920635,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3168,latent_3168,3214,0.006428,0.015021994,11.173794,Explicit interval comparison between current and prior radiographic exams.,"Highly activated examples involve explicit descriptions of findings from current and prior radiological exams, focusing on the comparison of findings and often noting changes or stability. This pattern involves addressing interval changes or stable findings between different examinations.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4248705958840739,0.425,0.422680412371134,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3169,latent_3169,23434,0.046868,0.020668166,2.984419,Comparison across multiple imaging views or interval changes.,"The selected examples reflect situations where images are compared across different views, such as frontal and lateral views, or sequential updates from prior to current images. The pattern captures radiological assessments based on multiple views combined with qualitative analysis of intervals.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4338377723970944,0.5276381909547738,0.5166666666666667,0.93,100.0,99.0
+3170,latent_3170,3420,0.00684,0.0095798485,4.8864756,"Description of findings compared to prior images or reports, focusing on change or stability.","These examples describe comparisons between the findings in current images and prior images or reports, judging them based on whether the changes are significant or unchanged. Reports often mention stability or change in medical conditions or radiologic findings, highlighting evolution in the patient's condition.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3171,latent_3171,3439,0.006878,0.009073355,4.1896663,Unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels are focused on describing stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies, often indicating specific attention to the maintenance of certain conditions like tube positioning, effusions, or opacifications consistent across multiple imaging reports. Common descriptions include the term 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or 'stable'.",0.3481481481481481,0.52,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3172,latent_3172,60908,0.121816,0.08144742,5.9191628,High activation reports emphasize changes compared to prior images.,Reports with activation levels tend to focus on comparing current imaging findings with prior images and providing a detailed analysis of changes or stability in findings. Reports with low or zero activation do not focus on such comparisons.,0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3173,latent_3173,32127,0.064254,0.036551204,5.1916595,Change or stability in lines/equipment position compared to prior imaging.,"This data set shows partial activation when directly comparing current and prior radiographic images, where changes or stability are documented. The presence of equipment (e.g., as tubes or catheters) and the mention of positional adjustments or unchanged positions contribute to this activation level.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6943811217715875,0.695,0.7142857142857143,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3174,latent_3174,17487,0.034974,0.02045568,2.5944011,Comparisons with multiple prior imaging studies indicating longitudinal assessment.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference a comparison to multiple prior imaging studies, suggesting a pattern of longitudinal assessment. These reports often emphasize changes over time rather than findings from a single baseline comparison, indicating a focus on tracking disease or condition progression.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4833333333333333,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3175,latent_3175,2742,0.005484,0.010506324,6.464578,Stable or normal findings reported in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature clear comparisons between current and prior images or studies, and they do not reveal significant negative findings or complications. This implies the model identifies cases where findings are largely stable or unchanged as more representative of the observed pattern.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4190268700072621,0.44,0.4032258064516129,0.25,100.0,100.0
+3176,latent_3176,6609,0.013218,0.009728107,5.651551,Describing interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve descriptions that evaluate the current imaging in comparison to a prior frontal image, showing interval changes or stability in specific findings. The descriptive pattern reflects verbatim language indicating comparative analysis, such as 'compared to the previous study', highlighting changes or unchanging elements from previous exams.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3177,latent_3177,7618,0.015236,0.027397225,5.8406262,Evaluating interval changes or stability through comparison of multiple radiographs.,"The examples consistently reference a need for evaluating changes in the condition of a patient using multiple radiographs or comparisons with previous studies, particularly focusing on interval changes, stability, or worsening conditions. This highlights the pattern of using past images as benchmarks to assess progression or stability of medical conditions in follow-up examinations.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3178,latent_3178,4615,0.00923,0.008060399,4.041222,Focus on changes or stability of pleural effusion and atelectasis against prior imaging.,"The samples with higher activation levels discuss interval changes or stability of chest radiographs, focusing on pleural effusion and/or atelectasis findings in relation to previous imaging studies. Other thematic elements include evaluation of devices placement or confirmation of physiological changes consistent with medical conditions.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.559322033898305,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3179,latent_3179,13073,0.026146,0.01679068,5.360263,Comparison in findings description prompting interval change text.,"Examples with positive activations highlight cases where current findings from medical imaging are compared to previous studies explicitly while prompting a textual description of interval changes, such as size reductions or stability of medical devices, conditions, or lesions. These comparisons feature unique descriptions of stability or removal of specific conditions or tools, necessitating textual processing.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5981105978757275,0.615,0.5815602836879432,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3180,latent_3180,3740,0.00748,0.015881885,7.3845515,Focus on atelectasis in radiology evaluations.,Examples with high activations consistently reference atelectasis either as a primary finding or in combination with other observations like pleural effusions or opacities. This suggests that atelectasis is a key focus of the model's pattern recognition in these activations.,0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8275162337662337,0.83,0.7661290322580645,0.95,100.0,100.0
+3181,latent_3181,5402,0.010804,0.013194318,7.473704,Device or tube placement and comparison in radiology studies.,"These examples mostly involve reports focusing on equipment or devices within the body, such as tubes or catheters, and their positioning in comparison to previous radiographs. The reports frequently mention endotracheal tubes, central venous lines, nasogastric tubes, and similar items, detailing changes in their positioning or status over time.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,0.78125,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.73786332913572,0.745,0.6842105263157895,0.91,100.0,100.0
+3182,latent_3182,19299,0.038598,0.033500638,5.089098,Comparisons with prior imaging highlighting stable or interval changes.,"The highly activated examples typically include a comparison with prior imaging, often highlighting interval changes such as unchanged conditions or minor progression, while maintaining references to stable findings across different anatomic and pathologic variables within the context of chest imaging.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4959473150962513,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.55,100.0,99.0
+3183,latent_3183,18217,0.036434,0.015937852,2.9865513,"Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies, indicating stability or change.","The highly activated examples consistently involve the use of current and prior image comparisons specifying stability or changes over time such as interval resolution or new findings. This includes specific terms like 'interval resolution', 'unchanged', or direct references to dates for comparison, which indicate an emphasis on longitudinal assessment in radiology.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6138613861386139,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3184,latent_3184,5408,0.010816,0.023240644,6.466142,Comparisons in imaging studies with clear instructions on discrepancies or statuses.,The examples with activations above 5.0 seem to focus on imaging studies requiring comparison between current and prior images. These often provide detailed descriptors of differences or stabilities in medical devices or anatomical structures between current and prior images.,0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.1818181818181818,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.328876251953175,0.345,0.2753623188405797,0.19,100.0,100.0
+3185,latent_3185,4814,0.009628,0.0119336005,7.0684967,Evaluates findings concerning for pneumonia or aspiration.,"This set of examples shows descriptions of radiology findings that incorporate reference to potential, questionable, or probable presence of pneumonia or aspiration, often in the context of clinical history or symptoms such as fever, cough, or respiratory issues.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5205479452054794,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3186,latent_3186,14765,0.02953,0.014666828,2.8529239,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal contours without acute findings.,"There is a common pattern of describing well-expanded lungs with no focal consolidations, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax, often alongside normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours. This indicates that the findings are typical without signs of acute pathology, and such language is prevalent in cases where the images reveal no significant abnormalities.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.6346153846153846,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3187,latent_3187,27310,0.05462,0.030436233,4.8188124,Detailed description of interval changes or acute findings on comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples typically describe radiological findings by referencing both current and prior images but focus specifically on identifying changes such as newly appeared or altered findings that suggest pathological processes like pneumonia or other acute changes. This involves a detailed comparison of the differences from previous reports, highlighting any new developments or persistent issues in the context of time (e.g., interval changes in opacities or effusions).",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3188,latent_3188,5076,0.010152,0.010937011,4.4643645,Comparison to prior imaging with unspecified details.,"Examples exhibit a pattern where current frontal and lateral chest images are compared with prior frontal images without specifying exact prior dates, using language associated with descriptions such as 'N/A', underscoring comparisons based on unspecified or known interpretations of previous radiographs.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3189,latent_3189,5305,0.01061,0.02929293,8.207661,Instructions or tasks to compare current to prior images.,"The high activation levels correspond to examples that include instructions or tasks requiring comparisons between current and prior images, specifically providing detailed instructions or prompts to compare such images. These often include an explicit structure or prompt framing format referencing both current and prior images.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3957057675338912,0.435,0.4569536423841059,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3190,latent_3190,5523,0.011046,0.013853636,4.0737896,Comparison of both current and prior images is emphasized.,"Examples with high activation typically include both current and prior images for comparison, using descriptive language about interval changes in findings, regardless of the presence or absence of acute abnormalities. This suggests the importance of explicitly mentioning comparison and interval changes when interpreting multiple images.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4170967138158774,0.455,0.4701986754966887,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3191,latent_3191,6541,0.013082,0.011879678,4.217428,Requests for comparison between current and prior frontal images in radiology.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison or requirement for a comparison between different radiographic images, particularly frontal images. This usually indicates a pattern of change detection or stability verification in medical imaging.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3192,latent_3192,8033,0.016066,0.01571291,4.8982334,Detailed comparison with prior images emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions of differences noted when comparing the current images to prior studies. High emphasis is placed on identifying changes in pathological conditions or stability over time. Reports frequently use phrases like 'in comparison with the previous radiograph', 'is unchanged from', or 'no significant change' to highlight the process of comparison over time.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.5785123966942148,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3193,latent_3193,4736,0.009472,0.012312024,4.790059,Directive prompts for comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Analysis of the examples shows that higher activation levels correlate with the presence of directive prompts asking the assistant to provide a detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies, specifically where explicit comparison cues or instructions are present. This indicates the pattern involves expectation of descriptive analysis based on comparative imaging context.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4141646615754786,0.44,0.4577464788732394,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3194,latent_3194,20641,0.041282,0.026755357,6.9725127,Comparison of medical device positions in serial imaging.,"The examples with higher activations involve comparative analysis regarding the positioning and changes in status of medical devices, such as lines and tubes, upon reviewing successive imaging studies. This includes identifying the placement of catheters like PICCs, Dobbhoff, and nasogastric tubes, indicating an emphasis on temporal analysis of device positioning.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7743173098623335,0.775,0.7659574468085106,0.7578947368421053,95.0,105.0
+3195,latent_3195,2326,0.004652,0.00437344,5.6426573,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations involve the description of findings evaluated through comparison with previous imaging, where explicit changes, new development, or status quo is discussed. The pattern emphasizes the similarity to or deviation from prior imaging findings.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4635084522724972,0.47,0.4754098360655737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3196,latent_3196,4237,0.008474,0.007835348,3.3444247,Normal cardiac silhouette contrasted with potential thoracic changes.,"These examples contain descriptions of radiographic comparison emphasizing changes or stability in findings, particularly indicating normal cardiac silhouette and lung structures, despite describing or speculating on potential new abnormalities elsewhere (like atelectasis or opacities), promoting a diagnostic impression based on comparison.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6222709073052807,0.625,0.6506024096385542,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3197,latent_3197,8921,0.017842,0.018254573,5.2646976,Evaluating interval changes from prior images alongside current findings.,"Highly activated examples often include a direct comparison of current and previous images to assess interval changes, with explicit mentions of resolved, unchanged, improved or worsened conditions, as well as a focus on identifying specific pulmonary or cardiovascular changes over time, particularly in relation to specific conditions like pneumonia or device placements. They often contextualize findings within the clinical history provided.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3198,latent_3198,4546,0.009092,0.01217776,5.70739,Stable findings with no acute cardiopulmonary process compared to prior.,"These examples involve descriptions of chest radiographs that are primarily stable or unchanged from prior imaging, where there is no acute cardiopulmonary process identified, no significant new findings, and often no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax present.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3199,latent_3199,6803,0.013606,0.014272699,3.8626156,Evaluation of lung pathology like pneumonia or consolidation.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to chest imaging observations often made in the context of detecting or evaluating pneumonia, consolidation, opacity, or other lung pathologies. The pattern highlights the specification and evaluation of findings related to potential infectious or inflammatory lung processes.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4409609428118153,0.445,0.4337349397590361,0.36,100.0,100.0
+3200,latent_3200,6464,0.012928,0.013661759,4.425734,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently describe findings in chest radiographs and CT scans in comparison to prior images without identifying new acute changes, only noting stabilization or mild improvements of chronic conditions. This indicates a pattern focused on stable, unchanged findings upon serial imaging comparisons.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3777360850531582,0.3969849246231156,0.34375,0.22,100.0,99.0
+3201,latent_3201,3254,0.006508,0.006825273,6.205775,Changes in tube or line placement on imaging comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes to supportive or monitoring medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or other lines, often in relation to patient management or current procedures. This pattern involves explicit mentions of device positions or adjustments noted when comparing current and prior imaging.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5235356937484597,0.565,0.6585365853658537,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3202,latent_3202,3676,0.007352,0.008837127,5.682794,Instructions emphasize comparing current images to prior images.,"The pattern indicates that the analyzed examples provide instructions on comparing current imaging findings with prior images, despite varying levels of completeness or specified comparison. High activation examples focus on providing details in this comparative context, even when previous reports are not available.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4212484497726333,0.44,0.4558823529411764,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3203,latent_3203,4639,0.009278,0.008997104,6.5811715,Identification or comparison of medical device placement and thoracic pathology between current and prior images.,"The examples consistently involve providing descriptions of imaging findings, specifically comparing current and prior images, particularly regarding the presence and placement of medical devices or changes in expected pathology such as effusions, pneumonia, or pneumothorax. The focus on device identification or changes in pathologic conditions is evident where they discuss detailed observations and comparisons based on serial imaging.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5944700460829493,0.615,0.5793103448275863,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3204,latent_3204,6387,0.012774,0.014892256,5.2525315,Evaluation of acute conditions or post-operative changes in radiology reports.,"Report examples with high activation are characterized by justification for imaging studies that involve monitoring or evaluating the impact of acute situations, such as assessing new or consistent discrepancies, acute symptoms, or post-operative changes, rather than mere routine checks or stable conditions.",0.2387820512820512,0.24,0.217391304347826,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4046278924327705,0.405,0.4095238095238095,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3205,latent_3205,3610,0.00722,0.008470811,5.105687,"High activation includes frontal and lateral image comparisons, especially regarding pneumothorax or pleural effusion findings.",Activation levels are high when image prompts include prior imaging comparisons across multiple perspectives (frontal and lateral) and mention findings related either to the placement of tubes or devices or interval change concerning suspected pneumothorax or pleural effusion.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5797760578738796,0.605,0.5704697986577181,0.85,100.0,100.0
+3206,latent_3206,8007,0.016014,0.012232498,4.657318,Presence of both frontal and lateral image comparisons in reports.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention both current and prior imaging, with findings being compared across these parameters. Specifically, highly activated examples often discuss findings in both frontal and lateral images, suggesting that the presence of these multi-view analyses contributes to the observed image comparison pattern.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3207,latent_3207,17151,0.034302,0.020605128,6.8791623,References to past surgeries or interventional history.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve certain procedural details like surgical history, presence of medical devices or foreign bodies, and previous interventions like catheter placements. This suggests a pattern where the detailed documentation of past surgical or interventional history in reports triggers higher activation.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.5365853658536586,0.5057471264367817,87.0,113.0
+3208,latent_3208,29721,0.059442,0.03469838,4.8811884,Comparison and stability/change analysis with prior imaging studies.,"All samples involve description of current findings with reference to prior imaging comparisons, particularly emphasizing consistency or change in observed features such as tube placements, effusions, or other radiological findings. The pattern consistently involves noting the stability or change relative to previous indicators.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5478603154339211,0.575,0.5503355704697986,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3209,latent_3209,38492,0.076984,0.042451866,7.724848,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels are associated with noting changes over time, such as improvement or worsening of findings, by comparing current with previous imaging, indicating a specific emphasis on assessing interval changes in radiological findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5731358529111338,0.5778894472361809,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,99.0
+3210,latent_3210,11998,0.023996,0.023463754,5.7756634,Comparison and analysis relative to prior images in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activations describe the radiological process of findings analysis in relation to past imaging studies, including descriptions of changes, stability, or other variations noted when compared to earlier images. This approach is evident in medical imaging for continuity in patient assessment.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3211,latent_3211,69539,0.139078,0.08290047,7.2472367,Stable findings when compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern frequently mention the absence of new findings or changes when compared to a prior study, along with stable conditions. This stability and lack of new findings, even when there is some condition present, is a defining feature in these radiology reports.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.4683544303797468,0.4111111111111111,90.0,110.0
+3212,latent_3212,4558,0.009116,0.014949946,5.0027328,Detailed comparisons in the presence of devices or specific findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to include specific findings or changes in the medical condition of the patient often related to devices, chest procedures, or specific findings like pleural effusions or medical implants (e.g., pacemakers, catheters). These examples include detailed comparative analyses and changes over time, with an emphasis on procedures or devices.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3637115158195345,0.365,0.3516483516483517,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3213,latent_3213,3681,0.007362,0.00814071,7.3141174,Updates or changes compared to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation involve radiology reports where there is a comparison of current imaging findings against prior images. They involve specific changes or updates noted from previous findings, such as stable or changed lesions, the introduction of new findings, or continuous conditions that need follow-up. This involves a pattern of comparing new findings to past imaging results, which is a critical part of radiological assessment in tracking patient progress or disease status.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3944004869141814,0.3969849246231156,0.3837209302325581,0.33,100.0,99.0
+3214,latent_3214,5753,0.011506,0.01208939,5.0650415,Frequent comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The samples with high activation levels prominently feature a pattern of diagnostic imaging reports that include comparison between the current imaging study and prior images. Phrases like 'in comparison with,' 'as compared to previous radiograph,' and specific findings being described in relation to prior images are common across these activations.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3215,latent_3215,5390,0.01078,0.016749002,6.0569115,Emphasis on comparing current imaging findings to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize the task of providing a description of the current radiological findings in comparison to the prior frontal image, even when no prior comparison is available. The phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' or similar directive is consistently present in these cases.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3216,latent_3216,2794,0.005588,0.009047837,6.7405047,Emphasis on imaging details involving lines or tubes.,"The examples with high activation levels mention the presence of imaging tubes, lines, or catheters, such as endotracheal tubes or central venous lines, suggesting attention to procedural details or post-procedural follow-up, in context of ongoing intervention (e.g., status post intubation, dobhoff tube placement).",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3788981967170333,0.405,0.3389830508474576,0.2,100.0,100.0
+3217,latent_3217,3080,0.00616,0.010632689,6.258633,Detailed findings without significant interval changes.,"The examples focus on describing radiological findings using specific terminology and phrases, yet the key observation of significant changes between current and prior images is omitted. This pattern centers around explicit comparisons made between multiple imaging sessions with missing clear interval changes.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.555893690403733,0.5577889447236181,0.5486725663716814,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+3218,latent_3218,6222,0.012444,0.022632807,7.471206,Descriptions of changes compared to prior images.,"The pattern found in these examples is explicit descriptions of changes or findings observed in the current radiological image, compared to prior studies. This emphasizes temporal progression in imaging findings, which is crucial in medical evaluation to understand disease progression or stability.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4591346153846154,0.46,0.4629629629629629,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3219,latent_3219,3236,0.006472,0.0070758592,6.1053324,Status post-surgical findings stable in imaging.,"The repeated mention of post-surgical findings like median sternotomy wires, surgical clips, or CABG (Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting) status, along with stable impressions of the cardiomediastinal silhouettes, implies that the pattern focuses on evaluating chest radiographs where status post-cardiac surgery findings are normal or unchanged.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.660377358490566,0.35,100.0,100.0
+3220,latent_3220,6789,0.013578,0.01799852,9.502222,Positioning and changes of medical support devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight the presence of P[IC]C lines, endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and other support devices which are often described in terms of their positioning and any changes over time. The pattern is focused on the observation and comparison of these medical devices between current and previous imaging to monitor for any critical changes.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.674601386698706,0.675,0.6881720430107527,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3221,latent_3221,2909,0.005818,0.008155931,4.8455954,"Structured, detailed reports with comparison to prior studies, using full sentences and specific terms.","Highly activated examples consistently involve a straightforward and structured format, regardless of imaging techniques stated, with clear comparison to prior studies. They often feature complete sentences in the assistant's response, specifier language for variation from prior exams, and often include specific anatomical terminologies and detailed changes observed.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5121552604698671,0.5175879396984925,0.5166666666666667,0.62,100.0,99.0
+3222,latent_3222,1972,0.003944,0.0064266203,5.4671636,Report findings focus on interval change relative to prior images.,"These examples highlight findings evaluated against prior imaging studies, looking for interval changes or stability in detected conditions. This representation encapsulates examination outcomes such as 'no interval change', 'interval placement', or 'interval worsening', which are specific language patterns indicative of assessing progression or resolution compared to earlier images.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3,0.24,100.0,100.0
+3223,latent_3223,5150,0.0103,0.012008961,7.7361884,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve prompts that instruct comparison between current and prior imaging findings, even if no new information is communicated. Phrases explicitly directing descriptions based on comparison with prior images trigger high activations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3224,latent_3224,42036,0.084072,0.043370858,3.91213,Comparative analysis with prior imaging studies for evaluating stability or change in findings.,"These examples focus on the assessment of radiological changes through comparison with prior studies, often highlighting stability or change in the context of specific medical indicators, with a particular emphasis on verifying known pathologies or newly appearing conditions. Comparisons usually denote change or stability and form the core of the clinical conclusions in these examples.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.5477707006369427,0.86,100.0,100.0
+3225,latent_3225,2656,0.005312,0.0069385367,7.4479504,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"Multiple examples in the set have high activation when prior imaging is involved in the report, regardless of the changes identified. The use of previous comparative analysis is crucial in these high-activation reports, suggesting the importance of tracking changes or stability over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3226,latent_3226,19721,0.039442,0.023442263,4.698936,Analysis based on comparisons with prior or concurrent imaging.,The examples with higher activations largely describe changes or interpretations of current imaging findings explicitly in comparison with previous (or similar) images or studies.,0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4658029878618114,0.5376884422110553,0.5232558139534884,0.9,100.0,99.0
+3227,latent_3227,5134,0.010268,0.007324686,3.83847,Detailed description of findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate references to comparison with prior imaging using terms like 'comparison to prior', 'stable from prior', or specifying previous imaging dates. This pattern emphasizes the monitoring of changes or stability over time, which is critical in radiology to track the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4264259708737864,0.4271356783919598,0.4299065420560747,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+3228,latent_3228,8244,0.016488,0.015696019,9.697696,Detailed comparative analysis rather than general findings or routine examination.,"The higher activation examples focus on current changes between newly obtained images and prior ones, especially with detailed, complex imaging characteristics. These examples request specific comparisons rather than generalized or routine descriptions, particularly in dynamic or complex scenarios.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3229,latent_3229,3778,0.007556,0.007340264,4.7290144,Evaluate interval changes by comparing current imaging with prior studies.,"High activation occurs when a radiology report prompts for analysis with prior studies to evaluate interval changes, often including specific comparison phrases such as ""compared to prior"" or ""in comparison"". These reports prioritize assessing changes over time using prior data.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4677419354838709,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3230,latent_3230,2591,0.005182,0.0060607214,6.601922,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"The examples with activation closer to 9 emphasize the comparison of new findings against prior findings, referring specifically to changes in clinical conditions or the stability of radiological findings. They frequently utilize the given frontal image(s) to assess interval changes and align with comparative analysis of previous conditions presented in prior reports or images.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5176470588235295,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3231,latent_3231,4031,0.008062,0.015938,4.643551,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3232,latent_3232,45572,0.091144,0.04740858,4.994803,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,"From the higher activation examples, the pattern indicates a focus on detailed comparison between present and past imaging studies. When findings are described as 'again noted', 'unchanged', 'prior studies indicate', or 'remains similar', these descriptive phrases suggest scrutiny through comparative analysis to identify stability or changes in a patient's condition, which is central to following disease progression.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5689655172413793,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3233,latent_3233,4038,0.008076,0.00680585,6.5384364,"Comparison with prior imaging emphasized, noting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a comparison with prior imaging, specifically when the findings or impressions require correlating with previous studies or explicitly reference changes or stability over time. This pattern demonstrates the emphasis placed on tracking interval changes in medical imaging reports.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3234,latent_3234,5599,0.011198,0.011273443,4.265899,Presence or stability of moderate/severe cardiomegaly in imaging results.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples that describe changes or findings such as ""cardiomegaly,"" ""pleural effusion,"" or ""vascular congestion,"" which indicate abnormal cardiomegaly findings. The more significant or stable the abnormality related to heart size or appearance, the higher the activation level is observed. These examples point out stable moderate or severe cardiomegaly across subsequent imaging or notice changes in effusion or lung conditions, which align with the pattern associated with higher activations.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.648,0.67,0.84,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3235,latent_3235,19259,0.038518,0.02150322,7.460524,Reevaluation in radiology findings compares current and prior images for interval changes.,"Examples that feature short deletion patterns often contrast findings with prior images, highlighting interval changes or stability. These include reassessments of disease stability or modification, using specific language patterns around unchanged or updated findings. This underscores the importance of direct visual comparison in radiological assessments.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3868916419649869,0.395,0.3248407643312102,0.7727272727272727,66.0,134.0
+3236,latent_3236,3051,0.006102,0.0076871393,6.671689,"Current and prior image comparison using multiple views (frontal, lateral).","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve cases where multiple images, specifically frontal, lateral, and prior images, are compared. These radiology reports highlight the importance of reference images in the assessment and diagnosis process, using both current and previous views to provide comprehensive findings.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3237,latent_3237,7751,0.015502,0.014882853,2.9787529,Reports without comparison reliance; focus on image findings and technical detail.,"The examples with high activations tend to mention specific technical and clinical descriptors for the images provided, focusing on identifying radiographic findings without prior comparison or inconsistent prior data. These reports focus on direct imagery findings and clinical descriptions rather than comparing to prior imaging or complex clinical scenarios.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.517214120212621,0.5527638190954773,0.6086956521739131,0.2828282828282828,99.0,100.0
+3238,latent_3238,25908,0.051816,0.02665597,3.0991218,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate stability or change.,"These examples consistently include a comparison of current findings against prior imaging to assess stability or change. Often, specific technical views or imaging dates are cited, and conditions are described as unchanged, stable, or changing in relation to prior findings. This pattern focuses on the temporal evaluation of radiographic changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3239,latent_3239,4033,0.008066,0.018898737,7.331144,Assessment of findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern is consistent mentioning changes or assessing findings in comparison to prior studies. These examples focus on whether findings are consistent with previous imaging, using observations like no significant change, similar, unchanged, or stable in relation to prior exams.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3862024500322373,0.405,0.4296296296296296,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3240,latent_3240,5512,0.011024,0.012191555,5.1147757,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral views for detailed comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include multiple imaging views (e.g., frontal and lateral) for comparison to prior imaging, focusing on description and interpretation of changes in context of a patient's medical history. This multi-view approach generally enhances the diagnostic details and interpretations, thus increasing activation levels.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5784126984126984,0.585,0.568,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3241,latent_3241,17068,0.034136,0.037245963,4.2851644,Emphasis on image comparison with detailed prior reference points.,"The activated examples describe scenarios in which a prior comparison of images is provided, specifying areas of focus and using phrases like 'provide a description', 'comparison is made', and specific or multiple prior dates. This suggests a pattern emphasizing detailed pre-existing image analysis with notes requesting current updates or specific comparisons.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4695652173913043,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3242,latent_3242,11792,0.023584,0.015839022,4.618804,Radiology comparison with prior emphasizing stability or unchanged findings.,"The examples exhibit a pattern of comparing current radiology findings with prior images to note changes or stability. This often involves acknowledging unchanged or persistent features, normal findings, and device placements or pathologies, without acute changes, and suggests stable conditions over time in diagnostic imaging reports.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5177418943394301,0.5226130653266332,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,99.0
+3243,latent_3243,36566,0.073132,0.046748955,4.945225,Change in patient status compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe conditions with either improvement or worsening compared to previous imaging, indicating a change in patient status or condition. No change or absence of comparison results in low activation.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6398559423769508,0.64,0.6346153846153846,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3244,latent_3244,10171,0.020342,0.011819996,3.838838,Explicit request to provide findings relative to absent prior radiographic images.,"The highest activations are associated with prompts requesting both current and prior radiographic images for comparison. These examples also typically include terms indicating the absence of prior studies or comparison elements ('No prior', 'None', 'N/A'), suggesting the explicit task of describing findings relative to absent baseline images leads to stronger activation.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3245,latent_3245,7980,0.01596,0.014964079,5.2634983,Clear comparative statements regarding findings from current and prior images.,"High activations are associated with reports that describe specific changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging, focusing on clear comparative statements or descriptions of differences or consistencies over imaging studies.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.382716049382716,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3246,latent_3246,27373,0.054746,0.033543125,6.333076,Evaluation of pacemaker or ICD lead positions in chest X-rays.,"The samples with higher activation values consistently involve descriptions of pacemaker or ICD placements and their evaluations in chest X-ray reports, particularly focusing on the lead positions and any associated changes since prior imaging.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.9545454545454546,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7964721845318861,0.82,0.9230769230769232,0.6,80.0,120.0
+3247,latent_3247,5319,0.010638,0.010001669,4.5659394,Temporal changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiological findings that require direct comparison with prior imaging results, often related to detecting changes or confirming stability over time. This includes interval changes in medical devices (like tubes), and evaluating lung or heart conditions, reflecting a pattern of emphasizing temporal changes.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5245901639344263,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3248,latent_3248,15110,0.03022,0.025885824,11.379406,Interval change observed when comparing current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples describe a scenario of comparing current radiographic findings to prior studies, where there is explicit mention of interval changes or stability of certain findings, using phrases like 'as compared to', 'new since prior', 'unchanged position', or specific details of changes in findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5054945054945055,0.55,0.3846153846153846,0.3333333333333333,75.0,125.0
+3249,latent_3249,6501,0.013002,0.011166797,3.5905743,Mildly enlarged heart size.,"The common theme in these examples is the identification of a mildly enlarged heart size, frequently accompanied by descriptions of mediastinal or hilar contours. This is a recurring observation in the examples with higher activation levels.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5274725274725275,0.57,0.675,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3250,latent_3250,27541,0.055082,0.034265533,6.4657435,Description of interval changes or stability in radiology comparisons.,"The pattern is consistent with radiological findings that note interval changes or stability of findings compared to previous imaging. This often involves describing changes in conditions like cardiomegaly, pulmonary opacities, pleural effusions, or the positioning of tubes and catheters, which are commonly tracked over multiple imaging sessions.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5784126984126984,0.585,0.568,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3251,latent_3251,3461,0.006922,0.009904055,5.8127713,References to pacemaker evaluation or positioning combined with related findings.,"Examples with high activation levels feature the mention of pacemaker presence or evaluation, either indicating unchanged positioning or evaluation for functionality, combined with enumerated features such as pleural effusion or mediastinal contours. This reflects a focus on describing stability or interval changes post-intervention.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4642857142857143,0.55,0.75,0.15,100.0,100.0
+3252,latent_3252,1915,0.00383,0.0060727955,8.322502,Well-expanded clear lungs without signs of acute pathology.,"These examples describe clear and well-expanded lungs, which are noted in the findings as a normal state in chest radiographs. The pattern indicates a focus on reassuring descriptions followed by the exclusion of acute pathological findings such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, and consolidation.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3253,latent_3253,4254,0.008508,0.017767899,6.9350643,Stable or unchanged findings over time with image placeholders.,"The key pattern identified in the highly activated examples is the explicit usage of 'image' placeholder syntax combined with descriptions indicating some sort of stability or remark that the silhouettes or findings are unchanged, which implies either no change or stable findings over time. This focus on stability or unchanged findings is crucial in these instances.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.545800365185636,0.5477386934673367,0.5398230088495575,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+3254,latent_3254,4319,0.008638,0.010896918,4.5807567,Focus on instrumentation or tube placements in chest radiographs.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions that highlight specific instrument, tube, or device placements, whether stable or changed, in the radiographic findings. Mentions often include positions of tubes, catheters, or details about surgical interventions, and sometimes include issues like malpositions, as these are critical for operational contexts and patient management.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3965183752417794,0.415,0.3692307692307692,0.24,100.0,100.0
+3255,latent_3255,3894,0.007788,0.0142949335,4.52413,"Comparison involving current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","The pattern observed in highly activated examples is the presence of comparisons across multiple radiographic projections—specifically frontal and lateral images—in relation to prior imaging. These examples consistently use all three types of images to evaluate changes or stability, indicating a thorough diagnostic approach in radiological assessments.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3256,latent_3256,6487,0.012974,0.013334521,4.6337495,Detailed comparison between current and prior images without concluding acute pathology.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, but without the inclusion of explicit diagnostic impressions or the absence of an acute process. This suggests the pattern involves focusing on the changes in imaging features without drawing broader conclusions about overall health.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3257,latent_3257,4630,0.00926,0.00997904,5.641051,Activation is linked to detailed findings emphasizing changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Activation levels are high when detailed descriptions focus on a specific noteworthy finding or intervention in the imaging, such as an unchanged or altered significant feature (like a pneumothorax or nodule), especially in cases where new changes are compared to prior states. Non-representative examples lack such comparisons or focus on findings without clear interval change.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4538941356246398,0.455,0.4587155963302752,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3258,latent_3258,5591,0.011182,0.006181672,4.788292,Focus on procedural changes or device positioning in imaging comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels indicate a reporting style that focuses on procedural elements or changes specifically related to supportive devices (e.g., tubes, lines, catheters) and their positioning or adjustment during imaging comparisons, showing attention to changes in imaging aspects other than intrinsic anatomical or pathological changes.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.57,0.57,0.57,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3259,latent_3259,3723,0.007446,0.00968292,7.2821555,"Examination findings without comparisons to prior studies, focusing on procedural or specific findings.","Examples with higher activation levels tend to include the indication for examination that focuses on precise procedural evaluations, such as catheter or tube placements, or assessments of specific conditions like pneumothorax, pleural effusions, etc. Comparisons to prior examinations are often absent or unspecified in these cases, indicating a current focus without direct historical comparison context. This contrasts reports with lower activations, which tend to focus on changes over time or comparisons to the historical images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3861057137225085,0.455,0.3636363636363636,0.12,100.0,100.0
+3260,latent_3260,4048,0.008096,0.007540355,4.0377855,Comparison requested between current and prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently involve providing a ""description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" This directive emphasizes interpreting images while consistently referring back to prior comparisons or images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4422994422994423,0.48,0.4868421052631579,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3261,latent_3261,22156,0.044312,0.030853307,7.989852,Detailed comparison with prior imaging for diagnostic insight.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize comprehensive comparison between current and prior imaging, specifically noting the presence or changes in significant findings such as disease states or clear resolution of symptoms, to reach diagnostic conclusions. They prioritize thorough and explicit comparative descriptions without omitting potential findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5765957446808511,0.5778894472361809,0.525,0.7,90.0,109.0
+3262,latent_3262,5450,0.0109,0.011595629,3.2560544,Instructions to compare current images with prior ones.,"The representative examples involve instructions to analyze current radiological images in comparison to previously recorded ones, which is a typical methodological approach for evaluating changes over time. This pattern of comparing diagnostic imagery is identifiable by explicit references to both current and prior images and prompts for comparison analysis, often indicated by instructions like 'given the current image and the prior image.'",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5747841901688056,0.585,0.5648854961832062,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3263,latent_3263,3425,0.00685,0.0105188,7.5710063,Comparative evaluation with prior images focusing on changes or stability.,High activation examples consistently describe the analysis and findings based on comparison between current and previous radiographic images. They often include how previous conditions have either changed or remained stable. This pattern signifies a focus on differential diagnosis based on temporal changes observed in serial imaging.,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5390625,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3264,latent_3264,6369,0.012738,0.012088648,3.6159902,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3265,latent_3265,7460,0.01492,0.0077764736,3.1296961,Detailed comparison with a focus on changes from prior images.,"The pattern observed is that the activation levels are highest when there is explicit detail combined with a clear description of comparison to prior studies, often highlighted through specific updates or changes in findings over time seen across the frontal and sometimes lateral images.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3266,latent_3266,14810,0.02962,0.021260737,5.080145,Changes in medical device status or position compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels include findings related to changes in position or the status of medical devices added in the interval between the current and prior imaging, such as the placement or position of chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, or vascular access devices.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6324195594211902,0.645,0.7301587301587301,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3267,latent_3267,2731,0.005462,0.0064841956,4.97967,Detailed comparison revealing unchanged findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly exhibit findings where there is clear differentiation between current and previous radiographic images, often emphasizing unchanged conditions despite technical or positioning differences. These examples discuss radiological findings indicating stability or similarity when comparing current images to previous images, highlighting stability in the condition being evaluated.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5714285714285714,0.28,100.0,100.0
+3268,latent_3268,13932,0.027864,0.013195265,4.172196,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images for changes or stable findings.,"Examples with higher activations involve cases where specific findings in the current image can be directly related (e.g., specific pathologies or opacities) or compared with the prior image, often involving changes or evaluations based on historical imaging context.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5302013422818792,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3269,latent_3269,28649,0.057298,0.023546394,2.0956962,Comparison descriptions with known changes in pathology.,"These examples with high activation levels involve instructions to provide descriptions of current findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, specifically in cases where there is a known change in pathology or condition. This includes descriptions focusing on interval changes or persisting pathology compared to prior images.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5945032665014642,0.595,0.6021505376344086,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3270,latent_3270,3361,0.006722,0.010662214,5.3460083,Findings descriptions emphasize comparison to prior images.,"The majority of examples with high activation levels focus on providing a description or assessment of radiological findings of the current images in explicit comparison to prior images. These reports highlight interval changes or stability in specific findings, often emphasizing comparisons. Such explicit comparative language differentiates highly activated examples from those with low activation.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4388129123587553,0.445,0.4545454545454545,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3271,latent_3271,3499,0.006998,0.008015435,5.0662546,Stable comparisons of device placements or medical conditions.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit descriptions of unchanged or stable conditions over multiple comparisons. These conditions typically concern the positions of medical devices or the cardiopulmonary status over time. The focus is often on the consistency of findings across different imaging examinations.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4341966306261001,0.65,0.6476190476190476,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3272,latent_3272,5136,0.010272,0.010010491,3.6826937,Prior image comparison emphasized in findings.,"The consistent detail across high-activation examples is the focus on comparison with prior radiological images to assess current findings, highlighted via specific mentions of both current and previous image evaluations. Lower activation corresponds to cases where no current-prior comparison is emphasized or noted.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3273,latent_3273,16306,0.032612,0.021842105,6.042203,Reports note explicit changes in comparison with prior studies.,"The examples with positive activation involve changes compared to prior studies, such as differences in lung volumes, resolution of opacities, stable nodules or effusions, or adjustments in medical devices like tubes and catheters. These changes are often explicitly noted, showing stability or alteration, which is a common feature used to track patient progress or detect disease.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6498599439775911,0.65,0.6442307692307693,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3274,latent_3274,5915,0.01183,0.010821126,3.125901,Simple image description task without complex analysis or comparison.,"The highly activated examples generally lack detailed findings or comparisons present in the prior report, indicating that these prompts involve basic descriptions of images without complex diagnostic reasoning or comparison details from previous studies.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6651785714285714,0.67,0.7236842105263158,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3275,latent_3275,6075,0.01215,0.011254276,4.914793,Comparison with prior images showing stable or unchanged findings.,"These examples are characterized by the consistency in findings when comparing current images with prior images, and the evaluations are centered around interval changes. The representative samples emphasize consistency in findings across multiple radiographic studies.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4545454545454545,0.25,100.0,100.0
+3276,latent_3276,18585,0.03717,0.05066274,4.169894,Detailed comparison and changes between current and prior studies.,"In these examples, there is a focus on describing detailed changes or stability in features between current and previous imaging studies, often with emphasis on cardiomegaly, lung opacities, pleural effusions, or other thoracic pathologies being unchanged or having minor evolutions. The mentions of ""compared to prior"" or similar terms of comparison are prominent in highly activated examples.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5051546391752577,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3277,latent_3277,6649,0.013298,0.009691164,6.76502,Focus on detection and comparison of changes in lung opacities or atelectasis.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve descriptions of pneumonia, changes in lung opacities, or atelectasis, and entail comparing the current study with prior imaging, focusing on subtle changes or stability. Lower activation examples often lack significant diagnostic changes related to pulmonary conditions or the description is more routine and non-specific.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.2727272727272727,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3637110016420361,0.38,0.3235294117647059,0.22,100.0,100.0
+3278,latent_3278,6994,0.013988,0.009217816,5.9576235,Tortuous thoracic aorta or anatomical structures.,"The pattern observed is the mention of thoracic anatomical structures appearing tortuous, particularly the aorta, in multiple examples. This is a focal point in the description of these imaging studies irrespective of the presence of other findings.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.8,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3703045606159793,0.495,0.4545454545454545,0.05,100.0,100.0
+3279,latent_3279,22169,0.044338,0.029622607,3.301986,Identification of significant changes in image findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation all involve providing explicative output based on imaging findings described in comparison to prior images, with specific attention to identifying significant interval changes (or lack thereof) such as opacities, possibly indicative of disease stability or progression.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4736842105263157,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3280,latent_3280,12983,0.025966,0.034360103,6.368265,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples describe a pattern where descriptions are made between current and prior images, with a focus on both cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes as secondary findings. Phrases indicating this include 'cardiac silhouette', 'mediastinal contours', 'comparison to prior', and 'stability' of these features.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3682739343116701,0.435,0.3142857142857143,0.11,100.0,100.0
+3281,latent_3281,24866,0.049732,0.03248554,5.1775813,Normal cardiac silhouette with minor accompanying findings.,"Examples with activations higher than 0.0 commonly describe either a normal cardiac silhouette or heart size in the presence of other minor findings such as pleural effusions or pulmonary vascular congestion, emphasizing normal cardiac appearance despite other minor or common abnormalities.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6130653266331658,0.6130653266331658,0.6161616161616161,0.61,100.0,99.0
+3282,latent_3282,9595,0.01919,0.014842856,5.8087296,Comparative analysis of current and prior chest images.,"The highly activated examples frequently mention the requirement to compare findings of current images with prior ones. The context setup consistently asks the reader to provide descriptive analysis based on comparisons with past images, underscoring the comparative analysis aspect, which aligns with the model's activation in these tasks rather than cases where comparisons are absent or vague.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3283,latent_3283,3725,0.00745,0.009706283,4.7802377,Instructions to compare current images against prior ones.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current chest radiographs with prior radiographs. The impression or assistant section provides a comparison of findings with the previous study, indicating similar or unchanged features, or describing any interval changes which are narrative prompts for automated interpretation of sequential imaging studies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3284,latent_3284,4757,0.009514,0.014030614,7.782276,Findings of stability in medical devices or interventions on radiographs.,"The context of examples given revolves around the patients' history or interventions such as surgeries, infections, or recent procedures, and the presence of metallic or plastic medical devices in the chest such as pacemaker leads or catheters. These are noted in reports when present and if stable in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern emerges strongly when interpreting post-treatment or intervention changes on follow-up radiographs.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3940074065761418,0.46,0.3823529411764705,0.13,100.0,100.0
+3285,latent_3285,24573,0.049146,0.022069445,2.959775,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels share explicit references to comparison with prior imaging, often indicating changes in findings over time or stability. This reflects a common practice in radiologic interpretation where current findings are directly compared with previous studies to assess for progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3286,latent_3286,2636,0.005272,0.008022345,8.154514,Comparison with prior images emphasizes noted changes or stability in specific conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe comparisons with prior images and list specific changes or stability in pathologies or specific elements such as opacities, nodules, or silhouette changes. This suggests that the pattern involves analyzing past and present images to note specific changes in conditions or elements being monitored.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3545966228893058,0.355,0.3473684210526316,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3287,latent_3287,3456,0.006912,0.011339768,5.2118163,"Assessment of both frontal and lateral views with normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes and absence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation.","Examples with high activation levels report findings from both frontal and lateral views of chest radiographs while describing the mediastinal and cardiac silhouettes, and consistently report no pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation, often mentioning cardiomediastinal silhouette as normal/unremarkable. The use and assessment of multiple views suggest comprehensive evaluation of thoracic structures.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6101769796512384,0.625,0.7049180327868853,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3288,latent_3288,4801,0.009602,0.023280898,6.294999,Instructions focusing on comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels all have instructions with directive phrases that instruct the assistant to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This pattern in the instruction prompt consistently sees high activation, suggesting the model is focused on comparison tasks.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3289,latent_3289,5104,0.010208,0.01372805,3.594981,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings for changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve specific instructions to compare findings from current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing change analysis. This linguistic pattern is distinct in the examples with explicit mention of current and prior images being compared and often includes medical indications or histories that guide the need for comparison. This reflects a common radiology practice emphasizing the need to detect changes or stability in medical findings over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3290,latent_3290,4875,0.00975,0.013175401,5.749755,Assessment of interval changes in chest imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels involve scenarios where multiple chest radiographs (frontal and lateral) are compared with prior images to assess interval changes in lung conditions, focusing on pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or other thoracic changes. There is an emphasis on changes compared to prior exams, signifying the importance of interval change assessment.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3291,latent_3291,3322,0.006644,0.007960685,5.560045,Comparison of current images against prior for interval changes.,"The examples consistently request or utilize the comparison between current and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on interval changes or stability of findings. They explicitly mention the comparison to prior exams, integrating temporal aspects to conclude about progression or regression of conditions.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3292,latent_3292,12559,0.025118,0.022068072,4.751095,Comparison of findings across current multiple imaging modalities and prior reports.,"Examples that exhibit activation focus on radiological comparisons between multiple imaging modalities or types, such as frontal images compared to lateral images or prior reports, with description providing a synthesis of findings across these modalities.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4752109704641351,0.4974874371859296,0.4964539007092198,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+3293,latent_3293,38484,0.076968,0.052346848,5.026282,Emphasis on stability or minimal change in imaging findings.,"Examples with comparison to previous radiographs and descriptions show 'minimal changes' with specific mentions such as 'stable', 'unchanged', 'normal', and 'improved' directly to emphasize stability over time in imaging findings. Activation correlates with these findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5778787878787879,0.5778894472361809,0.5757575757575758,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+3294,latent_3294,4628,0.009256,0.012072637,5.952297,Frequent reference to changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples predominantly feature reports that compare current imaging findings to previous studies, highlighting changes or stability over time. This is a common radiologic practice for tracking progression or resolution of conditions, especially when the examination includes explicit dates or words like 'compared to previous'. The higher activation levels in this set are associated with instances that strongly emphasize such comparisons.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3702691071112123,0.371859296482412,0.3818181818181818,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+3295,latent_3295,4299,0.008598,0.009931975,5.2724514,Comparison of significant interval changes in symptomatic contexts.,"Examples with high activation levels often relate changes or stability in findings compared to previous imaging, such as effusions, opacities, and cardiac silhouette size, specifically in the context of symptoms like dyspnea, chest pain, or post-surgical evaluations. This pattern shows the system's focus is on significant interval changes or the stability of critical findings.",0.4863731656184486,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4590163934426229,0.28,100.0,100.0
+3296,latent_3296,6299,0.012598,0.015465771,4.170299,Reports with detailed comparisons to prior images emphasizing stability or change.,"The examples with high activation levels demonstrate clearly articulated comparisons between the current and prior images, particularly in relation to cardiopulmonary findings and structural changes. This suggests that the pattern is related to reports that focus on changes or stability in imaging findings over time, as evidenced by specific commentary on comparisons with previous images or examinations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4770642201834862,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3297,latent_3297,6519,0.013038,0.012679944,5.8814087,Prompt requests comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels include explicit instructions to provide comparisons between current and prior imaging. This pattern indicates that the model is likely focusing on tasks where assessing changes between images in a temporal sequence is emphasized, especially when new images are provided and the task requires identifying differences.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3298,latent_3298,3535,0.00707,0.008207081,4.0318656,Normal defaults in imaging findings without acute changes.,"The prompt in these examples often references direct visual observations and comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on descriptions of distinct structures like the heart, lungs, and presence of pathologies. The key factor that triggers high activation levels is the clear articulation of normal findings without acute changes, particularly when both frontal and lateral images are mentioned.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.5826771653543307,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3299,latent_3299,12107,0.024214,0.016925946,4.77785,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize description and analysis of imaging findings with explicit comparisons to prior studies. References to specific changes or stability in patient condition across these studies are highlighted in descriptions, which is key for pattern recognition by the model.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.515527950310559,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3300,latent_3300,13125,0.02625,0.014299608,4.3247104,Descriptions of interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"The prompt involves current and prior imaging references, focusing on describing or comparing changes or consistencies between these images. This pattern indicates reports that evaluate continuity and progress in the patient's condition. This involves identifying variations in structures or conditions between different sets of imaging, using terms like 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', or 'interval change', which are highly specific to imaging comparison studies.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3301,latent_3301,27617,0.055234,0.029014474,3.7770295,Significant findings across multiple assessment aspects and comparisons to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation often lead to notable findings with conclusions drawn from specific image comparisons, reflecting changes over time. They frequently discuss notably altered or unchanged findings alongside varied clinical indications, suggesting that significant findings or changes in multiple assessment aspects increase activation.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3302,latent_3302,19046,0.038092,0.023111096,3.9821463,Detailed comparisons of current and prior chest images highlighting stability or changes.,"The highly activated examples focus on detailed evaluation of current and prior frontal and lateral chest images, often for specific clinical indications such as respiratory conditions. They involve precise comparisons to prior imaging or prior reports, highlighting changes or stability in medical devices, pulmonary, cardiac, or other observed changes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.5405405405405406,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3303,latent_3303,3623,0.007246,0.011745362,5.6726317,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve a comparison of the current imaging findings with prior images, explicitly indicating changes, stability, or absence of significant interval change. These reports utilize specific phrasing such as 'compared to prior', 'in comparison with previous', or directly refer to past dated studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4758064516129032,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3304,latent_3304,3886,0.007772,0.011257483,5.3206553,Comparison of current and prior images to assess interval changes.,"All of these examples involve examining a current image in relation to a prior image, which is a common radiological practice that allows assessment of changes in a patient's condition over time. The emphasis is on identifying stable conditions versus changes.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.4428571428571428,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3305,latent_3305,10582,0.021164,0.011577746,3.6843405,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or changes.,"Many examples describe the comparison of current and previous imaging, often highlighting stability or changes over time. This frequent annotation indicates a focus on longitudinal assessment, typical in radiological evaluations, where tracking the progression or resolution of findings is crucial.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.2916666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3236303514617099,0.325,0.3394495412844037,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3306,latent_3306,3675,0.00735,0.0068269246,5.4719133,Comparisons to prior images with focus on device placements or lung conditions.,"The examples typically involve providing descriptions of radiological findings in relation to prior images, especially with the presence of medical devices or changes in lung conditions. They often mention comparisons directly with previous images and note stability or changes in key areas such as the mediastinal silhouette or the presence of devices like pacemakers.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3049826245656141,0.305,0.3069306930693069,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3307,latent_3307,4884,0.009768,0.011898714,4.0601754,Direct image comparison instructive prompts.,"Examples with high activation involve phrasing that specifies interpretation or description of changes by comparing current images directly with prior images, sometimes including dates or references to identified changes.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5162256897331524,0.5678391959798995,0.5426829268292683,0.89,100.0,99.0
+3308,latent_3308,9582,0.019164,0.014794005,6.3845763,Reports focused on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels correspond to reports emphasizing interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging, which often include detailed evaluations of stability or progression of certain findings. These reports typically specify previous findings and note whether there are significant changes, improvements, or deteriorations, using a comparative language pattern within the context of radiological monitoring.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5714285714285714,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3309,latent_3309,3124,0.006248,0.0070185205,5.7346764,"Use of both frontal and lateral images with focus on comparison, despite lack of specified prior studies.","The distinguishing factor among the examples with high activation is the combined availability of both current frontal and lateral images for analysis along with a specified comparison, even if none is used. This suggests the model is identifying a pattern where clear lateral images support a comparison against the frontal images, although without direct prior comparisons.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3310,latent_3310,5457,0.010914,0.0129846055,5.691165,Focus on NG/OG tube placement and comparison to prior positioning.,"This dataset features numerous references to NG or OG tube placement or adjustments over time, with a focus on confirming the correct positioning or changes in position, typically involving comparisons to previous imaging studies.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3631577288060784,0.495,0.4444444444444444,0.04,100.0,100.0
+3311,latent_3311,2607,0.005214,0.0150886765,10.508313,Provide description without a prior report.,"The highly activated examples involve analyses and descriptions that explicitly mention a ""prior report"" or previous images. This pattern emphasizes the necessity of previous data for the assessment, suggesting that providing findings without a previous report leads to high activations due to its formulaic nature.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5131578947368421,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3312,latent_3312,10251,0.020502,0.012730992,4.2509913,"Comparison of current findings to prior images, assessing stability or changes.","Examples with higher activation levels mention the comparison of the current radiological findings to a prior image, particularly noting stability or changes from the previous imaging. These include descriptions or recommendations based on any identified differences, demonstrating a pattern of assessing interval change over time.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.2916666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3313,latent_3313,26005,0.05201,0.030033434,4.938233,Comparison of radiographic findings to previous imaging indicating clinical progression or stability.,"The pattern identified is the comparison of current radiographic findings to previous imaging. Examples with high activation describe a progression, stability, or resolution of previous findings, often indicating the patient's clinical trajectory. This comparison is central to assessing changes over time in radiology.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5691467002942412,0.59,0.5625,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3314,latent_3314,9126,0.018252,0.018406201,6.3903275,Documentation of substantial interval changes in radiological findings.,"These examples demonstrate substantial changes in radiological findings compared to previous studies, such as new placements, significantly altered effusions, or pneumothorax development. High activation is associated with notable changes documented in successive imaging.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.5434782608695652,0.25,100.0,100.0
+3315,latent_3315,20982,0.041964,0.029095368,5.765785,Focus on interval changes or comparison to prior studies.,"These examples specifically refer to interval changes or comparisons between the current imaging and one or more prior studies, highlighting changes or consistency in findings, such as tube placement or size of effusions, that help track patient progress or concerns across time.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4899591606815942,0.542713567839196,0.5276073619631901,0.86,100.0,99.0
+3316,latent_3316,3937,0.007874,0.009043529,5.5238857,Reference to positioning or placement of nasogastric or endotracheal tubes.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly involve scenarios where there is either a placement, confirmation, or repositioning of nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, often with reference to the tube's position being unchanged or satisfactorily placed over time. This pattern likely represents the typical content of reports focusing on tube placements and their evaluations.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.8461538461538461,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7608967967891198,0.7638190954773869,0.8441558441558441,0.65,100.0,99.0
+3317,latent_3317,5705,0.01141,0.013001301,3.9008594,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions to analyze new images against prior images, specifically including the requirement to compare both current frontal and lateral images with previous images, emphasizing this comparison in multiple modalities or views.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4084784751889583,0.415,0.4297520661157025,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3318,latent_3318,13709,0.027418,0.018180517,4.2186704,"Detailed comparison of findings with prior images, noting stable or evolving pathology.","The examples with higher activation levels often include precise descriptions of multiple concurrent findings or changes compared to previous exams. This could involve a historical perspective of medical changes or noting both stability and any improvement, even when the changes are not drastic. This pattern is indicative of radiology reports that thoroughly document and contextualize the findings within a clinical evolution framework.",0.493103448275862,0.5102040816326531,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4698795180722891,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3319,latent_3319,7866,0.015732,0.009411516,3.5101643,Significant vascular or cardiac changes with stable central thoracic features.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention the presence of some form of central vascular or cardiac changes, such as increased cardiac silhouette size, cardiomediastinal silhouette prominence, or cardiac pacing devices, often in conjunction with unchanged mediastinal or lung findings. This suggests that the pattern the model recognizes involves significant central thoracic features, possibly prioritizing these findings as key markers in the interpretation.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3896856881293866,0.4,0.3648648648648648,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3320,latent_3320,10808,0.021616,0.023220096,2.4908128,"High activation for current image analysis, both frontal and lateral.","High activation examples consistently involve analyzing two current images (frontal and lateral), whereas lower activation examples involve comparisons including prior images. The task of describing findings from the current images aligns with high activation due to the model's specialized focus on processing the current image data exclusively.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3321,latent_3321,3768,0.007536,0.0072434936,4.9541583,Emphasis on normal or unchanged findings and lack of acute changes.,"These examples frequently involve normalized, unchanged, or clear findings against a backdrop of only slight or no acute changes. There is a linguistic pattern emphasizing the normalcy or stability of the cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung structures, and lack of acute process, despite detailed examinations which otherwise look for changes compared to previous studies.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3322,latent_3322,3830,0.00766,0.013794737,6.909591,Requested comparison with unavailable prior images influences reporting.,"The examples with high activation describe the findings solely from the current images, with the prompt specifically requesting such a description to COMPARE to prior images (even though priors are unavailable or unspecified). These examples seem to emphasize that the absence of comparison influences the reliability or comprehensiveness of the reported findings.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5741376286981137,0.575,0.5688073394495413,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3323,latent_3323,32157,0.064314,0.03918315,5.0348554,Detailed comparison with previous findings in radiology reports.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels emphasize significant or noteworthy changes when comparing current radiographic findings to prior ones. The descriptions highlight aspects of changes or stability in lung conditions, instrumentation placement, or cardiomediastinal and vascular findings. Examples with zero activation lack detailed comparisons, focusing more on stable findings without highlighting prior radiographs or intervals.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.559322033898305,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3324,latent_3324,10912,0.021824,0.012414889,4.2343683,Comparison to prior images highlighting stability or improvement.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological assessments based on comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, with descriptions typically focusing on stability or improvement without significant new findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4448829925390237,0.455,0.4383561643835616,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3325,latent_3325,8290,0.01658,0.015828542,6.3840227,Assistants instructed to compare current findings with prior imaging.,The pattern involves initial instruction for the assistant to describe radiological findings explicitly in comparison to prior imaging. This likely highlights the training goal to emphasize changes over time in radiological diagnostics.,0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4522529971062422,0.47,0.4779411764705882,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3326,latent_3326,10031,0.020062,0.015703179,6.0283995,Reference to minimal or absent changes compared to prior imaging.,"Reported comparisons focus on the prominence of extensive evidence of lack of change or the specific indication of worsening conditions, suggesting that the prevalence of comparisons for these findings triggers the pattern.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5545454545454546,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3327,latent_3327,21055,0.04211,0.021063976,2.830942,Reports that describe detailed findings with specific technical terms and equipment positions.,"Examples with higher activation levels include multiple images, a technical description component, and a precise description indicating clearly identified findings. These examples often include terms like 'hazy opacification', 'cardiac silhouette', or specific references to anatomical features and interventions like tubes or devices. Comparisons to prior imaging are also common.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4785828206880839,0.5376884422110553,0.5240963855421686,0.87,100.0,99.0
+3328,latent_3328,3233,0.006466,0.0068467557,8.693934,Changes in positioning of medical devices between imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently mention the presence and positioning of medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes or PICC lines, along with descriptions of changes in their placement or removal between current and prior imaging. This pattern highlights interval changes in device positioning between imaging studies.",0.4595588235294118,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4679481678537716,0.535,0.6206896551724138,0.18,100.0,100.0
+3329,latent_3329,21467,0.042934,0.01779157,2.5896907,Radiological changes in context of medical history or intervention.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe radiological findings that indicate changes or stability over time in the context of precise medical history or surgical intervention, such as changes to pleural effusion, atelectasis, or mediastinal structures seen in consecutive studies.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5565410199556541,0.58,0.5547945205479452,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3330,latent_3330,2305,0.00461,0.007936855,9.227073,Precise measurement of the endotracheal tube distance from the carina.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently specify the exact distance of the endotracheal tube tip from the carina, often denoting a need for precise positioning of tubes, which may suggest issues with positioning that need urgent consideration. These distances are consistently marked, implying that close measurement of tube placement relative to a key anatomical marker like the carina is crucial.",0.9198717948717948,0.92,0.9565217391304348,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6755232851937552,0.695,0.8823529411764706,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3331,latent_3331,5099,0.010198,0.013818317,5.637577,Comparisons to prior imaging studies are integral to the reports.,"Examples with high activation levels universally have at least a 'prior report' mentioned or findings that relate current imaging to previous imaging, indicating that comparisons to previous images or historical context are a common feature of such activations. This contrasts with examples that either lack prior context or do not specify such comparisons.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3332,latent_3332,3078,0.006156,0.009374775,6.8312964,Comparison of current and prior frontal images in radiology reports.,"These examples focus on providing a detailed comparison with prior imaging studies, specifically involving descriptions of frontal images and potentially lateral images. The setting often involves a change or stability of findings across these studies.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4390044879640963,0.45,0.4609375,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3333,latent_3333,4326,0.008652,0.0090227835,4.641634,Stable findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The model highly activates when reports describe findings consistent with no change or stability compared to prior imaging studies, often indicating a stable condition or no evidence of new pathology. These reports often include phrases like 'no change from prior', 'similar to previous study', or 'stable appearance'.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4893071000855432,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+3334,latent_3334,9459,0.018918,0.01019795,3.8915915,Detailed findings focus on current images without effective prior comparison.,"The highly activated examples focus on detailing specific findings and their locations without comparison to prior images, often due to inadequate prior comparison reference or lack of significant changes. The focus is on describing present findings in current images with an absence of successful or meaningful comparison to prior images.",0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4606741573033708,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3335,latent_3335,12847,0.025694,0.017941723,3.9126468,In-depth comparison with prior imaging findings.,"These examples highlight a pattern of deliberate comparison with prior imaging to assess the stability or change of certain findings. The detailed listings of activities like the interval removal of devices, unchanged pulmonary conditions, and persistent findings across imaging sessions illustrate this pattern.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3999399939993999,0.4,0.4019607843137255,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3336,latent_3336,15254,0.030508,0.021029022,6.2059116,Focus on placement or position of medical devices.,"Samples with higher activation levels reference the placement or change in position of devices such as catheters, tubes, or pacemakers compared to prior images. These radiological reports focus on tracking the stability, addition, or adjustment of such devices, separating them from typical findings of physiological changes.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5945945945945946,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3337,latent_3337,5215,0.01043,0.01315707,5.693874,Evaluation of interval changes or interventions compared to prior images.,"These examples focus on changes or findings in current radiographic images by emphasizing comparison with prior images, primarily those noting changes or interventions. They include direct instructions to compare current images with previous ones, stressing the evaluation for interval changes or the addition/removal of medical devices.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3338,latent_3338,3996,0.007992,0.008278266,7.676389,Focus on comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"Reports with activation often emphasize comparison to previous images, highlighting changes or stability over time. High activation levels are associated with explicit descriptions of monitored medical devices or interventions and direct comparisons in radiological impressions, implying continuous evaluation.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4342809364548494,0.4874371859296482,0.4906832298136646,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+3339,latent_3339,12888,0.025776,0.0213691,6.530165,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours despite other findings.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on findings related to the cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours described as normal or within limits, despite evaluating various chest pathologies. This pattern is evident especially in examples with normal cardiomediastinal contours despite the presence of other findings such as nodules, atelectasis, or lung opacity.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3760064412238325,0.38,0.3571428571428571,0.3,100.0,100.0
+3340,latent_3340,4986,0.009972,0.010011744,4.976777,Absence of previous radiological comparisons in the report.,"Examples with activations closer to the pattern typically lack a historical comparison for radiology images, often resulting in uncertainty or difficulty in interpretation. They explicitly state 'comparison: none' or some variant, indicating no prior images for side-by-side examination. This affects the clarity or certainty of findings in radiology reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5698924731182796,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3341,latent_3341,3809,0.007618,0.008431483,4.2201924,Comparison to prior without a detailed prior report.,"The common theme among the examples with higher activation scores involves prompts that have a missing previous report, as indicated by placeholders like 'N/A' for the prior report, yet still ask for comparisons. These prompts focus on descriptions of current images relative to an implied or assumed prior image without detailed prior context. It's the combination of missing specific prior data with requested comparison that boosts the activation.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4938271604938271,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3342,latent_3342,10078,0.020156,0.054328497,6.279919,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images against prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve providing detailed findings that compare both frontal and lateral images to prior images, regardless of the specific conditions identified. This includes evaluating changes or noting stability in various features (like atelectasis, effusions, or mediastinal shifts) compared with previous studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4522529971062422,0.47,0.4779411764705882,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3343,latent_3343,2930,0.00586,0.007244874,5.3418612,Evaluation of tube placement with specific measurements from anatomical landmarks.,"These examples focus on the placement and evaluations of tubes, such as endotracheal tubes and nasogastric tubes, often in the context of comparing their positioning between current and prior studies. Descriptions typically include measurements in centimeters from anatomical landmarks, like the carina, emphasizing this detail in radiological assessments.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5668333377897805,0.595,0.6938775510204082,0.34,100.0,100.0
+3344,latent_3344,5453,0.010906,0.0076757376,9.188883,Changes in pulmonary vascular or interstitial markings indicating congestion or edema.,"Examples with high activations detail significant findings such as changes or potential abnormalities in the pulmonary vascular system or interstitial markings, as well as their potential implications, in comparison to previous studies. Descriptions include terms like 'vascular markings', 'vascular congestion', or 'interstitial markings', often related to pulmonary edema or congestion, suggesting these findings may hold clinical significance.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6074101337259232,0.68,0.4032258064516129,0.4807692307692308,52.0,148.0
+3345,latent_3345,29340,0.05868,0.038087852,5.710027,Assessment of line/tube placement compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern identified relates to references to changes and assessments in the positioning of lines and tubes, such as PICC lines, central venous catheters, and endotracheal tubes, with emphasis on their positions being unchanged or repositioned based on comparison with prior imaging. This pattern emerges due to the context and prevalence of line placement checks in many of the examples with higher activation levels.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6849291090495362,0.685,0.6796116504854369,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3346,latent_3346,5048,0.010096,0.022982588,6.8408165,Assessment using current and prior image comparisons.,"These examples often mention reviewing multiple image views, particularly both ""current frontal"" and ""prior frontal"" images. This pattern is associated with reports that assess the images from different time points and perspectives, emphasizing a comprehensive approach to comparison and analysis.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3347,latent_3347,14233,0.028466,0.02077917,4.4352593,Focus on central line or tube positions in comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the presence, position, or changes in central venous catheters and other tube placements (such as ET tubes) in chest radiographs, often in relation to prior studies. These elements are critical in radiology for monitoring patient interventions and changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.7649471131004475,0.765,0.7731958762886598,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3348,latent_3348,20580,0.04116,0.023055444,5.2745457,"Comparisons with prior images, noting interval changes or stabilities.","The examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons of current imaging findings with PRIOR images, often noting interval changes or specific observations (such as device placements or progression of findings) that are important in clinical decision-making, despite lack of prior data in some.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.3214285714285714,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.41486834537771,0.415,0.4174757281553398,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3349,latent_3349,22804,0.045608,0.027557649,4.216079,Focus on interval changes when comparing current with prior images.,"Examples with high activation level repeatedly involve specific reference to interval changes when comparing a frontal image with prior images, demonstrating how findings have evolved or remained stable over time. These examples illustrate a pattern where the focus is on temporal changes by using terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', or 'compared to prior'.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4959473150962513,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.55,100.0,99.0
+3350,latent_3350,1629,0.003258,0.0049655726,6.7799435,"Comparison of current and prior image findings, focusing on lung or heart changes.","The highly activated examples consistently involve comparative descriptions between current and prior images. Specifically, they focus on changes or stability in pulmonary findings, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or the presence/absence of pleural effusions and infiltrates. These comparisons are the key elements driving high activation, even when given frontal and lateral views.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4142824960576706,0.415,0.4205607476635514,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3351,latent_3351,5637,0.011274,0.014322872,7.6297145,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples in the high activation range consistently compare current findings to prior imaging studies and provide descriptions of stable conditions, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'compared to previous', or 'similar to prior'. This pattern reflects radiological reporting practices when assessing follow-up studies or monitoring chronic conditions.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4380881294484579,0.4568527918781725,0.4354838709677419,0.2727272727272727,99.0,98.0
+3352,latent_3352,10662,0.021324,0.018935028,5.9181814,Evaluation of medical devices or tubes placement compared to previous imagery.,"These examples include discussions about findings in radiology studies compared to prior imagery, but examples with higher activations also involve changes or intervals in medical devices placement, such as tubes or catheters, which require careful evaluation and repositioning based on imaging. This indicates a pattern of identifying and describing the status and placement of medical devices, especially when changes or adjustments are evident.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3353,latent_3353,11237,0.022474,0.01610565,4.9515543,Cardiac enlargement with concurrent pulmonary changes or congestion.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention changes or conditions in the lungs alongside cardiac enlargement or edema. These typically involve evaluations for cardiopulmonary issues, where lung assessments reveal pulmonary congestion or edema in the presence of cardiomegaly, reflecting the model's focus on heart-lung interactions in pathology.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6578053576444751,0.665,0.7323943661971831,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3354,latent_3354,21947,0.043894,0.026203692,5.8767695,Evaluation or mention of medical devices or support lines in imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve the presence and management of medical devices or hardware, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or other monitoring support. These cases focus on evaluating device placement or noting changes related to cardiovascular or supportive devices in radiology reports.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5945032665014642,0.595,0.5887850467289719,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3355,latent_3355,19231,0.038462,0.02416744,4.80872,Utilization of multiple image views for comparison with previous imaging.,"This pattern involves instances where current imaging is compared to prior imaging, specifically where multiple views or images (frontal and lateral) are referred to, even when comparison is not available, suggesting a detailed descriptive approach to identifying changes over time in radiological assessment.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4320486815415821,0.475,0.4838709677419355,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3356,latent_3356,92357,0.184714,0.104125276,4.283751,Comparison of current imaging to prior images or reports.,"The examples consistently describe radiological findings in relation to previous imaging or clinical history, indicating a focus on comparison to identify changes or stability in patient conditions. The mention of previous reports, the use of 'unchanged', and the context such as 'comparison to prior' or earlier imaging align with a pattern of follow-up and monitoring changes over time in patient imaging.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4726763065138353,0.525,0.5153374233128835,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3357,latent_3357,2557,0.005114,0.008009989,9.429404,Incomplete or unspecified comparison in imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to have vague or incomplete details in the 'COMPARISON' sections, indicating that unclear or non-specific comparison notes are related to the pattern being observed. Notably, the activation is often high when exact dates or comparisons are omitted.",0.3150684931506849,0.46,0.4791666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.382773777237445,0.505,0.5026455026455027,0.95,100.0,100.0
+3358,latent_3358,8677,0.017354,0.012710384,5.9864182,Reports emphasizing comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Reports with low activation levels focus on current, acute, or new findings and do not emphasize changes or stability over time. In contrast, high activation examples highlight detailed comparison to prior imaging, tracking improvements or stability in conditions such as pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, or device placement changes, often using specific comparative phrases.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5577607593571352,0.59,0.5584415584415584,0.86,100.0,100.0
+3359,latent_3359,23929,0.047858,0.02492192,4.2317414,Stable findings compared to prior exams.,"Samples with higher activations consistently mention 'comparison to prior image' or 'prior report' in the context of identified findings that were unchanged or stable since prior examination, implying a pattern of stable observations over time when compared to past results.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4459459459459459,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3360,latent_3360,6359,0.012718,0.01335565,3.8486109,References to interval changes from prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in findings over time, specifically in comparison with prior images. This pattern is emphasized by references to 'comparison', 'compared to previous', or 'interval change', highlighting the focus on noting differences from earlier scans.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4649122807017544,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3361,latent_3361,30580,0.06116,0.0286595,6.605077,Recognition and comparison of pleural effusions in imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss the presence of pleural effusions or fluid collections (both unilateral and bilateral), often noting changes in size or distribution between current and prior imaging studies. This indicates that the model is attuned to detecting patterns that involve the identification and comparison of pleural effusions across serial chest images.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.2025316455696202,0.4324324324324324,37.0,163.0
+3362,latent_3362,9692,0.019384,0.013082036,5.6121564,Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly in follow-up imaging.,"The examples with higher activation frequently mention the enlargement of the cardiac silhouette or heart size. These descriptions appear in contexts where cardiomegaly is stable, unchanged, or mildly enlarged, indicating this pattern is predominantly associated with recognizing stable or unchanged cardiomegaly in follow-up imaging.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5691467002942412,0.59,0.6607142857142857,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3363,latent_3363,6683,0.013366,0.013145885,4.9714518,Explicit comparison to prior images or studies with specific changes noted.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings from current imaging studies by comparing them specifically to prior studies, often noting changes, stability, or the need for further evaluation. Key phrases indicating a comparison, such as 'compared with', 'as before', 'since prior', or 'exam is compared to', are common in these examples.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.4,0.3,100.0,100.0
+3364,latent_3364,16493,0.032986,0.024127072,7.4305496,Focus on stability or change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on describing findings in relation to prior imaging or previous abnormalities. They involve stable or changed appearances from past scans, using phrases like 'unchanged', 'from prior', or 'compared to previous'. The activation correlates to the emphasis on comparison and change assessment across images, suggesting stability or progression of conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4875536480686695,0.5025125628140703,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,99.0
+3365,latent_3365,7294,0.014588,0.01445224,3.9544425,Explicit requests for comparison with prior images in the instruction.,"Most examples include direct mentions of previous comparison in the context of the provided instruction, which explicitly asks for descriptions including comparisons to previous reports. The instruction frequently mentions providing comparisons with prior images as an integrated part of the request, irrespective of any findings or impairments noted.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5413333333333333,0.57,0.5466666666666666,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3366,latent_3366,5262,0.010524,0.012311262,6.1491933,Highlighting description based on findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern in these examples indicates that reports providing findings correlated to prior imaging studies have higher activation when presented with phrases signifying a description derived from image comparisons, such as ""compared to previous,"" ""unchanged from,"" or ""evaluated against prior."" These phrase structures align with processes involving interpretation of multiple imaging studies together to derive insights.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4375617541992855,0.445,0.4552845528455284,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3367,latent_3367,5604,0.011208,0.009137326,5.9881964,Urgent or immediate medical concerns in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a scenario where the findings or diagnosis are described in relation to an urgent or immediate medical concern. These findings are often described with attention to urgent issues like active pulmonary issues, structural changes related to medical devices, or rapid changes needing precise technical assessment, as opposed to routine comparison or descriptive findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4482758620689655,0.26,100.0,100.0
+3368,latent_3368,20104,0.040208,0.02618246,5.1344132,Emphasis on interval changes in imaging findings over time.,"The highly activated examples involve detailed descriptions and assessments of interval changes in imaging findings, comparing current and prior studies with specific observations on stability or changes in certain medical features. The pattern emerges as these reports emphasize comparison and evaluation over time to determine any progression, stabilization, or resolution of observed conditions.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.538941365175548,0.542713567839196,0.5338983050847458,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+3369,latent_3369,4606,0.009212,0.011081322,5.0556827,Detailed comparison and description in relation to prior images.,"Highly activated examples provide direct comparisons with prior images and request detailed descriptions of radiological findings explicitly in relation to those prior images, indicating a scrutiny over change. Less activated examples feature comparisons but without explicitly requiring detailed descriptions of interval changes or are lacking that focus.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3370,latent_3370,3753,0.007506,0.007713954,5.074858,Comparison of current and prior chest images.,"These examples describe findings from multiple chest images, often mentioning an examination technique that compares either to a prior image or highlights the absence of comparison information. The pattern is established by the explicit directive to compare current imaging findings with previous or contextual absence of prior records.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3371,latent_3371,4921,0.009842,0.010027843,3.8781705,Detailed findings compared to prior imaging.,The presence of detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies or previous intervals is a consistent feature in these examples with higher activation levels. This indicates the focus of the pattern on identifying differences or stable findings compared to earlier images.,0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3547736667002722,0.36,0.3292682926829268,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3372,latent_3372,28273,0.056546,0.04038338,6.3034525,Presence and assessment of medical devices in imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to the presence and evaluation of medical devices or lines within the images, like pacemakers, tubes, or catheters, suggesting that monitoring these devices is central to the pattern being detected. The focus on device placement, condition, or comparison with previous exams is prevalent in these cases.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5082585511770061,0.5226130653266332,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,99.0
+3373,latent_3373,14027,0.028054,0.01438531,3.743927,Assessment of lung conditions using image comparison.,"This pattern involves radiology reports that focus on image comparison and particularly highlight findings related to lung abnormalities such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, or pulmonary edema. The reports also typically include detailed assessment intents for these conditions based on past imaging comparisons.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3374,latent_3374,4607,0.009214,0.009714055,9.036909,Presence or absence of indwelling medical devices in radiology images.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly describe the presence or placement of indwelling medical devices such as PICC lines, central venous catheters, or endotracheal tubes. These descriptions focus on the technical placement, positioning, or absence of these devices as an important finding.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.67499187479687,0.675,0.6442307692307693,0.7052631578947368,95.0,105.0
+3375,latent_3375,74859,0.149718,0.072616994,3.0031805,Radiology reports detailing interval changes in lung parenchyma or effusions.,"Examples with activation levels demonstrate changes or findings such as improved or worsened conditions like atelectasis, pleural effusion, or consolidation in the lungs with explicit reference to interval comparison. These examples differentiate from those that describe stable or unchanged conditions with no critical changes noted.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5806451612903226,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3376,latent_3376,8955,0.01791,0.015143851,5.1644764,Comparison of findings to prior images.,Activation is associated with requests to provide a description of imaging findings specifically in comparison with prior images. This suggests the model identifies a comparison element with a focus on noting changes over time or stability.,0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5618661257606491,0.595,0.5612903225806452,0.87,100.0,100.0
+3377,latent_3377,6640,0.01328,0.016213702,9.004252,Descriptive stability in cardiopulmonary imaging findings across images.,"Examples with higher activation levels have a consistent pattern of describing findings across multiple views or comparisons, specifically identifying no changes or stability related to pathologies or cardiopulmonary structures. Terms such as 'no focal consolidation', 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette', and 'no pleural effusion' are common and stable in these examples without changes noted on prior comparisons.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5463917525773195,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3378,latent_3378,5171,0.010342,0.019075967,5.8536906,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The consistently highly activating examples all measure the changes or stability of various features compared to prior imaging, even if such comparison indicates no changes or normal results. The examples often include an explicit 'comparison' statement with prior studies, but specifically detail stability or ongoing pathology in the current study with the previous state.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3379,latent_3379,5063,0.010126,0.012543785,3.7372015,Absence of prior report when providing findings from current images.,"These examples show that the pattern is characterized by the absence of a prior comparison or prior report alongside requests to provide descriptions based on current images. `PRIOR_REPORT: N/A` is commonly mentioned in higher activation examples, indicating the absence of prior data to compare against while the task is to infer findings solely using current images.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.418546365914787,0.42,0.4272727272727272,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3380,latent_3380,3231,0.006462,0.008265193,3.797456,Comparative assessment with prior imaging studies for interval changes.,"These examples describe findings in the current radiological study compared to prior studies, as indicated by references like 'compared with', 'unchanged', 'interval change', or dates of previous studies. This comparison signifies analysis of changes or consistencies over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4202014037229173,0.43,0.4444444444444444,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3381,latent_3381,7725,0.01545,0.01113405,5.714041,Assessment of findings relative to prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings in radiology studies in terms of direct comparisons to prior images or reports, identifying key changes or stabilities in the medical condition represented. They often mention terms like 'compared to', 'since prior', 'remained stable', or 'increased from', highlighting an assessment based on the sequence of radiological evidence rather than isolated descriptions.",0.3244485294117647,0.3877551020408163,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3382,latent_3382,9248,0.018496,0.013930002,5.2845774,Acute or notable interval change in radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to describe interval changes or new findings on radiological examinations, especially those that are acute or require clinical attention. Phrases indicating 'since prior', 'new', 'interval', or discussions of recent changes in findings are present.",0.5607843137254902,0.5625,0.5454545454545454,0.5217391304347826,23.0,25.0,0.5027178813406497,0.5125628140703518,0.5211267605633803,0.37,100.0,99.0
+3383,latent_3383,2659,0.005318,0.010934828,6.7725034,Reports lacking comparative analysis or detailed findings.,"The pattern in these examples is that the reports request a description of the findings in comparison to a prior image but provide minimal to no comparative analysis, indicated by the presence of placeholders like '_' or '[[:]]' in the 'COMPARISON' field, suggesting incomplete or pending information. High activations correlate with reports that lack comparison information or omit detailed findings.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7246022031823746,0.73,0.6796875,0.87,100.0,100.0
+3384,latent_3384,33318,0.066636,0.026229627,1.758117,Stable findings in current imaging compared to prior studies or explicit comparison with past imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions where current radiological findings are compared against previous imaging studies. These comparisons often note stability or minimal changes over time, with specific emphasis on comparing pathologies such as masses, effusions, or consolidations against known prior conditions.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5365853658536586,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3385,latent_3385,26424,0.052848,0.0309668,6.996997,Changes in medical device position compared to prior imaging.,"These examples often describe changes in lines and tubes or other medical devices compared to prior imaging. The recurring theme is the removal, adjustment, or unchanged position of such devices.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.95,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5591956681450845,0.595,0.5636363636363636,0.3522727272727273,88.0,112.0
+3386,latent_3386,3825,0.00765,0.009520059,7.8482413,Use of both frontal and lateral images in evaluations.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to both frontal and lateral images in their descriptions, suggesting a pattern that emphasizes the importance of using multiple views for radiological evaluation.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3387,latent_3387,6020,0.01204,0.014498591,4.9395766,Use of both current frontal and lateral images compared to prior images.,"Each example showing high activation levels involves comparing frontal and lateral chest images to prior frontal images, specifically indicating the presence and use of multiple images for evaluation. This pattern suggests a focus on reports utilizing multiple perspectives of imaging for thorough comparison.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3388,latent_3388,26717,0.053434,0.031587858,4.0066285,Focus on changes in equipment placement or position in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The samples with higher activations feature descriptions of equipment placements such as nasogastric tubes and PICC lines, and their changes in position over time compared to past imaging, reflecting focus on specific support devices and their interactions with anatomical structures.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.6,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3389,latent_3389,17399,0.034798,0.025336811,6.1256456,Comparison of interval changes in lung pathology or devices from prior imaging.,"Examples demonstrate a pattern of interval changes or stability in lung pathology compared to prior imaging studies, focusing on pleural effusions, pneumothorax, pneumonic changes, consolidation, or other acute respiratory conditions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5997536945812808,0.61,0.5833333333333334,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3390,latent_3390,6807,0.013614,0.012726578,6.843755,Detailed anatomical and device positioning descriptions.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently use more detailed descriptions of the shape, contours, or positioning of anatomical structures and medical devices, such as 'streaky opacity' or discussing 'positioning' relative to landmarks within the images. Precise descriptions of abnormalities are emphasized in higher activation examples, suggesting the pattern is focused on detail-oriented evaluation.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4339782190903267,0.4422110552763819,0.4266666666666667,0.32,100.0,99.0
+3391,latent_3391,23486,0.046972,0.025799358,3.469768,Detailed procedural or intervention-related changes in portable chest radiographs.,"Highly activated samples involve detailed descriptions of portable or AP chest radiographs after specific procedural or therapeutic interventions (such as surgery, central line placements or stents), with reference to comparisons to prior imaging.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5172413793103449,0.3,100.0,100.0
+3392,latent_3392,22188,0.044376,0.018421737,3.1886935,Inclusion of 'prior report' findings in the description.,"Samples with higher activation levels provide descriptions of findings derived from 'prior reports'. The reference is consistently made to a previously documented report, indicating that the activation might relate to explicit notations of past interpretative data being included in the report.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3393,latent_3393,28694,0.057388,0.028196756,4.3393383,Comparative analysis of radiology findings against prior imaging studies.,"The pattern in these examples involves the description of radiology findings with explicit comparison to a prior image, identifying either some form of change or stability in conditions such as devices, structural configurations, or specific pathologies. This is often signified by terms like 'unchanged', 'improvement', 'worsened', or reference to specific prior imaging dates.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3394,latent_3394,3924,0.007848,0.009545858,6.7381606,Comparison of current lateral with prior frontal views in findings.,"Examples with high activation mention the prior frontal and current lateral images specifically, which indicates the importance of using both current lateral and prior frontal images for comparisons in radiological evaluations, especially in chest imaging. This suggests a consistent approach incorporating various views for comprehensive analysis.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5576923076923077,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3395,latent_3395,15154,0.030308,0.021749819,5.8733544,Evaluation of interval changes from prior imaging.,"Example with activation levels above 3.0 frequently mention evaluating changes over time through comparison to previous images, using words like 'compared', 'stable', 'unchanged', 'interval', and dates or times for reference. This occurs in reports where identifying changes or intervals in patient condition is important, signifying continuity in the way reports compare new findings to prior studies.",0.4225589225589226,0.4285714285714285,0.4333333333333333,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4529736673089274,0.4623115577889447,0.472,0.59,100.0,99.0
+3396,latent_3396,5071,0.010142,0.014622023,4.0852747,Structured image tag format including both current and prior images.,"The examples highly activated have consistent presence of structured text format starting with ""Given the current"" followed by image tags ""<image>"" for both frontal and lateral views, and a comparison or analysis related to prior images, emphasizing the structured approach to radiology report documentation and analysis of image series.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4424262904452141,0.505,0.5029940119760479,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3397,latent_3397,6898,0.013796,0.01333867,6.068273,Tracking changes in chest radiographic findings over multiple comparative images.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe changes or transitions in radiographic findings over multiple images. These may involve changes in pulmonary conditions, line placements, or other monitored states, showing a dynamic assessment over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3398,latent_3398,3397,0.006794,0.0050427797,3.9929397,Radiological findings compared to prior images indicating stability or changes.,"The instances with higher activation levels frequently describe comparisons of radiological findings with previous images (either implicitly or explicitly detailed), which indicates recognition of stability, improvement, or worsening of conditions over time. This linguistic pattern underscores a focus on the comparative language of 'findings in comparison to prior', evaluations of persistency/stability, and adjustments in clinical context based on image history.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5245901639344263,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3399,latent_3399,9437,0.018874,0.015602127,5.6668353,Detailed findings or pathology with comparisons to prior imaging.,"High activation levels are noted in examples with detailed findings or complex conditions involving comparisons between current and prior images, especially when specific pathologies or changes are identified. In particular, these examples often involve cases where there is a notable change or progression of disease, or detailed technical observations about progression or stability of findings.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4162640901771336,0.42,0.4310344827586206,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3400,latent_3400,8168,0.016336,0.015771141,2.7332475,Detailed findings with explicit comparison to previous images.,"The examples with high activations involve detailed radiology findings that compare current imaging with prior studies or similar references, discussing significant changes, stability, or the presence of medical devices. Descriptions typically reference ""prior"" images for direct comparison against current assessments.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3761124595469255,0.3768844221105528,0.3655913978494624,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+3401,latent_3401,4522,0.009044,0.014297867,4.249843,Analysis of sequential imaging findings in comparison to prior exams.,"The pattern is highly represented in examples where the assistant provides findings that reference changes, similarities, or descriptions in context to previous imaging reports or exams. The use of terms such as 'unchanged', 'interval', and 'comparison' are pivotal in identifying these descriptions, which form a core aspect of radiological assessments.",0.510212950890917,0.5306122448979592,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4806201550387597,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3402,latent_3402,11352,0.022704,0.016085194,5.3406925,Normal cardiac silhouette and absence of major lung abnormalities.,"The highly representative examples feature the pattern of noting normal appearances of the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal structures, and osseous structures along with the absence of focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,0.78125,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8279178054458953,0.83,0.7704918032786885,0.94,100.0,100.0
+3403,latent_3403,17587,0.035174,0.015929522,4.132006,Marked structural changes or significant findings from prior similar studies.,"The examples show a pattern where significant change or findings often involve the presence of pulmonary opacities, effusions, or structural changes while maintaining stability or providing evident comparison to previous similar conditions. Those examples with higher activations have notable interpretations that are different from prior studies and marked observations like potential pneumothorax or significant pleural effusion or changes.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3404,latent_3404,12351,0.024702,0.013870275,6.999798,Reports highlighting interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with the highest activation level consistently highlight interval changes in the imaging findings, such as reaccumulation of pleural effusion, consolidation changes, or unchanged conditions in the context of an expected interval evaluation. This indicates a pattern of reports focusing on changes in clinical conditions relative to previous imaging studies.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.3786407766990291,0.609375,64.0,136.0
+3405,latent_3405,28563,0.057126,0.033212055,4.68578,Use of comparative language to describe interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The pattern identified is in the use of comparative language phrases in radiology reports, often referring to interval changes or the stability of findings when compared to prior imaging. This language is essential to assess progression or treatment response in a patient.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5791933167993735,0.592964824120603,0.5661764705882353,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+3406,latent_3406,6269,0.012538,0.014485628,12.50853,Presence and unchanged or new positioning of tubes or catheters.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of the presence and position of various tubes, catheters, or lines, with particular focus on their stable position, new insertion, execution of their intended function and their positioning relative to anatomical landmarks within the body, explicitly involving monitoring or clinical equipment involved in patient care.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6772458310919849,0.685,0.5760869565217391,0.6883116883116883,77.0,123.0
+3407,latent_3407,7737,0.015474,0.011111741,4.2649484,Stable or unchanged radiological findings.,"These examples often highlight scenarios where radiological findings are stable or unchanged, denoting a pattern where the current imaging results are not indicative of acute pathology or notable progression compared to previous images. This pattern aligns with unchanged or stable findings described in medical imaging reports.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4127118644067796,0.4343434343434343,0.3870967741935484,0.2448979591836734,98.0,100.0
+3408,latent_3408,16583,0.033166,0.02003443,7.478631,Interval assessment showing stability or change of medical conditions or devices.,"The pattern is noted in cases where radiological findings include an interval assessment of certain abnormalities or medical devices with explicit emphasis on whether significant changes are observed compared to prior images. These findings often include stability or changes in position for devices, persistent or newly identified opacities or effusions, and specifically address stability or change over time in the medical context presented (e.g., post-operation, ongoing treatment).",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.3511450381679389,0.7540983606557377,61.0,139.0
+3409,latent_3409,19545,0.03909,0.036848575,4.6498933,Clear lungs and normal cardiac mediastinal contours with minimal findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve clear lungs without notable findings such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, focal consolidation, or pulmonary edema. They also often reference the presence of normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, with minimal change or unremarkable observations compared to prior studies.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3410,latent_3410,5885,0.01177,0.008871904,3.5470116,Identification of specific findings or changes between current and prior imaging.,"Samples with significant activation levels often have text indicating the presence of specific findings, such as pneumothorax, consolidation, or the presence or removal of tubes or devices, in a current study when compared to prior imaging. This pattern suggests a focus on identifying change or notable findings in successive studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.4942528735632184,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3411,latent_3411,7995,0.01599,0.014169773,5.8797812,Use of multiple image views for comprehensive comparison with prior images.,"These examples consistently include references to multiple views (frontal and lateral images) for a comprehensive description of findings and comparison, as well as explicit directions for providing a description of findings as compared to previous images, leveraging the context of comparison to denote clinical relevance of changes or stability in imaging.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4564962934061646,0.4723618090452261,0.4776119402985074,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+3412,latent_3412,7402,0.014804,0.014173837,8.855144,Comparison and evaluation across different image views (frontal vs. lateral) or techniques (AP vs. PA).,"These examples highlight radiological descriptions where the focus is on findings that are compared across different views (e.g., frontal vs. lateral) or specified image positions, using a specific technique that affects the interpretation and visibility of findings (e.g., PA vs. AP). This includes considerations for different view types such as single frontal, frontal and lateral, AP, and PA, affecting what is visible in radiographic evaluations.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5415616445781499,0.5728643216080402,0.5460526315789473,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+3413,latent_3413,68139,0.136278,0.10965941,9.130843,Emphasis on unchanged findings despite pathologies when comparing with prior images.,"The model demonstrates higher activation levels for examples where findings are described as unchanged in comparison to prior imaging studies despite the presence of notable pathologic findings, such as atelectasis, pneumonia, or pleural effusions. Reports that emphasize stability in the presence of abnormalities are associated with higher activation, whereas reports indicating change or improvement activate less.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5937711577522005,0.595,0.5684210526315789,0.574468085106383,94.0,106.0
+3414,latent_3414,34131,0.068262,0.050999288,5.181385,Identification of interval changes in pulmonary features from prior studies.,"High activation examples consistently describe notable changes in pulmonary conditions, such as worsening or resolving effusions or infiltrates, from prior examinations. This pattern underscores the importance of interval changes in evaluating and diagnosing progressive or resolving pulmonary conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3415,latent_3415,2825,0.00565,0.008077029,8.699777,Comparison of multiple views in relation to prior imaging results.,"Examples with higher activation involve descriptions of radiological findings based on imaging that includes multiple views and their comparison, despite noting 'prior' images. Details of findings are often presented in relation to chest images and how they change over time, such as improvement or worsening of conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3416,latent_3416,4369,0.008738,0.01639895,5.5133843,Emphasis on interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently involve descriptions of changes detected through comparison with prior imaging. They often indicate interval changes or stability in abnormalities across examinations. The pattern involves the reporting and assessment of differences or consistency between current radiological findings and previous studies, highlighting changes or the lack thereof.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6220651808133364,0.635,0.5985401459854015,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3417,latent_3417,3845,0.00769,0.0105035845,5.5448756,Comparative analysis to prior images with emphasis on unchanged findings or minor changes.,"Highly activated examples include descriptions of findings where information is directly compared to prior images, noted with words like 'unchanged', 'interval', or mentioned in relation to exact past dates. The pattern identifies stability in findings or minor changes as factors of interest.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4192361375459967,0.4221105527638191,0.4069767441860465,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+3418,latent_3418,4108,0.008216,0.012020844,6.824701,Unremarkable or normal findings in the cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Examples with high activation levels generally describe the current radiological findings as 'unremarkable' or 'normal', focusing on the absence of pathology in the cardiomediastinal silhouette and pulmonary areas, irrespective of the context or indication.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7631551848419318,0.77,0.7014925373134329,0.94,100.0,100.0
+3419,latent_3419,7499,0.014998,0.017651116,7.211806,Described findings in comparison with priors despite stating no prior available.,"Examples with high activation levels describe changes observed in current imaging when compared with prior studies, despite the task often stating 'No prior' or 'Comparison: None'. It suggests an inconsistency between the description prompt and the typical pattern of making comparisons when reporting findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3420,latent_3420,13424,0.026848,0.01886585,4.873557,Use of both frontal and lateral images in analysis.,"Examples with high activation levels appear to incorporate multiple imaging views such as both 'frontal' and 'lateral' images. This suggests that the inclusion of multiple perspectives in the radiological report influences the activation level of this model, especially when comparisons are made with prior images.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3421,latent_3421,2981,0.005962,0.009356227,5.639664,Indication with partially redacted age details.,"All highly activated examples consistently describe an indication with missing age details that are likely to be specified in the format 'Indication: _-year-old'. This partially redacted format or omission of details about age denotes a significant pattern in the context provided, suggesting such omissions are used for privacy or formatting reasons where details are either generalized or de-identified.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6441005802707931,0.655,0.6148148148148148,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3422,latent_3422,2323,0.004646,0.0066712257,4.6381903,Comparison of current frontal image with prior for interval change assessment.,"These examples consistently involve the presence of a frontal image compared against a prior frontal image, with an emphasis on comparing current findings to prior studies, which is a common method for assessing changes or stability over time in radiological examinations.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3423,latent_3423,6731,0.013462,0.015073375,8.037225,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The radiology examples with higher activation consistently highlight findings with explicit commentary on comparison to prior imaging. This includes both direct observations of changes ('interval increase', 'unchanged') as well as impressions of stability or improvement ('no interval change', 'improved since prior exam').",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4958677685950413,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3424,latent_3424,20837,0.041674,0.023023179,4.041978,Emphasis on stability or change in specific imaging findings when compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include descriptions of imaging findings using current and prior comparative imaging, particularly focusing on the stability or changes of specific features such as heart size, lung opacities, or anatomical structures under comparison. Such reports emphasize interval change or stability in pathological findings.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3425,latent_3425,8445,0.01689,0.013550082,5.9093747,Detailed description comparing current and prior imaging for changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on providing a detailed description of radiological findings with a specific emphasis on comparison with prior imaging to evaluate for changes and the stability of any identified lesions or conditions. This includes assessments of pleural effusion, opacities, consolidation, and cardiomegaly.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4545454545454545,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3426,latent_3426,16048,0.032096,0.049428355,6.5462737,"Pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or atelectasis comparison in scans.","The activations reflect a focus on discussions regarding pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or atelectasis in comparison to earlier studies. These terms appear to trigger a higher activation due to their mention in contexts where changes from prior conditions are evaluated, linking to the model's interpretation of notable findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4595135622059854,0.46,0.4574468085106383,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3427,latent_3427,4858,0.009716,0.011126263,6.732293,Instruction to provide a comparison description with prior image.,"These examples show descriptions of radiological findings followed by the instruction to describe them in comparison to a prior image. The repeated mention of specific findings or lack thereof, accompanied by phrases like 'No acute process' or 'compared to prior' when detailing these findings highlights the pattern.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4064012406748843,0.445,0.4635761589403973,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3428,latent_3428,5544,0.011088,0.016490182,6.1390095,Tasks requiring image-to-image or temporal comparison.,"The examples commonly request comparisons, either explicitly in the prompt or implicitly by mentioning multiple images ('current' and 'prior') indicating a comparison task is necessary. The pattern is distinguished by a blend of hints on imagery ('current..image' and 'prior...image') and instructions to provide a description, typically requiring an assessment against baseline or prior findings.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4557253506384761,0.545,0.5248618784530387,0.95,100.0,100.0
+3429,latent_3429,11241,0.022482,0.0117603885,4.5604506,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the findings in terms of comparing the current image(s) to prior images. This includes the use of phrases like ""compared to prior,"" ""compared with the previous,"" and ""as compared to."" These examples involve interval assessments of changes based on past radiographs or other imaging studies.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3430,latent_3430,11492,0.022984,0.012685531,5.101278,Reports with stable or slightly changed findings compared to previous imaging.,"The main focus of the examples with higher activation levels is the description of slight changes or stability in findings, particularly in relation to cardiac size, pulmonary conditions, and the presence of pleural effusions or pneumonia. The narrative tends to focus on temporal comparisons and potential implications for changes in patient condition, often reflecting baseline stability or minor changes which may have clinical significance.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5043478260869565,0.6041666666666666,96.0,104.0
+3431,latent_3431,117625,0.23525,0.16357681,5.9631233,Assessment of interval changes relative to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with noticeable activation involve a comparison between current imaging findings and previous studies. In particular, these examples focus on clear interval changes or statement of stability or worsening relative to prior imaging, indicating dynamic changes in pathology over time.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.5923076923076923,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3432,latent_3432,8184,0.016368,0.01220223,7.2201552,"Clear lungs, stable cardiomediastinal silhouette, no acute disease.","Highly activated examples often mention clear lungs without concerning findings for pneumonia, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax and stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes. These phrases collectively form a pattern where the absence of acute cardiopulmonary findings, amidst unchanged comparisons with prior examinations, suggests close monitoring but stability of the patient's condition.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5170825122810913,0.565,0.3787878787878788,0.352112676056338,71.0,129.0
+3433,latent_3433,15324,0.030648,0.016589442,5.1821394,Interval comparisons to assess changes in sequential chest radiographs.,"Each example focuses on detecting interval changes or stability of specific chest findings when compared with prior imaging, utilizing terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'persistent', or 'stable'. These descriptions aim to identify any significant changes in pathology or stability from previous studies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3434,latent_3434,7386,0.014772,0.011041823,4.9506893,Interval changes indicating improvement or worsening in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe 'interval changes' where findings in chest radiographs show either improvement or worsening of a condition when compared to prior imaging studies. This reveals a pattern of focusing on temporal changes, especially those indicating a clinical development or resolution.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5862068965517241,0.34,100.0,100.0
+3435,latent_3435,10014,0.020028,0.014145112,5.805656,Reports detailing significant interval change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activations correspond to reports with findings showing interval changes in certain pathologies compared to previous images, precisely indicating worsening or improvement. Examples zero activation primarily show static conditions without mention of interval changes or abnormalities related to previous reports.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.685295324036095,0.6868686868686869,0.7261904761904762,0.61,100.0,98.0
+3436,latent_3436,27458,0.054916,0.02153065,2.315809,Assessment of imaging changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently request descriptions for changes observed when comparing current radiology images to prior images, highlighting the importance of change or update in imaging findings. This pattern likely focuses on detecting significant developments or stability in the patient's condition as observed through the comparative analysis.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3437,latent_3437,4757,0.009514,0.018364359,7.3291116,Comparisons of current and prior imaging studies within reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on providing a description of findings in the radiology report that directly compares the current images with prior imaging studies, often explicitly mentioning comparisons in lung or cardiac features or changes over time.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4612391499551033,0.505,0.5031847133757962,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3438,latent_3438,5689,0.011378,0.012233344,5.5879745,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3439,latent_3439,3891,0.007782,0.007361981,4.7777786,Explicit request for comparison with prior imaging.,The prominent theme of these examples is the presence of phrases that explicitly describe or request comparison of current study findings with prior imaging observations. This theme is evidenced through requests for 'description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image' and categorizations of no change or stable findings relative to previous imaging.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3440,latent_3440,12569,0.025138,0.017021928,5.3878593,Evaluation of changes relative to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with an activation value above 0 tend to focus on detailed analysis of changes relative to prior findings, particularly in the context of consolidations, opacities, effusions, or placement of medical tubes and devices. This pattern reflects the model's attention to radiology tasks where interpretation requires comparison with prior images to assess changes.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4936123805567096,0.507537688442211,0.5037593984962406,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+3441,latent_3441,14222,0.028444,0.018495467,6.3623333,Streaky or patchy opacities suggesting atelectasis but considering infection.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention streaky or patchy opacities, often attributed to atelectasis but also considering infection as an alternative diagnosis. This pattern is characterized by qualifying opacities as atelectasis with a suggestion of pneumonia or other infection without definitive exclusion, often associated with low or altered lung volumes.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6282243894986123,0.635,0.6666666666666666,0.5102040816326531,98.0,102.0
+3442,latent_3442,3514,0.007028,0.007836045,4.7322054,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations involve situations where the findings are stable, unchanged, or have minor changes from prior imaging, and this stability is explicitly noted using terms like 'unchanged', 'constant', or 'stable'. This reflects a pattern of medical follow-up and evaluation, indicating non-progressive conditions as observed through prior comparisons.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5194805194805194,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3443,latent_3443,7344,0.014688,0.01243612,4.7181096,Description of findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The strongly activated examples consistently include findings described in comparison to prior imaging, explicitly noting changes or stability over time. This pattern is reinforced by structured prompts requiring comparison to current and prior images, emphasizing interval changes or stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5822050290135397,0.595,0.5703703703703704,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3444,latent_3444,48307,0.096614,0.06351877,4.6446753,Detailed comparison of serial imaging changes or stability over time.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently show detailed serial comparison descriptions of changes or stability in the findings between current and prior images, such as tube placements, lung opacities, and effusions. These comparisons highlight the radiologist's attention to tracking and documenting the progression or resolution of findings over time, which is a focus of this activation pattern.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5517241379310345,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.6199741582427605,0.625,0.6016260162601627,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3445,latent_3445,6628,0.013256,0.009464472,2.544137,Analysis emphasizes findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activations consistently specify the comparison between current and prior images, especially emphasizing the changes or stability in findings such as effusions, consolidations, or device placements between the two imaging instances. This focus on using past images to explain the current state or changes makes these examples stand out as part of the pattern.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.4428571428571428,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3446,latent_3446,7427,0.014854,0.0109923165,4.7154593,Indicating stability or no significant change compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples describe a lack of significant change or stability compared to a prior imaging study, focusing on how findings are consistent with unchanged conditions or previous examinations. This is evident in both the template used to present findings and the use of language to describe the comparison, such as 'no significant change' or 'stable'.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3447,latent_3447,4023,0.008046,0.013017602,7.255412,Comparative stability or change in imaging findings over time.,"These examples primarily involve evaluation of radiological findings with reference to previous studies for any interval changes, focusing on the stability or change of abnormalities over time such as a 'stable radiographic appearance', and typically comparing the current exam with prior imaging given dates or contextual timelines.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3448,latent_3448,15035,0.03007,0.015458673,4.9883595,Observations of changes in medical equipment or devices between imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve descriptions indicating changes in devices, lines, or tubes compared to prior imagery, often marking the insertion, removal, or change in position of support devices or medical equipment like PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, or chest tubes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5939451568965075,0.605,0.6567164179104478,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3449,latent_3449,4347,0.008694,0.016303085,4.0662127,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3450,latent_3450,4172,0.008344,0.010469164,4.250331,Comparison limited to current and prior frontal images.,"The patterns observed are consistent with situations where the comparison is specifically between a current frontal image and a prior frontal image, typically used in radiology to track changes over time, excluding instances where a lateral view is also required for interpretation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3451,latent_3451,4766,0.009532,0.016269077,6.8337016,Stable radiological findings from comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve the comparison of current and prior imaging, focusing on specific findings such as lung opacities, pleural effusions, or cardiac silhouette changes. They tend to report stable findings without new acute processes, emphasizing descriptive evaluations of unchanged pathology or conditions that show minor or notable improvement or progression.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3493049393670511,0.395,0.2765957446808511,0.13,100.0,100.0
+3452,latent_3452,6575,0.01315,0.01266313,6.853031,Description of findings with consistent emphasis on clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The examples demonstrate an emphasis on descriptions of current and prior films with a focus on a detailed comparison. They frequently identify the absence of acute pathological findings across various examples, despite being compared to previous images, using clear assertions like 'lungs are clear' or 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal.' This pattern is indicative of routine radiological reporting.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7894736842105263,0.79,0.7636363636363637,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3453,latent_3453,4231,0.008462,0.011763128,4.8642015,Request for comparative description with prior images.,"The examples exhibit a pattern where direct comparison with previous images is explicitly requested or implied, often using the phrase 'in comparison' or 'compared to previous.' These examples prioritize comparing the current study with previous imaging findings even when previous details are unavailable or not provided.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.5212121212121212,0.86,100.0,100.0
+3454,latent_3454,22166,0.044332,0.023541179,3.5865526,Detailed findings with emphasized comparison or stability vs prior images.,"The pattern reflects detailed descriptions of radiological findings with emphasis on stability or change compared to prior images, using specific imaging observations and medical conditions. Clear, distinct clinical details describe findings like changes in effusions, opacities, tubes, etc., alongside triggers for evaluation such as specific indications or historical context.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3455,latent_3455,8159,0.016318,0.013386264,2.9671805,Analysis of current images with multiple view comparison to prior frontal images.,"These examples consistently describe findings based on the current images, either frontal or lateral, and emphasize comparisons with prior frontal images, a pattern characterized by the examination of multiple views. This involves observations of changes or stability over time, highlighting how the findings relate to previous examinations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3456,latent_3456,2776,0.005552,0.007982874,5.079675,Emphasis on comparing current and prior images for interval changes.,"These examples focus on providing a description of findings in the current studies compared to prior images, emphasizing the process of evaluating interval changes. Common context involves recognizing the differences or stability between consecutive imaging studies to assess progression, stability, or resolution of clinical conditions.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4330805178886079,0.445,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3457,latent_3457,2979,0.005958,0.0066108825,7.660179,Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours without acute abnormalities.,"These examples frequently mention the use of previous radiological images for comparison and emphasize the lack of acute findings such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, and maintain normal heart and mediastinal contours, indicating stability or non-criticality across views and exams.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6922223063144882,0.695,0.6638655462184874,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3458,latent_3458,7517,0.015034,0.012827883,4.937068,Use of language comparing current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature phrases like ""in comparison"" and reference changes or stability by comparing current imaging findings to previous or prior imaging studies. This indicates that the pattern being recognized is the use of language to compare current images with past studies, often detailing changes or the lack thereof.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3459,latent_3459,5831,0.011662,0.010613612,5.416786,Bilateral pulmonary opacities or effusions often compared with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels generally include descriptions of bilateral opacities, pleural effusions or interstitial markings, often mentioning stability or changes in comparison to previous imaging, suggesting a focus on localized changes or abnormalities in the lungs or pleura.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5641025641025641,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3460,latent_3460,7573,0.015146,0.021631088,5.5360394,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest imaging findings to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels are characterized by detailed comparative descriptions of chest imaging studies, often mentioning either a frontal or lateral view (or both) and explicitly noting whether the findings have changed compared to prior imaging. This comparative language is distinctly patterned in these examples.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4347737877865693,0.4371859296482412,0.4424778761061947,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+3461,latent_3461,4069,0.008138,0.0062613213,5.536562,Descriptive comparisons in imaging reports showing interval changes or stability.,"High activation levels are observed when the description of the image findings includes references to comparison with prior imaging, indicating any changes, stability, or improvements in specific conditions (pneumothorax, masses, effusions). This pattern reflects radiological practice of evaluating progression or resolution of specific findings over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4242424242424242,0.43,0.4416666666666666,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3462,latent_3462,6919,0.013838,0.010400357,4.4373627,Analysis of findings in comparison to prior imaging with medical history context.,"The common pattern among these examples is the acknowledgment of past medical history and the comparison of current findings with prior ones, often focusing on stability or change over time, and mentioning specific medical conditions, treatments, or procedures undergone by the patient.",0.4595588235294118,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4931506849315068,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3463,latent_3463,23844,0.047688,0.021053359,3.489926,Stability or changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe radiology findings with a focus on stability or changes between current and prior imaging. Phrases indicating 'stable', 'unchanged', or indicating comparison with past studies highlight this pattern.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3464,latent_3464,29730,0.05946,0.033016287,5.8892627,Findings compared to prior study.,"The examples consistently involve describing the findings of the current radiological images in relation to a prior study, emphasizing any changes or stability compared to previous exams. This linguistic pattern highlights the importance of continuity and changes over time in radiological assessments.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4448829925390237,0.455,0.4645669291338583,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3465,latent_3465,5225,0.01045,0.0240462,7.1005087,Changes or stability in the placement of medical equipment compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation typically involve descriptions of current findings while comparing them to a prior state to determine changes or lack thereof. The reports often explicitly describe the positions or changes in medical tools (catheters, tubes, etc.) between the current and prior images, which reflects monitoring the placement and therapeutic progress over time.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4884910485933503,0.5,0.5,0.35,100.0,100.0
+3466,latent_3466,6463,0.012926,0.009824166,4.2490835,Descriptive comparisons of current imaging with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current imaging findings with previous ones to determine changes or stability of detected conditions, demonstrating that interval comparison is a meaningful pattern for analysis and reporting.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3467,latent_3467,23524,0.047048,0.02691451,4.5958962,Descriptions include comparisons to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally involve comparisons of current chest imaging findings to prior examinations. These comparisons often reference whether changes are present or whether features remain unchanged, such as effusions or cardiomediastinal silhouettes.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3468,latent_3468,2859,0.005718,0.0069135125,6.6994576,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include explicit comparative analysis with prior images or reports, indicating the model is focused on changes or stability in radiological findings over time. Such comparisons often reference the presence, change, or stability in conditions compared to previous images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4321783952148625,0.485,0.4906832298136646,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3469,latent_3469,6162,0.012324,0.029564058,4.718321,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3470,latent_3470,5682,0.011364,0.011362245,5.0791144,Direct comparison of current images to prior ones indicating change or stability.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions of the current image(s) in direct comparison to prior images, identifying new or persisting issues (atelectasis, effusion changes) or unchanged conditions. This includes specific mention of changes or stability in findings such as effusions, consolidations, and device positions, all of which are common when assessing the progression or resolution of pathologies in follow-up reports.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4791666666666667,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3471,latent_3471,3316,0.006632,0.0070980615,4.566908,Stability of cardiomediastinal silhouette or normal bony structures in comparison reports.,Examples with clear comparisons almost always exhibit the pattern of describing normal contours of the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes or normal bony structures and findings indicating no acute changes despite having comparison possibilities. The focus is on the lack of acute abnormalities upon comparative assessment.,0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.5963302752293578,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3472,latent_3472,8052,0.016104,0.011771147,5.878601,Inclusion of relevant clinical context or detailed findings.,"Reports with relevant clinical context such as indications, history, or findings are more representative. This provides a clearer understanding of the purpose, action items, and diagnostic process encountered in the report, which reflects thoroughness and detail in medical documentation.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,100.0
+3473,latent_3473,3868,0.007736,0.011699921,7.3522043,Reports with explicit comparison to prior imaging and request for description.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include phrases that either explicitly state or imply comparison with prior imaging. This pattern indicates the model activates when focused on comparative analysis of current and previous findings, regardless of changes being present.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.460431654676259,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3474,latent_3474,3155,0.00631,0.00839055,5.4681606,"Detailed comparison with prior frontal image, noting stability or similarity.","The examples with high activation consistently provide detailed descriptions of the current chest X-ray images, explicitly comparing them to prior images, whether or not a change is present. They tend to specify stable or unchanged features or describe findings that are similar to the previous imaging. This indicates that high activation aligns with detailed comparative descriptions even if changes are minimal or absent.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4444444444444444,0.36,100.0,100.0
+3475,latent_3475,4696,0.009392,0.016397102,10.800384,Changes in the radiology study compared to prior imaging results.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently report observations in comparison to a prior study, emphasizing the concept of detecting changes over time or stability in patient radiology images. This comparison approach highlights ongoing monitoring and tracking of medical conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.494949494949495,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3476,latent_3476,5790,0.01158,0.014229492,8.463351,Report details tube or device positioning in radiology images.,"Several examples focus on the positioning of medical tubes or devices like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, central lines, or PICC lines in radiology images without significant changes in patient condition or lung findings. This often involves noting the distance from anatomical landmarks, such as the carina, which is a key aspect of these reports.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3477,latent_3477,5033,0.010066,0.01349993,4.780101,Descriptions highlighting interval changes or comparisons to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions that involve direct comparisons to previous imaging or assessments of interval changes related to prior reports. The prompts mention how current images compare to prior images, involving observations about what has not changed, changes in medical conditions, or alterations in medical devices, indicating a focus on comparative analysis.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.528169014084507,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3478,latent_3478,4842,0.009684,0.008761499,4.0347433,Comparison of medical device positioning or stability with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations feature descriptions focusing on the stable positioning of medical devices such as tubes or the repositioning of devices, in direct comparison with prior imaging studies. This pattern is consistent in reports where changes or confirmations of device locations are assessed across radiographs.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4705882352941176,0.24,100.0,100.0
+3479,latent_3479,6665,0.01333,0.013530728,5.6226106,Comparisons involving support devices or infiltrate changes.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve directives to compare the current imaging with prior ones and involve descriptions where support devices like tubes and lines, and changes in infiltrates or consolidations are detailed. These comparisons focus on the interplay between significant medical devices and conditions and their evolution or resolution over time.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4719101123595505,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3480,latent_3480,4023,0.008046,0.007872577,7.0401917,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3481,latent_3481,9897,0.019794,0.019046368,6.628299,Comparison indicating stable or unchanged findings.,"The pattern in highly activated examples involves findings being compared to previous imaging and explicitly described as having 'no significant change'. Examples often include language that indicates stability or lack of change in specific pathologies, highlighting that stability or lack of interval change is a focal point of interest.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3490513614352623,0.385,0.2830188679245283,0.15,100.0,100.0
+3482,latent_3482,8930,0.01786,0.016081464,6.062689,Comparative evaluation of findings even without prior imaging references.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the use of comparison, particularly describing differences or stability in findings, even when a direct comparison is not available. This suggests that the pattern involves evaluating the current state of a finding against a known prior one, which is distinct from simply using two images.",0.4405919661733615,0.4489795918367347,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5393258426966292,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3483,latent_3483,3252,0.006504,0.004269677,6.6698174,Evaluation of tube or catheter placement in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes or evaluations related to placement or position of medical tubes or catheters, such as feeding tubes, endotracheal tubes, and central venous catheters. This pattern highlights the importance of monitoring the position and condition of these medical devices in radiological assessments, often using phrases like 'is unchanged', 'now seen', or 'assess position'.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.620572260193872,0.635,0.5789473684210527,0.5176470588235295,85.0,115.0
+3484,latent_3484,9550,0.0191,0.018825885,5.192357,Description of changes or stability from prior frontal image.,"The examples with high activations focus on change from previous imaging, specifically addressing findings in comparison to one or more prior studies and highlighting any changes or stability of pathologies. These samples consistently emphasize stability, minor changes, or updates in findings from past imaging records.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4279405861099959,0.43,0.4375,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3485,latent_3485,23100,0.0462,0.019374952,3.4016447,Detailed comparison with prior imaging indicating changes or stability.,"These examples with high activation levels all preserve or provide a description of comparative findings based on prior imaging, offering detailed analysis of changes or stability. They specifically detail comparisons noting interval enlargement or modification which helps in evaluating progression or stability in medical conditions.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3486,latent_3486,4049,0.008098,0.01051591,8.709248,Opacities or scarring in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation consistently involve a finding of scarring, atelectasis, or nodularity noted on radiological imaging reports. This appears to be marked by phrases like 'opacities', 'scarring', 'nodules', 'atelectasis', which are stable or seen in specific lung regions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5897435897435898,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3487,latent_3487,4927,0.009854,0.010004364,3.52022,"Authors reference specific prior imaging studies, often using placeholder [[<image>]] for comparison.","The pattern shows explicit mention of comparing findings with prior radiology reports or studies, specifically across frontal and lateral views. Highly activated examples include prior imaging references and use the placeholder [[<image>]] and comparison sections, emphasizing cross-referencing of historical images or reports.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.5308641975308642,0.86,100.0,100.0
+3488,latent_3488,16164,0.032328,0.021903556,5.4117613,Detailed comparison of findings to prior images.,"The given examples mostly include detailed descriptions comparing current and prior radiology images or findings. These notes regularly describe or point out interval changes from the prior imagery, whether there are any new, resolved, or unchanged features such as effusions, consolidations, or the position of medical devices like tubes and lines.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3489,latent_3489,5377,0.010754,0.008928605,4.700197,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings upon comparison with prior images.,"The dataset features multiple examples describing the process of determining the stability or change of conditions in chest radiographs by comparing them to prior images. High activations often focus on unchanged features such as cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, endotracheal tube placement, or absence of new abnormalities. These examples prioritize the continuity and stability of specific attributes.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3490,latent_3490,21692,0.043384,0.03547346,4.715683,Interval change comparison for stability of anatomical findings on chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently present comparisons between current and prior chest imaging, evaluating interval changes, and describing stable or unchanged anatomical features and pathologies (e.g., nodular, opacities, effusions). The comparison and evaluation of interval changes are emphasized, highlighting stability or improvement without significant new findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5967335416876701,0.6,0.5847457627118644,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3491,latent_3491,13609,0.027218,0.015743203,10.4021225,Detailed comparison with prior radiographs in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels explicitly mention 'prior radiograph' or a specific previous date, indicating the pattern focuses on detailed comparison with prior images in radiological descriptions. This comparison helps in determining stability or changes over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.3214285714285714,0.5,18.0,32.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.2905982905982906,0.6071428571428571,56.0,144.0
+3492,latent_3492,24663,0.049326,0.026427733,6.091821,Stable positioning of pacemaker leads or generators.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions of stable cardiac devices, such as pacemakers, indicating the unchanged position of leads or pacemakers in follow-up radiological studies. This type of report highlights consistency in the placement of implanted cardiac devices over time.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5991489624125066,0.675,0.96,0.2727272727272727,88.0,112.0
+3493,latent_3493,4009,0.008018,0.011393881,6.218641,Radiological findings compared to prior images in reports.,"High activations are strongly associated with requests to provide a description of findings in current images in comparison to prior images, which is a common task in radiology to monitor changes over time, indicating this specific task is key to the activation pattern.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3494,latent_3494,18213,0.036426,0.022921216,4.181363,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern focuses on providing a comparison of current radiological findings with previous studies. The requested description repeatedly includes statements regarding similarities or changes in findings as compared to earlier imaging, which is a common feature of radiological evaluations when provided prior comparative images are available.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3495,latent_3495,7483,0.014966,0.017078422,3.9238431,Comparison of medical device positioning or change over time.,"These examples consistently describe changes or comparisons related to the positioning or change of tubes, catheters, or medical devices in sequential imaging studies. This common pattern in radiological reports focuses on device positioning and potential consequences like volume loss or tube advancement.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5657894736842105,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3496,latent_3496,21957,0.043914,0.02063591,2.8683653,Interval change in pulmonary or pleural conditions between imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight changes observed in sequential imaging. Specifically, they note interval changes in pulmonary and pleural conditions (e.g., pneumothorax, pleural effusion) compared to prior images, indicating the importance of detecting differences between radiological studies.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3497,latent_3497,3188,0.006376,0.011217374,5.3853807,Comparison analysis of frontal images with prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently contain structured information explicitly instructing to compare current imaging findings against prior images, with terms like 'comparison', 'compared to prior', indicating a focus on detecting interval changes or stability. The descriptions often lack a separate prior report and rely directly on image comparison.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.416383701188455,0.45,0.4662162162162162,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3498,latent_3498,3847,0.007694,0.007235585,11.966652,"ET tube position relative to the carina, assessed over time.","The highly activated examples often involve endotracheal tube (ET tube) placement and its position relative to the carina, with adjustments suggested based on current and prior imaging comparisons. Lack of significant obsession with ET tube placements in low-activated examples reinforces this rationale.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.5523130492455646,0.73,0.5882352941176471,0.175438596491228,57.0,143.0
+3499,latent_3499,3293,0.006586,0.011653611,5.3574586,Task involves detailed comparison of current image to prior image.,High activation examples consistently involve providing descriptions of new radiological findings in the current images compared to previous images. The main pattern is that these require an explicit task of comparing current imaging with prior imaging to detail differences or updates in diagnostic context.,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4259381171823568,0.455,0.4689655172413793,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3500,latent_3500,4426,0.008852,0.013177623,6.702279,Explicit comparison with prior imaging and noted changes in specific findings.,"The highly activated examples share a common feature where the findings explicitly include comparisons with previous images while also noting changes in specific clinical findings. These examples emphasize a structured approach towards identifying changes such as resolution of previous conditions or stability of existing features compared to prior imaging, using direct phrases for comparative descriptions.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.356848557933876,0.36,0.3372093023255814,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3501,latent_3501,25360,0.05072,0.026043443,3.0148087,Comparison of changes in medical device positioning across consecutive radiology images.,"Reports detail changes in positioning or status of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, catheters, or nasogastric tubes, often highlighting a status or effectiveness of placement relative to prior images. This information is important for ensuring patient safety and tracking changes.",0.5045739046701974,0.5714285714285714,0.7142857142857143,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5702932877740674,0.585,0.6349206349206349,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3502,latent_3502,3914,0.007828,0.015105041,7.340676,Emphasis on surgical materials and stability in comparison with prior imaging.,"The patterns emerge from descriptions comparing current and prior images, with high activation when descriptions focus on the presence or stability of surgical materials, such as sternotomy wires or clips, alongside comparisons to prior radiographs or CT scans. It often involves postoperative changes, chronic features, or unchanged positions of medical devices.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5882352941176471,0.3,100.0,100.0
+3503,latent_3503,27428,0.054856,0.028881446,3.9555237,Providing descriptions by comparing current and prior images.,"High activation examples involve providing comparative descriptions of radiological findings in the presence of prior images for reference, as seen in activation scores related to comparison between current and prior images to assess changes, emphasizing clinical relevance in changes or lack thereof.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3504,latent_3504,4391,0.008782,0.010160042,6.107996,Low lung volumes observable in chest imaging.,"The pattern involves low lung volumes, which are commonly mentioned in radiology reports to describe suboptimal imaging conditions, respiratory issues, or patient positioning that affect the appearance of lung structures. This term recurs in examples with high activation levels, suggesting a central theme.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4983323685878883,0.545,0.6153846153846154,0.24,100.0,100.0
+3505,latent_3505,8797,0.017594,0.010081893,4.784769,"Reports emphasizing placement or changes of tubes, catheters, or lines.","Examples with activations are focused on changes or procedures involving tubes, catheters, or lines in conjunction with chest imaging. Often, these activations highlight the placement and stability of tubes such as endotracheal, enteric, or central venous catheters in relation to previous imaging, using descriptive terms like 'interval placement', 'unchanged position', or 'in satisfactory position'.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.6075949367088608,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3506,latent_3506,3216,0.006432,0.007885128,6.046113,Descriptions involve technical comparison of current and prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe the technical aspects of reviewing current and prior radiology images, often noting the different views taken (frontal, lateral), technique specifications (e.g., portable, AP, PA), or timeframes of comparison, which forms a foundational part of the process mentioned explicitly for comparison purposes.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3507,latent_3507,4715,0.00943,0.008179012,4.8918457,Suggests comparing current with prior image findings.,"Examples with high activation levels exhibit a pattern where a radiological report provides both a current image and a prior image for comparison. Additionally, the reports with high activation often involve requests to describe or examine findings in relation to historical imaging findings or symptoms, despite some examples having missing or minimal contextual details in the report. This indicates that the pattern involves recognizing significant comparative intent, even in lightly detailed comparative narratives.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3508,latent_3508,40457,0.080914,0.037667107,4.376626,Minimal or no interval change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The samples showing patterns with activation indicate references to prior image comparisons and descriptions of minimal or no interval changes, using terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or descriptions of minor changes. This consistency between current and previous images is the key pattern being activated despite the presence of ongoing conditions or interventions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.531480215690742,0.5326633165829145,0.5393258426966292,0.48,100.0,99.0
+3509,latent_3509,6127,0.012254,0.016050791,4.3071556,No prior report available for comparison.,"High activation levels are consistently associated with prompts that include the phrase ""P [[RI]] OR_REPORT: N/A"" or similar, which indicates a lack of prior report data even when current and past images are available. This suggests that the model is recognizing the pattern of explicit absence of prior report documentation despite comparisons.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.5375,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3510,latent_3510,5374,0.010748,0.0076971366,5.234746,Explicit comparison to previous imaging with unchanged findings.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on the explicit comparison between current and prior imaging, especially noting entities like normal lung volumes or cardiac silhouette. They highlight any wording discrepancies or imaging details while confirming stability or change from the previous report, even within templates missing consistent comparison data.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5849782366636299,0.59,0.6153846153846154,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3511,latent_3511,3855,0.00771,0.010266367,3.647922,Comparison between current and prior images with detailed findings.,"The model shows a pattern of strong activation when both current and prior and/or comparisons to previous imagery are noted, typically paired with comprehensive detailing of radiological findings, with emphasis on both current state and changes over time as noted in repeated or comparative imaging findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4495412844036697,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3512,latent_3512,7828,0.015656,0.010338596,4.4250326,Detailed evaluation with multiple views compared to prior images.,"The activation levels are higher in examples where multiple radiological views are provided and explicitly compared to prior images to assess changes or stability. This indicates a pattern in which the model responds to detailed evaluation based on explicit comparison and multiperspective analysis referencing prior studies, particularly when multiple views like frontal and lateral are involved, as they offer comprehensive context for assessment.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3513,latent_3513,39299,0.078598,0.04436613,6.9899273,Noting interval changes when comparing current and prior images.,"These examples highlight the identification of interval changes between current and prior imaging studies, specifically noting changes like improved aeration or removal of devices, and might involve terms such as 'interval improvement', 'decreased', or 'changed'. The examples not reflecting this criteria have activation levels closer to zero.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6482323232323233,0.6482412060301508,0.6074766355140186,0.6989247311827957,93.0,106.0
+3514,latent_3514,3950,0.0079,0.0092506325,6.0798335,"Clear lungs, normal cardiac silhouettes, and instructions to describe findings.","The examples with high activation levels often have findings like clear lungs, no significant changes or acute abnormalities, which require radiologists to compare current and prior images and provide accurate descriptions of stability or lack of significant findings. These reports typically ask for a description despite unremarkable findings, emphasizing interpretive descriptions even when no acute change is present.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.656753502907349,0.665,0.7391304347826086,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3515,latent_3515,15290,0.03058,0.018981414,5.5801597,Focus on suspected disease progression or changes vs prior imaging.,"Reports with higher activation levels frequently refer to suspected disease progression or changes when compared to prior images, often recommending or having further evaluation/tests to investigate such progressions. This is in contrast to processes where no significant change or new assessment is noted.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.5572519083969466,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3516,latent_3516,3920,0.00784,0.0075278715,4.724074,Emphasis on consistent or unchanged findings in image comparison.,The examples with higher activation levels include statements providing a description of the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image. This linguistic structure involves noting specific observations that remain unchanged and is indicative of analysis oriented towards consistency or stability in imaging findings.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4916407415838328,0.4924623115577889,0.4953271028037383,0.53,100.0,99.0
+3517,latent_3517,5824,0.011648,0.015160077,3.7413404,Comparison of current and prior chest images with frontal and lateral views.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings across both current and prior chest images, often mentioning frontal and lateral views explicitly. They focus on a detailed description resulting from comparing images to track potential progression or resolution of a condition, more typical for more in-depth examination reports.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3518,latent_3518,3047,0.006094,0.00657876,5.649979,Comparative analysis of changes in findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often involved descriptions of comparative changes between current and prior imaging studies, especially when these changes have clinical implications or questions to be resolved, such as placement or changes in devices or tubes over time. The model appears to activate strongly when asked to provide comparative analysis across multiple time-point images.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3519,latent_3519,4507,0.009014,0.0070182164,4.790106,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The higher activation levels are associated with comprehensive comparative analysis of current imaging findings to prior studies, especially in the context of evaluating changes related to acute clinical conditions or significant new findings, which often necessitates detailed comparison and narrative.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.469150641025641,0.47,0.4673913043478261,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3520,latent_3520,3721,0.007442,0.0066688447,5.2772355,Normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes with clear lungs and no pleural abnormalities.,Higher activations are predominant in examples describing normal heart and lung conditions where no acute pathologies are detected such as 'Heart size is normal. The mediastinal and hilar contours are normal. Lungs are clear.' This reflects standard terminology for interpreting radiology studies without abnormalities.,0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7748592870544091,0.775,0.7894736842105263,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3521,latent_3521,3076,0.006152,0.014518624,5.3976974,Unchanged findings in radiology studies when compared to prior images.,"The examples shown indicate a pattern where the current radiology study is compared to prior imaging, especially emphasizing unchanged findings or stability across studies, which is a common aspect in radiology reports when no new findings or changes are observed compared to previous examinations.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,100.0,100.0
+3522,latent_3522,9158,0.018316,0.01261667,5.6292963,Comparison of line positions or placements to prior images.,"These examples all involve descriptions of line and tube placements or changes in their positions since the previous radiological exams, particularly focusing on right-sided PICC lines or other central line placements. Such comparisons explicitly detail any retraction, advancement, or stability of line tips in relation to anatomical landmarks, which is crucial for assessing proper placement and potential complications like pneumothorax.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3523,latent_3523,6151,0.012302,0.009907439,5.823633,Detailed comparison of current versus prior imaging findings.,"The common linguistic pattern in the examples with high activation involves comparative descriptions of current imaging in relation to past studies, emphasizing findings that have changed or remained stable ('as compared to’, 'interval change', 'no change'). Observations pertain to the state or progression of existing or suspected medical conditions.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3524,latent_3524,11185,0.02237,0.018542487,5.683855,Assessment of medical tube or device placement in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the placement and assessment of medical tubes or catheters (such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) within the patient's body. These reports focus on tube positioning and any adjustments needed, which is a common task in evaluating image overlays for therapeutic devices.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7111803602644979,0.715,0.6747967479674797,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3525,latent_3525,11593,0.023186,0.016924638,4.918416,Changes in lung opacities or effusions compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activations describe findings where there is a change in the appearance of the lungs or other areas compared to prior imaging, often involving the presence of new or decreasing opacities, effusions, or pulmonary congestion, indicating a focus on monitoring changes indicative of disease progression or resolution.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5829518868884143,0.59,0.6216216216216216,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3526,latent_3526,3425,0.00685,0.0060469927,5.638555,Absence of comparison data despite prior imaging.,The highly activated examples involve situations where there is a lack of adequate comparison information despite the presence of prior imaging information. This pattern indicates that the model is identifying instances where the absence of comparison data might hinder meaningful analysis of the findings.,0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4834180970544607,0.507537688442211,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,99.0
+3527,latent_3527,2673,0.005346,0.004179083,8.823545,New or worsening lung opacity/consolidation compared to previous imaging.,"These examples describe the identification of new or worsening opacities or consolidations in the lungs compared to previous imaging, which is typical for tracking disease progression or improvement, such as in pneumonia, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis scenarios.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5712058212058212,0.67,0.4418604651162791,0.3114754098360656,61.0,139.0
+3528,latent_3528,8582,0.017164,0.01598665,4.5758104,Description findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples describe findings or interpretations in the context of explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, which is a common practice in radiology to assess changes or stability in a patient's condition. The structure consistently uses comparison language and often includes lists of previous dates or scans.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3760064412238325,0.38,0.396551724137931,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3529,latent_3529,165101,0.330202,0.39255396,6.9050584,Use of prior imaging for comparative analysis.,"Higher activations occur when the model identifies explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. These often include detailed descriptions of changes or stability in clinical findings, indicative of evaluating the impact of interventions or the progression of a condition over time. The use of comparison or prior imaging is explicitly mentioned in high activation examples.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5157232704402516,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3530,latent_3530,7188,0.014376,0.012547837,5.109296,Comparison with prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels involve a requirement to compare findings with a prior frontal image, indicating a need to assess changes or stability in patient condition over time. This is a common theme in radiological assessments where previous images are used as a reference point for current findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3531,latent_3531,6840,0.01368,0.01673585,5.176192,Normal mediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"Descriptions of clear lungs free of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, along with the mediastinal silhouette being normal, are common patterns in radiology reports indicating the absence of abnormalities. These notes recur frequently across examples with varied clinical indications.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6572235104345197,0.66,0.6951219512195121,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3532,latent_3532,9871,0.019742,0.023542836,7.072545,Limited comparative analysis with absence of specific prior report data.,The pattern here is the evaluation of imaging studies without the use of explicit prior reports or specific prior comparison points. The presence of an indication or a history comment without detailed previous radiographic findings suggests a lower activation level as they don't entail detailed prior comparisons.,0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4356363636363636,0.515,0.5085714285714286,0.89,100.0,100.0
+3533,latent_3533,15931,0.031862,0.09077804,5.7595367,Emphasis on interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples showing high activation levels emphasize changes over time in radiological findings between current and prior images. These changes might indicate stability or progression of conditions, such as the interval increase in effusions, consolidations, or changes in lines or tubes, noted explicitly in the descriptions. This emphasis on interval changes is a key aspect of the rationale for imaging follow-ups in clinical settings.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3534,latent_3534,2541,0.005082,0.009462561,7.8048735,Reports requiring descriptions from both frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"Examples with high activation describe multiple views of the current image, specifically both frontal and lateral views, and often involve complex comparisons between these views. These scenarios require detailed report generation from multiple imaging perspectives, making them exhibit the pattern more prominently.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3535,latent_3535,5840,0.01168,0.010192152,4.9342937,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in comparison to previous studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the stability or unremarkable nature of the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in comparison to previous radiographic images. These examples often focus on unchanged findings, particularly with respect to the heart and mediastinal area, across different imaging evaluations.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4213342067911344,0.47,0.4285714285714285,0.18,100.0,100.0
+3536,latent_3536,41176,0.082352,0.03767372,3.4324832,Reporting interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels contain specific comparisons to prior studies and focus on detecting interval changes in radiological findings, such as airway, effusions, or small opacities, which are commonly sought after to assess progression or stability of findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3537,latent_3537,3232,0.006464,0.010308368,4.1522584,Explicit request or template for comparing current to prior images in reports.,"The highly activated examples consistently focus on providing descriptions of imaging findings by comparing current images to prior ones, with emphasis on using a standard template or request for assisting the description process, which appears to trigger higher activations.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,100.0,100.0
+3538,latent_3538,13890,0.02778,0.013224538,2.4964178,Presence of instructions for comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The focal mechanism detects explicit instructions to compare current imaging findings with those from prior imaging studies, often represented by phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior' or explicit use of the term 'comparison'. These examples highlight where specific prior imaging is referenced or requested for direct comparison, indicating a focus on changes over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4444444444444444,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3539,latent_3539,3295,0.00659,0.020001346,4.6407447,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3540,latent_3540,3892,0.007784,0.0082871085,4.698358,Prompts expecting a comparison to prior images for describing radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include prompts requesting a description of radiological findings across current and prior images. This suggests the pattern focuses on comparing findings against historical data, particularly with an emphasis on instruction-based information extraction.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3992963185445808,0.475,0.4853801169590643,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3541,latent_3541,5122,0.010244,0.010244348,5.3120217,Description of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"The active examples frequently mention specific changes or stability over time when comparing current images to prior ones. The language focuses on evaluating intervals of progression or resolution, such as 'changes,' 'improvement,' or 'unchanged,' emphasizing temporal evaluation.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4162640901771336,0.42,0.4047619047619047,0.34,100.0,100.0
+3542,latent_3542,9465,0.01893,0.023410806,7.417075,Describing changes or stability in current imaging findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation focus on the task of interpreting current imaging in light of prior images, with specific attention given to the description of findings. This pattern indicates increased attention to interpreting changes or stability in condition over time by comparing current and prior images, often marked by changes in medical devices or notable stability or change in pathologies.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3543,latent_3543,1888,0.003776,0.0043379306,5.7324214,Blunting of costophrenic angles or lung/pleura opacity changes.,"The most representative examples involve interpretations suggesting changes in pleural or lung opacity, blunting of costophrenic angles, or vascular congestion, indicating potential conditions like effusions or atelectasis. These findings are often linked to thoracic pathology where changes in opacity or blunting are significant, such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, or mild vascular changes. The consistent element is radiological findings focused on these conditions after comparative analysis with prior images.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5997816991086047,0.615,0.6885245901639344,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3544,latent_3544,24528,0.049056,0.022239672,3.4065895,Changes or updates in medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels include updates on the position or findings related to medical devices, especially tubes (e.g., nasogastric or enteric tubes) and catheters. These reports emphasize comparison to previous imaging to confirm appropriate placement or identify positional changes, crucial in patient management.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6292863762743282,0.64,0.7121212121212122,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3545,latent_3545,23937,0.047874,0.027597254,6.127242,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve reports that analyze radiological findings in the context of comparison with prior images, significantly emphasizing stable findings, unchanged structures, or consistent appearances over time. These samples often include explicit references to the unchanged status of notable findings such as cardiac silhouette sizes, nodules, and opacities, regardless of changes or assumptions of the clinical context.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5096153846153846,0.6022727272727273,88.0,112.0
+3546,latent_3546,5158,0.010316,0.008332844,4.8258886,Stable findings with no notable changes from prior imaging.,"These examples predominantly discuss findings that are stable or unchanged from prior imaging studies, focusing on consistency over time rather than acute changes. Stability is conveyed via expressions like 'unchanged', 'normal', 'clear', and the absence of new findings despite comparisons being made.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3547,latent_3547,89240,0.17848,0.09190588,2.675496,Comparative stability or minimal change in imaging findings.,"These examples tend to describe findings that are stable or slightly changed compared to previous studies. This focus on stability vs. change is reflected in phrases like 'unchanged', 'persist', 'not significantly changed', and 'compared to the prior' in the context of radiology reports following up on prior imaging.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5937711577522005,0.595,0.5855855855855856,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3548,latent_3548,4499,0.008998,0.011878376,6.5737247,Quantifying changes by comparing images with prior studies.,"The pattern shows the most representative activation occurs when the report explicitly features assessments based on prior radiographic comparisons with a focus on quantifying changes or stability, often using technical terms like ""decreased,"" ""unchanged,"" ""improvement,"" or ""resolution.""",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3853968253968254,0.395,0.36,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3549,latent_3549,7242,0.014484,0.0124856625,5.0977545,"Standardized radiology reporting templates, indicating image comparison and N/A for unavailable priors.","The pattern involves a heavy reliance on standardized report templates, which describe the process of comparing current imaging findings to prior images. The reports often specify the imaging views involved (e.g., frontal, lateral) and sometimes indicate that there is no prior comparison available, marked by 'N/A' or similar phrasing.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3430266608948079,0.355,0.3858267716535433,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3550,latent_3550,2836,0.005672,0.0050333785,5.5959373,Portable chest views evaluating changes or stability.,"High activation examples all involve portable views of the chest, which suggests a focus on urgent or immediate assessments often needed in critical settings. They also show a significant emphasis on evaluating unchanged or resolved findings in relation to prior imaging, highlighting stability or recovery.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5051546391752577,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3551,latent_3551,4375,0.00875,0.008442248,6.4954143,Comparison descriptions for current vs prior image findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels detail descriptions highlighting comparisons between current and prior images or reports, focusing on interval changes or stability of specific features or findings. They utilize detailed language about contours, sizes, or changes over time, which supports a pattern of emphasizing comparative analysis in radiological assessments.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4466722787683987,0.4522613065326633,0.4583333333333333,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+3552,latent_3552,6751,0.013502,0.015339585,5.077163,Detailed cardiovascular and pulmonary findings with stable or unchanged conditions from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation have references to detailed cardiovascular and pulmonary evaluations, often mentioning heart or lung conditions such as cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, or placement of devices (e.g., pacing devices, catheters) without changes from prior imaging. These reports tend to focus on stability or mild changes in chronic or previously noted conditions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5713054717794054,0.5728643216080402,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,99.0
+3553,latent_3553,16837,0.033674,0.024828997,4.9609685,Examination includes both frontal and lateral images with interval changes or comparisons.,"The examples describe instances where there are references to both frontal and lateral images, and solutions often involve assessing changes, progress, or intervals compared to prior imaging exams. This demonstrates a pattern of detailed evaluation across multiple plane views, emphasizing multi-planar assessment and comparison.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4951456310679611,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3554,latent_3554,6287,0.012574,0.017766466,5.513898,Providing a description of radiological findings by comparing to prior frontal images.,Each highly activated example includes a prompt asking for findings compared not just on previous images but highlights the role of frontal images - either explicitly or in context of missing comparisons leading to activated roleplay expounding those findings.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3555,latent_3555,25912,0.051824,0.033402164,3.7591143,Description involves comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"High activation levels occur when descriptions of current findings reference direct comparison with the prior imaging study using specific phrases or findings noted in both the current and previous images. The examples consistently involve language indicating change or stability with prior imaging studies, which is crucial for evaluating disease progression or improvement.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+3556,latent_3556,35663,0.071326,0.033894222,4.1113935,Comparisons to prior imaging noting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations explicitly compare current radiological images to prior images and note any changes or stability in conditions, reflecting a recognition of interval changes or the absence thereof. Lower activations either lack comparisons or denote first-time imaging with no historical context available.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.595959595959596,0.6,0.5833333333333334,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3557,latent_3557,1749,0.003498,0.004654327,8.774865,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves discussing and comparing radiological findings between current and previous images to comment on changes or stability over time. The activation highlights an evaluation process focusing on the temporal progression or regression of medical conditions. Specific phrases like ""in comparison to prior study,"" ""compared to previous,"" or ""interval change"" support this.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3558,latent_3558,4693,0.009386,0.007659194,3.5741673,"Description of pleural effusions, atelectasis, or small opacities.","These examples frequently describe pleural effusion, atelectasis, or small opacities as part of the findings in the radiology report, especially when changes over time are monitored. This is common as these features are often linked with progression or resolution of pulmonary processes.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3559,latent_3559,7623,0.015246,0.012146153,4.3536706,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3560,latent_3560,9340,0.01868,0.013041201,5.948216,"Describing interval changes in conditions like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pulmonary opacities.","These examples with higher activation levels feature reports that mention changes or stability in findings from prior studies. Typically, the reports focus on conditions like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary opacities that have altered from previous imaging, demonstrating interval changes or lack thereof.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3561,latent_3561,9575,0.01915,0.013683144,6.6601152,Comparison for stability or interval changes without significance.,"The examples with higher activation levels specifically involve comparison between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on intervals without introducing any notable new findings or acute conditions. These examples often emphasize stable conditions, removal or positioning of lines or tubes, or moderate changes over time while maintaining a clear pattern of consistency in the reports.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5,0.4395604395604395,91.0,109.0
+3562,latent_3562,3396,0.006792,0.0065829176,4.4204683,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the analysis of current and prior chest imaging, indicating changes or the stability of lung or cardiac features based on these comparisons. The emphasis is on the descriptive process comparing current and prior imaging studies, acknowledging whether significant changes or stability is observed.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3749369896158887,0.38,0.3536585365853658,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3563,latent_3563,7188,0.014376,0.008462479,5.8711724,Focus on evaluating changes related to prior imaging or specific pathologies.,"The examples with higher activation scores consistently request evaluation for changes related to prior imaging or indicate a need for comparison with previous images even when no direct comparison is available, emphasizing the importance of continuity or follow-up in the evaluation process, often with an emphasis on specific pathologies like pneumonia, pulmonary edema, or cardiac conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3918760882559318,0.415,0.3609467455621302,0.8714285714285714,70.0,130.0
+3564,latent_3564,48764,0.097528,0.06163496,8.851373,"Emphasis on comparison to previous images, even when prior imaging is unavailable.","Many examples involve interpreting radiological findings, especially ambiguous or subtle opacities or pathologies, in comparison with prior images. The pattern emerging is the explicit instruction for such comparison to previous studies, even when prior images were not available, suggesting reliance on historical imaging for comprehensive evaluation.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4595135622059854,0.46,0.3450704225352112,0.765625,64.0,136.0
+3565,latent_3565,2907,0.005814,0.009234844,5.87226,Presence of both frontal and lateral images increases activation.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include both a current frontal and a lateral chest image. This pattern suggests the model is activating strongly when analyzing both view types, while descriptions that only reference a frontal image tend to have lower activation levels.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6549741230592294,0.685,0.6163522012578616,0.98,100.0,100.0
+3566,latent_3566,41247,0.082494,0.042973667,4.4618597,Detailed pathology with stable cardiomediastinal silhouette on follow-up.,"The examples with higher activations frequently describe detailed pathological changes (e.g., opacities, fibrosis) along with unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes in serial imaging. High activation examples focus on clear pathological descriptions while stating stability in other anatomical areas, indicative of consistent comparison across follow-up studies to assess specific disease progression or resolution.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.55,0.22,100.0,100.0
+3567,latent_3567,12810,0.02562,0.017055897,6.402862,Reference and comparison to a prior frontal image in describing findings.,"The highly activated examples include references to a prior frontal image and the need to describe findings in relation to the prior image. Additional views, current images, and other report details are present, but the crucial pattern is the explicit mention of a prior image for comparison which indicates an update on the patient's condition based on changes observed over time.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4087213599408721,0.44,0.4589041095890411,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3568,latent_3568,4048,0.008096,0.0056734276,3.8424902,Changes in medical devices or findings between current and prior images.,"Examples describing findings that include interval changes or removing/adding lines, tubes, or catheters between current and prior image studies exhibit higher activation. These changes are frequently explicit in radiological reporting, marking alterations in medical devices or conditions over time for interpretation.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5576923076923077,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3569,latent_3569,3231,0.006462,0.009114688,6.357739,Comparison to prior images focusing on change or stability.,"Examples with higher activations involve the comparison of current radiology images with prior images, focusing on changes or stability of findings rather than identifying pathologies anew. This linguistic pattern emphasizes monitoring and tracking over time, indicating its importance in understanding the pattern.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3570,latent_3570,4737,0.009474,0.008841656,5.7926474,Low lung volumes.,"The majority of examples with high activation levels explicitly describe 'low lung volumes,' which seem to be a notable finding recurrently emphasized, often in connection with variations in bronchovascular markings or lung pathology. The presence of 'low lung volumes' is repeatedly mentioned in these samples with similar context or outcomes, indicating it is a pattern of focus within the reports associated with high activation.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.875,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7088791848617175,0.715,0.8028169014084507,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3571,latent_3571,27748,0.055496,0.030891746,4.3426027,Descriptions of findings via comparison with prior images.,"These examples involve providing descriptions of radiological findings in the context of comparing current imaging studies with prior ones. This is common in radiology to assess changes over time in a patient's condition, utilizing terms like ""interval increase,"" ""no relevant change,"" and ""compared to prior.""",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3572,latent_3572,5133,0.010266,0.009473736,4.504817,"Stable cardiac and mediastinal contours, no acute changes compared to prior.","Examples with high activation levels describe normal cardiac and mediastinal contours and the absence of acute findings, such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax, often contrasted with unchanged findings from prior imaging. This stabilizing or unchanged status, especially in heart and mediastinal areas, is highlighted in these reports and seems to activate the model strongly.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.620253164556962,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3573,latent_3573,3987,0.007974,0.014099208,5.671663,Incomplete or fragmented radiological findings descriptions.,"These examples all demonstrate the presence of a description of findings compared to prior imaging studies, along with incomplete contexts where some details are marked with symbols such as '[[ ]]', indicating there is potential missing or incomplete information in the reports. This pattern is not dependent on specific pathologies but rather on incomplete reporting.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3527508090614886,0.505,0.5025380710659898,0.99,100.0,100.0
+3574,latent_3574,11352,0.022704,0.016101278,11.765329,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with context on stability or change.,"Examples with higher activations often include detailed comparisons between current and previous imaging findings, specifically noting stability or interval changes in cardiopulmonary status, fluid collections, or device positions, while mentioning underlying conditions such as pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, atelectasis, or changes in mediastinal structures. These examples often detail relevant medical equipment and procedural changes across imaging time points, indicating an advanced interpretation supported by historical imaging data.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.2211538461538461,0.5227272727272727,44.0,156.0
+3575,latent_3575,40809,0.081618,0.048464585,4.0173388,"Comparison focusing on lines, tubes, or catheter positioning.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference changes or lack thereof in medical device placements, specifically lines, tubes, or catheters, when comparing current imaging to prior imaging. The stability, change, or re-positioning of these medical devices is a common theme.",0.6722408026755853,0.673469387755102,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.6265060240963856,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3576,latent_3576,2929,0.005858,0.008802997,4.301872,Provision of a current image with emphasis on comparing it to prior images.,"These examples consistently involve reviewing findings in a current image with explicit reference to a ""prior frontal image"" or description. Such phrasing is indicative of studies focusing on comparison rather than standalone assessment.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4750656167979002,0.545,0.5260115606936416,0.91,100.0,100.0
+3577,latent_3577,5355,0.01071,0.00803061,4.7530932,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3578,latent_3578,6953,0.013906,0.010647456,4.4876933,"Image comparison for interval change, especially post-procedure or device placement.","Samples with high activation often involve descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior images, particularly evaluating changes or stability in the presence of medical interventions or suspected pathologies. Additionally, activation seems higher when details of measurement or device placement are compared regarding changes from previous imaging, not just the current appearance.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3579,latent_3579,3255,0.00651,0.0064557497,5.356739,References to pulmonary edema severity or changes over time.,"The pattern observed is that notable mentions of 'pulmonary edema', often described with terms like 'new', 'increased', 'unchanged', or indicating different severity levels, correlate with the higher activation values. These reports highlight changes or stability concerning pulmonary edema across evaluations.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.65625,0.67,0.7833333333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3580,latent_3580,27666,0.055332,0.038926378,5.403032,Explicit request for comparison with prior images in the report or assistant's task.,"Prompts that involve an explicit request or reference to compare the current radiology findings with prior images exhibit higher activation. This pattern focuses on descriptive language that explicitly calls for comparison or description based on previous exams, especially when mentioned directly as part of the report or assistant's task.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3564993564993565,0.4,0.4342105263157895,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3581,latent_3581,3279,0.006558,0.009358788,9.724772,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes and absence of acute pulmonary processes.,"Highly activated examples all involve observations of unchanged or stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes alongside descriptions of normal lungs devoid of pleural effusion, consolidation, pneumothorax, or other acute processes. The pattern highlights the absence of acute changes in cardiac and pulmonary conditions while noting stability in these structures.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6549913747843696,0.655,0.6534653465346535,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3582,latent_3582,3443,0.006886,0.013114551,5.936898,Comparison and detailed analysis of complex changes in imaging.,Examples with higher activation explicitly require comparisons between current and prior imaging. They consist of both frontal and lateral views in some cases and require thorough analysis due to missing historical information or significant changes over time. This requirement for detailed analysis of complex changes results in higher activation.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.324577861163227,0.325,0.3333333333333333,0.35,100.0,100.0
+3583,latent_3583,5112,0.010224,0.012435001,3.4918594,Use of double-bracket notation around image placeholders.,"The pattern focuses on the inclusion of image bracket notation such as [[<image>]], suggesting strong emphasis on the inclusion of image placeholders in prompts for comparison, which differ from those not emphasizing such notation. This consistency appears strongly in higher activation examples.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7192982456140351,0.72,0.7,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3584,latent_3584,4651,0.009302,0.008916802,4.966434,Status of anatomical structures unchanged from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation typically include descriptive evaluations of radiological findings that reference anatomical or positional changes, involve comparison with prior images, and lack any major acute pathology. They often reference terms indicative of positioning such as catheter placements or hiatal hernias as 'again seen', emphasizing stability or lack of significant change.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4567901234567901,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3585,latent_3585,2868,0.005736,0.0076431064,6.648705,Technical description of chest imaging findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels contain descriptions using concise, technical language detailing specific findings in the current imaging compared to prior images. They assess lung volumes, opacities, and mediastinal and cardiac contours, often noting changes or the stability of specific features.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3586,latent_3586,4308,0.008616,0.01194584,7.220908,Image findings compared to prior studies to describe stability or change.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of the current image in comparison with prior imaging studies (often referencing specific comparisons) and focusing on stability or changes without requiring complex contextual indications or extensive additional findings.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3587,latent_3587,4831,0.009662,0.014628811,4.490981,Use of unchanged findings when comparing to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations predominantly involve descriptions of current images compared directly to prior images, alongside discussion of stable or unchanged findings. These reports focus on noting the lack of significant changes, especially in scenarios where markings like ""unchanged"", ""essentially unchanged"", ""not significantly changed"", or ""remains in unchanged position"" are used, highlighting stability over time.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4068554396423249,0.4371859296482412,0.3888888888888889,0.21,100.0,99.0
+3588,latent_3588,5641,0.011282,0.011822735,6.53384,Detailed comparison to prior radiograph noting clinical changes or device positions.,"Examples with higher activation tend to involve a specific comparison to a prior study where changes or consistencies are noted, commonly using the format 'as compared to the previous radiograph' followed by detailed observations of changes in clinical findings or device positions. This contrasts with low activation examples that lack detailed changes or observations in comparison to prior studies.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6910719802286067,0.7,0.6492537313432836,0.87,100.0,100.0
+3589,latent_3589,3982,0.007964,0.007963141,4.7983513,"Absence of focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax and stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently lack focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax findings, along with stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes. This combination of elements in a radiology report, particularly the normal state without acute changes, seems to be the pattern that triggers high activation.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4729729729729729,0.35,100.0,100.0
+3590,latent_3590,11818,0.023636,0.012518416,3.0022504,Emphasis on stable findings in comparison to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activations describe stable findings or lack of significant changes when compared with prior imaging. The use of terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and direct mention of comparison to prior studies highlights the importance of assessing stability or lack of change over time in these examples.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5135135135135135,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3591,latent_3591,14860,0.02972,0.021041837,6.1761403,Comparison of current imaging with prior and multimodal imaging.,"Cases with activation levels indicating existence of a pattern seem to feature comparisons with previous radiological exams or scans from multiple modalities, likely emphasizing the attempt to evaluate changes over time or provide a multi-dimensional assessment for clinical accuracy.",0.4842105263157894,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3592,latent_3592,11734,0.023468,0.01831403,4.5522194,Stable or unchanged findings over time in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation showcase the inclusion of detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifically describing stable, unchanged, or minimally changed conditions. This consistent pattern indicates that repeated stability in findings, including descriptions such as unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette or pleural effusions, is what the model identifies strongly with.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3593,latent_3593,2632,0.005264,0.0070989886,4.174508,Focus on interval changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation repeatedly emphasize the comparison between a current image and a prior image to assess interval changes. This contextually aligns with a focus on change analysis over time, which might be of specific interest in certain diagnostic or follow-up contexts in radiology.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3594,latent_3594,3856,0.007712,0.00881608,4.533596,"Evaluation for pneumothorax, pneumonia, effusion, or consolidation.","Samples with activation levels greater than zero frequently involve assessments of pneumonia, pleural effusion, consolidation, opacities, or pneumothorax. These are respiratory pathologies and conditions that require specific attention in radiologic evaluations alongside comparisons to previous examinations.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3595,latent_3595,7024,0.014048,0.014014106,4.6619782,"Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior, highlighting stable findings.","Examples with higher activation levels include a comparison of frontal and lateral chest images with prior images, specifically pointing out the presence or stability of findings and frequent references to ongoing observations across imaging. This pattern indicates attention to detailed updates in the lateral aspect in conjunction with prior observations.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5738636363636364,0.58,0.6052631578947368,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3596,latent_3596,6283,0.012566,0.009190708,6.8470697,Comparison of current images to prior imaging results.,"Most examples with activations have the explicit mention of 'comparison' to prior images while indicating findings such as interval changes, stability, or absence of change compared to prior exams. This description takes into account previous imaging results in its analysis.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4800509337860781,0.51,0.5067567567567568,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3597,latent_3597,18342,0.036684,0.024561578,5.728941,Descriptions of internal medical devices and their positions.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions of intrathoracic medical devices, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, or pacemakers, and their positions relative to previous imaging, indicating the model's stronger activation in contexts involving device placement and tracking within the thoracic cavity.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6296667000300271,0.63,0.6226415094339622,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3598,latent_3598,55666,0.111332,0.06285832,5.811843,Comparison emphasizing interval changes from previous imaging studies.,"Examples showing activations above zero demonstrate changes in placement or findings compared to prior imaging studies, suggesting intervals or alterations as a significant aspect. Examples with zero activation generally do not emphasize changes compared to previous imaging.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5775862068965517,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3599,latent_3599,4307,0.008614,0.015425998,4.917495,INDICATION: Specific medical context or history in reports.,"The samples with high activation levels all contain sections of text generated by the model from fragments of medical reports, specifically focusing on descriptions or indications prefixed by 'INDICATION:' followed by specific medical conditions or patient histories. These examples not only focus on comparisons with prior images but also incorporate specific and detailed indications from past reports as context.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.411525974025974,0.42,0.4354838709677419,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3600,latent_3600,7562,0.015124,0.013262977,7.4358025,Radiology descriptions focus on changes compared to prior images.,"These examples show reports that compare the findings in current images with previous ones, emphasizing changes over time. They frequently mention 'changes', 'prior reports', and use terms indicating comparisons like 'unchanged', 'new', and 'resolved' to assess conditions.",0.493103448275862,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3601,latent_3601,6160,0.01232,0.019815734,6.0073085,Emphasis on interval comparison for assessing change in findings.,"Most samples with high activation levels include comparisons between current and prior images, and specify degrees of change (e.g., 'unchanged', 'persistent'), particularly regarding cardiac or pulmonary conditions. This emphasizes reviewing changes in the condition over time, which is key in radiological evaluations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4251348518546923,0.4321608040201005,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,99.0
+3602,latent_3602,10090,0.02018,0.016978582,5.7908096,Descriptive language indicating minor changes or stability in findings.,"The highly activated examples describe various medical conditions, but consistently include phrases like 'slightly', 'somewhat', 'slightly improved', 'no significant interval change', etc., that indicate an observation of minor changes or stability in the condition compared to prior evaluations.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6081009154779646,0.628140703517588,0.5902777777777778,0.85,100.0,99.0
+3603,latent_3603,2148,0.004296,0.0059105614,4.6922126,Findings emphasize stable or unchanged imaging features compared to prior.,"Samples with high activation levels provide a summary of chest radiograph findings based on observations from current and prior images, such as unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette, size of heart, presence of prosthetic devices like portacath or pacemaker, and lung conditions post-sternotomy. They do not describe acute findings like pneumothorax or pneumonia progression, emphasizing post-operative stability and normal limits more often.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3604,latent_3604,12130,0.02426,0.014686363,4.326598,Focus on comparing current study to prior imaging with AI-generated descriptions.,"Examples with higher activations often include explicit instructions for the AI to compare current images with prior ones and frequently involve detailed impressions that note stability or changes between the images. These examples often do not rely heavily on prior examples, focusing instead on the AI providing direct descriptions based on observed imaging evidence.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4358974358974359,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3605,latent_3605,4673,0.009346,0.011553521,4.7549963,Observations based on comparison with prior imaging or reports.,"All the high activation examples involve descriptions related to the thoracic images along with any differences compared to a prior image or report. The consistent pattern is the emphasis on evaluating and noting changes in medical devices, lung conditions, and cardiovascular factors over time by comparing them to previous imaging or conditions documented in previous reports.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4629685157421289,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+3606,latent_3606,23676,0.047352,0.024764799,2.7003415,Specific evaluation of interval changes or acute processes in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activations involve specific comparison requests or notes about evaluating interval changes when observing images, especially when tied to a specific query such as '?infiltrate', '?aspiration', or acute processes. The pattern suggests systematic evaluation guidance in radiology linked to changes against prior known issues.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3607,latent_3607,32142,0.064284,0.053465888,5.3319473,Detection of atelectasis-related changes compared to prior imaging.,"The activation levels indicate sensitivity to findings related to atelectasis, which is a common post-operative or illness-associated condition that leads to partial lung collapse and can show variable imaging appearances over time. The examples with non-zero activation levels hint at stable or worsened atelectatic changes, often compared with prior studies, indicating a pattern of detection of atelectasis-related changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.6290322580645161,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3608,latent_3608,13921,0.027842,0.026816504,4.080944,Description of findings without prior comparison available.,High activation levels are associated with analysis that provides observations of interval changes or stability in findings when no prior comparison is provided. The phrase 'no comparison' or similar phrasing is shared across high activation instances.,0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5722222222222222,0.5757575757575758,0.5925925925925926,0.4848484848484848,99.0,99.0
+3609,latent_3609,5830,0.01166,0.014231134,5.6173625,Focus on unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently include specific references to stable appearances or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging studies. The pattern emphasizes stability or lack of change compared to previous reports, indicating a focus on recognizing non-progression in findings over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5978260869565217,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3610,latent_3610,48338,0.096676,0.054654736,9.21324,Comparison between current and prior images focusing on changes or stability.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that describe comparative analysis between current and prior imaging. These samples often highlight changes, improvements, or stability in conditions such as effusions, opacities, catheter placements, or device positions, indicating close attention to temporal changes.",0.5875055383252105,0.6122448979591837,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.3983669961323592,0.405,0.2205882352941176,0.6976744186046512,43.0,157.0
+3611,latent_3611,5176,0.010352,0.008152593,7.251925,Notification of interval changes or medical device placement/removal in imaging.,"These examples involve situations where changes in certain medical devices or significant interval changes in imaging (e.g., removal or placement of a tube, resolution or persistence of consolidation) are reported. The prompt and communication of these changes is critical, as indicated by the protocols for discussing findings with medical professionals.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5252525252525253,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3612,latent_3612,8903,0.017806,0.009863974,3.2854583,Presence of prior imaging comparison in study findings with no significant change or stable status.,"Higher activations appear associated with cases where images are compared to previous imaging despite having no or minimal descriptive findings. The absence of prior comparative data aligns with lower activation. Furthermore, situations with unresolved or evolving conditions which require continuous assessment over time, even if not explicitly altered from prior, seem to trigger higher activation patterns.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4761904761904761,0.3,100.0,100.0
+3613,latent_3613,2868,0.005736,0.007863724,5.1117277,Retrocardiac opacity or findings in chest images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings in the retrocardiac region, indicating some form of opacity or abnormality in this area. This repeated mention of 'retrocardiac opacity' or 'retrocardiac atelectasis' suggests that this region's findings are a key pattern driving the model's activation.",0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5663315592351665,0.615,0.8484848484848485,0.28,100.0,100.0
+3614,latent_3614,22664,0.045328,0.02177456,1.9049559,Focus on current imaging with frontal and lateral views.,"The data examples show a pattern of requiring the description of radiological findings based solely on current imaging without previous comparison. High activations are associated with prompts that include current frontal and lateral images, often with incomplete or nonspecific prior reports, emphasizing analysis based on current images over historical data.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4074074074074074,0.48,0.488235294117647,0.83,100.0,100.0
+3615,latent_3615,16761,0.033522,0.020462837,4.164735,Comparison focusing on vascular congestion or pleural effusions.,"Examples with activations typically highlight changes or comparisons specifically involving vascular congestion, fluid changes such as effusions, or other structural considerations compared to previous images. They frequently reference slight changes or stability in potentially concerning findings, suggesting the focus of the model is on understanding subtleties involving congestion or fluid dynamics in the chest area.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3616,latent_3616,5592,0.011184,0.015024445,3.410787,Reports emphasize stability of findings over previous changes.,"The high-activation examples highlight a stable appearance of particular findings (e.g., pleural effusion, opacities, lung volumes) over time, often in a context where a previous change or concern was noted. The reports emphasize stability rather than progression or resolution of findings compared to past images.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4857142857142857,0.34,100.0,100.0
+3617,latent_3617,13616,0.027232,0.018310511,4.220161,"Atelectasis or opacification changes with pleural effusion, pneumonia concern.","A pattern is observed revolving around the comparison findings, specifically with references to atelectasis or opacifications in conjunction with pleural effusions. The pattern involves reports of worsening or changes in these specific conditions, often associated with pleural effusions or pneumonia, across examples 12, 16, 26, 30, 35, 36, and 41 where these specific elements are mentioned and activation is notably higher.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.60984393757503,0.61,0.6145833333333334,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3618,latent_3618,3958,0.007916,0.013195892,5.4047713,Comparison to prior imaging without specific dates.,"Examples with high activation levels contain a reference to a prior image and condition in the text, yet the point of difference is that these descriptions lack precise dates or specifics, indicating a pattern where evaluations are repeated without clear temporal context, marking them as generic appraisal of interval changes lacking temporal specifics.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3619,latent_3619,55536,0.111072,0.061140127,7.4337935,Evaluation of imaging findings for interval changes against prior images.,"The more representative examples involve descriptions of changes in imaging findings over time, with assessments made regarding intervals between imaging events or referencing previous studies explicitly, focusing on particular pathologies or interventions over these intervals. Less representative examples either lack explicit comparison or primarily describe stable findings.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.3724137931034483,0.8571428571428571,63.0,137.0
+3620,latent_3620,3265,0.00653,0.010292167,4.0842147,Description in comparison with prior images for frontal and lateral views.,The examples with high activation consistently involve a description of the current imaging findings in the context of direct comparison with prior images. This specific pattern emphasizes direct comparisons across frontal and lateral images in order to describe current findings or status.,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4695652173913043,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3621,latent_3621,18373,0.036746,0.018957699,5.602992,Absence of significant interval change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Sample analyses make explicit comparisons to previous imaging but lack consistent emphasis on change identification, indicating they do not uniformly exhibit a pattern of interval change or progression in findings, leading to low activation values.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6169199594731509,0.6180904522613065,0.6292134831460674,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+3622,latent_3622,22756,0.045512,0.018540328,3.1060572,Stable or unchanged cardiac silhouette in chest imaging.,"The examples frequently mention the cardiac silhouette being stable or unchanged, indicating they focus on assessments where cardiomediastinal aspects are not the primary concern or do not show significant change, even if other findings (like comparison to prior studies) change.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.589041095890411,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3623,latent_3623,5941,0.011882,0.010437438,4.4455614,Monitoring changes or interventions in serial exams using multiple views or prior comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation indicate findings compared across multiple views or prior exams, showing changes or interventions over time, such as resolution or worsening of a condition, removal of tubes, or stable measurements. The language reflects detailed comparisons, indicating the monitoring function of radiology in serial assessments.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3949654464211373,0.455,0.4723926380368098,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3624,latent_3624,16289,0.032578,0.022111826,4.6208625,No acute cardiopulmonary process in chest imaging.,"Examples with significant activations consistently describe chest radiographs with no acute abnormalities, including normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, and clear lungs without consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. This reflects an overall depiction of 'no acute cardiopulmonary process' in the radiological assessments.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6818555008210181,0.69,0.6439393939393939,0.85,100.0,100.0
+3625,latent_3625,5268,0.010536,0.008529625,5.304547,Instructions to compare current images with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention specific details about comparing current imaging findings against multiple previous imaging studies. The presence of instructions or direct requests for descriptions of comparative findings seems crucial, indicated by the structure of the prompt and its focus on direct comparison.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3626,latent_3626,24447,0.048894,0.025395894,3.9266238,Consistent normal cardiomediastinal or hilar contours in comparison reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve reports comparing current radiographic findings to prior studies, particularly assessing changes or continuities, but describing consistently normal cardiomediastinal or hilar contours or normal lung appearances.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3627,latent_3627,4839,0.009678,0.017681567,5.3891068,Explicit comparison with prior images noting unchanged findings or stabilized pathology.,"Examples with high activation describe reports where specific imaging findings are compared to previous images, indicating changes or stability. The prompt instructs the assistant to compare current and prior images, and such reports include detailed comparisons often specifying unchanged or stable findings. This suggests the model activates more when the comparison is explicit and includes specific findings of stability or change from prior.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.25,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3901612903225806,0.4271356783919598,0.3529411764705882,0.1818181818181818,99.0,100.0
+3628,latent_3628,9034,0.018068,0.01129926,4.8115826,Comparison to prior images revealing changes or stability in lung conditions.,"The model activates more when there is mention of changes or stability when comparing current and prior imaging of lung conditions, particularly noting opacities, nodularities, or consolidations, and when there is an explicit comparison to specific past studies or radiographic changes mentioned.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3629,latent_3629,3371,0.006742,0.009424219,5.769136,Notable changes or stability when comparing current imaging to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve reference to prior imaging studies, suggesting that the pattern is influenced by changes observed when comparing current images to prior ones. This comparison is an essential part of assessing progress or stability of medical conditions.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3781440380191612,0.385,0.3544303797468354,0.28,100.0,100.0
+3630,latent_3630,2674,0.005348,0.009692102,5.062882,Complex comparison tasks using prior and current images.,"Examples with higher activations include the tasks to describe current findings and make comparisons with prior images; this involves complex processes of evaluation and reasoning in medical imaging, indicating deeper analysis and review of changes over time, which aligns with more sophisticated models for decision-making.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4298384542286981,0.46,0.4726027397260274,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3631,latent_3631,28345,0.05669,0.022504855,2.4336097,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe stable or unchanged findings in radiological studies, particularly noting the consistency with prior imaging. This pattern of stable comparisons is common when assessing chronic conditions or monitoring known medical devices such as central lines, chest tubes, or cardiomegaly over time, emphasizing that there is no significant change from previous images.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3632,latent_3632,4627,0.009254,0.010661128,6.1692953,Descriptions of stability of findings compared to prior radiographs.,"These examples tend to focus on providing descriptions of findings that note stability or changes in comparison to previous radiographs, particularly highlighting unchanged heart and mediastinal contours and absence of acute changes like effusion or pneumothorax.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4683544303797468,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3633,latent_3633,11894,0.023788,0.036433097,6.4006677,Image-based findings comparison without using prior reports.,"These examples consistently ask for a comparison of the current radiology study to prior images but do not provide other past reports or their interpretations. The focus is on extracting findings directly from the current imaging. This repeats the pattern observed where no prior report is available; the request is simply to describe the findings in comparison to the previous image provided, which implies a focus purely on image-based comparison rather than report contextualization.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4592511294315832,0.4595959595959596,0.4615384615384615,0.4848484848484848,99.0,99.0
+3634,latent_3634,2877,0.005754,0.0065200003,6.034575,"Identification of patient management changes, e.g., intubation/extraction, compared to prior imaging.","The data examples highlight the model's emphasis on identifying not only current radiographic findings but also changes made to patient management such as intubation, extubation, or tube placement as compared to prior studies. This reflects a critical aspect of longitudinal medical imaging analysis where procedural changes or interventions (e.g., placement of medical devices) are noted in combination with observed pathologies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5876719121062659,0.605,0.6779661016949152,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3635,latent_3635,9994,0.019988,0.012498758,9.440098,Comparison with prior imaging studies to assess findings.,"The examples often include explicit or implied comparisons with prior imaging studies, examining the evolution or stability of the findings. This pattern is crucial for assessing changes over time, focusing on stability or improvement of conditions, or confirming the presence of persistent findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4599459945994599,0.46,0.3237410071942446,0.7627118644067796,59.0,141.0
+3636,latent_3636,4729,0.009458,0.00833584,3.3542638,Explicit instructions for comparison in radiology prompts.,These examples include radiology prompts that mention the technique of comparison explicitly through phrases such as 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image' or 'Given the current... image and the prior frontal image'. This structure distinguishes them from examples that do not mention specific comparison instructions.,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3592376571099975,0.415,0.4465408805031446,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3637,latent_3637,4075,0.00815,0.0110902535,4.413847,"Detailed structured reporting with headers (COMPARISON, HISTORY, etc.).","Samples with high activation explicitly describe a thorough examination of medical imaging, involving sequences such as the frontal and lateral series, and meticulously document the findings in a structured format using headers like 'COMPARISON', 'HISTORY', 'TECHNIQUE', and 'FINDINGS'. These structured data elements provide context about imaging technique, comparative assessments, and clinical indications, demonstrating a comprehensive radiological examination standard.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3495157384987893,0.457286432160804,0.4751381215469613,0.8686868686868687,99.0,100.0
+3638,latent_3638,12059,0.024118,0.015805116,7.4081573,Comparison with prior frontal image findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the assessment of current findings in relation to a 'prior frontal image', showcasing usage of comparative language within radiological analyses to evaluate changes over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4185899542455573,0.425,0.3581081081081081,0.726027397260274,73.0,127.0
+3639,latent_3639,4059,0.008118,0.009025713,5.6650515,Reports indicating normal or stable findings compared to previous images.,"The representative examples consistently describe radiology findings that are primarily centered around unremarkable or normal observations in the current imaging, often remarking on the absence of significant abnormalities and generally stable appearances compared to prior studies. These reports often conclude with impressions that confirm no changes in the condition of the patient or simply re-state chronic findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.3866666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3640,latent_3640,6981,0.013962,0.0154689215,4.36391,Use of both frontal and lateral chest images in analysis.,"Examples with both frontal and lateral images tend to have higher activations. These provide comprehensive views allowing for more detailed analysis and comparison, thus appearing closer to representative radiological patterns being analyzed.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5561378646487873,0.585,0.5562913907284768,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3641,latent_3641,3841,0.007682,0.007992996,7.145521,Explicit comparison request using prior imaging provided.,"The examples showing higher activation levels consistently request a comparison to a prior frontal image while explicitly mentioning the existence of such prior images, unlike low activation examples that either lack a comparison request or data from prior images.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4064012406748843,0.445,0.4635761589403973,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3642,latent_3642,6142,0.012284,0.0116653675,3.9270113,Direct interpretation comparing current and prior images for changes.,"The examples with high activation involve direct interpretation of both a current image and a prior image, typically comparing them to assess changes or track existing conditions. This pattern is indicative of radiology studies where interval changes are highlighted with explicit reference to findings that have changed or remained stable over time.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3643,latent_3643,5664,0.011328,0.010130179,5.821079,Explicit comparative analysis with prior imaging studies.,Examples with higher activations request a direct comparison of the current imaging studies to specific prior imaging studies. This focus on comparative analysis is a common feature for following up on the progression or stability of certain medical conditions in imaging reports. The pattern highlighted is emphasized when detailed previous studies are explicitly considered and described in the instructions or findings.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3970455230630088,0.4,0.4122807017543859,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3644,latent_3644,2767,0.005534,0.011420106,5.657232,Detailed context comparison with prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently use comparative language that refers back to previous radiographs, CTs, or imaging events, evaluating findings against historical imaging data. This comparison often invokes measurement of changes like tube positions, pneumothoraces, or pleural effusions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3645,latent_3645,2811,0.005622,0.0047840015,3.9424295,Focus on post-procedural or intervention assessments.,"Most examples with high activation involve patients who have undergone recent medical procedures or are under specific medical observation (e.g., intubation, post-operative assessments). The reports focus on evaluating tube placements, surgical outcomes, or changes from a known medical baseline, indicating high clinical monitoring or acute findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4696969696969697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3646,latent_3646,6414,0.012828,0.00963343,3.798798,"Mentions of support line or tube evaluation, placement, or status.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently use language related to the evaluation, placement, and status of support lines and tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, etc. This suggests the model is identifying instances where these interventions are highlighted in the report.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7597838054248824,0.76,0.7452830188679245,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3647,latent_3647,4001,0.008002,0.009302628,5.7745857,Use of both frontal and lateral views alongside comparison to prior imaging.,The examples with a comparison to prior imaging alongside the use of both frontal and lateral views demonstrate the model activating when radiological analysis incorporates multiple images (frontal and lateral) to provide a more comprehensive review. This suggests that the pattern also involves noting findings visible across different views to interpret stability or changes over time.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.39,0.39,0.39,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3648,latent_3648,6082,0.012164,0.026030278,6.545341,Findings are compared across multiple views or to prior images.,"The highly activated examples describe changes or comparisons in radiological findings across multiple views or between current and previous images. They typically involve interpreting stable, improved, or changed conditions in comparison to prior studies, often indicating a full assessment including lateral or additional angles.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3859344224307728,0.47,0.4827586206896552,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3649,latent_3649,4872,0.009744,0.012229231,4.888189,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings upon comparison with prior images.,"These examples focus on describing findings that are consistent with results from a previous comparison image, and they particularly highlight cases where no new acute changes are evident and common findings like consolidated areas are either absent or stable. Such reports often label subtle changes or stability within chest x-rays as normal or normal relative to previous examinations.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3650,latent_3650,2755,0.00551,0.009249146,5.98585,"Comparison between current and prior images, prompting detailed description of changes.",These examples include explicit cues regarding the presence of a prior image for comparison and instruction for a description to be provided based on this comparison. The comparison is between current and previous images to evaluate changes in findings.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4568965517241379,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3651,latent_3651,54309,0.108618,0.054847892,3.2247465,Evaluation of interval change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe interval change in radiological findings, where the current examination is compared against prior images to evaluate changes in specific pathologies or conditions over time. The key pattern involves phrases indicating an assessment of change, such as 'interval change', 'unchanged', and 'compared to prior'.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5263157894736842,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3652,latent_3652,6656,0.013312,0.008823985,3.5648365,Accentuation of cardiac or mediastinal silhouettes due to low lung volumes or prior pathology.,Examples that received high activation levels consistently show reports that highlight accentuated cardiac or mediastinal silhouettes due to either low lung volumes or previous conditions. This signifies that noticeable changes in silhouette appearance can be attributed to changes in lung volumes or persistent findings.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3653,latent_3653,3398,0.006796,0.01261794,7.201627,Evaluation of interval changes or stability compared to previous images.,"These examples compare findings in current imaging with previous studies to identify changes over time. They share a focus on the interval changes, using specific wording like ""unchanged"", ""significant improvement"", ""unchanged cardiomegaly"", and examine the position or condition of lines, tubes, and abnormalities from previous reports.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.553030303030303,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3654,latent_3654,4281,0.008562,0.014158979,5.698166,Explicit task-oriented comparison between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention explicit requests or tasks involving comparison between current and prior images, often structured using imperative instruction-like language. This differentiates them from examples without such explicit task-oriented formatting or focus, which display lower activation even if comparisons are included.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3655,latent_3655,4740,0.00948,0.008519569,5.8931117,Comparison with prior images noting interval changes.,"The highly activated examples are those where comparisons are made with previous imaging studies or intervals with explicit mention of whether specific findings are changed or unchanged, often with a note of the previous condition or date for clarity.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4959473150962513,0.4974874371859296,0.4943820224719101,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+3656,latent_3656,5641,0.011282,0.021752348,5.346095,Comparison to prior images shows stability or no new significant findings.,"These examples are observations from paired current and prior images in chest imaging reports, highlighting unchanged or stable findings, which are common patterns in radiology documentation when no significant progression or resolution is noted. Examples often mention that no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax is present – indicating a common document pattern used.",0.2972620599739244,0.3265306122448979,0.2142857142857142,0.12,25.0,24.0,0.363619348110912,0.405,0.3061224489795918,0.15,100.0,100.0
+3657,latent_3657,11196,0.022392,0.013504454,6.1535697,Changes in medical device placement or status compared to prior imaging.,"Despite various medical contexts, the activation pattern highlights changes in medical device placement or status between current and prior radiographs, such as removal or insertion of tubes, catheters, or lines. This implies the model is focused on procedural or device-related changes in a clinical setting.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4676131322094055,0.505,0.5106382978723404,0.24,100.0,100.0
+3658,latent_3658,13975,0.02795,0.024890335,5.1395664,Comparison of current findings with prior images emphasizing change or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention a comparison of current radiographic findings to historical images or prior reports, particularly referencing equivalent structures such as the frontal or lateral views. This indicates a focus on the evaluation of progression or stability of findings over time.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4299429942994299,0.43,0.4313725490196078,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3659,latent_3659,13492,0.026984,0.016652113,3.6974614,Presence of stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern among the higher activation examples is the presence of findings that are stable when compared with prior imaging. These findings often explicitly mention terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'no significant interval change', indicating a lack of progression or resolution, which seems to trigger higher activations.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5056179775280899,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3660,latent_3660,7913,0.015826,0.013544673,5.341646,Assessment and identification of medical device positioning in imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation involve assessments of positioning and identification of medical devices such as PICC lines and chest tubes using radiographic imaging. Key descriptors include locations like ""PICC line ends in the low SVC"" and actions like ""pulled back"", indicating attention to changes in device placement or adjustment.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5934065934065934,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3661,latent_3661,20206,0.040412,0.01702791,3.6347544,Changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Higher activation levels appear when the current and prior imaging comparison reveals a significant change, like new placements of tubes or catheters, modifications in effusions or atelectasis, or substantial alterations in lung opacities. These specific updates often imply notable clinical implications, thus showcasing the pattern.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3662,latent_3662,2782,0.005564,0.0066591185,4.208695,Use of frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior.,"The pattern focuses on imaging studies where both frontal and lateral chest images are analyzed in conjunction with prior imaging, emphasizing the comparison to previous images. This is indicated in the examples by repeated mention of frontal and lateral views and comparison with prior images.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4415954415954416,0.51,0.5058823529411764,0.86,100.0,100.0
+3663,latent_3663,2455,0.00491,0.009038632,4.7660565,Comparison of current and prior images with focus on interval changes.,"Examples with high activation demonstrate requests to reference specific features and changes between the current and prior image, particularly requiring comparison with prior imaging.",0.28,0.28,0.28,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.418546365914787,0.42,0.4111111111111111,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3664,latent_3664,15428,0.030856,0.01921593,6.8111587,Physiological or pathological findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings with explicit comparisons to prior imagery (e.g., 'prior frontal image', 'previous study', 'comparison'). These records contrast and highlight changes or stability in medical conditions over time, which seems to be the key pattern the model is activating on.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5289634542853427,0.542713567839196,0.5,0.7802197802197802,91.0,108.0
+3665,latent_3665,6550,0.0131,0.013159084,6.3858247,Explicit comparison to prior images with findings stability/unreliability noted.,"The pattern observed in samples with activation values greater than zero involves detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies, with explicit references to previous findings, and noting stability or changes in the radiological findings over time. This trend is marked by phrases looking back at previous dates or exams and critically analyzing current versus past images.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5975609756097561,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3666,latent_3666,10410,0.02082,0.014682441,5.6945415,Requests for frontal and lateral chest imaging.,"High activation levels are seen in scenarios where both frontal and lateral chest images are requested, which indicates the model's stronger contrastive training on these simultaneous bilateral imaging views.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3667,latent_3667,6670,0.01334,0.013382323,8.808596,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing interval change or stability.,"Prompts that focus on providing a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings, especially regarding any changes or stability in findings, result in higher activation. These prompts emphasize describing interval change, stability, or progression of findings, aligning with the model's objective of comparing and analyzing imaging in a temporal context.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.382716049382716,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3668,latent_3668,7491,0.014982,0.016466267,5.07617,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Comparison to prior imaging is the distinct theme, indicating the model activation is enhanced when past imaging is assessed against the current findings, using radiological techniques like 'PA and lateral' views or 'upright AP' views for comparisons.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3669,latent_3669,15017,0.030034,0.021196887,5.774501,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples describe radiographic findings with comparisons to prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability of features. This pattern is typical in radiology reports where changes over time are assessed, using phrases like 'unchanged since', 'compared to prior', or explicit dates of previous studies, showing that the main focus is on assessing changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3670,latent_3670,13664,0.027328,0.019231208,6.541188,Reports discussing interval changes or improvements in radiographic findings.,"The examples show increased activation when there is mention of specific comparison or interval evaluation related to previous conditions or changes. Although many examples have comparison studies, those with higher activations focus on interval improvements or changes in specific findings.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3373312522248692,0.395,0.2439024390243902,0.1,100.0,100.0
+3671,latent_3671,10390,0.02078,0.012271627,3.8999517,Emphasis on comparison of current images with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels (such as 4.0, 5.0, or 8.0) consistently include the task of making comparisons between current and prior imaging. This suggests that the model is particularly responsive to patterns related to comparative image analysis. The reports demonstrating high activation often highlight changes or the stability of findings relative to a previous study, which indicates the model is attuned to detecting changes or making longitudinal assessments.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3672,latent_3672,6703,0.013406,0.012348261,5.50298,"Evaluation of respiratory symptoms, especially cough, for pneumonia or related conditions.","Examples with high activation levels consistently mention patients with cough or respiratory symptoms, suggesting an evaluation for pneumonia or related respiratory conditions. Lower activation levels occur when other symptoms or conditions are predominant.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.63996399639964,0.64,0.6428571428571429,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3673,latent_3673,3439,0.006878,0.007821586,8.716036,Focus on positioning or status of medical devices between serial images.,"Higher activations are associated with entries mentioning the repositioning, removal, or specific status updates (e.g., sustained position) of medical devices such as tubes or catheters seen in comparison with prior imaging. This involves the focus on medical device assessment and positioning between serial radiographs.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.6098401357959008,0.615,0.6493506493506493,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3674,latent_3674,3127,0.006254,0.0066974154,4.130332,Presence of both frontal and lateral images for evaluation.,"The highly representative examples often have an explicit mention of a lateral image in addition to a frontal image, and describe findings based on this combination. This pattern suggests that the mentions of both 'frontal image' and 'lateral image' together are significant for the observed activation pattern.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,0.6756756756756757,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6515679442508711,0.67,0.6164383561643836,0.9,100.0,100.0
+3675,latent_3675,7392,0.014784,0.013674299,4.527789,Incomplete data or assumptions in radiology exam comparisons.,"These examples often contain a description of the current findings based on the provided current and prior images, but notable omissions or ambiguities regarding findings and comparisons, revealed by gaps (e.g., 'COMPARISON: _', 'INDICATION: N/A', etc.) or incomplete data. These examples reflect situations where there's reliance on intrinsic or assumed patterns rather than explicit conclusions drawn from the comparison of images, which the assistant is expected to handle.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3981191222570532,0.52,0.5105263157894737,0.97,100.0,100.0
+3676,latent_3676,10825,0.02165,0.015114309,4.258573,Comparison across multiple image views including both frontal and lateral.,"The examples with higher activation levels show instances where the presence of both current and prior images, including both frontal and lateral views, is specifically noted and compared with previous findings. This implies a pattern where direct comparison between diverse sets of views (frontal and lateral) and various past examinations is relevant to the activations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.5826771653543307,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3677,latent_3677,2741,0.005482,0.008259098,8.594964,Interpretation of current and prior image findings for comparison.,"These examples all involve providing a description of radiological findings based on a current image, often with a comparison to a previous image. The pattern specifically focuses on the task of interpreting images in context and detailing changes or similarities noted between the current and prior images. This requires a reviewer to incorporate comparisons explicitly into their reports.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4696969696969697,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3678,latent_3678,4787,0.009574,0.02355986,9.790815,Delineation of findings through comparison with prior radiological studies.,"These examples highlight the extraction and analysis of radiological findings by comparing current images with prior studies, focusing on identifying stability or changes over time. The pattern involves the use of comparison language within instructions indicating detailed investigation of findings over serial radiographs.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3905970637858528,0.395,0.4102564102564102,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3679,latent_3679,4553,0.009106,0.008003131,5.811815,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3680,latent_3680,1726,0.003452,0.005575141,5.6050286,"Detailed descriptions of tube placements, particularly relative to the carina.","The highly representative examples specifically mention the precise position of tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, etc.) relative to the carina, often with measurements. This detail is crucial in radiology reports for assessing the proper placement of such devices.",0.939783219590526,0.94,1.0,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6735564304461943,0.6984924623115578,0.9333333333333332,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+3681,latent_3681,4203,0.008406,0.010257771,5.758635,"Focus on assessment of pneumothorax, line placements, or edema in comparison contexts.","These examples emphasize the use of radiological comparisons to assess stability or changes over time, but the high activation values specifically highlight descriptions related to pneumothorax, edema, or line placements, all in the context of comparison with prior studies. This pattern is reflective of how clinicians use comparative imaging features to monitor for complications or treatment effects.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3682,latent_3682,8718,0.017436,0.015918123,4.715479,Findings are described in comparison to prior images or reports.,"Many examples mention the comparison of current radiographic images (frontal, lateral) to prior images or prior reports with dates or unspecified prior studies. This comparison often focuses on the stability, change, or description of findings over time.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3683,latent_3683,4698,0.009396,0.010823787,5.0381885,Reports indicating no acute changes or new pathologies.,"The pattern consists of reports where comparisons to previous imaging find no new or worsening findings, indicating stability or improvement. Phrases like 'normal heart size,' 'lungs are clear,' 'no new or suspicious findings,' and 'impression: no acute process' describe reports without acute changes.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.56598701562183,0.5678391959798995,0.5625,0.63,100.0,99.0
+3684,latent_3684,40690,0.08138,0.04094532,3.859637,"Radiological changes compared to previous imaging, indicating progression.","Highly activated examples mention findings that show change or progression compared to prior imaging, often suggesting worsening or new pathology, such as a doubled opacity, increased opacity or pleural effusion. These findings imply dynamic clinical action, often indicating a need for increased monitoring or further diagnostic steps.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.59375,0.61,0.6833333333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3685,latent_3685,43280,0.08656,0.034275286,1.4672531,Documented changes in imaging findings when compared to previous studies.,"Examples with high activation levels often include descriptions of notable or interval changes in the lungs or mediastinal structures when comparing current and prior imaging findings. This pattern emphasizes significant differences or progression in opacities, effusions, or other concerning findings.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5630252100840336,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3686,latent_3686,30992,0.061984,0.026237812,3.530899,Descriptions of interval change between current and prior images.,"Examples showing interval change in findings or comparisons between prior and current images tend to activate the pattern. This involves both specific mentions of changes and the comparison process, suggesting the model is attuned to detecting and describing changes over time, even with sophisticated vocabulary.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6329352608422376,0.635,0.6173913043478261,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3687,latent_3687,21816,0.043632,0.022930833,6.717546,Emphasis on changes in medical device positioning or condition resolution.,"Instances with activation indicate updates or changes in tube or device positions relative to previous assessments, or the presence and visibility of these medical devices, potentially along with improvements in conditions like pleural effusions or atelectasis. Typically, this involves dynamic elements in the radiographic features or clinical context, showing interval changes or affirming resolutions in a given pattern, enhancing their significance or relevance in medical observation.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.3378378378378378,0.3424657534246575,73.0,127.0
+3688,latent_3688,10146,0.020292,0.013707384,3.6020105,"Use of 'normal', 'unchanged', or 'unremarkable' for cardiac and mediastinal findings.","The examples with higher activation often contain phrases that describe an absence of notable findings, using terms like 'unremarkable', 'normal', or 'unchanged', especially in relation to cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes. These terms imply stability and lack of progression, a normal state or otherwise clear indication in the evaluation of the studied images.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3689,latent_3689,41138,0.082276,0.04312991,4.6620164,Radiological findings compared with previous imaging for interval changes.,"The examples predominantly show the presence of specific radiological findings that are evaluated over time, leading to descriptions of changes or stability. These include consistent references to comparisons with previous radiographic exams to detail progression or resolution of pathologies, which is often expressed using terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'increased'.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3690,latent_3690,5256,0.010512,0.009776687,3.8711336,Presence of pulmonary vascular congestion.,"Instances with high activation levels consistently refer to 'pulmonary vascular congestion', indicating fluid accumulation in the pulmonary circulation, often associated with heart issues, which are detailed in their respective radiology studies.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5442708333333334,0.58,0.6818181818181818,0.3,100.0,100.0
+3691,latent_3691,3960,0.00792,0.016420223,5.2014203,Setup of comparison between current and prior images is emphasized.,"The examples that are highly activated consistently mention current and prior images alongside text indicating prior reports, often denoted as 'PRIOR_REPORT' or similar. These examples focus on providing a structure for summarizing and comparing findings without including the actual comparison text or findings, indicating focus on the setup of comparison reporting rather than detailed findings.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4554512802687985,0.53,0.5172413793103449,0.9,100.0,100.0
+3692,latent_3692,3934,0.007868,0.008574402,8.046496,Comparison to prior imaging with no notable interval changes.,"Examples with exact dates or phrases like 'as compared to', 'no significant interval changes', 'compared to previous', 'since prior', repeated in several examples, consistently involve a linguistic structure indicating comparison to prior imaging, particularly focusing on changes or stability of findings using historical context.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.489278913817369,0.5326633165829145,0.5853658536585366,0.24,100.0,99.0
+3693,latent_3693,6044,0.012088,0.010354251,3.8835533,Stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include comparison to previous images and emphasize 'no significant interval change' or directions for monitoring/removal of specific changes from the prior state, suggesting a focus on stability or resolution of conditions. These examples consistently provide detailed comparisons against prior images or descriptions.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4339782190903267,0.4422110552763819,0.4210526315789473,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+3694,latent_3694,31218,0.062436,0.030470861,3.1650298,Findings stable or improved since prior imaging.,"Examples highlight descriptions involving either stable findings or resolved conditions, emphasizing no significant interval changes or improvements relative to previous reports. These are common phrases in radiological comparisons indicating unchanged status or improvement over time.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5523809523809524,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3695,latent_3695,5176,0.010352,0.01265972,4.135017,Documentation of stability or change compared to previous imaging.,These scenarios are predominantly focused on evaluating radiological findings with respect to the stability or change compared to prior imaging. There is a notable emphasis on assessing changes in medical devices or anatomical structures versus previous states and documenting unchanged or stable appearances.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4349858746468661,0.435,0.4343434343434343,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3696,latent_3696,3437,0.006874,0.01056066,5.5060534,Prompts requesting findings comparison with prior imaging.,"Prompts with high activation all include prompts to 'provide a description of the findings in comparison', combined with explicit references to a prior imaging study or lack thereof (e.g., 'PRIOR_REPORT: N/A' or 'Provide a description...'). This reflects a data entry or reporting style task that emphasizes comparing current and prior imaging.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4381225346916768,0.505,0.5029585798816568,0.85,100.0,100.0
+3697,latent_3697,11366,0.022732,0.017542914,4.493308,Emphasis on changes or consistency in findings across compared images.,"Highly activated examples incorporate detailed findings from both current and prior images, with notable emphasis on changes or consistent features across these radiographs. Examples often document changes or stasis in pathologies, structures, or treatments seen in multiple images, especially when comparisons show stability or change in notable features.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4336319637524456,0.45,0.4626865671641791,0.62,100.0,100.0
+3698,latent_3698,4606,0.009212,0.006352024,3.0215788,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,The highly activated examples consistently include findings focusing on the stability or comparisons of radiological findings noted in the descriptive prompts that usually highlight stability or slight changes from prior imaging. This specific focus on stability indicates a comparison point between current and prior results strongly matches the pattern in question.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4480389869611426,0.4623115577889447,0.4477611940298507,0.3,100.0,99.0
+3699,latent_3699,3186,0.006372,0.007654183,4.655295,Comparison with prior images in absence of prior report.,"These examples emphasize the use of comparisons with prior images to assess changes or stability in the findings related to the given indications, where no 'prior report' is available. This highlights an examining pattern primarily driven by current versus prior image analysis without report context, suggesting examination dynamics oriented towards observational change.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3700,latent_3700,103828,0.207656,0.13756838,6.0995026,Mentions of low lung volumes affecting image interpretation.,"Activation is higher when the findings indicate low lung volumes, a common observation in radiology that affects the visibility and interpretation of other structures like the cardiomediastinal silhouette and can lead to accentuated markings. This pattern reflects the recurring mention of low lung volumes in activated examples.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7557109072481094,0.765,0.9344262295081968,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3701,latent_3701,6243,0.012486,0.010553959,6.082261,Providing a description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"Several examples with high activation levels refer to providing a description of findings in comparison to prior images and often include phrases such as 'in comparison to the prior study', but these do not stand out as unique in creating a pattern typical of these data compared to those with zero activation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3702,latent_3702,2596,0.005192,0.0039740396,2.706023,Absence of comparison with prior images increases activation.,"Highly activated examples contain references to the comparison of current radiological images to prior studies, coupled with either the absence of or acknowledgment of previous comparison reports, suggesting a lack of available comparison increases activation.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3703,latent_3703,18357,0.036714,0.017679097,4.225111,Comparison of findings to prior imaging to identify changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe findings in the context of previous imaging comparisons, focusing on changes or stability in structures such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or cardiac silhouette. This comparison against previous images is strongly emphasized in examples that achieved higher activation levels.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5235356937484597,0.565,0.5408805031446541,0.86,100.0,100.0
+3704,latent_3704,51457,0.102914,0.05407838,3.5523376,Comparison to prior imaging mentioned.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings by comparing them to previous imaging, even if the comparison suggests stability or no significant change.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4393716521883933,0.495,0.4969325153374233,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3705,latent_3705,6819,0.013638,0.0133008035,7.0990634,Comparison and analysis of current and prior chest imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve a detailed analysis of chest radiographs, comparing various views (frontal and lateral) with prior imaging reports, specifically noting changes in cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours as well as mentioning stable or normal findings. The narrative style of providing thorough comparative evaluations with prior images appears to be the triggering pattern.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3850102943928982,0.425,0.4503311258278146,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3706,latent_3706,91630,0.18326,0.100118764,3.3698883,Comparison of changes or stability with prior radiographic findings.,"The aligned pattern in activation levels involves explicit mentions of changes in radiographic findings over time. This is cited in terms such as 'unchanged since prior examination', 'improved since prior', or 'interval change'. This pattern focuses on identifying and documenting changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images, as part of ongoing patient monitoring or evaluation.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5735607675906184,0.62,0.572289156626506,0.95,100.0,100.0
+3707,latent_3707,17019,0.034038,0.017848048,4.8865094,Comparison involving frontal and lateral images.,"The examples show higher activation levels when radiological findings are described via comparison involving both frontal and lateral images. This pattern likely arises because it uses a comprehensive set of views, enhancing the detail and value of comparisons. Radiology studies often compare current images with prior ones to assess changes or stability.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4264259708737864,0.4271356783919598,0.4239130434782608,0.39,100.0,99.0
+3708,latent_3708,4737,0.009474,0.017921546,5.3989754,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The examples describe scenarios where there are clear lungs and a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette. They typically mention these normal findings in the context of describing the images, often after noting the absence of significant pathologies such as pleural effusions or pneumothorax. Key phrases like 'lungs are clear', 'normal cardiac silhouette', 'cardiomediastinal contours are normal', and 'no pleural effusion' are indicative of these reports.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5791933167993735,0.592964824120603,0.640625,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+3709,latent_3709,3050,0.0061,0.010213621,7.6236024,"Descriptions include comparisons with prior images, noting changes or stability.","The pattern consistently involves providing a comparison between current and prior radiology images, focusing on any changes or lack thereof in various structures such as cardiac silhouette, lung fields, pleural effusion, or other pathologies. This helps assess disease progression or resolution over time in medical imaging.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4672131147540984,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3710,latent_3710,3762,0.007524,0.011956623,6.0074496,Identification of new or changed radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe new radiographic findings, particularly those related to acute processes or changes following medical interventions, such as tube placements, previous surgeries, or suspected issues like pneumothorax. This includes specific phrases acknowledging new or changed findings compared to prior images.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4683544303797468,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3711,latent_3711,3556,0.007112,0.0083954735,5.971336,Focus on unchanged or stable findings compared to prior reports.,"The highest activations consistently include stable or unchanged findings relative to prior reports, emphasizing the consistency or lack of new pathologies over time. This pattern is typically seen in radiology reports to document stability or resolution.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3712,latent_3712,12549,0.025098,0.017365059,5.059476,Significant changes or resolution of findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activations describe findings that have either significantly changed or resolved compared to prior imaging, using explicit wording like 'resolved', 'interval increase', or 'dramatic improvement'. This pattern highlights the importance of changes in medical imaging over time.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5967741935483871,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3713,latent_3713,7370,0.01474,0.013384227,7.5253644,Presence of retrocardiac opacity indicating atelectasis or pneumonia.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention retrocardiac opacity, which is typically viewed as atelectasis, consolidation, or indicative of pneumonia. Phrases such as 'patchy retrocardiac opacity', 'retrocardiac density', 'retrocadic atelectasis', and 'retrocadic opacification' are recurrently used alongside unchanged findings, consolidation, or pneumonia.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6223303811271577,0.645,0.7843137254901961,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3714,latent_3714,14275,0.02855,0.017695935,3.4944491,Stable cardiac silhouette and absence of acute findings on comparison.,"Higher activation is related to examples where the heart or mediastinal contours appear stable or unchanged, and there is a general absence of acute findings or significant changes, often after comparison with prior images. Terms like 'no acute cardiopulmonary process', 'cardiac silhouette unchanged', and 'lungs clear' are common descriptors of the pattern.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5632183908045977,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3715,latent_3715,6737,0.013474,0.01177649,4.709536,Evaluation of radiologic findings in comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of imaging findings as compared to prior studies, identifying changes or stability over time. Key phrases like 'compared to prior', 'as seen on previous', 'unchanged from prior', etc., indicate this pattern where the focus is on comparing current results with historical imaging to assess evolution or stability.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.5454545454545454,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3716,latent_3716,2466,0.004932,0.006600361,11.772686,Presence of 'shortness of breath' as an indication.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently include ""shortness of breath"" as an indication for the radiological study, suggesting that the presence of this symptom is a key factor in the observed activation pattern.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7245250656202085,0.735,0.8852459016393442,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3717,latent_3717,23041,0.046082,0.026686804,5.831103,Describing findings with a focus on interval change or stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include detailed comparisons between prior and current images, identifying specific findings that have either changed or remained stable over time. This pattern emphasizes detailed diagnostic analysis based on temporal changes in imaging, characteristic of intricate radiological evaluations.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6234687298517085,0.635,0.6,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3718,latent_3718,8469,0.016938,0.00860989,6.262416,Directionally descriptive comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with a notable drop in activation level often lack specific comparative statements that highlight changes in findings from prior to current images. Higher activation examples make concise comparisons and outline distinct findings that show directional change, such as worsening, improvement, or additional characteristics not previously noted.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4554512802687985,0.53,0.2162162162162162,0.3076923076923077,52.0,148.0
+3719,latent_3719,26115,0.05223,0.031189516,5.300942,Comparison of findings over multiple studies with detailed changes or stability observed.,Higher activations are associated with examples where a description involves comparing multiple changes over different studies. This often includes observations like the adjustment or stability of medical devices and subtle anatomical or pathological differences compared to prior examinations.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3720,latent_3720,22586,0.045172,0.031586803,6.4710603,Worsening or unchanged findings relative to prior imaging studies.,"Samples with higher activation levels specify changes (or lack of) from prior imaging studies, particularly emphasizing the worsening, stability, or moderate improvement of pathological findings relative to earlier exams. This pattern often involves monitoring diseases or conditions over time using radiographic comparisons.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5384615384615384,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3721,latent_3721,28272,0.056544,0.0339339,5.2988214,Detectable interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The model activates when findings are markedly different in the current image in comparison to the prior image, often indicating the presence of pathologies such as pleural effusions or pulmonary opacities that suggest an acute process or clinical change.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4714285714285714,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3722,latent_3722,8960,0.01792,0.019552842,5.1506414,Findings related to unchanged status of medical devices in imaging comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe unchanged findings or persistence of medical devices upon comparing current and prior studies. This pattern is common when previous observations, particularly concerning medical devices like pacemakers, catheters, or endotracheal tubes, are found unchanged in subsequent examinations, indicating stability and compliance with expected findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5873015873015873,0.37,100.0,100.0
+3723,latent_3723,52448,0.104896,0.0469403,2.3299112,Direct comparison to prior imaging findings with details of changes or stability.,"All examples with high activation levels mention a direct comparison with prior imaging findings using explicit language, such as changes in size, positioning, or appearance over time. This aligns with the pattern previously established, that is, explicit comparison language indicating differences or stability between past and current findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3724,latent_3724,3797,0.007594,0.007253963,4.632492,Description of stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern focuses on findings described as unchanged over time, especially concerning devices, anatomical structures, or lung conditions, as seen in the examples. This pattern is frequently expressed via stability descriptions after evaluating prior imaging.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3725,latent_3725,8094,0.016188,0.01787105,6.1013465,Reports focusing on device placement or stability of specific findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently report changes or stability in specific medical devices or anatomical findings, rather than describing large changes in other conditions (e.g., effusion or consolidation). They focus on technical elements or functional stability rather than broader symptomatic changes.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5646621896621897,0.5678391959798995,0.5853658536585366,0.48,100.0,99.0
+3726,latent_3726,17123,0.034246,0.03455072,7.092463,Comparison of lung condition changes between current and prior images.,"The pattern in highly activated examples involves a clear mandate to describe changes or stability in lung conditions, especially consolidation, opacities, pneumothorax, and other lung pathologies, between current and prior frontal images. This consistency of descriptive language is in contrast to very low activation examples, where the reports often describe findings without direct, detailed, and explicit reference to prior image comparisons about lung conditions.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3727,latent_3727,7770,0.01554,0.012600661,4.648909,Focus on interval changes or medical device positions on comparison with prior radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on acute or significant changes, especially involving medical devices or pathologies, as compared to previous radiographs. They specify interval changes or assessment outcomes, often highlighting details about equipment placement or new developments in a patient's radiological study.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5689655172413793,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3728,latent_3728,14792,0.029584,0.01835732,4.3389506,Comparison with prior images indicating interval change.,"Every example with a non-zero activation level makes explicit comparisons between the current imaging findings and those of prior images, indicating interval changes or lack thereof. These comparisons are central to tracking progress or stability of medical conditions, and the examples consistently highlight this pattern of prior comparison, especially noting specific changes or stability in radiological findings such as effusions, levels of cardiomegaly, or tube placements.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6880032206119162,0.69,0.6637931034482759,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3729,latent_3729,8709,0.017418,0.011120462,6.0507445,Documentation of interval change or no change in follow-up imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently refer to changes observed in current imaging compared to a previous study, indicating a focus on documenting interval changes, which is a common reason for follow-up imaging in radiology to monitor for progression or resolution of findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3869962817807255,0.39,0.3720930232558139,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3730,latent_3730,3505,0.00701,0.01460265,8.142699,Comparison of current frontal and lateral chest images to a prior frontal image.,Examples with higher activation levels typically include a comparison between frontal and lateral chest images and an explicit mention of a prior frontal image for evaluation. This format is common in reports where multiple angles are assessed against a specific previous study to determine changes or stability.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3731,latent_3731,15027,0.030054,0.019767554,9.034829,Mention of heart size variation or aortic arch calcification.,"Examples with activation levels above 1.0 consistently mention either variations in heart size or aortic arch calcifications, which are descriptive features often highlighted in radiological exams. These details are considered relevant findings when evaluating chest radiographs.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6069439895185064,0.64,0.4375,0.5645161290322581,62.0,138.0
+3732,latent_3732,15683,0.031366,0.025075626,5.107297,Detailed evaluation of lateral radiograph or comparison with prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently evaluate findings on lateral radiographs or provide comparison with prior imaging, which suggests that providing detailed evaluations of additional lateral imaging views or comparing with prior images is critical for the observed pattern.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4968944099378882,0.8,100.0,100.0
+3733,latent_3733,3706,0.007412,0.00884656,5.5092573,Comparison of current and prior images with explicit change assessment.,"Examples with high activation describe findings in context of a comparison, often phrasing results with quantitative language about changes or distinctions from prior examinations. This indicates a focus on assessing change over time with a prior image specifically included for comparison against the current.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.2222222222222222,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4143260930457589,0.425,0.3972602739726027,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3734,latent_3734,18404,0.036808,0.022803577,4.871247,Increased heart size or cardiomegaly on comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include a finding of cardiomegaly or increased heart size compared to prior imaging. This is a specific pattern related to monitoring heart size for possible pathologies such as heart failure or cardiomyopathy, which is noted by the repetitive observation of cardiomegaly or mild increase in heart size on follow-up evaluations.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.3333333333333333,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4059701492537313,0.4773869346733668,0.4333333333333333,0.13,100.0,99.0
+3735,latent_3735,8919,0.017838,0.021530475,9.532858,Stable findings over time in comparison to prior imagery.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the stability of findings over time by comparing current images of the chest with prior images, emphasizing the unchanged nature of previously noted issues, artifacts, or conditions. This stability over time (e.g., ""unchanged from prior"") is a key theme highlighting no new findings and reinforcement of past observations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3694829760403531,0.4,0.3214285714285714,0.18,100.0,100.0
+3736,latent_3736,12458,0.024916,0.011977589,2.6119757,"Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, noting changes or stability.","Samples with higher activation level consistently point out changes or stability in imaging findings by comparing a current image with previous ones, specifically mentioning what is new or unchanged. This includes descriptions of conditions like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or device placement compared to past results.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5075757575757576,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3737,latent_3737,4528,0.009056,0.008441418,4.169668,Comparison and evaluation based on clinical indication.,"The pattern shown in these examples includes references to ""indication"" or clinical history which guide the evaluation, alongside the presence of comparison discussions despite unavailable prior studies. Activation is correlated with the reliance on current findings and clinical context.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+3738,latent_3738,3340,0.00668,0.009546481,4.6518693,Instructions to describe findings using current and prior frontal and lateral images.,"The highly activated examples explicitly mention specific frontal and lateral views and often provide detailed instructions to describe the findings from these radiographs. Additionally, there is a recurring format in the explanation of the imagery, involving structured and technical descriptions, and a patient context given in the ‘indications’. The examples contain text prompting the assistant to provide radiology descriptions, which closely aligns with the activation pattern.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3739,latent_3739,4000,0.008,0.010985227,3.895628,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3740,latent_3740,5475,0.01095,0.015770603,5.8038836,Incomplete or unclear comparative information in reference to prior imaging.,"The pattern in these examples centers on the use of unclear or missing comparative information when referencing previous imaging studies, which disrupts typical radiological reporting. This includes missing or incomplete comparison sections, with multiple examples showing partial or absent comparison data indicated by phrases like '_', '[[' or 'prior image', indicating a deviation from standard reporting formats.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.364719433931216,0.5125628140703518,0.5076923076923077,0.99,100.0,99.0
+3741,latent_3741,4152,0.008304,0.014687403,5.667389,Comparison of current and prior images to determine changes.,"These examples of high activation levels invariably contain instructions to refer to multiple images (current frontal and lateral or prior frontal images), with implication to analyze findings by comparing current images to the previous ones. A reference to a comparison with prior images despite variable details suggests a reoccurring process of reevaluating potential changes based on new imaging data.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3742,latent_3742,36099,0.072198,0.036287956,5.6695075,Technical limitations affecting diagnostic interpretation.,"These samples focus on evaluating technical limitations affecting diagnostic interpretation, such as body positioning, overlays, and equipment obscuring the viewing capability. Such issues may complicate the assessment of radiological findings, making them an important aspect of radiology reports to highlight for further clinical consideration.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.6056338028169014,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3743,latent_3743,15188,0.030376,0.021274688,4.2762094,Frequent notations of low lung volumes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss findings related to altered lung volumes, typically noting them as being low. This is a specific characteristic of the study being indicative of certain pathological findings or physiological states that seem to align with the activation pattern we are analyzing.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.8032240974797548,0.805,0.8765432098765432,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3744,latent_3744,4242,0.008484,0.006627232,5.825493,Emphasis on stability or minimal change compared to previous imaging.,"The highly activated examples generally have encouraged the assistant to provide findings that generally resemble the original points of comparison, with minimal changes or findings in the new images noted. This pattern suggests attention given to the current image findings in comparison to prior images or reports to indicate stability or minimal progression.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4375617541992855,0.445,0.4285714285714285,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3745,latent_3745,47361,0.094722,0.057963166,4.647054,Suboptimal imaging techniques with findings stable compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation typically describe scenarios where findings are stable or unchanged, albeit suboptimal, compared to previous imaging studies. Such conditions are indicated by phrases like 'there are no new findings', 'unchanged from prior', and 'persistent' observations compared to prior images.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5411764705882353,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3746,latent_3746,4133,0.008266,0.01143704,4.78305,Reports with detailed comparisons to prior imaging.,"The consistently high activation levels occur for descriptions focusing on detailed observations of image findings in comparison to prior studies indicating interval changes or stability in conditions, including tubal placements or presence of pneumothorax, while more generic observations or scenarios with missing prior comparisons generate low activation.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4017683465959328,0.4020100502512563,0.4077669902912621,0.42,100.0,99.0
+3747,latent_3747,11263,0.022526,0.0135415485,4.7436314,Activation increases with current and prior frontal image comparison.,"These examples involve providing a radiological comparison between current and prior imaging studies. The activation tends to increase when both the current and prior frontal images are provided, indicating more comprehensive analysis when both images are described.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3748,latent_3748,5113,0.010226,0.009924935,4.95373,Attention to interval change in lung and heart features from prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe imaging comparisons that reveal changes or stability in lung and cardiac features, frequently emphasizing 'interval change', 'no significant change', or 'mild increase', with a focus on cardiomediastinal features like silhouette size, pulmonary contours, and presence or absence of effusions or edema. These aspects observe detailed attention in the context of both stability and pathology progression.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3749,latent_3749,2465,0.00493,0.0070457226,5.201534,"Reports focus on specific changes or stability compared to prior imaging, often involving tube positions or cardiac silhouette.","The pattern involves making explicit comparisons to prior studies, but particularly highlights changes or stability in specific findings, along with details like cardiac silhouette, tubes, lines, etc. The more mechanical eld described, often about line positions or device placements, contrasts with examples lacking such assessments, showing direct relevance for specific monitoring or intervention needs.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4590358704719533,0.465,0.4710743801652892,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3750,latent_3750,4137,0.008274,0.0077537335,4.3692374,Instructive details for comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation contain detailed instructions to compare current imaging with prior studies, often involving both frontal and lateral views. This pattern emphasizes routine comparative analysis to identify changes or confirm status in radiology findings.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3751,latent_3751,21124,0.042248,0.0325506,5.7974396,Comparison of cardiomediastinal silhouette or related structures with prior images.,"The pattern involves making comparisons to prior imaging studies while referencing the cardiomediastinal silhouette, mediastinal/hilar contours, heart size, or lung volumes. These patterns occur in radiology reports that specifically compare these stabilized or unchanged features to prior exams.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3752,latent_3752,19965,0.03993,0.019733585,5.609832,Evaluation of interval change or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation generally focus on interval changes or stable appearances in radiology findings between current and prior images. The pattern emphasizes comparisons in size, position, or presence of devices or lesions, which indicate ongoing monitoring of conditions or evaluation of interventions.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.4758620689655172,0.8117647058823529,85.0,115.0
+3753,latent_3753,11049,0.022098,0.01605402,5.126075,Comparison to previous radiology reports or imaging in findings description.,"All examples that have high activation levels (>=5.0) focus on reporting findings in the context of previous reports or imaging studies. These examples consistently use comparative language or directly reference the results in comparison to prior imaging, regardless of the specifics of the current findings. The presence of a prior report or comparison element to contextualize the findings appears key to the pattern.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5059809608392773,0.555,0.5337423312883436,0.87,100.0,100.0
+3754,latent_3754,3151,0.006302,0.0096972,4.734897,Structured report format with placeholder/lack of comparison detail.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention a structured format involving an indication, description of the current imaging findings, and a placeholder or lack of comparison detail (e.g., 'N/A' or '[[_]]'). This structured approach without specific historical imaging comparison details is likely representative of a pattern in input format needed for a specific processing task.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3710691823899371,0.51,0.5051546391752577,0.98,100.0,100.0
+3755,latent_3755,12558,0.025116,0.018383827,4.6105866,Explicit descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The samples with higher activation focus on evaluating radiological images by explicitly describing changes or stability in findings as compared to prior studies, often using specific terms such as 'unchanged', 'resolved', 'improved', or 'new'. This comparison process is crucial for assessing medical conditions over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.596516764983784,0.605,0.5813953488372093,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3756,latent_3756,4929,0.009858,0.009846928,3.9437537,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette amidst other abnormalities.,"The representative samples consistently involve an unremarkable or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac size, even when abnormalities are noted elsewhere, such as pulmonary opacities or changes in lung condition.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5927089880578253,0.595,0.5826086956521739,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3757,latent_3757,2706,0.005412,0.0078065936,6.061474,Detailed comparison of current and prior images with explicit findings.,The activation pattern indicates that the absence of descriptions or a lack of comprehensive findings in comparison to prior images results in lower activation scores. Cases where detailed descriptions are provided about changes or stability in findings between current and prior images score higher. These findings are crucial for understanding interval changes in medical conditions.,0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3758,latent_3758,4176,0.008352,0.009866176,3.9658384,Exploration of findings through imaging comparison with prior studies and differential interpretation based on specific indications.,"The examples generally involve the description of findings by comparing new imaging studies to prior studies, particularly focusing on aspects like cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung markings, and other anatomical changes, despite varying indications and techniques documented within each report. This pattern is evident in the high-activation responses and aligns with typical radiological interpretations requiring comparative assessments.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3759,latent_3759,6560,0.01312,0.01438863,5.280488,Comparative analysis involving detailed impressions of chest radiographs.,"The highly activated examples all involve findings from chest radiographs and utilize multiple aspects of imaging analysis such as comparison with prior images, specific radiographic indications, findings descriptions, and detailed impressions that lead to an interval change assessment. This combination suggests a refined application of comparative analysis with emphasis on chest abnormalities.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3760,latent_3760,11030,0.02206,0.029235162,5.129626,Structured analysis comparing current and prior imaging.,"The pattern in these examples is the structured comparison of current imaging findings with prior images. This includes explicit instructions to compare changes, stability or new developments while incorporating clinical history or other indications for the study. The focus is on identifying interval changes or asserting stability of specific findings across different time points or conditions.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.412650987001711,0.425,0.4418604651162791,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3761,latent_3761,5640,0.01128,0.015452509,4.9923863,Emphasizes interval changes or stabilities from prior imaging.,"These examples demonstrate a detailed comparison with prior imaging studies, focusing not only on the changes in the current findings but also on stabilizations or improvements. The text frequently specifies changes or stabilities compared to earlier states, emphasizing interval progression (or lack thereof) across multiple observations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4864864864864865,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3762,latent_3762,21358,0.042716,0.017384717,2.36629,Comparison between current and prior image studies for evaluation.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve the analysis of current and prior imaging to assess changes, advancements, or comparisons of radiological findings, typically asking for progress reports or stability assessments. These requests are more frequent in cases where there is pathology or imaging tool adjustment to evaluate, such as pneumothorax or tube positioning.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3763,latent_3763,24470,0.04894,0.024034398,3.2811165,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior images.,These samples with higher activations emphasize the description of specific radiological findings in comparison to prior images. This indicates that discussions about changes or stability in findings compared to previous studies are particularly relevant in this pattern.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3764,latent_3764,9946,0.019892,0.012038957,5.05043,Comparisons of thoracic anatomical features to prior images with attention to changes or stability.,"These examples describe the imaging in terms of comparisons to prior images, especially involving changes or stability of cardiomediastinal silhouettes, hila, and other features of the thoracic anatomy. The pattern indicates that the examples focus on stability or changes in established thoracic findings and any new developments or lack thereof.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3765,latent_3765,7101,0.014202,0.015161598,5.68082,Pattern involves comparison with prior images without detailed findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, but notably lack specific details about the findings from these comparisons, suggesting a pattern where the expectation is to describe changes from prior images. The low activation samples either have detailed discussions or explicitly state no comparison was available.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3766,latent_3766,10537,0.021074,0.015491459,5.186225,Identification of new or interval changes in medical findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples show high activation when there is a comparison with prior imagery that identifies any new or changed medical conditions, such as an interval change in lesions, opacities, or any medical condition which needs attention.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3767,latent_3767,4808,0.009616,0.009138507,8.954319,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"Most examples focus on explicit comparison between current imaging findings and those from prior studies. This pattern often includes details regarding the absence of prior comparisons, specific findings compared to previous images, or notes on unchanged, stable features. This aligns with typical radiological practice where longitudinal comparisons are critical to evaluating changes or stability over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3768,latent_3768,24181,0.048362,0.03607653,4.8315797,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The pattern among these examples involves describing findings using comparisons with prior imaging studies to assess stability or changes in conditions. This is indicated by phrases specifying unchanged or persistent conditions compared to prior studies, highlighting ongoing comparative analysis over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3769,latent_3769,5968,0.011936,0.0081635825,6.963445,Reports describing interval changes in medical conditions over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include descriptions of changes in medical conditions over time, suggesting these are the main considerations in reports that contrast historical images with current ones. Reports detail differences in pathologies or stable conditions that highlight the progression or resolution of medical issues.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.484375,0.4848484848484848,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,98.0
+3770,latent_3770,21350,0.0427,0.021100515,4.733377,Changes or stability in the orientation or volume of specific features compared to prior imaging.,"The examples show the model activating more on descriptions that note changes or stability from a prior state, particularly focusing on changes in orientation, volume, or location of features like tracheostomy tubes, fractures, effusions, and pneumothoraxes.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6452029663316193,0.6532663316582915,0.6153846153846154,0.8080808080808081,99.0,100.0
+3771,latent_3771,4064,0.008128,0.014173643,8.050856,Observation of cardiomegaly or cardiac enlargement.,"The highest activation examples consistently include patterns related to the presence of cardiomegaly, enlarged cardiac silhouette, or cardiac abnormality. These are the prominent features that are explicitly described and emphasized in the impressions, contrast findings, or conclusions of the example reports, matching the activation pattern significantly.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.54,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3772,latent_3772,24173,0.048346,0.03572481,6.0508847,Explicit instructions for direct comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples frequently explicitly instruct a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or lack thereof. The task describes findings with a direct reference to a prior exam or images, stating 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This reflects a pattern of comparison, which is not seen in examples with zero activation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3773,latent_3773,4450,0.0089,0.008981582,7.5145903,Use of comparisons to prior imaging in findings.,"These examples have high activations when there is a comparison to prior imaging studies, which is a hallmark pattern of radiology reports to track changes or stability in patient condition over time. This involves phrases like 'compared to', 'unchanged from', 'prior study', or specific dates of previous examinations to note interval changes.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4726763065138353,0.525,0.5153374233128835,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3774,latent_3774,5063,0.010126,0.013563567,4.4752293,Comparison of indwelling devices or tubes positioning in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activations focus on the description of indwelling devices, tubes, and their positions such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, or NG tubes which are crucial in post-procedural and intensive care settings. The descriptions often compare the position of these devices with previous images or studies to assess changes or confirm correct positioning.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5818181818181818,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3775,latent_3775,10551,0.021102,0.0141040785,4.2940564,Detailed and structured comparison with prior frontal image.,"The pattern involves instructions to provide a comparison of imaging findings with a prior exam. High activation samples explicitly note a current frontal image alongside a prior image and give detailed findings, reflecting the task of consciously comparing past and current images to determine changes. Samples with less organized comparison instructions, or those focusing instead on acute findings without explicit prior comparison in the structured output, show lower activation.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3776,latent_3776,3753,0.007506,0.009239566,4.6688232,Requests for comparison descriptions between current and prior images.,"The pattern involves explicit requests to provide descriptions or assessments of radiological findings in relation to earlier imaging. The examples often specify comparing current and prior images to identify changes or stability in findings, using phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior.' High activations consistently show focus on comparative descriptions.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4774193548387097,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3777,latent_3777,6492,0.012984,0.009833945,7.343864,"Stable findings with central vascular congestion, often without acute distress.","Samples with high activation levels describe findings that note an absence or minimal presence of significant acute pathology, often highlighting central vascular congestion without signs of acute distress like significant edema or pneumothorax. This implies a focus on the stable or low-level findings prevalent in routine monitoring or chronic conditions.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5565410199556541,0.58,0.6140350877192983,0.3608247422680412,97.0,103.0
+3778,latent_3778,5958,0.011916,0.015957654,3.7651832,Available prior report for comparative analysis.,"Higher activation levels are evident when there is a prior report available for comparison, indicating that having a prior report for comparison is a characteristic pattern of interest in these examples. These prior reports provide historical context that is not present in examples with lower activation.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3779,latent_3779,18575,0.03715,0.019441385,5.284891,Use of 'interval' to describe changes between current and prior studies.,"Examples show changes that are referred to with the term 'interval', indicating alterations noted between current and prior studies. This is a common descriptor in radiology reports to denote any interval change observed in imaging findings over time.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6041666666666667,0.62,0.7,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3780,latent_3780,8123,0.016246,0.015028664,4.976322,Emphasis on stability or progression over time in image comparison.,"High activations feature comparisons to prior images, with a focus on stable, unchanged, or potentially benign conditions over time. This suggests an emphasis on continuity and reassurance in image interpretation, rather than acute changes or emerging conditions.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.2233122362869198,0.2562814070351759,0.0847457627118644,0.0505050505050505,99.0,100.0
+3781,latent_3781,26620,0.05324,0.051878482,7.7444906,Changes in thoracic pathologies or interventions compared to prior images.,The pattern seems to focus on changes in thoracic conditions or interventions when compared to prior radiographs. The examples with high activation scores often describe changes in pulmonary conditions (like effusions or edema) or medical interventions (such as tubes or catheters) relative to prior imaging studies. This implies that monitoring changes in thoracic pathologies or medical device placements between images is significant for pattern recognition.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3782,latent_3782,23993,0.047986,0.055510342,4.6834655,Description of current findings compared to past imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve description of past versus present observations regarding a patient's condition, especially when there are graphical comparisons or observations about current and previous physiological states. These tend to emphasize specific changes or stability in specific findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5667945405673426,0.585,0.5602836879432624,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3783,latent_3783,17042,0.034084,0.027452447,5.9008083,Unchanged findings in the current radiology exam compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on the stability or minor changes observed during follow-up studies, emphasizing unchanged findings (e.g., tubes, lines, pleural effusions) since the prior exam, indicating a pattern of stability in radiological findings across comparative studies.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.64996499649965,0.65,0.6470588235294118,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3784,latent_3784,5783,0.011566,0.009823947,5.814137,Findings compared to prior images with cardiomediastinal and hilar contours within normal limits.,"Examples with low activation are often unmodified from prior studies, having cardiomediastinal and hilar contours within normal limits and no acute pathology identified. High activation is seen when findings actively compare to prior images, assessing changes.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6612654516039334,0.665,0.7088607594936709,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3785,latent_3785,5050,0.0101,0.008443768,4.6748466,Descriptions involving changes in atelectasis between current and prior images.,"These examples describe radiologic findings in terms of changes observed in comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. Specifically, such changes are often related to the presence, resolution, or new development of atelectasis—portions of the lung that are collapsed or not fully inflated. This is a common finding frequently reported in follow-up imaging studies and highlighted in the activations.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6116918003138381,0.635,0.7647058823529411,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3786,latent_3786,11562,0.023124,0.016338754,9.657254,Detailed comparison with prior images indicating change or stability.,"Highly activated examples typically involve detailed analysis of findings seen in prior reports or images indicating specific changes, stability, or the absence of acute changes compared to previous studies. These comparisons are made using explicit mentions of earlier studies or changes in longitudinal observations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.489903745553463,0.507537688442211,0.2807017543859649,0.6666666666666666,48.0,151.0
+3787,latent_3787,4190,0.00838,0.011227062,5.8134174,"Description of findings compared to previous imaging studies, focusing on stability or changes.","The highly activated examples involve radiology descriptions where the findings are compared to previous imaging studies, particularly focusing on stability or changes in cardiac silhouettes, pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, or device positions. These comparisons are significant in clinical assessments to determine the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.38,0.38,0.38,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3788,latent_3788,9587,0.019174,0.013142171,5.4478235,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging highlighting stability or change.,"High activation occurs when the report evaluates changes over time based on previous imaging studies, specifically noting tautological restructuring. Prominent markers include explicit comparisons to prior reports, stable vs. new findings, and unchanged clinical contextual markers such as the condition of medical devices and unchanged pathologies, indicating monitoring of disease progression or treatment effects over time.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3789,latent_3789,4927,0.009854,0.011296098,4.3375525,Comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently refer to 'prior images' for comparison, indicating the pattern involves analyzing differences or similarities with previous imaging studies. This consistency aligns with the model's likely focus on the significance of prior comparisons in interpretation.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3790,latent_3790,3653,0.007306,0.009521448,5.472234,Comparisons with prior image studies highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on any changes or stability in findings over time. This includes explicit reference to dates or observed differences in findings such as tube placements, pleural effusions, or size of nodules. The emphasis is on changes or stabilities highlighted in the context of previous imaging.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5920075321686369,0.61,0.5774647887323944,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3791,latent_3791,5184,0.010368,0.016943159,7.215321,Presence and placement of indwelling medical devices in the SVC.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence and placement of indwelling medical devices such as central lines, endotracheal tubes, or PICC lines in the SVC (superior vena cava). The recurring mention of these devices' placement in conjunction with descriptions of their stability or changes between compared images aligns with interpretation and follow-up patterns in clinical radiology.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.50997150997151,0.57,0.7333333333333333,0.22,100.0,100.0
+3792,latent_3792,3561,0.007122,0.014663577,7.7662783,Directive to compare and describe findings across current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation typically include a prompt to provide a description of findings in the radiology study compared to the prior image, which indicates an expectation of actively interpreting and comparing images. The presence of 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]] : N/A' signals a similar directive, further reflecting the instruction to actively discern differences, possibly indicating these prompts are exercises or incomplete descriptions requiring active engagement.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3793,latent_3793,4681,0.009362,0.008624892,4.636217,Significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently have findings that indicate a change compared to prior imaging, such as worsening edema or significant interval changes. This pattern involves comparison with past images and indicates how a condition has progressed or regressed.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5671641791044776,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3794,latent_3794,1967,0.003934,0.002863715,5.596783,Focus on specific changes or comparative stability in imaging findings.,"Reports with moderate to high activation levels consistently mention or imply that there is a specific change or improvement observed between current and prior imaging. This demonstrates that the pattern focuses on the identification of changes or stability of specific findings across multiple reports, which indicates tracking the course or improvement of the disease or condition.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4231884057971015,0.4371859296482412,0.4503816793893129,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+3795,latent_3795,6463,0.012926,0.010036579,3.9878364,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' and comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern indicates that the model activates strongly for examples where descriptions include both current and prior imaging findings along with a report indicating stability or evaluation of existing conditions in context to previous records. This explains why examples frequently use 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'comparison to prior', and refer to baseline conditions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4896551724137931,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3796,latent_3796,4101,0.008202,0.010337617,6.921276,"Comparative analysis with prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes.","Examples with higher activation levels often mention explicit comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or evaluations over time indicated by the use of phrases like 'compared to prior' or 'interval change'. These comparisons might highlight changes in medical devices, presence or absence of diseases, or anatomical changes, which are crucial in understanding the progression of a patient's conditions.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4117647058823529,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3797,latent_3797,10799,0.021598,0.013009792,3.8375943,Comparison findings explicitly noting unchanged stability.,"The examples with higher activation relate to descriptions of radiological findings with explicit instructions or conditions to compare the current imaging study with prior images, but notably emphasize the stability or unchanged nature of key findings despite clinical concerns.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3957057675338912,0.435,0.3673469387755102,0.18,100.0,100.0
+3798,latent_3798,5945,0.01189,0.012682302,8.732833,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern evident from higher activation levels includes specific mentions of previous findings and emphasizes comparing them to current images, especially spatial aspects like views (frontal, lateral) which are associated with significant updates or unchanged findings. Such details are crucial in medical analysis context using past images as reference points.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4197633643633794,0.425,0.4369747899159664,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3799,latent_3799,27252,0.054504,0.030413408,5.4542656,Detailed findings about medical devices or lines in chest radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation frequently include detailed findings regarding devices, tubes, or lines identified in the patient's chest radiographs. The focus on interventional or supportive devices, along with changes or positioning, contrasts with less activated examples that primarily describe respiratory findings without such device evaluations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4102142540254182,0.435,0.3898305084745763,0.23,100.0,100.0
+3800,latent_3800,17463,0.034926,0.020011976,6.336786,Detection of new lung opacities or consolidation on current imaging compared to prior.,"These examples with moderate activation levels frequently involve lung opacity or consolidation that is not seen in prior imaging, often concerning for pneumonia or development of new pathologic findings compared to previous radiographs. This pattern focuses on detecting or assessing new changes such as opacities that may indicate pneumonia.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5769230769230769,0.303030303030303,99.0,101.0
+3801,latent_3801,2661,0.005322,0.010879563,7.655164,Detailed image comparisons with historical context and specific medical indication.,"Higher activation levels are consistently associated with cases that involve detailed descriptions and specific comparisons of current imaging to prior imaging studies, especially with specific medical history, rather than imaging studies without comparison or specific medical context.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3802,latent_3802,4617,0.009234,0.014580815,6.9226847,Procedural developments like placements or removals noted in follow-up imaging comparison.,"The response patterns in the highly activated examples tend to provide explicit descriptions of interval changes compared to previous images, especially indicating procedural updates like line placements, tracheostomy, or radiographic observations related to placement (e.g., pacemaker or tube). These are typically key procedural descriptions associated with follow-up strategies, making them highly representative of the pattern.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5296743697478992,0.5477386934673367,0.5833333333333334,0.35,100.0,99.0
+3803,latent_3803,12481,0.024962,0.012785759,4.2419696,Identification of significant change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently identify explicit changes or differences when compared to prior images, often describing new findings or unresolved issues from past reports. Common patterns include terms like 'new opacity', 'worsening', 'persistent', or emphasizing changes over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.474671669793621,0.475,0.4761904761904761,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3804,latent_3804,22143,0.044286,0.032344025,4.538599,Comparison descriptions across multiple views and prior imaging context.,"Highly activated examples predominantly focus on interpreting and noting changes or consistencies in imaging findings across multiple views (frontal and lateral) and comparisons with previous images, often in complex clinical scenarios. The emphasis on clarification with prior imaging and use of specific radiological terminologies like 'consolidation', 'effusion', and 'stability' correlates with the activation pattern.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4370404411764705,0.51,0.5058139534883721,0.87,100.0,100.0
+3805,latent_3805,4590,0.00918,0.01648229,6.6350517,Descriptive comparison with prior images to assess changes or new findings.,"The examples with higher activation explicitly compare current imaging findings to prior imaging, often highlighting evolution or detection of new findings, as indicated by the repetition of phrases directing description in comparison to prior images. This pattern focuses on comparison as a method of detecting changes, indicative of common practice in radiology for assessing disease progression or response to treatment.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3680325589625622,0.375,0.396694214876033,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3806,latent_3806,4140,0.00828,0.007788498,6.0758986,Unchanged cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette in successive imaging.,The examples with high activation consistently note enlarged heart or cardiac silhouette. They describe varying conditions of the lungs but emphasize if the cardiomegaly remains unchanged compared to prior imaging. These findings are central to the reports and are compared against previous images. The heart's unchanged or consistent enlargement is a key aspect.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5625,0.18,100.0,100.0
+3807,latent_3807,10229,0.020458,0.015243757,8.403887,Unchanged monitoring/support devices across comparative radiological studies.,"These examples highlight either an unchanged or stable condition when comparing current radiological findings with prior images, specifically noting the retention of original support or monitoring devices without significant change in their position or appearance.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.4714285714285714,0.4024390243902439,82.0,118.0
+3808,latent_3808,14962,0.029924,0.0147410035,2.9218175,Describing interval change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern evident among higher activation examples is descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging, where some form of change or progress is noted, often in relation to current symptoms or treatment interventions. This involves identifying interval changes such as improvement, worsening, or stability of conditions, as well as changes related to interventions.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4903846153846153,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3809,latent_3809,11203,0.022406,0.012746702,4.034464,Comparisons with prior radiology images to assess changes.,Examples exhibit findings or impressions based on comparison of current radiology imaging with prior images. The pattern includes descriptions of changes or stability in patient condition over time through explicit examination of prior imaging.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3810,latent_3810,17069,0.034138,0.019959558,4.2252436,Interval changes in lungs or devices compared to prior images.,"These examples tend to focus on the taking into account the interval changes observed from past comparison studies to the current radiographic evaluations. Such phrasing elucidates context for present evaluations, incorporating terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'similar', often assessing device positioning or signs of improvement/worsening of conditions.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5989974937343359,0.6,0.6111111111111112,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3811,latent_3811,13238,0.026476,0.012782584,4.83957,Emphasizes comparative evaluation between current and prior images.,The highest activation levels occur when the reports ask for a comparison of current and prior images with an expectation to identify changes or stability related to specific clinical indications or suspected conditions. The pattern suggests the model is more activated by prompts that necessitate evaluative comparison over those simply reporting unchanged status or asking for procedural reviews.,0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.3537414965986394,0.7123287671232876,73.0,127.0
+3812,latent_3812,15590,0.03118,0.017537313,4.4636207,Changes in device or tube positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples specifically involve updates or changes in the position of clinical devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, catheters) in current versus prior imaging, indicating that recognizing alterations or stability in medical equipment placement holds significant importance for the model.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.6744186046511628,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3813,latent_3813,18850,0.0377,0.023279153,4.2253942,Comparison with prior images to assess stable or unchanged conditions.,"Examples with positive activation levels show use of historical or prior comparison in imaging analysis, indicating a focus on recognizing changes relative to past findings, typically in cases involving certain detectable pathologies or conditions, albeit not acutely abnormal findings like pneumothorax or pleural effusion.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4497799119647859,0.45,0.4479166666666667,0.43,100.0,100.0
+3814,latent_3814,24192,0.048384,0.02563491,4.381943,Device or tube placement and stability assessment in radiology images.,"The examples showing high activation levels involve the interpretation and validation of medical devices or tubes (like PICC lines, pacemakers, enteric or nasogastric tubes, endotracheal tubes) in terms of placement and stability, often using language about distances from anatomical landmarks, positions (e.g., carina), or changes identified since prior studies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6504854368932039,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3815,latent_3815,4645,0.00929,0.014297533,6.777216,High activation when comparisons highlight stability or changes from prior imaging.,"The activation pattern is strong when comparisons are explicitly made in reports, especially when specifying previous imaging or when changes are indicated, though not all comparisons lead to high activations based on the context or type of findings reported.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4599459945994599,0.46,0.4607843137254901,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3816,latent_3816,3097,0.006194,0.011690134,6.6980224,Request to describe findings compared to prior imaging studies in radiology exams.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently request radiological study descriptions that include an explicit process of assessing findings against prior imaging studies, even in cases where no prior image existed. This process involves the reiteration or explicit mention of 'comparison', demonstrative findings or techniques.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+3817,latent_3817,75471,0.150942,0.06856022,2.2228549,Interval changes noted compared to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern in highly activated examples involves significant changes noted against prior imaging studies, often highlighting interval changes over time. This temporal aspect is evident through phrases like 'progression', 'interval increase', 'unchanged compared to prior', and references to date comparisons. Notably, assessments of pneumothorax and pneumonia seem to be particular contexts where interval change is emphasized.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6363636363636364,0.64,0.675,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3818,latent_3818,10819,0.021638,0.01574965,4.2681375,Stable cardiomediastinal findings in comparison to prior images.,"The activation levels highlight examples where there is stable cardiac or other anatomical findings across imaging studies, which are often described in reports without significant change compared to prior imaging. This linguistic pattern includes descriptions of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as unchanged or unremarkable in the context of clear lung fields or stable pathologies.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5783132530120482,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3819,latent_3819,20289,0.040578,0.020458099,4.0581093,Descriptive comparison to prior images reveals interval changes or stability.,"The pattern exhibits a focus on changes over time in the radiographic representations, especially associated with indications of new or resolved features or devices as compared to prior images. Phrases that suggest these temporal changes indicate a focus on interval changes and adjustments in medical presentations or interventions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6262626262626263,0.63,0.6083333333333333,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3820,latent_3820,4819,0.009638,0.0077661467,6.0634665,Stable or normal cardiomediastinal and lung findings upon comparison.,"Examples with significant activation levels often mention the absence of major pathological changes like consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, alongside consistent imaging findings (e.g., 'cardiac silhouette is normal', 'mediastinal contours are normal'). This indicates that the model recognizes stable findings or non-progressive states in the comparative imaging as indicative of the pattern, regardless of any comparisons with prior imaging.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3821,latent_3821,19712,0.039424,0.02404798,5.1032844,Compares current imaging findings with prior studies to evaluate changes.,"The highlighted examples demonstrate a comparison of current imaging findings with previous studies, primarily focusing on the presence or absence of changes in the pathologies or conditions being monitored. The examples with higher activations specifically use past imaging as a reference to note stability or change in findings, such as unchanged cardiac silhouette or stable lung opacities.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3822,latent_3822,16768,0.033536,0.020311607,7.8653035,Description of interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"Samples with highest activations show explicit instructions to compare current images to prior ones to describe interval changes. These examples prominently feature a reference to prior imaging and subsequent comparison, demonstrating a pattern of longitudinal evaluation in radiological assessments.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5454545454545454,0.55,0.3846153846153846,0.7142857142857143,63.0,137.0
+3823,latent_3823,4664,0.009328,0.014687498,4.148816,Instructions for comparing current and prior images in radiology study.,"These examples are framed as prompts requesting a comparison of current and prior imaging studies. Examples with higher activation values specifically reference comparison with prior images, indicate a history-related indication, and include requests for description. The pattern focuses on repeated comparative assessments of chest imaging.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3824,latent_3824,3970,0.00794,0.010778767,3.3903053,Evaluation of interval change or stability from prior images.,"These examples involve review of current images alongside prior images, specifically noting any interval changes or stability in findings. This indicates a pattern of evaluating interval change and stability in the context of radiological assessments.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3838383838383838,0.39,0.4083333333333333,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3825,latent_3825,4336,0.008672,0.0096809855,4.508802,Presence of surgical intervention markers and comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples often highlight the presence of median sternotomy or surgical intervention markers in chest imaging. These reports note unchanged or clarified mediastinal and cardiomediastinal contours, and often involve comparison to prior studies, especially following surgical interventions like sternotomies or CABG.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6254681647940075,0.63,0.6065573770491803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+3826,latent_3826,12748,0.025496,0.015596631,7.789771,Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours with pulmonary or alternative pathology.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently feature findings that include terms like 'normal' for the heart, mediastinal, and pulmonary structures, while indicating consolidation, opacity, or abnormal findings related to pulmonary or osseous structures elsewhere, showcasing how these normal features are balanced with noted abnormalities.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.3544303797468354,0.3888888888888889,72.0,128.0
+3827,latent_3827,2876,0.005752,0.014503421,7.808543,Comparison between current and prior images using a structured format.,"The pattern consistently noted in highly activated examples is the explicit mention of both current and prior imaging studies for comparison purposes. These examples predominantly feature the format 'Given the current [imaging type] and the prior [imaging type]' or a similar clause with a defined structure indicating a comparison base, even when DEC
+iiMAY YankDoument.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3982048143614851,0.41,0.4296875,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3828,latent_3828,28329,0.056658,0.022042463,1.7110968,Requests for comparisons with prior imaging in study descriptions.,"Examples are considered relevant when they ask for a description in comparison to a prior image. ""Activation"" was higher when a prior study was explicitly requested, indicating a focus on consistency or changes over time as a core element of the analysis.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3829,latent_3829,2850,0.0057,0.005176653,6.4601727,Description highlights stability or change when compared to prior imaging.,"The activation pattern is primarily characterized by the frequent comparison to prior imaging, which is standard in radiology to identify changes. Examples with high activation levels mention stable or unchanged conditions, indicating the recognition of stability in medical condition over time as a pattern.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3830,latent_3830,4019,0.008038,0.012217946,5.789306,"Direct comparison between current and prior images, focusing on observed changes or stability.","Highly activated examples typically call for direct comparison between current and prior radiologic images, without additional extraneous commentary or techniques specified. Phrases in these examples often begin with straightforward comparisons or end with straightforward descriptions identifiable directly through imaging, such as observed changes or stability over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4554455445544554,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3831,latent_3831,24962,0.049924,0.02659869,4.7297482,Increased focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve new findings or changes in the patient's condition noted between the current and prior images (like interval development or worsening of pleural effusions or fluid overload). These descriptions often use terms like 'new', 'increased', 'improved', 'unchanged', or 'worsened', focusing on comparisons with prior imaging to highlight changes in patient status.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3832,latent_3832,14947,0.029894,0.01610958,4.5758595,Tortuosity or calcification of the aorta across serial images.,"The data consistently shows high activation levels when reports highlight aortic anomalies described as tortuous or calcified in conjunction with stability over time, often comparing current findings to previous images. These models focus on vascular features of interest and their stability, a common theme in radiological assessments.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6576695194206715,0.675,0.8181818181818182,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3833,latent_3833,4719,0.009438,0.011276458,6.03415,Notable interval changes or management after interventions.,"The activation levels increase with the presence of interval change following previous medical interventions, such as thoracentesis, NG tube placement, and pneumothorax assessment. Radiological descriptions necessitating immediate or critical communication to healthcare providers also show high activation. These instances indicate active medical management or significant changes that require urgent acknowledgment.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.56,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3834,latent_3834,3197,0.006394,0.0041764653,2.3479972,Explicit request for comparative findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels feature requests for comparative analysis between current and prior images explicitly within their structure, especially asking for description related to a previous study. The model seems to trigger on the clear instruction to provide comparative analysis as a distinct task or request within the report.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+3835,latent_3835,5682,0.011364,0.010543692,4.1421447,"Comparison using current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve examination of both a frontal and lateral image, along with a prior frontal image. This triad is a key pattern for highly representative samples, as it allows a detailed comparison, especially when considering changes over time and positioning in chest radiographs.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3836,latent_3836,6240,0.01248,0.008727395,3.9618607,Comparison with prior images and detailing prior reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on providing descriptions that compare the current imaging findings with prior images. This pattern is highlighted by the frequent use of the phrase 'in comparison to the prior frontal image' as well as the inclusion of prior report details that help in comparative analysis, which is a key aspect of interpreting follow-up radiology studies.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3876042656530461,0.42,0.4452054794520548,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3837,latent_3837,5723,0.011446,0.0070476583,3.9517689,Detailed descriptions of tube and catheter placements in imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve radiology studies that describe specific details about the placement, stability, or changes of medical tubes such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central venous catheters. Reports detailing the precise positioning and any changes from prior studies show patterns of monitoring tube positions.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.6027397260273972,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3838,latent_3838,4697,0.009394,0.015396855,7.0996895,"Reports frequently note no focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax.","Many examples describe the absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. These phrases are consistent findings noted across different radiology descriptions, especially when the images are otherwise normal or slightly changed from prior studies.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7017113678303293,0.705,0.6694214876033058,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3839,latent_3839,7246,0.014492,0.011337025,4.9834657,Detailed comparative descriptions of changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The high activation levels are associated with reports that provide detailed interpretative comparisons over time and explicitly describe changes or stability of findings relative to previous imaging, especially focused on evaluating for interval change in conditions or devices, which aligns with standard radiological practices.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3840,latent_3840,14525,0.02905,0.020202829,8.375473,Complex comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently include detailed comparative descriptions between current and previous radiology images. The instructions explicitly request providing detailed comparisons and findings based on multiple views or historical contexts, which aligns with complex comparison tasks that activate the model strongly.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5404390305798756,0.542713567839196,0.4919354838709677,0.6853932584269663,89.0,110.0
+3841,latent_3841,425717,0.851434,1.8655019,10.888815,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess stability or changes in pathology.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve evaluation of current images against prior ones. They highlight changes (or lack thereof) in specific pathologies or findings over time, with explicit comparison to previous studies, either in terms of image assessment or through direct language stating lack of change, indicating stability or progression of noted abnormalities.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3842,latent_3842,4862,0.009724,0.011224632,4.2278404,Explicit reference to a 'PRIOR_REPORT' in comparison.,"In these examples, the inclusion of an explicitly identified 'PRIOR_REPORT' is associated with higher activation. This suggests the pattern focuses on instances where a detailed comparison to prior imaging studies is explicitly summarized within a formally delineated previous report.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4825174825174825,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3843,latent_3843,18949,0.037898,0.030103825,6.5379453,Assessment of interval change against prior imaging.,"Examples showing significant activation levels include findings described in comparison with prior studies using phrases like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'progression', or providing a detailed description that quantifies the change. The focus on interval change, stability, or progression aligns with the central task of radiology assessments. Therefore, these examples embody the pattern of specific changes against past imaging findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3844,latent_3844,2640,0.00528,0.012308952,7.9922338,"Pulmonary edema with changes in heart size, pleural effusions, or vascular congestion.","Highly activated samples correlate pulmonary edema with descriptions of changes or evaluations regarding heart size, pleural effusions, or pulmonary vascular congestion. This indicates pulmonary edema features prominently in the reports generating higher activation levels.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6784242789669379,0.68,0.7093023255813954,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3845,latent_3845,6098,0.012196,0.018248934,6.464288,Exams with no prior study for comparison.,"The examples with high activation do not involve comparison with prior images or findings; they often state 'no comparison' or 'none' when referencing prior reports. Additionally, they often task the assistant with reports based only on current images without prior reference.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5376321629030153,0.5527638190954773,0.578125,0.3737373737373737,99.0,100.0
+3846,latent_3846,11841,0.023682,0.019679744,7.5177817,Stable findings in comparison to prior radiological studies.,"Examples with high activations mention a direct comparison between current and previous radiological findings, highlighting no significant changes, normal findings, or any consistent abnormality noted in prior studies. These reports typically have terms like 'as compared to', 'no significant interval change', or 'continued' stability in their analysis, ensuring that the focus remains on stable findings over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6052232007288187,0.61,0.6410256410256411,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3847,latent_3847,3823,0.007646,0.0074590347,4.4854426,Direct and explicit comparison with prior images in descriptions.,"The examples labeled with a higher activation level consistently involve a direct or explicit comparison to prior images to evaluate changes or stability. The comparison element is a critical part of the reports with these tasks, affecting activation scores accordingly. This is less prominent in examples with zero or low activations, where comparison might not be the central task.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3848,latent_3848,25203,0.050406,0.03226719,5.3635087,"Stable atelectasis or effusion, no acute abnormalities in comparison to prior imaging.","Samples with higher activation levels include explicit references to standard imaging procedures that do not indicate acute abnormalities but suggest further examination or depict stable chronic conditions like atelectasis or effusions, using terms suggesting stability or lack of change. Phrases that explicitly compare previous imaging results or detail stable cardiopulmonary silhouettes contribute to increased activation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4647887323943662,0.33,100.0,100.0
+3849,latent_3849,3984,0.007968,0.013697121,5.2117906,Detailed image comparisons with changes or stability noted.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of comparisons between current and prior images, emphasizing stability, interval changes, or resolution of medical findings. These examples focus not only on pathological findings but also on how they have changed or remained stable over time by explicitly referencing prior images.",0.3875,0.3877551020408163,0.4,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.320211038961039,0.33,0.2763157894736842,0.21,100.0,100.0
+3850,latent_3850,5348,0.010696,0.014202187,5.160494,Focus on medical device placement and evaluation in radiology.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe changes, adjustments, or evaluations of medical devices (like tubes and catheters) or findings related to positioning of devices rather than the disease process itself. This suggests the pattern is related to radiology reports focused on device placement and evaluation.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.6,0.42,100.0,100.0
+3851,latent_3851,8860,0.01772,0.020202976,6.2169414,Detailed comparative analysis of current vs. prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include language prompting a detailed comparison between current and prior images, specifically seeking assessments on changes or stability of findings. This promotes detailed analytical comparison, which is a specific cognitive process of the model being studied.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4742268041237113,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3852,latent_3852,8880,0.01776,0.008900939,3.9280536,"Comparison of current images to prior, emphasizing stability or change.","Reports with higher activation often include phrases emphasizing comparison between the current radiographs and prior images, specifically noting whether there has been change or stability. Examples with references to findings demonstrating 'little change,' 'stable,' or 'interval change' suggest a focus on continuity or lack of progression, which aligns with follow-up and diagnostic practices in radiology.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4792588285851513,0.485,0.4876033057851239,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3853,latent_3853,7914,0.015828,0.016001195,5.9073586,Tasks prompting comparison-based descriptions of images.,"High activation examples explicitly use instructions such as 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image,' indicating the task involves evaluating radiological findings against previous images. This pattern highlights the model's focus on tasks involving comparison-based descriptions when cues are given to specifically evaluate change.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4775615626192363,0.555,0.5310734463276836,0.94,100.0,100.0
+3854,latent_3854,4267,0.008534,0.007767263,4.0739584,Use of direct comparison with previous imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation involve direct comparison with previous imaging, and commonly mention changes or stability over multiple studies. This includes terms like 'compared to previous', 'stable', 'interval change', 'unchanged', or specific improvements/worsening over time. Such comparisons are often made to evaluate progression, improvement, or the stability of conditions, emphasizing the longitudinal evaluation present in the reports with higher activations.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3855,latent_3855,31712,0.063424,0.0442211,7.3979907,Detailed comparison with prior images highlighting specific changes or stability.,"The examples with the highest activation levels frequently include direct references to detailed comparisons with prior imaging results, emphasizing specific changes or stability in disease or injury features over time.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6980676328502415,0.7,0.6724137931034483,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3856,latent_3856,11641,0.023282,0.013648423,6.171563,"Low lung volumes noted, often with basilar opacities or bronchovascular crowding.","The pattern in the examples with higher activation involves low lung volumes frequently mentioned, alongside associated conditions like basilar opacities or bronchovascular crowding. This pattern captures radiological descriptions suggesting reduced lung capacity or function impacting imaging findings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5238095238095238,0.2222222222222222,99.0,101.0
+3857,latent_3857,90343,0.180686,0.10231198,4.4610224,High activation with comparison to prior radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention a comparison of findings with a prior image. These comparisons are crucial in radiological interpretation to evaluate any changes or stability in imaging findings over time, which helps in guiding clinical decisions.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4931506849315068,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3858,latent_3858,4127,0.008254,0.014245436,6.930966,Radiology studies comparing current frontal and lateral views with prior imaging.,"Examples with a high activation level describe multiple radiographic views available for comparison, specifically frontal and lateral views, and provide a comparison narrative of the findings with prior imaging studies. This format aligns with established practices in radiological assessment, where multiple images are compared over time to assess changes.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.5563380281690141,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3859,latent_3859,17703,0.035406,0.05549359,6.257541,Detailed comparison with prior frontal images.,"High activation levels correspond with radiology examinations where images are explicitly compared to prior images, providing a detailed description of findings, changes, or stable conditions between the current and prior studies. This comparison is a standard method in radiology to assess disease progression or stability.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3860,latent_3860,4397,0.008794,0.012125652,6.933912,Descriptions of normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Examples with high activation consistently contain multiple descriptions of normal structures, specifically the heart size, mediastinal, and hilar contours. The consistent emphasis on normality of these structures correlates with the activation patterns, suggesting a focus on identifying reports where the cardiac and mediastinal aspects are unremarkable.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7303523035230353,0.7386934673366834,0.6791044776119403,0.91,100.0,99.0
+3861,latent_3861,16319,0.032638,0.012310602,1.9535989,Reports emphasize new or resolving findings compared to prior images.,"A pattern identified through multiple examples is health conditions reported as compared to previous images, but when the context focuses more on stable or unchanged status or mild abnormalities, the activations are notably lower. The reports discussing significant new findings or specific significant changes (e.g., 'new pleural effusion,' 'resolved pulmonary edema') have higher activations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3862,latent_3862,3717,0.007434,0.010020659,5.6261234,Prior image comparison with notable findings or critical remarks.,"This set describes scenarios where image comparisons are performed but feature significant findings such as alterations in lung opacities, cardiomediastinal silhouette changes, or device placements. These reports often include direct comparisons to prior images but highlight major changes or presence of critical signs, unlike examples with no such significant findings.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3863,latent_3863,30962,0.061924,0.032985646,6.498416,"Clear lungs without consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe lungs as clear or well inflated without focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, typically mentioning no acute cardiopulmonary abnormality, despite other imaging comparisons or findings mentioned.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5392856151647193,0.585,0.4090909090909091,0.380281690140845,71.0,129.0
+3864,latent_3864,1943,0.003886,0.0035802426,4.9910445,Device placement or change detailed in comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe changes or comparisons using specific medical devices like pacemaker leads, Port-A-Cath, or changes of such devices between image sets. These descriptions focus on device positioning, functional status, or related anatomical influences in imaging reports.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3865,latent_3865,14367,0.028734,0.016102294,6.080767,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging.,This dataset involves examples with explicit references to previous imaging studies or radiological findings for comparative analysis. Samples with lower activation levels tend to not include such comparative details or explicitly seek guidance on changes relative to prior imaging.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5290322580645161,0.8367346938775511,98.0,102.0
+3866,latent_3866,35611,0.071222,0.038117643,5.7600403,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging for clinical evaluation.,"Higher activations occur when the studies explicitly reference comparison with prior imaging results, emphasizing specific changes or confirmations. This is a common pattern in radiology, showing continuity and clinical context by discussing how findings have evolved from prior studies using specific terms like ""compared to previous exam"" or ""no interval change.""",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3867,latent_3867,3886,0.007772,0.009425607,5.4827867,Comparison of current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels mention providing a radiological comparison between current images and prior images, either explicitly stated or hinted at, despite the image descriptions. This pattern highlights the summarization or comparison task that integrates prior images into the descriptions.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3868,latent_3868,3411,0.006822,0.01598316,6.518522,Radiology findings described without comparison to a prior study.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently do not involve comparison to prior images explicitly mentioned, focusing purely on findings from the provided images without reference. The absence of comparison report details is a common characteristic, indicating a lack of prior examination data in these cases.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.6181818181818182,0.34,100.0,100.0
+3869,latent_3869,7253,0.014506,0.008824561,5.0372944,Interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples that are representative of the pattern describe findings of interval changes compared with prior imaging studies, often mentioning specific changes like effusion increase, mass removal, or opacity changes. This pattern is indicative of the incorporation of historical data in the analysis of radiological findings, which is critical for assessing disease progression or resolution.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6245400615754299,0.625,0.5945945945945946,0.6875,96.0,104.0
+3870,latent_3870,11634,0.023268,0.020495461,4.733755,Explicit comparison to prior images with noted changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation involve descriptions where imaging findings are explicitly compared to prior images, and there is either a new finding or a notable change in a specific condition, often affecting the cardiac silhouette or revealing minimal abnormalities. This implies the model is sensitive to changes or comparisons noted across sequential imaging related to prominent anatomical features.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3871,latent_3871,3193,0.006386,0.010016524,6.8358865,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Highly representative examples consistently mention the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as being within normal limits, often in the context of evaluating chest pathologies or techniques that include comparing frontal and lateral images.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4310916255643414,0.455,0.423728813559322,0.25,100.0,100.0
+3872,latent_3872,8615,0.01723,0.016733952,5.5315957,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"This pattern emphasizes descriptions of changes or stability over time in radiology findings. Higher activations correlate with explicit mentions of 'comparison to prior', 'interval change', or similar phrases, which indicates a focus on evaluating changes in radiographic images over time for diagnostic purposes.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3873,latent_3873,42563,0.085126,0.046451084,13.815743,"Management and comparison of lines, tubes, or devices in imaging.","The pattern exhibited centers on the management and comparison of lines, tubes, or devices (such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or NG tubes) within the radiological findings. These objects are often highlighted in the findings when they are appropriately positioned, and contribute to the comparative aspect of the observations, often relating back to procedural contexts.",0.609375,0.64,0.45,0.5625,16.0,34.0,0.4111152005888848,0.52,0.0891089108910891,0.6923076923076923,13.0,187.0
+3874,latent_3874,10927,0.021854,0.014687928,5.225524,Measurement and positioning challenges in interpreting frontal or lateral images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to coexisting conditions or factors contributing to interpretation difficulties, such as catheter positioning issues or measurement errors during image acquisition.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6185567010309279,0.6,100.0,100.0
+3875,latent_3875,14473,0.028946,0.023811908,6.3024917,"Stable cardiomediastinal, hilar contours, or aortic structure compared to prior studies.","These examples articulate unchanged or stable findings in cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, heart size, or aortic tortuosity compared to prior imaging studies, while other pathologies vary or are newly recognized. The reports emphasize the constancy or mild variations of these structures or features as specific hallmark findings over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5339333175442751,0.5527638190954773,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,99.0
+3876,latent_3876,3505,0.00701,0.013775221,7.5209074,Descriptions that highlight normal or unchanged findings in lung and heart comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels describe normal findings or unremarkable chest images when doing comparisons with prior studies or when no prior study is used, highlighting the importance of unchanged, normal, or clear findings of the lungs and cardomediastinal silhouette. The recurring pattern is the focus on unremarkable findings or lack of pathological changes when providing descriptions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4770568021022842,0.4773869346733668,0.4761904761904761,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+3877,latent_3877,20944,0.041888,0.02809359,5.2221584,Assessment of interval changes or stability in chest findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in various chest findings when compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern involves dynamic or static descriptors of lung, mediastinal, or cardiomediastinal changes, emphasizing interval alterations or lack thereof.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5565410199556541,0.58,0.5547945205479452,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3878,latent_3878,45305,0.09061,0.048333246,5.809816,Detailed description and confirmation of tube placement in radiology studies.,"The examples with higher activation frequently involve radiology reports that mention specific tube placements (e.g., Dobbhoff or nasogastric tube) with detailed commentary on their positions, often in the context of placement confirmation or adjustment. The descriptions include anatomical landmarks indicating where the tube terminates or is positioned relative to expected anatomical boundaries.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6465073388150311,0.655,0.7246376811594203,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3879,latent_3879,8726,0.017452,0.012813538,5.960388,Descriptions focused on the positioning of medical tubes or lines relative to anatomical landmarks.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe the positions of medical tubes, lines, or implants (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube, central venous lines) in context of assessment or positioning. This pattern involves detailed notation of these object's placement relative to anatomical landmarks or changes observed from prior imaging.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6831290281814735,0.6834170854271356,0.6989247311827957,0.65,100.0,99.0
+3880,latent_3880,8400,0.0168,0.012229018,6.151839,Cardiac silhouette is enlarged or shows significant change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or findings in the cardiomediastinal silhouette, the cardiac silhouette being significantly enlarged, or some other increase in heart size, which often suggests an acute or significant pattern that contrasts with lower activation examples without such findings.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5813953488372093,0.25,100.0,100.0
+3881,latent_3881,6164,0.012328,0.020840818,7.9441237,Providing comparative analysis with prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples consistently feature a request for the assistant to provide descriptions based on comparison with prior imaging, explicitly mentioned in the input prompt, such as 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This showcases the significance of longitudinal assessment in interpreting changes or stability in findings across multiple studies, a common practice in evaluating patients over time.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.423728813559322,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3882,latent_3882,10828,0.021656,0.016181612,6.19005,Focused on stability or continuation of observed features over time through imaging comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve findings or interpretations made in the context of both a current and a prior image, showing specific attention to comparisons rather than new procedures or information. These reports provide detailed descriptions that highlight the continuation or change of conditions, often noting devices or certain distinct observations (like tubes or the position of leads) considered stable or unchanged. This specificity and continuing observation align with high activation patterns indicating a particular focus on comparative stability.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+3883,latent_3883,3327,0.006654,0.010586623,4.984855,Multiple image views or complex comparison details in the report.,"The examples with high activation are generally image descriptions provided with a comparison to previous images, but the actual difference seems to be associated with the format or presence of additional views in the current examination or variation in comparison points across multiple prior studies.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,100.0,100.0
+3884,latent_3884,7311,0.014622,0.011919073,7.9660234,Evaluation of interval change in lung pathology or medical device positioning.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the evaluation for interval changes between current and prior chest images, with comparisons focusing on specific changes or stability in lung pathology and devices like tubes or catheters. Reports often contain the word 'change', suggesting a focus on evaluating progress or regression of conditions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5,0.8023255813953488,86.0,114.0
+3885,latent_3885,2900,0.0058,0.0074753696,10.301796,Instructions to compare findings with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often instruct the assistant to compare current imaging with prior studies, highlighting their consistency in seeking change or stability, especially when points of comparison are explicitly mentioned, suggesting that the model is more active when specific comparative aspects are requested.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+3886,latent_3886,7394,0.014788,0.016395863,6.7214613,Description of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"This dataset includes consistent use of explicit comparison with prior imaging studies and the analysis of any interval changes. Examples with higher activations often emphasize descriptions regarding changes or stability in the patient's condition compared to previous images, using language that denotes observation over time, such as 'improved', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+3887,latent_3887,15948,0.031896,0.024392402,5.4672127,Mild cardiomegaly or enlarged heart noted in radiographic findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to mention findings related to mild cardiomegaly or enlargement of the heart, often in connection with other conditions like pulmonary edema or pleural effusions. This pattern highlights a specific condition or aspect of the radiographic findings, while examples with no such mention exhibit lower activation levels.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7129258895520133,0.715,0.7590361445783133,0.63,100.0,100.0
+3888,latent_3888,10477,0.020954,0.02780234,4.87352,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies in findings.,"The pattern includes either explicit or implied references to comparison between current and prior imaging. Examples with high activation consistently reference direct comparisons, using wording such as 'compared to the previous radiograph' or 'as compared to the previous study', highlighting the use of past references in evaluating new images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4202014037229173,0.43,0.4444444444444444,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3889,latent_3889,6697,0.013394,0.011918122,3.8745446,Comparative evaluation of imaging findings against prior studies.,"Examples with high activation frequently mention technical descriptions following 'Given the current frontal image, the current lateral image, and the prior frontal image' combined with specific language about findings compared to prior studies. These descriptions include comparisons that indicate changes (or stability) in pathological findings such as opacities or devices, implying focused detection of these dynamics.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3717919252279169,0.385,0.4108527131782946,0.53,100.0,100.0
+3890,latent_3890,4237,0.008474,0.010675719,5.702052,Changes in pleural effusion status compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activations consistently mention changes concerning pleural effusions, whether they are new developments, stable, or worsened as compared to prior studies. These references to pleural effusion status and comparison to previous studies are consistent, indicating this is the pattern the activations are tracking.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6472663139329806,0.66,0.7580645161290323,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3891,latent_3891,3803,0.007606,0.009618818,6.5292935,"Presence of pulmonary congestion, edema, or abnormal vascular widths compared to prior imaging.","The highly activated examples include findings that suggest changes or abnormalities in pulmonary features like edema, congestion, or vascular pedicle width, compared to prior imaging examinations. They specifically mention conditions that align with fluid imbalance or cardiac issues such as mild pulmonary edema, vascular congestion which can often be related to cardiopulmonary evaluation.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.9411764705882352,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6558356108917907,0.66,0.7051282051282052,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3892,latent_3892,4900,0.0098,0.013894649,7.174318,Emphasis on explicit instructions to compare findings with prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature explicit instructions to compare findings from the current radiographic images to previous images, often integrating specific directive language like 'comparison to the prior frontal image.' This suggests a focus on comprehensively evaluating changes or continuities over time as indicated by the language relating to image comparisons.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4069003839159426,0.4070351758793969,0.4077669902912621,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+3893,latent_3893,6334,0.012668,0.016193924,5.2531133,Emphasis on changes noted when comparing current to prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe both findings in current radiological images as well as changes from previous assessments. This comparison and change emphasis differentiates these from purely static or non-comparison reports, which have lower activation values.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3894,latent_3894,12308,0.024616,0.016761139,5.9100747,"Findings compared to prior images, focusing on changes in medical conditions.","The pattern is the comparison of current imaging findings with previous images to detect changes. Each example with high activation describes findings in the context of their stability, increase, or improvement compared to prior images, including descriptions of specific medical conditions or changes.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6046511627906976,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3895,latent_3895,7686,0.015372,0.009970984,3.3280487,Focal stability noted and explicitly compared to prior images.,"Samples demonstrating high activation levels describe findings that compare very closely with prior images, showing stable or unchanged elements in the radiographic reports. These frequently include observations such as 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is unchanged', 'no interval change', or 'similar to prior', indicating temporal comparison and stability over time in images.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5072463768115942,0.35,100.0,100.0
+3896,latent_3896,4874,0.009748,0.010180577,4.3326836,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"These examples consistently mention a prior or comparison imaging study, and they assess the current imaging findings in relation to these prior images. This often includes noting whether there are interval changes, improvements, or stability in the observed conditions.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4768253968253968,0.485,0.488,0.61,100.0,100.0
+3897,latent_3897,3171,0.006342,0.008843426,8.1860075,Focus on describing findings relative to prior imaging for comparison.,"High activation levels in these examples correlate with the explicit instruction to provide a description of the findings by comparing current imaging results to previous exams, especially when there is an emphasis on identifying interval changes or stability. This indicates a pattern of focus on comparing current and prior imaging details, which is a common requirement in radiological assessments.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3898,latent_3898,7988,0.015976,0.010327587,8.292603,Detailed comparison and analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"Samples with high activation consistently involve the analysis of current and prior imaging, explicitly noting how current findings relate to previous examinations. The requests require comparisons and detailed analyses between current and past images, focusing on specific changes or consistencies in the findings. This pattern is essential in tracking the progression or stability of medical conditions.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4109136006614303,0.43,0.2272727272727272,0.4629629629629629,54.0,146.0
+3899,latent_3899,54253,0.108506,0.06712308,5.6195855,Interval changes in fluid levels or significant pathologies compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve changes in fluid levels (e.g., pleural effusion or intrapulmonary changes) that are highlighted through direct comparison with prior imaging reports, showing interval change. This pattern stands out as significant against the backdrop of unchanged structures or positioning of tubes and lines that do not usually prompt high activation.",0.5596919127086007,0.5714285714285714,0.5882352941176471,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.6228786926461345,0.625,0.6470588235294118,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3900,latent_3900,2172,0.004344,0.006493219,6.951282,Detection or concern for aspiration-related pneumonia or opacities.,"The high-activation examples often describe scenarios of potential aspiration or infection following aspiration events. These situations are assessed in light of the clinical context, such as recent seizures, altered mental status, or a history of aspiration risk.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,100.0,100.0
+3901,latent_3901,4216,0.008432,0.0092912465,5.5304856,"Findings in current images compared to prior images, noting stability or change.","The represented pattern involves cases where findings in current imaging studies are described in direct comparison to previous images, with particular attention to stability or change in observed features, as indicated by explicit mentions of prior images and comparison statements.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3749843746093652,0.375,0.3762376237623762,0.38,100.0,100.0
+3902,latent_3902,12014,0.024028,0.012872428,3.4306397,Description involving detailed comparison between current and prior images with interpretation of changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve descriptions of findings that compare current images with prior ones and offer explicit changes or evaluations over time, especially in the context of assessing specific pathologies or conditions.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4246575342465753,0.31,100.0,100.0
+3903,latent_3903,24667,0.049334,0.039071504,5.2316017,Comparison of current and prior diagnostic images.,"These examples frequently mention the presence of a comparison between the current study and a prior radiological study, allowing for interval changes or stability to be noted. The common pattern is the language that describes findings with reference to previous images, assessments of changes, or the stability of findings over time.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3904,latent_3904,3103,0.006206,0.010277925,7.4419384,Descriptive comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation explicitly involve descriptions comparing current imaging findings relative to one or more prior studies. Phrases like 'in comparison with', 'as compared to', and explicit dates indicate that referencing previous exams to assess changes is central to these activations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3689903846153846,0.37,0.3796296296296296,0.41,100.0,100.0
+3905,latent_3905,7656,0.015312,0.009334286,4.4962206,Structured comparison of findings with specific pulmonary conditions.,"Examples with higher activations involve providing a structured comparison of the current study with previous imaging findings from prior reports coupled with specific mentions of potential or known pulmonary conditions such as pneumonia or effusions, and differentiations in the extent and nature of findings based on a variety of patient contexts including pleural effusion or pulmonary edema.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5714285714285714,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3906,latent_3906,6207,0.012414,0.016827779,4.4260654,Emphasizing stability or change compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to explicit comparisons with prior studies to highlight stability or changes in findings, whether regarding lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, or specific findings like pleural effusions or implanted devices. They emphasize stability or change compared to previous exams.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3907,latent_3907,91283,0.182566,0.11323605,5.5295033,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,These examples always deliver an evaluation of findings based on the current images and a prior image. They emphasize a methodology of detecting stability or change in radiological findings through comparative analysis with prior records.,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3908,latent_3908,76711,0.153422,0.09919474,7.3471003,Detailed change analysis between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently feature detailed descriptions of findings by comparing current radiographs with previous images. The emphasis is on evaluation of changes over time, stability, or resolution of prior findings, indicative of an ongoing process being monitored through serial imaging.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5309734513274337,0.6666666666666666,90.0,110.0
+3909,latent_3909,5976,0.011952,0.011197628,4.699722,Comparison of current and prior image findings with explicit change assessment.,"These examples involve making a comparison between current and prior radiographic images, often specifying changes or stability in radiological findings. The pattern involves using comparative language (like 'there has been interval', 'no significant interval change', 'in comparison') and mentions of prior findings or studies as benchmarks for current observations.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3910,latent_3910,18108,0.036216,0.019956024,5.7323055,Explicit change or status of medical devices on imaging.,"Examples that have higher activation levels involve descriptions where the radiology report explicitly mentions detailed comparisons, includes changes in medical devices or tools, or provides a qualitative assessment or impact of medical events on current imaging findings. While they all provide comparison to prior images as some with lower activations do, these descriptions become pivotal when they assess change or status of medical devices.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6848030018761726,0.685,0.6761904761904762,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3911,latent_3911,3972,0.007944,0.008508739,4.1856294,"Explicit comparison with a prior imaging study, noting changes or stability.","The examples that show higher activation levels often involve an explicit comparison between a current imaging study and a prior exam. The presence of specific language describing comparative findings, changes, or stability concerning prior images seems to trigger the observed activation pattern.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.2222222222222222,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3657289002557544,0.38,0.3285714285714285,0.23,100.0,100.0
+3912,latent_3912,2953,0.005906,0.009567562,5.1925836,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest images with a prior image without additional clinical context.,"The most representative examples describe evaluating current frontal and lateral chest images in comparison to prior images, with no further clinical indication provided. This illustrates a focus on procedural instruction without specific clinical context or history.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4132250056420672,0.415,0.4234234234234234,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3913,latent_3913,13302,0.026604,0.013453381,6.942346,Presence of linear or streaky opacities indicating atelectasis.,"Activation levels are primarily associated with mentions of linear or streaky opacities, commonly indicative of atelectasis. Examples with these features have elevated activation, while absence leads to lower activations.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.9166666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6571521863350658,0.685,0.5063291139240507,0.625,64.0,136.0
+3914,latent_3914,22158,0.044316,0.024207529,4.148919,"Findings suggestive of pulmonary hypertension, including enlarged cardiac or mediastinal silhouette and prominent pulmonary vasculature.","Examples with higher activation values consistently feature descriptions indicating pulmonary hypertension often linked to features like an enlarged cardiac or mediastinal silhouette, increased pulmonary vascular markings, or associated structural changes. Contrastingly low activations often lack these specific findings or highlight different conditions.",0.4842105263157894,0.5102040816326531,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,24.0,0.4577218728162124,0.515,0.5428571428571428,0.19,100.0,100.0
+3915,latent_3915,3770,0.00754,0.01791434,7.4281397,Description of radiology findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing a description of the current findings in comparison to previous imaging. This pattern focuses on evaluating changes over time between current and prior studies, often involving assessment of progression, stability, or resolution of observed features.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+3916,latent_3916,2875,0.00575,0.007751426,3.899778,Descriptions of interval changes using prior and current images to track condition progression.,The activation level is high when the prompt involves evaluating a current image alongside prior images to track changes over time for specific medical conditions or procedures. This includes references to previous and comparison studies indicating progression or stability of conditions.,0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3592169328186886,0.365,0.3333333333333333,0.27,100.0,100.0
+3917,latent_3917,3834,0.007668,0.007809171,7.246477,Comparison of current radiological findings to prior images with emphasis on changes or stability.,"These examples consistently describe findings in the current images in reference to prior images, often highlighting changes or stability over time. This pattern is representative of follow-up or comparative analysis commonly performed in radiological exams.",0.2171818546768366,0.22,0.25,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3383458646616541,0.34,0.3222222222222222,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3918,latent_3918,7789,0.015578,0.018349417,4.68646,Comparative findings of pleural effusions with prior imaging.,"In these examples, the referential comparisons frequently include descriptions of pleural effusions, whether noting their stability, change in size, or presence in relation to previous images. The pattern highlights variations, presence, and evaluations of pleural effusions compared to prior imagery, suggesting this finding is distinctive.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5817245817245817,0.61,0.7291666666666666,0.35,100.0,100.0
+3919,latent_3919,4489,0.008978,0.007880607,4.2126203,Findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Prompts with higher activation levels consistently discuss the evaluation of radiographs by comparing current images with prior studies, often detailing changes, stabilities, or the absence thereof, in findings. This emphasis on comparison to prior imaging is a key radiological practice and linguistically noted by phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'unchanged', or numerical data from prior dates.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,100.0,100.0
+3920,latent_3920,3651,0.007302,0.0073835338,4.6917973,Findings compared to prior imaging studies showing stability or no change.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe the comparison between current and prior imaging findings, often noting stability or lack of change. This comparison element, even when not drastic, is frequently identified in radiology reports to track progress or maintain continuity in patient monitoring. Uses phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', and similar descriptors implicitly linked to continuity.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,100.0,100.0
+3921,latent_3921,3014,0.006028,0.008708821,6.783931,Inclusion of both lateral and frontal chest images for comprehensive assessment.,Examples with high activation levels often feature findings from both current frontal and lateral chest images. This suggests the pattern prioritizes multiple views to provide more comprehensive detail compared to single-view assessments. Examples without lateral views tend to have lower activation levels.,0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.6153846153846154,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6592292089249493,0.685,0.6193548387096774,0.96,100.0,100.0
+3922,latent_3922,15644,0.031288,0.022985058,6.6895924,Unchanged cardiac silhouette upon comparison with prior imaging.,"The representative examples involve radiology reports comparing current imaging to previous studies while describing stable or unchanged cardiac silhouettes and other anatomical contours, even when there's an indication of mild cardiomegaly or mild changes in cardiac silhouette size.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.6067315304272325,0.615,0.6619718309859155,0.47,100.0,100.0
+3923,latent_3923,27404,0.054808,0.031762574,6.88322,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern focus on descriptions of stable findings when compared to previous images. These examples highlight unchanged or expected post-operative features and stable conditions identified through a comparison with prior imaging, using language such as 'no significant interval change', 'similar to prior exam', and 'unchanged moderate cardiomegaly'.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.4782608695652174,0.5238095238095238,84.0,116.0
+3924,latent_3924,8281,0.016562,0.013075919,9.848507,Comparison with prior imaging indicates stability or change in findings.,"These examples with higher activation levels predominantly focus on the comparison of current findings with previous images, emphasizing stability or changes. This comparison is a key feature in assessing the progression or resolution of conditions, and the pattern is characterized by phrases indicating comparison with prior imaging studies and stability or changes in findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.365079365079365,0.7931034482758621,58.0,142.0
+3925,latent_3925,6996,0.013992,0.01372021,6.3956056,Comparison of current images with prior imaging.,"The examples exhibit a structure where findings are compared against prior images to ascertain changes or stability, which is typical of medical imaging reports that focus on identifying new, unchanged, or resolved conditions. Examples with higher activations often contain detailed findings relevant to the clinical indication or history provided, indicating a focused interpretation of the changes since the prior imaging.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3926,latent_3926,7341,0.014682,0.019779112,5.549216,Instructions to compare current imaging findings to prior studies.,"Most high activation examples involve the instruction to compare current imaging findings with prior examinations. This suggests that the presence of explicit past comparisons for stability or changes over time, detailing differences or consistencies, significantly accounts for the activation pattern.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4285714285714285,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4793388429752066,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3927,latent_3927,3030,0.00606,0.008881646,5.238405,Descriptive comparison of current radiological images with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently discuss changes or stability in imaging findings by comparing current images to prior images, specifically focusing on aspects like new findings, changes in size or appearance, or stability over time. This pattern concentrates on the comparative analysis over different radiological studies.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4952898550724638,0.507537688442211,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,99.0
+3928,latent_3928,5734,0.011468,0.009174758,7.06428,"Examination comparing current and prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to a comparison between current and prior imaging studies with descriptions of interval changes or stability ('unstable position', 'unchanged', 'removed', etc.). This pattern emphasizes updates or stability in specific conditions over time, contrary to examples with lower activation levels which include general findings without such comparative assessments.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3929,latent_3929,3430,0.00686,0.008282109,6.399716,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern is linked to instances where there exists explicit guidance to compare current images against prior images, which is commonly seen in radiology reports, especially when there are concerns of changes over time. References to comparisons, the histories provided, and the reasoning behind assessments such as worsening or stability are indicative.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.4298245614035088,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3930,latent_3930,10989,0.021978,0.013800561,5.2621126,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently mention findings in direct comparison with prior imaging studies, identifying stability or changes over time such as unchanged cardiac silhouette, stable conditions, or interval changes. This emphasis on the stability or variation between imaging studies as the key point of analysis is a common pattern in radiology, particularly highlighted in these examples.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5975609756097561,0.49,100.0,100.0
+3931,latent_3931,4466,0.008932,0.010166696,4.529433,Generate comparison analysis between current and prior images.,The highly activated examples focus on procedural content or directive format that emphasizes the input being an analysis based on a comparison between current and prior imaging. The examples consistently ask to provide a description focused on comparison without extra clinical detail or context outside the immediate change observation.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3932,latent_3932,10548,0.021096,0.012030849,4.796808,Evaluations based on comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, particularly noting changes, stability, or evaluation outcomes based on these comparisons. This suggests that references to direct comparisons with prior imaging, where specific changes or stabilities are evaluated and detailed, are the key feature being captured by high activation.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3933,latent_3933,3506,0.007012,0.012923717,5.520133,Assessment and evaluation of medical device or intervention placement.,"The examples exhibiting the pattern all have explicit requests for assessment of specific findings such as lines, tubes, or surgical results. The activation appears related to the mention and evaluation of medical devices or interventions like PICC lines, pacemaker leads, drains, and their positions or changes relative to prior imaging.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5082585511770061,0.5226130653266332,0.5303030303030303,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+3934,latent_3934,5439,0.010878,0.009332082,5.746788,Descriptions of changes or potential changes in rib structures on imaging.,"High activation values are associated with descriptions of changes or suggestions of changes in rib structures in comparison to previous images, often indicating possible fractures or acute changes, whereas descriptions focusing on other aspects, like lung fields or existing conditions without suggesting change in rib structures, are given low activation.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,1.0,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4692770373864843,0.55,0.7272727272727273,0.16,100.0,100.0
+3935,latent_3935,7195,0.01439,0.010226408,4.1332335,Emphasis on comparative descriptions of radiologic images.,The high activation examples primarily include specific directives to 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior image' even when previous studies are not explicitly compared. This indicates emphasis on examining changes or assessing stability between current and prior images. This language pattern contributes significantly to the activation level in these cases.,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.442866801893171,0.485,0.4903225806451612,0.76,100.0,100.0
+3936,latent_3936,5931,0.011862,0.023434293,6.727168,Descriptions evaluate findings by comparing current images with prior studies.,Most examples document the comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging studies using specific dates or prior studies as a reference basis. This is a feature of radiology reports that helps to track changes or stability over time.,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5025130917607432,0.5226130653266332,0.5142857142857142,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+3937,latent_3937,8228,0.016456,0.010966711,4.1544175,Document comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation consistently note comparisons of current radiographic findings with prior images. The model likely emphasizes the verbatim process of radiological comparison and tracking of changes over time, suggesting that these reports directly focus on historical changes in imaging studies.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3957057675338912,0.435,0.4569536423841059,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3938,latent_3938,4150,0.0083,0.007889229,4.836855,Reports indicate stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples all involve descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to previous studies, focusing on unchanged states or absence of new abnormal findings, despite previous conditions like effusions, consolidation, or interventions. The presence of comparative descriptions indicates continuous evaluation of stable or unchanged pathology across exams.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4328358208955223,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3939,latent_3939,4296,0.008592,0.0097863795,3.6333013,Comparison to prior images with emphasis on unchanged findings.,"The pattern evident in these examples includes descriptions of findings with comparisons to prior images, typically indicating no significant change. These descriptions often highlight consistency or stability of certain conditions across imaging sessions, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'compared to prior', or negative phrasing denoting no new change.",0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.4882755811289049,0.4924623115577889,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,99.0
+3940,latent_3940,6559,0.013118,0.01179077,5.339989,Comparative analysis with reference to prior imaging studies.,"The examples mostly feature explicit comparison and direct reference to previous imaging studies, often assessing for stability or changes over time. The examples specifically highlight findings that are interpreted relative to past imagery, using phases like 'compared to the previous' or 'interval change'.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.49,0.4939024390243902,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3941,latent_3941,5576,0.011152,0.013658446,7.9879622,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, hilar contours, and pulmonary vasculature.","Examples with higher activation demonstrate a distinct pattern where the cardiac silhouette, along with mediastinal and hilar contours, is normal, and pulmonary vasculature also appears normal. This pattern commonly signifies an unremarkable or stable chest radiograph without acute pathology, which aligns with the type of training patterns typically requiring confirmation of normalcy in radiology.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7724917212265223,0.775,0.7272727272727273,0.88,100.0,100.0
+3942,latent_3942,3335,0.00667,0.009888704,4.998203,Strong reliance on prior comparative imaging in report analysis.,"Examples with high activation focus on radiological studies where prior comparative imaging is heavily referenced either explicitly via prior reports or implicitly through findings and impressions. The reports focus on evaluating current findings in context of those past images, assessing changes or stabilities. This pattern reflects critical investigative analysis characteristic of clinical radiology.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+3943,latent_3943,13487,0.026974,0.011919862,5.429702,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide detailed radiological descriptions that emphasize changes or stability in findings as compared to previous studies, using explicit comparison terms such as 'changed', 'unchanged', 'new', or 'stable'. This suggests that the pattern involves the thorough evaluation of interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.3238095238095238,0.5666666666666667,60.0,140.0
+3944,latent_3944,3653,0.007306,0.009584637,5.007071,References to frontal images with incomplete or disrupted context.,"The highly activated examples refer to both a current frontal image and a prior frontal image for comparison, containing incomplete or critically lost information in the 'practical assistants' section. Low activation examples have complete particulars or differing descriptions. The pattern reflects incomplete text with unclear context.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.5208333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4038559107052258,0.53,0.515625,0.99,100.0,100.0
+3945,latent_3945,7979,0.015958,0.013999375,4.4419923,In-depth comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention a direct observation that uses technical medical phrasing and descriptors that would be common in medical imaging analysis, emphasizing the comparison of findings between current images and prior images, particularly in relation to clinical indications given and the imaging techniques used.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3813471502590674,0.3819095477386934,0.3904761904761905,0.41,100.0,99.0
+3946,latent_3946,2753,0.005506,0.008024389,7.673351,Description involves direct comparison with previous imaging findings.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve evaluation and comparison with previous diagnostic imaging, indicating changes or stability of particular pathologies over time. Such descriptions include comparative phrases like 'increased since prior,' 'stable,' 'interval change,' making these examples directly relevant to cases which involve monitoring specific conditions across different time points.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+3947,latent_3947,16304,0.032608,0.03768508,4.358146,Evaluations of interval changes in medical artifacts and findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often provide a commentary on past and present medical artifacts or conditions observed in imaging studies, highlighting stability, change, or removal of medical devices or findings from previous assessments. The comparison is made between current and prior exams, noting continuity or changes in the findings.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4358974358974359,0.51,100.0,100.0
+3948,latent_3948,3249,0.006498,0.012358582,6.292238,Comparative interpretation of current and prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently ask for detailed descriptions based on both current images and comparisons to prior images, implying a pattern where current findings are evaluated against previous studies to determine significance.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+3949,latent_3949,4134,0.008268,0.011532581,8.552196,Reports noting an enlarged cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe an enlarged cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly. Terms like 'mildly enlarged', 'enlargement', or 'cardiomegaly' appear prominently in these examples, explaining the pattern of increased activation when such cardiac findings are noted.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.9166666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7238331952499311,0.725,0.7586206896551724,0.66,100.0,100.0
+3950,latent_3950,7375,0.01475,0.014872253,4.5524964,Instructions require comparison description between current and prior images.,The highly activated examples frequently require the assistant to provide a description of radiological findings based on current images in comparison to prior imaging. The presence of comparison to prior imaging is a key element in these instructions that results in higher activations.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+3951,latent_3951,2108,0.004216,0.0057170494,5.1387033,Presence of small bilateral pleural effusions.,"The examples with high activation involve the presence of small bilateral pleural effusions, often described in conjunction with other chest findings. The reports explicitly mention these pleural effusions, whether new or stable, and often in the context of comparison to previous images, indicating a focus on small changes in fluid accumulation.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6871966346672419,0.71,0.9565217391304348,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3952,latent_3952,92207,0.184414,0.14855598,4.836579,Identification of interval changes or findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Consistently throughout the activation examples, there is an emphasis on changes over time or progression/regression of certain conditions when compared with prior imaging. Reporting is focused on identifying new findings, interval changes, or stable conditions over time using previous imaging as a baseline for comparison.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6292863762743282,0.64,0.6044776119402985,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3953,latent_3953,11405,0.02281,0.0132628605,4.705621,Radiological findings with noted stability or subtle changes over time.,"Highly activating examples frequently mention both the presence and the comparative stability or change of certain features, such as effusions, emphysema, opacities, or cardiac silhouettes, even when changes or comparisons are subtle or relatively minor. They often discuss ongoing management or recommend further studies in response to minimal observed changes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6535361904044588,0.655,0.6371681415929203,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3954,latent_3954,10959,0.021918,0.023045195,5.478958,Comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples consistently describe radiology studies that compare current findings with prior images. This includes descriptions of whether previously identified abnormalities have changed, using phrases like 'compared with', 'increased', 'unchanged', or specific terms indicating changes over time, which is crucial in follow-up imaging.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4676258992805755,0.65,100.0,100.0
+3955,latent_3955,10243,0.020486,0.016430235,4.612647,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette across imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations primarily mention the need to note changes, either improvement, stability or resolution in features, when comparing current and prior imaging. This includes identifying cardiomediastinal or hilar contours or viewing typical structures as within normal limits relative to previous imaging.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.575,0.46,100.0,100.0
+3956,latent_3956,5375,0.01075,0.009151632,4.730142,Comparison of current and prior imaging focusing on new or unchanged findings.,"Examples identify differences between current findings and prior reports using words that indicate change or stability such as 'newly appeared', 'stable', or 'there is no relevant change', often focusing on pleural effusions or lung opacity, suggesting evaluation of recent alterations in the image.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3999399939993999,0.4,0.3979591836734694,0.39,100.0,100.0
+3957,latent_3957,4208,0.008416,0.01057704,3.600994,Evaluation and description of medical device placement in chest radiographs.,"The examples exhibiting the pattern describe medical evaluations using chest radiographs, with specific focus on the positioning or evaluation of medical devices like nasogastric tubes, tracheostomy tubes, chest tubes, and PICC lines. The presence and correctness of these devices are checked, which is a common radiological task in clinical settings, apart from noting unchanged pathological findings.",0.2921492921492921,0.34,0.1666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.2979782863051345,0.355,0.1627906976744186,0.07,100.0,100.0
+3958,latent_3958,17019,0.034038,0.019203426,8.386781,Comparison of current and prior images for changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve a pattern of utilizing comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on the analysis of changes or stability over time. This shows that the model is sensitive to cases where previous and current studies are compared to assess interval changes, particularly in terms of hardware or anatomical structures like catheters, effusions, or pneumothoraxes.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.4871794871794871,0.7916666666666666,24.0,26.0,0.3336506425511661,0.335,0.2389937106918239,0.76,50.0,150.0
+3959,latent_3959,5144,0.010288,0.012319657,4.3775516,Instructions to compare images despite 'no comparison available'.,All examples with high activation use specific instructional language for comparing current and prior imaging studies but notably say 'comparison: none' or 'no comparison'. This indicates a pattern of expecting comparative description instructions despite indicating no available prior comparison visuals.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5652173913043478,0.26,100.0,100.0
+3960,latent_3960,43874,0.087748,0.059153687,6.5564733,Explicit comparison with previous imaging studies to assess changes or stability.,"The prominent factor in these examples is the explicit comparison of current radiological findings with previous imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability. Activation is high when these comparisons are clearly stated, using previous studies for reference, changes, or stability comments.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.4201680672268907,0.5,100.0,100.0
+3961,latent_3961,3603,0.007206,0.006687235,8.94406,Detailed diagnostic comparison with prior images.,Examples with higher activation levels involve comparing current images with prior frontal images and providing a detailed descriptive diagnosis based on comparison. They frequently note changes or no changes from previous images to make clinical decisions.,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4285714285714285,0.5517241379310345,87.0,113.0
+3962,latent_3962,12910,0.02582,0.023024868,5.9414515,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies with noted changes.,"Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior examinations, indicating detected interval changes or stability. Descriptions lacking or noting no comparison have lower activation.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3775287892934952,0.4,0.3387096774193548,0.21,100.0,100.0
+3963,latent_3963,8676,0.017352,0.017477931,6.322568,Comparison with prior imaging showing stability or resolution of abnormalities.,"Examples showing high activation levels involve descriptions comparing findings with prior imaging studies, while noting consistent or resolved issues, absence of new abnormalities, or providing interpretations based on imaging changes over time.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+3964,latent_3964,7801,0.015602,0.009261273,3.766016,Comparison of current and prior images with emphasis on device or anatomical stability/change.,Highly activated examples often discuss specific changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical findings from prior imaging reports. This shows a focus on comparisons highlighting temporal stability or change in assessed features like devices or anatomical structures.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4924646417806631,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+3965,latent_3965,3986,0.007972,0.009027114,4.1566744,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+3966,latent_3966,5156,0.010312,0.013217558,7.694904,Evaluation for pneumonia or thoracic-related conditions from chest imaging.,The examples consistently involve requests for radiological descriptions in the context of evaluating symptoms or conditions like cough and potential pneumonia. The focus is on examining images with an emphasis on pathologies related to respiratory issues or thoracic health concerns.,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4452409398645958,0.4723618090452261,0.4791666666666667,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+3967,latent_3967,16655,0.03331,0.015455137,5.0655036,Descriptions or comparisons of findings with prior imaging studies.,"These examples mostly involve clear comparisons between current and prior radiographic findings. The examples with higher activations frequently encompass elements of follow-up imaging for progression, resolution, stability of findings, or alterations noted when compared with past imaging, emphasizing changes or similarities over time which is crucial in monitoring conditions and adjusting treatments.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3944991789819376,0.41,0.4014084507042254,0.6333333333333333,90.0,110.0
+3968,latent_3968,33939,0.067878,0.0464814,3.8575928,Detailed comparison with prior imaging over multiple studies.,"The examples activate strongly when they describe findings on current imaging in direct comparison with findings on multiple or prior images, usually highlighting intervals, changes, or stability in certain conditions or features. Often, these examples also involve more complex radiographic findings that require careful observation over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5025125628140703,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+3969,latent_3969,4146,0.008292,0.009929363,4.007592,Explicit request for comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels show radiological prompts explicitly calling for comparison of findings between current and prior images. This pattern is indicative of the reports focusing on changes over time or stability of certain findings, typically articulated as 'comparison' or directly referencing prior studies.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6074319055685515,0.635,0.5882352941176471,0.9,100.0,100.0
+3970,latent_3970,13758,0.027516,0.016929377,4.9221973,Explicit mentions of unchanged findings or stable conditions between current and prior images.,"The pattern is consistent across examples where the activation level is high, indicating explicit mentions and descriptions of changes or comparisons between current and previous images, particularly about specific features or findings that remain unchanged or have changed.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5633802816901409,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3971,latent_3971,3881,0.007762,0.009948646,3.8959339,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiographs focusing on interval changes.,"Samples with high activation levels explicitly highlight the comparison with prior radiographs, pointing out specific interval changes, irrespective of whether any significant findings or changes were noted (e.g., ET tube placements, new pneumothorax). These examples focus on radiological comparisons to assess changes over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+3972,latent_3972,88832,0.177664,0.106999025,4.2900414,Reduced or low lung volumes affecting imaging evaluation.,"Examples with high activation levels typically present with low lung volumes or are noted to have poor inspiration. Such descriptions often imply limited evaluation due to the reduced lung inflation, altering the density and visibility of certain thoracic structures.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4652553819013754,0.515,0.5384615384615384,0.21,100.0,100.0
+3973,latent_3973,2882,0.005764,0.009714683,6.09073,Evaluation of current images compared to prior radiographs.,"The pattern here is characterized by the comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images, focusing on changes over time. This is a common practice in radiology to evaluate improvements, stability, or progression of certain conditions, consistently mentioned across the samples with varying degrees of detail.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5464100011063171,0.59,0.5555555555555556,0.9,100.0,100.0
+3974,latent_3974,5343,0.010686,0.00762115,3.8803837,Descriptions focus on interval changes from prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels involve descriptions that compare current imaging findings with prior studies, specifically noting interval changes (improvements, worsening, or stability). The pattern emphasizes the use of such comparisons to determine changes in the patient's condition.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4565217391304348,0.46,0.4655172413793103,0.54,100.0,100.0
+3975,latent_3975,74409,0.148818,0.102664135,5.1296597,Assessment of tube or device placement changes.,"The model highly activates on examples that involve changes in the position or condition of tubes and devices like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, chest tubes, or catheters, between imaging studies. This reflects the task's importance in clinical practice to ensure correct placement and function.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6058669460450498,0.6161616161616161,0.6716417910447762,0.4545454545454545,99.0,99.0
+3976,latent_3976,14976,0.029952,0.015965948,5.175788,Descriptions emphasize interval changes or stability in radiologic findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe interval changes against prior imaging studies, focusing not just on the presence of comparison but highlighting specific changes or stability in abnormalities such as effusions, opacities, and lines/catheters. This emphasis on change or stability in specific clinical features is consistent across high activation examples.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5925209542230818,0.605,0.5777777777777777,0.78,100.0,100.0
+3977,latent_3977,4899,0.009798,0.0070637474,3.228327,Descriptive comparisons of chest radiographs with prior images.,"The highly activated samples consistently involve descriptions of chest radiograph findings, specifically focusing on comparisons with prior images to identify changes, progressions, or stability in conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.553030303030303,0.73,100.0,100.0
+3978,latent_3978,4833,0.009666,0.007670511,6.3397636,Description of tubes or catheters in comparison to prior placement.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention findings related to the placement or condition of tubes and catheters (e.g., ET tube, NG tube, PICC line), and their comparison to prior positions, indicating that this information is critical for the pattern the model recognizes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,100.0,100.0
+3979,latent_3979,9769,0.019538,0.018725865,4.414345,Complex imaging findings with multi-view comparison focusing on cardiopulmonary conditions.,"The highly activated examples involve multiple imaging views and descriptions of complex cardiopulmonary or thoracic conditions, often comparing current findings against prior studies while focusing on indications like acute or chronic pulmonary pathologies, cardiovascular assessment, or traumatic changes. This offers detailed analysis and interval changes across multiple timed studies.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+3980,latent_3980,5445,0.01089,0.009607471,4.424853,Comparison to prior imaging with explicit description of interval changes.,"The activation levels are higher in examples involving descriptions of interval changes or evaluations in comparison to prior images, where changes or stability are explicitly noted. The examples show a focus on reporting differences or stability over time, common in follow-up imagery assessments.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+3981,latent_3981,6789,0.013578,0.015348368,4.2814903,Documented interval changes in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels (4.0 and above) include terms or interpretations that signal an interval change or mention findings consistent with a significant pathological process. These are descriptions indicating alterations or lack thereof compared to a prior study, often detailing improved, worsened, or unchanged pathologies after taking into account the context of previous findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+3982,latent_3982,33857,0.067714,0.027370373,2.07658,Importance of multi-view radiographs and interval change evaluation.,"Higher activation examples explicitly reference multiple radiographic views (frontal and lateral) or specifically highlight unique findings associated with comparison to prior imaging, such as changes in intrathoracic devices, lung opacities, and subtle structural differences that may require a detailed multi-view analysis for thorough assessment of interval changes.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+3983,latent_3983,4331,0.008662,0.008678679,5.3361936,Explicit reference to prior images even without described changes.,"Examples with high activation prominently mention comparison with previous imaging to highlight changes or stability in findings, indicating that the pattern focuses on reports where prior images are explicitly cited for comparison, even if changes are not described. This suggests the pattern strongly relates to explicit prior image presence rather than changes themselves.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4424262904452141,0.505,0.5029940119760479,0.84,100.0,100.0
+3984,latent_3984,7746,0.015492,0.016987683,5.0095243,Assessment of interval change in imaging findings.,"The observed pattern is that these reports focus on the evaluation of changes over time, utilizing phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'similar compared to prior'. This pattern is common in radiological reporting when assessing interval changes in medical imaging.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4867256637168141,0.55,100.0,100.0
+3985,latent_3985,7813,0.015626,0.013685007,7.026442,Reports discussing tube or catheter positioning changes compared to prior images.,"These examples highlight radiology reports which explicitly involve detailed descriptions about adjustments or positioning of tubes (such as NG or ET tubes) or catheter placements as they are compared to prior images, indicating any necessary changes or recommendations. Such comparisons often revolve around line placements, repositioning, and tube conditions, which are a frequent focus in hospital settings for critically ill or post-operative patients.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6061724433033804,0.628140703517588,0.75,0.39,100.0,99.0
+3986,latent_3986,12445,0.02489,0.011751021,2.9557855,Description focuses on stable findings across comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation consistently describe the presence and comparison of current images with prior radiographs or imaging studies, focusing particularly on stable or unchanged findings across examinations. This pattern is indicative of a broader theme in radiology of monitoring stability or progression of findings over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5505392716660322,0.5527638190954773,0.5647058823529412,0.48,100.0,99.0
+3987,latent_3987,3414,0.006828,0.007952292,5.129835,"Description of stable or normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with terms like 'normal', 'unchanged', or 'stable'. This suggests that the model is activated by passages where these anatomical features are explicitly noted to be stable or within normal limits on imaging.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6051587301587301,0.6080402010050251,0.5948275862068966,0.69,100.0,99.0
+3988,latent_3988,7693,0.015386,0.01644951,4.7110033,Emphasis on comparing current images with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently utilize direct comparisons between current imaging findings and previous studies. The emphasis on comparative analysis and interval changes is critical in these examples, focusing on changes or stability in imaging results.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4030813906590303,0.445,0.4640522875816993,0.71,100.0,100.0
+3989,latent_3989,11031,0.022062,0.024182335,7.3944273,Comparison of specific focal opacities or identifiable lesions between studies.,"The examples with higher activation typically mention specific focal opacities or other identifiable lesions, pleural effusions, or signs of pulmonary congestion which are compared across current and prior exams. These findings include terms suggesting progression or stability over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+3990,latent_3990,2907,0.005814,0.011359676,7.0434756,Comparison using PA and lateral views with prior frontal image.,"The high activation level examples involve explicit comparisons of current findings to previous medical imaging, while indicating the presence of specific radiological techniques such as PA (Posteroanterior) and lateral views. This pattern underscores the importance of assessing changes over time based on technique-specific views.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+3991,latent_3991,11952,0.023904,0.014937174,5.6032543,Descriptive comparison request in radiographic studies.,"This pattern aligns with the presence of either the wording directly asking for comparison or unexplained suggestions that directly reference sequential evaluations since the first image, indicating comparison across sequential imaging studies that request possible improvement or similarities across the patient's diagnosis. These explanations usually include 'prior frontal image' instructions, possibly allowing incorrect interpretation when comparison is being asked.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4750224517287831,0.5276381909547738,0.5185185185185185,0.84,100.0,99.0
+3992,latent_3992,2831,0.005662,0.00985111,6.683243,Emphasis on describing interval changes through comparison to prior images.,"The examples describe radiological findings using specific language indicating a comparison between current and prior imaging studies. The examples with high activation levels explicitly direct to provide or note descriptions comparing current and prior images, ensuring any changes are highlighted. This reflects a common practice in radiology reporting emphasizing the use of comparison to assess for interval changes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+3993,latent_3993,4115,0.00823,0.023008268,7.6042576,Structured comparison with prior images in radiology reports.,"The examples show a recurrent pattern of radiological reports providing comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, specifically using structured phrases indicating change or stability over time. Phrases such as 'comparison', 'prior frontal image', or 'unchanged from prior' frequently appear, emphasizing the analysis of interval changes.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+3994,latent_3994,4175,0.00835,0.0077686883,6.0018134,Detailed imaging descriptions emphasizing normalcy and stability.,"These examples frequently provide very specific imaging findings with similar descriptions, focusing on indicating clear, normal or minimal pathological findings while emphasizing stability and lack of significant changes over time. References to 'no acute' conditions and terms like 'normal' and 'clear' appear repeatedly.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4996408045977011,0.507537688442211,0.5135135135135135,0.38,100.0,99.0
+3995,latent_3995,8316,0.016632,0.012593577,5.5439816,Explicit comparison to prior imaging findings indicating interval stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation values describe findings in current imaging data compared explicitly with findings from prior imaging data to note stability, change, or absence of significant interval change, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'no interval change', 'compared to prior', etc. These phrases are crucial to understanding the pattern as it involves comparisons with previous imaging studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.58,0.58,0.58,0.58,100.0,100.0
+3996,latent_3996,27760,0.05552,0.04337905,4.508208,Unchanged cardiomediastinal contours compared to previous images.,"These examples consistently focus on stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal contours and other findings when comparing the current images to prior studies. The pattern highlights reports that point out a lack of significant new findings, emphasizing stability over time, which is crucial in tracking chronic conditions or post-surgical assessments.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.58,0.29,100.0,100.0
+3997,latent_3997,2786,0.005572,0.0073130955,6.0032926,Presence or mention of prior image comparison.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where there is either prior imaging available for direct comparison or mention of a comparison to previous imaging findings. This comparison with the prior imaging is highlighted as a critical factor in determining changes or stability of conditions.,0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4565061929689064,0.525,0.5146198830409356,0.88,100.0,100.0
+3998,latent_3998,8931,0.017862,0.01305586,4.192275,Reports using current and prior images to assess for changes or stability.,"The data examples indicate moderately high activation for scenarios where there are current and prior images involved and the reports focus on identifying changes or similarities over time. This suggests the model is particularly focused on the continuity of imaging findings, with emphasis on stability or changes.",0.2921492921492921,0.34,0.3947368421052631,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+3999,latent_3999,4998,0.009996,0.013057665,4.719847,Pleural effusion or atelectasis in stable radiographic context.,"High activation levels consistently appear in instances where pleural effusion and/or atelectasis are mentioned, suggesting a pattern involving these specific lung abnormalities appearing in otherwise relatively typical or stable radiographic contexts. These findings often focus on stability or lack of change, and descriptions use phrases like 'effusion unchanged' or 'atelectasis stable.'",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.609375,0.61,0.6195652173913043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4000,latent_4000,5870,0.01174,0.016816719,4.4990396,Comparative analysis reference between current and prior images.,"These examples typically include references to both current and prior images and use the placeholders '<image>' within the context of comparing current and previous radiological images. They often contain keywords related to changes or comparisons between these images, suggested by terms like 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'INDICATION', and others indicating provision for a description of findings relative to prior images, which ties together the aspect of comparison as central to the pattern.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4725620020199753,0.53,0.5180722891566265,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4001,latent_4001,7371,0.014742,0.016700748,5.165587,Comparison with prior frontal image specified but detailed findings referenced as '<image>'.,"The examples with high activation involve a pattern where the radiology findings are explicitly compared to a prior image, and the current and prior frontal images were all referred to with placeholders ""<image>"". These mappings are consistently seen in examples with higher activations.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+4002,latent_4002,15234,0.030468,0.015678737,6.4258924,Radiographic stability without interval change from prior images.,"Examples exhibiting this pattern specifically mention findings from a radiographic study without significant interval change or progression when referenced against prior imagery. Phrases like 'unchanged in position', 'persistent', and 'no significant interval change' are frequently used to convey stability in findings.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5714285714285714,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5847828526540231,0.63,0.4411764705882353,0.4545454545454545,66.0,134.0
+4003,latent_4003,21867,0.043734,0.028478594,10.464367,Comparison with prior images revealing pneumonia or unchanged lung conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve radiological findings where there is a comparison between current images and prior images, resulting in the identification of either new opacities suggestive of pneumonia or unchanged findings consistent with stable conditions, often in the context of pneumonia or other lung conditions. The common theme is associating the comparison with pneumonia-related findings or stability involving lung conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5286724273369993,0.58,0.2631578947368421,0.6410256410256411,39.0,161.0
+4004,latent_4004,9325,0.01865,0.013296199,5.8896613,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated samples discuss situations where changes shown in current imaging are compared to prior images, with a focus on stability or notable changes between images, such as stable lung nodules, resolved consolidations, or unchanged lesions. This suggests the emphasis on temporal comparison of radiological findings, typically indicating stability or improvements over time compared to prior exams.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.431578947368421,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4005,latent_4005,2804,0.005608,0.005678417,5.346405,Presence of a prior frontal image and comparison text with reduced clinical significance.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include the use of frontal images, descriptions of radiology studies, and explicit comparisons to prior imaging despite reduced clinical or diagnostic significance in the indications and findings. This pattern focuses less on the complexity of findings and more on procedural text components and a focus on image comparison text in the presence of contextual detail omission or specificity in some medical conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4246260069044879,0.45,0.4647887323943662,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4006,latent_4006,8527,0.017054,0.010906191,3.9779043,No significant interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels typically involve phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph' and descriptions that do not identify significant changes in the latest imaging, indicating no new findings or status quo in patient condition. These examples might also include conditions like unchanged devices or persistent issues as before, without reporting new pathologies.",0.5440850686752325,0.5714285714285714,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4377820760799484,0.455,0.4307692307692308,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4007,latent_4007,4005,0.00801,0.0111103365,8.766018,Presence of both current and prior images for comparison.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently require the AI to refer to both a current frontal and a prior frontal image. This suggests that the model associates these instructions with a higher need for comprehensive analysis of change across time, demanding context from both current and previous images.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4125585456854806,0.445,0.4625850340136054,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4008,latent_4008,38609,0.077218,0.03533854,3.7169898,Comparison with prior imaging study to identify changes.,"The pattern involves comparing findings to prior imaging studies, specifically noting interval changes and developments. This pattern is a standard approach in radiology to identify changes over time. Examples with higher activations emphasize clear changes or stability of findings compared to prior images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5733333333333334,0.6,0.5666666666666667,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4009,latent_4009,34675,0.06935,0.03293628,3.53732,Explicit comparison with prior imaging studies noting interval changes.,"The higher activation levels are associated with descriptions that explicitly compare current imaging findings with prior studies, indicating interval change or stability, using structured formats that emphasize comparison, such as noting changes or stabilities in findings from prior images.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.5959595959595959,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4010,latent_4010,13176,0.026352,0.020816116,5.532384,Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly in chest imaging.,"The prominent finding amongst these examples is cardiomegaly or an enlarged heart. Descriptions such as 'heart is moderately enlarged' and 'moderate cardiomegaly' highlight this feature. These reports specifically note either stable or unchanged cardiomegaly, differentiating them from other observations or changes recorded in the imaging.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.58,0.29,100.0,100.0
+4011,latent_4011,18353,0.036706,0.01680345,3.2850552,Comparison with prior radiographic studies emphasizing changes in findings.,"Examples with high activation show explicit references to comparing radiological findings to previous images, particularly noting changes over time, such as changes in lung volumes, the positions of medical devices, or the resolution of clinical conditions. This pattern highlights a focus on diagnostic progression and continuity of care in medical imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4012,latent_4012,7353,0.014706,0.010255429,3.8126736,Dynamic observation and interpretation of findings over time.,"Examples with high activation focus on the dynamic observation and interpretation of changes in findings between current and previous exams, such as changes in opacities, new positions of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters), or descriptions of intervals in conditions. These reports include interpretations of changes over time, notably comparing intervals between and documenting specific updates or observations.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4809985096870343,0.507537688442211,0.503448275862069,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+4013,latent_4013,8980,0.01796,0.010917349,4.204229,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4014,latent_4014,6602,0.013204,0.025217295,8.521499,Prompt requests findings or comparisons without explicit prior comparison data available.,"The examples with high activation levels often lack prior comparison radiographs explicitly mentioned in the report. Instead, they contain prompts asking for comparison or description of findings. This indicates a pattern related to situations where there are direct requests for interpretation without clear prior data to compare against, reflecting an examination approach where the model is required to deduce findings without explicit historical reference. These examples stress a lack of direct comparison information despite needing to provide comparative analysis or possible narrative prompts.",0.4731182795698925,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4744718309859155,0.5175879396984925,0.5095541401273885,0.8080808080808081,99.0,100.0
+4015,latent_4015,9442,0.018884,0.010368716,2.9871233,Emphasis on stability or minor changes in comparative image analysis.,"This pattern focuses on comparative analysis between sequential imaging studies to assess changes over time in the presence or absence of pathological findings. The examples reflect frequent mention of stable conditions or minimal changes, emphasizing the continuity or improvement without substantial new findings.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.464665415884928,0.465,0.4631578947368421,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4016,latent_4016,4623,0.009246,0.005960042,8.317977,Detailed descriptions of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with lower activation often lack direct comparisons to previous imaging, which is a common style in radiology reports to evaluate changes over time. The presence of detailed change descriptions in some reports indicates the focus on interval changes is a key pattern being activated.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.238095238095238,0.3333333333333333,60.0,140.0
+4017,latent_4017,4592,0.009184,0.010544877,4.194893,Changes in findings compared to previous radiographs.,"These examples frequently contain references to comparison with prior radiographs and explicitly describe changes, such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'there is...change'. This pattern is often used in radiology to identify and communicate changes in the patient's condition over time by comparing current imaging to prior studies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4993742817009322,0.5,0.5047619047619047,0.53,100.0,98.0
+4018,latent_4018,24348,0.048696,0.027214948,5.703419,Detection and reporting of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations frequently mention comparisons of findings with prior images, often identifying changes such as 'interval increase', 'progressed', 'new since prior', or 'stable since prior exams', indicating a pattern of detecting and reporting changes or stability over time.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6443142588136834,0.66,0.6126760563380281,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4019,latent_4019,37071,0.074142,0.033671327,2.6763666,Sparse or unclear use of comparison to prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels tend to lack or provide sparse explicit prior comparison information or focus on newly noted findings rather than providing detailed comparisons to previous images. This suggests an association to scenarios where radiologists are requested to deliver summative or conclusive interpretations in the absence of comprehensive prior image comparisons.,0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3826390771362308,0.4824120603015075,0.4888888888888889,0.8888888888888888,99.0,100.0
+4020,latent_4020,16116,0.032232,0.02124954,3.9117668,Comparison with unspecified prior imaging studies and reporting findings.,Higher activation instances are often associated with multiple reference to unspecified prior studies or previous exams while noting significant findings or changes in imaging. The pattern emphasizes comparison with unspecified previous radiographs and description of findings or notable changes.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4792588285851513,0.485,0.4876033057851239,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4021,latent_4021,5148,0.010296,0.01292796,4.0999827,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4022,latent_4022,30661,0.061322,0.037620492,5.294893,Use of lateral imaging compared to prior frontal images.,"Higher activations are present when descriptions include both lateral and frontal views, often comparing these to prior studies, to comprehensively assess findings across multiple planes. This seems to reflect a pattern where cross-referencing current images with historical data across multiple views increases activation.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5447154471544715,0.545,0.5473684210526316,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4023,latent_4023,11251,0.022502,0.01543644,4.866394,Comparisons indicating changes or stability in current versus prior imaging findings.,"Higher activations occur in examples where there are explicit descriptions comparing findings in the current images to those in prior studies, often noting changes such as worsening, improvement, or stability in the findings. This includes comments on pleural effusions, lung volumes, cardiomegaly, and other conditions, where changes are directly mentioned in comparison to previous imaging.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4024,latent_4024,7083,0.014166,0.008675367,5.522159,Highlight changes or stability in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference evaluations of changes or stability in findings based on prior images, especially focusing on specific observations like stability of nodular findings or cardiorespiratory structures. It frequently involves clarification of previous reports or specific observations resulting in recommendations for follow-up imaging or clarifications using prior data.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6202791461412152,0.63,0.5984848484848485,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4025,latent_4025,48486,0.096972,0.07114419,5.43534,Descriptions of stability or interval changes despite imaging technique limitations.,Activation levels are high for examples that describe stability or interval changes despite significant limitations or differences in image acquisition techniques. This can require careful interpretation and is emphasized in radiology reports for clarity in handling differences in patient positioning or imaging quality.,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4026,latent_4026,8575,0.01715,0.011382892,5.977633,Comparison to prior imaging for assessing change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels indicate the presence of a comparison to prior studies, particularly emphasizing changes or stable findings without previous comparison data. This covers all scenarios where a current examination is described in the context of previous imaging.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4027,latent_4027,7692,0.015384,0.012074303,3.9812882,Detailed comparison with prior radiological images.,"These examples consistently include a detailed description of the radiological study findings compared to a previous or prior image, which is indicative of monitoring for changes over time in the medical context.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3949848746218655,0.395,0.3939393939393939,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4028,latent_4028,7067,0.014134,0.012290038,4.8235884,Consistency in comparing current imaging with prior images.,"The examples highlight the importance of comparing current imaging findings with prior images. Reports frequently include explicit descriptions of this comparison, using terms like 'comparison to prior', 'compared to previous', or references to prior images by date. These enable the assessment of changes over time, crucial for tracking disease progression or response to treatment.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4029,latent_4029,2507,0.005014,0.00632003,5.6910686,Inclusion of PRIOR_REPORT and comparison of current to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation show comparisons made against prior reports, while low activation examples lack this element. They frequently contain the phrase 'PRIOR_REPORT' indicating both current and prior imaging studies are being analyzed to track changes, which aligns with the task of evaluating changes over time in radiologic findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4030,latent_4030,2037,0.004074,0.006057762,9.807821,Comparative analysis of findings with prior images indicating stability or change.,"Both high activation examples involve comparing current radiological findings specifically with prior images and noting some form of interval change. In particular, these texts often describe stability or change in the appearance of specific lung findings or other conditions over time.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6266666666666667,0.65,0.6,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4031,latent_4031,5795,0.01159,0.010035571,6.4426966,Emphasis on changes in findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Prominent examples depict changes in findings such as the presence or severity of conditions or procedural changes, compared to prior imaging. They emphasize the comparison aspect, typically making a statement about change or stability, while unrepresented examples focus on standalone evaluations without change assessment.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4032,latent_4032,7325,0.01465,0.009346339,4.0464168,Comparison of current and prior images with emphasis on specific findings or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve a description of both a frontal and lateral chest image in comparison to a prior image and include specific changes or stability in particular structures, indicators, or medical devices. Comparisons are sometimes explicitly noted, focusing on things like consolidation, effusion, or technical details about support devices. In contrast, the lower activated examples often describe cases where the comparison with a prior image doesn't result in significant findings or change descriptions.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4533463727776524,0.455,0.4594594594594595,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4033,latent_4033,2720,0.00544,0.005074168,4.688395,Hyperinflated lungs indicating potential obstructive pulmonary condition.,The pattern involves the detection of hyperinflated lungs evident in several examples that account for high activation levels. This is a common descriptive feature in radiology pointing towards conditions like Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and is frequently reported without it being directly aberrant aside from this characteristic.,0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5743352535543006,0.625,0.9032258064516128,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4034,latent_4034,7780,0.01556,0.017741185,6.75922,Detailed comparative analysis of chest images with technical terminology.,"Examples with high activation levels involve detailed examination of multiple images (frontal, lateral, prior) of the chest, where the findings from these images are thoroughly described and specifically compared to previous findings, often with specialized or technical terms used to describe cardiopulmonary status precisely. This aligns with a pattern focusing on comprehensive analysis and precise terminology used in radiology.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4695652173913043,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4035,latent_4035,14165,0.02833,0.017652802,6.04215,"Comparative findings emphasizing stable interstitial, pleural, or atelectatic changes.","These examples focus on comparative analysis where changes or stability are observed between current and prior imaging, using phrases such as 'unchanged', 'compared to previous', and 'since prior', but with a focus on ongoing interstitial, pleural, or atelectatic changes rather than outright resolution or normalization.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6004320752319228,0.6030150753768844,0.6265060240963856,0.52,100.0,99.0
+4036,latent_4036,35846,0.071692,0.048369277,5.9732103,"Comparison of imaging findings, focusing on tube/device positioning and stability/change of findings.","The pattern primarily concerns the change or stability in imaging findings, comparing current images to prior ones. This is often expressed through change in positioning or condition of tubes or devices, and whether previous findings like opacities or effusions have resolved or persisted. The comparison aspect is crucial, but specifically in relation to changes in intervention placements or specific findings shown in context with prior imaging.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4037,latent_4037,16106,0.032212,0.023208866,5.8421946,Descriptions include direct comparison to previous studies or procedures.,"The examples with activation typically describe findings in relation to previous imaging studies or changes undergone during medical procedures. Terms like 'direct comparison', 'unchanged', or 'interval change' appear throughout these examples, showing a consistent pattern of evaluating changes over time or procedure-related modifications.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4608246545021141,0.525,0.514792899408284,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4038,latent_4038,8827,0.017654,0.009939083,5.97107,Evaluations of changes or new concerns in comparison to prior imaging.,"Reports with activation above zero often involve the evaluation or mention of changes in patient status and conditions utilizing various imaging comparisons, which might cause medical concerns. They are focused on identifying discrepancies, changes, or new concerns from prior imaging states or conditions, suggesting an interpretation or follow-up in the context of clinical assessment.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5041322314049587,0.6288659793814433,97.0,103.0
+4039,latent_4039,15648,0.031296,0.023612633,5.494838,Limited or no comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve imaging studies that show either no comparison or are limited in comparison to prior studies. The emphasis seems to be on reports where either a lack of comparison or limited availability of prior imaging is highlighted, such as 'Comparison: None' or limited 'Comparison: _'.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.53125,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4040,latent_4040,4112,0.008224,0.014388125,6.5571785,Comparison to prior images with unchanged or normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The pattern focuses on providing radiological descriptions in comparison to prior images while maintaining a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, aligning with standard practices in radiology where changes from prior studies are noted, but findings often indicate no significant change due to a normal silhouette or stable state of those features.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3464052287581699,0.37,0.2903225806451613,0.18,100.0,100.0
+4041,latent_4041,3730,0.00746,0.010197617,4.7785673,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"The higher activation levels correspond to examples where findings are compared with prior images or where changes are noted in comparison to previous imaging studies. This pattern indicates that the model is identifying reports with comparative analysis or a clear reference to image comparisons, whether changes are reported or not.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4142824960576706,0.415,0.4205607476635514,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4042,latent_4042,8786,0.017572,0.013554584,5.069079,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The high activation examples focus heavily on evaluating for specific interval changes in radiological images when compared to prior imaging. This suggests a pattern of detailed assessment on changes, improvements, or stability in specific findings, pointing out ""interval change"" in pathologies or anatomical placements.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4043,latent_4043,14537,0.029074,0.020099675,4.0756717,"Presence of lines, tubes or medical devices in chest imaging.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention lines, tubes, or other medical devices in the thoracic region of the body, often indicating their position or stability compared to past imaging. This pattern is notable in radiology as identifying and reporting the placement and situation of medical devices is a critical and common aspect of imaging analysis.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5625730994152047,0.5707070707070707,0.5972222222222222,0.4343434343434343,99.0,99.0
+4044,latent_4044,4679,0.009358,0.010007729,5.1542354,Device or tube assessment changes from prior radiology report.,"The samples that exhibit the pattern focus on the presence of prior reports and reference changes or comparisons specifically tied to medical devices or tubes within the patient, such as pacemakers, defibrillators, or tubes. This distinct feature, indicating a clinical context involving device assessment or comparison over time, appears crucial to the activation pattern.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4048716260697828,0.435,0.3818181818181818,0.21,100.0,100.0
+4045,latent_4045,20538,0.041076,0.03450055,4.789939,Stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"High activation examples often show comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, typically indicating a lack of significant change or a stable condition. This demonstrates a pattern of assessing stability over time against previous images.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6055226824457594,0.615,0.6666666666666666,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4046,latent_4046,10753,0.021506,0.013273718,5.4022045,"Radiological findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or no acute changes.","The examples primarily show unchanged radiology findings between current and previous imaging studies, often noting stability, absence of acute changes, or slight improvements. This pattern aligns with the language used when findings are stable over time and no new significant developments have occurred.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5426673737909438,0.542713567839196,0.5463917525773195,0.53,100.0,99.0
+4047,latent_4047,2914,0.005828,0.009085813,3.7316306,Prompt involves basic comparison of current versus prior radiology images.,"The highly activated examples consistently prompt for descriptions comparison of the study against prior frontal images, especially referencing the phrase 'current frontal image' or 'current lateral image' and 'prior frontal image', but often involve only a single or limited view without specifics on comparison details or patient history. This pattern may facilitate identifying basic status updates in a patient’s condition based on imaging.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4948794093974633,0.545,0.5276073619631901,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4048,latent_4048,5483,0.010966,0.011551278,7.245221,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of specific changes from prior imaging studies, such as interval developments in lung opacities, suspicious nodules, or device advancements. The reports indicate comparisons to understand progressions or new features over time, relevant for diagnostic purposes.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4049,latent_4049,28430,0.05686,0.021898778,2.6011794,Detailed description of findings and comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples exhibit a pattern involving reference to prior imaging comparisons, but the activation levels are influenced by detailed descriptions of current imaging findings, specifying changes or stability. High activation examples contain significant updates or stability statements related to observed pathologies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4797175278294385,0.5125628140703518,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,99.0
+4050,latent_4050,4396,0.008792,0.011129716,5.312071,Analysis and description of findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples that involve comparison between current and prior imaging findings, typically analyzing changes or stability over time, exhibit higher activation levels. Specific reference to comparisons tends to activate the pattern, indicating the model preferentially responds to comparative analysis of medical images.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.426031746031746,0.435,0.448,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4051,latent_4051,13003,0.026006,0.015870335,4.338826,Changes in pleural or lung findings from prior studies without new significant findings.,"Results exhibiting activation levels of 3.0 or above consistently describe cases where comparison with prior imaging is used to observe interval changes but does not report significant new findings, focusing mostly on changes deemed stable or mildly changed, and often involving pleural thickening, pleural effusions, or atelectasis.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5346534653465347,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4052,latent_4052,6008,0.012016,0.01534965,6.509359,Comparison between current and prior imaging findings for changes.,"The pattern consistently mentioned across high activation examples highlights the focus on radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. This involves determining changes or stability over time, which is a key aspect of follow-up imaging.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.6153846153846154,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4053,latent_4053,3939,0.007878,0.0126487035,5.5354447,Findings in the context of examination without available prior comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature certain key radiological findings in the context of examining images with comparisons to prior reports or using phrases indicating stable findings without acute change, suggesting a focus on consistency in diagnostic language across imaging evaluations without prior studies for comparison.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4054,latent_4054,6431,0.012862,0.009203877,4.761529,Absence of acute abnormalities or significant findings in the radiology report.,"Examples with high activation levels contain radiology reports where findings indicate a lack of acute abnormalities or significant pathology, emphasizing no acute cardiopulmonary or significant radiological change in the images. These descriptions often include phrases like 'no acute cardiopulmonary abnormality', 'lungs are clear', 'no pleural effusion', 'heart size is normal', highlighting stable features without urgent findings.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6745314636565944,0.6934673366834171,0.6326530612244898,0.93,100.0,99.0
+4055,latent_4055,12045,0.02409,0.014945986,8.112452,"Observations compared to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples demonstrating higher activation levels involve direct comparisons to a prior imaging study, with statements about findings being stable or unchanged over time. This specific language linking directly to previous scans and emphasizing stability or change is central to the pattern, contrasting examples that either lack comparisons or do not focus on stability/change updates from previous studies.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4943806162549122,0.495,0.3925925925925926,0.7361111111111112,72.0,128.0
+4056,latent_4056,32923,0.065846,0.05225404,5.9465375,Detailed assessment of medical devices and objects in chest radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently highlight the evaluation of medical devices (like catheters) and other objects in relation to their placement or status, such as 'central venous catheter in mid SVC', 'location of IJ line', and mention specifics about 'cardiac silhouette'. These findings often guide medical decisions related to procedural interventions, indicating the importance of detailed object assessment in radiographic studies.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5641173376086576,0.565,0.5714285714285714,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4057,latent_4057,3325,0.00665,0.013274441,6.3067474,Emphasis on generating comparative descriptions of image findings with prior images.,"Examples rated with higher activation levels focus on specific instructions to describe findings while comparing them to prior images, explicitly demanding the generation of comparative descriptions rather than merely presenting findings. This reinforces that the task is to articulate changes over time by comparing to past data.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4058,latent_4058,3070,0.00614,0.010172457,4.9105873,Comparisons focusing on frontal image views.,"The highly activated examples consistently request descriptions comparing current and prior frontal images, often specifying only a frontal view either as current or prior. This pattern emphasizes comparisons focusing particularly on frontal image views in the context of specific clinical indications.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3953802353908016,0.485,0.4915254237288136,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4059,latent_4059,1884,0.003768,0.005496642,5.011181,"High activation without prior image comparison, using current frontal and lateral images.","Examples with high activation levels specify findings using both the current frontal and lateral images without available prior frontal images or indicate 'no comparison available'. Most examples explicitly or implicitly mention comparing current images (frontal + lateral) to prior imagery, but examples with high activation describe findings only based on the current set of images provided without such comparisons.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4685662596110357,0.53,0.59375,0.19,100.0,100.0
+4060,latent_4060,5695,0.01139,0.012310028,6.1162515,Comparison with prior images showing stability or change.,"The activation pattern is highest when the reports describe findings that are directly compared to prior images, showing stability or change over time, particularly concerning cardiomediastinal silhouette, pulmonary opacities, or pulmonary edema. These descriptions are crucial for ongoing assessment and management of cardiac or pulmonary conditions, marking their importance in the radiology context.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4061,latent_4061,22540,0.04508,0.031359453,7.7914743,Presence of references or comparisons to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include a reference to and comparison with an actual prior image, even if the prior image result is blank or not explicitly detailed. This indicates the model's higher attention to scenarios where image comparison was intended or explicitly structured for interpretation, reflecting a pattern in assessing changes over time.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3957057675338912,0.435,0.4539473684210526,0.696969696969697,99.0,101.0
+4062,latent_4062,2637,0.005274,0.0065356446,5.908517,Explicit 'PA and lateral views' in findings related to prior evaluations.,Examples with high activation levels specify 'PA and lateral views' for chest imaging explicitly along with a description of the findings in relation to prior studies. These examples focus on evaluation context and often include acute findings like consolidations or effusions.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5295766189570613,0.53,0.5319148936170213,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4063,latent_4063,17656,0.035312,0.019641709,5.9605355,Description of interval or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The consistent mention of comparison between current and prior imaging studies indicates this pattern. Reports consistently focus on changes over time and assess interval changes, indicating the pattern is about assessing changes compared to previous images.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6096486838154338,0.61,0.5289256198347108,0.7529411764705882,85.0,115.0
+4064,latent_4064,16000,0.032,0.015430927,3.7867172,Description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Comparisons between current and prior imaging studies focus on interval changes in radiological findings, often affecting structures such as the lungs or tubes, which indicate stability, improvement, or progression of pathologies. Examining differences in pathologies or structural positions over time is a common practice in radiology reports.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6249156060113525,0.625,0.6213592233009708,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4065,latent_4065,1855,0.00371,0.0044519575,5.082062,Detection of interval changes post procedures in radiology comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly involve descriptions of interval changes, typically after a medical procedure, showing updates in positioning or status of medical devices and alterations within the patient's condition when compared with prior images. These often address specific alterations such as the placement or removal of medical devices, internal changes like opacities or infiltrates, and do not just state stability.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3390549169859514,0.515,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4066,latent_4066,14037,0.028074,0.021756012,7.835397,Monitoring and comparison of medical device positions across studies.,"The pattern indicates a focus on detecting changes or stability regarding inserted medical devices, like pacemakers and catheters, between current and prior imaging. This involves detailing positions and conditions of these devices against past imaging for updates or affirmations of intervention status.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.5263157894736842,0.4444444444444444,90.0,110.0
+4067,latent_4067,5487,0.010974,0.014837759,6.1777897,Structured language with direct image comparison details.,"The examples with high activation involve specific references to comparison with prior imaging studies, but also use structured language nouns such as ""Prior_Report"", ""Indication"", ""Technique"", and ""Findings"" along with explicit detail on ""Comparison"" which include dates or qualifiers like ""from yesterday"", ""since baseline"", etc. These often also contain detailed ""Findings"" or ""Impressions"" after a comparison with prior images, notable details or changes deviate from a previously mentioned baseline.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4068,latent_4068,2642,0.005284,0.009554598,14.146875,Evaluation of invasive device positioning through image comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on evaluating the position of tubes and other invasive devices by comparing current and prior imaging. This pattern often involves updates or changes to medical devices such as nasogastric tubes, endotracheal tubes, or catheters.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6619490905421428,0.665,0.6867469879518072,0.5816326530612245,98.0,102.0
+4069,latent_4069,3437,0.006874,0.007594997,4.6884136,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images, indicating a pattern of generating comparative analyses.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4070,latent_4070,19351,0.038702,0.017693317,3.255585,Description of stability or change in imaging findings between current and prior studies.,"The examples that have higher activation levels emphasize the identification of changes or the stability found in imaging between the current and previous radiographs, often detailing support devices, fluid levels, or structural formations remaining consistent over time. The pattern recognizes reports that articulate stability or progression in radiological features.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4071,latent_4071,8162,0.016324,0.011642717,5.012319,Descriptions involving interval changes or comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison between current and prior frontal images where specific differences or intervals of change such as resizing or repositioning of structures, removal or addition of medical devices, and interval changes in pleural effusions or opacities are described. The descriptions focus on differences observed over time or since the last image, reflecting the dynamic aspects of patient care and monitoring.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4072,latent_4072,31860,0.06372,0.039543938,3.3599646,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples showing significant activation levels explicitly describe documentation of comparison between current imaging and prior studies, providing detailed descriptions of findings, with some examples noting that changes were 'unchanged,' 'stable,' or 'slightly' modified. The reports also explicitly connect the findings back to prior exams, often noting stability of disease or no new pathology, which seems to influence the activation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5741376286981137,0.575,0.5824175824175825,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4073,latent_4073,18869,0.037738,0.029202806,4.2338643,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"These examples consistently describe normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, which are likely indicative of stable conditions regarding the heart and mediastinal structures, observed in radiological examinations. This pattern appears frequently among reports, both with indicated pathologies elsewhere and instances where none are present.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.62996299629963,0.63,0.6274509803921569,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4074,latent_4074,9131,0.018262,0.0129139135,5.7542624,Comparative analysis of current and prior images with specific changes detailed.,"Examples with high activation levels have detailed comparative descriptions of current findings in relation to prior imaging, emphasizing changes like resolution, persistence, or slight worsening in specific areas such as pleural effusions, air opacities, or cardiac silhouette. Prompts involving radiological comparisons with detailed descriptors of specific changes are related to the pattern.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5315315315315315,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4075,latent_4075,25363,0.050726,0.026215462,4.623838,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies indicating changes or stability.,"The examples with activation refer to the presence and use of a comparison with prior imaging studies, including explicit conclusions about changes between current and past images. This pattern involves describing stability, progression, or resolution of findings when compared to a previous study.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5907928388746804,0.6,0.5769230769230769,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4076,latent_4076,7207,0.014414,0.016105274,7.129195,Unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on radiological findings that are explicitly said to be unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging studies, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant interval change'. The examples describe findings in comparison to previous studies, highlighting the absence of change in conditions or devices.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5075252525252525,0.507537688442211,0.504950495049505,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+4077,latent_4077,3262,0.006524,0.008738653,5.7461166,Stable findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations notably feature reference to details and comparisons drawn from prior imaging studies, likely focusing on observing changes or stability over time in certain conditions. These reports emphasize the chronicity or stability of certain radiological findings rather than acute changes.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5178571428571429,0.29,100.0,100.0
+4078,latent_4078,4863,0.009726,0.008129342,5.921492,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels involve comparison of current imaging findings against a prior study, but with a consistent observation of normal ""cardiomediastinal silhouette"" or similar stable mediastinal findings, even when other thoracic findings are discussed.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5718891038039975,0.585,0.6307692307692307,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4079,latent_4079,3087,0.006174,0.009323215,7.726556,Requests for comparison with prior frontal images despite presence of multiple views.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently request descriptions compared to prior frontal images across examples, whether or not specific comparisons were made in the preamble. Examples with low activation levels may lack instructive consideration of prior studies or simply document the findings with little or no comparative notes.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4080,latent_4080,18212,0.036424,0.024243802,5.8204813,Complete sentences and detailed impressions following radiology study requests for comparison.,The examples with higher activations consistently provide a complete sentence or detailed impression following the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. These detailed comparisons appear essential for activation.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5180722891566265,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4081,latent_4081,5871,0.011742,0.014075367,6.5280423,Analysis of both current frontal and lateral images for radiology study findings.,"The activation levels are high for examples that prompt the assistant to analyze both a front and lateral image, thereby indicating the pattern involves descriptions referencing multiple current images for comparison.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.639865340953574,0.655,0.6099290780141844,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4082,latent_4082,8497,0.016994,0.016076643,5.8954587,Comparative evaluation with focus on significant cardiopulmonary findings and progression.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions of specific pathologies being compared across multiple imaging studies, with a focus on identifying changes or stability. Key elements include evaluation of cardiomegaly or cardiac silhouette size, thoracic aorta abnormalities, or respiratory system changes (e.g., atelectasis, effusions, pneumothorax), typically correlating with ongoing or resolved clinical concerns.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4083,latent_4083,6310,0.01262,0.008475261,3.7760997,Instructions for comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels include instructions to provide a comparative assessment of current findings against prior imaging, an aspect highlighted especially where change or stability of certain findings over time is emphasized. This consistency aligns with a pattern of evaluating clinical findings in light of patient imaging history.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4084,latent_4084,39513,0.079026,0.054617807,8.558852,Detailed temporal changes in radiological findings based on prior comparisons.,"The examples activate when there is inclusion of detailed descriptions of changes over time, suggesting the analysis or evaluation focuses on documents including comparisons with prior results to monitor various conditions.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6096486838154338,0.61,0.4715447154471545,0.8169014084507042,71.0,129.0
+4085,latent_4085,8355,0.01671,0.010417831,6.185864,Comparison of chest findings with prior non-radiograph imaging (like CT scans).,"Examples with higher activations reference specific prior CT or other types of imaging comparisons rather than chest radiographs, while low activation ones reference comparisons to prior radiographs directly or have no comparison at all. High activations have distinct abnormalities discussed in reference to non-radiographic imaging.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6436075427537966,0.665,0.7636363636363637,0.4375,96.0,104.0
+4086,latent_4086,4771,0.009542,0.010544027,7.885909,Prominent interstitial lung markings in imaging reports.,"Examples with high activation levels exhibit patterns where interstitial lung markings are prominently noted or discussed. This includes descriptions of ""increased interstitial markings"", ""diffuse chronic interstitial markings"", or ""diffuse increase in interstitial markings"" across different imaging views and contexts. These findings suggest a focus on evaluating chronic or significant pulmonary interstitial changes.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7489689797382104,0.755,0.8695652173913043,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4087,latent_4087,4253,0.008506,0.011322888,6.242253,Prompt artificially generates radiology interpretations.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently appear as if they've been generated using AI, with the assistant providing responses based on prior reports and patient history. Phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings' signal prompts for AI-generated interpretations.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4453734671125975,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.8,100.0,99.0
+4088,latent_4088,5545,0.01109,0.009050296,5.8037252,Explicit reference or statement of unavailable prior imaging comparison.,"The examples with the highest activation involve the presence of a comparison with prior imaging, either clearly referenced or implied in the text. The pattern reflects cases where reports make reference to comparison despite stating 'no comparison' available, signifying specific consideration given to comparison as a task.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4791666666666667,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4089,latent_4089,6579,0.013158,0.011181214,4.766897,Stable or resolved findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels have consistent reporting of findings with previous comparative studies, demonstrating radiological language that notes either stability, resolution, or changes in conditions over temporal comparative imaging. They explicitly detail findings as they compare to previous imaging results, indicative of assessments made for interval changes or stability in medical imaging reviews.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4090,latent_4090,13149,0.026298,0.014773193,3.877048,Focus on comparing current and prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve a prompt to compare the current image with a prior image, specifically for the purpose of identifying changes or confirming medical conditions. This emphasis on image comparison is highlighted by phrases such as 'comparison to the prior image', 'as compared to the previous radiograph', or 'provide a description in comparison', indicating a deliberate focus on evaluating differences or stabilities between past and current imaging.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4977617643847581,0.54,0.5253164556962026,0.83,100.0,100.0
+4091,latent_4091,39255,0.07851,0.045460448,6.3110065,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples compare recent imaging with prior studies, emphasizing unchanged or stable findings across multiple exams or on current exams compared to prior reference points, highlighting 'no change' or similarity, usually indicating benign conditions or stability of chronic conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4952898550724638,0.507537688442211,0.4320987654320987,0.4022988505747126,87.0,112.0
+4092,latent_4092,97725,0.19545,0.1143021,4.700941,"Evaluation of cardiomegaly, diffuse opacities, or pulmonary vascular congestion indicating potential pulmonary edema or infection.","When activated, the examples consistently describe findings of cardiomegaly, diffuse or bilateral opacities, or pulmonary vascular congestion and tend to frame these observations in the context of worsening pulmonary edema or superimposed potential infections. These reflect a pattern of co-occurrence in radiological evaluations often seeded by a subject's history of heart failure or cardiogenic pathology.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4093,latent_4093,2816,0.005632,0.007508739,4.637606,Direct comparison instructions of current vs. prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples involve prompts that request a comparison of two images, typically using a format like 'Given the current frontal image<image> and the prior frontal image<image>...'. This pattern indicates direct instructions for image comparison, without additional contextual information being prioritized.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+4094,latent_4094,4621,0.009242,0.0108202975,5.8650727,Precise location or termination of medical devices in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the precise positioning or location of medical devices or anatomical structures, typically using the term 'terminates'. This suggests a pattern focused on specific placement details noted in radiological reports.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.64,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4095,latent_4095,10703,0.021406,0.017158374,5.0286655,Focus on changes between current and prior image findings.,"Examples that receive high activation focus on providing descriptive assessments of various radiological findings, specifically emphasizing the comparison between current and prior images, identifying interval changes or stability of findings.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5796553173602353,0.6,0.5694444444444444,0.82,100.0,100.0
+4096,latent_4096,7805,0.01561,0.012799709,4.4104123,Descriptions emphasizing changes vs. stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently describe comparisons of current images with prior ones, specifically noting changes or stability of findings. Phrases like 'compared to prior', 'since prior examination', or overall stability in conditions are emphasized, reflecting a pattern focused on reporting changes across time points.",0.3854515050167224,0.3877551020408163,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5024623077505872,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+4097,latent_4097,7115,0.01423,0.01691911,9.71943,Comparison with prior imaging noting persistence or worsening of abnormalities.,"The key to the activation pattern lies in the consistent interpretation or expected follow-up for observed persistent or worsening chest findings compared to prior images. Descriptions of unchanged, worsening, or similar abnormalities play a crucial role in these reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.6212121212121212,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4098,latent_4098,13482,0.026964,0.025085442,4.6353498,Comparison between current and prior images noting changes in lung opacities or vascularity.,"These examples frequently contain direct references to comparison with prior imaging and frequently employ frontal and lateral images in the descriptions. Specifically, the descriptions often discuss changes in lung opacities, vascular engorgement, or changes related to medical devices between current and prior images, which are key elements in assessing the activation level for this pattern.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4099,latent_4099,3363,0.006726,0.006555711,4.7144127,Comparisons to prior imaging labeled as 'N/A' or inaccessible.,"The pattern includes cases where comparisons are made to 'prior image' without indicating the prior as accessible, leading to descriptions primarily based on the current findings alone. Examples exhibit absence of meaningful comparison, using non-specific terms like 'none', 'N/A', or not provided, indicating the comparison is negligible in the descriptive findings only.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4100,latent_4100,22796,0.045592,0.025837412,7.3891764,Indication of potential new or evolving pathology in radiology reports.,"Reports with higher activation levels describe radiographic findings suggestive of possible new or changing pathological processes, such as ""new vague opacity,"" ""a change from prior,"" or ""recent interval changes."" These details often indicate an active condition or a concern for progression, prompting higher attention in readings.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.3737373737373737,0.5873015873015873,63.0,137.0
+4101,latent_4101,14626,0.029252,0.017807065,3.926148,Focus on changes or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Instances with high activation levels frequently involve radiology reports that prominently feature descriptions comparing current imaging findings with prior imaging, indicating stability or change over time. This pattern highlights that the inclusion of temporal comparison in medical imaging reports is a characteristic triggering high activation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4566929133858268,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4102,latent_4102,9843,0.019686,0.03090828,7.2689514,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight the linguistic task of describing radiological findings by comparing current images to prior ones. This pattern is emphasized by repeated mentions of the term 'comparison', 'prior', 'since', or stated time references indicating a need to contextualize current findings with past imaging.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4103,latent_4103,5727,0.011454,0.009436531,5.3069296,Comparison requests involving current and prior images.,"The prompt structure, specifically the inclusion of 'current image' and 'prior image', is used to form a comparison of sequential diagnostic imaging requests. High activation levels correspond with lines that explicitly require a comparison between current diagnostic images and previous ones.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5655080213903744,0.61,0.5670731707317073,0.93,100.0,100.0
+4104,latent_4104,3604,0.007208,0.0066609485,3.243743,Reports describe changes or adjustments in patient status or medical equipment.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve situations where there have been specific changes or adjustments (such as procedural updates or equipment repositioning) between comparisons of current and previous images, indicating an action or change in status.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4105,latent_4105,5914,0.011828,0.015756465,6.56631,Direct comparison to prior studies in imaging findings.,"High activation levels are seen in examples where imaging findings are evaluated in direct comparison to prior studies, which is a standard practice in radiology to note changes, stability, or progression of conditions. These often include phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from', or the presence of explicit comparison statements such as 'similar to prior study'.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.568547082299644,0.6,0.564935064935065,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4106,latent_4106,41241,0.082482,0.051142804,9.233711,Lack of notable changes or new findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"All examples here with low activation relate to prompts that involve generating descriptions based on current and prior imaging studies. Despite multiple mentions of 'prior', they lack significant findings or interval changes, common in examples with near-zero activation, indicating standard observations without notable updates.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4032118055555556,0.45,0.1954022988505747,0.2982456140350877,57.0,143.0
+4107,latent_4107,7777,0.015554,0.011826447,3.7956865,Unchanged or improved findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"High activation levels correspond with examples that note unchanged or improved outcomes compared to prior imaging studies, indicating improvement or stability in contrast to previous findings. These examples focus on resolving conditions or unchanged medical devices or anatomical features.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.551131611627848,0.5527638190954773,0.5568181818181818,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+4108,latent_4108,4562,0.009124,0.011022789,4.529725,Detection of incomplete or missing information in report sections.,"These examples have missing or incomplete information in the 'comparison' or 'findings' sections which leads to high activation levels, possibly indicating the model's focus on report structure or completeness in the context of imaging analysis. Frequent use of placeholder characters like brackets around incomplete words reinforces this.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3527508090614886,0.505,0.5025380710659898,0.99,100.0,100.0
+4109,latent_4109,7314,0.014628,0.014307977,7.881377,Use of multiple image views for detailed analysis and comparison to prior images.,"These examples frequently cite observations made when multiple views are provided, specifically mentioning the current frontal and lateral images compared to prior imaging. This pattern commonly refers to the image acquisition process or multiple image analysis, indicating more intricate or comprehensive assessments are performed with comprehensive or combined data sets.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,100.0,100.0
+4110,latent_4110,4376,0.008752,0.013501151,6.8419747,Comparison of current and prior findings on imaging.,"Highly activated examples often mention the presence of prior imaging for direct comparison, specifying changes or stability such as 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'no interval change'. This indicates a focus on longitudinal analysis of radiological findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3943383805134957,0.425,0.4482758620689655,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4111,latent_4111,3235,0.00647,0.009541967,6.9785333,Reports with multiple views and explicit prior comparison.,"These examples exhibit high activation levels when the report includes multiple chest radiograph views (both frontal and lateral) and explicit comparison to prior images, highlighting consistent findings across these studies.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4825174825174825,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4112,latent_4112,4464,0.008928,0.0105606085,7.471987,Detailed image comparison prompt structure using placeholder terms like <image> increases activation.,"Examples with higher activation reference detailed descriptions of findings from multiple images taken concurrently or comparisons made in a specific context. They extensively describe specified areas using the prompt structure including detailed instructions using placeholder terms like ""<image>"" after 'Given the current frontal image' or 'Given the current lateral image'. This structured prompt consistently results in notable activations when compared to examples using a more generalized description structure or prior information presented without explicit placeholders. The detailed comparative prompts create scenarios demanding in-depth review and justifications - contextually driven explorations that resemble long-form evaluations in a methodological structure rather than independent or standard findings. These illustrate the area of being mostly focused or most scrutinized.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4389901823281907,0.52,0.5113636363636364,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4113,latent_4113,44456,0.088912,0.055404037,6.234627,Explicit comparison of current findings to past images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve instances where findings from a current image are compared to previous images explicitly, with detailed descriptions of changes or stability over time. Lower activation examples either lack this detailed comparison or rely on no prior comparison images.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5755120041897517,0.615,0.5714285714285714,0.92,100.0,100.0
+4114,latent_4114,4955,0.00991,0.0075897723,6.1354017,Low lung volumes highlighted in imaging comparisons.,"The lower activation scores illustrate that when comparison is included, it often lacks clear substantive findings related to the pattern of significant interval changes. Higher activation examples involve indication of changes (e.g., decreased lung volumes, improvement of specific pathologies) without explicit significant differences in size or location of previously noted abnormalities.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3940074065761418,0.46,0.3823529411764705,0.13,100.0,100.0
+4115,latent_4115,6563,0.013126,0.006522648,3.1042626,Important changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve reports that compare current findings to previous radiologic images or studies, specifically noting changes such as the stability, improvement, or progression of medical findings, often with detailed focus on specific changes over time, rather than simply establishing historical stability.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4116,latent_4116,9918,0.019836,0.011867034,5.0328803,Significant change in medical devices or surgeries since prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels all reference marked or significant changes in medical devices, procedures status, or surgical interventions (e.g., tubes, catheters, wires) since the previous imaging. These terms indicate the focus on procedural follow-up and changes rather than stable findings or descriptions of pathology unrelated to interventions.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5925925925925926,0.32,100.0,100.0
+4117,latent_4117,4906,0.009812,0.014589129,4.913372,Explicit directive to compare current images to prior images.,"Prompts with high activation levels consistently ask for a description of findings in current images compared to prior images. This linguistic pattern of specific and clear directive to compare current and previous images is the primary focus of these prompts, as seen by repeated instructions to 'compare' or evaluate interval changes in imaging studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5934627170582227,0.5979899497487438,0.5785123966942148,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+4118,latent_4118,16467,0.032934,0.01965919,5.470899,Clear descriptions or documentation of changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on providing a description of findings, often centered around identification or documentation of changes, directly comparing current images with previous ones. These examples show clear communication about changes, particularly in a structured format.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4119,latent_4119,8013,0.016026,0.011442794,6.419503,Detection of interval changes or device placements compared to prior studies.,"These examples illustrate the pattern of reporting interval changes or device placements as compared to prior imaging studies. They consistently highlight changes in medical devices installed in the patient's body, detection of pneumothoraces, effusions, or atelectasis, and comparison with previous imaging findings for medical assessment.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5689655172413793,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4120,latent_4120,2991,0.005982,0.006636132,8.509922,Comparison of current and prior chest images to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions of current and prior chest radiographic images, comparing the findings to discern changes or stability. This pattern highlights the importance of temporal comparison in evaluating the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4121,latent_4121,33610,0.06722,0.028346173,2.2857509,Detailed comparison of current vs prior imaging reports with noted changes.,"The examples with activations focus on detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior frontal and/or lateral chest images, especially highlighting changes or stability in pathologies such as effusions, opacities, or device placements. These reports emphasize temporal changes, contrasting with zero-activation examples that lack such detailed comparative elements or changes.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5847404627892432,0.585,0.580952380952381,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4122,latent_4122,2554,0.005108,0.004466726,4.52691,Detailed comparison analysis using multiple current image views.,"Most highly activated examples provide detailed comparison text where the radiologist reviews multiple view images, such as current frontal and lateral images, and reports findings. This suggests that detailed comparative analysis, often including multiple perspectives of the current imaging, is key to the activation pattern.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.44,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4123,latent_4123,12492,0.024984,0.012824079,3.218651,Explicit comparison to prior imaging indicating interval change.,"The examples consistently involve explicit comparisons of current radiological findings against prior imaging, indicating interval changes. These intervals are often emphasized when discussing features like cardiac silhouette, pulmonary opacities, tube placements, or effusions. This pattern suggests evaluation for stability, improvement, or progression of findings over time in clinical reports.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4124,latent_4124,5903,0.011806,0.01150675,3.5504594,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"These examples show consistent patterns of detailed radiological comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, with an emphasis on documenting the presence or absence of changes over time. They frequently reference specific time points and note stability or changes in medical conditions or devices, highlighting the importance of temporal assessment in monitoring patient progress or disease stability.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4125,latent_4125,4029,0.008058,0.01389112,5.671836,Requests for findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently request a comparison between current imaging findings and those from a specified prior study. They include explicit instructions in the context to 'compare' or 'describe findings in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating a focus on evaluating changes over time.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4147058823529411,0.4371859296482412,0.4565217391304347,0.63,100.0,99.0
+4126,latent_4126,3758,0.007516,0.010232771,4.0877423,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation values consistently involve requests for interpreting current imaging findings in the context of stable or unchanged prior findings, which is a prevalent requirement in follow-up studies where radiologists compare new images against previous ones to assess changes over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4127,latent_4127,40265,0.08053,0.04168506,5.56781,Stability or minimal change in imaging findings over time.,Examples with significant activation levels frequently mention seeing no or minimal change or stability in conditions that may typically worsen or get better. These examples emphasize consistent imaging features over time or unchanged clinical scenarios in follow-up assessments.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.520870821400512,0.5226130653266332,0.5227272727272727,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+4128,latent_4128,57978,0.115956,0.069685444,3.3334873,Stable positions and normal functionality of lines and tubes in radiology studies.,"The pattern emerges from examples dealing with constancy across imaging studies, specifically ensuring placements of medical devices (like tubes and catheters) are properly positioned and unchanged between exams. Such reports commonly describe the position of lines and tubes relative to anatomical landmarks, and any complications such as pneumothoraxes are noted. The focus is on assessing and documenting unchanged positions and ensuring no adverse developments.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.5142857142857142,0.18,100.0,100.0
+4129,latent_4129,5633,0.011266,0.016431829,7.2294755,Describing findings in comparison with prior radiology images.,"Higher activation examples consistently contain prompts for providing descriptions of current radiology findings compared to prior images, labelled as ""PRIOR_REPORT"" or ""COMPARISON"". This indicates a focus on identifying changes over time in these cases.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+4130,latent_4130,98960,0.19792,0.13981049,8.262715,Reports with imaging comparisons highlighting changes or stability.,The examples with activation levels of 2.0 to 5.0 consistently feature the comparison of current and previous imaging findings—highlighting any new developments or confirming stability. These reports involve evaluating changes or stability in pathologies over time.,0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6665872826863539,0.685,0.6258503401360545,0.92,100.0,100.0
+4131,latent_4131,8106,0.016212,0.0113993455,7.418882,Descriptive comparison to prior imaging studies with changes noted.,"The given examples showcase radiology reports comparing or contrasting current imaging with prior studies, highlighting both any stable findings and changes observed over time. This is a standard practice in radiology to assess the progression or stability of previously identified conditions or new emergent pathologies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4132,latent_4132,5214,0.010428,0.013664231,4.1785946,Inclusion of both current and prior imaging across multiple views in a radiology comparison.,"The examples focus on the necessity of comparing the current and prior images to assess for interval changes, specifically emphasizing the presence of comparison images across different views (frontal and lateral). This can be identified through consistent reference to both current images and those from past exams.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4133,latent_4133,9205,0.01841,0.018516894,5.259546,Reports include missing comparisons or placeholder descriptions.,"These examples involve descriptions comparing current chest images with previous imaging studies without an available comparison at the time of dictation or reference. Such comparisons may include references to images outside the scope of the original radiology report or involve missing data, indicated by placeholders like '_'.",0.3150684931506849,0.46,0.4791666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3556824343721093,0.495,0.4974093264248704,0.96,100.0,100.0
+4134,latent_4134,3002,0.006004,0.008201568,8.7674675,Assessment and comparison of current vs. previous radiographic images.,"The examples with high activation demonstrate detailed error patterns in image-based AI responses to radiology reports that involve instructions to provide a description or compare current and prior images. In these scenarios, 'errors' may refer to mere differences, comparable findings without resolution discrepancies, or specific interpretations. Lower activation examples generally miss explicit mention of diagnostic comparisons.",0.2784380305602716,0.32,0.3783783783783784,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4774193548387097,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4135,latent_4135,33366,0.066732,0.038258553,3.8305452,Comparison of findings to prior images showing interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation focus on descriptions involving comparison to prior images, indicating changes in findings. Changes are explicitly noted, such as resolution or persistence of abnormalities, which suggests relevance to tracking disease progression or recovery.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6199741582427605,0.625,0.6016260162601627,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4136,latent_4136,5778,0.011556,0.009282223,4.399536,Reports compare current versus prior images for changes.,"The pattern involves references to current and prior images, particularly noting comparison and absence or presence of changes over time. This is seen in medical imaging reports to evaluate stability or progression of findings.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.5486111111111112,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4137,latent_4137,7484,0.014968,0.015102367,6.6035395,Stable or unchanged cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"The high activation levels are in examples that discuss unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior examinations, specifically focusing on the cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours being stable or unchanged despite some presence of pathology elsewhere.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4138,latent_4138,2984,0.005968,0.010821616,6.0083866,Comparative evaluation using current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image provided.,"These examples emphasize the pattern of comparing the current frontal and lateral chest images with a prior frontal image, often highlighting inherent changes. Each prompt includes phrases like 'given the current frontal image' along with 'and the prior frontal image', causing higher activations when such a comparative analysis structure is evident.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4139,latent_4139,5821,0.011642,0.009167981,6.0979714,Presence of notable changes in chest radiograph abnormalities.,"The examples vary significantly in terms of radiological findings and medical conditions described. However, common among examples with higher activation levels is the presence of significant or notable changes in comparison, particularly regarding opacities, consolidations, or other abnormalities associated with more serious medical conditions (e.g., pneumothorax, pneumonia, atelectasis). These reports tend to emphasize changes or findings that could indicate critical issues or progression.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4140,latent_4140,6446,0.012892,0.0126474835,4.6426606,Comparison to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation often contain explicit comparison to prior images, indicating whether changes or stability is observed. This involves consistent language referring to comparison, evaluation of interval changes, and determination based on previous data. In contrast, lower activation frequently lacks such structured comparisons, or there is minimal change noted, reducing the complexity of assessment.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4418604651162791,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4141,latent_4141,3358,0.006716,0.0085231885,4.935587,Instruction to describe findings from multiple views compared to prior image with prior report as 'N/A'.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions to provide a description of findings from multiple image views (frontal, lateral) and the explicit comparison to a prior image, especially when the prior report information is marked as 'N/A'. This specific instruction pattern engages the model distinctly, indicating it's a key trigger for the activation noted.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5267857142857143,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4142,latent_4142,4855,0.00971,0.008300529,4.7021728,"Instruction to provide comparison with ""N/A"" or inappropriate comparison use.",The examples with higher activation levels discuss imagery where there is either no comparison available or unnecessary mention of a comparison when it is not relevant. These are associated with instructions to describe findings when no true comparison is made or needed.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4143,latent_4143,3696,0.007392,0.008615279,7.061229,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The textual examples with high activation levels consistently note a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette along with clear lungs, without consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. This pattern reflects a routine observation found in chest radiographs where the heart and mediastinal contours remain normal amidst standard lung assessments.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.8461538461538461,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7542566262945409,0.755,0.7865168539325843,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4144,latent_4144,5720,0.01144,0.013961545,5.8469253,Requirement to compare or describe images using previous imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels involve cases where there is a requirement to describe or compare findings using successive imaging studies. This pattern is evident in descriptions of pathologies, medical device placements, or physiological changes compared across different time points, using a reliance on comparison to prior images to ascertain changes.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4306008042029879,0.515,0.5084745762711864,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4145,latent_4145,4098,0.008196,0.007397485,5.276946,"Explicit references to image availability and comparison, with abstract indications.","The examples with activation high provide descriptions that explicitly mention which images from a current study are available and an indication that prior comparisons are available for these images. They also typically do not include specific information regarding prior findings or aren't absorbed into the findings in the report. Examples like example 8 suggest mild enlargement of the heart and have a high activation level, suggesting specific cardiac pathology as a pattern. Additionally, the mentions of an indication without specifics, suggesting certain abstractions.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4459520578923564,0.51,0.5059523809523809,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4146,latent_4146,5784,0.011568,0.018608257,5.310072,Use of both frontal and lateral views in chest X-ray evaluation.,"Examples with high activation involve multiple views of chest X-ray imaging or descriptions of findings extrapolated from both frontal and lateral views, while examples with low activation involve only the frontal view or lack detailed multi-view analysis.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4147,latent_4147,11649,0.023298,0.015042787,3.6448007,Significant changes or stability in pathological findings over time.,"The activation levels are higher for examples where the radiological findings include changes over time, particularly those with significant pathologic changes, such as development of conditions or significant stability or resolution of prior findings. These describe shifts in the patient's condition that are important for diagnosis and treatment planning, hence garnering higher activation levels.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4851485148514851,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4148,latent_4148,10050,0.0201,0.022923676,6.223112,Explicit comparison to prior imaging with focus on changes or lack thereof.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize the explicit comparative analysis of current and prior images focusing on interval changes or lack of changes relating to specific medical indications. This usually includes phrases that state the comparison outright, often with detailed observations about the patient's condition in context to possible diagnoses like pneumonia or structural changes over time.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4554455445544554,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4149,latent_4149,32926,0.065852,0.034003325,4.6763287,Unchanged medical equipment positioning in serial imaging studies.,"Examples exhibit a pattern of descriptions including medical equipment and tubes (like ETT, PICC lines, catheters, etc.) and their placement in relation to anatomical landmarks or changes compared to prior studies, often indicating medical equipment positioning as unchanged or continuous.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6457131288591963,0.65,0.6923076923076923,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4150,latent_4150,4989,0.009978,0.008209545,5.1703267,Low lung volumes with subsequent findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include descriptions highlighting low lung volumes, often associated with additional findings like volume loss, crowding of bronchovascular structures, or changes that evoke attention to potential atelectasis or other related complications. These repeated observations suggest an emphasis on recognizing altered lung volumes as a notable pattern.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6818555008210181,0.69,0.7794117647058824,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4151,latent_4151,3261,0.006522,0.009571952,6.776575,Radiological comparison for interval change assessment.,"The activated examples consistently emphasize the comparison with prior imaging studies to evaluate changes or stability in findings. Unchanged findings from previous imaging or slight interval changes are explicitly described, indicating a focus on longitudinal assessment.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5118999487884424,0.542713567839196,0.5266666666666666,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+4152,latent_4152,2166,0.004332,0.0041805007,5.9205384,Assessment for free air under the diaphragm or related findings indicating pneumothorax.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include a specific pattern related to the evaluation of free air or pneumothorax under the diaphragm in radiologic assessments. This finding is commonly highlighted in cases of suspected abdominal perforation or trauma, where air under the diaphragm or pneumothorax can indicate critical issues.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6874684948079444,0.69,0.6610169491525424,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4153,latent_4153,24064,0.048128,0.025302766,6.219601,Stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on comparisons between current and previous imaging, specifically identifying stable or unchanged findings over time. The consistent theme is stability or lack of change in various imaging observations between comparisons, which these reports frequently highlight to evaluate disease progression or stability.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6428914444584861,0.6432160804020101,0.5922330097087378,0.6777777777777778,90.0,109.0
+4154,latent_4154,14228,0.028456,0.017713374,4.535373,Descriptions include stability or change over time based on multiple comparisons with prior images.,"These examples feature explicit instructions to compare current radiological images with prior frontal images or explicit notes in the findings section that suggest providing descriptions that highlight stable, unchanged, or mildly worsened conditions over time. This pattern aligns with radiology practices of documenting changes over time by comparing with previous imaging when available.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4155,latent_4155,23833,0.047666,0.023452625,3.7543254,"Comparison of current and prior images, noting stability or changes in nodes/masses.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions of radiological findings being compared to prior images or accounts, with emphasis on stability or change regarding nodes or masses, particularly in the context of lymphadenopathy or metastatic lesions, relevant for oncology patients. This pattern helps in assessing disease progression or response to treatment.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4156,latent_4156,3815,0.00763,0.010299455,5.9962387,Detailed comparison with prior radiographic images.,"The examples highly representative of the pattern have a comparison to previous radiographic images, all being elaborate and detailed comparisons containing statements recounting changes or stabilities in structures over time. This implies that a comparison with historical data is crucial to represent the activation pattern being observed.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4157,latent_4157,23868,0.047736,0.02098576,2.831352,Detailed tube positioning and adjustment guidance.,"Examples with high activation levels mention specific changes or positions of medical tubes, often providing guidance on advancing or adjusting their position. This includes descriptions like 'advanced by 15 cm for appropriate positioning' or correct placement. Other examples do not have this specificity about tubes or devices and their positioning adjustments.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5847828526540231,0.63,0.8823529411764706,0.3,100.0,100.0
+4158,latent_4158,59534,0.119068,0.07309047,8.335858,Comparison to prior imaging and discussion of interval changes in condition.,Higher activation values are associated with findings that include a description or mention of the state of a condition compared to a prior examination. Consistently low activation values occur when no comparison to prior imaging is present or when there is no discussion of changes over time.,0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.3571428571428571,0.75,60.0,140.0
+4159,latent_4159,7539,0.015078,0.00979693,5.91114,Cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly stable across images.,"Many samples indicate a focus on cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly being stable despite other findings such as pneumonia, effusion, or edema. Descriptions frequently relate to heart size, medical devices like pacemakers, or pleural abnormalities, but activation is high when discussing cardiac stability or consistent size across imaging.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6946259167480163,0.695,0.7096774193548387,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4160,latent_4160,11631,0.023262,0.010069559,3.794657,Radiological comparison to prior images indicating changes or stability.,"The pattern here focuses on radiological evaluations where comparisons are made with previous studies, emphasizing changes or stability in the observed findings in relation to previous examinations. These comparisons help to establish temporality and progression or resolution of medical concerns.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4161,latent_4161,4954,0.009908,0.007713476,3.7644517,Focus on interval changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These examples involve the use of comparative language, particularly focusing on changes or stability in findings over time. Such emphasis includes phrases regarding the interval decrease or stability of certain radiological features such as pleural effusion or lung opacities, in relation to previously reported studies, often noted as 'unchanged' or 'interval decrease/increase'.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4162,latent_4162,27482,0.054964,0.033186715,6.524134,Pleural effusion or atelectasis with changes compared to prior imaging.,Analysis indicates that specific findings of pleural effusion or atelectasis in conjunction with comparison to prior frontal images exhibit high activation. These findings are often highlighted in radiology reports where the status and progression of such conditions are crucial and heavily monitored over time.,0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6465073388150311,0.655,0.7246376811594203,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4163,latent_4163,36979,0.073958,0.05244314,7.5696483,Detailed comparisons of current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or stability in specific pathologies or radiological findings. This emphasizes the importance of comparative analysis in identifying patterns over time in chest radiology.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4246804625684723,0.4271356783919598,0.3956043956043956,0.3789473684210526,95.0,104.0
+4164,latent_4164,5102,0.010204,0.012445572,9.243301,Description of findings in comparison to multiple prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally involve descriptions which explicitly reference comparison against 'multiple' prior imaging studies or instructions to describe findings in relation to previous imagery, highlighting changes, stability, or resolution of conditions over time. This repeated emphasis on comparative analysis with prior studies suggests this pattern is a key aspect of reports with high activation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6949923748093703,0.695,0.696969696969697,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4165,latent_4165,1557,0.003114,0.003376412,6.9775095,Stable mild cardiac silhouette enlargement post-surgical procedure.,"These examples highlight descriptions of heart size as 'mildly enlarged,' often in relation to median sternotomy or post-surgical procedures, indicating that the heart is larger than normal but stable or not acutely concerning. These phrases are frequently found in radiology reports discussing patients with chronic conditions or post-operative status, where heart enlargement is monitored but not indicating acute change.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4456893501592169,0.53,0.6363636363636364,0.14,100.0,100.0
+4166,latent_4166,13133,0.026266,0.017723598,5.394127,Presence of normal cardiomediastinal contours in comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with high activation primarily revolve around descriptions that explicitly compare the current radiological findings with previous frontal images, and emphasize the presence of a normal cardiac and mediastinal contour or silhouette. This is evident through the inclusion of specific comparison requests and results.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.6323529411764706,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4167,latent_4167,7918,0.015836,0.009713269,4.1755047,Comparison images show significant changes or progression.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally highlight specific changes over time in the imaging findings, showing clear and significant differences in comparison to prior studies. These changes typically reflect inferences about changes in the patient's condition, or the progression or improvement of specific features, which may be an area of focus in evaluating radiological patterns.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.25,100.0,100.0
+4168,latent_4168,4795,0.00959,0.00880313,3.9809957,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples often mention 'comparison to prior', 'compared with study of _', 'no significant interval change', which signify the process of evaluating current results against historical records to identify changes or stability over time. This pattern focuses on highlighting any significant change or stability compared to previous findings, which is essential in tracking the progression of conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4169,latent_4169,7838,0.015676,0.017422464,4.2888417,"New findings description based on comparison with prior images, where prior report is unavailable or incomplete.","Examples with high activation levels involve instructions to provide detailed findings based on new radiographic images, explicitly incorporating comparison with prior images, especially where no previous comparison report is readily available. This pattern emphasizes the task of producing new comparative descriptions.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4996408045977011,0.507537688442211,0.504,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+4170,latent_4170,4886,0.009772,0.009782644,5.672249,Comparison of multiple view (frontal/lateral) radiology studies to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiological comparisons with prior images using frontal and lateral views. This pattern focuses on studies where multiple views are compared with previous exams, often resulting in comprehensive findings and impressions based on image analysis.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4561403508771929,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4171,latent_4171,2719,0.005438,0.011654455,6.5343695,Current frontal and lateral chest images compared to prior frontal image.,"The key indicator in the examples is the pairing of current frontal and lateral chest images with a prior frontal image, and the focus on comparing these images for interval changes. This setup emphasizes the importance of lateral views in conjunction with frontal views in assessing changes over time, which is a routine practice in radiological assessments to ensure a comprehensive evaluation, especially when previous comparative lateral views are available.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4172,latent_4172,7438,0.014876,0.022018697,5.311895,Current and prior imaging findings despite lack of explicit prior data.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe the findings from both the current and prior images without any explicit prior data available, yet there is a provision of findings as if they were from the prior scan. This suggests a pattern of describing imaging findings particularly in the absence of comparable prior data explicitly given in the summary.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4086523498288204,0.43,0.4492753623188406,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4173,latent_4173,24221,0.048442,0.02354473,3.4303944,Low lung volumes influencing pulmonary or cardiac findings.,"The examples with higher activations frequently describe changes in pulmonary conditions, like atelectasis or pneumonia, with attention to low lung volumes or cardiomediastinal silhouette changes. The text correlates these radiological findings to lung volume adequacy or cardiovascular observations, commonly discussing atelectasis due to low lung volumes or resembling characteristics in prior studies indicating stability or change, particularly focusing on the lungs' bases.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.6041666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+4174,latent_4174,3472,0.006944,0.009036009,3.8242626,Prompts lacking specific medical indication or technique details have high activation.,"Prompts with a low activation level tend to involve clear definitions of an interval change and provide an explicit interpretation, whereas those with high activation involve more ambiguous or indirect references to techniques or indications. High activation prompts often lack details, making them more vague and demanding further clarification or follow-up imaging.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.5477707006369427,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4175,latent_4175,4950,0.0099,0.014356593,6.069641,Comparison of current and prior images showing stability or minimal change.,"Examples with high activation explicitly involve comparisons between current and prior images, frequently focusing on aspects such as unchanged or stable findings, minimal new changes, or reassessment of previous findings. Note the consistent reference to prior images throughout such reports, as indicated by phrases like 'compared to', 'previous study', or 'unchanged'.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4353094562466447,0.4422110552763819,0.4285714285714285,0.33,100.0,99.0
+4176,latent_4176,6064,0.012128,0.017079102,4.3397164,Comparison of current radiology findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels specifically provided a comparison of the current radiology findings with a prior image, along with an assessment of changes over time. This serves to highlight interval changes in medical conditions, a critical aspect of radiological assessments.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4177,latent_4177,14405,0.02881,0.021744661,6.0869756,"Inclusion of direct, detailed comparisons to previous imaging.",The higher activation levels are associated with examples that include direct radiological comparisons to previous studies. This involves explicit statements about the radiological findings and how they have changed or remained the same in comparison to prior imaging.,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5983935742971888,0.61,0.582089552238806,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4178,latent_4178,20612,0.041224,0.020954454,5.1575527,Over-reliance on sequential imaging without clear clinical progression.,"In these examples, the comparisons rely on analyzing the sequence and interval changes of sequential images to provide insights in the clinical interpretation. However, the activation is high in examples lacking clear interaction or elaboration on how changes manifest over time. Descriptions often lacked outcomes of various pathologies besides the need to monitor progression over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5350877192982456,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4179,latent_4179,10052,0.020104,0.013458229,4.8626757,Detailed comparison of findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally include a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies, often showing detailed observations or changes observed over time, without explicitly stating 'no comparison'. They often use terms or phrases indicating a narrative analysis of changes or consistencies with previous reports.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.494949494949495,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4180,latent_4180,7154,0.014308,0.01216725,4.8948126,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4181,latent_4181,5030,0.01006,0.009817142,5.4572887,Explicit comparison of current images with prior frontal image findings.,"Reports with higher activation levels often include a phrase indicating to ""provide a description of the findings... in comparison to the prior frontal image"" or explicit comparisons to previous imaging for evaluating changes, often for specific pathologies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4182,latent_4182,3134,0.006268,0.0076809153,5.625608,Comparison of current and prior images for interval change in findings.,"These examples contrast features from current images with prior images to assess interval changes or stability, often including techniques or observations from multiple images to enhance diagnostic accuracy. They commonly note unchanged positions or stability of medical devices, as well as changes in pathological or anatomical structures.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4183,latent_4183,6225,0.01245,0.009880414,4.974154,Detailed assessment relative to prior imaging comparison.,"The higher activation examples generally involve evaluations or assessments relative to prior imaging studies, mentioning specific changes or stability in conditions like nodules, opacities, or other focal findings. This pattern is distinguished by detailed longitudinal assessments with explicit conclusions derived from prior comparisons.",0.3875,0.3877551020408163,0.375,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4184,latent_4184,58876,0.117752,0.06619947,3.9630675,Interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Many samples describe radiological findings in comparison to previous studies or images, indicating interval changes such as removal of lines, resolution of symptoms, or unchanged conditions. This comparative analysis is a common pattern in radiology reports, highlighting changes over time in patient examinations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5246157041960947,0.5376884422110553,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,99.0
+4185,latent_4185,5277,0.010554,0.012744461,10.620361,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include a specific comparison between current and prior images, often noting stable or unchanged findings regarding devices or anatomical structures, whereas examples with low activation do not highlight such comparison intricacies.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5175438596491229,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4186,latent_4186,13898,0.027796,0.024252066,6.19431,Comparison or description of findings referenced against prior images.,"Highly representative samples describe findings of radiological examinations in direct comparison with prior imaging. Most examples emphasize stability or interval changes, focusing on elements comparing the current images against a known set of prior images. This is reflected in phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from', and direct date comparisons.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4187,latent_4187,5495,0.01099,0.012826087,5.652548,Explicit instructions to compare current and prior images.,Examples with high activation levels include comparative language analyzing current images against previous or other films. Low activation examples do not include comparison instructions explicitly or only involve one set of images. These findings indicate a focus on explicit comparison statements and image availability.,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.37993799379938,0.38,0.3775510204081632,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4188,latent_4188,41583,0.083166,0.037523296,2.8225114,"Detailed comparative descriptions of current and prior radiological findings, especially device placement.","Examples with higher activation involve complex comparisons of multiple variables, such as device placements and changes in medical condition shown through preceding and current images. These examples provide detailed descriptions of changes from previous studies or specific evaluations related to medical devices in place, often using phrases like ""as compared to"", ""unchanged"", or ""interval"".",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4189,latent_4189,15584,0.031168,0.022733519,9.364241,Stable findings over time when compared to previous imaging.,"The examples that show higher activation levels consistently involve stable findings over time when compared to prior imaging or descriptions. This pattern is indicative of the model's sensitivity to providing consistent findings over time, which is critical in tracking the progression of known abnormalities in serial imaging.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.615,0.3636363636363636,0.4067796610169492,59.0,141.0
+4190,latent_4190,4477,0.008954,0.015334275,4.397759,Describing changes or stability using prior image comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight imaging reports where findings are compared with a prior image and changes or stability are explicitly noted. This pattern indicates an emphasis on the process of comparison to prior images to evaluate for change, a common practice in follow-up assessments.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5276573787409701,0.5376884422110553,0.5271317829457365,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+4191,latent_4191,3163,0.006326,0.009129132,6.8802247,Comparison involving current frontal image only.,"The examples with high activation involve comparisons between images, specifically noting the presence of only one current image for the comparison, suggesting a potential focus on the simpler format or condensed information provided by comparing single images rather than multiple.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5148313693620479,0.5175879396984925,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,99.0
+4192,latent_4192,11577,0.023154,0.018260734,4.521067,Reports with instructions to compare with prior studies.,"These examples are focused on reports that include prior imaging or explicit comparisons as part of the findings, with instructions to provide details based on these comparisons. This is a common practice in radiology reports to assess stability or changes in observed findings over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5267857142857143,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4193,latent_4193,3661,0.007322,0.009362699,7.2242036,Radiology findings focused on comparison with prior images with unspecified or incomplete metadata.,"These examples involve the presence of imaging comparisons, often with undefined or blank metadata, where the primary task is to compare current and past imaging for changes or stability. There is frequently a 'comparison' section which is left as an underscore, indicating reliance on comparison for detailed analysis, which is a hallmark of radiology reporting.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4188606145989257,0.505,0.5028248587570622,0.89,100.0,100.0
+4194,latent_4194,3749,0.007498,0.011366399,5.3459663,Explicit use of prior image comparisons regardless of prior report presence.,"The examples with high activation focus on radiological assessments explicitly requesting comparisons between the current and prior images despite the prior report sometimes being 'N/A'. It suggests the pattern is identifying instances where direct imaging comparisons are actively facilitated, particularly when the report format emphasizes comparison findings as a structured task.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4195,latent_4195,3878,0.007756,0.013095955,5.15381,Use of current and prior images for comparative analysis.,"The samples with higher activation levels include both current and prior images for evaluation purposes and emphasize the use of comparative analysis in radiology, likely in sentences mentioning 'comparison' along with phrases related to previous states of findings. These samples also consistently provide or request descriptions of findings relative to prior images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3831228473019518,0.457286432160804,0.4761904761904761,0.8,100.0,99.0
+4196,latent_4196,7187,0.014374,0.012024769,4.9647474,Comparison with prior images indicating interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of radiographic changes over time, typically with explicit comparisons to prior images. These reports often explicitly mention improvement or stability in radiographic findings. Lower activated examples rarely mention interval radiographic changes or comparison with prior imaging.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4197,latent_4197,8499,0.016998,0.013002402,3.9036918,Description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often mention specific changes or assessments made in reference to both current and previous images, highlighting any evolved findings. This pattern of assessing interval changes is a crucial aspect of radiological comparisons, especially for patient monitoring post-interventions or procedures.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4455445544554455,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4198,latent_4198,7102,0.014204,0.010678902,3.2912583,"Findings compared to prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability.","These examples demonstrate a focus on describing radiological findings in the context of comparisons to past imaging results, particularly emphasizing any changes, progressions, or stability in the findings. This pattern is indicative of follow-up evaluations where previous exams are used as benchmarks.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4199,latent_4199,5456,0.010912,0.0090188235,6.0917892,Stable cardiac silhouette over time.,"The pattern exhibits radiological findings where the cardiac silhouette is either unchanged or stable over time, regardless of other findings present in the imagery, such as surgical changes, hardware presence, or observations of pulmonary conditions. These reports consistently note cardiac silhouette as stable in relation to prior images.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4200,latent_4200,2135,0.00427,0.009205668,6.5601745,Task involves multiple images including comparison with prior image.,"The examples with high activations involve a task or prompt requiring multiple images, including a frontal image and a lateral image, alongside reference to a 'prior' image, regardless of whether comparison information is explicitly available or utilized in the task.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3776430224208091,0.415,0.4429530201342282,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4201,latent_4201,12340,0.02468,0.018666552,6.0634623,Discussion of interval changes between radiographic exams.,"Higher activation examples consistently highlight changes and comparisons between the current imaging findings and prior imaging, specifically noting updates or differences in lung conditions, placement of medical devices, or identifying significant changes that may impact diagnosis and treatment. These examples focus on updating clinical status using radiographic comparison.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6068255091609656,0.625,0.5874125874125874,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4202,latent_4202,3897,0.007794,0.01404927,8.074757,Analysis involving multiple views and prior imaging comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels require the analysis of multiple views (frontal, lateral) in conjunction with prior imaging for comparison. This implies a more thorough examination and comparison across different angles and timelines.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4060669978629513,0.465,0.4785276073619632,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4203,latent_4203,5415,0.01083,0.008990971,3.506127,Reports describing changes or status of medical devices or implants.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve references to the presence, positioning, or changes in lines, tubes, or other medical devices. These references are crucial for monitoring patient status and ensuring treatment efficacy, generating specific activation responses.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4204,latent_4204,15155,0.03031,0.016061489,3.921966,Unspecified or absent prior comparison details and focus on tube placements.,"These examples show radiology reports that either lack information on previous comparisons, as indicated by missing or unspecified comparison dates, or focus on tube placements where direct prior image comparison is less critical. The lack of specifics regarding comparison renders these less representative of a pattern that relies on detailed prior comparisons.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4205,latent_4205,5205,0.01041,0.008071014,3.4581163,Comparison of current images with prior ones to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels all mention current and prior images, demonstrating a focus on evaluating changes or stability across imaging studies. These reports frequently include phrases indicating comparison with prior studies, noting specific aspects like absence of changes or interval developments.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4046232300484067,0.425,0.4452554744525547,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4206,latent_4206,6982,0.013964,0.020641707,4.9053206,Emphasis on stable findings compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples frequently request descriptions that explicitly include a comparison to prior images, particularly findings of stable or unchanged conditions from past imaging. Lower activated examples lack this emphasis or comparison point.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3808049535603715,0.415,0.3396226415094339,0.18,100.0,100.0
+4207,latent_4207,27903,0.055806,0.0260681,3.0346477,Structured input descriptions involving prior and current images with PRIOR_REPORT.,"Samples with high activations consistently feature a specific command structure starting with 'Given the current...and the prior...PRIOR_REPORT', suggesting a format involving explicit comparisons with prior radiological images. Lower activations lack this exact phrasing and sequence, thus leading to a hierarchical pattern of text interpretation by the model.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4208,latent_4208,13027,0.026054,0.0154474005,3.54279,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"These examples involve the comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, with a focus on identifying changes, stability, or progression. The common theme is the assessment of interval change or lack thereof, which is indicated by specific terms like 'unchanged', 'increased', 'decreased', or 'slightly'.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6329689619404771,0.655,0.6040268456375839,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4209,latent_4209,19606,0.039212,0.017350536,3.1583922,Highlighting interval changes or stability in follow-up imaging.,"Examples with high activation ratings often involve the identification of interval changes or the resolution of conditions when compared with prior images. Specific language like 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'resolved' is used to describe the comparison between current and prior images, indicating an emphasis on follow-up and stability of findings across exams.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5327868852459017,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4210,latent_4210,3602,0.007204,0.00668972,9.306934,Emphasis on tube positioning and interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The activation is high when the examples reference endotracheal or other tubes and lines, focusing on their placement relative to the carina or other anatomical landmarks. Tubes like ETT tips, PICC lines, and NG tubes feature prominently, and their precise placement is often detailed in radiological assessments. These reports also mention interval changes, showcasing how current findings are compared with previous ones in terms of tube positions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4211,latent_4211,9608,0.019216,0.015363871,8.341915,Detection of stable or unchanged thoracic structures over time.,"The pattern is evident in examples where a specific condition or feature, such as cardiomegaly, aortic tortuosity, or other thoracic structures being noted as unchanged, is either explicitly compared to prior imaging or deemed stable over time. This emphasizes the importance of longitudinal analysis in detecting subtle changes possibly contributing to chronic or ongoing conditions.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.64,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5813321018062397,0.5879396984924623,0.4946236559139785,0.5679012345679012,81.0,118.0
+4212,latent_4212,38610,0.07722,0.034755386,2.7392368,Radiological findings interpretation with an emphasis on comparison with prior images.,"The examples exhibiting activations tend to involve providing interpretations of radiological findings while often referencing prior images for comparison. These examples often concern potential changes or stability in patient conditions, while non-representative examples generally don't focus on or have missing comparative analysis components.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4726763065138353,0.525,0.5153374233128835,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4213,latent_4213,5315,0.01063,0.014495633,3.9727964,Unchanged or unremarkable mediastinal or cardiomediastinal contours.,"The highly activated examples are characterized by the descriptive findings of unchanged cardiac or mediastinal contours, often following a statement about heart size or the clear presence or absence of other chest pathologies. The focus is specifically on the stability or normality of mediastinal or cardiomediastinal contours regardless of other lung pathologies or conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4214,latent_4214,10692,0.021384,0.015316537,4.087678,Cardiac enlargement with medical device position or change.,"The strongly activated examples consistently describe findings in relation to medical devices such as catheters, chest tubes, NG tubes, or pacemakers, indicating that changes or stability regarding these devices are a focus. Additionally, references to cardiomegaly or lung abnormalities often accompany these descriptions.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5305164319248826,0.57,0.6666666666666666,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4215,latent_4215,4315,0.00863,0.007994057,7.4048376,Lack of specified prior comparison or focusing on current study findings.,"Higher activations correlate with the absence of a prior comparison (indicated as 'N/A') or the presence of comparison capability stated. This pattern points to responses indicating that the given images do not have direct comparability with prior images, whether hypothesized or explicitly noted, correlating with descriptions focusing on current findings rather than comparison statements.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.469150641025641,0.47,0.4673913043478261,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4216,latent_4216,3372,0.006744,0.010975353,4.9211826,Descriptions of radiographic findings in comparison with prior images.,"Highly activated examples include comparative descriptions of radiographic findings with assessments of changes based on prior imaging. These describe specific interval changes, stability, or resolution of anomalies, linking past and present images. This suggests the model is detecting a pattern where radiological change over time is analyzed, such as new placements or stable conditions versus previous studies.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4217,latent_4217,3829,0.007658,0.0056645125,4.2083783,Describing findings by comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently utilize comparative language to evaluate current findings against previous imaging studies. The connection to providing a comparative analysis, such as changes observed or stability, directly relates to the activation level observed, indicating that explicit comparisons in image descriptions are central to what the model is recognizing.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4473684210526316,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4218,latent_4218,17399,0.034798,0.021858828,5.933358,Descriptions of stability and minimal change in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of current findings on imaging reports being compared to prior studies, often highlighting little to no change, suggesting stability. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'no significant change', or 'comparison to prior' indicate a pattern where stability in findings is important, contrary to examples showing notable changes or no prior comparison, hence low activation.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4219,latent_4219,4941,0.009882,0.010641294,5.2918873,"Inclusion of current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images for comparison.","Activation is high when the data includes both current frontal and lateral images along with prior frontal comparisons. These instances consistently show the format of reporting current and historical findings together, often to assess change or stability of a condition, providing a thorough comparison from varied perspectives.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4220,latent_4220,10833,0.021666,0.012206517,6.120151,Persistent or unchanged imaging findings across studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve imaging findings in the chest that identify or describe prominent or unchanged patterns, especially related to features like atelectasis or findings unchanged between current and prior imaging. Lower activations often describe normal findings or lack comparison details.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.4563106796116505,0.5802469135802469,81.0,119.0
+4221,latent_4221,5039,0.010078,0.010891982,4.930103,Mentions of calcifications in the radiology report.,"The examples with higher activation levels include specific mentions of calcifications, such as calcified aortic arch, pleural plaques, granulomas, or calcified lymph nodes. These detailed findings likely indicate a common pattern in the dataset focusing on the presence and description of calcifications on radiological images.",0.7887931034482758,0.7959183673469388,0.9375,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5865376664185893,0.625,0.8205128205128205,0.32,100.0,100.0
+4222,latent_4222,26054,0.052108,0.02361945,4.2368155,Frequent evaluation or description of medical devices' positions in imaging.,"The dataset exhibits a frequent examination or evaluation of medical devices' positions, such as PICC lines, tubes, catheter tips, and pacemaker wires. These evaluations are commonly found in radiology reports as they are crucial for patient management, especially post-procedure or in ongoing treatment.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6185567010309279,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4223,latent_4223,7011,0.014022,0.01237055,4.4099874,"Low lung volumes often with other lung findings (atelectasis, effusions).","Examples with high activation exhibit findings involving low lung volumes, often accompanied by other pulmonary findings like effusions, atelectasis, or consolidation, which are related to various pathological states but not pneumothorax or effusion.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.6166666666666667,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4224,latent_4224,10494,0.020988,0.012259702,4.9119625,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4225,latent_4225,94045,0.18809,0.13315342,5.335532,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"These examples frequently mention phrases like 'comparison', 'unchanged', or 'improved', indicating that the pattern involves comparing current chest imaging findings to those on prior imaging to assess changes or stability of findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4226,latent_4226,19776,0.039552,0.015978197,3.426689,Detection and description of interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe changes in imaging findings when compared to prior studies, highlighting changes such as new or resolved opacities, and specifying the timeframe or comparative data from previous radiology studies. Such descriptions emphasize changes or stability over time in radiological features relative to prior imaging results.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.59,0.59,0.59,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4227,latent_4227,6720,0.01344,0.021885041,5.485839,Task structure with reference to current and prior images for comparison.,"This pattern involves the task structure and sequence, often starting with 'Given the current frontal image', followed by specific instructions to compare with a prior image. It focuses on the comparison task but notably includes pattern variations where the precise comparison is ambiguous or partial, indicated by breaks in text or placeholder notations. This structure aligns with higher activations when both current and prior comparison instructions are consistently emphasized, without completion or objective description.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4273024777933614,0.51,0.5056818181818182,0.89,100.0,100.0
+4228,latent_4228,1124,0.002248,0.005253137,7.8115497,Instruction to describe findings in comparison to prior image.,"The highly activated examples predominantly contain explicit instructions to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating a focus on generating comparative findings. This emphasizes a requirement for analysis or summarization based on pre-existing data, which is often seen in radiological assessments and comparisons.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4750656167979002,0.545,0.5260115606936416,0.91,100.0,100.0
+4229,latent_4229,5828,0.011656,0.008839686,3.856829,Comparison with prior radiographic studies.,"These examples are characterized by a specific linguistic pattern where the findings are compared to prior radiographs or imaging studies, often with explicit dates or details of the previous studies. This aspect of the radiology report is common for tracking changes or stability of findings over time, reflecting a routine process in the radiology field of comparing current images with prior ones.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.4428571428571428,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4230,latent_4230,7481,0.014962,0.013521692,3.4610283,Emphasis on interval change or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels tend to involve descriptions or assessments that explicitly reference the stability or change of specific features or devices over time as compared to prior imaging studies, indicating a focus on dynamic changes rather than static findings or lack of comparison.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4319312871037009,0.4321608040201005,0.4326923076923077,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+4231,latent_4231,3477,0.006954,0.0062798164,4.186266,Comparison of radiology findings with prior images.,"The high activation examples consistently include requests to describe and compare radiological findings between current and prior images. The task explicitly asks the assistant to evaluate changes or stability over time in the imaging, which is a focused aspect of assessing disease progression or stability in radiology.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4232,latent_4232,9561,0.019122,0.012074344,4.378976,Stable or unchanged status of monitoring and support devices.,"The common theme among these examples is the status of medical devices (like catheters, pacemakers, etc.) in chest images, where these devices' positions or presence are unchanged or stable when compared with prior exams. This attribute is highlighted by terms like 'remain', 'unchanged', and 'constant', demonstrating a pattern focused on device stability across time points.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7444825772188681,0.745,0.7692307692307693,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4233,latent_4233,4898,0.009796,0.018126173,5.6730094,Detailed comparison with prior reports highlighting change or stability.,"The high activation samples involve cases where findings from radiological images are explicitly compared with prior reports to highlight specific changes or stability in clinical context. These examples often involve complex medical histories and technical details, emphasizing the process of comparison to detect change or stability over time.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4756097560975609,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4234,latent_4234,4141,0.008282,0.011232653,4.10233,Handling tasks requiring comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels all explicitly involve tasks where the model must process a combination of frontal, lateral, and prior images to compare current versus previous findings or provide interpretations. The repeated structure and command phrases for descriptive comparison tasks lead to high engagement of the model.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4235,latent_4235,5815,0.01163,0.008711362,5.219178,Comparison of medical tube positioning across imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation consistently reference a comparison with prior imaging and specifically highlight changes or stability regarding the position or presence of medical tubes (e.g., ET tubes, feeding tubes) over time. This pattern differentiates these examples from others that do not mention or emphasize these details.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4042553191489361,0.19,100.0,100.0
+4236,latent_4236,22108,0.044216,0.021025628,2.7432,Imaging description indicating stabilization or improvement.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions indicating changes, particularly stabilization or improvement, in the patient's condition or devices shown in the imaging. Such commentary usually includes phrases like 'unchanged', 'persistent', or 'interval changes', suggesting a progression or resolution from prior conditions.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4237,latent_4237,7967,0.015934,0.018494602,3.8732321,Explicit direction to interpret multiple images including 'current lateral image'.,"Highly activated examples heavily utilize the phrase 'given the current frontal image', referring directly to multiple image types such as 'lateral image' and comparisons with 'prior frontal image'. This explicit naming of images for evaluation seems to drive the pattern.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4238,latent_4238,5620,0.01124,0.009246704,4.9425354,Effective documentation of changes compared to prior imaging despite incomplete comparison data.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently show reports where findings are effectively compared to prior reports despite incomplete or missing comparison data, leading to changes being well-documented in terms of positioning or changes in condition.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4239,latent_4239,15051,0.030102,0.02444181,4.144945,Description of changes in radiological findings over time via comparisons.,"The examples indicate a pattern where the report describes findings that either state or imply a change in a patient’s condition over time in comparison to prior radiographic studies, often using changes in opacities, effusions, or devices as indicators.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4240,latent_4240,48593,0.097186,0.045964424,3.6063538,Definite interval change in findings based on prior imaging comparison.,"Examples with low activation describe findings without significant interval changes or utilize unclear comparison points, while examples with higher activation highlight specific changes or evaluations using prior imaging. The pattern involves the presence of definite interval change in findings from prior imaging and evaluation based on this comparison.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.6271186440677966,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4241,latent_4241,4922,0.009844,0.011133375,3.4473238,Prompts with prior images marked as [[<image>]] trigger higher activations in comparison tasks.,The examples largely feature differences in activation based on the inclusion of prior images in the prompt when tasks involve comparisons. The explicit indication of prior images in prompts is a key contributor to higher activations. Being represented as [[<image>]] rather than <image> appears to increase relevance in these comparison tasks.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4787494719053654,0.5326633165829145,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,99.0
+4242,latent_4242,10767,0.021534,0.016157728,5.2590275,Comparison directed findings with significant changes or specified abnormalities.,"The examples with higher activations often involve scenarios where a clear comparison is possible against prior images, and significant changes or findings are noted. These examples either feature explicit instructions or contexts for comparing new and previous images to note similarities, differences, or specific changes.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3799915931063472,0.41,0.3392857142857143,0.19,100.0,100.0
+4243,latent_4243,4046,0.008092,0.010949472,4.294531,Explicit descriptions of changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently utilize comparisons between the current and prior image findings. They explicitly state changes like increases, stability, or resolution of pathologies such as effusions or atelectasis. These comparisons are expressed using terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'interval increase', or similar phrases indicating assessment of change over time.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.2857142857142857,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3903532365070826,0.405,0.3623188405797101,0.25,100.0,100.0
+4244,latent_4244,14348,0.028696,0.018730493,5.677605,Multi-view imaging findings with prior comparison.,"The examples with high activations consistently refer to the presence of multiple images (frontal and lateral) along with prior comparisons. These reports emphasize detailed evaluation across multiple perspectives, focusing on changes in pathological findings rather than just static observations in single-view reports.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4245,latent_4245,5560,0.01112,0.011539832,6.343401,Comparison to prior with noted interval findings or changes.,"Examples with notable activation levels involve references to prior imaging comparisons, much like previous patterns, but specifically highlight any change in current versus previous imaging findings, sometimes using direct indicators like presence or removal of tubes or catheters, or interval changes in medical conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,100.0,100.0
+4246,latent_4246,3613,0.007226,0.009976418,5.7906656,Analyses requesting comparison to prior images.,"Examples with activation scores significantly above zero have a common feature: they are asked to compare current imaging findings to prior studies. This involves instructions asking to find differences or changes from previous imaging. The pattern is consistent with tasks requiring historical comparison to derive diagnostic insights, typical in longitudinal radiological assessments.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4247,latent_4247,5920,0.01184,0.006348688,3.6660824,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and observation of changes.,"Examples with high activation tend to describe the radiological findings in comparison to prior images, mentioning changes observed. They often note 'interval changes', 'persistent findings', or specify the stability or changes of opacities, fluid, or devices, while high activation consistently includes detailed observation of changes over time.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4248,latent_4248,4774,0.009548,0.011185057,7.16664,Comparison of findings across frontal and lateral views.,"These examples frequently request a description of findings based on image analyses, particularly focusing on comparisons of different views (frontal and lateral) or contrast-enhanced assessments, rather than cross-sectional analyses.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5384142436275138,0.5404040404040404,0.5402298850574713,0.4795918367346938,98.0,100.0
+4249,latent_4249,4961,0.009922,0.009056313,6.8359833,Assessment of tube or device position and its stability or change over time.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of lines or tubes on imaging, specifically focusing on accurate placement or repositioning, and comparison with any changes over time. These details suggest a clinical context where monitoring and adjustment of tubes or lines are critical.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3677257525083612,0.4271356783919598,0.3157894736842105,0.12,100.0,99.0
+4250,latent_4250,10367,0.020734,0.013928949,6.745667,Explicit comparisons of current findings with respect to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels include direct comparisons of current findings with respect to prior or same-day imaging results. They often mention changes, placements, or stabilities of specific medical devices or medical conditions explicitly tied to these comparisons.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5126050420168067,0.648936170212766,94.0,106.0
+4251,latent_4251,14024,0.028048,0.015499991,3.6832402,Detailed progression or stabilization findings in radiology study.,"All examples describe or imply changes in observations detailed through radiology study comparisons and emphasize the progression or stabilization of certain medical or anatomical conditions. However, lower activations involve frequent non-specific or non-progressive patterns in radiological reporting.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5267857142857143,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4252,latent_4252,6929,0.013858,0.012407067,4.8323793,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging studies.,"The prominent pattern in these examples is the use of current and prior imaging to identify and evaluate changes, especially concerning the lungs, pulmonary vasculature, and specific lines or devices. High activation samples consistently mention assessments over time based on past imaging comparisons, checking for pathologies or device placements.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4253,latent_4253,4469,0.008938,0.009582968,3.92455,Integration of multiple views for comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often emphasize interpreting current findings in light of previous images or reports, yet reflect a coherent set of observations across multiple supporting views (frontal and lateral radiographs). This consistent approach facilitates comparative analysis of medical imaging.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4254,latent_4254,7457,0.014914,0.019242916,5.026223,Comparison to prior imaging assessing changes or stability.,Examples with high activation levels explicitly identify changes or lack thereof when current radiographs are compared to prior images. This pattern involves phrases specifying comparison to previous imaging to assess stability or changes in clinical findings.,0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4255,latent_4255,3650,0.0073,0.011233858,11.290892,References to patient status post medical procedures.,"Positive activations correspond with cases where the status of a patient post a specific medical procedure or surgery is mentioned. The pattern focuses on statements indicating post-procedural status combined with the comparison of radiological findings over time, as these are frequently repeated in these descriptions.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.597979797979798,0.5979899497487438,0.6,0.6,100.0,99.0
+4256,latent_4256,41677,0.083354,0.058862075,6.965464,Use of a prior frontal image for comparison in radiology studies.,"The examined reports involve the current use of frontal and/or lateral imaging along with a prior reference point, where the frontal image plays a central role in determining comparisons and changes over time. The activation is driven by the mentioning of a prior frontal image as a reference for current interpretation.",0.4102070293692826,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4257,latent_4257,7678,0.015356,0.013791573,3.7829304,Assessment of cardiac silhouette or heart size.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings related to cardiac silhouettes or heart size, irrespective of whether there are previous images for comparison or not. This suggests a focus on assessing the cardiac silhouette for changes or abnormalities within the context of chest imaging reports.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6382794684280884,0.655,0.6083916083916084,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4258,latent_4258,15619,0.031238,0.021405783,5.5398364,Descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Activations are high for examples that mention specific findings that resulted from interval changes or stabilizations between the current and prior images within a single report, particularly changes in patient condition or device placement. Instances where comparisons were explicitly noted without finding differences tend to have lower activations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4388129123587553,0.445,0.430379746835443,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4259,latent_4259,3679,0.007358,0.008237136,3.5897725,Explicit presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' in the prompt.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the presence of prior reports explicitly noted or referenced, particularly those labeled as 'PRIOR_REPORT', regardless of whether a specific comparison is made. The inclusion or reference to detailed prior history or reports in the prompt pattern contributes to the activation.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5164835164835164,0.56,0.5375,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4260,latent_4260,13564,0.027128,0.016839016,6.4062886,Comparison text noting interval change or progression.,"Activation levels tend to be higher in examples where the description indicates comparison with prior images, but with a notable change, improvement, or new aspect in the findings which implies a progression in the patient's condition or clear interval changes. Examples without significant change or comparison text receive lower activations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3890224358974359,0.39,0.3804347826086957,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4261,latent_4261,74339,0.148678,0.09624977,4.495179,Comparison of current and prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"The prompts with higher activation levels consistently involve a clear comparison of current and prior imaging, focusing on changes (or absence of changes) noted between the studies. This involves identifying either stability or change in relevant features in imaging studies separated by date or previous versus current exams, and is a common pattern in diagnostic radiology for tracking patient progression.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4262,latent_4262,4513,0.009026,0.013051948,10.14628,Current image analysis when prompted for comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern is reflected in the lower activation scores when prior images or reports are mentioned, even when comparisons are requested. High activations occur when only current imaging is discussed despite a prompt for comparative analysis. This distinguishes tasks directed at analyzing current images independently from comparative evaluations.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4263,latent_4263,4689,0.009378,0.015004862,6.2287536,Comparing current images with prior imaging is emphasized.,"The high activation level examples are consistently involving scenarios where 'comparison' with prior imaging is crucial, whether it be involving changes in medical signs, evidence of new findings, or a specific requirement to compare changes over a timeline, especially where the history, or present condition is complex or significant for changes.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3799915931063472,0.41,0.4375,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4264,latent_4264,1975,0.00395,0.0073692496,5.974735,Detailed comparison and assessment of findings against prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve comparisons with previous imaging studies and explicitly highlight changes such as progression or stability of findings. Additionally, they frequently include distinct terms and quantities associated with specific pathologies or clinical changes, often involving detailed measurements or elaborations of radiographic findings from previous exams.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4778761061946903,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4265,latent_4265,4865,0.00973,0.0074759447,4.6325526,Normal heart size and mediastinal contours.,"The higher activation levels are associated with the presence of a normal-sized heart or mediastinal structures, regardless of other observations such as potential lung abnormalities or pacemaker positions. This pattern focuses specifically on imaging findings that identify heart size and mediastinal structures as normal or unchanged.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6899689968996899,0.69,0.6862745098039216,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4266,latent_4266,40195,0.08039,0.037929628,4.6732497,Descriptive variance in findings over time including recommendations for follow-up.,"The pattern with higher activations is often correlated with more explicit and detailed descriptions of changes observed in imaging, particularly those that explicitly include deliberations on changes over time and discussions about issues like consolidation, pneumothorax, and other pathologies that are described in terms of interval changes. This includes uncertainty in speech about improvement or worsening in clinical terms, often recommending follow-up or further evaluation. Examples often discuss continued improvement or require recommendations for further action due to unclear resolutions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6417669466939125,0.645,0.6790123456790124,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4267,latent_4267,31305,0.06261,0.029425692,2.45948,Evaluation of placement or repositioning of medical devices compared to prior.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe modifications in medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, based on previous studies. They detail placement or repositioning of these devices in the body, which is a consistent pattern across many of these samples. Common phrases include 'placement ... as compared to prior' or 'repositioning ... since prior exam'.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4268,latent_4268,8398,0.016796,0.014439309,6.290297,Focus on tube placement and adjustments in chest radiographs.,"These samples focus on radiographic findings related to chest tubes, including their placement and required adjustments, as documented in radiology reports. An emphasis is placed on the positioning of tubes such as endotracheal and nasogastric tubes without consideration for other chest abnormalities.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6613300492610837,0.67,0.75,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4269,latent_4269,3974,0.007948,0.007108904,3.460009,Comparative analysis includes current lateral images.,"The higher activation levels appear when there are current and lateral images being compared to prior images. The inclusion of current lateral views alongside the frontal view for comparison seems to be a key component in these cases, as noted in examples with higher activation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5882166613873931,0.61,0.5753424657534246,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4270,latent_4270,4066,0.008132,0.009489761,4.3183813,"Stable findings on comparison with prior imaging, without new significant changes.",Highly activated examples feature radiology reports that describe findings in comparison to prior studies but ultimately indicate no significant new findings or interval changes. This pattern of stability in medical imaging is often considered clinically reassuring.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5975609756097561,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4271,latent_4271,36873,0.073746,0.045162093,6.734648,Detailed anatomical descriptions with absence of acute changes or pathology.,"Reports with higher activation often involve detailed descriptions of pulmonary or cardiomediastinal findings without acute changes, especially when devices or anatomical structures are described as normal or unchanged. These reports contain explicit radiological findings and comparisons, even when no clinically significant change is observed. The lack of pathological focus while detailing anatomical and device status seems to align closely with robust, neutral reporting style typical of the pattern.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.634771732332708,0.635,0.6161616161616161,0.6354166666666666,96.0,104.0
+4272,latent_4272,2513,0.005026,0.006686093,5.6683617,Presence of both current and prior frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the presence of both current and prior images, usually specified as 'frontal' and 'lateral'. This structure suggests comparisons are made between different perspectives of the same region in current and past imaging studies, often aiding in tracking changes over time or spatial orientation.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4273,latent_4273,9438,0.018876,0.012217835,5.804923,Stability and unchanged findings relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels for this pattern consistently note findings that are unchanged from previous studies. These examples track stability in medical features across time, such as unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung clearances, or persistent clinical tools like pacemaker leads and catheters, reflecting a focus on comparability between current and past states.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4686730435233429,0.4824120603015075,0.4776119402985074,0.32,100.0,99.0
+4274,latent_4274,3686,0.007372,0.012113882,6.740788,Detailed comparison of current and prior images or thorough descriptions trigger higher activation.,"Example activations suggest that retaining detailed comparisons of multiple studies or extensive history on images for evaluation triggers higher activation. Nevertheless, examples where only limited or basic attributes (normalcy or lack of issue) are checked against past imagery do not lead to measurable activation.",0.3853046594982078,0.4285714285714285,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4048716260697828,0.435,0.4551724137931034,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4275,latent_4275,10583,0.021166,0.013188998,6.789311,Description of significant interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to include descriptions of interval changes, either improvement or worsening, in radiological findings between current and prior imaging studies. Specific changes such as resolution or progression of pulmonary opacities or effusions are detailed, which represent significant updates in the patient’s condition.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6260697827518105,0.645,0.6086956521739131,0.4883720930232558,86.0,114.0
+4276,latent_4276,6482,0.012964,0.009705458,3.2444634,Focus on detailed descriptions of thoracic features.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve intricate descriptions of chest features such as the cardiomediastinal silhouette, mediastinal and hilar contours, and interstitial opacities. These specific terminologies and focus on these thoracic features are notably present in highly activated examples, more so than in less activated ones which tend to be more general or conclude with fewer detailed thoracic findings.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5402820738386447,0.595,0.5562130177514792,0.94,100.0,100.0
+4277,latent_4277,2959,0.005918,0.0047314176,5.5309362,Stable comparison of new and prior images with unchanged findings or interventions.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of both frontal and lateral current images being compared with prior images for evidence of interval change or presence of a specific finding like new tubes or pneumothorax, but with an emphasis on stable or unchanged findings or new stable interventions.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5428571428571428,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4278,latent_4278,37671,0.075342,0.080463305,5.1592603,"Stable findings compared to prior images, no change in pathology.","The examples with high activations consistently describe the process of comparing current and prior imaging studies, specifically noting the absence of change between the studies. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or references to comparisons of current and previous images regarding chronic or stable findings are recurrent.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.6190476190476191,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4279,latent_4279,34573,0.069146,0.03727879,5.542735,Comparison of radiological findings over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions where changes in radiological findings are analyzed and compared explicitly with prior images. These examples often note stability, significant findings, or absence of new developments compared to the previous images, emphasizing consistent change monitoring.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+4280,latent_4280,8524,0.017048,0.02938288,6.4362288,Mention of comparison with prior imaging studies or assessment of interval change.,"The pattern with high activation levels involves explicit indications of comparison with previous studies, often highlighted through similar language and structure present in various examples, but the focus is on repeated mentions of comparison or stability of features. This mirrors frequent practice in clinical radiology to evaluate changes over time.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4177029196484449,0.465,0.4777070063694267,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4281,latent_4281,7762,0.015524,0.02937031,6.9328938,Radiological study descriptions indicating a lack of prior comparison.,Examples with a high activation level tend to lack explicit no comparison phrasing and include instructions to provide descriptions without a clear directive of existing comparison studies. This suggests a pattern focusing on studies where the explicit need for comparison information is omitted or vague.,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5833333333333334,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4282,latent_4282,6149,0.012298,0.009163588,3.7168813,Descriptions of stable findings across comparative studies.,"Highly activated examples involve patterns of language indicating repeated observations, such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'as compared to previous', that describe findings consistent over multiple examinations. They often highlight the stability or consistent presence of certain features across comparative radiological studies.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5218403014897437,0.5226130653266332,0.5274725274725275,0.48,100.0,99.0
+4283,latent_4283,45856,0.091712,0.06127933,4.8091283,Descriptions involving stability or changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with activations tend to involve reports that include or emphasize comparisons with prior images, particularly those that note changes or stability in the condition of the cardiopulmonary structures. This suggests that the pattern of interest is related to descriptions involving comparisons to prior imaging, possibly linked with conditions showing chronic stability or specific status changes between studies.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5747841901688056,0.585,0.5648854961832062,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4284,latent_4284,3512,0.007024,0.011457768,7.1505194,Requests for descriptive comparison with prior images in radiology studies.,"These examples frequently feature analyses requesting descriptions of findings in radiology studies that are meant to be compared with prior frontal images. This task of comparing new images with prior images is often highlighted in radiological evaluations, indicating a recurring emphasis on this detailed comparative analysis.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4067522381620105,0.45,0.4675324675324675,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4285,latent_4285,55195,0.11039,0.06194877,3.9515617,Presence of medical device with evaluation or changes over time.,"The pattern that emerges from the examples with higher activation levels is related to the presence of a medical device in the chest cavity along with changes or conditions tracked over time via comparison to previous imaging, typically focused on potential aspiratory or infective changes post placement or maintenances of these devices. This includes evaluation for pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or infection.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5980303487086724,0.6,0.6162790697674418,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4286,latent_4286,5221,0.010442,0.012441415,5.3117404,Normal findings or stability of cardiomediastinal silhouette in radiological comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels typically describe a radiology study without notable changes or acute findings, using terms such as 'normal','unremarkable', 'clear', or 'stable'. The presence of normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, unchanged structures, or absence of acute processes correlates with high activation levels.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6625620105260508,0.665,0.6410256410256411,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4287,latent_4287,6997,0.013994,0.0174953,7.365178,Unchanged or stable patient status compared to prior images.,"Descriptions frequently focus on comparisons between current and prior images, emphasizing interval changes. However, the activation doesn't always correlate with complexity, indicating the pattern involves referencing status consistent with no new substantial changes in findings despite multiple time points.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4294672457659788,0.445,0.417910447761194,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4288,latent_4288,6266,0.012532,0.00818487,4.828537,Comparisons highlighting interval changes from prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels contain explicit references to comparisons with prior radiology studies, often involving details of progressive changes or stability. These involve quantified measurements, transformations from the previous findings, or stability over time, indicating specific attention to comparisons with earlier studies.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5463917525773195,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4289,latent_4289,51982,0.103964,0.08488418,7.8760304,Low lung volumes noted in imaging descriptions.,"While many entries mention comparison to prior exams, entries with an activation higher than zero frequently exhibit specific descriptions of thoracic anatomy or image findings with low lung volumes. These comments focus on limited detail provided regarding image findings in relation to the expected level of detail for diagnostic purposes.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.2857142857142857,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.2933872195864815,0.5125628140703518,0.5769230769230769,0.15,100.0,99.0
+4290,latent_4290,45486,0.090972,0.06442895,5.504146,Priority on findings changes compared to prior images.,"High-activation examples emphasize changes in findings between the current and prior images, indicating an event or progression. Low-activation examples mention stability, normality, or other factors but do not emphasize changes between comparisons, which is the core pattern identified.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5841584158415841,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4291,latent_4291,27325,0.05465,0.034391295,5.05722,Comparisons of interval changes with prior imaging.,"The commonality in these examples is the specific comparison of findings with previous images or reports, highlighting the interval changes or stability rather than merely noting findings as significant or insignificant. This reflects radiological practices where direct comparisons with prior imaging play a critical role in interpreting pathology evolution or resolution.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4292,latent_4292,4630,0.00926,0.01032527,5.7928333,Noting stability or changes in positions of lines and tubes between studies.,"Examples with high activation describe tracking changes in monitoring or support devices (e.g., ET tubes, catheters) across sequential radiographs. They use similar phrasing to express comparisons of the device positions or state (e.g., unchanged, removed, extended) relative to previous studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.604301948051948,0.61,0.6447368421052632,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4293,latent_4293,4457,0.008914,0.012385414,4.431103,Comparison to prior imaging is explicitly analyzed.,"Examples with high activation levels all involve making direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, with explicit use of phrases like 'in comparison to', 'as compared to', and involvement of prior reports. The instructions consistently involve mentioning how findings relate specifically to what was observed in previous images or reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4225603173407647,0.425,0.4336283185840708,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4294,latent_4294,3422,0.006844,0.006157962,7.2800937,Detailed comparison of current and prior images to assess for changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently detail a thorough comparison between current and prior images. They often describe changes in anatomical features or medical devices like the presence or absence of pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, or the adjustment of medical devices by comparing it explicitly with prior imaging studies. The pattern hinges on detailing interval changes from what is visually available in present and past images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4078683259735046,0.41,0.3977272727272727,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4295,latent_4295,11719,0.023438,0.016953561,4.8974557,High activation with chest imaging comparisons.,"Highly activated examples involve chest radiographs, indicating a preference or specificity for imaging of the chest region and possibly focusing on findings or comparisons explicitly stated in radiology reports, especially when comparing current images with prior ones from identical anatomical regions.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4296,latent_4296,3856,0.007712,0.011567315,5.1456127,"Normal or stable findings, clear lungs, and absence of effusion or pneumothorax.","Higher activations are observed when descriptions focus on clear lungs and/or unremarkable findings coupled with comments on the absence of pneumothorax or pleural effusion, indicating a normal or stable condition. This contrasts radiology reports emphasizing incidental or confirmation of non-acute findings or unchanged states in comparison with prior images.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6591478696741855,0.66,0.6454545454545455,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4297,latent_4297,4665,0.00933,0.009059661,5.428653,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The examples that show high activation levels consistently discuss findings in comparison to previous images, highlighting stability, changes, or maintaining similar appearances from prior studies. This pattern provides context or reassurance about the presence or absence of disease progression.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,100.0,100.0
+4298,latent_4298,17130,0.03426,0.017745446,4.27481,Comparison of radiology findings with prior studies for interval changes.,"Examples feature an explicit comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, specifically highlighting changes in diseases or medical conditions over time like 'interval changes', 'worsening', or 'stability'. These linguistic patterns emphasize temporal evaluations rather than standalone assessments.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5718433263343443,0.5829145728643216,0.5648854961832062,0.74,100.0,99.0
+4299,latent_4299,5938,0.011876,0.01614235,4.328554,Instruction to compare with prior image and provide detailed findings.,"Highly activated examples involve instructions to provide findings while explicitly stating a detailed comparison with prior imaging. These examples specify that the description of findings should be made relative to the prior imaging, and frequently request new interpretations or updates on existing findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4538461538461538,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4300,latent_4300,16311,0.032622,0.021604965,6.178841,Monitoring interval changes in imaging for specific abnormalities or interventions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of interval changes or stability in radiological findings in comparison to prior images, sometimes involving specific changes such as removal of chest tubes or presence of abnormalities like effusions or atelectasis. These high-activation examples focus on comparing current and past imaging to assess for changes, particularly involving interventions or observed abnormalities.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6332650199546974,0.66,0.6038961038961039,0.93,100.0,100.0
+4301,latent_4301,38044,0.076088,0.045290325,5.154979,Unchanged tube or catheter position in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels show a pattern of unchanged positions of tubes or catheters in comparison with prior imaging, suggesting stability in their placement or presentation. This is a specific aspect tracked in medical imaging reports and frequently noted when evaluating radiological findings in continuous or sequential observations.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679197,0.555,0.6666666666666666,0.22,100.0,100.0
+4302,latent_4302,11527,0.023054,0.019423103,5.246303,Summary focuses on comparison between current and prior images.,"The high activation examples predominantly feature comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. The Assistants describe differences or lack of changes between the two. Compared to examples with lower activations, these don't drift into specific findings but focus on relative change or stability between images.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4303,latent_4303,22590,0.04518,0.02877679,5.843058,Tasks requiring analysis of current versus prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels explicitly involve a request to describe differences in findings between current and prior images, which is a specific task focused on comparison analysis in radiology. This involves evaluating the stability or changes in the observed medical condition, often related to monitoring for progression or resolution of an issue.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4540811834111121,0.535,0.519774011299435,0.92,100.0,100.0
+4304,latent_4304,14941,0.029882,0.018597832,4.344779,Detailed comparative evaluations of imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain detailed analyses of the thoracic condition in relation to previous imaging studies. This includes consistent referencing of findings, stability or changes, signs of complications, and the integration of clinical context, such as medical devices or conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.58491045991046,0.5879396984924623,0.5726495726495726,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+4305,latent_4305,7714,0.015428,0.01214997,3.6447263,Comprehensive comparisons with prior images revealing dynamic changes or stability.,"In these examples, there is a recurring theme of comparing current radiological findings with prior imaging, but the highly activated ones involve complex image assessments across different views (frontal, lateral, etc.) and explicit inclusion of prior imaging for comparative analysis, indicating dynamic changes or stability.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3145780051150895,0.33,0.2571428571428571,0.18,100.0,100.0
+4306,latent_4306,9850,0.0197,0.017548466,2.3962543,Absence of actual comparison despite prompt mentioning prior image comparison.,"Most highly activated examples ask for a description of findings in radiology images with comparison to prior images but specify 'comparison: none', indicating no prior images are available or used for comparison. The activation correlates with the lack of actual comparison despite the prompt mentioning comparison.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3869455463397043,0.49,0.4945054945054945,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4307,latent_4307,4219,0.008438,0.014321293,6.5404367,Detailed description of image findings regardless of explicit comparison summary.,"High activation levels correspond to examples where detailed image findings are included even when the comparison is intended but not explicitly stated. These examples report the primary task of providing detailed descriptions for the presented images, focusing on providing clarity between current findings and impressions from provided images without necessarily needing comparison details present.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4175609756097561,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.8888888888888888,99.0,100.0
+4308,latent_4308,6958,0.013916,0.013528071,6.8092575,"Comparison with prior imaging studies, highlighting stability, changes, or resolution.","Consistent with the pattern identified, examples with a high activation level involve descriptions of changes or comparisons to previous imaging studies indicating disease progression, stability, or resolution, which is a common narrative structure in radiological assessments.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4309,latent_4309,2937,0.005874,0.009379976,6.7829804,Comparison of given images without existing prior report.,"The examples with high activation levels all request the generation of a report that provides a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to a prior image, particularly where the prior report is indicated as 'N/A'. This pattern is significant in cases where current imaging needs to be explicitly compared with prior images without an existing narrative report or conclusion.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5898359343737495,0.59,0.5865384615384616,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4310,latent_4310,7199,0.014398,0.014977198,5.0745025,Comparisons to prior images in radiology reports.,"The pattern is focused on making comparisons explicitly to previous radiological images, a routine practice in radiology to track changes over time. Examples with high activation levels often request comparisons to 'prior' images as part of their analysis, regardless of whether new data is available.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3820066906713654,0.395,0.4186046511627907,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4311,latent_4311,35862,0.071724,0.031747654,2.979509,Stable cardiopulmonary status without acute process.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe features that do not indicate any acute process or change, focusing on findings like the absence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or pneumonia; essentially the presence of stability in the patient's cardiopulmonary status in light of a radiographic comparison.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5454545454545454,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4312,latent_4312,5890,0.01178,0.012585945,5.072079,"Stable or changing pulmonary findings, with stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.","Examples with high activation consistently mention the stability or change of pulmonary findings like effusion, edema, or atelectasis in comparison to prior images, along with stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours. These examples highlight findings of stability or subtle changes that are critical for patient management.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.607487922705314,0.61,0.5948275862068966,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4313,latent_4313,8864,0.017728,0.02169689,5.7928934,Direct visual comparison of current and prior imaging.,"The analyzed samples consistently involve a direct comparison of current imaging findings against prior images. Any form of direct visual comparison involving the current and previous imaging studies results in higher activation due to this common theme, especially when noted explicitly in the prompt.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3059483726150393,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4314,latent_4314,11982,0.023964,0.013709928,3.0469542,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette with frontal and lateral views analyzed.,"The common theme among samples with high activation is the explicit mention of reviewing multiple image views (both frontal and lateral) in combination with references to stability and cardiomediastinal silhouette being within normal limits. These sample patterns are indicative of standard analysis techniques of radiology studies, often focused on consistency across multiple views to determine stability or changes.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.421152732986025,0.475,0.4358974358974359,0.17,100.0,100.0
+4315,latent_4315,36778,0.073556,0.056556296,5.730267,Comparison against prior imaging highlighting changes over time.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently reference a direct comparison of current radiology findings against prior imaging studies, specifically identifying changes over time such as new findings, persistent abnormalities, or resolved pathologies. This comparative analysis is essential in radiology reports to understand temporal changes in patient status.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4316,latent_4316,6640,0.01328,0.023493156,5.955926,Explicit comparison to prior imaging with stability noted.,"The examples with high activation levels often include instances where temporal changes in imaging findings are explicitly compared to prior studies, particularly with reference to stability or changes in concerning conditions like pneumothorax, effusions, or other abnormalities. This pattern highlights the importance of perceived stability or gradual change relative to previous imaging.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.52,0.26,100.0,100.0
+4317,latent_4317,7609,0.015218,0.019070076,3.6039972,Clear lungs and unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette without significant findings.,"Activation levels are high when the text effectively communicates the absence of significant findings or changes, focusing on the use of phrases like 'The lungs are clear', 'The cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal', and 'No effusion or pneumothorax'. These statements are indicative of routine checks in radiology reports where no critical developments are observed.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7085720028137876,0.71,0.7441860465116279,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4318,latent_4318,26556,0.053112,0.049463958,5.0454187,Emphasis on interval change over time or treatment.,"The examples with higher activations focus on describing interval changes in clinical or radiological findings over time, often in direct comparison with previous imaging. They often articulate changes such as improvement or worsening in conditions like atelectasis, edema, effusion, and other specific abnormalities in detail.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.5416666666666666,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4319,latent_4319,3140,0.00628,0.012911638,7.322207,Radiological findings interpreted with reference to prior reports.,"These examples involve interpretation and description of radiological findings, including comparison to prior images or their explicit indication for evaluation based on prior reports. The pattern includes referring to 'prior reports' or comparison with previous findings, which is a common practice in radiological analysis to assess changes over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4320,latent_4320,4908,0.009816,0.0067879506,5.390234,Comparison of current imaging with prior images indicating changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference comparisons with prior imaging, and often these descriptions entail changes or stability in medical devices and anatomical conditions from the prior state. There are frequent mentions of stable or changed findings compared to previous images, indicating that detecting differences or confirming stability in follow-up imaging is a key activation pattern.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4162063588550889,0.4422110552763819,0.4577464788732394,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+4321,latent_4321,8641,0.017282,0.014601643,3.239121,Focus solely on describing current image set without comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples request a description of current images without comparison to prior images, focusing solely on the details from the current set of frontal and lateral images given by the prompt. In contrast, examples with a comparison to past images or involving text descriptions tend to have lower activations.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6605102480301994,0.665,0.7142857142857143,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4322,latent_4322,8243,0.016486,0.027508521,6.5942774,Frontal and lateral chest image comparisons provided.,"Across the examples with high activation, the pattern is that these medical reports involve interpretation of both frontal and lateral chest images for comparison. This suggests a thorough examination approach, contrasting with reports that often only compare frontal images or involve descriptions without direct comparison of image modalities.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5632710994650071,0.6,0.5632911392405063,0.89,100.0,100.0
+4323,latent_4323,3534,0.007068,0.0067997877,5.8850055,Interval change or differences noted between current and prior imaging.,"These examples with high activation levels all describe differences or changes between a current and a prior imaging study, often noting specific changes such as interval progression, resolution, new findings, locations of medical devices, or complicating conditions. This suggests a pattern of interest in the comparison with prior imaging reports.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.2857142857142857,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.4625,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4324,latent_4324,37974,0.075948,0.03590573,2.6767662,"Explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability.","The data reveal a pattern where reports make direct comparisons with previous imaging studies and specifically describe interval changes or stability in findings. Such comparisons utilize specific temporal references and observations about changes or stability in structures or pathologies, which are characteristic of follow-up radiology reporting.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4325,latent_4325,13093,0.026186,0.01412275,2.8841853,Descriptions include comparison between current and prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently include instructions to provide a comparison between the current and a prior radiological image. These reports contain phrases like 'compared to', 'in comparison to the prior image', or specific indicators that describe change or stability over time. The presence of these comparative phrases correlates with higher activation scores.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3739737274220033,0.39,0.4166666666666667,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4326,latent_4326,11229,0.022458,0.012952771,4.4451385,Longitudinal assessment with multiple view comparisons.,"These examples include terms suggesting repeated or ongoing comparisons, or descriptions of multiple views (such as PA and lateral views) and highlight findings about cardiomediastinal structures or pleural effusions, typically across current and previous imaging. This pattern suggests an emphasis on longitudinal assessment.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4466145833333333,0.49,0.4935897435897436,0.77,100.0,100.0
+4327,latent_4327,3479,0.006958,0.00934469,4.850762,Unchanged findings or stability of previously observed features.,"The texts seem to focus on two types of interpretative language: descriptions of comparisons with prior studies and references to the unchanged status or stability of previous findings. This includes references to unchanged medical devices like catheters or tubes, stable opacities, or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes, indicating detection of consistent previous observations.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4606741573033708,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4328,latent_4328,23243,0.046486,0.029456692,5.701707,Comparisons to prior imaging with specific changes or stable findings.,"Highly activated samples consistently involve descriptions that include specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often noting subtle changes or stable findings such as unchanged device positions, stable or resolved opacities, unchanged heart size, or previously noted opacities suggesting potential pathology. Unactivated samples lack comparative data or specific imaging findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6175523349436394,0.62,0.603448275862069,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4329,latent_4329,47942,0.095884,0.08447329,6.9393787,Focus on changes or progression in pleural effusions or configurations.,"The examples with higher activations often describe pleural effusions or other findings that show notable change or progression, sometimes hinting at anomalies that potentially require further evaluation. These mentions tend to be descriptive about changes between current and prior studies, indicating an emphasis on change detection.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5238095238095238,0.22,100.0,100.0
+4330,latent_4330,4213,0.008426,0.012130618,6.728907,"Comparison to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","These examples typically describe a comparison between current and previous imaging studies, noting stability, changes, or the absence of change in specific radiographic findings. This pattern focuses on continuity or alteration over time, often using terms like 'unchanged', 'persistent', or descriptors of specific comparisons to prior states/imaging.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.4285714285714285,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4331,latent_4331,6760,0.01352,0.009277695,4.4551535,"Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging, noting stability and changes.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to a detailed comparison between current images and explicitly mentioned prior images, noting differences, details, and stability concerning specific findings. This involves a comprehensive comparison to track changes in pathologies or conditions over time, with interpretation of any radiological progression or stability.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4963570825983587,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+4332,latent_4332,4707,0.009414,0.014104555,6.780299,Comparison focusing on fluid-related changes in the chest.,"Examples with significant activation levels often contained descriptions focusing on comparisons, particularly references to specific changes or lack thereof in conditions such as pleural effusion, consolidation, or cardiomegaly compared to previous studies. An explicit focus on fluid dynamics (pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pulmonary edema) impacts activation.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4333,latent_4333,4980,0.00996,0.014482891,7.1038475,Emphasis on lung changes/stability or comparative lung evaluation.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently emphasize changes or observations in lung conditions, often in contexts where prior imaging or conditions could inform understanding, without dictating any other notable abnormality in the cardiomediastinal contour. They frequently mention comparative assessments, stable conditions concerning lungs or associated studs' lungs evaluations with a priority of less change in considerate of a pre-existing condition.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3838051349572087,0.415,0.4413793103448276,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4334,latent_4334,3237,0.006474,0.010316831,9.683283,Radiological comparisons with prior images noting changes in pulmonary or cardiomediastinal findings.,"The high activation examples include requests for descriptions or comparisons of the findings in the current radiology study to prior images, along with specific radiological findings in the current images predominately related to pulmonary or cardiomediastinal contour changes due to pathological conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4335,latent_4335,2944,0.005888,0.0064976183,5.9976206,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation values emphasize comparison to prior imaging studies, highlighting changes such as stability or interval changes of specific findings. This indicates that the pattern likely focuses on changes or stability over time rather than acute findings present in the current image alone.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4336,latent_4336,10622,0.021244,0.014580153,6.3391457,Detailed description of changes compared to prior chest images.,"This pattern involves the use of detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on identifying any changes or intervals in conditions of the chest, especially related to pleural effusions, pneumothorax, atelectasis, and specific cardiac or pulmonary conditions.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6462312068264933,0.6482412060301508,0.6206896551724138,0.7346938775510204,98.0,101.0
+4337,latent_4337,5946,0.011892,0.018868033,5.6616197,No acute focal abnormality or cardiopulmonary process despite equipment or stable findings.,"Examples with a high activation level predominantly feature clear indications that there is no acute focal abnormality or cardiopulmonary process, despite the presence of equipment like tubes, lines, or stabilization of findings such as mediastinal contours or mild effusions. This simplicity and clarity in impression is the key pattern noted irrespective of potentially complex background information, providing reassurance by confirming stability and lack of acute change in prioritized areas.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5648148148148148,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4338,latent_4338,8608,0.017216,0.014385706,5.7808166,Evaluation of post-surgical or medical intervention changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention specific medical interventions or surgical equipment references post-surgery or major medical events like cardiac arrest or intubation, indicating the model is attuned to performance-critical situations that involve analysis of medical procedures or devices.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3645833333333333,0.39,0.3166666666666666,0.19,100.0,100.0
+4339,latent_4339,2791,0.005582,0.008112125,10.8530445,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples exhibit high levels of activation when they describe findings related to stable conditions with references to prior imaging studies, emphasizing the absence of change or noting specific features remain unchanged despite previous conditions or placements.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4649001435843884,0.4824120603015075,0.46875,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+4340,latent_4340,3912,0.007824,0.011372414,4.5313416,Comparison of current images with prior ones using specific findings.,These examples highlight scenarios where radiological findings are systematically compared with prior imaging. The activation values indicate that the presence of findings specified in relation to prior images is a key factor.,0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4341,latent_4341,18374,0.036748,0.02551752,6.007531,Comparisons highlighting changes in the position or status of medical devices.,"These examples show comparison findings between current and prior chest imaging, focusing on changes in medical devices such as tubes and catheters, or the unchanged status of these devices. The descriptions highlight insertion, removal, or positional changes of medical devices along with concurrent radiological findings.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6393650793650794,0.645,0.6933333333333334,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4342,latent_4342,6749,0.013498,0.009791496,4.1885643,Comparative stability or change from prior radiological images.,"These examples focus on comparing radiological findings to prior images to assess stability, change, or progression of conditions. The activation is higher with more specific comparisons noting unchanged or stable findings, suggesting that such comparative language is critical to the pattern.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4343,latent_4343,7077,0.014154,0.030145645,5.2826095,Comparison requested without an existing prior report.,"The higher activation samples consistently contain references to comparison with a prior study but have 'PRIOR [[_]] REPORT: N/A' or mention 'comparison: none', indicating a focus on conducting evaluations without existing prior reports.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4784090909090909,0.4848484848484848,0.4876033057851239,0.5959595959595959,99.0,99.0
+4344,latent_4344,2121,0.004242,0.009170653,7.612178,Instructions to compare current image findings with prior images.,"These examples frequently instruct the user to compare the current radiological findings with previous images, necessitating descriptions based on differences or similarities noted between the two sets of images. This instructional pattern emphasizes evaluating changes over time or confirming stability of findings, utilizing phrases like 'compared to the prior frontal image'.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5882242840717666,0.615,0.5761589403973509,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4345,latent_4345,4274,0.008548,0.013181136,7.0142574,Stable or unchanged findings on current imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels include specific reference to comparisons with prior imaging studies and descriptions of stability in certain findings. The emphasis is on identifying unchanged or persistent patterns over multiple examinations, which often indicate non-acute or chronic conditions. This pattern contrasts against examples that describe new findings or significant changes, which are often used to interpret acute conditions and result in lower activation levels.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7903917790622993,0.7939698492462312,0.736,0.92,100.0,99.0
+4346,latent_4346,5095,0.01019,0.010543474,5.1522694,Detailed references to the position of tubes or catheters in imaging.,"The examples with high activation often mention the position of tubes or catheters such as an endotracheal tube, Swan-Ganz catheter, or central venous catheter. These reports typically describe their position relative to anatomical landmarks and state that their positions are either stable or appropriately positioned, which appears to be the pattern the model is recognizing.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5693408356035339,0.5728643216080402,0.5853658536585366,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+4347,latent_4347,10882,0.021764,0.018243467,5.920864,Findings related to recent medical interventions or condition management.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels mention management history such as recent surgeries, specific procedures, or ongoing medical treatment related to the findings, often noting changes since such events. This suggests that management history related to interventions or conditions factors significantly into the activation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5008187134502924,0.51010101010101,0.5079365079365079,0.6464646464646465,99.0,99.0
+4348,latent_4348,7089,0.014178,0.0084951725,3.980099,Stability of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation mention comparisons to previous imaging, indicating stability or changes over time, with a focus on stable findings. This aligns with the pattern of providing continuity and tracking progress or stability over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5167062913822634,0.5226130653266332,0.5256410256410257,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+4349,latent_4349,2890,0.00578,0.011610075,8.0059595,"Comparison with prior imaging, focusing on historical medical indications or situations.","High activation examples involve the use of specified historical medical indications or situations alongside comparable imaging techniques. This often involves comparing the current images to previous ones (e.g., prior frontal images) or referencing historical reports with a focus on specific medical indications, discussions, or evaluations.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5227720717916796,0.54,0.5289855072463768,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4350,latent_4350,4926,0.009852,0.010168307,4.485754,Comparison of cardiopulmonary structures between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels showcase scenarios where multiple findings are compared with previous radiographs, emphasizing changes or stability in lung volumes or structures and cardiomediastinal silhouettes. Specific terminology regarding relative stability or slight changes in these features is emphasized in high activation sentences.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4351,latent_4351,3037,0.006074,0.007299627,6.0568333,Narrative focus on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior studies.,"This pattern identifies radiology reports that describe findings in relation to changes or comparisons to prior studies, focusing on the narrative of interval changes or stability. This is a typical structure in radiology when monitoring or evaluating disease progression or the effects of treatment.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5747841901688056,0.585,0.5648854961832062,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4352,latent_4352,23106,0.046212,0.02145664,2.1748934,"Explicit comparison of findings with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels explicitly provide or imply a comparison of the current radiological findings against prior images, while noting specific changes or the stability of findings. This pattern occurs across various imaging modalities and clinical indications, emphasizing changes noted over time, suggesting the model is attuned to descriptions that stress comparative changes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4353,latent_4353,4037,0.008074,0.011035957,7.474624,Emphasis on comparing current and previous images for changes.,"Certain examples focus on the act of comparing current imaging findings with previous studies to determine changes or stability. This pattern in radiology reporting is explicitly highlighted by examples discussing 'as compared to', 'in comparison with', and 'unchanged since' prior examinations.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4354,latent_4354,19902,0.039804,0.018885234,3.9144385,Notable changes in image findings compared to prior study.,"Examples that show higher activations consistently include descriptions of findings from an image sequence that represents notable changes in a condition compared to a prior radiographic study, often with detailed specifications about stable or altered conditions of observed phenomena. Plain representations of findings or conditions without comparison detail or specificity tended to lead to low activation levels.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5934627170582227,0.5979899497487438,0.6282051282051282,0.49,100.0,99.0
+4355,latent_4355,4144,0.008288,0.008994776,3.331537,Comparison to prior imaging or findings indicating changes or stability.,"The high activation examples consistently involve a 'comparison' element, including past and present imaging or findings ('compared to previous', 'unchanged from prior exam'). These descriptions assess stability or changes over time in lesions, tubes, or other anatomical features present in radiographs.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4356,latent_4356,6379,0.012758,0.0137386415,5.5216117,Explicit comparison and interpretation of current versus prior imaging findings.,"High activation occurs when the query explicitly involves the comparison of current radiological images with prior studies, along with the necessity of providing interpretation based on these comparisons. The details on specific findings from the comparison, changes identified from previous imaging, or status quo assessments contribute to higher pattern recognition.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4357,latent_4357,6636,0.013272,0.009382686,4.7199726,Evaluation of changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The examples demonstrate comparison between current and prior imaging findings, focusing on changes or stability. High activation levels correspond to instances where radiological changes from previous images are noted, discussed, or evaluated, often involving detailed descriptions of any interval changes or stabilizations. These examples significantly detail changes or stability, contrasting previous and current presentations, which is central to this pattern.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4358,latent_4358,16963,0.033926,0.023001293,4.4277897,Comparison with prior studies highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Positive activation examples discuss findings in relation to changes noted from prior imaging. Common expressions include 'unchanged', 'worsening', 'improved', or 'interval change', reflecting the comparison or progression of findings over time as seen in examples.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4359,latent_4359,7893,0.015786,0.0118073225,5.7005672,Detailed findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with activations center around the presence or absence of phrasing related to details found when comparing to prior available scans. However, only the activations with higher values include detailed descriptions of changes or the stability of findings from those comparisons, suggesting the pattern focuses on explicating changes or continuity over sequential observations.",0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.5862068965517241,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5718891038039975,0.585,0.562962962962963,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4360,latent_4360,5813,0.011626,0.0075070458,4.8753195,Comparative imaging descriptions highlighting stable or interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve comparative descriptions of sequential chest images and focus on nuanced changes in lung or heart conditions, particularly stable or interval changes noted across imaging studies. This comparative focus suggests increased relevance in monitoring lung or cardiac conditions over time.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.4803149606299212,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4361,latent_4361,21901,0.043802,0.017915014,2.2507226,Explicit requests or statements of radiological changes compared to prior imaging.,Samples with higher activations frequently describe chest imaging findings such as heart and mediastinal structures or clinical scenarios where explicit historical comparisons are being made despite variations in terms and conditions used to describe these changes.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4582815762349023,0.4824120603015075,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,99.0
+4362,latent_4362,28186,0.056372,0.04786991,5.659235,Assessment of monitoring or indwelling devices.,"Notable examples involve descriptions of changes or stabilities in internal monitoring or indwelling devices, which are a recurrent focus in radiology reports where assessments are made regarding device placement or condition. This pattern emerges consistently in examples with non-zero activations, often corroborated by specific observations relating to these devices.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4857142857142857,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4363,latent_4363,2183,0.004366,0.0074207373,6.940315,Focus on precise endotracheal tube positioning relative to the carina.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe the precise positioning of endotracheal tubes (ETT) and occasionally other tubes or lines, even when mentioning comparison with prior images. In particular, they emphasize the distance of the tube tip from the carina. This suggests the model is recognizing descriptions specifically detailing tube placement and its exact measurements, demonstrating focus on acute care settings where line and tube management is crucial.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6136159560284073,0.645,0.8372093023255814,0.36,100.0,100.0
+4364,latent_4364,4906,0.009812,0.014377851,6.8175206,Comparison of findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize the description of radiographic findings in comparison to prior images, highlighting changes or stability over time. The format suggests an AI pattern of understanding or processing radiological reports that focus on sequential changes.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4365,latent_4365,5612,0.011224,0.0069620293,7.239643,Emphasis on stable findings or unchanged conditions in comparison.,"The examples showing higher activation levels focus on identifying changes in findings compared to previous images or reports, often highlighting unchanged or stable conditions. This is indicative of the model activating for descriptions that emphasize stability or lack of significant change in a comparison context.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5819110370193962,0.605,0.4625,0.5068493150684932,73.0,127.0
+4366,latent_4366,90857,0.181714,0.15453371,8.430217,Detailed comparative assessment of current and prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels correspond to radiologic descriptions focusing on instructing or requesting comparisons between current and prior images, explicitly mentioning findings from both images and noting changes or stability in specific anatomical details or pathologic findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6286631874749097,0.63,0.6160714285714286,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4367,latent_4367,22035,0.04407,0.02692947,4.6458607,Emphasis on comparison and interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of findings by comparison with prior imaging studies, despite issues with image quality or positioning, and include a summary or impression of the findings, suggesting that comprehensive comparative analysis is of interest.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4303733089207608,0.44,0.4523809523809524,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4368,latent_4368,3232,0.006464,0.009463895,5.588372,Use of multiple current views and prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with high activations consistently highlight the involvement of multiple image views (frontal and lateral) along with a prior image reference, indicating a focus on comprehensive comparison across multiple perspectives instead of single session descriptions.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4912648497554158,0.545,0.5272727272727272,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4369,latent_4369,3521,0.007042,0.0069079422,6.2453,Emphasis on stability and normalcy in chest imaging over time.,"The reported pattern involves assessments made using both frontal and lateral chest views from the current and prior imaging, but with emphasis on absence or lack of acute changes, such as new consolidations or pneumothorax, with a focus on stability over time.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4895833333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4370,latent_4370,4436,0.008872,0.008584064,7.090274,Comparison of findings with prior studies detecting interval changes or stable findings.,"High activation levels consistently appear in examples where there is an analysis of current imaging in relation to previous studies. This includes evaluating changes in opacities, any interval changes, and assessments of possibly worsening conditions or stable findings compared to either historical images or a prior report explicit reference.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4371,latent_4371,4615,0.00923,0.0076113,3.427342,Findings in radiology studies specified using image comparison analysis or specific devices.,"These examples describe changes or synopses of findings in radiology studies based on visual analysis (frontal and/or lateral images) or noted devices, often with terms describing specific techniques or devices (e.g., ED tube, catheter etc.). The activation levels suggest these patterns are key to the findings, emphasizing the comparison between images provided.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4721757144073327,0.535,0.5207100591715976,0.88,100.0,100.0
+4372,latent_4372,10625,0.02125,0.013037143,6.620222,Assessment of medical device placement in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the description or assessment of medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes or catheters, and their placement based on comparative imaging. This pattern contrasts most with low activation examples, which typically describe anatomical findings without such device assessments.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4373,latent_4373,36971,0.073942,0.063015394,7.1478076,Normal heart and mediastinal contours or clear lungs without effusion.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe normal heart size, mediastinal, and hilar contours, or clear lungs with no effusions or pneumothorax, when compared with normal baselines or when no prior comparison is noted. This reflects a pattern where the focus is on normal or unremarkable key thoracic structures.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4374,latent_4374,23594,0.047188,0.03782994,5.39502,Focus on dynamic changes between current and prior radiological studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes observed when comparing current images to prior images, indicating a focus on altering clinical conditions and sequential changes visible through imaging. Descriptions often note improvements, stability, or worsening of findings, focusing on the dynamic nature of patient conditions over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4375,latent_4375,10115,0.02023,0.011287403,3.746835,Cardiomegaly with comparison to previous images.,"Descriptions of cardiomegaly (enlarged heart size) appear frequently alongside or in relation to other findings, often with emphasis on stability, change, or context matched against previous images. Cardiomegaly is frequently highlighted with consideration or exclusion of associated conditions such as edema or vascular congestion.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5626666666666666,0.59,0.68,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4376,latent_4376,4850,0.0097,0.0075779604,3.4234898,Detailed assessment of changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels offer detailed comparisons to prior imaging and often involve specific notations about changes or stability of findings, such as cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, and tortuous aortas. This highlights the model's sensitivity to documentation that methodically tracks and assesses changes in medical imaging over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4377,latent_4377,7693,0.015386,0.011618052,4.692376,"Detailed analysis of frontal and lateral chest radiographs, specifically comparing findings that include cardiac, mediastinal, and lung conditions.","The most highly activated examples consistently include detailed radiological description and analysis of both frontal and lateral chest views, with specific mention of findings such as cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, lung fields, and conditions like pleural effusion and pneumothorax. Requests for descriptions often follow those detailed comparisons.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4378,latent_4378,18303,0.036606,0.01864435,2.6402884,Reports noting unchanged or stable findings upon comparison.,"Examples with high activations consistently mention stability or minimal change in findings when comparing current and prior images, with examples noting unchanged levels of certain findings or structures like nodules, cardiomegaly, or effusions. This suggests the pattern is identifying reports noting stability upon comparison.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5108695652173914,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4379,latent_4379,38043,0.076086,0.044726558,4.982745,Direct comparison with prior images showing significant change.,"Examples with high activation scores frequently mention direct and explicit comparisons between current and prior images, often including a reported significant change from previous states or deterioration in condition or interval findings of pathology.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5714285714285714,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4380,latent_4380,5875,0.01175,0.012502201,6.148697,Recurrent references to normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"In radiology reports, normal findings are often emphasized using terms such as 'within normal limits', 'normal', 'unremarkable', or 'clear'. These examples reference the normal appearance of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, as well as clear lungs and lack of acute findings.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7532169927727834,0.755,0.8072289156626506,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4381,latent_4381,6376,0.012752,0.010929316,8.014804,Reports emphasizing significant changes or interventions compared to prior studies.,"The examples that show activations often involve specific, actionable interventions or recommendations, indicating that the report provides meaningful change over the prior study, especially involving catheter or tube placements and intervals. It likely reflects significant changes or interventions being emphasized rather than mere comparisons that show stability.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5861736660580239,0.5879396984924623,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,99.0
+4382,latent_4382,134910,0.26982,0.17924374,6.3072715,Emphasis on significant interval changes in pulmonary conditions.,"The examples with higher activation highlight comparisons that involve changes in pulmonary conditions, such as consolidation or effusions, typically indicative of worsening or improvement. These reports emphasize significant interval findings or stability in pathologies that alter pulmonary or pleural characteristics over time, a key concern in monitoring progression or resolution of conditions. Lower activations often describe minimal or no change without new or worsening findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.6379310344827587,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4383,latent_4383,27140,0.05428,0.03223509,4.483399,Analysis of current frontal and lateral images against prior frontal image findings.,"The examples with higher activations frequently include observations from both current frontal and lateral chest images, alongside comparisons with prior frontal images. Assistants provide detailed descriptions noting the current state versus prior findings, often mentioning specific anatomical changes or improvements. The presence of both image orientations and direct comparative statements is key.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4384,latent_4384,11780,0.02356,0.014996072,4.222616,Emphasis on findings over time via image comparison and stability or change of conditions.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve providing a concise summary of findings from new images compared to prior studies. They emphasize changes or stability, such as resolution of findings, new suspicious areas or stability of known issues, often including medical history or relevant follow-ups.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4385,latent_4385,2128,0.004256,0.008417206,7.2314525,Use of comparative analysis to assess interval changes and stability.,"This pattern focuses on reports that provide a comprehensive narrative of findings using both current and prior imaging for comparative analysis. These examples assess for changes over time through comparison, often considering the positions and stability of internal devices like tubes and catheters, as well as the heart size and lung conditions, without significant omission of descriptions regarding stability or changes.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4386,latent_4386,5252,0.010504,0.009076708,4.581541,Reference to stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation consistently mention details of comparison with prior imaging, but specifically highlight unchanged or stable findings, which is a strong indicator for the absence of acute changes or progression of disease. This pattern is characterized by phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'as on prior'.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.3939393939393939,0.26,100.0,100.0
+4387,latent_4387,19746,0.039492,0.038239174,4.6993785,Describing or establishing baseline findings due to missing or specified previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve prompts where there is either an explicit request to describe findings in relation to prior images or the absence of a prior report, suggesting the task is to establish a baseline by contrasting current findings without available historical data. This pattern indicates the model is focused on the task of generating a baseline report or evaluating changes when prior data is missing or referenced.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4202014037229173,0.43,0.4054054054054054,0.3,100.0,100.0
+4388,latent_4388,15990,0.03198,0.037418175,6.2002983,Detailed assessment of changes against prior imaging.,"The observed high activations are related to the focus on changes in findings compared to previous images, specifically mentioning detailed aspects of those changes, such as increase, resolution, or stability of specific conditions seen in the images. These details suggest active tracking and monitoring of specific traits across the radiological examinations.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4389,latent_4389,7403,0.014806,0.016859816,5.996273,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging or reports.,"The high activation examples consistently require a comparison of current imaging findings with prior reports or images, specifically involving a detailed analysis or a qualitative comparison (e.g., unchanged, improved, stable). The comparison often drives the narrative of the report, evaluating changes over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4390,latent_4390,10964,0.021928,0.014042729,2.7959616,Stability or lack of significant interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples that have explicit comparisons with prior imaging often have higher activation levels, suggesting this is a relevant pattern. Reports also often describe stable or unchanged conditions in comparison to prior studies, indicating that stability or lack of interval change is the focal pattern associated with high activation levels.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4391,latent_4391,19008,0.038016,0.022645852,6.63898,Comparison of imaging focusing on changes in medical device positioning or notable thoracic structure changes.,"The examples exhibiting higher activations consistently involve cases where comparison to prior images highlights specific or notable changes in thoracic structures, especially relating to tubes, lines, and other medical devices. This indicates that the model activates when assessing stability or changes, which requires precise comparison of device positions and alterations between images.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4392,latent_4392,27492,0.054984,0.026171742,4.363828,Focus on changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Activation levels are higher when reports describe changes or comparisons based on prior imaging, especially those involving significant stability or improvements. This highlights a particular interest in not merely the current findings but how they have evolved over documented previous examinations.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4393,latent_4393,10094,0.020188,0.015306941,4.274453,Emphasis on comparison to prior images to assess changes or stability.,"The provided examples reflect a pattern where the text heavily focuses on describing image findings in juxtaposition to previous studies, with prevalent usage of phrases like 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'from/to prior', and 'comparison with prior studies'. These phrases indicate an emphasis on comparing current imaging results with earlier images to assess stability or changes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.54520624303233,0.5879396984924623,0.5527950310559007,0.898989898989899,99.0,100.0
+4394,latent_4394,3118,0.006236,0.0087710675,4.206098,Stable findings or unchanged impressions on comparative studies.,"The samples with high activation frequently mention the stability or absence of significant change in various findings when comparing new images to prior studies. This pattern emphasizes the notation of stability or unchanged findings across different examinations, often used to describe cardiomediastinal contours, heart size, or presence of certain conditions.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5052631578947369,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4395,latent_4395,6479,0.012958,0.010738098,5.244726,Comparison to prior images with noted changes or stability.,Radiology reports typically compare current and prior imaging to note changes or stability. The reports with high activation levels consistently reference findings in relation to previous images to highlight specific changes or ongoing stability in clinical conditions.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4396,latent_4396,8008,0.016016,0.015924443,4.4359374,Image prompts with minimal text focusing on comparison.,"In this set of examples, the model demonstrates higher activation when presented with prompts that include both current and prior images for comparison without extensive specific details, indicating a focus on basic image comparison setup rather than detailed analysis or complex medical conditions.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4985754985754985,0.56,0.5352941176470588,0.91,100.0,100.0
+4397,latent_4397,3050,0.0061,0.008140211,3.933732,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Each example with high activation includes comparison information to a prior radiograph or imaging study. This is a frequent pattern in radiology reporting, where determinations about the patient's progress or condition stability are made by directly comparing the current findings to earlier images. Descriptions of imaging findings in comparison to prior studies are often detailed and note specific changes or stabilities over time or since a previous exam.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3810876623376623,0.39,0.3552631578947368,0.27,100.0,100.0
+4398,latent_4398,10560,0.02112,0.018438896,3.4039247,Explicit request for comparison to prior image findings.,"The data shows higher activation levels for examples that focus on changes observed or comparison with prior images, especially when a detailed analysis is requested on findings related to the prior image. This involves explicitly noting any changes in radiological findings compared to past imaging, even without specific patient condition changes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4399,latent_4399,5913,0.011826,0.010991118,7.8881245,Detailed comparative description between current and prior radiographs.,"The activation levels suggest a pattern focused on comparisons between current and prior radiographs. Reports with specific descriptions of changes or lack thereof in terms of linear opacities, rib fractures, or improvements in previous conditions relate directly to monitoring changes across time, which aligns with a high activation response when there is continuity of care and detailed comparative analysis provided.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.4716981132075472,0.5376344086021505,93.0,107.0
+4400,latent_4400,6371,0.012742,0.013425139,5.2597885,Explicit interval comparison to prior radiographs in findings.,"Analysis shows high activation when the current radiology findings are explicitly compared to prior imaging to identify changes. This includes identifying any interval developments or noting the stability of previous findings through explicit comparison language, often containing phrases like 'as compared to' or specifying a time point for comparison.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4401,latent_4401,39675,0.07935,0.03661584,4.011696,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies, particularly when specific pathologies are identified and noted as stable or unchanged. This reflects a common pattern in radiological exams where stable findings help rule out acute changes or worsening conditions, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'as before'.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6047529706066291,0.605,0.6105263157894737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4402,latent_4402,72452,0.144904,0.07779549,6.2057056,Description of radiological findings with interval change compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve findings compared to prior imaging highlighting changes, such as interval improvements, resolutions, or lack of changes in specific pathologies. This common practice ensures thorough analysis over time for conditions that might develop or resolve. It also frequently includes comparison of device placements over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6396757081373237,0.64,0.6146788990825688,0.6907216494845361,97.0,103.0
+4403,latent_4403,8954,0.017908,0.010942474,5.895429,Assessment of changes or stability in medical device placement.,"The pattern indicates a focus on change in medical devices like tubes, lines, catheters, and stents, as compared to prior images, especially noting any new placements or unchanged positions. This often impacts management plans and requires direct comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or complications.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.565,0.5471698113207547,0.3152173913043478,92.0,108.0
+4404,latent_4404,6460,0.01292,0.0074152676,2.8088596,Stability or no significant change compared to prior imaging.,"The reports consistently describe findings as being stable or unchanged based on comparisons with prior images and examinations. This is evident from phrases like 'no significant change', 'remains', 'unchanged', and references to stability compared to previous radiographs.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.4819277108433735,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4405,latent_4405,2734,0.005468,0.009064996,5.641134,Presence of findings comparison against prior imaging.,"This dataset involves radiology examples where the presence or absence of specific changes in the findings are evaluated by comparing current imaging against prior imaging results. High activation is associated with explicit change detection or stability in reported findings in comparison to previous studies, such as resolution or presence of effusion, unchanged opacities, or other structural comparisons.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4406,latent_4406,16450,0.0329,0.015635662,3.8137558,Impact of patient positioning on imaging assessment.,"Evaluations are made based on comparisons between current and prior imaging. High activations involve observations of patient positioning affecting the assessment, which is a subtle but important detail when comparing images. Observations of low lung volumes and changes due to rotation or position are noted, which can affect interpretations.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5213944023046224,0.542713567839196,0.5789473684210527,0.33,100.0,99.0
+4407,latent_4407,57873,0.115746,0.06799053,7.3591495,Description of interval change in findings compared to prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies, especially when there is a presence of new findings, effusions, consolidations, or the stability/resolution of existing conditions. This pattern emphasizes comparative analysis, noting specific changes or stabilities, in radiological interpretations.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6396757081373237,0.64,0.536,0.8271604938271605,81.0,119.0
+4408,latent_4408,6976,0.013952,0.022355253,4.933815,Comparison of changes or stability in specific findings with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples describe findings in radiological studies with explicit comparison to prior images and normally emphasize changes or stability of specific conditions or pathologies. They are likely to include details about tubes, catheters, or certain medical conditions such as edema or pneumothorax, indicating interval changes or the presence of a new finding.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4409,latent_4409,6045,0.01209,0.009639313,3.665345,"Focus on comparing findings to previous imaging, emphasizing changes.","Highly activated examples include radiology reports that contain specific instructions for comparison to prior images, placing emphasis on change or stability in findings from previous imaging, often using terms like 'in comparison to', 'unchanged', or 'advanced' in positioning specifically referencing tubes, catheters, or specific anatomical features.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4251348518546923,0.4321608040201005,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,99.0
+4410,latent_4410,3916,0.007832,0.01229866,5.2127547,Descriptions entail multiple image views and comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"The examples consistently mention comparison with prior imaging studies, often involving specific views (frontal and lateral) or multiple comparison points in the same description. The presence of a prior report or reference to past studies suggests that re-evaluation based on past data is part of the pattern.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5063291139240507,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4411,latent_4411,4521,0.009042,0.007322429,6.168112,"Reports on the status of pleural effusions or atelectasis, comparing with prior images.","The common pattern in these examples is the presence and progression or resolution of pleural effusions and/or atelectasis, often with accompanying cardiopulmonary findings like pulmonary edema or cardiomegaly. Reports often focus on describing the status of these conditions in comparison to prior studies, highlighting whether there's interval change, progression, or stability, particularly for conditions of chronic heart or lung issues.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6265469669304118,0.628140703517588,0.6511627906976745,0.56,100.0,99.0
+4412,latent_4412,8352,0.016704,0.008701207,3.2250822,Detailed temporal comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation consistently mention the comparison to previous imaging studies, which suggests the model activates highly when evaluations indicate changes over time, specifically mentioning previous state or intervals of findings like atelectasis, pneumonia, or lung opacity changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4413,latent_4413,2349,0.004698,0.0046909926,5.4618325,Assessment of changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,The pattern is visible in examples that refer to comparing current findings with prior imaging studies to assess for either changes or stability in the findings. This is characterized by phrases that compare findings against 'prior frontal image' or specify changes observed since the 'prior study'.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4414,latent_4414,19313,0.038626,0.022449654,5.2303314,Multiple imaging views with detailed comparison to prior reports.,"Higher activations are noted in examples that involve detailed comparisons of multiple imaging views (frontal, lateral) and are explicitly contextual about the observed changes or stasis concerning previous reports without explicit reporting on the assistant's findings related to comparisons.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4415,latent_4415,3222,0.006444,0.008001397,5.0512395,Use of current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal image in analysis.,"The examples with high activation levels feature descriptions of findings obtained using both frontal and lateral images of the chest, as well as comparisons to prior frontal images. This suggests a pattern where comprehensive analysis involving multiple view angles of the current state and past comparisons is emphasized.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4416,latent_4416,5859,0.011718,0.009877566,4.9841876,Comparison of current radiological findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve providing a comparison or description of findings between current radiological images and prior images, typically focusing on specific changes or lack thereof.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.460431654676259,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4417,latent_4417,17666,0.035332,0.01803976,5.2161922,Stable findings or unchanged devices in radiological comparisons.,"There is a frequent mention of images being similar or showing minimal change compared to prior images. Specifically, references to stable conditions, unchanged devices (like pacemakers), or the observation of unchanged conditions across different studies are consistent elements in the examples with high activation.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4418,latent_4418,3627,0.007254,0.008678467,5.6261215,Describing findings in comparison to prior images with emphasis on stability or change.,"These examples consistently provide a narrative of the findings in the context of a comparison with previous images. Specifically, reports with low activation lack comprehensive comparative detail, while those with high activation explicitly describe stable or unchanged conditions, emphasizing continuity in imaging over time.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4419,latent_4419,10393,0.020786,0.02086412,5.260913,Focus on reports with stable or normal cardiopulmonary descriptions and comparison to prior images.,"The examples that show activation are typically dealing with distinct imaging descriptions indicating normalcy or stability, such as 'cardiac silhouette is normal,' 'mediastinal and hilar contours are normal,' 'lungs are clear,' and reference comparable prior images or stable conditions, suggesting an interest in reports where established normal baselines are mentioned rather than acute findings or changes.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4420,latent_4420,2379,0.004758,0.009249346,4.535488,Focus on reporting basic stable findings and procedural descriptions.,"Examples with low activation describe a straightforward reporting style without exhibiting patterns like explicit documentation of findings in comparison to previous examinations. These reports emphasize current observations without suggesting significant updates or changes in the context of repeated imaging, missing additional comparison details and sophisticated description formats expected in professional or educational contexts.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5064935064935064,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4421,latent_4421,21958,0.043916,0.04008675,5.6317325,Evaluative comparisons to prior imaging for interval changes.,"These examples frequently refer to descriptions of the current imaging findings in the context of comparison to prior images or reports. High activation examples often elaborate on changes noted between current and previous studies, emphasizing clinical interpretations such as stability or worsening of specific conditions mentioned previously.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4422,latent_4422,9743,0.019486,0.020097524,6.2621484,"Comparison findings of pulmonary edema, effusion, and cardiogenic features.","These examples often mention findings of pulmonary edema or cardiogenic features like cardiomegaly, and changes related to fluid overload, such as pleural effusion, when comparisons are made with previous imaging studies. Terms like 'pneumothorax', 'pleural effusion', and references to line placement are given context against prior images which often help assess fluid status and lung changes.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6985227615315044,0.7,0.7325581395348837,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4423,latent_4423,3512,0.007024,0.005675331,5.2503314,Normal findings with emphasis on no acute changes or issues.,"The samples with higher activations feature findings that show no acute issues or notable changes, with distinct findings such as normal heart size, clear lungs, and absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax being frequently reported, even when there are prior images available for comparison. These statements often include indicative, reassuring phrases used in the context of follow-ups where expected or stable conditions are noted.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5698924731182796,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4424,latent_4424,5750,0.0115,0.013736565,3.5085702,Description of findings compared to prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels frequently require the assistant to provide a description of current imaging findings in direct comparison with specific prior reference images. This contrasts the assistant's role in summarizing current findings independent of any prior comparisons in lower activation examples.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.456,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4425,latent_4425,6591,0.013182,0.010309743,4.633059,"Frontal and lateral images provided, with comparison to a prior image.","Examples with high activation frequently involve the provision of frontal and lateral images, with explicit instructions to compare to prior frontal images. This pattern emphasizes the comparison process inherent in interpreting changes or stability in radiologic findings, especially with multiple imaging angles provided.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4635084522724972,0.47,0.4754098360655737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4426,latent_4426,6621,0.013242,0.010263172,4.735272,Emphasis on stability or change in findings over time.,"These examples involve reports that explicitly evaluate and describe changes over time, often discussing variations in the context of patient management or ongoing conditions (e.g., stable, improved, or worsened findings compared to prior imaging). This highlights a recurrent pattern of stability or change affecting clinical decisions.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5135135135135135,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4427,latent_4427,3897,0.007794,0.013192479,6.2495813,Requests to compare current to prior images in radiology.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently ask for a description of findings in radiology studies compared to prior images, suggesting a specific interest in comparative analysis. This often involves instructions to compare given images to previous ones, regardless of the presence of explicit prior reports or details.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3986276374290046,0.415,0.4360902255639097,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4428,latent_4428,55108,0.110216,0.06463898,5.0242877,Descriptions of change in pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The examples show activation when there are specific references to the progression or stability of pathologies, often noted in comparisons with prior imaging. These descriptions assess changes like improvements, persistences, or new findings, indicating that continuous monitoring or reassessment is a characteristic pattern.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6541552232733191,0.66,0.626984126984127,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4429,latent_4429,5675,0.01135,0.010071271,5.1331854,Observations or changes noted through direct comparison with dated prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe a radiology evaluation where changes or findings are identified through comparison with a listed prior imaging study date or detail. Common phrasing includes 'compared to prior study', 'no significant change', or 'interval improvement'.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.4298245614035088,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4430,latent_4430,7994,0.015988,0.00955582,6.3631444,Comparison to prior images in context of current findings.,"Examples that reference prior imaging in the context of current findings generally have higher activation levels, indicating that comparisons between current and prior imaging findings are central to the pattern. Despite some examples being low, such as those without specific findings changes or without direct comparison, indicating variability when significant changes or findings are not indicated.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.4496644295302013,0.7282608695652174,92.0,108.0
+4431,latent_4431,27828,0.055656,0.034483355,7.595371,Describing interval changes compared to prior imaging.,Examples with activations indicating the pattern reference multiple prior imaging studies or specify changes over time compared to prior images. This suggests an emphasis on describing changes relative to previous findings when reporting results.,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.4672897196261682,0.6097560975609756,82.0,118.0
+4432,latent_4432,5742,0.011484,0.007886524,5.1351748,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern that corresponds to higher activations frequently involves providing a description of the findings in comparison to a prior image and mentioning the stability of conditions or artifacts over time, often implying an unchanged condition. This specific comparison mentality is a typical aspect of radiology reporting when previous examinations exist for evaluation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.6,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4433,latent_4433,4973,0.009946,0.0076495726,3.3656673,Findings indicating interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve findings that directly address or compare changes between the current chest radiograph and prior imaging studies, noting either stability or interval change. This comparison theme, emphasizing subtle progress in imaging findings, is captured repeatedly in context.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6068152031454783,0.61,0.5932203389830508,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4434,latent_4434,82488,0.164976,0.112166494,5.4805326,Fluid-related changes in lungs or pleural effusions.,"These examples involve the presence of pleural effusions or opacities, often combined with fluid imbalance, pulmonary congestion, or other related findings in chest radiography. The examples typically remark on changes in fluid levels or pleural effusion size compared to prior images.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6635786196680977,0.665,0.6896551724137931,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4435,latent_4435,3269,0.006538,0.0063667535,5.8898673,"Standard, unremarkable chest X-ray findings with normal heart and clear lungs.","The examples with high activations consistently involve simple, clear findings in standard chest radiographs without complex conditions or notable changes from prior images. These are straightforward scenarios often used for trainees to learn routine normal chest reading without unusual pathology or critical alterations.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7042023663810689,0.71,0.7916666666666666,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4436,latent_4436,9347,0.018694,0.013721392,7.140838,Indications of comparison with prior imaging reports.,"This pattern involves explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, often detailing stability, changes, or no significant differences in findings from previous reports. The presence of phrases referencing 'prior radiograph', explicit acknowledgment of previous studies, and assessments based on those comparisons are central to the pattern.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4757834757834758,0.54,0.5235294117647059,0.89,100.0,100.0
+4437,latent_4437,4676,0.009352,0.008640532,4.9078298,Findings described in direct comparison with prior images to assess changes.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve an explicit mention of comparative analysis with prior images to describe interval changes or stability of findings in the radiologic study. The importance of comparison is highlighted in evaluating changes in clinical status or progression of disease.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4438,latent_4438,16017,0.032034,0.026014773,7.394046,Descriptions of interval change in medical devices or disease processes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve assessments of interval change, improvements, or stability of specific medical devices or disease processes between the current and prior imaging. They make explicit comparisons and note changes or lack of changes in medical devices or pulmonary findings.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7368154671525458,0.74,0.6967213114754098,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4439,latent_4439,29051,0.058102,0.04375228,4.2437563,Comparative analysis of radiological changes over time.,"Examples with high activation levels feature descriptions of radiology findings in a comparative context, highlighting changes over time or stability in findings, often in relation to medical devices or interventions. This pattern reflects the narrative style of radiology reports when comparing current and previous imaging studies. The common thread is the comparison for evaluating progression, improvement, or stability in radiological findings.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+4440,latent_4440,4178,0.008356,0.00993739,7.022081,Emphasis on minimal changes in radiology findings.,"Examples that scored highly refer to minimal changes in findings, such as 'minimal atelectasis', 'minimal effusion', or 'minimal interval increase'. This suggests that reports focusing on subtle or minimal changes in condition or device positioning tend to have higher activation scores.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.637060187518903,0.64,0.6186440677966102,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4441,latent_4441,49877,0.099754,0.04410152,1.7063265,Comparative stability in radiological findings.,"The data samples showcase a pattern where the descriptions emphasize stability in findings, particularly in the cardiomediastinal and pulmonary structures, when compared to past readings or contrasting them with abnormality suspicions. These examples often assure the absence of acute notable changes through comparative analysis, reaffirming stability or repetition of prior assessments.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4634146341463415,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4442,latent_4442,3804,0.007608,0.007983481,4.9410567,Presence and comparison of medical devices between images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve description or evaluation of medical devices, such as pacemakers or tubes, where these devices are mentioned specifically in both the prior report findings and the instructions for comparison with current images. This suggests the model is recognizing the pattern of identifying these devices and comparing their positional stability or changes between imaging studies.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4776119402985074,0.32,100.0,100.0
+4443,latent_4443,27042,0.054084,0.034059655,5.4149313,Stable cardiomediastinal profile upon comparison with prior images.,"Examples with elevated activations consistently include a stable or unchanged cardiac outline and mediastinum after comparing current images with prior reports. These examples highlight persistent conditions or a lack of notable progression, using terms similar to 'appears unchanged' or 'stable'.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5636363636363636,0.31,100.0,100.0
+4444,latent_4444,7823,0.015646,0.010605727,5.013269,Radiographic comparison indicating stable or changed clinical findings.,"Samples with high activation levels involve findings that emphasize a stability or change in clinical findings on comparative images or reports, typically using phrases like 'unchanged', 'resolved', 'interval improvement', or 'stable' in reference to a previous image. These denote radiologists' evaluations over a timeline, crucial for monitoring disease progression or treatment effect.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4445,latent_4445,4801,0.009602,0.011182714,3.8559868,Tasks involving comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include instructions to compare current and prior imaging studies, which is a key pattern in radiological evaluations to track changes over time. References to the frontal and lateral images, alongside wording that implies comparative analysis like 'provide a description' or 'in comparison to the prior' indicate such pattern.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.503030303030303,0.83,100.0,100.0
+4446,latent_4446,9005,0.01801,0.010447458,5.591186,Position of medical tubes and devices in chest imaging.,"Many examples involve chest imaging findings, including descriptions regarding the position of various tubes or catheters observed in the image, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central venous catheters. These are noted alongside discussions of their proper or improper placement relative to anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina, diaphragm).",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6390977443609023,0.64,0.6555555555555556,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4447,latent_4447,3196,0.006392,0.007520589,4.7934175,Describing stability/change in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize providing detailed comparative descriptions of current and prior imaging findings, suggesting a specific interest in differences or stability between exams. This involves noting changes or stabilities in both pathological and non-pathological aspects such as devices or anatomical structures.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4271932469098582,0.43,0.4186046511627907,0.36,100.0,100.0
+4448,latent_4448,3996,0.007992,0.010833502,5.060563,Comparative evaluations with prior imaging.,"These examples consistently include terminology that highlights changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging studies, frequently with explicit date references indicating an ongoing comparison perspective.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4449,latent_4449,3944,0.007888,0.007184471,4.43013,Detailed description of changes in findings compared to prior image.,"Instances with higher activations indicate significant use of comparative analysis to identify changes between current and previous imaging. These reports often provide a detailed analysis of progressive or unchanged disease states, especially when comparing variations in opacities, heart sizes, or lung conditions as mentioned across different examples.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6138613861386139,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4450,latent_4450,21548,0.043096,0.032302473,4.754649,Presence of atelectasis in findings.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern frequently involve references to atelectasis—partial lung collapse. Atelectasis is a common finding in radiology reports due to its prevalence in patients with respiratory problems and its visibility in imaging. The examples describe atelectasis affecting various lung regions, such as bibasilar or right-sided atelectasis.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5964912280701754,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4451,latent_4451,46695,0.09339,0.04655349,3.731802,Comparison with prior imaging to document stability or changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently request descriptions of radiographic findings with explicit comparisons to prior imaging, and they highlight stable or unchanged findings, improvements in conditions, or stable abnormalities over time. These patterns underline the practice of documenting longitudinal progress by comparing current and previous imaging results.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.4477611940298507,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4452,latent_4452,2476,0.004952,0.010288208,7.1332016,Focus on stable or unchanged findings compared to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently contain descriptions that indicate unchanged or stable findings since the previous study, often considering ""no new findings"" or ""stable"" states in comparison texts. These reports emphasize stability over change in clinical contexts.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569377990430622,0.5707070707070707,0.5795454545454546,0.5151515151515151,99.0,99.0
+4453,latent_4453,54230,0.10846,0.052120324,3.1530316,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison with prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation appear to describe stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. Terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant interval change', and 'persisting' recurring indicate that stability or lack of change is a key leader to the activation levels in this dataset.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4454,latent_4454,18227,0.036454,0.018963998,5.2908597,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples showing higher activation levels consistently highlight features or findings in images that are described in the context of comparison with prior images, indicating stability or minor changes. This reflects the model's focus on identifying reports where imaging findings are stable or unchanged over time, particularly in serial radiology imaging.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4029850746268656,0.27,100.0,100.0
+4455,latent_4455,3849,0.007698,0.013490937,5.529802,Detailed cardiomediastinal findings and historical comparisons in chest imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve providing detailed observations of changes or lack of changes from prior imaging, especially concerning cardiomediastinal anatomy or presence/absence of specific findings such as effusion, consolidation, or devices. Reports often elaborate on comparisons, history, and specific indicators to rule out or confirm conditions like pneumonia, edema, or cardiomegaly, using specified technique and imaging projection.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4192799070847851,0.45,0.4657534246575342,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4456,latent_4456,10501,0.021002,0.021202473,5.383545,Assessment of medical device positioning relative to prior imaging.,"The pattern here involves evaluations focusing on assessing changes in location or presence of medical devices like tubes and catheters against previous examinations. There is a frequent mention of positioning or status changes of specific medical devices like endotracheal tubes, catheters, and NG tubes.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4104159842777596,0.46,0.4047619047619047,0.17,100.0,100.0
+4457,latent_4457,6282,0.012564,0.013117559,5.0841336,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, particularly including frontal and lateral views.","These examples consistently involve descriptions that emphasize imaging obtained at multiple angles (frontal and lateral) or comparisons with prior imaging. This pattern often appears in radiology contexts, especially in differential diagnoses or when evaluating progression or stability of findings in chest radiography.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4458,latent_4458,90189,0.180378,0.11834485,4.534169,Interval change in pulmonary opacities or effusions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels highlight the presence of pulmonary opacities or findings such as effusions and atelectasis, suggesting interval changes in chest imaging compared to prior studies. This implies the pattern relates to tracking progression or improvement of specific conditions.",0.6524822695035462,0.6530612244897959,0.6521739130434783,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6373758267575781,0.645,0.704225352112676,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4459,latent_4459,4105,0.00821,0.0076935347,3.694128,Findings compared explicitly to previous imaging.,"The highly activated examples focus on descriptions of findings on radiological exams with explicit comparisons to previous exams. Specific conditions, changes (or lack thereof), and medical devices are often directly compared using phrases like 'as compared to', 'in comparison with', or mention specific conditions or devices across time points. This pattern is frequent where longitudinal tracking or progression of a condition is concerned.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4460,latent_4460,7543,0.015086,0.013687655,3.2263381,Use of frontal and lateral chest images for comparison.,"These examples involve descriptions based on both frontal and lateral chest images, with multiple instances referencing prior frontal images for comparison. This approach provides a more comprehensive assessment utilizing multiple imaging planes to better identify or confirm findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+4461,latent_4461,2723,0.005446,0.0069326684,6.205913,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior radiographic findings.,"The activations exhibit a pattern focusing on the comparison of current findings on radiographic images against prior images. This indicates a significant emphasis on assessing progression, stability, or resolution of findings. Reports lacking detailed comparative analysis or failing to highlight changes tend not to activate the pattern.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4462,latent_4462,5840,0.01168,0.007847999,7.079408,Chest radiology report describing findings when no prior comparison is available.,"Despite errors and omissions in the comparison section, the most activated examples focus on descriptions of findings without any prior comparisons available, evaluating for previous conditions like pneumothorax or pneumonia, and describing common radiologic assessments such as effusion presence or heart size. The assistant reliably identifies and rules out abnormalities matching the condition being examined.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.3666666666666666,0.2784810126582278,79.0,121.0
+4463,latent_4463,9322,0.018644,0.022045862,6.668004,Comparison of current and prior chest images for changes.,"These examples describe a step-by-step radiological assessment and comparison of current chest images with prior studies. They typically involve detailed findings related to changes (or the lack thereof) in current images compared to the earlier ones, focusing on stable findings, any newly emerged or worsened pathologies, and consistently unchanged anatomical structures. This approach is typical of assessing stability or progression in conditions requiring longitudinal imaging follow-up.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4464,latent_4464,11229,0.022458,0.010787364,2.544551,High activation with explicit changes in pathology compared to prior images.,"Comparisons between current and prior images often result in specific descriptions of changes, improvements, or stability in pathologies, and those reports with explicit change details, especially improvement or stabilization of specific pathologies, tend to have higher activation levels. This pattern indicates a focus on interpreting progression or stabilization/dissolution of pathologies over time.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4465,latent_4465,15780,0.03156,0.02234333,3.71718,Specific findings in radiology with changes or status stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings based primarily on radiological comparisons to prior images, focusing on specific changes or stability, despite some examples lacking prior comparison. This suggests the pattern is formed by those reports including very specific findings related to the patients' medical statuses as indicated in their histories, which distinguish them from general non-specific findings or new comparisons without context.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4466,latent_4466,2198,0.004396,0.0046022143,4.437286,Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours on imaging.,"Analysis reveals a pattern where there is specific attention given to the mediastinal and heart contours, often described as unremarkable or normal, while examining chest radiographs across various examples. Terms indicating normality of cardomediastinal contours are consistent across highly activated examples.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.2165532879818593,0.37,0.2340425531914893,0.11,100.0,100.0
+4467,latent_4467,4673,0.009346,0.012865345,4.461458,Descriptions of cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette with pulmonary findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings of cardiomegaly or enlargement of cardiac silhouette alongside accompanying descriptions of the lung fields or pulmonary conditions, often for assessing changes over time. This points to a pattern where cardiomegaly, as a notable finding, is linked to the need for detailed comparative analysis in context of pulmonary conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5901197281846619,0.62,0.7608695652173914,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4468,latent_4468,27068,0.054136,0.026655972,4.008096,Detailed comparative analysis of current vs. prior images and clinical implications.,Reports with high activation levels either provide detailed findings from radiological images in clear comparisons to prior images or include assessments of clinical implications. Examples include specific pathologies compared to past images or notable changes in condition. This pattern reflects comprehensive analysis and clinical integration.,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5754716981132075,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4469,latent_4469,4954,0.009908,0.012321051,5.6901684,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and interval changes.,"These examples focus on describing the findings based on current imaging compared to prior images, often including specific findings about interval changes or stability of the condition over time. The presence of a prior imaging report or explicit instructions to compare with prior imaging and an assistant's follow-up description are highly indicative of this pattern.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3693080047428038,0.375,0.345679012345679,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4470,latent_4470,8482,0.016964,0.011347268,3.423325,Description includes prior imaging comparison with interval changes.,"Examples with higher activations are consistently cases where description of findings includes a comparison to prior imaging, along with noting changes such as resolution of previous pathologies or stability when compared to prior studies. This pattern shows a linguistic focus on documenting temporal changes in findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.389490148591034,0.395,0.3703703703703703,0.3,100.0,100.0
+4471,latent_4471,39203,0.078406,0.049284093,9.4933815,Stable or unchanged findings from prior imaging study.,"The pattern seen at activation levels above zero in these examples is the description of stable or unchanged intrathoracic findings, often indicating minimal or no significant interval change when compared with prior imaging studies. The key terms are 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'persistent', signifying consistency over time.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.3103448275862069,0.4285714285714285,63.0,137.0
+4472,latent_4472,12748,0.025496,0.014410449,6.679799,"Comparison of imaging findings with past images, focusing on interval changes.","In the examples with high activation, reports typically request comparison of the current imaging findings with previous examinations. The pattern shows a focus on evaluating changes or stability in specific conditions, often referencing equipment like tubes or catheters.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4411764705882353,0.6896551724137931,87.0,113.0
+4473,latent_4473,2977,0.005954,0.0073896004,5.014553,Detailed findings in relation to prior images.,These examples focus on providing detailed descriptions of current imaging findings in direct comparison with prior radiographic exams. This pattern is evident in follow-up studies where changes or stability in a medical condition are assessed against previous imaging results.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4689287075867328,0.4723618090452261,0.4782608695652174,0.55,100.0,99.0
+4474,latent_4474,7508,0.015016,0.016534042,3.8182366,Explicit instructions to compare findings with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels explicitly instruct the assistant to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images. This instruction appears as part of the prompt, suggesting specific attention to changes or comparisons with previous imaging, often noted in phrases like 'provide a description of findings in comparison'.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.562769906811122,0.5628140703517588,0.5588235294117647,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+4475,latent_4475,5092,0.010184,0.009518945,8.210902,Postoperative or procedural follow-up imaging findings.,"These examples are related to postoperative or procedural follow-up imaging, often seen in patients with conditions requiring surgical interventions or monitoring following medical procedures. The reports frequently indicate status post procedures like surgical placements, chest tubes, or other interventions with phrases such as 'status post', 'post-surgery', or references to recent medical procedures.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.6052232007288187,0.61,0.6410256410256411,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4476,latent_4476,4007,0.008014,0.008468117,4.6040215,Use of frontal and lateral images with comprehensive findings.,"Many highly activated examples reference multiple views (frontal and lateral), often accompanied by an explicit description of findings in comparison to a prior image. Additionally, clear indications are provided with detailed instructions for evaluation, showing a pattern of comprehensive assessment through multiple diagnostic points and methodologies.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5806476663819212,0.595,0.5693430656934306,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4477,latent_4477,7963,0.015926,0.012150251,3.3265176,Stability noted in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations typically refer to 'unchanged' or 'stable' findings in comparison to previous studies, and often note no new acute disease or persistent conditions. This statement points to a pattern of stability in radiological findings across different studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4478,latent_4478,71553,0.143106,0.07409715,3.2783227,Stable or unchanged pulmonary findings compared to prior radiographic studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to lung volumes or opacities that have not changed or are improved compared to prior studies, indicating stability. This reference to unchanged findings over time is distinct from other examples which focus on new findings or changes in pulmonary conditions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5849782366636299,0.59,0.6153846153846154,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4479,latent_4479,28569,0.057138,0.044713352,7.3611856,Imaging assessments noting stability or change compared to prior studies.,"Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions of imaging findings that include specific terminology indicating interval changes or consistent stable conditions compared to previous assessments. Examples frequently include phrases like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', 'increased', or 'decreased' alongside detailed descriptions of the conditions that continue or have changed over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6180387563341907,0.625,0.5984251968503937,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4480,latent_4480,8966,0.017932,0.013349344,4.7116776,Evaluation of interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"The pattern is recognized by the high activation level associated with the presence of both current and prior images being described, and a focus on identifying interval changes or stability in medical conditions reported in the descriptions. Key terms include 'compared to prior', 'as before', 'in comparison with', which are indicators of analyzing differences or similarities between images of the same patient over time, essential for tracking disease progression or treatment effect.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4635084522724972,0.47,0.4754098360655737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4481,latent_4481,14284,0.028568,0.013673084,5.022875,Mentions of cardiac silhouette or its comparison with prior imaging.,"The model shows activation for studies that mention either comparison to prior imaging or significant changes, findings, or conditions involving the cardiovascular system, such as cardiomegaly or pleural effusion comparisons. However, more emphasis is on reports mentioning the cardiac silhouette or related descriptions.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4390243902439024,0.5934065934065934,91.0,109.0
+4482,latent_4482,4462,0.008924,0.011551156,4.121229,Reports requiring comparison but lacking completed prior information.,"The examples with high activation levels often lack or have incomplete prior reports. Despite being instructed to provide comparisons, these reports do not offer comprehensive prior information, making a comparison difficult. Additionally, multiple high activation instances emphasize the lack of prior image data available, which could lead to ambiguities in evaluations as the assistant may implicitly address comparisons without specific prior comparisons to correlate with.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4715073529411764,0.54,0.5232558139534884,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4483,latent_4483,5137,0.010274,0.0090545425,7.1274123,Negative or unremarkable findings in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe negative findings such as normal or unremarkable results, including stable cardiomediastinal or mediastinal structures, and absence of acute abnormalities. The use of 'no', 'normal', 'negative', and 'unremarkable' are common descriptors across these activations.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4484,latent_4484,16586,0.033172,0.018494299,5.568652,"Emphasis on devices (tubes, catheters) and changes in their placement or condition.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently contain findings that emphasize the current state or change in intrathoracic structures often affecting or relating to tubes, devices, or technical aspects, such as insertion or positions and changes as compared to prior examinations. The focus revolves around devices like tubes that need to be monitored for placement, repositioning, or associated changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.534950145409223,0.5477386934673367,0.5671641791044776,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+4485,latent_4485,13078,0.026156,0.019111505,5.9370346,Detailed evolution or stability vs. prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations consistently provide detailed descriptions of changes or stability in comparison to prior images. The key focus is on describing the evolution of findings, stability of identified anomalies, or positioning of medical devices as observed in sequential imaging studies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4486,latent_4486,4651,0.009302,0.008892091,4.1390653,Updating interval changes in comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The high activation examples consistently involve statements analyzing current images and descriptions in the context of comparisons to prior imaging. These examples uniquely emphasize description of interval changes, stability, or explicit comparisons with previous scans.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.3902439024390244,0.32,100.0,100.0
+4487,latent_4487,17372,0.034744,0.052154534,4.715686,Direct comparison description requested or emphasized.,"High activation levels correlate with samples where a direct comparison with previous imaging is specifically requested or highlighted, often indicated by 'Provide a description of findings in comparison to the prior image.' This suggests the model identifies patterns where direct comparative descriptions are emphasized.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4488,latent_4488,11097,0.022194,0.026614888,6.8080606,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings that are unchanged or stable compared to previous radiographs. These reports indicate tracking of conditions over time, specifically identifying when there is no significant change from prior imaging findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4597701149425287,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4489,latent_4489,3635,0.00727,0.015584325,5.914944,Radiology findings described as compared to prior imaging.,This list includes numerous instances where the interpretation of new radiology imaging studies is done in direct comparison with images taken on prior occasions. The consistent inclusion of terms indicating comparison with 'prior' radiographs or discussion of any 'interval changes' suggests the pattern here is descriptions involving comparisons to prior imaging studies.,0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4490,latent_4490,4866,0.009732,0.008991889,5.898183,Emphasis on stability of heart size compared to prior images.,"The consistent pattern in highly activated examples is the evaluation of findings against prior images, focusing on stability or lack of change in observed findings, particularly regarding the heart size 'heart size stable','heart size unchanged' or similar descriptions. This pattern captures the distinct focus on stability alongside any changes in pathology description.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.2142857142857142,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4883720930232558,0.21,100.0,100.0
+4491,latent_4491,40387,0.080774,0.043768164,3.6951866,Radiological descriptions of interval change or new findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels include a noted change or new finding in patient condition, suggesting a focus on interval changes in radiological examinations. Examples describe distinct findings such as new opacities, effusions, or other conditions not previously evident or with notable interval changes, compared to prior imaging.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4492,latent_4492,5748,0.011496,0.014034508,5.528925,Explicit task to compare current images with prior images.,"The distinguishing pattern in these samples is the explicit inclusion of a prior report or prior imaging study in the prompt, along with an explicit or implied task to compare current imaging findings to prior images. This comparison is central to the radiological practice to track changes in patient conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4763814616755793,0.53,0.5182926829268293,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4493,latent_4493,13334,0.026668,0.015405668,5.919077,Severe cardiomegaly with stable or unchanged imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently mention both 'severe cardiomegaly' and specific changes in imaging findings relative to previous studies, often highlighting the stable or unchanged nature of certain conditions despite severe cardiac enlargement.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4295634920634921,0.54,0.8333333333333334,0.1,100.0,100.0
+4494,latent_4494,6120,0.01224,0.014640876,6.478376,Findings related to diaphragm contour or elevation.,"These examples consistently describe the findings related to diaphragmatic contours, specifically highlighting variations such as elevation or abnormalities in contrast to prior imaging. Such references indicate changes in diaphragmatic positioning or outline, occurring often alongside other thoracic observations, forming a notable pattern in the imaging examinations.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.9,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.73786332913572,0.745,0.8656716417910447,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4495,latent_4495,26481,0.052962,0.037956018,7.952848,Tube positioning and related findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings related to tubes, such as endotracheal (ET) tubes or nasogastric (NG) tubes, particularly focusing on their position relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or stomach. Low activation examples either lack these details or focus on other findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.4137931034482758,0.2790697674418604,86.0,114.0
+4496,latent_4496,6010,0.01202,0.015616248,4.265068,Detailed findings comparison without explicit prior image reference.,The examples with activation focus on detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging without an explicit reference for comparison. This involves describing changes over time and noting stability or progression of observed abnormalities. This pattern is consistent in radiology reports that evaluate temporal changes in patient condition.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4433160309937561,0.445,0.4382022471910112,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4497,latent_4497,3989,0.007978,0.009047252,4.38412,Requests for descriptive comparison between current and prior images.,"These examples involve requests for descriptions or analyses of radiological findings based on a comparison of current and prior images, as indicated by consistent references to 'prior' in the prompt. They ask for the user to provide descriptive interpretations which may include technical imaging terminology and comparative analysis across image sets.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4498,latent_4498,3488,0.006976,0.007269896,5.357719,Comparison emphasizing unchanged clinical status from prior imaging.,"The pattern observed here is the description of findings in comparison to prior imaging, specifically focusing on statements where changes or lack thereof are explicitly noted, emphasizing stability or unchanged status.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.53125,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4499,latent_4499,11733,0.023466,0.0121629415,2.5465841,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral views with comparisons to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently include both frontal and lateral views in conjunction with explicit comparison of previous images. The pattern is the routine practice of evaluating new images by comparing them against prior studies, which is reinforced by repeated references to 'comparison' in the context of multiple views.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5161094224924012,0.5175879396984925,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,99.0
+4500,latent_4500,238372,0.476744,0.3835036,4.504411,Explicit comparison to prior imaging with detailed stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide comparative language that explicitly references a prior imaging study by identifying it with previous examinations or stating findings such as 'unchanged' or 'stable.' This linguistic pattern of explicit comparison to past studies is used to identify changes or the stability of findings, which is a crucial aspect of radiology reports.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.62996299629963,0.63,0.6326530612244898,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4501,latent_4501,32115,0.06423,0.038781557,5.2423573,Use of prior image comparison to assess changes.,"The pattern is indicated by the correlation of findings between current and prior radiographic images, often highlighting stability or changes. Reports with higher activation levels include more comparisons or remarks about the similarity of current findings to previous studies, which is central to clinical radiology evaluation.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4502,latent_4502,6378,0.012756,0.01979907,4.449918,Radiological findings discussed in relation to external devices or changes from prior studies.,"Examples with high activation frequently involve description of technical terms related to radiology imaging comparisons, such as findings related to external devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) or explicit mentions of previous studies to show intervals of stability, progression, or procedure effects.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4503,latent_4503,11017,0.022034,0.013816937,4.4112954,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly contain or require a comparison between a current and a prior imaging study, allowing for evaluation of stability or change over time. References to 'prior image', 'comparison', and descriptive changes in findings between timepoints indicate this pattern, even where explicitly said 'comparison: none'. The element of observation through time is central to this pattern.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4377820760799484,0.455,0.4666666666666667,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4504,latent_4504,5677,0.011354,0.008021846,5.2765584,Changes or stability described in comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently discuss findings in comparison to prior radiological images and note specific changes or stability, whereas lower activation examples either don't emphasize or lack comparative analysis this explicitly.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4505,latent_4505,14798,0.029596,0.014728644,5.4612694,Comparisons required for detecting interval changes in known medical conditions.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on cases where descriptions about current images require comparisons to prior images or reports, indicating potential changes or stability of features related to clinical indications such as trauma, potential pathological signs, or post-procedural evaluation. Match phrases like ""provide a description in comparison"" and ""stable/same as previous"" or observations regarding infrastructure such as the positions of tubes or signs of pneumothorax, effusion, etc., consistent with previous or expected intervals.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3882555170757602,0.395,0.3448275862068966,0.6578947368421053,76.0,124.0
+4506,latent_4506,4464,0.008928,0.008378344,3.8061202,Cardiomediastinal silhouette described as normal or unchanged.,"Examples with higher activation levels have reports where the cardiomediastinal silhouette or contours are described as unchanged, unremarkable, or within normal limits, often with reference to prior or current comparison studies. This suggests a pattern where the focus is on reporting stability or lack of acute change in these areas.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6749268585431722,0.675,0.6804123711340206,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4507,latent_4507,3899,0.007798,0.008141141,3.9815483,Comparison for position of medical tubes or devices in image findings.,"The examples with higher activations focus on scenarios where comparisons are made to prior imagery, evaluating the position or status of medical tubes and devices, often reassessing their placement or potential changes. These reports typically involve checking for stability or correctness of position, particularly for tubes like NG or orogastric tubes, or devices like pacemakers or tracheostomy tubes.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4704066425377901,0.4974874371859296,0.4909090909090909,0.2727272727272727,99.0,100.0
+4508,latent_4508,8045,0.01609,0.013751541,5.940413,Discussion of changes compared to prior images with focus on heart and lung condition stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference comparisons between the current and prior frontal chest images, focusing specifically on changes or stability in certain conditions, including heart and lung conditions. The need to describe or assess the stability or change over time in these conditions is common in radiological assessments.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4509,latent_4509,7726,0.015452,0.010073593,5.0639744,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Reports with significant activation levels typically describe changes or comparisons in radiological findings compared to prior studies. This emphasizes the clinical relevance of monitoring changes over time, especially noting unchanged conditions or detecting new developments in chest radiographs or related procedures.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4510,latent_4510,17840,0.03568,0.01707606,2.8216987,Description of interval changes or findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"When observed, examples with higher activation levels consistently mention interval changes or the presence of interval findings when comparing a current radiological study to previous ones. This suggests the model is particularly attuned to identifying new or evolving abnormalities mentioned in the context of interval comparisons in radiological reports.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4511,latent_4511,4242,0.008484,0.010166694,4.5677085,Comparison with prior imaging revealing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activations pertain to cases where findings in the radiological study differ from the findings in the previous images, indicating changes over time, new developments, or consistent aspects since the last examination. This is indicated through expressions of comparison with prior imaging indicating changes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4220521756698739,0.4221105527638191,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,99.0
+4512,latent_4512,3589,0.007178,0.010452254,6.6819134,Comparative interpretation of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples contain references to the description or comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging studies. Examples with higher activation often start with a directive or context for providing a comparison, involve interpretation of multiple images, and involve indicating stability or change since previous imaging findings.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4405452141186044,0.45,0.4603174603174603,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4513,latent_4513,3221,0.006442,0.008227262,4.4051123,Evaluations of cardiac silhouette size and status in chest radiographs.,"Samples with high activation levels attribute significance to descriptions of the cardiac silhouette as stable, enlarged, or top-normal, despite other possible findings like vascular congestion, pleural effusion, or atelectasis. This entails a focus on heart characteristics as a major feature for decision-making.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4514,latent_4514,2904,0.005808,0.005060882,4.1810822,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior imagery.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently use descriptions of findings such as atelectasis, opacities, fractures, or effusions, and explicitly compare these to prior imaging studies. This comparison is part of the process in identifying interval changes that are often emphasized in these reports.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4515,latent_4515,30970,0.06194,0.025889674,3.4292068,Interval change or evaluation in tube/catheter placement or position.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe changes or evaluations related to tubes, catheters, or lines in the image and mention changes as compared to previous imaging. This pattern is consistent with radiology reports focused on procedural changes, placement evaluations, or comparisons.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6013564235976288,0.615,0.6825396825396826,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4516,latent_4516,17817,0.035634,0.02254516,6.0166626,Evaluative comparisons of changes in lung or cardiac findings on serial imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically provide comparisons to previous imaging and make note of changes or stability in specific lung opacities or cardiac conditions. This pattern highlights the model's sensitivity to temporal comparisons and evaluative statements about change, such as resolution or increase in particular findings, especially those related to opacities or complications like effusions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+4517,latent_4517,13300,0.0266,0.020310638,3.1463041,Comparison of anatomical or support devices between current and prior images.,"The examples focus on the comparison of current findings against previous imaging and often refer to changes in medical devices or anatomical structures, with language indicating whether or not changes have occurred since the prior imaging. This includes discussions about positioning of tubes or lines, or changes in lung, cardiac, aortic, or mediastinal features.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4518,latent_4518,18496,0.036992,0.025950082,5.303348,Absence of detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples highlight a pattern where there is a lack of comparative imagery or prior imaging studies, indicated by the absence of both explicit comparison statements and observations specific to prior imaging.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4519,latent_4519,15260,0.03052,0.017499588,5.6393027,Reports note no significant changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that have higher activation levels consistently contain expressions indicating that there is an absence or lack of change, such as ""no significant interval change,"" ""unchanged,"" or ""stable."" These are phrases indicating minimal progression in findings relative to prior studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.509090909090909,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4520,latent_4520,5799,0.011598,0.009994703,5.3293266,Use of both current and prior images for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve commentary or analysis of images in relation to prior imaging, especially where comparisons between different types of images are mentioned, like 'chest PA and lateral' with or without explicit detail but focusing on the change or stability of findings over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4133333333333333,0.45,0.4666666666666667,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4521,latent_4521,3436,0.006872,0.011430052,4.7655554,Analytical comparison of chest images over time without additional medical context.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on describing findings in chest radiographs compared to a prior image, without specific reference to other medical information such as previous diagnoses, procedures, or embedded reports. The focus is purely on changes observed analytically in imaging over time, reflecting interval improvement, unchanged status, or deterioration, as instructed by the prompt.",0.4225589225589226,0.4285714285714285,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.4070947643452919,0.41,0.4210526315789473,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4522,latent_4522,49704,0.099408,0.04364103,2.922883,High activation occurs when comparing current and prior imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting stable, worsened, or resolved conditions. These comparisons often provide insights into changes over time and assist in ongoing patient management.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4255514705882353,0.5,0.5,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4523,latent_4523,4436,0.008872,0.010853867,7.753376,Complex or detailed comparison with previous imaging findings.,"The examples demonstrating high activation levels involve scenarios where the radiological findings have an aspect of complexity or subtlety, such as changes in condition or intricate physiological states that would require expert assessment for an accurate comparison with previous imaging, indicated by complex or detailed terminology in the findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4524,latent_4524,7000,0.014,0.016203253,5.799424,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on the comparison of findings between current and prior imaging studies. The pattern seems to involve a detailed comparison of new and previous images, specifically examining changes in findings such as lung pathology or cardiopulmonary status. Such comparative evaluations are crucial when monitoring patients over time or assessing the progression of ailments. The activation levels indicate recognition of detailed comparative assessments in specific examples.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4395604395604395,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4525,latent_4525,3096,0.006192,0.006012101,6.0950136,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal contours.,"High activations are associated with reports where no focal lung pathologies such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax are noted, and cardiomediastinal or hilar contours are described as normal or unremarkable. This reflects a pattern of recognizing clear lungs and normal cardiac silhouettes.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7348342714196372,0.735,0.7473684210526316,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4526,latent_4526,4647,0.009294,0.014834779,6.2210817,Explicit instructions to compare current findings to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve providing descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior imaging, using explicit cues about prior imaging or history such as '_previous_', '_comparison_', or 'PRIOR_REPORT'. These explicit cues indicate tasks requiring comparison of current and past findings, which is a focus of radiological interpretation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4527,latent_4527,6535,0.01307,0.011532557,5.4457674,Detailed comparison or commentary on extensive medical history or condition changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels systematically involve detailed descriptions of medical conditions or changes over time, often involving complex medical histories or specific pathologies. These descriptions often include references to comparisons with prior imaging or medical conditions, thus requiring an extensive understanding and context of the patient's medical condition or history.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4796747967479675,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4528,latent_4528,12688,0.025376,0.020672614,5.5881677,Findings warranting interval change analysis compared to prior imaging.,"The cases with higher activation identify interval changes or stability in abnormalities, often mentioning specific findings like consolidation, pneumothorax, effusions, or structural changes that are subtle or complex, warranting detailed comparison description. Lower activations tend to lack interval changes or specific complex findings needing such analysis of changes.",0.6016260162601625,0.6122448979591837,0.5757575757575758,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4529,latent_4529,5801,0.011602,0.020111257,4.830618,"Descriptions of findings comparing with prior images, indicating stability or change.",The examples with higher activation levels often include a directive or indication to provide a description or comparison against a previous image that emphasizes assessing stability or changes in specific conditions or findings.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.423728813559322,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4530,latent_4530,21029,0.042058,0.021592783,3.50674,Detailed imaging comparisons noting interval changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve detailed comparisons of radiological findings with prior imaging studies, often noting interval changes or specific differences. This pattern, while potentially discussing current conditions, focuses on the variance over time between scans.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7095352564102564,0.71,0.6944444444444444,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4531,latent_4531,5298,0.010596,0.013640366,5.9914765,"Description of findings relative to prior images, highlighting stability or progression.","The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of imaging findings in relation to prior studies, with a focus on comparison or stability of findings over time. Reports mention previously identified conditions ('unchanged', 'stable', 'compared') or monitor progression and resolution, which is critical in radiological assessment.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4736842105263157,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4532,latent_4532,10604,0.021208,0.029558077,8.950133,Focus on stability or lack of acute change in comparison with prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently mention the assessment of changes over time, usually comparing current findings to prior imaging studies, with cardiac or pulmonary findings being stable. High activations seem to be associated with a focus on stability or lack of acute change while monitoring for potential progression.",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5578947368421052,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4533,latent_4533,7525,0.01505,0.012428427,3.8930466,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and unchanged medical devices.,"These examples frequently include reference to the stability or stability-related comparison of various radiographic findings, most notably cardiac or cardiomediastinal silhouettes, which are stable or unchanged between current and prior images. Stable findings often involve the presence of known devices (e.g., pacemakers, sternotomy wires) or unchanged anatomical contours.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4875,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4534,latent_4534,10487,0.020974,0.0147276465,3.5076344,Complex medical history and detailed comparisons.,"The examples with a high activation level involve complex medical indications, often mentioning a prior condition or medical history, such as lung cancer, pneumonia, or specific post-surgical evaluations. These conditions suggest that the model is identifying detailed, complex medical contexts as a defining feature of the pattern.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4966887417218543,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4535,latent_4535,3983,0.007966,0.007000318,4.004181,Dependencies on explicit analysis of both current and prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions for or discussions around image comparisons, where either the current and prior images are explicitly given or referenced for interpretation. These cases have more detailed comparisons made between the current findings and prior images, highlighting differences or stabilities in diagnoses over time.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4536,latent_4536,26694,0.053388,0.035525307,6.948245,Detailed comparison to prior images emphasizing stability or minor improvement.,"Examples with higher activations generally provide specific descriptions of changes observed in comparison to previous images, particularly focusing on stable findings, interval improvements, or minor changes in clinical context. This suggests the pattern is related to how the text emphasizes stability or improvement when comparing with prior examinations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4537,latent_4537,20381,0.040762,0.018035432,3.4045284,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The data examples with higher activations focus on detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging, emphasizing changes in clinical findings, diagnoses, or observations over time. Lower activations lack such specific comparative analysis or show minimal change, are more general, or lack prior comparison entirely.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4538,latent_4538,10980,0.02196,0.01606222,5.4036055,Unchanged device position or findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels correlate with reports describing unchanged medical device positions (e.g., catheters, tubes) and no significant new findings compared to prior images. These reports often emphasize stability rather than changes.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7189883580891208,0.72,0.6964285714285714,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4539,latent_4539,5920,0.01184,0.024247186,3.7879274,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4540,latent_4540,11704,0.023408,0.014376288,4.3528285,Comparison highlighting unchanged or stable findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels highlight the comparison between imaging studies to note either the stability or change of specific findings over time, typically using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'persisted', or mention of dates for previous imaging studies.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.56,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5978260869565217,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4541,latent_4541,4090,0.00818,0.011006896,4.240657,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,"Instructions consistently ask for a description based on comparison between current and prior images, which creates an expectation of prior imaging references. Even when no prior imaging is available for comparison, the pattern of comparing findings to a previous image is central to the instruction and report language.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.4384615384615384,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4542,latent_4542,15277,0.030554,0.016012887,3.9205847,Evaluation of medical devices or tube positions compared to prior imaging.,These examples describe radiological findings or changes in medical devices (such as tubes or catheters) or chest tube positions compared to prior imaging results. It's a common pattern in radiology reports to evaluate the current status of such devices or position changes relative to prior documentation.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5161290322580645,0.32,100.0,100.0
+4543,latent_4543,7818,0.015636,0.010046777,8.05684,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve stable findings or lack of change in successive comparative imaging studies, indicating no progression or improvement of observed conditions against prior imaging. This suggests a focus on consistent or unchanging findings relative to prior reports.",0.2788461538461538,0.28,0.2608695652173913,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5518339426819201,0.62,0.3333333333333333,0.4339622641509434,53.0,147.0
+4544,latent_4544,25122,0.050244,0.022923782,3.0639808,Stable or unchanged cardiopulmonary findings with new developments elsewhere.,Examples with higher activation levels feature reports that note stable or unchanged cardiopulmonary findings in combination with other new or progressive conditions. The key factor for higher activations is describing minor changes or stability in the cardiac silhouette or pulmonary vasculature while comparing it to prior imagery.,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.589607149222191,0.592964824120603,0.6172839506172839,0.5,100.0,99.0
+4545,latent_4545,14423,0.028846,0.016283263,5.5547385,Changes or stabilities in findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern identified in these samples is the emphasis on changes or stability in findings when current imaging is compared to prior studies. The focus is on describing how the condition of certain features has evolved or remained unchanged over time, which is essential for monitoring patient progress.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5865376664185893,0.625,0.577639751552795,0.93,100.0,100.0
+4546,latent_4546,3824,0.007648,0.0075710975,7.9977036,Detailed comparison of current and prior images evaluating changes over time.,"Samples with higher activation involve detailed comparison between current and prior images, evaluating changes over time, such as status changes in medical devices, presence or stability of medical conditions, or alterations in lung or heart characteristics.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4547,latent_4547,15012,0.030024,0.019916132,9.012001,Emphasis on unchanged device placement and structure stability.,"In these examples, mentions of detailed device placements and unchanged status of structures such as tubes or catheters, along with detailed anatomical positioning against prior images, feature prominently. This specificity in unchanged device/structure status suggests a focus on monitoring equipment placement and stability rather than diagnosing new conditions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5170909090909092,0.585,0.3387096774193548,0.3333333333333333,63.0,137.0
+4548,latent_4548,3748,0.007496,0.004629606,4.786634,Comparison highlighting change or stability in imaging findings.,"The activated examples consistently compare findings between current and prior imaging studies and describe changes or stability in clinical terms. These examples frequently include evidence of changes in condition (e.g., 'decrease', 'increased', 'unchanged'), indicating a significant portion of the analysis involves assessing temporal changes in a patient's clinical presentation.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5703732605020159,0.5829145728643216,0.5639097744360902,0.75,100.0,99.0
+4549,latent_4549,5063,0.010126,0.007616093,7.343227,Explicit instructions to compare current and prior images.,"Most of the examples with higher activation levels describe a process where the current image(s) are compared against prior images to evaluate changes or stability in findings. The pattern involves instruction to provide a comparative analysis, often with an explicit request to describe interval change or stability.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4387755102040816,0.4526315789473684,95.0,105.0
+4550,latent_4550,9256,0.018512,0.018851284,4.7940655,Explicit requests for comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include explicit instructions to compare the current image to prior imaging studies, either directly or indirectly, which is a common practice in radiology to assess for changes over time. The presence of definite comparison information or imaging is a key feature.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4551,latent_4551,8577,0.017154,0.014097442,4.9818435,Involves comparison of current and prior images.,"Each high activation example involves mentions of both current and prior imaging, typically with instructions to describe or compare findings across the images provided. This frequent reference to comparison is highlighted in instructions asking for a description in the context of previous images, suggesting that the model is recognizing a task pattern centered around evaluating changes across time using different views.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3528513370091377,0.375,0.4087591240875912,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4552,latent_4552,10157,0.020314,0.050767656,7.4149446,Coordination of multiple imaging views and comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve coordination of multiple imaging views and comparison with prior frontal images as a significant aspect of the analysis. Each sample, regardless of findings, emphasizes the inclusion of different perspectives (frontal and lateral) and historical comparison as crucial for detailed assessment, possibly integrating previous reports.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3879015721120984,0.457286432160804,0.4730538922155688,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+4553,latent_4553,19499,0.038998,0.01814808,4.1167626,Findings report no significant change compared to previous imaging.,"These examples frequently discuss the absence of significant changes in radiological findings when compared to prior imaging studies. This implies stability and the comparisons are often format-driven, evaluated in the context of finding no notable new pathologies or changes despite previous abnormalities or ongoing conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5111111111111111,0.23,100.0,100.0
+4554,latent_4554,13778,0.027556,0.014275741,2.9344058,Detailed comparison and interpretation of findings related to prior reports.,"Across examples, activation levels indicate the radiology report pattern focuses on thorough, detailed analysis and interpretation of imaging findings in comparison to prior studies, regardless of the number of images involved or the approach used for comparison.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5570910973084886,0.5678391959798995,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,99.0
+4555,latent_4555,60103,0.120206,0.06730326,6.163095,Explicit changes or stability noted compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activations show notable findings compared to previous imaging. These include wording that indicates observable changes or stability over time, like 'has decreased', 'is unchanged', or direct comparisons to past imaging findings, indicating analysis based on historical imaging reference points.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.576,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4556,latent_4556,15518,0.031036,0.021203807,5.1452875,Findings compared to prior images indicating stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current findings to prior imaging, specifically indicating changes or stability of certain features such as devices, structures, or opacities, using expressions indicating comparison of historical imaging data, like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'increased', 'improved', 'new'. This type of language is more prevalent in examples with significant findings relative to previous studies.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5432263814616756,0.59,0.5548780487804879,0.91,100.0,100.0
+4557,latent_4557,3022,0.006044,0.00998552,4.179102,Requests comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently ask for comparisons between current radiological images and prior images when describing changes, indicating that this is a key feature or prompt triggering high activation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4558,latent_4558,2947,0.005894,0.009291038,10.076154,Detailed comparisons of current versus prior imaging findings with interval changes.,"The highly activated examples highlight the radiologist's detailed comparisons between current and prior images, often including interval changes or stability in medical devices, pneumothorax, effusions, and other radiographic features. This pattern focuses on evaluating changes or stability in patient conditions, particularly through interval changes from prior imaging results.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5874292071197411,0.5879396984924623,0.5794392523364486,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+4559,latent_4559,11957,0.023914,0.014837936,9.2333145,Chronological comparisons and changes in imaging findings or interventions.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe changes or stability in imaging findings over time and involve specific interventions or follow-ups like removal of chest tubes, changes in scavenging radiopacity, or evaluation for medical equipment positioning, all necessitating meticulous chronological description within the reports.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.326797385620915,0.8771929824561403,57.0,143.0
+4560,latent_4560,3050,0.0061,0.008649711,4.1339498,"Focus on change descriptions of lung and pleural opacities, heart size, and mediastinal contours in multiple views.","These examples focus on describing and comparing multiple views of the chest, highlighting changes in lung opacities, heart size, and pleural effusions. Frequently, descriptions include observations of bony structures and the mediastinal silhouette contours in comparison to previous imaging. However, activation levels are non-uniform, indicating a pattern related to detailed descriptions of lungs, pleural space, and cardiac silhouette in cases of potential deterioration or respiratory distress.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4561,latent_4561,8704,0.017408,0.01512685,5.079683,Direct comparison of current and previous imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels include descriptions of the current radiology findings in direct comparison to previous imaging studies, specified by phrases like 'As compared to' or explicitly detailing changes or status of previous observations. All examples highlight changes (or stability) between current and past images, essential for tracking disease progression or response to treatment.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4562,latent_4562,2857,0.005714,0.008584626,6.6199903,Technical setup for comparative analysis with prior images.,"The descriptions in examples with high activation commonly focus on technical aspects and initial setup involving the image capture, such as the specific type of images provided (frontal and lateral), instructions for providing a comparative analysis with prior images, and requesting assistant interpretation of findings. These elements suggest an evaluative setup purpose before diving into the specific radiological findings.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4563,latent_4563,4925,0.00985,0.008217613,4.357833,Given current and prior images for structured report comparison.,"The examples with higher activation all specify the use of current and prior images for comparison, along with placeholders suggesting a template for structured radiological reporting. The presence of both current and prior image references highlights the comparative nature of the task.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5282462554546526,0.6,0.5561797752808989,0.99,100.0,100.0
+4564,latent_4564,8428,0.016856,0.01645281,3.5176911,Explicit requests for comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include explicit instructions or instances where a comparison of current radiological findings with previous images is required, emphasizing the comparison process or providing interpretations based on such comparisons.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4565,latent_4565,14474,0.028948,0.05020072,5.453374,Description of catheter and tube placements.,"The pattern in these examples involves listing various catheter and tube positions, such as endotracheal, nasogastric, and PICC lines. These reports focus on confirming proper placement or changes in placement over imaging studies, indicating they are tracking the position of these medical devices amidst other findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5892857142857143,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4566,latent_4566,5496,0.010992,0.015294574,7.75415,Atelectasis indicated by linear or patchy opacities in lung bases.,"The consistent pattern among these examples is the observation and description of atelectasis, which appears as linear or patchy opacities, often transient and usually seen at the lung bases. This characteristic finding is likely what leads to higher activation levels in these examples.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.7131041808938463,0.7135678391959799,0.7362637362637363,0.67,100.0,99.0
+4567,latent_4567,3814,0.007628,0.0088376785,6.440653,"Lung volume abnormalities, such as hypoinflation or hyperinflation, emphasized in reports.","These examples frequently observe changes in lung volumes, often specifying the lungs as hyperinflated or hypoinflated (low lung volumes). This description is a prominent feature across many of the examples, and is emphasized in the contexts of various pulmonary and thoracic evaluations.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.6265060240963856,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4568,latent_4568,31606,0.063212,0.0324668,3.8595514,Stable cardiac or mediastinal silhouette with no acute changes.,"The activation is higher when the reports indicate a presumed normal finding in cardiac or mediastinal silhouette, or relate to chronic conditions without immediate pathological changes, especially in comparison to previous images, even if some abnormalities are noted.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4569,latent_4569,6921,0.013842,0.01053897,4.787815,Clear lungs and normal cardiac/mediastinal silhouettes in chest radiographs.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels involve descriptions of chest radiographs with clear lungs and unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes. This pattern matches routine findings in chest radiographs when no acute pathology is detected, as opposed to normal heart size only mentioned in examples with low activation levels.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7536140791954746,0.755,0.8,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4570,latent_4570,3857,0.007714,0.007335865,4.6430483,Detailed comparison analysis of current vs prior frontal chest images.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on providing detailed descriptions and comparisons to previous frontal images, emphasizing the need for clear documentation of changes or stability over time in radiological findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4444444444444444,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4571,latent_4571,10256,0.020512,0.019901289,5.4102726,Explicit interval comparison between current and prior imaging.,"The highly representative examples consistently involve explicit comparisons of current and prior imaging results. These examples specifically include mentions of intervals or changes detected over time between the imaging examinations, often highlighting stability or changes in findings related to various conditions, such as effusions, opacities, or other pulmonary signs.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4906100311731759,0.4924623115577889,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,99.0
+4572,latent_4572,15190,0.03038,0.014674957,5.2179933,New findings or changes compared to prior radiographic results.,"The examples demonstrate activation based on findings that involve new developments or changes observed in the current imaging compared to prior studies, particularly describing newly appeared or altered opacities, masses, or pulmonary conditions. These cases describe comparisons that highlight changes or stability, indicating conditions that may warrant further clinical attention.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5776581142434801,0.6,0.5285714285714286,0.4404761904761904,84.0,116.0
+4573,latent_4573,4509,0.009018,0.01424381,10.163351,"Requests for findings in the context of prior image comparison, often with 'prior report' silence or in contrast to earlier findings.",The examples that have higher activation levels involve a description that emphasizes images described in the context of previous findings or reports for reference.,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4574,latent_4574,9479,0.018958,0.012546061,4.0457873,Emphasis on comparison with previous imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels explicitly incorporate direct comparisons to previous imaging, despite the distraction of other parts of the text or detailed findings. This pattern shows essential continuity with prior observations as a major component, which drives the activation regardless of specific disease findings.
+
+",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.465648854961832,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4575,latent_4575,55436,0.110872,0.07627917,6.3561378,Description of interval changes between radiographic images.,"This pattern involves identifying phrases that describe interval changes in findings between images, such as ""new"", ""improved"", ""unchanged"", or ""stable"". Examples with positive activations often emphasize changes detected when comparing current images to prior ones, highlighting dynamic processes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4576,latent_4576,14273,0.028546,0.017800298,7.0728073,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation consistently describe stability or lack of significant change in comparison to prior radiographs. These reports often mention phrases like 'no change', 'stable', or 'unchanged', indicating a consistency with prior findings rather than the development of new findings. This pattern of emphasizing the absence of change likely triggers higher activation.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.4563106796116505,0.5662650602409639,83.0,117.0
+4577,latent_4577,21164,0.042328,0.023371221,6.510729,Comparative imaging review with focus on longitudinal changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include comparison between current and prior imaging studies, with particular emphasis on changes or stability in lung opacities, volumes, or presence of devices. This pattern reflects the model's focus on longitudinal assessment of patient data through comparative radiology reports.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.4496644295302013,0.8375,80.0,120.0
+4578,latent_4578,15305,0.03061,0.020675914,5.3466682,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding or basal opacities.,"Many examples describe low lung volumes paired with bronchovascular crowding or the presence of opacities, particularly at the lung bases. These are indicative of conditions or imaging positions where lung expansion is limited and structural crowding occurs as a result.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4579,latent_4579,7158,0.014316,0.0141626205,7.924862,Observation of notable changes or stability in pulmonary findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention specific descriptions of changes or stability in pulmonary findings such as effusions, opacities, or nodules when compared to prior exams. The pattern focuses on descriptions that assess distinct changes or lack thereof in specific regions or structures over time.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3708425019601892,0.371859296482412,0.358695652173913,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+4580,latent_4580,10487,0.020974,0.017240541,6.3346786,Comparison of current findings to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference findings in the radiology study in comparison to a prior image. They focus on reporting changes or stability using terms like 'compared to prior' and 'in comparison', highlighting significant or notable differences or stabilities from previous studies.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5749080882352942,0.63,0.5755813953488372,0.99,100.0,100.0
+4581,latent_4581,4884,0.009768,0.012649229,5.7847557,Change in positioning or status of medical devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples describe specific changes in placement or status of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or signs of interval change like improved or worsened pulmonary edema, in comparison to prior images. These changes in positioning or presentation suggest monitoring for device placement or clinical status that can impact patient management.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,100.0
+4582,latent_4582,10816,0.021632,0.013156495,3.6585472,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes in medical conditions.,"This pattern is about describing radiological findings in relation to a prior image by noting changes or stability in certain features over time, such as stability of existing conditions (like cardiomegaly), or noting interventions (like catheter placement) and their effects.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+4583,latent_4583,4846,0.009692,0.010999418,4.181293,Comparisons highlighting intervals or changes between current and prior images.,"The pattern involves making comparisons between current and prior radiographic images or exams, specifically highlighting intervals and changes over time, which is a key aspect of longitudinal radiology evaluation.",0.3662911973299958,0.3673469387755102,0.3703703703703703,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.3549838745968649,0.355,0.3535353535353535,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4584,latent_4584,13510,0.02702,0.019774942,7.307437,Subtle opacity or findings consistent with early pneumonia.,"Examples with high activation involve findings of early-stage pneumonia or potential pneumonia, usually highlighted by subtle opacities that could suggest early changes consistent with pneumonia. These findings often require close correlation with clinical presentation or follow-up imaging for confirmation.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5963408560719248,0.615,0.7017543859649122,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4585,latent_4585,3882,0.007764,0.01113159,5.781129,Detection of changes in pleural effusions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation often mention pleural effusions and compare the size or presence of these effusions to previous images, indicating that detecting changes in pleural effusions between imaging studies is the underlying pattern.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6796196775527077,0.69,0.796875,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4586,latent_4586,4185,0.00837,0.009391854,7.9073014,Description of device placement or changes between imaging studies.,"The samples consistently involve descriptions that highlight interval changes or the stability of medical devices, such as Dobbhoff tubes, central lines, or pacing devices, from one imaging study to another. These functional observations emphasize the clinical utility of tracking device positioning for patient management.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4501504305425874,0.47,0.4516129032258064,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4587,latent_4587,34808,0.069616,0.057945397,6.416253,Comparison of current with prior imaging studies.,"Highly representative samples consistently involve radiological comparisons to a ""prior"", noting changes or stability over time in specific pathologies or anatomical features. This temporal comparison with prior imaging is key to the activation pattern.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+4588,latent_4588,18049,0.036098,0.017860994,4.4603066,Explicit comparisons with prior radiological examination findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe an examination performed in specific comparison with prior imaging, particularly focusing on stability or changes in pathological findings, devices, or anatomical structures. This is a key aspect of radiology reporting, where identifying stable conditions or notable changes over time is essential.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4589,latent_4589,3968,0.007936,0.006311363,3.8685522,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on changes in cardiomegaly or pulmonary vascular congestion.,"The activation levels are highest in examples where clear direct comparisons are made with previous studies, particularly highlighting changes in cardiomegaly, pulmonary vascular congestion, atelectasis, or opacities. This repetitive pattern emphasizes changes in vascular conditions and lung volumes compared to previous imaging.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4590,latent_4590,4935,0.00987,0.0077528995,6.3669853,Stability of findings over time in comparison to prior imaging.,"Reports exhibiting high activation all present findings that are consistent or unchanged from prior imaging without evidence of new or acute pathology, emphasizing the stability of the findings. They include terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'again noted', and similar phrases to highlight continuity in diagnoses, regardless of the other clinical presentations or findings.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4591,latent_4591,31544,0.063088,0.04076337,3.369469,Comparison of imaging results over time for change or stability.,"The pattern identified involves direct comparisons of current imaging findings with previous radiographs, where the analysis focuses on any changes or stability in pathological findings over time. Activation levels are higher when reports explicitly describe interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4592,latent_4592,4283,0.008566,0.018088432,8.030883,Description confirming unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels repeatedly involve descriptions of the heart, mediastinal, and lung observations that confirm the absence of new findings despite having prior imaging for comparison. This corroborates the pattern where similar or unchanged findings from prior comparisons are typical, with language indicating things like 'no new', 'unchanged', or referencing 'comparison' of stable findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4593,latent_4593,10741,0.021482,0.02905646,5.429862,Lack of explicit prior comparison or reference information in the prompt.,"The examples with high activation levels typically do not provide prior comparison information within the prompt even if there's a contextual inclusion of an image for comparison, indicating the completion focuses on generating descriptions without actual historical data to reference. High activation occurs when contexts appear to lack available comparison, possibly steering the system to explore deferring to general findings rather than specific prior comparisons.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5914793319309628,0.592964824120603,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,99.0
+4594,latent_4594,9621,0.019242,0.012138072,3.7853737,Explicit comparison of cardiac size or pleural effusions with prior imaging.,"Reports with low activation levels do not provide prior imaging for radiological comparison or use vague terms for such comparisons. Those with higher activation focus on analyzing specific findings or changes between current and prior imaging, usually involving cardiac measures or pleural conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.614448051948052,0.62,0.6578947368421053,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4595,latent_4595,4111,0.008222,0.012514254,4.183977,Stable or unchanged conditions compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels align with descriptions that compare current and prior imaging, identifying any changes or lack thereof in specific conditions such as edema, pleural effusion, opacities, or markings that have persisted, improved, or worsened. The reports focus on interpreting the clinical significance of changes over time rather than new isolated findings, often indicating stable or slightly changed conditions of known abnormalities.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4596,latent_4596,5984,0.011968,0.0108379815,4.4017725,Reports highlighting interval changes or stability in medical devices or tubal placements.,The examples with high activation levels frequently include both comparative analysis with prior imaging and either recent changes in tubal placements (such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) or mention of specific medical devices' positioning. This suggests that the focus is on reports that note interval changes or stability in medical apparatus placement compared to prior studies.,0.6198275862068966,0.6326530612244898,0.6875,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5874818568409259,0.595,0.6301369863013698,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4597,latent_4597,4848,0.009696,0.013217949,3.9804945,Direct comparison between current and prior images.,"These examples include specific references to comparison with previous imaging studies using language like 'given the current frontal image', 'current lateral image', and 'prior frontal image'. This linguistic pattern mirrors reports with explicit instructions to compare current with prior images and characterize changes, indicating that comparison is a central task despite varying contexts.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4598,latent_4598,4101,0.008202,0.0077309636,5.8337884,Typical pattern involves current frontal and lateral images with a prior frontal image for comparison.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently involve interpretations where both current frontal and lateral images are provided, along with prior frontal images for comparison. This suggests that the concurrent presence of multiple views (frontal and lateral) alongside a prior image is a key pattern in these activations.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4703754424950259,0.4824120603015075,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,99.0
+4599,latent_4599,10686,0.021372,0.0109847635,3.771762,Descriptions include comparisons with prior images.,"These examples consistently describe the findings in comparison to a prior study, regardless of the imaging modality or patient condition. This pattern is fundamental in monitoring the progression or improvement of a patient's condition over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4600,latent_4600,4512,0.009024,0.009622364,6.511392,Unremarkable lungs or cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Representations of clear lungs without focal abnormalities or cardiac issues appear to be associated with activation. Mentioning unremarkable findings in the lungs or mediastinum commonly occurs in this context, even when assessed against prior imaging for normalcy.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5555555555555556,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4601,latent_4601,8823,0.017646,0.011155082,2.8448646,Specific findings compared against prior imaging results.,"The highly activated examples involve radiological findings that are specifically compared to prior imaging studies, including explicit changes or stability over time. This comparison element is a fundamental part of evaluating progression or resolution of conditions, and employs phrases like 'compared to','unchanged','interval','as previously noted'.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.504097623635196,0.5125628140703518,0.512,0.64,100.0,99.0
+4602,latent_4602,4383,0.008766,0.010924618,6.314672,Stable or minor changes in cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes despite other findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe cardiac or mediastinal silhouettes as stable in comparison to previous radiographs or with minor changes like 'mild cardiomegaly'. The descriptions highlight certain stable findings of cardiomediastinal contours or silhouettes despite other changes in pulmonary regions, indicating a focus on stability or minor variation in cardiomediastinal aspects across imaging.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5710848415106182,0.59,0.5633802816901409,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4603,latent_4603,6131,0.012262,0.009469715,4.676069,Comparison to prior imaging findings to assess change or stability.,"All examples with higher activation levels include detailed comparisons of the current imaging findings to prior studies, emphasizing the temporal changes or stability in the observed radiological features. This suggests a focus on tracking the progression, regression, or stability of conditions over time, particularly useful in longitudinal studies or follow-up assessments, which fits the pattern of interest.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4604,latent_4604,24691,0.049382,0.028192183,4.684679,Explicit comparison of current versus prior imaging findings.,"This set of examples indicates a pattern where prior reports are compared or described alongside current imaging findings, with an emphasis on identifying any changes or new developments based on past observations. High activation examples often reference explicit comparisons, showing relevance and change over time, while lower activations lack significant comparative descriptions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4605,latent_4605,195660,0.39132,0.30374825,4.670938,Interval change or placement of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"These examples mentioning explicit references to prior imaging studies describe interval changes over time, particularly placement of medical devices such as chest tubes or PICC lines and assessment of their current position compared to prior images. This linguistic pattern is consistent with tracking changes in medical interventions, using terms like 'interval placement', 'in unchanged position', and 'still present',' compared to prior exams.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6355906468266019,0.64,0.6794871794871795,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4606,latent_4606,4451,0.008902,0.012358313,6.464332,Reports emphasizing interval changes from prior imaging.,"The highlighted pattern in activations indicates reports where findings are directly compared to prior imaging studies, noting changes, stability, or improvements. These examples emphasize differences that denote progression, lack of change, or regressions specific to clinical queries or radiographic signs, e.g., opacities, effusions, tube placements, or device positions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4607,latent_4607,5064,0.010128,0.011555796,4.8566756,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in imaging comparisons.,"Activate examples consistently mention the cardiomediastinal silhouette, hilar contours, or heart size being within normal limits or unchanged in comparison to previous images, in scenarios where various pulmonary or pleural abnormalities might exist. The pattern indicates that despite other findings, the stability or normativity of the cardiomediastinal silhouette is a highlight.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7532169927727834,0.755,0.717948717948718,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4608,latent_4608,4459,0.008918,0.0117530525,5.571507,Reports emphasize comparison with prior imaging for stability or change.,"These examples focus on providing detailed comparisons with prior imaging, particularly looking for changes such as stability, resolution, or progression of identified features. This comparison is a key aspect of the reports and is used for evaluating the progression or stability of clinical conditions based on imaging findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4609,latent_4609,5839,0.011678,0.009614626,4.2152514,Bibasilar opacities often indicating atelectasis or stable findings excluding acute processes.,"High activation examples repeatedly note findings consistent with atelectasis or consolidation based on multiple views, contrasting with stable cardiac silhouettes or absence of acute findings like pneumothorax or pleural effusion. Terms like 'no focal consolidation', 'stable cardiomediastinal silhouette', and 'bibasilar atelectasis' frequently appear in high activation cases.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6829046209879354,0.6834170854271356,0.6956521739130435,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+4610,latent_4610,19299,0.038598,0.020291802,2.913875,Focus on comparison to prior imaging to assess interval changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation illustrate scenarios where current imaging is compared to prior imaging to assess for changes, and a particular focus on interval changes or stability is evident. These examples consistently include language that references the stability or change of certain findings across different times of imaging, highlighting a linguistic pattern focused on 'comparison to prior images'.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4343434343434343,0.44,0.45,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4611,latent_4611,10534,0.021068,0.010154042,5.528713,Examples requesting findings comparison with prior images show high activation.,The examples with high activation levels consistently include instructions to provide findings in comparison to prior images. This distinguishes them from other examples that either do not request such a description or lack a prior comparison.,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3207180980106744,0.335,0.2758620689655172,0.8727272727272727,55.0,145.0
+4612,latent_4612,9452,0.018904,0.018021373,3.8827999,Assessment using current images and comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples consistently include both current frontal/lateral images and prior frontal images, enabling direct comparison between multiple image sets to assess interval changes or stability in patient conditions. This format suggests interpretations are based on sequential or serial radiologic evidence.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714285,0.48,0.4875,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4613,latent_4613,25318,0.050636,0.05196107,4.6630507,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve comparisons of current imaging findings to prior studies, either noting changes or stability in conditions, often with explicit references to previous work such as ""compared to prior"", ""interval"", and ""unchanged"".",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.586606035551881,0.6,0.5735294117647058,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4614,latent_4614,10569,0.021138,0.010768499,5.662957,Use of terms indicating stability or unchanged condition in comparison reports.,"Examples with activation of 2.0 or higher often feature references to an unchanged or stable condition upon comparison with previous radiographs. Phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or comparisons made to prior images are indicative of reports describing findings in relation to previous studies, highlighting unchanged or stable conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5012273584661895,0.5125628140703518,0.4285714285714285,0.4235294117647059,85.0,114.0
+4615,latent_4615,3930,0.00786,0.009750226,5.084412,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4616,latent_4616,18261,0.036522,0.019843519,5.312671,Instruction to provide a detailed descriptive comparison of images.,"These examples focus on reports that include the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study' or similar instructions. This is a pattern indicating that a detailed, interpretative description of the imaging findings is required, often in an educational or documentation context.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.4496124031007752,0.6823529411764706,85.0,115.0
+4617,latent_4617,6142,0.012284,0.020487059,4.99815,Focus on comparison to prior images to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels (
+5.0 or above) consistently emphasize the description of current findings in relation to prior images. This aligns with the high activation seen in examples specifically requiring comparison and interpretation of new images concerning previous studies.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4618,latent_4618,3568,0.007136,0.008535,3.6568363,Presence of 'Prior Report' content indicating reference to existing documentation.,"The samples with high activation explicitly mention a 'Prior Report', indicating that there is an existing record or documentation to be referred for evaluating interval changes. This seems to denote that the pattern being identified is the inclusion of content about prior documentation or existing records in the comparison process.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5251580422780973,0.585,0.5497076023391813,0.94,100.0,100.0
+4619,latent_4619,5405,0.01081,0.011687701,5.202914,Comparative analysis of current radiological findings with prior images.,"Most examples with the highest activation involve providing a description of findings in a radiology study while specifying whether there was a comparison with a prior study or not. They follow a structured format and include explicit requests to provide descriptions relative to past examinations, even if the comparison states ""None"".",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4620,latent_4620,2734,0.005468,0.011660859,10.449708,Concise description of specific radiological findings or conditions.,This pattern captures reports that include brief findings along with a description of specific results or underlying conditions. These results often suggest a rapid synthesis of critical information from the report.,0.5045955882352942,0.5510204081632653,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.560056186949304,0.5606060606060606,0.5566037735849056,0.5959595959595959,99.0,99.0
+4621,latent_4621,7663,0.015326,0.02097106,6.0826035,Comparison of current imaging with prior imaging to assess for interval changes.,"Reports with high activation levels contain requests for the assistant to provide descriptions or findings based on comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability of observations over time. These are framed within the context of observing interval changes.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4622,latent_4622,11351,0.022702,0.02918884,10.412938,Inclusion of comparison with prior imaging findings across multiple views.,"Examples with high activation discuss the presence of comparison between imaging studies. Although the overall context varies, examples frequently mention findings in relation to previous reports, procedures, or state of particular structures in past imaging studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4736842105263157,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4623,latent_4623,7509,0.015018,0.014052537,3.5013146,Explicit emphasis on directive to compare current and prior findings.,"These examples emphasize the importance of comparing current radiologic findings with prior exams, but the high activation samples differ by closely following a specific format that requests detailed comparison explicitly, even when a prior image is mentioned to not be available, prompting a systematic comparison directive.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4624,latent_4624,2869,0.005738,0.007671192,3.9198937,Detailed description of radiology findings with comparison statements.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on providing detailed descriptions of findings from radiological studies and carefully note comparisons to previous images across various conditions, which suggests comprehensive documentation of any changes or stabilities in these imaging results.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4466722787683987,0.4522613065326633,0.4583333333333333,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+4625,latent_4625,4425,0.00885,0.011416963,4.59486,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations frequently include some form of explicit comparison against prior images, often using phrases like 'in comparison with' or 'as compared to'. These examples involve noting changes (or lack thereof) in radiographic findings against previous studies.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4715015321756894,0.4773869346733668,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,99.0
+4626,latent_4626,4833,0.009666,0.010292486,5.733203,Focus on positioning or changes of medical devices in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on changes involving lines, tubes, and devices such as endotracheal tubes, jugular catheters, and chest tubes, either remaining stably positioned, being newly placed, removed, or in terms of placement evaluations. This pattern emphasizes the identification and management of medical devices within chest imaging findings.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6447779862414009,0.645,0.6526315789473685,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4627,latent_4627,20934,0.041868,0.022942647,3.1345482,Significant changes in pathologies or medical devices compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activations generally involve comparison with prior studies, revealing changes in medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) or pathologies (e.g., pneumothorax, pneumonia), noted specifically by terms like 'new', 'changed', or particular measurements indicating change or comparison.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5996396757081373,0.6,0.6063829787234043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4628,latent_4628,4337,0.008674,0.011676011,4.688954,Incomplete or corrupted prompts with missing or mangled content.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently have incomplete or corrupt prompts, indicated by missing or mangled words, placeholders, or symbols, primarily affecting the PRIOR_REPORT or FINDINGS sections. This pattern highlights possible emphasis on the challenges of processing incomplete or irregular input.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3443491506341269,0.505,0.5025125628140703,1.0,100.0,100.0
+4629,latent_4629,1665,0.00333,0.0026130907,4.563808,Emphasis on stability or incremental changes in findings with prior comparison.,"Examples that exhibit the pattern frequently mention both the stability or slight variation in pathological findings and the comparison to prior images, indicating an intention to observe for changes over time rather than diagnose new conditions. Common elements include references to unchanged conditions, stability or consistent findings, and phrases such as 'unchanged', 'slightly improved', or 'minimally increased'. In contrast, low activation ones often focus on acute abnormalities or lack comparison.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4630,latent_4630,9531,0.019062,0.012123867,3.633537,Notable interval changes identified through comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples describe substantial changes or abnormalities identified through comparisons with prior imaging, often involving changes in tubes or devices in the chest region, or noticeable changes in pleural effusions or pneumothoraces. The key pattern revolves around identifying and reporting notable changes detected through direct comparison with past images.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4631,latent_4631,5424,0.010848,0.010517733,6.4296346,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, hilar contours or lung clarity.","The pattern is seen in examples where diagnostic descriptions include references to chest structures that are within normal limits, including phrases like ""the cardiac silhouette is normal,"" ""lungs clear without consolidation,"" or ""hilar contours unremarkable,"" highlighting a consistent observation of normalcy in certain thoracic findings throughout the examples with high activations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4632,latent_4632,123282,0.246564,0.15625544,3.1711583,Descriptions of interval anatomical changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with a higher activation score describe changes or significant findings in the anatomical location that were present or modified compared to prior imaging, implying notable conditions like surgeries, interventions, or lesions. Characterizations of change or stability in anatomical structures compared to prior images are indicative of the pattern.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4633,latent_4633,18093,0.036186,0.016380727,2.374782,Evaluation of interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention focal changes or interval changes since prior imaging, either through identification of new findings, resolution, or stabilization of findings over time, despite the absence or presence of acute processes.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4651162790697674,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4634,latent_4634,30853,0.061706,0.03834288,6.465344,Tube or line position changes compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern is identifying when there are mentions of different interventional lines like PICC, ETT, or feeding tubes, and their positions being unchanged or adjusted compared to prior studies. These examples primarily focus on evaluating positions of these tubes and lines in the context of a pattern consistent with interval imaging or follow-ups.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.7290430314707772,0.7336683417085427,0.821917808219178,0.6,100.0,99.0
+4635,latent_4635,19652,0.039304,0.018320804,3.256278,Focus on device placement or anatomical change relative to prior images.,"Many of the examples involve descriptions that include a comparison with prior images, but the elevated activations often mention specific references to changed positions or states of monitoring/supporting devices and alterations in conditions like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or device placements. This indicates a pattern focusing on the detection of device changes or specific anatomical or pathological changes in relation to prior images.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4636,latent_4636,3935,0.00787,0.011146469,3.9317245,Explicit comparative analysis of findings with prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with statements explicitly comparing findings with prior studies or changes since previous imaging, a common element in certain radiology reports focused on assessing changes over time. The format includes detailed comparative language.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4878048780487805,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4637,latent_4637,113279,0.226558,0.14191404,4.9803543,Mentions of pulmonary vascular congestion or pulmonary edema.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe changes or conditions related to pulmonary vascular congestion or edema. This pattern could pertain to the model's detection of common descriptive terms like 'vascular congestion', 'edema', and associated heart or lung pathology in the context of radiological evaluation.",0.5647840531561462,0.84,1.0,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6829439434496738,0.695,0.819672131147541,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4638,latent_4638,85526,0.171052,0.07912923,1.7725631,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding or atelectasis.,"These examples focus on radiological findings that suggest or confirm conditions associated with low lung volumes or reduced aeration, such as atelectasis or low lung volumes, combined often with bronchovascular crowding or pleural effusions. Consistent references to low lung volumes are a key feature in these descriptions, highlighting their significance in diagnosis.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5481940144478844,0.5577889447236181,0.5774647887323944,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+4639,latent_4639,5027,0.010054,0.0080590565,6.677718,"Dependency on comparison, even if prior data is unavailable or unclear.","The samples with higher activation levels often have detailed comparative descriptions, even when comparison was stated as not available. This emphasizes the focus on 'comparison' despite prior evaluations not being available or unclear, suggesting a need to infer changes without explicit comparative data.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.4782608695652174,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4018069131386636,0.515,0.5080213903743316,0.95,100.0,100.0
+4640,latent_4640,22888,0.045776,0.038845263,5.6571755,Focus on comparison and interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on comparing the current and prior imaging findings to assess changes, explicitly noting stability or changes in findings such as positioning of medical devices, lung conditions, or pleural effusions. They reference direct comparisons and interval changes, suggesting the model is responding to its task of evaluating and describing changes over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+4641,latent_4641,6608,0.013216,0.014386508,3.8033586,Comparison of current images to prior images to assess for changes.,The examples with high activation levels generally contain interpretations of image findings that are compared explicitly with previous imaging studies. These comparisons appear to look for significant changes or confirm stability between the studies. The recurring theme is comparing current findings to previous ones to ascertain consistency or change in medical conditions.,0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4202014037229173,0.43,0.4444444444444444,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4642,latent_4642,10080,0.02016,0.008912141,3.0865605,Detailed findings provided for chest imaging with reference to prior studies.,"The pattern focuses on evaluating changes by comparing current chest imaging findings with previous studies. However, the activation is not tightly linked to a specific comparison to prior images, but rather to acknowledgment of detailed imaging techniques and providing a clear description of findings and comparisons stated within the reports.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4882755811289049,0.4924623115577889,0.4957264957264957,0.58,100.0,99.0
+4643,latent_4643,4116,0.008232,0.011286476,6.9991164,Comparison to prior images with emphasis on changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels contain explicit references to comparisons with prior studies, as well as clear descriptions of differences or stabilities noted over time. This is consistent with reports where interval changes in pathological findings or conditions are enhanced to aid in medical decision-making.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4394955459913923,0.44,0.4361702127659574,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4644,latent_4644,9977,0.019954,0.012294342,5.006793,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies indicated.,"The highly activated examples consistently include explicit references to prior imaging studies for comparison. These examples emphasize the comparison between the current and prior images, indicating a pattern of evaluating changes in the condition over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.503946821769838,0.5175879396984925,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,99.0
+4645,latent_4645,23522,0.047044,0.058269057,6.5648875,Comparison of current and prior radiological studies for interval changes.,"The examples describe a pattern focusing on the comparison of current and prior radiological studies. The methodology involves identifying changes, or lack thereof, across various patient conditions and radiology techniques which are directly compared against previous studies' findings. This pattern is evident in cases where details like 'interchange', 'stable', or 'no acute change' are emphasized, often indicating developments or confirming stability in patient conditions in follow-ups.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4646,latent_4646,19549,0.039098,0.027644165,5.2570996,Stable findings or unchanged conditions in comparison with prior imaging.,The examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of findings that include comparisons to prior imaging studies and often mention stable findings or unchanged conditions over time. This focuses on changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging as a core component of the report.,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5747863247863247,0.5778894472361809,0.5641025641025641,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+4647,latent_4647,3213,0.006426,0.008836281,5.738261,Focus on pleural effusion or pulmonary and cardiac evaluations.,"Despite various techniques and indications, the consistent pattern is the recurrence of pleural effusions or processes typically related to the lungs and cardiac silhouette, such as heart or pulmonary evaluations, appearing in the findings, impression, and history sections.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4648,latent_4648,6292,0.012584,0.012264842,5.695214,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples report specific changes in findings when comparing current and prior imaging, often using terms like 'interval removal', 'unchanged', or 'better visualized'. This includes noting any change or stability in observed pathologies, contrast with previously noted findings, and typically discusses any interval changes in size or appearance compared to the previous exams.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5123657951244158,0.5125628140703518,0.5145631067961165,0.53,100.0,99.0
+4649,latent_4649,25595,0.05119,0.02827089,3.6604576,References to stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples often contain references to unchanged findings, suggesting stability or resolution over time, with a direct comparison to prior images to highlight these stable features. This stability is indicated in descriptions like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'stable', and 'persisting', particularly when findings have remained unchanged despite previous pathologies.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5740061162079511,0.5778894472361809,0.6,0.48,100.0,99.0
+4650,latent_4650,4472,0.008944,0.016990077,8.0787945,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior imaging.,Highly activated examples consistently incorporate elements of both frontal and lateral imaging perspectives while making comparisons to prior images. This suggests a pattern focusing on reports where findings span multiple imaging views and are evaluated against prior data.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.5158730158730159,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4651,latent_4651,5157,0.010314,0.017193355,5.5325713,Reports emphasize stability or unchanged findings since prior studies.,"Reports with high activation levels often contain mentions of stable appearance or no significant change when compared with prior studies, using specific comparisons between successive imaging to highlight stability or minor changes while ruling out acute processes.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.3939393939393939,0.26,100.0,100.0
+4652,latent_4652,4951,0.009902,0.009746606,6.043051,Mention of PICC line in imaging comparison.,"Highly activated examples include references to specific long lines, such as PICC lines, highlighted in context as 'seen', placement or evaluation for their positioning, or changes thereof. This context suggests the importance of line placement or status updates in comparison assessments.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6017258546299369,0.64,0.868421052631579,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4653,latent_4653,39339,0.078678,0.03291224,3.708563,Interval changes in imaging findings relative to prior studies.,"Radiology examples describe changes or findings based on comparisons with prior imaging studies. Descriptions of differences or stability in conditions like opacities, line placements, or cardiomediastinal contours relative to a prior state are the focus, specifically interval changes or consistency between images.",0.4452830188679245,0.4489795918367347,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.6049901247531189,0.605,0.6039603960396039,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4654,latent_4654,2887,0.005774,0.008802636,5.3419504,Compared assessment finds lungs are clear without consolidation.,"The pattern present in the examples with higher activation levels involves descriptions of findings that align with prior imaging comparisons but highlight clear lungs without pleural or pulmonary issues. Phrases indicate ongoing clear lung status without new or worsening findings like 'lungs remain clear', 'the lungs are clear', or 'symmetrically well-expanded lungs' with various contexts revealed through the retrospective comparison to prior data.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.515625,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4655,latent_4655,18767,0.037534,0.02220983,3.9477348,Mentions of tube placement and comparison to prior imaging.,"Activation is higher when there is explicit mention of tube placements (e.g., PICC line, NG tube) and their positions changing or remaining stable compared to previous imaging.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5980303487086724,0.6,0.6162790697674418,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4656,latent_4656,3713,0.007426,0.010777938,5.519326,Frequent comparison with prior imaging highlights changes or stability.,"The pattern involves a specific focus on comparison with prior radiological exams, often with explicit reference to changes or status quo in medical device placements, pulmonary processes, or the presence of pneumothorax or effusions. The assistant prompts highlight these comparisons prominently, indicating their importance in the review process.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5670995670995671,0.59,0.5616438356164384,0.82,100.0,100.0
+4657,latent_4657,10077,0.020154,0.019093914,4.2815833,Frequent identification and comparison of intrathoracic tubes or devices.,"Highly activated examples emphasize the identification, positioning, and comparison of various tubes, catheters, or surgical devices within the chest (like endotracheal, nasogastric, PICC lines, etc.), often requiring careful attention in radiology for accurate interpretation. They often exist alongside unchanged cardiac or mediastinal structures in comparative imaging.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4962025316455696,0.5175879396984925,0.5254237288135594,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+4658,latent_4658,2157,0.004314,0.0059276624,6.1468663,"Evaluation of changes in lung findings compared to prior image, focusing on opacities, atelectasis, or effusions.","These examples describe stable findings and changes in lung volumes or opacities, emphasizing assessment of pulmonary interventions or pathologies in comparison to a prior image. Particularly, examples with high activation levels describe the absence or presence of pleural effusion, atelectasis, or opacities.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.4819277108433735,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4659,latent_4659,3726,0.007452,0.0058545414,5.339494,Descriptive comparisons between current and prior radiographs noting interval changes.,"Examples with activations demonstrate a repeated pattern of providing detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging, specifically noting interval changes or stable findings. These include information about anatomical structures, devices, or lesions based on previous examinations and provide explicit assessments of changes.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4476190476190476,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4660,latent_4660,10237,0.020474,0.01336009,4.6737776,Comparison of current to prior imaging focusing on lung conditions or medical devices.,"High activation is present in examples discussing changes, stability, or comparison regarding lung conditions and devices placement between current and prior images. This is a common rationale in radiology where follow-up changes or stability are significant findings.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4661,latent_4661,2612,0.005224,0.0066120443,7.301721,Mention of prior medical history or clinical indications.,"The pattern involves references to prior medical history or specific indications for the imaging procedure, indicating a clinical context for undertaking the study, often describing a patient's medical issues or symptoms. This provides a narrative for interpreting changes or findings in the current scans relative to patient history.",0.4715686274509804,0.5510204081632653,0.5227272727272727,0.9583333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4038559107052258,0.53,0.515625,0.99,100.0,100.0
+4662,latent_4662,5243,0.010486,0.008697031,6.8824396,Explicit comparison of current findings to prior imaging results.,"The commonality among these highly activated examples is they each compare findings in the current study to an explicit prior imaging study, with consistent focus on either unchanged or specific changes in findings. References to consistency or variability compared to previous images, explicit mentions like 'compared to', or stating direct changes, signal this pattern.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4663,latent_4663,4877,0.009754,0.016435051,5.898478,Inconclusive or intermediate findings requiring further observation or imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often explicitly mention providing descriptions of findings from radiographic images rather than concluding observations, or they reference uncertainties and recommendations for further imaging or stabilization of findings without definitive conclusions, indicating focus is more on consolidation of prior information or ongoing evaluations.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3997496871088861,0.4494949494949495,0.3720930232558139,0.1632653061224489,98.0,100.0
+4664,latent_4664,4676,0.009352,0.008980965,3.5157423,Mentions of image view orientation without prior study comparison.,"These examples involve both the mention of specific views of images (frontal or lateral) and the lack of specific comparison to prior reports within the context of the example, often referred to directly ('compared to the prior study'). The pattern suggests that the indication of an image perspective in absence of prior study analysis or notation indicates higher activation.",0.4166666666666666,0.4285714285714285,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,24.0,0.4915903768362785,0.5175879396984925,0.5370370370370371,0.29,100.0,99.0
+4665,latent_4665,14315,0.02863,0.015016367,4.8759775,Presence of explicit changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"While the dataset contains many consistent descriptions and comparisons of current images to previous ones, only instances that prioritize explicit inter-image changes and developments since the prior exam show higher activations. The presence of changes or evaluations of alterations is more significant than status quo imaging for eliciting higher activations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5851063829787234,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4666,latent_4666,4902,0.009804,0.014326751,4.6348796,Radiology study findings described in comparison to a prior image.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological studies that have images compared between different time points, specifically a recent image compared against a prior one. This aspect is central to the activation, as these cases hinge on the identification or monitoring of interval changes.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4667,latent_4667,3813,0.007626,0.0063577145,4.9118085,Direct comparison of current findings with prior frontal images.,The samples with high activation levels consistently present scenarios where direct comparison with prior frontal images is explicitly stated. The prompt specifically asks for a comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4668,latent_4668,7277,0.014554,0.012892867,4.2399845,References to comparison with prior frontal image findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings in relation to previous imaging studies or explicitly mention comparison or changes over time. The activation pattern suggests that these are consistently associated with reports that note changes, similarities, or stabilities from prior examinations, often using explicit language linking the current study to a prior one.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4895104895104895,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4669,latent_4669,4960,0.00992,0.016097423,5.0523186,Clear impressions with specific comparisons to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention or imply a definitive impression or conclusion regarding the findings in the context of the prior report. These often include terms like 'increased', 'decreased', 'unchanged', or specific comparisons regarding findings like consolidation, pleural effusion, or device placement. This clarity and specificity in interpreting findings relative to prior imaging likely contribute to higher activation levels.",0.4863731656184486,0.4897959183673469,0.4761904761904761,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4302325581395348,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4670,latent_4670,2466,0.004932,0.007202844,5.3730364,Emphasis on stability or change over time in comparison with previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels specifically involved descriptions comparing current images to prior ones, with emphasis on identifying stability or changes (e.g., stability of nodules, effusions, etc.). Lower activation levels occurred when comparisons were explicit but did not focus on sustained findings across studies as much as new findings or non-comparable contexts.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4671,latent_4671,17712,0.035424,0.025627317,4.896536,Emphasis on unchanged or persistent findings compared to prior imaging.,"The key element in high activation examples is the consistency of findings over time or the unchanged status of certain features compared to prior imaging. The language often highlights stability with terms like 'persistent', 'unchanged', and 'stable', which are used to underline ongoing issues or unchanged anatomical features, potentially affecting clinical decision-making and patient monitoring.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5604395604395604,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4672,latent_4672,13013,0.026026,0.015888393,7.2771163,Focus on changes or interval changes observed in findings.,"Examples show high activation levels when there is an observed change or interval change present in the findings and described in relation to prior studies, indicating the pattern focuses on noting changes over time, especially mentions of 'little overall change', 'essentially unchanged', or 'negligible interval change'.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.4233576642335766,0.7341772151898734,79.0,121.0
+4673,latent_4673,10680,0.02136,0.012595678,3.7247376,Descriptions focused on interval change comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples involve providing a description of the findings in the current radiology study in the context of comparisons to prior images or evaluations for interval change, even when new imagery does not provide significant evidence of acute findings or notable changes.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5880959736381424,0.6,0.5746268656716418,0.77,100.0,100.0
+4674,latent_4674,19323,0.038646,0.020087989,4.632035,Change or improvement in lung conditions compared to prior images.,"Higher activations are associated with reports describing definite changes or interval improvements in specific lung conditions, often involving the pleura or pleural effusions. The language focuses on changes observed when comparing current and prior images, highlighting decreases or improvements in opacities, consolidations, or effusions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5882352941176471,0.3,100.0,100.0
+4675,latent_4675,2938,0.005876,0.012308995,8.126352,Focus on new changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe explicit changes or stability of radiological findings when compared with prior imaging studies. This indicates that the model activates on reports detailing interval changes, especially when highlighted or emphasized directly in the report.",0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.52,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5738636363636364,0.58,0.5645161290322581,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4676,latent_4676,10445,0.02089,0.02307226,6.330193,Analyzing current and prior image findings for comparative radiology.,"The examples showing higher activation describe a task or scenario where the user is asked to provide a comparative analysis of current images with prior images, using radiological findings. These examples often contain structured prompts for comparison, indicating a pattern where the model is tasked with identifying changes or confirming stability in imaging studies over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4677,latent_4677,3063,0.006126,0.013076321,6.3366604,Current and prior images referenced with minimal additional context or description.,"Highly activated examples reference both current and prior images while simultaneously excluding explicit indications, supplementary history or description of findings. These examples provide minimal context or imaging details, focusing primarily on the structure and format of including image references.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4916115912557193,0.575,0.5414364640883977,0.98,100.0,100.0
+4678,latent_4678,3910,0.00782,0.009342738,4.6655416,"Description includes comparison to a prior image, emphasizing interval changes or stability.",This pattern focuses on interpreting changes in radiological findings over time by comparing current and previous images. Typical language includes phrases like 'compared to prior' and highlights updates or stability of observed conditions.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.4509803921568627,0.46,100.0,100.0
+4679,latent_4679,3731,0.007462,0.007741992,8.184201,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4680,latent_4680,13041,0.026082,0.025976734,5.7090454,"Comparison of current findings to prior imaging, highlighting stability or change.",Examples that have an activation level above 3 tend to feature statements noting the stability or changes in findings after reviewing current imaging alongside prior imaging studies. This pattern often involves consistent phrasing that describes stability or adjustments based on specific anatomical or pathological features over time.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4681,latent_4681,4318,0.008636,0.014984832,5.3729734,Comparison requested when prior images are unavailable.,"Many highly activated examples prominently include language that indicates the absence of comparison, or a lack of previously referenced images against which to compare the current findings, while still requiring a descriptive comparison of findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5747126436781609,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4682,latent_4682,10398,0.020796,0.014509806,7.659509,Frequent comparison of ETT placement to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels (5.0 and above) involve detailed descriptions of airway and vascular tube placements, especially of the endotracheal tube (ETT) and its positioning relative to the carina, often in the context of comparison to prior positions in successive images, even within a short timeframe.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6027617516315142,0.685,0.6764705882352942,0.3066666666666666,75.0,125.0
+4683,latent_4683,5055,0.01011,0.008712496,5.392143,Structured report format with instructions or prompts for description.,"These examples frequently include comparisons between current and prior imaging, sometimes involving multiple views (such as PA and lateral), but only strongly activated examples also include specific instructions or structure in the report format, such as clear demarcations or instructions like 'PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION'. The presence of detailed instructions or prompts for a structured report format seems to correlate with higher activation levels.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3325632139648312,0.48,0.4896907216494845,0.95,100.0,100.0
+4684,latent_4684,2718,0.005436,0.008272999,7.977508,Comparison of the status or positioning of medical devices and hardware to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve an analysis of changes in medical devices (like tubes, catheter, or sternotomy wires) from prior images. These cases involved descriptions where positions of medical devices, such as tubes and wires, were compared to findings in previous radiographs as the primary focus of the analysis, which differentiates them from other samples.",0.5775862068965517,0.5918367346938775,0.625,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4685,latent_4685,5495,0.01099,0.013541345,6.2586308,Comparison of current versus prior radiographic findings mainly focusing on lines/tubes.,"Most examples involve comparison between current and previous radiographs, which is evident from phrases like 'in comparison to the prior', 'unchanged', 'interval change', etc. Additionally, examples with images present utilize specific imaging techniques such as AP and lateral views. Finally, high activation examples focus on findings related to tubes, catheters, or interventions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.546875,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4686,latent_4686,15052,0.030104,0.015265326,3.6906729,Evidence of interval change on comparative imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels feature descriptions of previous imaging compared to current findings, focusing on changes such as resolving effusions, opacifications, and structural stability. These descriptions indicate the importance of interval change in assessing disease progression or stability.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.63996399639964,0.64,0.6372549019607843,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4687,latent_4687,16661,0.033322,0.015177126,2.4247656,"Multiple images given, explicit request for comparison in findings.",Examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight the need to compare current findings with previous imaging studies specifically when multiple images (frontal and lateral) are provided in combination with findings description. This is a typical requirement in radiology to observe changes over time.,0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4273024777933614,0.51,0.5056818181818182,0.89,100.0,100.0
+4688,latent_4688,4925,0.00985,0.010984249,3.6092942,Comparative analysis noting changes or stability in imaging over time.,The highly activated examples all include prompts where the completion of the report involves directly comparing findings with previous imaging or noting their stability over time. This pattern focuses on the importance of comparison and identification of changes or lack thereof in radiological findings over time.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4689,latent_4689,43470,0.08694,0.03778376,3.5034883,Low lung volumes frequently leading to crowded bronchovascular markings.,"The examples depict a recurring pattern wherein low lung volumes are frequently mentioned, which commonly leads to accentuation or crowding of bronchovascular markings, contributing to the appearance of mild pulmonary vascular congestion but without significant acute pathology such as pneumothorax or effusion.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.6829268292682927,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4690,latent_4690,6720,0.01344,0.012731889,4.6098237,Focus on changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often note explicit comparisons of imaging findings with previous exams, even if minor. These comparisons outline stability, progression, or improvements in identified pathologies. Significant attention is given to phrases that note changes over time compared to earlier images, highlighting possible diagnostic changes or persistence of previous findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4691,latent_4691,7089,0.014178,0.011802745,3.8684006,Interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activations consistently describe the comparison between current imaging findings and prior studies, with specific attention to 'interval changes' such as improved aeration, stability, or persistence of findings, and explicit comparison to prior images provided.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4692,latent_4692,8617,0.017234,0.015730206,3.729571,Comparison with prior imaging to note any changes.,"The examples that activated highly consistently require comparison with previous images to observe changes or detect abnormalities. This requirement is explicitly mentioned with phrases like 'compared to previous study', 'compared to the study from earlier the same day', or specifying that comparisons should be made against prior radiographs or imaging.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4287014333021562,0.435,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4693,latent_4693,34283,0.068566,0.03120223,3.6278338,Comparison-focused findings and actionable recommendations.,"The examples assign higher activation levels when specific radiological findings compare the patient's current imaging with prior images, especially by identifying new or increased pathology, changes in medical lines, tubes, or devices, and recommendations for repositioning or further evaluation. This focus on interval change and actionable guidance seems to be the pattern.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4694,latent_4694,3994,0.007988,0.01497188,5.349955,Active search for changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve the 'comparison to prior imaging' prompt, but specifically focus on identifying new findings or changes in imaging, whether or not there was a detailed description of prior studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4695,latent_4695,8444,0.016888,0.015606542,4.838607,Normal or stable mediastinal and hilar contours.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe normal or unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours, regardless of the presence of other findings. This pattern indicates that references to unremarkable mediastinal and hilar contours are strongly associated with the observed activation pattern.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.6171875,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4696,latent_4696,10622,0.021244,0.015044744,7.447673,Direct comparison analysis with the prior image.,"Each example with positive activation involves a description of findings derived from analyzing current radiological images in direct comparison with a prior study, typically using phrases like 'comparison with the next preceding similar study' or 'analysis is performed in direct comparison'. This comparative analysis is a common practice in radiology, useful for tracking changes over time.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4697,latent_4697,10059,0.020118,0.010321575,5.0651546,ET tube positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve the identification or monitoring of an endotracheal (ET) tube's position compared to prior images. This pattern suggests that the detection and positioning of ET tubes on chest imaging are critical features that the model identifies, leading to higher activation levels.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.4705882352941176,0.0879120879120879,91.0,109.0
+4698,latent_4698,5199,0.010398,0.013079502,4.7265544,Implicit comparison of current and prior images without explicit labeled comparison.,"The high activation examples consistently reference both current and prior imaging directly in their analysis, without an explicit comparison available (""COMPARISON: None available"" or missing explicit comparison). These descriptions often include an assistant examining the current images relative to prior ones, providing a comparison without a formal label.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4699,latent_4699,71442,0.142884,0.08467006,4.851917,Comparison of cardiac enlargement or vascular changes over time.,The pattern indicates a focus on the stability or change in the cardiac silhouette or pulmonary vascular structures when comparing current with previous imaging. The mentions of heart and vascular condition changes or consistencies are emphasized in reports showing any activation.,0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.595959595959596,0.6,0.625,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4700,latent_4700,15578,0.031156,0.020818375,5.029801,Use of comparative language highlighting interval changes in imaging.,"Highly activated examples demonstrate detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging, particularly mentioning interval changes, stable findings, or improvements using explicit comparative language which aids in evaluating progression, stability, or improvement of conditions.",0.4820295983086681,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5344827586206896,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4701,latent_4701,22901,0.045802,0.022896903,3.1489317,Descriptions of interval changes or comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"Samples with higher activation levels frequently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging reports or findings, specifically focusing on changes in clinical conditions or interventions between prior and current examinations.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5195982094115078,0.56,0.5379746835443038,0.85,100.0,100.0
+4702,latent_4702,4941,0.009882,0.014688476,5.397409,Presence of assistant section summarizing findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Many examples with higher activation focus on descriptions of findings where current imaging is compared explicitly to prior imaging, and these reports frequently include an assistant statement summarizing the observations. These focused assistant statements highly correlate with templates or patterns in reporting, thus resulting in higher activation.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4906100311731759,0.4924623115577889,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,99.0
+4703,latent_4703,14590,0.02918,0.020051373,4.538663,Step-by-step comparison of current and prior images in instructions.,The pattern is best seen in examples where there is a specific instruction to analyze and describe findings by comparing current images with prior ones. Examples with higher activations often explicitly include a step-by-step approach to compare current findings with earlier imaging.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4704,latent_4704,63026,0.126052,0.072757624,6.9754415,Detailed comparison to prior radiographic findings regarding changes.,Examples with higher activations provide detailed descriptions of changes in the findings compared to prior imaging; reports with detailed interpretation of intervals and stable or changed conditions exhibit higher activations.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.5897435897435898,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4705,latent_4705,3854,0.007708,0.008105879,4.012647,Comparison and evaluation of medical devices' positioning in radiographic studies.,"These examples commonly focus on monitoring and evaluating placement or stability of devices such as pacemakers or lines (e.g., PICC lines), using past and current radiographic images for comparison. Higher activation levels are often triggered by reports that have specific indications related to device monitoring or changes in positioning, reflecting a pattern of concern for device positioning and function.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5081967213114754,0.31,100.0,100.0
+4706,latent_4706,1735,0.00347,0.006664636,8.195989,Focus on position of endotracheal tubes in radiographic images.,"The highly activated examples focus on the position and changes in position of medical support devices, notably endotracheal tubes, in radiographic images, particularly through explicit measurement from anatomical landmarks like the carina. These examples consistently mention ""endotracheal tube"" positioning.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7639573070607553,0.77,0.8970588235294118,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4707,latent_4707,8084,0.016168,0.012993812,4.776009,Stable unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples marked with high activation levels describe findings focusing on the absence of significant acute abnormalities or pathological processes in current radiographs when compared against prior imaging studies. They emphasize stable conditions, unchanged findings, or the absence of acute changes, which often suggests the lack of new or worsening pathology.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.6190476190476191,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4708,latent_4708,3926,0.007852,0.013078652,6.5274487,Normal cardiomediastinal and clear pulmonary findings without mention of significant pathology.,"Examples with high activation consistently note the lack of significant pathologies such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation. This suggests the pattern focuses on normalized or unchanged cardiomediastinal and clear pulmonary findings in radiology reports. High activation often involves confirming absence rather than explaining findings.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6262626262626263,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4709,latent_4709,4284,0.008568,0.008258038,4.144969,Detailed analysis of changes in current imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation values consistently involve reports discussing comparison of current images to prior imaging studies, often examining changes in clinical findings or equipment position. These reports include detailed descriptions of past versus present imaging results, indicating an emphasis on changes or stability over time, which seems to trigger high activations.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4710,latent_4710,21754,0.043508,0.023716949,3.9629948,References to minimal or no changes compared to prior studies.,"In examples with high activation, there is a consistent mention of comparison to prior imaging specifically to evaluate either minimal or no change over time, while lower activations at times showed significant change or new findings. High activation examples focus on stable conditions or minimal changes like 'no significant change' or 'similar in appearance', common in follow-up radiology descriptions.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.537583350171752,0.5376884422110553,0.5416666666666666,0.52,100.0,99.0
+4711,latent_4711,4809,0.009618,0.010973104,5.8150964,Provide descriptive findings via comparison with prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently involve providing descriptions based on visual comparisons to previous studies and require specifically comparing changes over time in imaging findings, whether improvements or stability. The recurring element is detailed comparison check against a prior image or report.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4285714285714285,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.3942579660083602,0.395,0.3870967741935484,0.36,100.0,100.0
+4712,latent_4712,3345,0.00669,0.012454713,7.559293,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral views in radiology study.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include both frontal and lateral chest radiographs for comparison, suggesting that this model is attuned to reports where multiple imaging perspectives are provided, likely to give a more comprehensive view of the chest structures.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5856863134595193,0.635,0.5798816568047337,0.98,100.0,100.0
+4713,latent_4713,59469,0.118938,0.06854063,6.173245,Evaluation of interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of changes in radiological findings over time, specifically focused on interval improvement, stability, or progression of specific issues. Reports detailing whether findings such as effusions, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis have improved, remained stable, or worsened compared to prior exams illustrate a dynamic assessment, unlike those with lower activation levels which often lack this temporal element.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4714,latent_4714,4612,0.009224,0.006710267,4.65618,Assessment without prior comparison.,"Activation levels are high when patient history and findings are assessed without a prior study for comparison. These cases typically require interpretation of current clinical findings without relying on changes from previous images, focusing purely on current assessment.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5510204081632653,0.27,100.0,100.0
+4715,latent_4715,5452,0.010904,0.012397004,5.0958877,Comparative imaging reports emphasizing changes or stability.,Examples with higher activation scores include comparative language specifically referencing changes or stability in medical conditions as seen across different imaging studies. The focus on assessing changes over time indicates the model's emphasis on detecting changes in comparative reports.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4565217391304348,0.46,0.4655172413793103,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4716,latent_4716,4468,0.008936,0.009740052,5.3969746,Evaluation or comparison of anatomical tube or line placement.,"Many examples with high activation levels involve discrepancies, abnormalities, or evaluations related to anatomical tube placements or lines in the imaging, specifically focusing on the course, position, or comparison with prior images. These include nasogastric, feeding, and PICC lines, which require precise placement verification often reported together with subtle changes in radiology findings.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.613831841319993,0.615,0.6292134831460674,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4717,latent_4717,3340,0.00668,0.011563141,6.4157357,Comparison with prior images in acute or worsening clinical scenarios.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve indications of acute or previous health concerns and the need for a comparison with prior imagery, often due to the potential for acute exacerbations or identification of new pathological findings. This highlights cases where the current findings are critical for clinical assessment alongside historical data such as past occurrences that may influence current medical decisions.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4649122807017544,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4718,latent_4718,4466,0.008932,0.010128668,7.98734,Comparative analysis of current image against prior radiological studies.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention providing findings and impressions that are compared against a prior radiology study or image, involving analysis in relation to past and current observations to describe changes or stability. This pattern may influence the perceived detail and depth of analysis in reporting.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4719,latent_4719,17300,0.0346,0.016553188,1.6629245,Radiology prompt emphasizes image inputs (frontal/lateral) for comparison.,"These examples emphasize the input of a frontal image only, or a combination of frontal and lateral images in the prompt. This pattern highlights the requirement to compare radiographic findings primarily when images are mentioned, without detailed text-based findings.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4080854309687262,0.515,0.5081081081081081,0.94,100.0,100.0
+4720,latent_4720,5420,0.01084,0.01406086,5.9967666,Reports that predominantly confirm normalcy or absence of acute findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention terms like 'normal', 'clear', 'unremarkable', or 'no acute findings' concerning various aspects of radiological findings. This pattern suggests reports focusing on confirming stability or absence of acute issues, rather than detailing new or significant abnormalities, which corresponds to a specific reassurance or baseline found often in routine follow-ups or check-ups.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.6153846153846154,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6791764674789227,0.6934673366834171,0.6382978723404256,0.9,100.0,99.0
+4721,latent_4721,27407,0.054814,0.03021254,2.847591,Unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette with stable prior findings.,"Highly activated examples include descriptions of the unchanged cardiomediastinal or cardiac silhouette along with unchanged (or stable) findings compared to prior imaging studies, suggesting that the pattern involves stable landmark features in chest radiographs possibly correlated with stability in the patient's condition.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5666666666666667,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4722,latent_4722,10523,0.021046,0.013537637,3.3209128,Changes in support devices or interventions when compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples all involve changes in medical support devices or interventions, such as placements or removals of tubes, pacemakers, or catheters, and compare these findings with previous imaging to evaluate the outcomes or intervals of such changes.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5836652874508493,0.595,0.6417910447761194,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4723,latent_4723,4944,0.009888,0.009801107,3.8885484,Explicit comparison of current and prior images in the prompt.,"These examples consistently involve a direct comparison between current and previous imaging studies, even when the comparison states 'none' or is against unspecified prior imaging. The language specifically requests a descriptive comparison between the current and an earlier image.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4724,latent_4724,6204,0.012408,0.0140907755,4.5773816,"Evaluation of findings relative to prior images, highlighting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels feature details about findings in comparison with previous imaging. This includes things like the explicit mention of providing descriptions relative to prior images, suggesting the importance of evaluating changes over time.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3412947831552483,0.345,0.3652173913043478,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4725,latent_4725,3429,0.006858,0.007826129,3.7454488,Reports emphasize stability and lack of change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation (≥5.0) emphasize the stability or lack of significant changes in imaging findings compared to prior reports. These examples further highlight observations such as normal or mildly altered cardiac and pulmonary status, akin to routine or non-progressive conditions.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4782608695652174,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4726,latent_4726,22631,0.045262,0.022485334,4.0235343,References to changes over time based on comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons to prior images, requiring description of changes over time. These statements often use specific linguistic patterns indicating interval change or stability, and include terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', and 'since previous'. This pattern reflects the model's focus on identifying temporal changes by referencing past imaging findings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4727,latent_4727,10174,0.020348,0.011297819,4.5936074,Stable or improved findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently mention specific comparisons to prior radiographs within the context of noting changes in lung or chest findings, particularly stable or improved conditions over time. Examples vary slightly in phrasing but focus prominently on comparative stability or improvement based on historical imaging data.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5753424657534246,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4728,latent_4728,4176,0.008352,0.009223192,8.175654,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in radiology reports.,"Activation levels indicate a pattern that involves describing the cardiomediastinal silhouette as normal, often within the context of clear lungs and no acute cardiopulmonary issues. Observations consistently point out a 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette,' which signals stable, non-concerning cardiac and mediastinal findings.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7397657892102892,0.74,0.7264150943396226,0.77,100.0,100.0
+4729,latent_4729,26509,0.053018,0.03160056,6.3992476,Provide detailed description comparing current and prior imaging views.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently contain descriptions of the findings from multiple imaging projections (frontal and lateral views) with emphasis on identifying changes or intervals, but importantly, these reports often include explicit or implied instructions to provide descriptions, analyses, or comparisons to prior images, indicating a pattern of evaluating changes over time between different imaging views and prior reports.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4730,latent_4730,3546,0.007092,0.010959851,5.960798,Use of prior reports in conjunction with current imaging for comparative assessment.,The examples with high activation values consistently employ prior reports alongside current imaging studies. This pattern indicates a focus on continuity of patient information from past to present imaging studies.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5164835164835164,0.56,0.5375,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4731,latent_4731,18035,0.03607,0.022271322,6.739585,Emphasis on aortic tortuosity or elongation.,"The examples with high activation predominantly describe findings that assess the thoracic aorta as either 'tortuous' or 'elongated'. These anatomical descriptions reflect a focus on the morphology of the aorta more than any acute findings or considerable changes in the lungs or other structures, which tend to have lower activation when not prominently featured in the description.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3923611111111111,0.51,0.5833333333333334,0.07,100.0,100.0
+4732,latent_4732,9286,0.018572,0.017132249,5.1939473,Interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently use phrases referencing the review of radiology findings in comparison to prior images, indicating interval change or stability, as opposed to descriptions on standalone images without comparison.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4253452969049299,0.43,0.4146341463414634,0.34,100.0,100.0
+4733,latent_4733,8752,0.017504,0.02721082,4.5258055,Reflects detailed comparison with prior reports or findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior reports, or they describe findings in context with a previously included detailed radiology report. This pattern represents the model focusing on instructions that demand referencing prior standardized reports or making thorough comparisons.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4225603173407647,0.425,0.4336283185840708,0.49,100.0,100.0
+4734,latent_4734,4049,0.008098,0.012415411,12.249004,Absence or multiple prior comparison references leading to varied findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently incorporate reports with no prior comparison or comparisons to multiple prior exams. This absence or multiple comparisons could indicate ambiguity or complexity, causing differing findings related to specific changes over time present in the descriptions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4735,latent_4735,5846,0.011692,0.014389521,4.316445,Significant changes or stability observed in lungs or heart when comparing prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples often contain explicit references to prior frontal images for comparison, indicating that significant changes or stability have been observed in lung or cardiac findings.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3393769152196119,0.3467336683417085,0.3037974683544304,0.2424242424242424,99.0,100.0
+4736,latent_4736,32732,0.065464,0.027146563,2.385546,Detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern with higher activation levels reflects detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. Terms like 'compared to', 'as compared to', 'unchanged', 'improvement', or specific changes are often noted. This suggests that the model is recognizing nuanced descriptions in comparison reporting, emphasizing stability or changes in findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4737,latent_4737,4613,0.009226,0.012885549,4.213303,Explicit call for comparing findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions or requests for comparisons between current and prior images. Additionally, these examples prominently feature evaluations for consistency and stability over time, which often involves reference to prior conditions such as heart size, presence or absence of infiltrates, pleural effusions, or other anomalies. The focus is on the comparative aspect of the current imaging to determine changes or stabilities from prior states.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4738,latent_4738,8120,0.01624,0.009039169,4.2137027,Changes in radiographic observations between current and prior images.,"Examples that exhibit higher activation levels feature changes in imaging findings over time, specifically the resolution or progression of certain findings (e.g., opacities, device placements). Lower activation corresponds to examples with no such notable changes over time, or no previous image for comparison, indicating the pattern involves detecting temporal change in radiographic findings using previous imaging comparisons.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4763157894736842,0.4773869346733668,0.4770642201834862,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+4739,latent_4739,8847,0.017694,0.011660802,4.342943,Unremarkable cardiac silhouette in radiology reports.,"Examples with activation levels suggest a stable or normal cardiac silhouette in imaging findings, often paralleled by unremarkable pulmonary, mediastinal, or osseous structures. The pattern is a common phraseology in radiology indicating a normal heart size or contour despite other findings.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.74,0.74,0.74,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4740,latent_4740,4719,0.009438,0.013791233,4.4061313,Radiology findings compared with prior images using explicit 'PRIOR_REPORT' format.,The activated examples consistently refer to the comparison of frontal images with other views or prior images and provide an explicit report format denoted with 'PRIOR_REPORT'. They typically use this format to note unchanged findings or reference multiple comparison points.,0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5691374770605601,0.595,0.5637583892617449,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4741,latent_4741,15451,0.030902,0.023095772,5.350326,Presence of comparison to prior imaging studies detailing changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels demonstrate a distinct pattern of referencing comparison to previous imaging studies. Key focus is placed on changes or stability in findings over time, using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'stable from prior exam', and specific dates for studies, indicating the pattern predominantly reflects attention to comparative evaluations between current and past radiological findings.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4742,latent_4742,3660,0.00732,0.008968424,4.4846244,"Detailed evaluation of chest radiographs with frontal and lateral views, following acute medical interventions or acute symptoms.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the detailed evaluation of current chest radiographs, both frontal and lateral views, specifically for patients with recent medical interventions or acute symptoms like respiratory distress, fever, or changes following significant interventions like surgeries (e.g., CABG or catheter placement). These cases are often urgent, complex, involving multiple prior evaluations, and the focus is on detecting subtle changes or acute findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5426455566905005,0.5477386934673367,0.5416666666666666,0.65,100.0,99.0
+4743,latent_4743,5285,0.01057,0.008530027,5.5059476,Reports describing placement or evaluation of medical devices or tubes.,"Highly activated examples refer to radiological studies that include devices or tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or Dobbhoff catheters, showing placement or positioning. These examples often involve changes or evaluations regarding these devices, and comparison with prior imaging to note any interval changes in such devices.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5352112676056338,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4744,latent_4744,11495,0.02299,0.01359668,2.7958457,"Request for description based on current images only, no comparison to prior images.","Higher activation examples consistently request descriptions based solely on current images (frontal and lateral), without prior image comparison. They lack comparison to prior reports or images, focusing solely on current findings, which distinguishes them from examples involving comparative analysis.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6576408341114224,0.67,0.7741935483870968,0.48,100.0,100.0
+4745,latent_4745,28458,0.056916,0.024929555,3.5962627,"Unchanged positions of tubes, lines, or catheters.","Examples with higher activation often feature unchanged positions of tubes, catheters, or lines between current and prior images. The reports highlight stability rather than new developments or changes in pathology, suggesting that patterns of language and focus in these reports specifically describe stable positions of medical devices over time.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6138996138996139,0.64,0.7916666666666666,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4746,latent_4746,4289,0.008578,0.015568464,5.297021,Use of structured radiology reporting format with prior reports and findings.,"Patterns in these examples consistently involve images and their analysis in the context of previous reports, focusing on descriptions rather than overt results, specifically noting technical aspects and comparisons of new findings to previous images to establish stability or changes. They feature phrases like 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'FINDINGS', 'TECHNIQUE', and indications of comparisons, which are consistent elements in reported cases that activate highly.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4557253506384761,0.545,0.5248618784530387,0.95,100.0,100.0
+4747,latent_4747,5047,0.010094,0.008744636,4.240436,"Description proceeds from current image comparisons to prior images, focusing on unchanged findings and stability.","The examples with higher activation consistently indicate evaluations based on comparisons with prior images. This indicates the importance of interval changes or lack thereof, rather than new findings. The pattern highlights assessments of stability and comparison with historical radiology findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5875,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4748,latent_4748,5822,0.011644,0.01007117,3.9640467,Comparison of current findings to previous imaging results.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve findings where explicit comparison is made to prior imaging studies, with attributes focused on changes or stability noted between the current and prior examinations. This suggests that the pattern is specifically detecting radiology reports with a focus on changes in the findings over time, assessing stability or progression.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4749,latent_4749,28768,0.057536,0.041424923,6.0577674,Description of stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize descriptions with nuanced changes or findings in current images compared to prior images, often involving deductive assessments regarding stability or changes in a medical condition. They typically include a stable finding, persistent compared size or feature, or improvement of a known condition, sometimes allowing for technical differences in imaging.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5555555555555556,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4750,latent_4750,32167,0.064334,0.04174436,6.911331,Comparative analysis emphasizing changes or stabilities from prior radiographic studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize comparisons between current and prior images, particularly changes or stabilities in conditions like emphysema, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary changes. Even when no acute changes are noted, the emphasis is placed on comparative analysis with past examinations.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5741893219783819,0.61,0.5660377358490566,0.9090909090909092,99.0,101.0
+4751,latent_4751,17341,0.034682,0.015022595,2.4905305,Description of interval changes between imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve descriptions comparing findings to previous imaging, especially when there is mention of interval change or progression/regression of certain pathological findings. This comparison narrative indicating change or stability between current and prior imaging is a focal point in the pattern.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6743405395926751,0.675,0.6605504587155964,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4752,latent_4752,4504,0.009008,0.012162235,6.607123,References to both frontal and lateral chest images in findings.,"Examples with higher activation include explicit references to findings observed across both frontal and lateral chest images, indicating that the pattern being captured is the inclusion of both perspectives in the radiology reports.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6693333333333333,0.69,0.6266666666666667,0.94,100.0,100.0
+4753,latent_4753,3876,0.007752,0.010514885,4.205311,Comparison using multiple image views and detailed findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve the evaluation or comparison of current and prior images using multiple views, usually frontal and lateral, and include a narrative description based on given indications and techniques.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3968343062415805,0.457286432160804,0.4753086419753086,0.77,100.0,99.0
+4754,latent_4754,9133,0.018266,0.021590186,7.795703,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation involve providing detailed descriptions of chest imaging findings by comparing the current radiographic images with prior images. This pattern is indicative of reports that highlight both the method of image assessment and specific comparisons with earlier findings, often in the form of confirmed stability or changes in findings.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4755,latent_4755,54567,0.109134,0.0759249,5.574124,Emphasis on stable findings upon comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations often contain unremarkable or stable findings upon comparison to prior imaging, highlighting this as a key pattern noted for identified activation.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.5689655172413793,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4756,latent_4756,5318,0.010636,0.008239875,5.7104588,"Presence of both current frontal and lateral images, without reference to prior images.",These examples have high activation levels when additional lateral images are included in the assessment alongside the current frontal image but without comparison to prior imaging. This suggests that the pattern being identified is the reliance on multiple perspectives (frontal and lateral imaging) to form the assessment rather than a comparison to past images.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.56,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4757,latent_4757,2197,0.004394,0.009060853,8.236672,Prompts with a description request comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activations tend to include a directive or request to provide a description of the findings in specific images, usually accompanied by a reference to a prior image for comparison. Notably, these prompts ask for an appraisal of changes or stability over time without a focus on detailed historical context or a detailed existing report, as seen in narratives with lower activations.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4658213730151742,0.545,0.5254237288135594,0.93,100.0,100.0
+4758,latent_4758,6424,0.012848,0.007965359,2.8071413,Radiological findings stable over multiple imaging modalities compared to prior studies.,"In these examples, activation is notably high where patterns involve explicit mention of stability or only minor changes over time in radiological findings, particularly when described in relation to various imaging techniques (e.g., comprehensively compared views like PA and lateral), notwithstanding potentially significant clinical concerns. This might reflect the model's capacity to identify constancy across comparative evaluations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5636363636363636,0.31,100.0,100.0
+4759,latent_4759,32026,0.064052,0.027361121,1.892564,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on reports that either explicitly mention prior studies or include a detailed analysis of modifications compared to prior imaging (changes in line/catheter placement, tube adjustments, etc.), using terms like 'compared to the previous radiograph', 'since prior', and 'in comparison with study of _'. This emphasizes the comparisons and interval changes in imaging findings as crucial elements of these reports.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4760,latent_4760,17103,0.034206,0.018254748,4.607113,Cases lacking explicit comparison or detailed technical context in imaging reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels often indicate situations with no clear comparison or are less thorough in providing specific technical imaging context, leading to diminished relevance. This reflects cases where radiological evaluations are performed without explicit prior comparisons or additional technical details, which might otherwise provide a complex context in interpreting findings.",0.5462962962962963,0.5510204081632653,0.55,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.587929292929293,0.5879396984924623,0.59,0.59,100.0,99.0
+4761,latent_4761,4063,0.008126,0.009617752,4.4419665,Comparison of current to prior images with description of interval changes.,"The high activation examples generally asked for or provided descriptions that explicitly differentiated current images with prior images, indicating a pattern that emphasizes observable changes or stability over time. This distinction and comparison between current and previous is essential for monitoring patient conditions and is hence given higher activation.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3346103437846557,0.34,0.3048780487804878,0.25,100.0,100.0
+4762,latent_4762,3587,0.007174,0.015343911,5.4417567,Detailed description required comparing current and prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently mention the provision of a description in comparison to a prior image. This suggests that the model is highly activated when tasked with comparison and description from prior imaging, which is often a critical aspect in radiological interpretation.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4763,latent_4763,5671,0.011342,0.008261186,3.8481112,Low lung volumes causing accentuation or crowding effects.,"The pattern is evidenced by consistent mentions across several examples involving the description of low lung volumes in the context of radiological examinations, which further affects the interpretation of other mediastinal and cardiac structures.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3890909090909091,0.475,0.4,0.1,100.0,100.0
+4764,latent_4764,6257,0.012514,0.009855574,3.4056728,Comparison of medical device positioning between current and prior radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve positional changes or the status of medical devices (e.g., PICC lines, catheters, tubes) as compared to previous studies, while the low activation examples typically discuss static findings unrelated to medical device positioning. This indicates that the model activates more when there are changes or assessments involving medical devices.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.6346153846153846,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4765,latent_4765,4453,0.008906,0.013035699,5.6597743,Use of interval change or comparison to prior imaging studies to assess change.,"These examples emphasize radiological findings that highlight 'interval change', 'comparison to prior', or specific changes noted from earlier imaging studies. References to prior imaging are pivotal for determining stability or progression in medical imaging, often indicating an interval improvement or lack of change in pathologies. The pattern follows indicating alterations in medical devices like tubes or changes in symptoms such as pulmonary edema, pneumonia or atelectasis.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5625,0.58,0.5571428571428572,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4766,latent_4766,31260,0.06252,0.02532024,2.5968635,Assessment of changes in pathology or device position across images.,"Not all examples had exact references to prior studies, instead focusing on findings without specific comparative statements. However, a common theme in those with high activation scores is the change or stability of certain pathologies or device placements across current and prior images, mentioned explicitly or implicitly, rather than explicit continuous comparison phrasing.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4767,latent_4767,15701,0.031402,0.024504226,4.669113,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, focusing on opacities and pleural effusions.","These examples describe details and findings of radiological images in comparison to prior examinations, focusing particularly on the presence, stability, or change of lung field opacities, interstitial markings, and pleural effusions. Reports indicating changes or stability in these areas are indicative of the pattern.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4935064935064935,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4768,latent_4768,3422,0.006844,0.011914454,5.9702272,Accentuation of cardiac silhouette and structures due to low lung volumes.,"The examples with high activation levels describe low lung volumes, which cause increased visibility of structures like the heart or pulmonary vasculature. This pattern recognizes visual findings in radiographs influenced by reduced lung inflation, using terms like 'accentuated', 'prominent', 'enlarged', or 'visible' for these structures due to reduced lung volume.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4370404411764705,0.51,0.5357142857142857,0.15,100.0,100.0
+4769,latent_4769,2928,0.005856,0.008542827,5.788778,Reports comparing current findings to prior imaging.,"The patterns in the examples with higher activation levels emphasize the comparative analysis between current and prior imaging to highlight stability, changes, or resolution of specific features. The language often specifies findings as 'stable', 'improved', 'resolved', or 'unchanged,' which is consistent with monitoring for interval changes over time.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4399624765478424,0.457286432160804,0.4666666666666667,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+4770,latent_4770,7795,0.01559,0.009720242,4.9767346,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe radiographic findings explicitly in terms of changes or stability relative to previous imaging studies. These reports often utilize comparative language, demonstrating a focus on the temporal aspect of findings, such as improvements, resolutions, or unchanged conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4771,latent_4771,11248,0.022496,0.017532732,5.7201347,Focus on detailed descriptions of current image findings.,"The examples with higher activations consistently focus on descriptions that detail imaging findings in the current study, particularly explaining abnormalities or features without needing extensive comparison to prior images. These findings are often articulated in comparison reports but can stand independently, suggesting that the model activates on comprehensive descriptions of radiologic features or abnormalities presented in the current images.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5771449071391119,0.6130653266331658,0.569620253164557,0.9090909090909092,99.0,100.0
+4772,latent_4772,5311,0.010622,0.017285885,5.5966625,"Comparison of findings with prior imaging, often noting resolution or persistence.","These examples consistently compare current radiological findings with prior reports, highlighting any resolved or persistent pathologies along with specifying the imaging technique used. They often include reports such as PA, AP, and lateral views, comparing findings in terms of changes or stability related to previous studies.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4781424243195763,0.4824120603015075,0.4830508474576271,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+4773,latent_4773,2608,0.005216,0.009692834,6.049183,Higher activation with explicit image comparison or changes from prior studies.,"These examples illustrate a pattern where the presence or absence of a prior report or prior imaging study as a basis for comparison significantly impacts the activation level. Cases making explicit comparisons to prior images, or that indicate changes or stability from prior imaging, often receive higher activation levels. In contrast, when no comparison is available, or 'N/A' is noted for the prior report, the activation levels are lower.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4836756756756757,0.5175879396984925,0.5099337748344371,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+4774,latent_4774,13814,0.027628,0.01610898,5.9319525,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The consistent pattern across these examples is the reference to comparison with previous imaging, particularly noting no significant change or stability over time, which suggests a focus on monitoring changes or stability of a patient's condition using serial imaging.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3964538455556419,0.4120603015075377,0.3676470588235294,0.2525252525252525,99.0,100.0
+4775,latent_4775,8012,0.016024,0.012172296,5.4630365,Low lung volumes exaggerate or accentuate anatomical structures in chest images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions of radiological findings where low lung volumes are noted, and there is a mention of these low volumes accentuating or exaggerating adjacent structural appearances such as cardiac silhouette or bronchovascular markings. This pattern highlights the impact of lung volume on radiographic interpretation, especially when comparing current images to prior studies.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.9411764705882352,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5429001640181765,0.575,0.6595744680851063,0.31,100.0,100.0
+4776,latent_4776,3472,0.006944,0.005315256,8.318997,Detailed comparison of changes or persistent findings with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve changes or updates in the findings based on the comparison with prior imaging studies. They prominently highlight changes or persistent conditions noted between different imaging time points, often with detailed comparisons. These comparisons are crucial in evaluating the progression or stability of conditions, which aligns with the pattern in highly activated samples.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.57,0.57,0.4418604651162791,0.8028169014084507,71.0,129.0
+4777,latent_4777,7880,0.01576,0.01383797,3.4711742,Radiographic findings based on explicit comparison with prior images.,"Analysis of the examples indicates that descriptions frequently involve sequential assessment from a given current image set while specifically providing comparison details to a prior image. Descriptions often include technical details about the imaging technique, comparison to previous studies, and findings highlighting significant radiological changes or observations based on image comparison, whether those changes are positive or negative.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4778,latent_4778,6442,0.012884,0.017921375,8.589719,Detailed radiological assessments in patients with notable medical histories.,"Reports with high activation levels describe patients with certain complex medical histories or acute concerns where comparison with prior studies is explicitly noted, and detailed descriptions are provided, including the use of medical imaging to interrelate an underlying patient condition like CHF, CABG, persistent pleural effusions or potential progression of disease related to cardiopulmonary issues or pneumonia.",0.5,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+4779,latent_4779,5215,0.01043,0.010930879,4.325776,Descriptions of findings in images compared to prior images.,"This set of examples consistently includes scenarios where radiological images are compared explicitly with prior images, often marked by 'prior frontal image', 'comparison', or 'findings compared to prior'. The activation levels suggest a pattern of interest in comparisons between current and past imaging for detailed evaluation.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.25,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3693080047428038,0.375,0.345679012345679,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4780,latent_4780,25943,0.051886,0.04560457,4.733331,Detailed findings or changes based on prior imaging comparisons.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently reference specific detailed findings in past imaging studies or changes seen over time, frequently focusing on subtle differences such as growth, stability, or resolution of pathologies. The presence of direct comparisons with past images, specific measurements, and detailed descriptions of changes or stability is notable in these examples.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3846153846153846,0.385,0.3904761904761905,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4781,latent_4781,15616,0.031232,0.023393417,4.8191,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The examples that trigger higher activations frequently involve providing comparative analyses between the current image studies and prior imaging, typically involving explicit analysis of changes or lack thereof based on earlier imaging findings. This pattern indicates a specific focus on evaluating the progression or stability of medical conditions based on imaging history.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5188679245283019,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4782,latent_4782,3983,0.007966,0.008794748,7.3395386,Explicit comparison highlighting specific changes or observations in prior and current images.,"These examples highlight specific changes or findings that aren't present in nonrepresentative activations, indicating a pattern of identifying subtle or distinct changes in imaging over time or due to specific conditions, such as entities with opacification or positioning changes related to medical equipment or anatomical alterations, with detailed comparisons to prior images when available.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5564336372847012,0.5577889447236181,0.5545454545454546,0.61,100.0,99.0
+4783,latent_4783,11102,0.022204,0.017613089,4.7121563,Comparison to prior images with history of trauma or procedures.,Examples with higher activation levels frequently indicate the examination of current imaging in comparison to prior images with specific history indicators such as trauma or invasive procedures that direct specific diagnostic assessments.,0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.44,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4784,latent_4784,8560,0.01712,0.009062475,3.978975,Comparison and stability of findings with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize the comparison aspect of radiographic images against prior studies. They often provide an interpretation or diagnosis based on changes or the lack thereof, such as 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'interval change', usually in follow-up actions or evaluative remarks.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4785,latent_4785,110666,0.221332,0.1558595,3.9539063,Finding descriptions compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with significant activations report descriptions of imaging findings with explicit comparison to previous imaging, either through nuanced observations indicating stability, change, or direct references to earlier reports or images. This pattern is evident across various diagnostic contexts and imaging techniques.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5065283400809717,0.507537688442211,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,99.0
+4786,latent_4786,27347,0.054694,0.02476525,3.4012141,Detailed descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that show higher activation levels consistently provide detailed descriptions of the comparison between the current and prior imaging findings, especially noting any changes or stability regarding bone or other traumatic injuries, positioning of medical devices, or soft tissue conditions. The pattern emphasizes detailed comparisons and narrative descriptions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5775862068965517,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4787,latent_4787,5834,0.011668,0.008670777,5.734212,Focus on cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes or contours.,"Examples with high activation levels note the heart along with either an emphasis on the mediastinal and hilar contours or the aorta, indicating a focus on cardiac structures and their surroundings, despite providing a stable or unchanged assessment.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.6666666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5817245817245817,0.61,0.5723684210526315,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4788,latent_4788,7763,0.015526,0.011062328,3.7664208,Detailed interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation focus on detailed interval changes or comparisons to prior imaging studies, often highlighting new, unchanged, or resolved pathologies explicitly. This radiological pattern emphasizes tracking changes over time for specific pathologies and treatment responses.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4789,latent_4789,9957,0.019914,0.011608071,3.3026998,Technical details of frontal and lateral chest radiograph acquisition.,"Examples with a higher activation level focus on the technical details of obtaining both frontal and lateral views of chest radiographs, often referring to radiographic techniques and sometimes comparisons. Lower-activation examples either lack this technical detail or exclude comparison focus.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4790,latent_4790,3820,0.00764,0.009261234,4.697793,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and absence of acute changes compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples involve comparing current imaging findings against prior studies, often noting stability or lack of interval change, but those with high activation predominantly describe findings related to normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes and stable impressions, with absence of acute processes like pleural effusion or pneumothorax.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.416383701188455,0.45,0.4038461538461538,0.21,100.0,100.0
+4791,latent_4791,4026,0.008052,0.006901357,5.3065295,Imperative commands to describe or summarize findings.,"The examples with higher activations tend to be directives given to an AI assistant to describe or summarize the current findings against prior imaging. The use of imperative phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings' is instructing another system or assistant to produce a response, indicating a command or prompt for action.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4792,latent_4792,4277,0.008554,0.011565893,5.0980253,New examination requests without available prior study comparison.,"The pattern emerges from examples emphasizing the absence of a prior study for comparison, despite providing a comparison in the requested description, meaning that the request is for a new, standalone examination of findings without historical context.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5662650602409639,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4793,latent_4793,29637,0.059274,0.031999566,4.8294168,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The model demonstrates higher activation levels for prompts that make comparisons against prior imaging studies and indicate stability or no significant change in identified abnormalities. This pattern suggests that the model focuses on the concept of monitoring or stable findings across time intervals, often reported in radiology to track patient progress or changes in pathology.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7049336100622641,0.705,0.6990291262135923,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4794,latent_4794,3500,0.007,0.008793307,8.919905,Comparison of current and prior radiology images for evaluation of changes or stability.,"Examples with comparability activation levels often provide a description comparing radiological findings between current images and prior images. The reports mention previous imaging studies, and evaluate changes or stability over time, highlighting specifics such as new findings or unchanged conditions from prior studies.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4795,latent_4795,15618,0.031236,0.021694383,7.6347537,"Detailed comparisons to prior studies, noting stability or lack of acute changes.","Higher activations are associated with reports detailing findings across multiple views and multiple prior reports, often indicating no acute changes despite specific findings. References to comparisons or stability, even with additional findings like cardiomegaly or aortic tortuosity, are common.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.4415584415584415,0.3541666666666667,96.0,104.0
+4796,latent_4796,6315,0.01263,0.01575844,8.899843,Concise comparison noting stability or minor changes.,"There is a consistent pattern in highly activated examples where the report directly involves a straightforward acknowledgment of findings and/or minor changes when comparing current and prior images, specifically focusing on stability, small changes, or lack of new findings, and is devoid of detailed verbosity or lengthy speculation about potential causes.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3613607188703466,0.3969849246231156,0.3018867924528302,0.1616161616161616,99.0,100.0
+4797,latent_4797,4197,0.008394,0.009226645,6.3719916,Clear lungs without acute findings or cardiomediastinal abnormalities.,"The pattern can be observed in activation levels associated with examples that describe clear lungs without acute findings like consolidation, pneumothorax, or effusion, along with a consistent cardiomediastinal silhouette. These reports suggest absence of acute abnormalities, consistent with stable or unchanged radiological findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6254681647940075,0.63,0.6666666666666666,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4798,latent_4798,5357,0.010714,0.010300908,3.9178867,"Clear lungs without focal consolidations, effusions, or pneumothorax.","The pattern evident in these examples is the mention of the absence of focal consolidations, effusions, or pneumothorax. Reports describe the findings from current imaging against prior imaging, noting clear, well-expanded lungs without these specific issues. This pattern matches radiological assessments that confirm stability in the patient's chest condition.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7375735443294786,0.7386934673366834,0.7142857142857143,0.8,100.0,99.0
+4799,latent_4799,3187,0.006374,0.009534526,5.4156427,Reports with comparison to prior imaging are emphasized.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate comparison with prior imaging studies as a major part of the radiology report. This comparison acts as a core aspect in identifying changes over time or stability of the findings, which appears key to the pattern being detected.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.50625,0.81,100.0,100.0
+4800,latent_4800,4352,0.008704,0.012662117,8.0116,Assessment of interval changes using prior images for comparison.,"Examples with high activation involve comparisons or descriptions of changes in findings between current and prior images, often detailing whether conditions are stable, improved, or worsened. This pattern emphasizes the interval change aspect in diagnostic imaging reports.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4508196721311475,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4801,latent_4801,3627,0.007254,0.011973881,5.1755385,Technical imaging details and views provided for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include terms related to the technical aspects or context of the imaging, such as descriptions like 'PA and lateral', 'upright AP', 'frontal view', etc. These refer to the positioning and technique used during imaging, which are critical to interpreting results in radiology reports.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.5333333333333333,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4173805197427244,0.495,0.4971098265895953,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4802,latent_4802,6204,0.012408,0.008002872,3.1645238,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4803,latent_4803,25908,0.051816,0.030695511,8.296554,Abnormal lung volumes on chest imaging.,"High activation occurs with descriptions referencing altered or abnormal lung volumes, such as 'low lung volumes,' 'hyperextended lungs,' or unusual diaphragmatic positions. These patterns are consistently linked to the specific activations observed, indicating a systematic or recurrent feature in the imaging findings that differ from normal expectations.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5386109762020399,0.62,0.3448275862068966,0.3448275862068966,58.0,142.0
+4804,latent_4804,3589,0.007178,0.0069308695,7.0123587,Stable or unchanged chronic interstitial lung disease or reticulolinear opacities.,"These examples revolve around the identification or description of chronic interstitial lung disease patterns, reticulolinear opacities, and changes in the lung parenchyma consistent with chronic disease. Comparisons typically make note of unchanged or stable features indicative of chronicity rather than acute alterations.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4403277084861824,0.5376884422110553,0.75,0.12,100.0,99.0
+4805,latent_4805,4677,0.009354,0.016320297,4.6922994,Findings requested for comparison but no actual comparison available or performed.,The examples with high activations involve repetitive phrasing where current findings are requested for comparison against prior images but no actual comparison is made. This indicates a pattern of providing findings without comparative analysis despite the stated request.,0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4744948808553049,0.565,0.5355191256830601,0.98,100.0,100.0
+4806,latent_4806,12140,0.02428,0.023071324,5.6190777,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images.,"The more highly activated examples often involve the comparative description of changes or stability in the current imaging findings against a previous image, using terms like ""stable"", ""increase"", ""repositioning"", and explicit comparisons with prior imaging. The comparison to previous images appears to be an essential component associated with higher activation levels.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.40625,0.43,0.45,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4807,latent_4807,8781,0.017562,0.013122165,5.681058,"Stable unchanged findings compared with prior studies, without acute pathology.","The highly activated examples describe an unchanged stable appearance in comparison with prior imaging studies, without evidence of acute abnormal findings such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. They consistently note the absence of significant changes or acute pathologies when compared with these prior images.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4808,latent_4808,7131,0.014262,0.0101927575,8.393935,Stable or unchanged cardiac and mediastinal features in chest imaging.,Examples with high activation levels frequently highlight cardiac and mediastinal features as either stable or unchanged in context of chest imaging findings. This indicates that stability or lack of change in these features is notable within these examples.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.4625,0.4302325581395348,86.0,114.0
+4809,latent_4809,9972,0.019944,0.013110742,4.373849,Finding descriptions in current images without prior comparison.,Examples with higher activation tend to include imaging findings reported for multiple views (frontal and lateral) without any comparison to previous studies; this implies a pattern where findings are analyzed as standalone observations. Other examples often make explicit comparisons to prior images.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5333333333333333,0.24,100.0,100.0
+4810,latent_4810,22243,0.044486,0.024474652,5.9325695,Reports include interval changes based on prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples consistently report findings that involve explicit comparisons with previous imaging studies, noting interval changes in pathologies, positions of medical devices, or absence of change, which are crucial in tracking patient progress or deterioration.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5161290322580645,0.6881720430107527,93.0,107.0
+4811,latent_4811,6597,0.013194,0.011730526,4.223808,Comparison to previous imaging revealing significant clinical change.,"Representative samples consistently note significant clinical trends observed through previous imaging comparison, including interval changes, stability, or resolution of findings over time. Reports frequently use phrases such as 'comparison made to previous', 'have worsened', 'no interval change', or 'improved' to track patient conditions, emphasizing the use of prior images to monitor clinical progress.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.4909090909090909,0.27,100.0,100.0
+4812,latent_4812,5420,0.01084,0.018961402,6.289044,"Imaging comparison mentioning unchanged or stable findings, often without acute issues.","Examples with an activation level greater than zero focus on radiological comparisons that identify differences or stability in imaging features with or without detailed prior history of change. They often involve indicating improved or unchanged pathologies, normal findings, or direct verification tasks like tube placements in context without acute emergent issues.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4233343630933992,0.44,0.4090909090909091,0.27,100.0,100.0
+4813,latent_4813,12851,0.025702,0.030141044,4.4833627,Radiographic comparison to prior studies in evaluating changes or stability.,"These examples focus on evaluating current radiographic findings against previous imaging studies to assess stability, new developments, or changes in a condition. This observation manifests in the frequent use of terms highlighting comparison with prior examinations, emphasizing variations in clinical status like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'improved'.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4814,latent_4814,8006,0.016012,0.01194554,4.7019687,Detection of interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imagery.,"The illustrative examples show high activation levels when there is a reference to specific interval changes or stability observed in the comparison of current and prior imaging studies. These comparisons often find changes in medical conditions or apparatus positions that can significantly impact patient management, underscoring their importance in assessment.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4815,latent_4815,3823,0.007646,0.012047546,4.9131756,Comparison reveals stable or unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activation levels describe unchanged or stable findings compared to prior radiology studies, emphasizing stability rather than acute changes. This pattern highlights the importance of comparing current findings with previous images, noting minimal or no change in specific conditions or placements.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.475,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4816,latent_4816,7807,0.015614,0.013456127,6.720507,Interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"These examples frequently mention findings with interval changes in radiology studies compared to prior images. The pattern includes discussions of changes like increased opacities at bases, interval improvements in lung conditions, and stability or changes in medical devices.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.6,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4817,latent_4817,4097,0.008194,0.011119249,8.071658,Focus on positioning of tubes or lines in imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activations consistently include references to endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and other inserted lines or devices, along with details about their positions compared to prior imaging. These types of descriptions are common in reports focusing on assessing and confirming the correct placement of medical devices during follow-up evaluations.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4677419354838709,0.29,100.0,100.0
+4818,latent_4818,5726,0.011452,0.033308204,4.704192,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4819,latent_4819,4481,0.008962,0.0042821113,2.5541677,Interval evaluations of medical device positioning or associated clinical changes.,"Examples with higher activations reference evaluations of intervals or changes, particularly concerning medical devices like catheters and tubes. This pattern emphasizes the value placed on identifying changes regarding device positioning or associated clinical conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4951697629724536,0.5025125628140703,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,99.0
+4820,latent_4820,5024,0.010048,0.015100221,8.0181875,Importance of unremarkable contours in instructed radiological comparison.,"Highly activated examples focus on images with specified views and instructions to compare findings predominantly associated with information that doesn’t change across comparisons, such as cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours being normal.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5256410256410257,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4821,latent_4821,34984,0.069968,0.034139715,4.504749,Increased activation corresponds with detailed comparisons to prior reports.,"The observed pattern across the examples relates to the model's increased activation when descriptions of imaging findings include details about changes or stabilities in previous reports, particularly emphasizing comparisons of known features (like nodules, consolidation, etc.) with prior imaging. This pattern is less evident in general reports without such comparisons.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4822,latent_4822,7075,0.01415,0.009086479,3.4420195,Comprehensive multi-view comparisons with detailed radiological findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve multiple types of imaging views (current and prior frontal or lateral) to describe the findings, and often have detailed findings, history, indication, technique, and comparison descriptions, providing comprehensive and thorough radiological assessments in relation to previous or concurrent imaging exams.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4823,latent_4823,6406,0.012812,0.011850785,4.3840675,Use of AI Assistant for automated description relative to prior studies.,"The dataset includes reports where images are compared to prior studies, but a key factor is the assistance provided by an AI Assistant indicated by the presence of an automated description or comparison. This reflects a common pattern where automation in radiology assists in interpretation relative to historical data.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4303733089207608,0.44,0.4523809523809524,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4824,latent_4824,4656,0.009312,0.010637656,5.2713866,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4825,latent_4825,4640,0.00928,0.01472541,5.0293107,Significant changes in comparison to previous radiographs.,"High activation levels are observed in examples where reports include comparative examinations of radiographs, typically with significant findings such as improvements, changes, or resolutions of pathological states over time. This is reflected in specific linguistic patterns denoting changes (e.g., worsening, improvement). Lower activation levels correlate with absence of significant mention of comparative findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4042553191489361,0.19,100.0,100.0
+4826,latent_4826,40674,0.081348,0.039737273,4.615065,Focus on interval changes or stability in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation scores tend to emphasize the comparison against prior studies, focusing on changes or lack thereof in radiological findings over time. They often highlight stability, interval improvement, or deterioration, using specific phrases to discuss findings relative to previous exams.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4827,latent_4827,4412,0.008824,0.011528605,5.7480946,Changes in device positioning or pulmonary opacities compared to prior studies.,"The data indicates that cases with frequent updates on medical devices or changes in pulmonary opacities tend to generate higher activation levels. Mentions of devices like chest tubes, central venous catheters, or PICC lines, as well as changes in opacities, often require careful integration with prior study results, suggesting interesting developments or potential suspicions that need addressing between imaging studies.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6080795899909557,0.61,0.5964912280701754,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4828,latent_4828,3622,0.007244,0.006822497,2.9657748,Comprehensively describing or interpreting in absence of definitive prior image data.,"The examples with high activation often lack comparison references, even when potentially prior images are available, emphasizing the importance of generating comparative findings and showing a need for assistance in interpreting such findings. The task often involves interpreting on-the-spot comparisons or includes notes or discrepancies in histories that require thorough analysis, which differentiates from low activation samples where comparisons or findings are straightforward.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4777777777777778,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4829,latent_4829,31501,0.063002,0.029257001,3.0266316,Mild pulmonary edema with enlarged cardiac silhouette or tortuous aorta.,"These examples describe mild pulmonary edema in multiple findings, characterized by terms like 'cardiac silhouette is mildly enlarged', 'moderate pulmonary edema', 'persistent small pleural effusions'. Additionally, tortuosity of the aorta often accompanies the descriptions, potentially linking to hypertension.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4594594594594595,0.17,100.0,100.0
+4830,latent_4830,1896,0.003792,0.0064686844,8.160287,Comparison of imaging findings with prior studies to assess changes.,"In this set of examples, the pattern highlights clinical scenarios where the radiology study requires a detailed description based on comparison with prior imaging, often using terms like 'no significant change', 'unchanged', 'new findings', and specific historical context for evaluating changes over time. This is common practice in serial imaging follow-up to assess for disease progression or treatment response.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4831,latent_4831,15172,0.030344,0.023589915,6.601135,Descriptive comparison of findings with previous radiographs.,"Detailed comparisons with previous radiographs, including descriptions of new findings or stability of past findings, increase activation levels. Higher-level comparisons often use specific language describing directional changes or stability in pathologies, while lower activation examples lack these detailed comparisons or contain purely anatomical descriptions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6202791461412152,0.63,0.5984848484848485,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4832,latent_4832,4135,0.00827,0.009438827,7.5212846,Radiology evaluation focused on medical device placement confirmation.,"These examples consistently involve radiology reports where the primary focus is on the description and confirmation of correct placement of medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or other implements within the body, indicated by phrases like 'tip projecting over the stomach' or 'confirm placement'. The reports emphasize details around ensuring proper positioning and any changes indicating displacement, reflecting clinical scenarios centered on device management.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3708155198838428,0.415,0.3191489361702128,0.15,100.0,100.0
+4833,latent_4833,4897,0.009794,0.008735591,7.4868393,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior images and specific patient history.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include instructions to compare findings against prior images, and they mention various patient histories or conditions. These elements indicate a focus on evaluating changes over time due to existing medical conditions or interventions, which are crucial in radiology follow-ups.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5203836930455635,0.565,0.5403726708074534,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4834,latent_4834,21323,0.042646,0.024085801,7.8115606,Changes in pleural effusions or pneumothoraces.,"The examples with higher activations involve changes or possible changes related to pleural effusions, pneumothoraces, or other pleural conditions. These findings often necessitate a detailed comparison with prior images and involve assessing changes in lung and pleural conditions, particularly focusing on the status of the pleura.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6307753140493354,0.6934673366834171,0.4307692307692308,0.5384615384615384,52.0,147.0
+4835,latent_4835,12823,0.025646,0.015403649,5.504384,Presence or description of mass in imaging studies.,"The common feature among examples with high activation levels is the presence of a radiological mass observed in an imaging study. These examples describe such masses, detailing or confirming their dimensions or compatibility with known conditions, often related to malignancies, while also assessing their constancy or change in size.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4007664932931837,0.5025125628140703,0.5294117647058824,0.09,100.0,99.0
+4836,latent_4836,8559,0.017118,0.016578611,3.5890694,Comparison to prior imaging studies with specific details.,"Examples with high activation involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, frequently using language that describes this comparison relative to historical images across multiple modalities with specific dates or indications. The context of comparison includes historical references and discussing image changes or stability over time, which is emphasized prominently within the task prompts.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4555555555555555,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4837,latent_4837,3678,0.007356,0.009845492,4.4649143,Description of significant changes compared to prior imaging.,"In these examples, the model is tasked to describe findings in current image comparisons to prior images. When significant changes are detected, it results in high activation levels. Language indicating significant change like 'improved', 'unchanged', 'better', or 'worsened' in comparison to past imaging is prominent in examples with high activation.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4838,latent_4838,5079,0.010158,0.014022941,4.058567,Explicit comparison to previous imaging.,"The pattern observed is that reports with high activation levels contain explicit comparisons to previous imaging, often with references to prior reports or images. This includes using the word 'comparison' and others related to 'prior', indicating an element of comparison with past reports or images. This suggests the model is sensitive to discussions of longitudinal change or stability in findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4839,latent_4839,2396,0.004792,0.007297733,4.4777265,Short preamble with references to current and prior images.,"The highly activated examples prominently feature short initial prompts containing phrases like 'Given the current frontal image' followed by 'and the prior frontal image'. This indicates a pattern of generating reports based on comparison between current and prior images using structured, concise preambles.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4744948808553049,0.565,0.5355191256830601,0.98,100.0,100.0
+4840,latent_4840,34859,0.069718,0.043317787,5.536978,Atelectasis or lung opacities with stable heart or mediastinum in comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on findings of atelectasis or similar focal lung opacities and their association with unchanged conditions in the heart or mediastinum. The examples discuss the pulmonary processes with specific mentions of opacities, atelectasis, and mediastinal structures, often in the context of a comparison to prior imaging without significant changes in the cardiomediastinal silhouette.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.67499187479687,0.675,0.6732673267326733,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4841,latent_4841,4014,0.008028,0.0064255996,4.8318424,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings with emphasis on change over time.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions or interpretations of current chest imaging findings explicitly in comparison to past images, focusing on changes or stability over time. This mode of reporting is typical in radiology to determine the evolution or resolution of a condition, often involving phrases such as 'interval change', 'compared to prior', 'since previous exam', etc.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4842,latent_4842,5157,0.010314,0.011083983,4.2669497,Evaluation of interval change in radiology findings.,"The pattern in these examples involves descriptions of findings with a focus on interval changes between the current and prior radiology studies, especially noting new, worsening, or unchanged aspects of patients' conditions. These interval observations are crucial for tracking the progress of medical conditions over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4843,latent_4843,6053,0.012106,0.008830772,4.2788134,Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples focus on explicit and detailed comparisons of radiographic findings between current and prior imaging studies, often noting specific changes or stability in conditions. This often includes descriptions of sizes, positions, and evolution of specific features such as atelectasis, effusions, pneumonia, cardiomegaly, etc.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.537583350171752,0.5376884422110553,0.5416666666666666,0.52,100.0,99.0
+4844,latent_4844,11902,0.023804,0.014890008,8.700292,Dobbhoff catheter placement or adjustments across studies.,"The high activation examples mention changes or stability in Dobbhoff catheter positioning across studies, which is a specific procedure-related evaluation in radiology involving feeding tube placement. This is distinct from general radiographic interpretation and focuses on tube positioning interpretations and adjustments over comparisons.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.8,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4349626533534579,0.635,0.2666666666666666,0.0606060606060606,66.0,134.0
+4845,latent_4845,4992,0.009984,0.010240821,3.510669,"Comparison of current images with prior, noting changes in lung and chest findings.","These examples use a specific pattern where multiple current images are described and findings are compared to a prior image, particularly focusing on lung-related findings while assessing for changes or any new findings from previous frontal images. The primary focus is on the stability or change noted upon comparison, but examples without available comparison yield low activation.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4846,latent_4846,13063,0.026126,0.028116602,7.375405,Interval change or positioning of medical devices like tubes and catheters.,"Despite having varied activation levels, a clear pattern emerges in examples with higher activation levels which frequently address the positioning and interval change related to medical devices such as chest tubes, nasogastric tubes, or intravascular catheters. This specific focus on device placement and interval comparison is often indicative of acute procedural or post-procedural radiographic assessment.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4368076332174335,0.4723618090452261,0.4489795918367347,0.22,100.0,99.0
+4847,latent_4847,7953,0.015906,0.008851987,5.967206,Direct comparison of current findings to prior studies.,"This pattern involves making specific comparisons to prior imaging studies. When there is mention of comparison, context such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or documentation of changes over intervals can activate this pattern. It may involve documenting stability, resolution, or change of certain findings over time, often implying medical decision-making based on these comparative assessments.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4601248976248976,0.4673366834170854,0.4296296296296296,0.6666666666666666,87.0,112.0
+4848,latent_4848,7481,0.014962,0.015298106,6.781929,Changes noted in comparison with prior imaging.,"The maximizing examples consistently include changes in certain features when comparing current and prior images, typically focusing on modifications such as changes in lung conditions, device placements, or heart size. Descriptions include phrases like 'as compared to previous' or 'change noted' indicating these interval changes.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5047619047619047,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4849,latent_4849,7689,0.015378,0.019405814,5.696284,Evaluation of interval changes or comparison in radiology results.,The examples with high activations consistently refer to descriptions intended for comparison or interval change assessment in radiological findings paired with the use of language suggesting evaluation over time or against prior results. The language focuses on interval changes and comparative outcomes based on findings from current and previous images.,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4107382934294459,0.485,0.4912280701754385,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4850,latent_4850,3318,0.006636,0.0075118043,4.0765104,Comparison of findings with prior studies emphasizing stability or changes.,"The pattern between activation levels indicates a focus on identifying changes over time, particularly with reference to comparison studies showing alterations or stability. High activation occurs where stability or change is explicitly discussed, with reference to alterations, consistency, or interval developments in pathology or procedure outcomes.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4555902812783546,0.46,0.4661016949152542,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4851,latent_4851,3543,0.007086,0.01538667,5.947691,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings on thoracic imaging over time.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence of enduring or unchanged findings when comparing current and prior chest imaging studies, particularly focusing on cardiovascular, pulmonary, mediastinal features, as well as the position or changes in medical devices. This indicates a focus on continuity and stability of clinical findings or management of ongoing medical conditions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4533463727776524,0.455,0.449438202247191,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4852,latent_4852,5589,0.011178,0.012208863,5.2500362,Observation and positioning of support devices.,"The higher activation examples highlight descriptions related to monitoring or support devices, focusing on their positioning and impact on cardiomediastinal contours. Common language includes terms like 'unchanged position', 'stable appearance', 'nasogastric tube', and 'endotracheal tube'.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5121552604698671,0.5175879396984925,0.5189873417721519,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+4853,latent_4853,8564,0.017128,0.021271579,4.2643404,Use of current frontal and lateral images along with prior frontal for comparison.,"Highly activated examples include references to current frontal and lateral views along with prior frontal reference, presumably indicating a comprehensive assessment based on multiple imaging perspectives, allowing for detailed comparative analysis of findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.4469696969696969,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4854,latent_4854,10041,0.020082,0.012060959,4.824076,Description of interval changes or relating findings to prior imaging.,"Reports with activations refer to clear abnormal findings or suggest significant interval changes compared to prior studies. These explanations frequently directly note observations such as 'interval changes' or 'unchanged', making comparison a central element for assessing condition stability or progression.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4492229082393016,0.4773869346733668,0.4827586206896552,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+4855,latent_4855,22069,0.044138,0.044694517,5.3991714,Analysis of interval change in chest radiographs through comparison with prior images.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently discuss changes or stability in the radiological findings by comparing them with past images, highlighting changes or no changes in pulmonary or cardiac conditions over time and emphasizing the assessment of devices and any new formations. They are explicit about differences in findings between consecutive studies.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6009060511271707,0.63,0.5844155844155844,0.9,100.0,100.0
+4856,latent_4856,17727,0.035454,0.017794011,6.141693,Clear interval changes in pathologies or treatment status compared to prior imaging.,"The consistency across highly activated examples lies in their explicit mention of both current and prior images, often with specific indications for conditions such as pneumonia, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion, as well as comparisons for interval change. These examples frequently use phrases emphasizing comparison and description of current versus prior findings, which aligns with the activation pattern.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.3478260869565217,0.4324324324324324,74.0,126.0
+4857,latent_4857,12838,0.025676,0.018676322,5.5477743,Comparison indicates normal findings with no acute changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparing current and prior imaging, with normal findings in the current images and no acute issues noted, such as normal cardiac silhouette, unremarkable mediastinal contours, and clear lungs without effusion or pneumothorax.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6464646464646464,0.65,0.6875,0.55,100.0,100.0
+4858,latent_4858,3721,0.007442,0.0071386495,3.4665313,Comparisons to prior imaging with specific clinical evaluation or interpretation of changes.,"The pattern in these examples focuses on cases where radiological assessments compare current findings to prior images, especially when providing a detailed analysis that includes findings or impressions indicating stability, improvement, change, or clinical recommendations. This is evident in references to prior assessments and the assessment of changes between them.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5261904761904762,0.5276381909547738,0.5225225225225225,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+4859,latent_4859,4750,0.0095,0.00869883,7.7157946,Assessment or description of changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Many samples involve scenarios where comparison to prior radiographs is used to assess changes or stability in the patient's condition. The high activation levels correspond to evaluations that describe or specifically assess interval changes, differences, or stability compared to prior imaging data.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4193548387096774,0.5842696629213483,89.0,111.0
+4860,latent_4860,29098,0.058196,0.04896742,6.4890738,Comparisons of support device positioning or anatomical changes with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed findings compared to prior studies, emphasizing intervals, changes, or updates to specific support devices or anatomical structures. The pattern involves the use of comparative language indicating updates or status change of medical equipment compared to prior imaging.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6592487746061702,0.675,0.6223776223776224,0.89,100.0,100.0
+4861,latent_4861,15983,0.031966,0.021137884,4.8030686,Comparison to prior imaging highlights stability or unchanged findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve radiological interpretations of current images in comparison specifically to prior images, following a stable or pathologically stable course. This often includes language indicating unchanged conditions, stability over time, or specific comparison to previous identical exams.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5753424657534246,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4862,latent_4862,3229,0.006458,0.007439767,4.453481,Evaluation for interval changes using comparison with prior images.,"These examples focus on analyzing current and prior radiographic imaging for interval changes. This involves systematically comparing findings to assess if there has been any change, improvement, or consistency in pathology or anatomical positioning since previous studies, often reported using phrases indicating no significant change or noting persisting abnormalities.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4863,latent_4863,4751,0.009502,0.009511508,5.4905076,This pattern focuses on findings unchanged or consistent with prior imaging.,"The pattern identified is related to reports of imaging studies where findings or descriptions are reiterated in context to earlier reports or images. This is indicated by descriptions such as 'unchanged', 'similar to prior exam', or 'compared to prior films'. The pattern highlights reports focused on the observation of change or stability over time based on previous examinations, shown in high activation examples with consistent comparisons.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5749893747343684,0.575,0.5742574257425742,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4864,latent_4864,9178,0.018356,0.012803669,4.816701,Reports noting changes or stabilities compared to previous studies.,"The highly activated examples contain instances of comparison references where there is evidence of change or differentiation from a previous study, often indicating clinical relevance or a need for further clinical action. This is a common theme in radiological reports where significant findings are highlighted.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4287014333021562,0.435,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4865,latent_4865,4051,0.008102,0.010764461,8.260407,Changes in lung volumes and associated lung findings from imaging.,"These examples trigger the pattern due to findings involving the lungs or thoracic cavity indicating changes in lung volumes, presence or resolution of pulmonary opacities or consolidation, or involvement of lung structures such as taken a better inspiration, hyperinflation, or low lung volumes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4831460674157303,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4866,latent_4866,55002,0.110004,0.047896445,2.9558783,"Describing changes or stability compared to prior imaging, regardless of significance.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently reference changes in patient's current imaging findings compared to a prior image, even when the change is minimal or negligible. These reports use language describing any observed differences, stability, or issues in interpreting changes due to conditions like rotation or underpenetration.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+4867,latent_4867,15508,0.031016,0.017462097,5.2971764,Changes or stability in devices/anatomical features between imaging studies.,"The pattern observed in these examples involves radiological reports that detail changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical features over time, often with reference to previous imaging studies for comparison. High activation levels occur when changes or stable placements of tubes, lines, and surgical alterations are noted, indicating analysis over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4868,latent_4868,25859,0.051718,0.022543455,3.000502,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in radiological findings.,"Samples with higher activation levels involve not only identifying and describing current radiological findings but also include comparisons to prior imaging, emphasizing descriptions of interval changes or stability, often mixed with observations concerning additional features like devices or anatomical structure positions.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4869,latent_4869,4176,0.008352,0.011883415,6.1686745,Findings compared with prior images for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently discuss comparison with prior imaging studies, while examining for interval changes or stability. These comparisons are detailed, explicitly mentioning prior findings or images and their current status. They often mention unchanged or stable conditions explicitly.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4870,latent_4870,4580,0.00916,0.010045896,5.227639,Placement and positioning of medical devices in imaging.,"The examples consistently refer to the insertion and position of medical devices, such as catheters or tubes, and changes observed in these devices between studies, including comparison to prior placements, adjustments, or initial placements. This pattern emphasizes the positional aspect of medical devices in imaging.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4459459459459459,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4871,latent_4871,47020,0.09404,0.072562516,4.954062,Evaluation of stability or change in conditions over time compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation focus on the analysis of baseline and previous conditions for stability or change in the findings. They emphasize the evaluation of interval changes compared to prior examinations, looking for stability or change in noted conditions such as lung opacities or device placements, rather than simply describing conditions like pneumonia or effusions. This indicates a pattern where the focus is on finding stability or discussing changes over time against baseline or previous images.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5275176737361611,0.5527638190954773,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,99.0
+4872,latent_4872,22424,0.044848,0.028572982,4.8046646,Comparison to prior images highlighting changes in lung or pleural findings.,"The consistent feature across these examples is the presence of a reference to prior imaging and mention of changes in pulmonary or pleural findings when compared to those prior images. The description typically includes changes in pleural effusion, pneumothorax status, atelectasis, or consolidation compared to prior reports, leading to higher activation.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6946259167480163,0.695,0.6822429906542056,0.73,100.0,100.0
+4873,latent_4873,23931,0.047862,0.04358149,5.681767,Identification of significant changes relative to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe various pathological changes within the context of previous imagery, showing a pattern of identifying and evaluating changes in the condition over time by comparing current images to prior or earlier studies. The presence of interval change or notable consistency with prior findings often highlights disease progression or stability, contributing to the pattern recognized with high activations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.6164383561643836,0.45,100.0,100.0
+4874,latent_4874,3828,0.007656,0.0096612675,4.273299,"Explicit comparisons with prior images, indicating interval change or stability.",The highly activated examples consistently describe findings from radiology reports by explicitly comparing the current images with prior images or examinations. This pattern highlights the emphasis on assessing changes or stability over time in follow-up imaging studies using phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph'.,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4875,latent_4875,4444,0.008888,0.010271894,6.3062544,Cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette.,"Samples with high activation often have notable cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouettes. This specific finding is repeated across many examples where activation levels are higher, regardless of other conditions noted.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8641981549349171,0.864321608040201,0.8476190476190476,0.89,100.0,99.0
+4876,latent_4876,2689,0.005378,0.0062345224,6.8371906,Unremarkable mediastinal and hilar contours.,The examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of the mediastinal and hilar contours as being normal or unremarkable. This pattern suggests a focus on the absence of abnormalities in these particular thoracic structures in the activation process.,0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7415824276050771,0.745,0.6991869918699187,0.86,100.0,100.0
+4877,latent_4877,40868,0.081736,0.077076174,5.0091424,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels consistently reference specific changes or comparisons to prior imaging studies, such as interval changes, stable lesions, or new placements/procedures validated against the previous imaging. This often involves referencing dates or previous findings directly in the description, indicating a focus on detecting changes over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6292063492063492,0.635,0.608,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4878,latent_4878,6875,0.01375,0.01115816,3.8096938,"Description focuses on comparison with prior imaging, noting significant interval changes or stability.","These examples demonstrate a pattern of radiological comparison between current and prior imaging, with a focus on evaluating changes, whether significant or interval. The model activation seems to highlight reports that contain specific details about changes compared to previous studies.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4673232323232323,0.4673366834170854,0.47,0.47,100.0,99.0
+4879,latent_4879,58430,0.11686,0.07105573,7.1755977,Comparison with prior imaging that assesses change or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels commonly include a direct description or evaluation of the current findings as compared to those in prior imaging reports. This comparison is accompanied by a status update or change assessment, which is integral to understanding the progression or stability of a medical condition in the patient.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5538461538461539,0.7659574468085106,94.0,106.0
+4880,latent_4880,9623,0.019246,0.014528256,5.8281603,Detailed comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels typically provide a thorough description of both the current imaging findings and a detailed comparison with prior imaging studies. There is a consistent focus on stability, changes, or resolutions in the condition being monitored, often emphasizing continuity or progression in findings from previous reports. These detailed comparative assessments reflect the reports' focus on evaluating longitudinal changes.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4881,latent_4881,3127,0.006254,0.0074461503,5.1147876,Updates or confirmations on tubing and line positions based on image comparison.,"The examples demonstrate an increased activation level in scenarios where changes or confirmations of medical devices (like tubes or lines) and their positions are noted, often in comparison to previous images.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5857142857142857,0.41,100.0,100.0
+4882,latent_4882,7826,0.015652,0.012427113,4.285428,No significant interval change compared to prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize the stability of findings or lack of significant change when compared to prior imaging, even when pathologies are noted (like atelectasis or minimal opacities). This common radiological practice aids in assessing progression or resolution of disease and aligning with the context of no new acute findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.660377358490566,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4883,latent_4883,8652,0.017304,0.017364284,5.917145,Comparison stating interval changes or stability in pathology/images.,"The reported descriptions have a focus on interval changes identified through direct comparison of the current and previous images. Impressions frequently indicate stability or change in pathology, emphasizing details such as new developments, removals, or stability of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or lines.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.537583350171752,0.5376884422110553,0.5416666666666666,0.52,100.0,99.0
+4884,latent_4884,4564,0.009128,0.014247654,6.7696085,Descriptions of findings in absence of prior comparison data.,"The highly activated examples consistently lack any prior imaging for comparison, yet require a description as if a comparison exists. This represents a pattern of incongruity where the prompt suggests a comparison making the task difficult without prior data.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5131578947368421,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4885,latent_4885,15807,0.031614,0.017091522,6.367276,Radiological comparisons with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples reflect a pattern of detailed comparative analysis between current and previous imaging studies, noting stability or changes in medical conditions, object placements, and anatomical features.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.7674418604651163,86.0,114.0
+4886,latent_4886,25357,0.050714,0.03063993,7.863136,"Comparison with prior imaging, focusing on interval changes or stability.","The higher activation levels correspond to examples comparing current findings with prior imaging, especially when there is an emphasis on changes, stability, or resolution of findings over time. Examples with ""unchanged"", ""interval improvement"", or ""previously seen"" align with the pattern of tracking changes over time in medical imaging.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.3564356435643564,0.5,72.0,128.0
+4887,latent_4887,4816,0.009632,0.007120377,6.8632684,Comparison of current imaging findings with one or more prior images.,"High-activation examples consistently describe changes or stabilities observed in findings between a current image and one or more prior images, indicating a comparison is a key part of the pattern. This involves terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'interval changes', or dates that link to previous studies, demonstrating a process of evaluation through change detection.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.50920245398773,0.8469387755102041,98.0,102.0
+4888,latent_4888,4234,0.008468,0.0097837215,5.759832,Descriptions in comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently include a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging. This pattern focuses on identifying changes or stability in medical imaging, which is a critical aspect of radiological assessments, particularly in ongoing monitoring of conditions.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4889,latent_4889,6045,0.01209,0.010551429,7.702998,Comparison to previous imaging reflecting changes in clinical condition or pathology.,"Higher activations are present when there is an explicit comparison with prior images noted, particularly when changes in pathology, such as size of fluid collections, position of devices, or appearance of opacities, are described. These examples commonly address findings as stable or changed compared to a prior imaging study, which is a key pattern in radiological assessments.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5251798561151079,0.776595744680851,94.0,106.0
+4890,latent_4890,5751,0.011502,0.011600621,6.848332,Focused evaluation of interval changes or device positioning.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on reports where changes over time are assessed, particularly in relation to interval changes or the stability of medical devices like tubes, lines, or in relation to acute conditions (e.g., pneumothorax, changes after chest procedures). This pattern involves descriptions assessing for changes or lack thereof since the prior, often recent, imaging, emphasizing interval change assessment.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4891,latent_4891,3588,0.007176,0.008101973,4.5529146,Explicit comparison and documentation of changes between current and prior radiology images.,"The examples with high activation levels often indicate a clear comparison between current and prior imaging studies, explicitly noting stability or changes in condition, which is essential in radiological evaluations. This pattern involves consistent mention of the comparison process and uses descriptive terms to assess changes or stabilities, such as 'unchanged', 'little change', or specifying improvements or new findings relative to past images.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+4892,latent_4892,59869,0.119738,0.0643522,6.1629224,Comparison highlighting changes in cardiopulmonary conditions or device positioning.,"The pattern observed is consistent across examples where there is a description of a cardiopulmonary or related issue in the current imaging when compared with prior images. These reports tend to highlight changes in established conditions such as cardiomegaly, atelectasis, pleural effusion, or the position of lines and tubes, indicating an effort to assess for interval change in a chronic or monitored condition.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4893,latent_4893,5048,0.010096,0.020556668,9.636569,Generated imaging comparison despite missing prior comparison data.,"Examples exhibit completion of prompts where imaging findings are compared to previous studies, even if no prior comparison is accessible.&nbsp;The requests primarily focus on changes or stability in certain medical devices or anatomical features observed in sequential imaging studies. High activation occurs when comparison details are absent yet results are generated, indicating a pattern of completing information requests despite having limited comparison data.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4894,latent_4894,12408,0.024816,0.014589278,3.4615593,"Comparison with specific prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples with a high activation level consistently provide a comparison of the current radiological findings with specific prior studies or images. Key terms include 'compared to prior', 'since prior', 'unchanged from' and specified previous dates or cases. This demonstrates a documented pattern of evaluating stability or change over time rather than isolated findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+4895,latent_4895,5201,0.010402,0.013343691,4.3760357,Comparison of current and prior imaging with stable cardiac or lung findings.,The pattern observed in the high activation examples shows comparison between current and prior imaging alongside a relatively stable or unchanged feature such as cardiac silhouette or stable lung findings with slight changes or findings. This pattern indicates the focus is on the comparison with prior imaging despite any noted pathologies.,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4896,latent_4896,8472,0.016944,0.020721117,4.384977,Stable findings across different radiographic views.,"Examples with high activation levels feature a specific pattern where the analysis is based on the combination of multiple views (frontal, lateral) and includes descriptions of stable or unchanged pathology across views, even if comparison with prior images indicates no significant acute changes. This indicates the model identifies stabilizing features across different imaging planes as crucial.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4897,latent_4897,7957,0.015914,0.01129735,3.5957198,"Detailed comparison between previous and current imaging, noting stability or changes.","The pattern indicates instances where detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies focus on changes in pathology, even when these changes are minimal or absent. This often includes those involving indwelling medical devices or tubes, and any abnormalities or changes in pulmonary or thoracic structures. Activation is observed based on notable descriptive changes or stability of these features over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4898,latent_4898,2728,0.005456,0.008545813,5.659767,Emphasis on interval changes in medical devices or conditions.,"The pattern here involves a focus on reporting interval changes, stability, or removal of medical devices/applications (like tubes, lines, etc.) and comments on changes related to conditions such as effusions or pulmonary congestion compared to previous images. High activation levels correspond to reports emphasizing these types of changes.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4899,latent_4899,23632,0.047264,0.024010105,2.4893835,Evaluation of imaging findings compared to prior chest images.,"These highly representative examples involve a detailed analysis of current imaging findings in the context of prior imaging for comparison, especially with prior chest images or radiographs. They consistently involve evaluating and noting changes, non-changes, or expected post-procedure appearances, which is a common practice in radiology to track disease progression, resolution, or stability.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4900,latent_4900,9648,0.019296,0.021540333,5.9798613,Significant changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently reference comparisons to prior imaging studies, identifying specific changes or lack thereof over time. Activation levels are high when these comparisons show significant changes or stability in notable structures such as opacities, effusions, or the cardiomediastinal silhouette. This reflects a pattern of emphasizing changes in findings over time in radiology reports.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5895720909021813,0.595,0.5772357723577236,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4901,latent_4901,4508,0.009016,0.008053787,3.4901075,Repeated evaluations showing normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The pattern shows examples often involving descriptions of a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and absence of acute processes, without indicating significant findings despite prompts involving current and prior images. Subtle changes may be noted, but the overall tone underscores stability or normalcy. This pattern is encapsulated in radiology reports where a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette suggests little or no change or serious abnormality in the context of repeated imaging.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.6379310344827587,0.37,100.0,100.0
+4902,latent_4902,29157,0.058314,0.031929836,6.3576016,Improvement or stability in a medical condition over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparison and mention of improvements or resolutions regarding medical conditions. These instances describe improving or stable conditions in the subject reviewed across multiple studies, indicating progress, a pattern of interest in radiology evaluating therapeutic efficacy or patient recovery. ",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5,0.4888888888888889,90.0,110.0
+4903,latent_4903,2249,0.004498,0.010165616,7.064962,Detection of mild to moderate abnormalities in chest imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation often describe mild to moderate findings such as mild cardiomegaly, mild pulmonary vascular congestion, or mild interstitial edema. These findings suggest the model is sensitive to descriptions indicating minor abnormalities or changes likely related to early disease or chronic but stable conditions rather than fully normal or acutely abnormal findings.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.688974688974689,0.71,0.6381578947368421,0.97,100.0,100.0
+4904,latent_4904,4954,0.009908,0.011398942,6.2211747,"Descriptive imaging comparison focused on changes, especially device positioning.","Examples with higher activation levels include comparisons that detail specific changes over time, like device placements, consolidation resolution, or atelectasis improvements, often including descriptions of tube or catheter positioning across current and prior images. Reports without such detail and focus, often stating no comparison or change, have low activation.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+4905,latent_4905,17262,0.034524,0.017894875,3.4323263,Acute or marked changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples show prominent references to findings that indicate acute or marked changes compared to prior images, often noted alongside chronic or stable processes. The pattern combines recognition of acute or worsening conditions while previous findings are also used to underscore stability or persistence of chronic findings.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5102040816326531,0.25,100.0,100.0
+4906,latent_4906,10276,0.020552,0.014809332,6.6711607,Significant interval changes in condition or devices across serial studies.,"The highly activated examples involve significant observations of change over time, particularly related to acute conditions such as atelectasis or effusion changes, as well as devices like tubes and lines. The pattern is about identifying and noting temporal alterations in clinical conditions across serial imaging studies, not merely commenting on stability or 'no change'.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5362318840579711,0.3775510204081632,98.0,102.0
+4907,latent_4907,19521,0.039042,0.015594213,3.6134176,Specific comparison of current findings with prior images.,"The main linguistic pattern among examples with higher activation levels is the identification of detailed and notable changes or stabilities reported from findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. These examples consistently note comparisons between current and prior images, often highlighting changes, stabilities, or the absence of acute findings. This focus on detailed radiological comparisons characterizes these examples, unlike those without such comparisons or detailed observations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+4908,latent_4908,12127,0.024254,0.019015834,5.511737,Depictions of comparison to both current and prior images.,"These examples include both current and prior imaging, with explicit discussions of findings compared to previous examinations. Differences in captioning elements like 'current frontal image' and 'prior frontal image', and explicit comparison of findings, particularly where changes are noted or lack thereof, drive activation highlighting comparative description.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+4909,latent_4909,3487,0.006974,0.007367034,4.3687005,Comparison between current and prior images for interval change assessment.,"These examples frequently reference image comparisons where descriptions focus on identifying interval changes or stability of findings between current and prior examinations. They are structured to assess modifications between sequential studies, particularly those without acute findings.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4634146341463415,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4910,latent_4910,7786,0.015572,0.016865179,4.4194818,Assessment of specific injuries or findings in relation to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a detailed acknowledgment of both current and prior imaging results, with specific descriptions or assessments of injury or pathology in relation to previous findings. The explicit description of changes such as fractures, pneumothorax, etc., contrasted with wording indicating 'comparison' or 'assessment' related to prior radiographs, exhibit a pattern of contrastive analysis.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5263157894736842,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4911,latent_4911,7101,0.014202,0.0102432035,4.224067,Comparison focusing on medical devices or lines placement.,"Instances where medical devices like tubes or lines are mentioned tend to have high activation. These examples specifically involve descriptions or evaluations of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or chest tubes, focusing on their placement or changes since a prior image. Comparisons to prior images in the context of medical device assessment are commonly noted in radiological reports where high attention to detail is necessary.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6597938144329897,0.64,100.0,100.0
+4912,latent_4912,10286,0.020572,0.015836375,5.6834054,Assessment of stability or interval changes compared to prior exam.,"Highly activated examples often mention interval changes or comparisons to prior exams, noting stability or slight alterations in findings, particularly when previous pathologies are unchanged or stable. The pattern focuses on reports that assess ongoing conditions via prior comparisons.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4913,latent_4913,29733,0.059466,0.032698885,6.053521,Radiographic evaluation relative to prior studies.,"The pattern involves descriptions of radiographic findings that are evaluated in comparison to previously taken images. A typical aspect in these examples is 'comparison' statements, indicating stability or changes relative to prior images and observing findings across multiple studies to assess progression, regression, or stasis of conditions.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4247151233543533,0.48,0.4876543209876543,0.79,100.0,100.0
+4914,latent_4914,5188,0.010376,0.009080349,5.7671175,Documentation of catheter or tube placement and positioning compared to previous imaging.,"The examples show explicit documentation of the placement and course of catheters or tubes, such as PICC, central venous catheters, pigtail, enteric tubes, and nasogastric tubes. Reports identify the positioning and any changes or consistencies in these placements compared to prior images.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+4915,latent_4915,19763,0.039526,0.022250537,3.0742054,Instruction to provide findings based on comparison of current and prior images.,"Higher activation examples are characterized by instructions starting with a standardized phrase referring to current and prior images and requiring an analysis of findings in those images. No specific pathological indication or findings are noted, emphasizing image description over clinical findings or indications.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4259381171823568,0.455,0.4689655172413793,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4916,latent_4916,6146,0.012292,0.010894898,4.8254113,Focus on interval change in tube or line positioning.,"The examples all note changes in the position of tubes or lines (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube, PICC), including measurements of distance from anatomical landmarks like the carina, when comparing current and prior images. This focus on interval change in tube or line positioning is a critical aspect of certain radiology reports.",0.517757809157039,0.5306122448979592,0.5625,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5305164319248826,0.57,0.6666666666666666,0.28,100.0,100.0
+4917,latent_4917,10324,0.020648,0.015592255,9.092819,"Evaluation or repositioning of tubes/catheters relative to prior images, with anatomical measurements.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve evaluating or re-positioning of tubes, catheters, or lines in relation to prior images, emphasizing changes in their positioning. The examples describe intervals of repositioning with measurements of distance from anatomical landmarks, providing critical information post-surgery or intervention.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5480419920478274,0.605,0.5319148936170213,0.3048780487804878,82.0,118.0
+4918,latent_4918,20154,0.040308,0.02506261,5.2513733,Comparison with prior imaging including medical device position or changes.,"The examples with higher activations contain references to both comparison with prior imaging and specific observations regarding the position or signage of tubes, catheters, or other medical devices in the body. This indicates a focus on both stability or progression of condition and considerations of mechanical support placements as patterns of interest.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.595959595959596,0.6,0.625,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4919,latent_4919,4367,0.008734,0.009728736,5.5663047,Stable cardiomediastinal/cardiac silhouettes without acute changes.,"The high activation examples typically describe stable cardiomediastinal or cardiac silhouettes, sometimes mildly enlarged, often without focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, and mention other findings like tortuosity of the aorta. This suggests that the model activates when there are no acute, significant changes in these silhouettes, possibly due to this being a common typical pattern in such reports.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6314056390203746,0.6381909547738693,0.6111111111111112,0.77,100.0,99.0
+4920,latent_4920,4603,0.009206,0.011566523,4.2075405,"Comparison of current findings with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation frequently describe cases where findings are reported in comparison to prior images, indicating changes, stability, or removal of elements (e.g., tubes, effusions). They utilize language related to procedural interventions or changes over time. Examples with comparisons to previous radiographs or changes noted have higher activation, while those without such descriptions or with minimal findings have low activation.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4921,latent_4921,104979,0.209958,0.12936367,4.9491725,Comparison to prior images with specific noted changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit evaluation or description of findings in comparison to prior imaging. This includes any noted pulmonary changes or stability, and specific changes in structures or devices noted from prior reports. Lower activation examples lack such direct comparisons or descriptions of change.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.64024220313648,0.645,0.6178861788617886,0.76,100.0,100.0
+4922,latent_4922,6077,0.012154,0.010491841,5.196598,Comparison of current images with prior images to evaluate for changes.,"Examples consistently refer to multiple images with a directive to compare findings against prior images, often using terminology like 'compared to', 'similar to prior', or 'in comparison to', typically with a goal of monitoring changes in patient condition.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+4923,latent_4923,15004,0.030008,0.014647024,6.4351635,Comparative assessment of new images against prior studies with explicit evaluation of stability or change.,"This data suggests that the model shows higher activation when tasked with providing a comparative interpretation between current imaging and prior studies, particularly when there is explicit acknowledgment of stability or change in pathology. This pattern is hinted by examples with explicit dates and references to changes in clinical conditions between studies.",0.4691666666666666,0.4693877551020408,0.48,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.2758620689655172,0.5714285714285714,56.0,144.0
+4924,latent_4924,22749,0.045498,0.021189762,4.011195,Comparison of current and prior images with focus on lung and device changes.,"The samples with moderate activation levels describe findings by comparing current and prior frontal images, particularly focusing on significant changes or improvements in lung processes or devices. Comparison is essential, especially with prior history, without an explicit prior report, prompting attention on notable changes or possible complications, such as tube displacements or effusion changes.",0.517757809157039,0.5306122448979592,0.53125,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5546218487394958,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4925,latent_4925,52383,0.104766,0.06763517,4.4483585,Findings from frontal and lateral chest X-ray with diaphragm or pleural changes.,"Examples 40, 41, 42, and similar ones with high activations involve using a frontal or lateral chest X-ray image to describe distended or altered diaphragms. These findings often describe interactions between lung conditions such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, pleural plaques, or accompanying cardiac silhouette. These results are derived by comparing current chest X-ray findings to previous ones, hence fulfilling both imaging and diagnostic description requirements.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.5897435897435898,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4926,latent_4926,8562,0.017124,0.011770339,5.716929,Unchanged findings or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of stability or unchanged findings when compared to prior radiographs. Specifically, language like 'unchanged', 'no relevant change', or 'constant appearance' is used, often in relation to medical devices, positioning, or opacities in the lungs.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.651541682527598,0.6532663316582915,0.6371681415929203,0.72,100.0,99.0
+4927,latent_4927,12462,0.024924,0.018166749,7.0750875,Emphasis on comparison to unchanged findings in prior studies.,"Samples with high activation involve reports that explicitly compare and note changes based on prior imaging studies, highlighting stable, unchanged, or improvements in specific findings. This context is key, as it suggests the model activates on descriptions relying heavily on temporal comparison.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.5733333333333334,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4928,latent_4928,4917,0.009834,0.010570556,6.1752667,Diagnostic comparisons with prior imaging showcasing interval or unchanged findings.,"Examples with activation demonstrate reports containing direct comparisons with prior imaging studies, specifically discussing interval or unchanged findings, suggesting a diagnostic focus on monitoring alterations over time or stability of conditions.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5116279069767442,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4929,latent_4929,7908,0.015816,0.013559138,6.490932,Interpretation involving medical device or intervention positioning.,"Examples that have activation levels indicate a continuation related to the interpretation of prior or current imaging, with attention on placement and positioning of medical devices or interventions, such as PICC lines, pacemaker leads, endotracheal tubes, and changes in pleural or lung conditions.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.633128772381746,0.6331658291457286,0.6326530612244898,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+4930,latent_4930,3868,0.007736,0.009711347,5.4746575,Comparative descriptions against prior imaging to assess interval change or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve comparative descriptions of current radiographic imagery with prior images, specifically focusing on identifying interval changes or stability over time. These examples frequently detail the unchanged state of anatomical or pathological findings relative to past imaging, highlighting the continuity or resolution of findings. This pattern indicates that the model associates the use of such comparative language regarding radiological findings as significant.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4931,latent_4931,3766,0.007532,0.0048885522,8.122255,High complexity in interpretation of devices or structural findings relative to prior images.,The high activation levels occur in examples where there is an explicit need for interpreting findings in complex contexts involving multiple devices or significant prior medical interventions. This includes cases where support/monitoring devices or structural changes require careful interpretation relative to potential pathologies or previous images. These contrasts with low-activation examples where such complexities are absent or simple direct comparisons suffice.,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4495045540986888,0.45,0.3453237410071942,0.7164179104477612,67.0,133.0
+4932,latent_4932,3157,0.006314,0.0080005545,11.219243,Description of interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with the highest activation typically emphasize comparison of current radiological images with prior ones, specifically noting interval changes such as increases in effusions, positions of tubes or catheters, and any stable, unchanged pathologies. Reports often highlight minor changes that could impact ongoing patient management, such as adjusting medical devices or tracking the progression or resolution of a pathology.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,100.0,100.0
+4933,latent_4933,7330,0.01466,0.01293413,5.68261,Assessment of subtle and stable changes in chronic conditions.,"These examples often provide descriptions of findings with indications of stability or small changes in various anatomical features, such as heart size or lung opacities, in connection with a history of chronic conditions like emphysema. This suggests a nuanced focus on subtle progression in the context of persistent, non-acute conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4934,latent_4934,27521,0.055042,0.03758313,6.8841243,"Comparison to prior image with focus on changes in lung, cardiac, or mediastinal findings.","The pattern is evident in reports that contain comparison language, particularly when describing changes or stability between current and previous images related to specific findings, often related to lung volumes, opacities, or cardiac contours. This comparison is an essential aspect of tracking medical conditions in radiological imaging.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4935,latent_4935,5798,0.011596,0.010963732,5.935369,Observation of stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels feature examinations incorporating a specific comparison to a prior study or existing findings for evaluation, particularly emphasizing changes or stability over time without an indication of acute abnormalities.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4634146341463415,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4936,latent_4936,5577,0.011154,0.009482692,4.0392065,Focus on comprehensive multi-view and prior comparison analysis in radiology.,"These examples often include instructions for comparing findings across multiple imaging views or against prior imaging results. The pattern underscores checking for discrepancies or consistencies among different views and timelines, emphasizing comprehensive analysis in radiology.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4267714747864581,0.495,0.4970414201183432,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4937,latent_4937,28037,0.056074,0.037521258,8.183716,Changes in inspiratory lung volumes in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a description of lung conditions related to inspiratory volumes, such as decreased volumes, hyperexpansion, or changes in lung aeration/volumes, which are often indicative of specific breathing efforts or conditions.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5783475783475784,0.63,0.4,0.4666666666666667,60.0,140.0
+4938,latent_4938,20761,0.041522,0.016866324,3.1925867,Documentation of interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in specific pulmonary or mediastinal features when compared to previous imaging studies. This suggests that the model is sensitive to reports that highlight interval changes or lack thereof, a common practice in follow-up radiological assessments.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4939,latent_4939,2836,0.005672,0.0068398984,5.6245103,Comparison of current to prior radiological findings in given images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve a prompt that requires comparison of radiological findings between current and prior images, with the explicit instruction to provide descriptions based on these comparisons. This pattern involves assessing any changes or stability in findings over time.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+4940,latent_4940,3125,0.00625,0.008895074,7.010915,Emphasis on cardiac silhouette in radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss radiological findings about the heart such as 'cardiac silhouette is mildly enlarged' or 'normal size of the cardiac silhouette'. These examples consistently focus or comment on the cardiac silhouette's size or its changes, whereas those with low or zero activation rarely focus on the cardiac silhouette.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6462681287584011,0.675,0.6114649681528662,0.96,100.0,100.0
+4941,latent_4941,13022,0.026044,0.013940156,5.4978995,Comparisons to prior images with stable findings or significant interval changes.,"Higher activations involve radiological descriptions that compare new findings with prior imaging, indicating stability or changes (e.g., 'unchanged', 'increased', 'stable'). Lower activations provide observations without comparison or changes noted since there are no prior studies or changes to report.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.3839285714285714,0.6323529411764706,68.0,132.0
+4942,latent_4942,19219,0.038438,0.02109564,2.4398024,Describing interval changes between current and prior images.,"These examples show radiology reports that explicitly involve examining interval changes by comparing a current image with a prior image. This is common when evaluating the effectiveness of treatments or the progression of certain illnesses, and is a repeated theme across the high-activation examples.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4859813084112149,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4943,latent_4943,3775,0.00755,0.008238525,3.5638974,Emphasis on comparison to prior images or explicit stability/change details in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention a comparison to previous imaging studies or describe imaging findings in detail that provide a clear deduction about changes, stability, or explicit positioning of medical devices related to past observations. Terms like 'no change', 'unchanged', or references to prior states are frequently used.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4944,latent_4944,6630,0.01326,0.015030587,7.7689524,Comparison of current and prior frontal images in diagnostics.,"The consistent pattern in these examples are instructions or notes to compare the current 'frontal image' with a 'prior frontal image' within radiology contexts. This suggests the importance of direct visual comparison of imaging over time to identify changes, and these sequentially ordered images form the basis for diagnostic conclusions. This emphasis on comparison reflects protocols in tracking progression or stability of conditions.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.498663101604278,0.55,0.5304878048780488,0.87,100.0,100.0
+4945,latent_4945,3783,0.007566,0.0074318955,10.3385315,Commentary on findings relative to known pre-existing conditions.,"These examples tend to describe findings in the radiology study in relation to known, pre-existing conditions or prior established pathologies rather than newly identified or acute changes. They often mention things like 'known mass', 'known chronic lung infiltrate', and hint towards stable conditions rather than new comparisons.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5377358490566038,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4946,latent_4946,6504,0.013008,0.01051114,3.2962136,Instructions or findings involving comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve instructions or findings based on comparison between current and prior images, which specify this in the verbal prompt using phrases like 'comparison to' or 'as compared to'. This pattern is consistent with describing changes over time or stability in radiographic findings, key elements for radiologists in monitoring disease progression or response to treatment.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4104159842777596,0.46,0.4746835443037974,0.75,100.0,100.0
+4947,latent_4947,46370,0.09274,0.043222196,3.643973,Presence and status of medical devices or interventions compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with cases where the reports explicitly mention medical devices or interventions (like catheters, tubes, drains, or surgical changes) and their positioning or status in comparison to the prior study. These elements indicate specific procedural details that the model seems sensitive to when present alongside the changes noted in imaging findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5825350688740047,0.5829145728643216,0.5913978494623656,0.55,100.0,99.0
+4948,latent_4948,5800,0.0116,0.016696543,4.6980224,Presence of both frontal and lateral chest images in the study.,"The high activation examples consistently include both frontal and lateral views in the imaging technique, suggesting that the involvement of both the frontal and lateral views is a significant pattern for high activation responses.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6637173020204525,0.695,0.6211180124223602,1.0,100.0,100.0
+4949,latent_4949,11892,0.023784,0.019640028,4.7060685,Reports with filled or not obscured PHI fields in findings have high activation.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently lack obscured sections like patient age, gender, or unclear indications, yet they are clear in assessment or comparison even with minimal details. However, example 24 mentioned various anatomical findings but rated low due to such unclear obfuscations.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.4565217391304347,0.21,100.0,100.0
+4950,latent_4950,4132,0.008264,0.012804243,5.674694,Explicit request for comparison of current findings with prior images.,"Higher activation levels are linked with explicit instructions to describe or compare current findings with prior images. Such reports often explicitly request comparison, reflecting a pattern in the data.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.508679986898133,0.55,0.5316455696202531,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4951,latent_4951,3489,0.006978,0.008313262,6.103138,Assessment of interval change in radiological findings using comparison to previous images.,"Examples with high activation emphasize identification of changes or stability between current and prior images, using explicit comparison statements. Examples with low activation lack clear changes or emphasize stability without thorough comparison statements.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6116918003138381,0.635,0.5906040268456376,0.88,100.0,100.0
+4952,latent_4952,11285,0.02257,0.010921347,3.2474234,Description of changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"Examples show descriptions which provide comparison between current radiological findings and prior imaging. They tend to detail changes or stabilities found when comparing present images to previous ones, a common practice in radiological assessment.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4953,latent_4953,4972,0.009944,0.010946376,7.0861707,Direct comparison of current to prior chest images.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to descriptions where both a current image and a prior image of the chest are being directly compared to assess stability or changes in findings, with explicit mentions of specific findings that are unchanged or new in comparison.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3893368824864949,0.415,0.4397163120567376,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4954,latent_4954,9881,0.019762,0.0149242,5.8882055,Comparison with prior imaging and noted changes or stability.,"Most examples showing high activation levels involve scenarios where prior imaging is explicitly compared, often highlighting stable findings or new changes between examinations. This pattern is indicated by phrases like 'compared to prior' and mention of previous dates or results, which is central to the evaluation process in radiology.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4793388429752066,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4955,latent_4955,23332,0.046664,0.021814983,5.4352226,Comparisons noting pleural or pulmonary changes over time.,"These examples primarily highlight findings or changes observed in comparison to prior images, with specific attention given to pleural effusion or pulmonary changes over time. The common pattern is descriptions of ""stable"" or ""interval change"", indicating no major findings or noticing subtle temporal differences in the lung or pleura.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.3675213675213675,0.6323529411764706,68.0,132.0
+4956,latent_4956,9567,0.019134,0.014650968,5.20135,Identification and evaluation of interval changes between radiographs.,"The examples have higher activation levels when the reports mention comparisons or evaluations involving specific changes over time, such as interval placement or removal of medical devices, stable or persistent conditions, or notable changes in health status based on the radiographs. These examples focus on interval changes noted between current and prior studies, highlighting specific findings and adjustments over time.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+4957,latent_4957,7159,0.014318,0.016238859,5.1128683,Notable interval change in medical devices or pathology.,"The high activation examples consistently involve a comparison between the current and previous imaging studies, and indicate a notable change such as interval placement or removal of medical devices, intervals shifts in fluid or anatomical positions, or progression/regression of a clinical condition. These changes are typically emphasized in clinical interpretations requiring prompt assessment or action.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6550324675324675,0.66,0.7105263157894737,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4958,latent_4958,2292,0.004584,0.0076714456,8.101377,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include findings described in relation to a prior examination, particularly pinpointing stability or unchanged condition over time. The presence of unchanged findings suggests that the pattern of interest involves evaluation of consistency or stability between current and prior imaging.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4412481457936004,0.4673366834170854,0.4385964912280701,0.2525252525252525,99.0,100.0
+4959,latent_4959,3096,0.006192,0.010623478,4.8592563,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging reports.,Radiology reports often use a specific language pattern focused on comparison of current findings with previous images or reports to determine changes or 'stable vs. unstable' conditions associated with patient treatments or conditions. This pattern is frequently applied in cases with decreasing health symptoms and post-procedure evaluations.,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+4960,latent_4960,63612,0.127224,0.05476851,2.058979,Focus on placements and observations of lines and tubes in radiology images.,"The pattern exhibited in these examples emphasizes descriptions involving specific lines or medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube) along with their placements, changes, or observations during follow-up evaluations. These elements are explicitly reported, often leading to higher activation if commented upon in terms of comparison or placement changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5952380952380952,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4961,latent_4961,33239,0.066478,0.039588217,10.840308,Assessment of tube or catheter placement and related changes.,"There is an emphasis on evaluating the positioning and potential complications related to tubes, such as intubation tubes or catheters, with attention to changes in location or potential improvements over previous attempts. These examples describe tube positioning, changes following recent procedures, and specific findings related to the tubes' presence.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.3809523809523809,0.3809523809523809,21.0,29.0,0.5035736714614671,0.585,0.24,0.4090909090909091,44.0,156.0
+4962,latent_4962,3961,0.007922,0.012560983,5.4357576,Presence of lateral views in imaging studies is crucial for detailed evaluation.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve the presence of lateral views in the imaging study or specific references to lateral views in the findings. This likely implies that the pattern involves cases where findings need both frontal and lateral views to be fully detailed or evaluated, which underscores the importance of thorough multidimensional imaging.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+4963,latent_4963,45356,0.090712,0.04848422,6.2882104,Comparison of current images against prior images.,"These examples illustrate language where current radiological findings are compared against prior images, noting stability or minor changes. The pattern emphasizes referencing previous studies to describe changes or stability in findings, a linguistic structure typical in follow-up evaluations or monitoring situations in medical imaging.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.4736842105263157,0.8,90.0,110.0
+4964,latent_4964,5124,0.010248,0.008721453,4.498527,Observations of current patient imaging in comparison with prior studies indicating consistent features or relevant changes.,"These highly activated examples all report findings that include clear observations processed in the context involving past or current imaging to highlight stability, change, or anomalies while considering Time indications and their correlation with past observations or personal patient history.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4230185241421196,0.43,0.4426229508196721,0.54,100.0,100.0
+4965,latent_4965,36065,0.07213,0.03932492,4.761183,Focus on details of catheters and tubes alongside findings.,"This pattern involves reports detailing specific changes or state considerations of medical devices, catheters, or tubes seen within the radiographic image alongside other findings. These descriptions are included because they are critical for specific diagnostics and management, making understanding stable versus changed positioning key for assessments.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5840097402597402,0.59,0.618421052631579,0.47,100.0,100.0
+4966,latent_4966,4345,0.00869,0.011446368,7.9273443,High activations are linked to providing detailed comparative analysis with notable changes or descriptions from prior studies.,"All examples with high activations provide a comparative analysis of current and prior studies, specifically mentioning changes or the status of findings observed over time. The examples also reference details from prior reports and make some form of comparative evaluation without specific observations about unchanged or stable features.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3362215297306883,0.345,0.2987012987012987,0.23,100.0,100.0
+4967,latent_4967,17011,0.034022,0.015964536,4.5061264,Comparison of current and prior imaging to evaluate change or stability.,"High activation examples consistently provide detailed comparisons between current and prior radiological findings. The reports consistently identify similarities or changes in pathologies, effusions, or other features, reflecting a core pattern of monitoring stability or highlighting changes over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+4968,latent_4968,1932,0.003864,0.0048390566,4.154681,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The commonality among the high activation samples is the detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings, with specific reference to both anatomical and pathological changes or stability. This corresponds with the task prompt and description provided, emphasizing changes identified between sequential imaging.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4516129032258064,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4969,latent_4969,5489,0.010978,0.011045393,9.246823,Significant change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels indicate the presence of a conclusive comparison finding, especially when there is a significant change such as improvement, progression, or newly identified stability in conditions when compared to a prior image, a focus in medical imaging comparison reports.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+4970,latent_4970,6198,0.012396,0.01787625,5.8599434,"Comparison of current and prior imaging findings, often using both frontal and lateral views.",The examples with high activation levels tend to involve clear comparisons or descriptions based on viewing both current frontal and lateral images against prior exams or with a clear purpose of ruling out or validating particular conditions. This suggests that the pattern the model activates on involves evaluating recent and past imaging for changes.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,100.0
+4971,latent_4971,180331,0.360662,0.2742462,5.79652,Detailed comparative analysis of interval changes from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation compare current radiology studies to prior images, emphasizing changes or the stability of specific findings over time. These examples often incorporate discussions of current intervention placements and comparative stabilization or change in conditions, such as pulmonary opacity, atelectasis, and pleural effusions, often providing a detailed narrative of interval changes.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6439228666716819,0.645,0.6629213483146067,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4972,latent_4972,5226,0.010452,0.013894789,6.0966606,Detailed comparative pulmonary findings in serial imaging reports.,"Highly activated examples predominantly include detailed descriptions of pulmonary findings and changes over time, particularly emphasizing conditions like pulmonary edema, pneumothorax, effusions, or pneumonia, through comparative analysis with past imaging. These descriptions often involve terms like 'worsening', 'improvement', 'mass-like', or specific airway and lung findings.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4691358024691358,0.38,100.0,100.0
+4973,latent_4973,8893,0.017786,0.011594052,3.4075477,Changes in position or presence of medical devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"The activated examples include changes or observations regarding medical devices or films like NG tubes, PICC lines, chest tubes, and imaging comparison. The pattern revolves around radiological reports that highlight changes in medical devices or procedure results between current and prior imaging studies.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3923261004006346,0.435,0.3617021276595745,0.17,100.0,100.0
+4974,latent_4974,5297,0.010594,0.018163143,5.206234,Comparisons with prior radiographs or images.,"Many examples involve references to previous radiographs or other imaging modalities, assessing changes or the presence of new findings compared to past studies. This comparison with historical data is common in follow-up imaging interpretations to evaluate the progression or stability of certain features.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+4975,latent_4975,3716,0.007432,0.008398427,5.656444,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+4976,latent_4976,5005,0.01001,0.0077889627,4.20788,Descriptions focus on interval changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently refer to descriptions of findings that emphasize interval changes or the absence of change when comparing current and previous images. This creates a pattern focused on evaluating change over time, which inherently involves comparisons with prior studies and noting stability or alteration.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4811320754716981,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4977,latent_4977,126370,0.25274,0.17561692,7.601791,Comparison to prior imaging findings is present.,"The activation levels are higher when there is evidence of comparing current findings against previous images as part of the assessment. This is observed in examples where the description includes explicit mentions of 'compared with prior', 'unchanged since prior', or referring to prior imaging by date, indicating the clinical determination of stability or change based on historical comparison.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4900173611111111,0.53,0.5192307692307693,0.81,100.0,100.0
+4978,latent_4978,25142,0.050284,0.038566817,3.766109,Explicit comparison with prior findings if prior is available.,"The samples with higher activation consistently request an explicit comparison between current and prior imaging studies, indicating that the pattern strongly involves analyzing changes or stability across multiple images over time, if any prior exists.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+4979,latent_4979,5634,0.011268,0.015841566,5.4998097,Evaluation across both PA/lateral views with historical image comparison.,"The examples with high activation describe imaging findings where a notable pattern or lack of change is reported over multiple views, specifically mentioning the frontal and lateral images, and even prior images, indicating thorough review and comparison. This suggests a focus on comprehensive assessment involving multiple image perspectives and historical comparisons.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4980,latent_4980,15544,0.031088,0.021000624,3.2315588,Stable or improving findings upon comparison with prior images.,"Examples with stable or improving findings upon comparison with prior images typically reflect a pattern of chronic or non-progressive conditions, which aligns with cases where abnormalities are stable or slightly improved, marked by unchanged hardware, catheters, or other clinical interventions being noted without significant change in condition.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+4981,latent_4981,4405,0.00881,0.011947247,4.7579093,Description of change or stability compared to prior chest images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently provide a description of new or improved findings in current chest radiographs compared to previous images. This pattern involves terminology indicating a comparison of findings over time with prior images to assess stability or change, while those with lower activation contain stable findings and lack such comparative analysis.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3746091307066916,0.375,0.3809523809523809,0.4,100.0,100.0
+4982,latent_4982,20941,0.041882,0.031782288,5.3004413,Detailed assessment of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with activations show detailed comparisons indicating changes or stability of findings between current and past imaging studies. This aspect is not prominent in 0 activation examples, which focus more on standalone observations without emphasis on comparative analysis or changes over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+4983,latent_4983,7861,0.015722,0.012774963,6.636854,Detailed comparison with prior imaging explicitly highlighted.,Examples with higher activation levels frequently include a detailed comparison of the current radiological findings with those from a previous study. This comparison is a common requirement in medical imaging to evaluate the progression or stability of a finding.,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5829518868884143,0.59,0.5714285714285714,0.72,100.0,100.0
+4984,latent_4984,3593,0.007186,0.009871187,5.2232146,Evaluation of positioning or changes in medical devices.,"Examples with high activations repeatedly describe changes, particularly the placement or stabilization of medical devices like endotracheal tubes and lines based on image comparisons. This matches the task focus of evaluating interval changes across sequential images with special attention to device positioning.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4107142857142857,0.23,100.0,100.0
+4985,latent_4985,5755,0.01151,0.018210096,4.8305616,"Explicit reference to prior imaging comparisons, even with stable findings.","The pattern here is the use of comparisons with prior imaging for assessment, even when the findings are stable or unchanged. High activation occurs when reports explicitly note comparisons to prior images, mentioning previous evaluation dates or changes over time, despite no significant findings.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4444444444444444,0.52,100.0,100.0
+4986,latent_4986,5960,0.01192,0.015225921,4.5039086,Focus on stability or resolution in sequential studies.,"The highlighted examples with significant activations identify clear, stable conditions across intervals, indicating unchanged or resolved findings over sequential studies. This is a common reporting structure in radiological assessments where stability or resolution is emphasized, demonstrating a comprehensive review of changes related to prior comparisons.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+4987,latent_4987,13397,0.026794,0.015442315,5.544124,Comparative analysis of stability or change in device placement or lung conditions over time.,"Analyzing examples with varying activation levels, the pattern appears to be when reports make a comparative or evaluative statement concerning a change or stability in medical devices, opacities, or specific lung conditions over time. Such statements emphasize continuity or change compared to prior imaging. Inclusion of specific terms related to device placement stability or unchanged lung findings aligns with higher activation levels, distinguishing them from examples focused predominantly on acute findings without stable comparisons.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.565,0.5419354838709678,0.84,100.0,100.0
+4988,latent_4988,38612,0.077224,0.047749136,3.751093,Comparisons with prior imaging studies highlighting changes in pathology.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on changes in pulmonary or other pathologies. They utilize explicit direct comparisons such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'since the last imaging'.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,100.0
+4989,latent_4989,6767,0.013534,0.00982169,5.1878715,"Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging, often involving medical devices or opacities.","The consistent pattern across higher activation levels involves descriptions of patterns of opacity or lung volumes within the context of existing medical devices internal or external structural elements, and their historical or unchanged state in comparison to previous imaging results. These examples refer in detail to comparisons made with prior images or reports, focusing particularly on consistent or stable findings rather than acute changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5638297872340425,0.53,100.0,100.0
+4990,latent_4990,15424,0.030848,0.020133583,3.794062,"Detailed analysis and comparison of prior imaging findings, particularly regarding tube/catheter positioning and opacities.","High activations align with extended comparison and analysis of existing findings, particularly with devices such as tubes or catheters, and any updates on conditions like opacities or effusions from previous imaging studies. Lower activations lack this level of detailed follow-up or change description.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5528455284552846,0.68,100.0,100.0
+4991,latent_4991,3403,0.006806,0.011931464,5.594748,Assessment of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples demonstrate a pattern where the provided frontal image, prior image consultations, and assistant evaluations are analyzed to assess for interval changes. These findings, when compared, can indicate whether any significant new pathologies or postoperative changes have occurred in a patient's specified condition or situation.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+4992,latent_4992,16228,0.032456,0.014609327,3.3336556,Comparative findings between current and prior imaging studies involving change detection.,"The models generate a general pattern where they are more active when contexts contain specific comparisons of current to prior images, often involving providing a detailed description of specific changes or a lack thereof, between the compared studies, especially focused on changes noted in medical device placements or specific abnormal findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+4993,latent_4993,7345,0.01469,0.0112822605,5.7011333,Persistent or unchanged cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently contain findings related to the cardiac silhouette, cardiomegaly (enlarged heart), or cardiac-related pathologies. These findings are marked as unchanged or compared to prior radiographs, indicating a focus on assessing cardiac size or related features.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5084745762711864,0.3,100.0,100.0
+4994,latent_4994,16850,0.0337,0.017633546,5.034082,Report states lungs are clear or well-inflated compared to prior studies.,"The samples with higher activation levels contain findings of lungs being clear, well-inflated, or equally non-consolidated in comparison to prior radiological studies, despite presenting some context for potential pathologies or processes being evaluated. These phrases indicate stability or lack of acute change, which is a common assurance in radiology, particularly when relevant pathologic processes like pneumonia or edema are being ruled out.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.58,0.66,0.33,100.0,100.0
+4995,latent_4995,1964,0.003928,0.0052931113,4.551578,Concurrent multiple abnormalities noted in findings.,"These examples describe findings consistent with multiple pathologies observed concurrently across either focal consolidations, atelectasis, opacities, or pleural effusions in chest images. The pattern highlights documentation of multiple abnormal findings in radiology reports, as opposed to single pathologic features, which seems to influence the activation level positively.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+4996,latent_4996,2902,0.005804,0.010728413,5.672744,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"These examples frequently mention a comparison with prior imaging, which provides context for the current findings. The reports often evaluate the status and changes of certain features or pathologies against previous images.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.371846359798167,0.39,0.417910447761194,0.56,100.0,100.0
+4997,latent_4997,4448,0.008896,0.010534757,6.6695237,Explicit task directive for comparing current to prior images.,"For highly activated examples, instructions include comparison between the current and prior imaging findings, explicitly requesting a description of findings relative to prior images. The pattern shows that the presence of a directive for explicit comparative analysis or providing descriptions relative to prior studies, often in the structured task specifications ('Provide a description... in comparison to the prior...'), corresponds to higher activation levels.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+4998,latent_4998,9263,0.018526,0.009622808,6.2310796,Reports focused on procedural or symptom-driven interval changes.,"These examples often describe serial progressions or stability in medical imaging findings against a backdrop of acute or critical medical conditions or post-procedure status, and express explicit necessity for evaluation for interval changes, using phrasing directly focusing on procedural outcomes or symptom evolution.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5452845866223515,0.5577889447236181,0.5413533834586466,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+4999,latent_4999,4453,0.008906,0.013191255,4.8300757,Presence or change in lung consolidation pattern.,"Highly activated examples frequently include the presence or resolution of lung consolidation, which refers to a radiological pattern indicative of various conditions such as pneumonia, influenza, or pulmonary edema. Less activated examples often lack mention of any consolidation, focusing instead on the stability or other conditions that do not involve alveolar filling processes or comparisons indicating consolidation.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5918367346938775,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5000,latent_5000,17476,0.034952,0.028414596,5.2779045,Comparison revealing interval changes or movement of devices.,"Examples with high activation involve providing descriptions or comparisons about interval changes, particularly when significant modifications in positioning of medical devices or changes in opacities are identified compared to past imaging. Specific mentions include movement of chest tubes, degree of consolidation, and variations in pleural effusions, showcasing alterations in the images that have a clinical impact.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5999599959995999,0.6,0.6020408163265306,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5001,latent_5001,4369,0.008738,0.010627658,3.8122115,Presence of structured radiology report elements.,"The pattern seen in high activation is the presence of structured radiology report elements including INDICATION, TECHNIQUE, COMPARISON, FINDINGS, and IMPRESSION. These elements are highly formalized and are key aspects of a comprehensive and professional radiology report, being explicitly structured in all high-activation examples.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.382773777237445,0.505,0.5026455026455027,0.95,100.0,100.0
+5002,latent_5002,22593,0.045186,0.030698283,9.949309,Presence of aortic tortuosity or pulmonary comparison with prior imaging.,"Cases with tortuosity of the aorta involve multiple types of images (current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal) and scenarios where any form of interval comparison, especially concerning cardiac conditions or pulmonary assessment, is emphasized. The presence of aorta in multiple examples with various pathologies signifies its consistent relation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.3149606299212598,0.6153846153846154,65.0,135.0
+5003,latent_5003,4227,0.008454,0.008021606,4.3272676,Emphasis on interval change or stability of radiographic findings.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently use comparative language to describe changes over time, often highlighting new, unchanged, or resolved findings in relation to prior images. This context of comparing changes over time helps in diagnosis and management and is consistent across high activation examples.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.553030303030303,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5004,latent_5004,9071,0.018142,0.019932361,5.1637487,Describing findings in relation to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons with prior imaging studies or explicit references to previous examinations. This pattern emphasizes the analysis of changes or stability over time, particularly in the context of radiographic interpretations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3735600942248454,0.395,0.4233576642335766,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5005,latent_5005,6417,0.012834,0.009405304,6.245917,Focus on positions and pathways of medical tubes and catheters.,"The higher activation examples focus on the positions and pathways of multiple specific medical devices (like ET tubes, nasogastric tubes, chest tubes, and catheters) in the context of their placement within the body, without significant description of other findings.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7588182092252035,0.76,0.7280701754385965,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5006,latent_5006,3867,0.007734,0.009805479,4.3046026,Presence of distinct emergent pathological findings like consolidation or effusion.,"The examples with high activations describe findings such as consolidated areas, opacities, or effusions, often in the context of evaluating or ruling out processes like infections. These findings are absent or unremarkable in low activation examples, suggesting that the presence of distinct pathological or structured findings corresponds with higher activation.",0.2921492921492921,0.34,0.1666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3616607920956954,0.425,0.2972972972972973,0.11,100.0,100.0
+5007,latent_5007,5036,0.010072,0.010459892,6.1357546,Radiological findings are stable or unchanged over time.,"These examples highlight persistent findings of medical devices, anatomical changes, or opacities compared over time, often exhibiting little to no interval change. The focus is on stability and unchanged conditions in the context of radiological evaluations, associated with phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'persistent.'",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4233343630933992,0.44,0.4090909090909091,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5008,latent_5008,7342,0.014684,0.010931984,3.7683985,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The model identifies examples where a detailed comparison is made to prior imaging findings, particularly changes or no changes in specific features such as opacities, pleural effusions, or atelectasis. High activation correlates with narrative focused on these comparative changes.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.43,0.43,0.43,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5009,latent_5009,92617,0.185234,0.12997256,5.5972757,Substantial interval change or resolution noted on comparison with prior imaging.,"Reports with an activation level that significantly denote changes from previous imaging, particularly around structures like tubes or pleural effusions, indicate that these changes are indicative of a pattern where historical reference is substantially emphasized. Higher activation is associated with specific resolutions or changes noted in these structures, indicating significant interpretation or changes from previous investigations.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5660377358490566,0.3,100.0,100.0
+5010,latent_5010,11033,0.022066,0.024781961,7.304471,Stable or unchanged radiological findings with clinical indications.,"These examples demonstrate a pattern where radiological findings are presented alongside specific clinical indications or history, often including descriptions of stable or previous conditions, or changes over time with reference to prior images. This includes stable devices, unchanged findings, or interval changes relative to earlier studies.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5578947368421052,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5011,latent_5011,35621,0.071242,0.032444708,3.0612283,Changes in positioning of medical devices in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activations frequently highlight changes in the position of medical devices, such as central venous catheters. These examples include specific details about changes in device placement, which seems to be the focus of the model's pattern of interest.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,100.0,100.0
+5012,latent_5012,4106,0.008212,0.008667534,4.4622197,Comparative description using frontal and lateral views of current and prior images.,The examples with high activation emphasize the inclusion of both a current lateral view and a prior frontal view image for comparison. This configuration suggests a pattern where the model identifies collections of images for detailed comparative analysis as more representative.,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4486974202567035,0.4522613065326633,0.4608695652173913,0.53,100.0,99.0
+5013,latent_5013,10608,0.021216,0.0238224,4.3884096,Reports not suggesting new or definite acute significant changes.,"The pattern identified is the consistency in ruling out specific conditions, such as pneumonia or other acute cardiopulmonary processes, especially in patients with chronic conditions or past medical interventions. These reports tend to show improvisation with specific lung findings but consistently rule out acute or worsening conditions, making them less representative of new or significant change that drives the activation values higher.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5014,latent_5014,32278,0.064556,0.027405767,2.9021957,Emphasis on interval change and stability in imaging comparisons.,"Reports with higher activation frequently compare current imaging with previous studies, explicitly stating intervals of change or stability. These examples include direct phrases or structures indicating previous imaging comparisons.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6221614642667275,0.6231155778894473,0.6090909090909091,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+5015,latent_5015,17067,0.034134,0.034005336,5.862726,Focus on device placement or positioning changes.,"These examples include examinations where the primary focus is an evaluation of medical devices, such as tubes and catheters, often comparing their current placement to prior imaging. This pattern is consistent across examples with high activation levels, where the focus is on the status and positioning of these devices rather than on diagnosing or identifying new pathologies.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.614448051948052,0.62,0.6578947368421053,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5016,latent_5016,3916,0.007832,0.010801623,4.9722605,Assessment of interval changes using comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples consistently describe a pre-existing condition or intervention (baseline findings) and assess for changes relative to previous imaging studies. Reports frequently include phrases about stability, change, or comparison to prior images and specific time comparisons, denoting the importance of interval changes in the radiology assessment.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4682539682539682,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5017,latent_5017,5045,0.01009,0.008459465,5.5859194,Interval change and device placement descriptions with specific anatomical focus.,"Examples with high activation levels include detailed descriptions of anatomical findings and device placements, often mentioning intervals or comparisons with prior positioning, reflecting a consistent focus similar to surgical or follow-up assessments after medical procedures.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5999599959995999,0.6,0.5980392156862745,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5018,latent_5018,3362,0.006724,0.005788762,4.009403,Medical device observation and comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing findings from current and prior images, highlighting changes or stability in medical devices such as pacemakers, catheters, or endotracheal tubes. These reports emphasize monitoring device positioning and any associated complications or changes over time through specific comparison language.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.633811412877632,0.64,0.6111111111111112,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5019,latent_5019,18537,0.037074,0.02514075,7.2216253,Findings indicate stability or no significant change from prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation include findings of stability or lack of significant change over time, often explicitly comparing current imaging to previous studies and confirming no concerning new findings have emerged. This stability or lack of interval change is noted as an assessment of the current state against previous conditions, ensuring no growth or development of pathologies, and depicting that nothing acute or urgent is seen in the imaging comparison.",0.6287878787878788,0.6326530612244898,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5520833333333334,0.5353535353535354,99.0,101.0
+5020,latent_5020,4499,0.008998,0.008680689,4.0581675,Description of change relative to previous imaging studies.,"The pattern involves reports that make comparisons to previous images and highlight changes in clinical findings, specifically mentioning any new pathology or improvements relative to prior examinations. These reports use explicit terms highlighting stability, improvement, or changes in pathology, which allows for tracking progressive or stable disease processes.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.2222222222222222,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4130434782608695,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5021,latent_5021,2981,0.005962,0.008997746,7.561704,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently mention or describe a comparison between current and prior radiographic imaging to assess for changes or intervals in medical conditions, findings, or placements of medical devices. This task is specified consistently despite some context around different clinical indications or patient history, showing a focus on comparing images over time as the pattern of interest.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5022,latent_5022,4890,0.00978,0.016262839,6.0361505,Focus on image-based comparison tasks without additional unrelated information.,"Examples with high activation typically involve analysis or description based on comparison of specific images, particularly frontal images, without the presence of unrelated text or completion of other tasks.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5523484294116052,0.5829145728643216,0.5526315789473685,0.8484848484848485,99.0,100.0
+5023,latent_5023,4181,0.008362,0.0069671967,3.3219366,Explicit reference to 'prior report' or detailed prior imaging comparison.,Examples with high activation levels consistently contain the phrase 'prior report' or reference 'comparison' with prior imaging. This indicates a pattern focused on reports explicitly containing a prior report or organizing findings around prior comparisons.,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5024,latent_5024,4849,0.009698,0.006774078,8.308604,Findings discussed in comparison to previous images.,"The pattern emerges through explicit statements comparing the findings on current radiological images to those on previous (prior) images, which is a routine practice in radiology reports to evaluate for changes indicative of progression, stability, or resolution of a clinical condition.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.50625,0.8181818181818182,99.0,101.0
+5025,latent_5025,6917,0.013834,0.011449058,3.3607974,Detailed impressions without comparison to prior imaging studies.,"These examples depict a pattern of evaluating findings from current images without direct comparisons to prior images. The reports focus instead on the detailed findings of the current study or do not provide comparison details, even though the prompt provides prior images.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4456893501592169,0.53,0.6363636363636364,0.14,100.0,100.0
+5026,latent_5026,20159,0.040318,0.021132778,4.3723097,Comparison to prior imaging studies with noted changes or stability.,"Higher activation appears in examples where a radiological comparison to prior images is made, explaining any stability or changes in pathologies like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or lesions over time, enhancing the interpretive value of findings. Comparisons provide a way to track the progression or stability of conditions, which is crucial for ongoing patient assessment and management.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5027,latent_5027,6893,0.013786,0.010001163,6.17656,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiology images for changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation consistently refer to radiology studies comparing a current examination with prior images to identify changes or stability in conditions. Phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph', and 'compared to most recent study' feature prominently in these comparisons, which emphasize evaluations of change or stability.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5028,latent_5028,13704,0.027408,0.014326918,3.9158254,Reference to prior imaging studies for comparison.,"The pattern in these examples involves referencing prior imaging reports to highlight interval changes or stabilization in radiological findings. Comparisons to previous results are intrinsic to diagnosing progression or stability in medical conditions, as emphasized in the radiology study descriptions.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.498663101604278,0.55,0.5304878048780488,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5029,latent_5029,1873,0.003746,0.0059621935,6.212343,Comparison between current and prior radiological images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve the analysis of current radiological images with an explicit comparison to prior images or prior reports, often leading to a diagnosis or an observation of stability or change. This pattern is essential in follow-up studies in medical diagnostics.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5030,latent_5030,5318,0.010636,0.010817006,6.9722667,Current findings compared to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels often reference specific current, prior, and comparison imaging for evaluating interval changes or confirmed stability of findings, such as size and location of nodules, conditions, or devices. This pattern shows a detailed analysis leveraging past references to assess patient status or procedural outcomes.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.25,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.356848557933876,0.36,0.3372093023255814,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5031,latent_5031,10742,0.021484,0.01536602,5.1799946,Emphasis on presence/absence of prior image comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly address the presence or absence of prior comparison images, often providing detailed comparisons to previous imaging findings. This pattern suggests a focus on examples that clarify the use of prior images in the analysis, potentially as a core skill of the model's capabilities.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4523809523809523,0.54,0.5222222222222223,0.94,100.0,100.0
+5032,latent_5032,14945,0.02989,0.020239308,4.714425,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss findings compared to a prior study, with a focus specifically on stability or recurrence of findings, such as unchanged cardiomegaly or progressive atelectasis, rather than resolution. This suggests a focus on chronic or ongoing conditions rather than improvement or resolution in comparison to previous images.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4567901234567901,0.37,100.0,100.0
+5033,latent_5033,21519,0.043038,0.03156624,4.7214646,Evaluating interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions detailing interval changes, often assessing new developments or improvement in conditions such as effusion, pulmonary opacities, or support devices. This indicates focus on comparisons highlighting changes over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5433070866141733,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5034,latent_5034,34296,0.068592,0.059850417,8.1567745,"Comparison of current images to prior exams, noting changes or stability.","Samples with higher activations focus on comparing current imaging findings with previous examinations, detailing changes or stability over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5035,latent_5035,5290,0.01058,0.009848532,4.9617653,Evaluations of internal tube placements or positions.,"Highly activated samples refer to changes or evaluations in imaging related to tube placements (e.g., NG, ET tubes), suggesting the pattern involves radiological assessments of internal medical devices or interventions and changes in their positioning or effects.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5036,latent_5036,10396,0.020792,0.012687168,4.0883417,Comparison of current image findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or stability compared to previous images, indicating a focus on evaluating current radiological findings against historical data. The examination technique and comparison are specified, emphasizing the use of prior studies as a baseline for current assessments.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4259381171823568,0.455,0.4689655172413793,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5037,latent_5037,7538,0.015076,0.0126710385,4.934649,Exploratory assessments with prior imaging focus.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels often contain specific requested evaluations, thorough descriptions, and continued emphasis on previously noted health issues or changes in medical devices, despite the lack of acute findings. This indicates a comparison-based approach to identify situational changes requires contextual understanding or evaluation in addition to imaging comparison.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4837840870833801,0.54,0.5240963855421686,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5038,latent_5038,3832,0.007664,0.01036781,6.09774,Observation of fluid-related changes in portable chest X-rays.,"Activation levels indicate a focus on evaluations involving any kind of fluid change in the lungs or surrounding areas, such as pleural effusions or pulmonary edema, which are often assessed using portable chest radiographs. These patterns are noted as key features in several activated examples and are significant in respiratory and cardiovascular evaluations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5339578454332553,0.5577889447236181,0.6111111111111112,0.33,100.0,99.0
+5039,latent_5039,4490,0.00898,0.009229037,4.052029,Comparison to prior imaging studies is emphasized in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological studies where findings are reported in the context of a prior examination for comparison, emphasizing changes or stability over time. The prompt consistently invokes comparison to prior images in its instructions or findings, which aligns with the activation pattern observed, as radiological comparison is a significant part of diagnostic and evaluative language in these reports.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5952765183534414,0.605,0.5801526717557252,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5040,latent_5040,20909,0.041818,0.024651134,4.8812556,Comparison to prior radiographs or imaging reports.,Activations are higher in examples where prior radiographs or imaging reports are explicitly compared to the present examination to assess for changes in findings or stability of previously-identified conditions. Specific linguistic patterns include explicit references to and evaluations against prior reports or images.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4276736617663562,0.49,0.4939759036144578,0.82,100.0,100.0
+5041,latent_5041,4918,0.009836,0.010839447,5.0468254,Presence of frontal and lateral views with comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently refer to the use of multiple imaging techniques (frontal, lateral, PA views) and comparisons with prior images to assess for changes, emphasize when images are compared across studies, or indicate the level of detail in the description.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4298384542286981,0.46,0.4726027397260274,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5042,latent_5042,4347,0.008694,0.014222236,7.4447336,Frequent checks for pneumonia or related symptoms.,"Examples with high activation levels make explicit references to pneumonia, either by direct mention or by symptoms associated with pneumonia (e.g., cough, fever), often in combination with a comparison to prior images or the presence of infiltrates or opacities. This pattern reflects radiology reports frequently looking for or assessing changes suggestive of pneumonia.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7395234811920631,0.745,0.689922480620155,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5043,latent_5043,4998,0.009996,0.0054329606,5.869227,Presence of medical devices like tubes in chest imaging.,"This set of examples often includes findings of medical devices like tubes and catheters on chest radiographs, along with evaluations for pneumothorax or pleural effusions, commonly associated with these devices. The use cases described often involve post-drainage, placement of tubes, or monitoring interval changes, which are routine with such interventions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5242043160999845,0.6130653266331658,0.3333333333333333,0.3050847457627119,59.0,140.0
+5044,latent_5044,10530,0.02106,0.014895389,8.530533,Evaluation for pneumonia in radiological studies.,"These examples involve usage of terms and phrases that are indicative of evaluating for or diagnosing pneumonia in patients, often in the context of other respiratory symptoms or clinical histories like COPD, asthma, or cough. This is a common radiological indication given the impact pneumonia has on lung opacity and shape.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5359641255605381,0.542713567839196,0.4329896907216495,0.5384615384615384,78.0,121.0
+5045,latent_5045,19003,0.038006,0.020020826,5.2070103,Low lung volumes leading to accentuation of cardiac silhouette or bronchovascular crowding.,"Examples with low lung volumes, sometimes explicitly noted, often also show accentuation of various structures such as the cardiac silhouette or bronchovascular crowding. This distinct pattern involving low lung volumes leading to various accentuations or visual changes in radiological views is a recurrent theme in these examples.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7896634615384616,0.79,0.8152173913043478,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5046,latent_5046,5421,0.010842,0.014301635,4.475501,Analysis of current imaging findings in comparison to prior images with detailed descriptions.,The examples with high activation levels often involve providing descriptive findings comparing current imaging with prior radiographs. These samples frequently include explicit wording for assessing changes or stability over time based on prior comparative imaging. Examples with high activation usually emphasize analyzing differences and similarities with past images.,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4674010503394389,0.4696969696969697,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,98.0
+5047,latent_5047,5579,0.011158,0.013582962,11.537118,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe radiological findings by comparing current images with prior imaging studies. Descriptions include changes in medical devices, assessment of tube placements, and comparisons indicating stability or change in various structures and conditions.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.6153846153846154,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5048,latent_5048,5116,0.010232,0.00866365,5.3264556,Descriptive focus on opacities often considered atelectasis.,"These examples highlight the presence of opacities, which are often described as patchy or streaky, and frequently attributed to atelectasis (a condition where part or all of a lung becomes deflated). Furthermore, comparisons to prior images often indicate stability or minor changes in these opacities.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7235063786787925,0.7236180904522613,0.7184466019417476,0.74,100.0,99.0
+5049,latent_5049,29495,0.05899,0.031034006,4.057631,Emphasis on detailed comparison with prior imaging examination results.,"High activation levels correspond to a consistent comparison of current findings with prior imaging, with specific comparisons of changes or stability in relevant pathologies like atelectasis, pneumothorax, or consolidation. This pattern is emphasized through descriptive language comparing prior and current examinations.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5050,latent_5050,7616,0.015232,0.014443303,4.221849,Direct comparisons with prior imaging highlighting stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels primarily reference direct comparisons between current imaging findings and prior imaging to evaluate changes over time, which include observations of the progression, stability, or resolution of medical conditions. This includes noting the stability or change of effusions, consolidations, or devices.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5703324808184143,0.58,0.5615384615384615,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5051,latent_5051,7801,0.015602,0.018356366,9.066854,Stable cardiomegaly or unremarkable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,Examples with high activation levels often mention the presence of a normal or mildly enlarged heart size and some comparison with previous imaging without significant changes in cardiomediastinal or pulmonary findings. These examples often mention cardiomegaly stability or typical descriptions that indicate no acute change or stable chronic conditions.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6128221244500314,0.615,0.6352941176470588,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5052,latent_5052,5535,0.01107,0.015363696,4.387072,Detailed comparison of unchanged findings between current and prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently include detailed descriptions, using specific terminology to compare changes in pulmonary conditions or medical devices between current and prior imaging studies. These examples often feature unchanged findings, stable conditions, or comparisons over multiple prior studies.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6449911247781195,0.645,0.6464646464646465,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5053,latent_5053,9881,0.019762,0.016488852,4.1227627,Comparison with prior and emphasis on stability or changes in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels predominantly follow a structure that refers to the current imaging studies and directly compares them to prior studies, often with detailed observations of changes or the stability of findings. This suggests the pattern is related to the emphasis on comparative examination across different placeholders where current and prior study comparisons are explicitly discussed.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.37,0.37,0.37,0.37,100.0,100.0
+5054,latent_5054,4880,0.00976,0.008024022,4.865652,Comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"In these examples, the dataset seems to focus on radiological descriptions of findings in comparison to previous imaging. The pattern is the identification of specific new or changed features, typically pathologies or medical devices, when juxtaposed with prior images. This use of prior comparative description underlies the dataset's activation in detecting this pattern.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5055,latent_5055,2535,0.00507,0.009276199,9.277533,Explicit instructions for comparing current and prior images.,"High activation levels correlate with prompts instructing comparisons to be made explicitly between current radiological images and prior images, in addition to those providing interpretations directly related to the differences identified compared to prior imaging, emphasizing the need for evaluating changes or stability over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4354609929078014,0.4371859296482412,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,99.0
+5056,latent_5056,22714,0.045428,0.027442968,6.5622897,Detailed evaluation of device placement or interval changes in imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often contain specific references to changes or intervals between imaging studies, such as certain devices or findings being 'unchanged', the addition or removal of tubes, or clear descriptions of positions like 'unchanged left PICC line'. Examples with lower activation lack interval changes or new clinical insights about devices or medical history.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5779816513761468,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5057,latent_5057,37591,0.075182,0.037770893,4.909617,Focus on changes or discrepancies compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on identifying discrepancies or changes in the current imaging compared to a prior report. This includes detecting new findings, changes in previously known conditions, or clarifying the status of a medical device. This is a frequent task in radiological assessments where understanding changes over time is essential, hence the focus on careful comparison to previous imaging studies.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5058,latent_5058,5396,0.010792,0.009423763,5.8247013,Presence of explicit labeled preamble or prior report references.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature preambles or prior reports explicitly labeled and discussed ('PRE [[AM]] BLE', etc.), indicating structured documentation of prior studies or findings. This specific reference structure contributes to the activation pattern.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3417156437678646,0.4824120603015075,0.4921465968586387,0.94,100.0,99.0
+5059,latent_5059,4441,0.008882,0.010303043,6.1640596,Direct comparisons to prior imaging with an emphasis on interval change.,"Examples with high activation all make direct comparisons between current imaging and prior studies, explicitly mentioning changes or stability in medical findings over time. Such examples focus on change assessment.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5060,latent_5060,8458,0.016916,0.021392232,4.169405,Low lung volumes influencing image interpretation.,"This set of examples shows a pattern where the findings are compared to prior imaging to determine any changes in opacity, effusion, or tube placement. Prominence of low lung volumes is frequently noted, often affecting other assessments like cardiac silhouette size or pulmonary structures, indicating a consistent focus on volume-related changes or crowding/opacity changes across the studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4736842105263157,0.18,100.0,100.0
+5061,latent_5061,3571,0.007142,0.0067388304,8.91111,"Focus on procedural descriptions, line placements, and immediate findings in critical contexts.","The examples with higher activation levels indicate a linguistic pattern of providing a summarized impression or report of the findings, often including procedural descriptions like tube placements, position of lines (e.g., ET tubes, catheters), and immediate observations in critical care settings. Lower activation examples tend to lack comprehensive descriptions related to findings or immediate clinical relevance.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5919343814080655,0.592964824120603,0.6067415730337079,0.54,100.0,99.0
+5062,latent_5062,91608,0.183216,0.1062367,4.9007645,Stable findings or minimal change since prior images.,"These examples focus on stable findings or minimal changes since a prior imaging comparison, often specifying unchanged medical devices, the position of tubes, and stable pathological findings. This reflects a pattern of radiology reports concerned with continuity in patient monitoring and lack of progression in findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6498599439775911,0.65,0.65625,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5063,latent_5063,10031,0.020062,0.01189211,6.1100545,Changes in pulmonary findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings in which there are intervals showing changes from a previous image, especially related to deterioration or improvement of pulmonary conditions, even if subtle. They often highlight pleural effusion, atelectasis, or pneumonia changes, contrasting against previous studies, indicating the pattern involves evaluating changes in pulmonary areas specifically.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5316455696202531,0.4242424242424242,99.0,101.0
+5064,latent_5064,5448,0.010896,0.010815029,3.7876818,Focus on interval changes or comparisons over time in radiological findings.,"High activation examples typically involve descriptions of radiological study findings, along with phrases emphasizing interval changes or comparisons to prior studies. Descriptions frequently highlight individual findings or clinical indications, often mentioning specific respiratory conditions or chest anomalies, and focus on detailed changes over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5065,latent_5065,5223,0.010446,0.017819248,5.1453447,Specific request for comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels uniformly seek specific input to compare current radiological findings with prior imaging, particularly using phrases like 'given the current frontal image and the prior frontal image'. This suggests a focus on recognizing and processing requests for detailed comparative evaluations in radiological reports.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5066,latent_5066,2965,0.00593,0.0055490904,3.9018037,Descriptions of positions and placements of medical devices or tubes.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern contain descriptions of radiological findings with specific positional details of medical devices such as catheters, tubes, or surgical tools, indicating a focus on procedural aspects or post-operative evaluations.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5797101449275363,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5067,latent_5067,20648,0.041296,0.01811447,2.8123398,Multiple pathologies or findings described in radiology reports.,"Examples with varied radiological findings exhibit activation when descriptions include multiple pathologies or elements, likely due to the presence of complicating factors or multiple clinical considerations.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5953937130407718,0.61,0.5797101449275363,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5068,latent_5068,24429,0.048858,0.02283806,3.832949,Detailed comparison with prior images indicating stability or change.,"The examples with higher activations frequently involve detailed descriptions of the findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, with emphasis on stability or changes over time, particularly regarding heart size, lung volume, and presence or position of foreign objects like catheters or tubes. This pattern suggests the model is sensitive to reports focusing on continuity or change across imaging sessions, especially in a stable condition context.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5523809523809524,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5069,latent_5069,2919,0.005838,0.006006743,4.9039893,Positional placement of interventional lines or tubes described.,"Examples with high activation frequently describe medical lines or tubes such as endotracheal or gastric tubes in the imagery combined with specified positional measurements, typically in centimeters, indicating precise placement. These include examples reporting interventions or devices that have been newly placed or adjusted in position, particularly with reference to prior placements or examinations. This focus on interventional changes aligns with high activation scoring.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5070,latent_5070,26028,0.052056,0.022371594,2.269952,Mention of comparison to past imaging exams to assess changes or stability.,"Activations with positive values correlate with instances where there is explicit mention of prior comparison images to assess changes or stability in the condition being evaluated, showing that past imaging is key to these assessments. Fluctuating activations indicate varying completeness or relevance of comparison information.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5071,latent_5071,3839,0.007678,0.0074872747,4.5229435,"Reports emphasizing comparison with prior studies, highlighting stability or changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve reference to comparison with prior imaging, indicating a focus on changes in the radiological findings over time. This often includes detailed descriptions of changes such as improvement, stability, or interval changes. This pattern aligns with radiology practices focusing on tracking the progress or resolution of a condition.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4298544362874946,0.435,0.4453781512605042,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5072,latent_5072,5598,0.011196,0.00929313,5.0905085,Positioning or adjustment of tubes and catheters compared with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations include references to the positioning or changes in position of tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, etc.) and catheters in relation to a prior imaging study. This indicates an emphasis on monitoring these medical apparatuses' positions using follow-up imaging for clinical evaluation purposes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.5208333333333334,0.25,100.0,100.0
+5073,latent_5073,3399,0.006798,0.010085962,5.375334,Comparison of current findings with prior images for evaluation of changes.,"The examples with high activation levels often refer to specific findings compared against prior imaging studies. These references facilitate visual tracking of changes over time, such as stability or evolution in radiographic findings.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5074,latent_5074,5554,0.011108,0.010029008,8.322427,Comparison with prior images to describe changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels compare current and prior images to describe changes or stability in findings. They consistently use phrases indicating a comparison, like 'in comparison with' or 'in comparison to', and note alterations or lack thereof in patient conditions or device positions.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+5075,latent_5075,5039,0.010078,0.010668178,6.6243486,Unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations all include explicit references to a comparison between the current and previous imaging, emphasizing on findings that are unchanged, stable, or minimally changed since the prior study. This seems to be the characteristic the activation level is picking up on. Such phrases are commonly seen in radiology reports for monitoring progression or stability of a condition.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4705882352941176,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5076,latent_5076,7788,0.015576,0.014835114,6.010783,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies with mentioned changes or stability.,"Activation levels are high when there is a clear reference to changes or stability in the findings when compared to prior imaging studies. Reports mentioning ""compared to prior study"" or using specific prior dates to describe changes align with a radiological focus on tracking progress or stability of findings across imaging sessions.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.4942528735632184,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5077,latent_5077,4213,0.008426,0.009031224,5.8674135,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern in these examples centers on providing a description of the findings based on current and prior imaging studies. Instances with high activation levels involve comprehensive detail capturing subtle changes and comparative analysis between current and previous imaging, which demonstrates a methodical approach in differential diagnosis or stability assessment, independent of the underlying condition of the patient or findings in the radiograph.",0.3254067584480601,0.3265306122448979,0.3333333333333333,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5078,latent_5078,2884,0.005768,0.009228551,8.745932,Identifiable updates or changes in findings between current and prior imaging.,"These examples involve chest radiographs where the descriptions often include comparisons with prior images, but the models activate highly when the comparison results in a clear update or change in findings. This suggests that the core pattern activations are centered around clearly distinct findings being noted over time from similar imaging.",0.2359932088285229,0.28,0.0769230769230769,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3031358885017421,0.34,0.2037037037037037,0.11,100.0,100.0
+5079,latent_5079,3611,0.007222,0.012324099,8.455516,Comparison to prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability.,"Examples with a strong activation level frequently mention the need to compare current imaging findings to a prior study. This indicates a focus on detecting interval changes or stability in reported findings over time. The key pattern is in language referencing prior images for comparison, despite the varying presence of an assistive response for report generation.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5080,latent_5080,3780,0.00756,0.008153558,4.1054325,Comparisons with prior imaging for interval changes or stability in conditions or medical devices.,"The high-activation examples consistently involve specific references to comparing current findings with prior imaging studies, implying that these comparisons are relevant for diagnosing progressive or stable conditions. Mentions of changes in medical devices or existing conditions align with the focus of investigations for interval changes or stability.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5229309985407546,0.5376884422110553,0.5259259259259259,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+5081,latent_5081,6745,0.01349,0.01367116,6.936966,Observations of interval change in chest imaging findings.,"This dataset contains examples emphasizing observations of changes between the current chest imaging and prior studies, specifically mentioning any differences or stability in findings relative to past images. These are commonly reported features in radiological evaluations to track the progression or stability of conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5729690869877786,0.5757575757575758,0.5701754385964912,0.65,100.0,98.0
+5082,latent_5082,4905,0.00981,0.00869483,4.935922,Detailed comparisons of findings to prior images emphasizing detected changes.,"In this dataset, examples with higher activation levels frequently reference finding changes in radiological images when compared with prior images. References such as 'unchanged', 'moderate change', or detailed comparative observations are consistent in high activation samples, indicating attention to change over time rather than simply noting current findings.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5125,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5083,latent_5083,24216,0.048432,0.031375613,9.121438,Comparison to prior imaging focused on chest findings improvement or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels return comparisons of current findings to prior images, often noting improvements or lack of change, specifically in terms of opacities or other pulmonary or chest conditions. The comparison is focused on providing updates or justifications for the present state.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5087710084033613,0.5276381909547738,0.3267326732673267,0.559322033898305,59.0,140.0
+5084,latent_5084,5813,0.011626,0.009642217,5.907172,"Presence of atelectasis or patchy opacities, often bibasilar, evaluated over time.","The pattern of high activation in these reports is associated with the presence of bibasilar opacities, atelectasis, or patchy opacities often evaluated for interval change when compared to previous studies. These findings are typical of conditions like atelectasis or pneumonia, which are frequently subject of radiological comparison and follow-up.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5747841901688056,0.585,0.6231884057971014,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5085,latent_5085,18068,0.036136,0.027060928,4.4749284,Noting changes from prior imaging such as effusion or opacity.,"Samples with higher activation levels involve a change in findings compared to prior radiographs, particularly related to pleural effusion, opacity, or cardiomegaly. These descriptions note changes rather than stability when compared to previous imaging, using terms like 'developed', 'increased', or 'new'.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5086,latent_5086,3890,0.00778,0.0097354185,5.6260047,Standard descriptions without available prior comparisons.,"Despite the explicit mention of comparison with prior images, only samples that have 'none' or 'not available' for prior comparisons achieve higher activation levels. This suggests a focus on studies that highlight findings without prior reference, reinforcing a standard description without comparative context.",0.6722408026755853,0.673469387755102,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.6296296296296297,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5087,latent_5087,5299,0.010598,0.010857796,5.859996,Stable imaging findings with no acute abnormalities.,"Examples with activation levels marked as significant consistently show imaging results with stable observations across serial imaging comparisons, particularly when they explicitly indicate descriptions like ""the lungs are clear"" or ""cardiac silhouettes are unremarkable"" without finding acute abnormalities, consolidations, or effusions, even across multiple studies. It reflects a consistent lack of acute pathological changes.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4545103612851152,0.695,0.6408450704225352,0.91,100.0,100.0
+5088,latent_5088,6329,0.012658,0.008651604,4.429954,Descriptive analysis of interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit comparison and description of changes or stability in radiological findings between current and prior imaging studies, showcasing continuity or change in clinical status. This pattern reflects the clinical significance of following up on prior imaging for diagnosis or assessment of interventions.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6822617026129711,0.6834170854271356,0.6607142857142857,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+5089,latent_5089,19912,0.039824,0.022217272,6.610349,Focus on device (tube/catheter) positioning assessment.,"Activation levels are higher in examples that emphasize the correct positioning of tubes or catheters, which require a detailed comparison with prior imaging for accurate assessment. Lower activations are indicated for reports focusing more on stable conditions without significant change.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.633811412877632,0.64,0.4857142857142857,0.7391304347826086,69.0,131.0
+5090,latent_5090,7121,0.014242,0.014128176,5.4394994,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels typically involve cases where new or changed findings in a current radiology study are being compared with prior images, specifically looking at details like interval progression, placement of medical devices, or changes in lung volume/opacity. This pattern involves direct reference to noted changes over time in an active clinical context like a comparison to detect growth, resolution, or stability in a medical condition or device.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5433070866141733,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5091,latent_5091,5620,0.01124,0.019543763,5.094497,Comparison with prior images to note changes or stabilities.,"The examples primarily involve comparisons of radiological findings with prior images to identify any changes or noted stabilities. This is a frequent procedure in monitoring patients over time, especially when noting heart size, pleural effusions, and any interval changes in conditions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5092,latent_5092,8060,0.01612,0.029693533,6.1578307,Exam findings explicitly compared to prior images or with specific focus on interval changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently provided a detailed comparison or evaluation relative to prior images, either explicitly asked or implied by the presence of ""PRIOR_REPORT"" instructions or specific indications for interval changes. Low activated examples lacked explicit comparison directives or were not as focused on changes over time, thus receiving lower activation.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4931506849315068,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5093,latent_5093,6246,0.012492,0.010787555,4.552898,Moderate enlargement or tortuosity of thoracic structures compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight the presence of moderate enlargement or tortuosity of thoracic structures such as the aorta or heart, with repeated imaging comparisons demonstrating stability or notable changes from prior exams.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.491180461329715,0.55,0.65625,0.21,100.0,100.0
+5094,latent_5094,47024,0.094048,0.053497624,5.0492077,Presence of unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activation examples mention specific unchanged findings when compared to prior images, indicating a pattern of stability or minor changes over time. Not the presence of such phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar configuration', signaling unchanged findings in comparison with previous studies.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5825242718446602,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5095,latent_5095,9595,0.01919,0.01633923,3.159835,Frequent references to low lung volumes in image comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels describe comparisons with previous and/or current radiological images focusing on lung volumes. Specifically, many examples refer to low lung volumes, which can be a meaningful finding affecting diagnostic interpretations. Such discussions are often notable and therefore suggested by higher activation levels.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5209447415329769,0.57,0.6944444444444444,0.25,100.0,100.0
+5096,latent_5096,23254,0.046508,0.02648481,4.113798,Description and assessment of lines or tubes position compared to prior scan.,"Highly activated examples often describe and assess the position or changes of endotracheal tubes or other lines/devices compared to prior imaging. Activation is linked to narratives involving placement or repositioning of lines, suggesting increased attentiveness to such details.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5920032639738881,0.6,0.6388888888888888,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5097,latent_5097,26795,0.05359,0.031735707,5.479852,Specific descriptions of lung/aorta findings differing from prior comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize specific descriptions of lung or aortic characteristics, like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or changes in pulmonary vasculature, which are differentiated from the prior comparisons. These descriptions often highlight specific changes or stability between current and prior assessments, necessitating detailed clinical judgment or importance.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.60984393757503,0.61,0.6057692307692307,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5098,latent_5098,7017,0.014034,0.016546566,8.077607,Findings explicitly compared to prior frontal images for interval changes.,High activation levels correlate with examples that explicitly involve the evaluation of images using comparison to prior frontal images to detect interval changes or consistencies. These are typically structured around medical findings and descriptions relevant to prior observations.,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4634146341463415,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5099,latent_5099,27005,0.05401,0.065182395,4.7044654,Comparison of current and prior imaging with focus on medical devices and stability.,"The highly activated examples frequently discuss the comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, often noting medical devices, and stability or interval changes in pulmonary or cardiac conditions. This pattern involves providing context for changes or lack thereof over time, as seen in radiology.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5770242914979757,0.5778894472361809,0.5824175824175825,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+5100,latent_5100,12752,0.025504,0.017152116,4.13403,Comparison to prior imaging studies highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples consistently describe the comparison of radiological findings with prior studies, often using statements of change or stability like 'unchanged', 'decreased', 'increased', or 'compared to prior'. These comparisons are essential in radiology to track progression or stability.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5101,latent_5101,4792,0.009584,0.013228296,4.6158648,Structured comparison of multiple current and prior images in findings.,"Examples with higher activation seem to have a setup spanning current and prior frontal and lateral images, with subsequent detailed analyses that involve terms like 'comparison', 'prior', and instructions about comparisons. This suggests a structured pattern of comparing multiple images with prior ones to provide nuanced descriptions, which is not prominently reflected in lower activation examples.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4330805178886079,0.445,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5102,latent_5102,14452,0.028904,0.023598999,6.6103096,Comparison of current image findings to prior ones indicating stability or change.,"Activation levels closely align with mentions of changes in findings compared to prior images, particularly indicating stable, resolving, or unchanged conditions which provide context and significance to the current findings. High-activation examples typically show changes in imaging studies over time.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5103,latent_5103,9176,0.018352,0.013270276,4.3057156,Cardiac silhouette is normal or unchanged among diverse pathologies.,"These examples highlight reports where despite many possible findings, the cardiac silhouette is described as normal or unchanged in size and shape. This finding appears consistently among various pathologies depicted or suspected in the samples.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.648735447611401,0.65,0.6339285714285714,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5104,latent_5104,9164,0.018328,0.016980918,3.6387908,Combination of current and prior images in diagnostic description.,"There is a pattern of mixing current and prior images, where information is compared to make assessments of changes or the status quo. The description taxonomy often includes keywords like 'comparison', 'prior image', and phrases indicating descriptions from findings in previous images.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3811440619951258,0.435,0.4591194968553459,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5105,latent_5105,3579,0.007158,0.008276181,4.853897,Comparison across multiple imaging views.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature radiological comparisons to prior images or studies, but unlike other sets, they differentiate findings across views (frontal and lateral). The model appears to activate more with detailed comparison across multiple imaging planes rather than single-dimensional comparisons or cases without elaborate cross-views analysis.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5106,latent_5106,4605,0.00921,0.01531596,5.8666577,Detailed comparison against prior imaging studies.,Examples with high activation levels consistently mention 'comparison with prior' and go on to detail the similarities or changes in the radiological findings. This shows a specific focus on re-evaluating image findings over time.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5107,latent_5107,4470,0.00894,0.013512634,5.9493256,High detail in diagnostic findings that are often tied to acute changes or comparisons.,"More highly activated examples involve a higher concentration of diagnostic information or findings provided closely related to acute symptoms or changes, often with reference to past images for comparison detailing findings with specific measurements, locations, or notable changes.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3050811943425877,0.3232323232323232,0.3636363636363636,0.4897959183673469,98.0,100.0
+5108,latent_5108,4313,0.008626,0.007998015,5.1618857,Stable findings without significant change on sequential imaging.,"These examples frequently highlight the presence of a specific finding, abnormality, or medical condition that persists without significant change compared to past imaging. This pattern involves mentioning stability or lack of change in the radiological findings over time, which is crucial in monitoring chronic conditions or assessing the effect of treatments.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5058823529411764,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5109,latent_5109,6690,0.01338,0.013756182,5.3518395,Bilateral lung or pleural findings in comparison context.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the directive to provide a radiology report based on a current and prior image comparison, where the task involves description with specific attention to bilateral or diffuse lung or pleural findings. Emphasis on bilateral conditions such as pleural effusions, opacities, or edema, which are prominently featured in the assistant's description, aligns with the pattern exhibited by the examples with high activation.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6242390841453944,0.625,0.6373626373626373,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5110,latent_5110,16655,0.03331,0.016181309,3.3867502,Active medical interventions with recommendations for optimization.,"Examples with high activation levels request specific descriptions that involve active interventions or procedures like tube placements, with recommendations or actions to optimize positioning, unlike lower activation examples that do not involve such actions.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4253384282709796,0.515,0.5714285714285714,0.12,100.0,100.0
+5111,latent_5111,9749,0.019498,0.011876143,5.048372,Comparison focuses on interval changes of medical devices.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of interval changes, particularly focusing on the removal or repositioning of medical devices, such as chest tubes, catheters, or other monitoring devices, with specific comparisons to prior imaging findings. The examples describe both the intervention and the associated radiographic changes without new pathology.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5112,latent_5112,3928,0.007856,0.008284611,6.389555,Comparison to prior imaging shows unchanged or stable findings.,"The examples show comparisons of current radiological findings with prior exams, highlighting either 'unchanged findings' or explicit lack of changes, minimal variation, or stability over time concerning specific conditions or features in the images.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.4657534246575342,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5113,latent_5113,2859,0.005718,0.005765374,7.0200963,Descriptions of stability or change when compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of current findings compared to prior imaging, specifically emphasizing stability or changes over time. These comparisons are noted with explicit references to 'prior images', 'previous study', or 'compared to'.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3966040024257125,0.3969849246231156,0.3936170212765957,0.37,100.0,99.0
+5114,latent_5114,25428,0.050856,0.059480656,5.2717633,Comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples highlight comparisons between current and prior imaging results. The emphasis is on changes or the absence of changes when images are compared longitudinally, which is crucial in patient management for assessing progression, resolution, or stability of conditions.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+5115,latent_5115,10771,0.021542,0.017043408,4.027643,Influence of past data comparison in image-based findings.,"Generates high activations for inputs where findings are compared or described relative to prior images, using both textual and visual aids in the task prompt by referring to ""prior frontal image<image>"" or detailed comparisons to previous observations. These cases often emphasize changes or stability, and describe complex findings in layman's terms for clearer interpretation.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4315744315744316,0.47,0.4802631578947368,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5116,latent_5116,15651,0.031302,0.023820996,6.7595015,Focus on monitoring or changes due to medical interventions.,"The higher activation levels correspond to reports involving the explicit monitoring or evolution of medical interventions, such as placement and repositioning of tubes or catheters, evaluations of pleural effusions post-drainage, or evaluating other critical interventional changes which signify treatment response or management strategies. Lower levels do not focus on procedural interventions or their results over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5117,latent_5117,10947,0.021894,0.014076003,9.181482,Comparison indicates stabilization or improvement in findings.,"The common theme with higher activation levels is the concept of changes, particularly improvements or stabilizations, in the findings described when compared with a prior imaging study. The changes described often indicate a positive progression or lack of new negative findings, which is a distinct focus in these examples.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5970373733647379,0.645,0.3571428571428571,0.6382978723404256,47.0,153.0
+5118,latent_5118,4410,0.00882,0.010906008,4.2196493,Inclusion of comparative analysis with prior reports and images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, often indicated by explicit acknowledgment of a previous report. This pattern aligns with how radiologists assess changes over time in terms of pathology progression or stability.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4494735945968954,0.515,0.5088757396449705,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5119,latent_5119,3742,0.007484,0.010492364,7.4112153,Comparison highlights significant interval change in interventions or placements.,"Samples with significant interval change in findings compared to prior images, especially involving tube or line placement, demonstrate high activation levels. This pattern reflects the importance of reporting changes between studies, particularly in terms of new interventions or placements.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5403424930306651,0.5628140703517588,0.6181818181818182,0.34,100.0,99.0
+5120,latent_5120,16265,0.03253,0.024835026,7.842755,Notable changes or stability in pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with higher activation levels indicate instances where there are notable changes compared to prior imaging, particularly concerning new or changing pathologies such as new nodular densities, resolution or appearance of pleural effusions, and other significant interval changes noted in the imaging. These are often highlighted in radiology reports for follow-up or further evaluation.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5175438596491229,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5121,latent_5121,11566,0.023132,0.01238472,3.3568094,Focus on placement or change of position of medical devices.,Examples with high activation levels consistently highlight the placement or change of position of medical devices like tubes or catheters in comparison to previous imaging studies. They focus on noting changes or confirming stability in the position of medical devices.,0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.6190476190476191,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.6827075621364358,0.685,0.7228915662650602,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5122,latent_5122,23413,0.046826,0.04163732,4.7609277,Providing structured radiology report and assistance outputs.,"The model exhibits high activation when the focus is on providing a report structure using outputs like 'The heart is normal in size', 'The lungs appear clear', and 'The cardiac silhouette is normal' especially when requested to emphasize specific aspects of the radiology study or prompts framed as assistance related.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4517906336088154,0.4773869346733668,0.4825174825174825,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+5123,latent_5123,3837,0.007674,0.011772041,5.2331095,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior images or findings.,"The pattern observed is an emphasis on the use of direct image comparison to prior examinations often with detailed findings indicating stability or change, including specific measurements or observations about medical devices, fluid collections, or anatomical structures. This is typically more evident when consistent language or structure is employed to emphasize comparison outcomes.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3845500848896434,0.42,0.4459459459459459,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5124,latent_5124,2352,0.004704,0.006440887,6.4876747,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on cases where the radiology report involves making a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, regardless of specific conditions or findings, indicating that such comparisons are a central feature of the pattern behind high activations.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4825174825174825,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5125,latent_5125,100662,0.201324,0.15810351,7.0514107,Comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparison between current and prior imaging findings and often identify specific changes or describe stability compared to the previous scans. High activation examples make clear contrasts between current and past observations.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5126,latent_5126,4765,0.00953,0.009058438,6.233526,Comparisons highlighting changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,The dataset shows that higher activations are linked to reports explicitly mentioning changes or stability over time in findings compared to prior images. The model has learned to recognize and activate on phrases indicating either stability or change when prior comparisons are provided. High activation scores are associated with reports that emphasize interval change or use specific comparative language to express changing medical conditions.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5127,latent_5127,5233,0.010466,0.010088349,4.1946015,Detailed comparative analysis with previous images stating clinical observations and changes.,"This set of examples shows high activation when reports include a comparison of imaging findings with prior exams along with detailed evaluative descriptions that use specific clinical terms and observations. Throughout, reports that focus on documenting clinical indications and descriptions with explicit state changes in the patient's condition relative to prior studies tend to trigger higher activation.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3463555521775481,0.355,0.3116883116883117,0.24,100.0,100.0
+5128,latent_5128,16553,0.033106,0.020052163,6.8778553,Reports detail condition changes through comparison with prior images.,"High activation examples include radiology report descriptions that explicitly reference changes in previous conditions by directly comparing current findings to past studies and highlighting specific resolutions, improvements, or stability of medical conditions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.3928571428571428,0.7746478873239436,71.0,129.0
+5129,latent_5129,22804,0.045608,0.021141179,4.2033,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or improvement.,"The increased activation pattern involves radiological examination of prior chest images compared to current ones, with descriptions indicating stability or change in specific pulmonary or cardiothoracic findings from a past study. Reports focusing on stability in findings, or stating improvements or intervals since previous exams when compared to new ones, tend to trigger such activations.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5996396757081373,0.6,0.6063829787234043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5130,latent_5130,5742,0.011484,0.019742772,10.38613,Reports note 'lungs are clear' compared with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently highlight 'clear lungs,' a term indicating absence of pathology such as pneumonia, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. This explicit statement of 'clear' is the common theme driving activation for these comparisons.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5477159656264134,0.6,0.8125,0.26,100.0,100.0
+5131,latent_5131,18555,0.03711,0.016477505,4.393205,Monitoring/support devices unchanged in comparison with previous image.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe the presence of unchanged monitoring or support devices (e.g., ET tubes, catheters) when comparing current and prior images, indicating their role in the activation pattern.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5478052963954365,0.565,0.6065573770491803,0.37,100.0,100.0
+5132,latent_5132,8711,0.017422,0.014417718,4.342002,Ambiguous opacities suggesting multiple differential diagnoses.,"Examples with high activation levels all involve ambiguous or interstitial opacity findings that could suggest multiple differential diagnoses, often seen in radiology reports when complex cases are evaluated. The descriptions often mention overlapping conditions needing distinction, such as interstitial opacity or densities potentially representing pneumonia, infection, effusions, or other pathologies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.6285714285714286,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5133,latent_5133,31904,0.063808,0.029588517,3.9760246,Discussion of interval change in pulmonary findings or device placement.,Examples with significant positive activations consistently include references to changes or stability in specific pulmonary findings or devices over time in comparison with prior imaging.,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5125628140703518,0.5125628140703518,0.5151515151515151,0.51,100.0,99.0
+5134,latent_5134,5705,0.01141,0.014905055,4.8140125,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5135,latent_5135,7160,0.01432,0.01280727,3.8830364,"High activation pattern includes ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.""","Examples with high activation levels (e.g., 6.0, 8.0, 9.0) consistently use the linguistic structure 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This repetitive phrase integrates with the description of current imaging compared to a prior image and serves as a cue for elevated activation, indicating a pattern in prompt construction rather than specific radiological findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4353598881900768,0.495,0.4969696969696969,0.82,100.0,100.0
+5136,latent_5136,4166,0.008332,0.0077203903,8.9131565,Contextual medical procedures or history enhance detail.,"Examples with higher activations include references to specific medical procedures, historical medical events, or advanced imaging techniques that serve as context for findings, not just general comparisons of findings.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4461025516926138,0.485,0.4901960784313725,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5137,latent_5137,11726,0.023452,0.013724119,4.4351964,Technical descriptions of specific conditions or surgical findings.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on clear descriptions of specific medical conditions or post-surgical findings, especially using technical terminology to describe states like postoperative changes, comparisons, or interval changes in conditions. Meanwhile, the low activation ones focus more on routine imaging processes or findings that are not detailed in the same technical manner. The examples may draw particular awareness to significant updates or observations in a medical context over a potential baseline.",0.5006645990252547,0.5306122448979592,0.5384615384615384,0.2916666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5523645114040594,0.5678391959798995,0.6129032258064516,0.38,100.0,99.0
+5138,latent_5138,3692,0.007384,0.010250596,5.557344,Analysis of radiological findings with direct comparison to prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation levels have explicit prompts to provide descriptions in comparison to prior frontal images, often using terms like ""provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image"". These prompts suggest the analysis focuses on comparing resultant findings to the prior frontal images provided.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5139,latent_5139,4315,0.00863,0.01803128,7.1985407,Request for description of findings compared with prior images without explicit prior reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include indications of providing a description of findings across current and prior images, without explicit prior reports whenever a thorough unchangeable analysis is requested. The text setup encourages active engagement with comparative analysis from the radiologist or AI assistant perspective, emphasizing detailed evaluation and consistency checking.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5140,latent_5140,13391,0.026782,0.01287368,3.524221,Emphasis on changes between current and prior images in findings.,"Detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior images are given higher activation levels, indicating that drawing specific comparisons between images is the key pattern of interest. This is a common reporting feature, reflecting the importance of tracking changes over time in radiologic findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5141,latent_5141,6413,0.012826,0.0117225135,5.9972577,Bilateral lung opacities' interval change between radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation (close to or above 5) often describe or express changes in the lung opacities in comparison to prior imaging, such as 'slight interval improvement', 'substantial increase', or 'interval decrease', especially noting bilateral patterns or ongoing pulmonary conditions like pneumonia or pulmonary edema. This suggests a pattern focus on the interval change in the presence of bilateral lung conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5509093322713394,0.5728643216080402,0.6363636363636364,0.35,100.0,99.0
+5142,latent_5142,4250,0.0085,0.012957621,5.80293,Radiology reports emphasizing changes from prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently feature specific changes in comparison to previous imaging studies, such as improvement or resolution of conditions, stable or unchanged findings, or interval decreases in noted conditions. These comparisons are often used to directly inform the interpretation and clinical decisions based on observed changes over time.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5143,latent_5143,5566,0.011132,0.0105960285,2.7807398,Descriptions of imaging findings with comparison to current and past images.,This pattern focuses on the need to analyze and provide findings in current radiology studies concerning provided images while making references to any available prior ones. The emphasis on comparing past and present imaging to report current observations or changes characterizes these reports.,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5144,latent_5144,4544,0.009088,0.008714607,10.345009,Identification or exclusion of pneumothorax or free air.,Highly representative examples describe radiological findings of either pneumothorax or free air under the diaphragm. This is a distinct pattern associated with urgent diagnoses that might require intervention when suspected in plain chest radiographs. Examples with higher activations consistently touch upon even the suspicion or exclusion of these findings.,0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6049111049986247,0.605,0.5728155339805825,0.6276595744680851,94.0,106.0
+5145,latent_5145,6539,0.013078,0.011657389,5.974087,Presence of aortic tortuosity or abnormality in radiology findings.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently discuss findings related to the tortuosity or abnormal configuration of the aorta, specifically noting its presence or changes in comparison to prior studies. Terms like 'tortuous', 'tortuosity', and references to the thoracic aorta appear frequently in these cases.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6648847043804356,0.685,0.8627450980392157,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5146,latent_5146,4656,0.009312,0.011196449,5.4620013,Low lung volumes or chronic atelectasis paired with cardiac silhouette assessment.,"There are frequent terms like ""low lung volumes,"" ""atelectasis,"" and ""cardiac silhouette"" in the highly activated examples. These terms indicate a pattern of describing subtle or chronic changes in the lungs and heart size, often related to issues like low lung volumes, mild cardiomegaly, or specific lung base abnormalities like atelectasis.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4306778169014084,0.4773869346733668,0.4418604651162791,0.1919191919191919,99.0,100.0
+5147,latent_5147,7019,0.014038,0.010785525,4.97649,Descriptive abnormalities or changes on prior comparative imaging.,"High activation levels are linked to specific findings indicating abnormalities, such as tortuosity of the thoracic aorta, pneumonia, or pleural effusion, when described in context with reference to comparative or prior imaging. This suggests a focus on changes or abnormalities as critical points in radiological evaluations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4864864864864865,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5148,latent_5148,4973,0.009946,0.011375257,6.590414,Mentions comparison with prior image studies.,"The pattern is characterized by imaging reports that explicitly mention comparisons between the current and previous imaging, either by indicating a comparison was done or specifying changes/stabilities since previous imaging sessions.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.392,0.43,0.4533333333333333,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5149,latent_5149,3716,0.007432,0.010337076,5.6725,"Stable, unchanged findings in imaging compared to prior studies.","The principal insight from the high-activation samples relates to detailed descriptions and stable non-acute assessments in the radiology reports. When the findings are stable, unchanged, or without acute pathology when compared to prior images or expected changes, it seems to trigger higher activations. This is consistent across stacks of comparative descriptions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4615384615384615,0.3,100.0,100.0
+5150,latent_5150,2734,0.005468,0.0070130285,4.191397,Reports include comparison to prior imaging.,"The activation levels are high when the radiology study being described includes a comparison to a prior image, regardless of the specific findings detailed in the report.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5151,latent_5151,4688,0.009376,0.010718538,4.0798783,Analysis based on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The activated examples describe a correlation with prior imaging studies, especially in the context of analyzing changes or similarities. This pattern often employs phrases like 'compared to prior image', 'interval change', or 'prior study', focusing on previous imaging for diagnostic understanding.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.432,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5152,latent_5152,4842,0.009684,0.009137041,4.334124,"Position of medical devices like tubes, with focus around carina/SVC in radiology imaging.","The prominent characteristic among these examples is their referral to intubation or placement of tubes such as endotracheal, tracheostomy, PICC lines, or nasogastric tubes, alongside the description of lung findings. These examples focus on the evaluation and positioning of medical devices in radiology images. Mention of 'intubation', or devices positioned around the carina or SVC, correlates with higher activation levels.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4675397831291367,0.5226130653266332,0.5555555555555556,0.202020202020202,99.0,100.0
+5153,latent_5153,27548,0.055096,0.03284308,6.759263,Descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight ""providing a description"" or comparison with prior radiographs as a fundamental aspect of the reports, regardless of the findings. This suggests a focus on the process of explicitly detailing radiological changes between current and prior images, especially in conditions where changes are noted or serial monitoring is necessary.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.4503311258278146,0.8292682926829268,82.0,118.0
+5154,latent_5154,10870,0.02174,0.020456728,3.7017334,"Description of current findings against prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The instances with typical findings have explicit references to previous imaging but have noted changes compared with prior imaging or stability over time. The focus here is on interpreting changes in observed radiological structures or confirming the absence of changes, with mention of prior diagnostic context.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5155,latent_5155,8964,0.017928,0.011686177,4.365621,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies with noted changes or stability.,"This dataset includes reports that contrast current imaging results with prior studies. The activation levels are influenced by observations of new or unchanged pathologies when compared to earlier images, focusing mainly on changes like opacities, effusions, or devices (e.g., tubes in place). Descriptions that emphasize comparing current imaging to prior are more likely to show high activation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5101535924131533,0.5151515151515151,0.5083333333333333,0.6224489795918368,98.0,100.0
+5156,latent_5156,10791,0.021582,0.015460242,6.0662913,Evaluation of medical device placements and changes.,"The examples with moderate to high activation levels focus on changes, effects, or placements of medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or lines, often in relation to prior images. This includes examination of intervals, placements, and comparisons to identify any shifts, complications, or improvements.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8279178054458953,0.83,0.7704918032786885,0.94,100.0,100.0
+5157,latent_5157,10777,0.021554,0.011406374,5.008914,Descriptive changes in radiology findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings in the context of comparing current images to prior images, and often note changes or stability in key cardiac and pulmonary features, indicating the importance of interval changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.549113425274416,0.5505050505050505,0.5084745762711864,0.6593406593406593,91.0,107.0
+5158,latent_5158,54714,0.109428,0.05113078,4.4608326,Focus on interval changes in pleural effusions or atelectasis.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings such as effusion, atelectasis, or fluid changes with specific reference to previous radiographs for comparison of interval changes. This pattern suggests that examples focusing on radiological findings which have a strong emphasis on temporal or interval changes, possibly affecting pleura or lung volumes, provoke higher model activation.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5476190476190477,0.23,100.0,100.0
+5159,latent_5159,2827,0.005654,0.0061951266,4.926462,'Linear' or 'streaky' opacities often indicating atelectasis or infiltration.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels predominantly mention the presence of 'linear' or 'streaky' opacities, often associated with atelectatic changes or minor infiltrates. This specific language pattern seems to correlate with increased activation, suggesting the model is sensitive to these terms when evaluating chest radiographs.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.9,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.655094537815126,0.6683417085427136,0.7833333333333333,0.47,100.0,99.0
+5160,latent_5160,6763,0.013526,0.010717272,2.7145407,Instructions for comparing current and previous imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on prompting a comparative analysis of current and prior images, specifically asking for descriptions of differences or assessments of interval changes. They all involve explicit directives or assistant instructions to compare current images to prior imaging studies.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5161,latent_5161,7724,0.015448,0.014110812,7.2524614,Consistent reference to comparison with previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include descriptions that compare current imaging findings with prior studies, highlighting changes or stability over time. This pattern assists in tracking patient progress, identifying new issues, or confirming stability of existing conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5162,latent_5162,6161,0.012322,0.016738629,5.6598325,Interval changes or stability in medical support devices or interventional lines.,"This pattern emphasizes change in medical support devices like tubes or catheters, which are either compared to prior positions or described in terms of placement and adjustments in the absence of new disease findings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4010088272383354,0.43,0.375,0.21,100.0,100.0
+5163,latent_5163,8666,0.017332,0.011965001,9.045629,Assessment or adjustment of tube placement.,"Active cases refer to the presence of a tube and its assessment or adjustment. These examples often discuss the placement, positioning, or required adjustment of supportive tubes (e.g., nasogastric, endotracheal, or chest tubes), and their relative position compared to prior imaging.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5071523019593701,0.59,0.3529411764705882,0.2686567164179104,67.0,133.0
+5164,latent_5164,5369,0.010738,0.010174392,3.4926367,"Comparison with prior imaging studies, noting unchanged or changed findings over time.","These examples consistently refer to comparisons with prior imaging studies, often noting unchanged findings or changes over time, suggesting a pattern of diagnostic evaluation in light of previous results. The descriptions frequently use terms like 'unchanged' or note specific differences relative to previous imaging studies.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5165,latent_5165,3644,0.007288,0.007328217,4.4206505,Comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation describe scenarios where radiological exams make direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or lack thereof. Reports frequently describe findings and unchanged states compared to prior images, often noting the presence or absence of new pathologies.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5166,latent_5166,3330,0.00666,0.008300095,4.398273,Description requested without available prior image for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve scenarios with no available prior images for comparison despite the prompt requesting such a comparison. This presence of 'None' or 'N/A' for comparison yet asking for a comparison suggests an expectation to handle situations lacking prior data, yielding higher activation.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7189883580891208,0.72,0.6964285714285714,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5167,latent_5167,3591,0.007182,0.0072665946,3.3011298,PICC line evaluation or focus on catheter positioning in chest radiology.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve evaluation or mention of central venous catheters (such as PICC lines) and their positions in radiological reports. The comparison with prior images often focuses on the PICC line position, and missing the focus on acute pathological changes results in high activation.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.6829268292682927,0.28,100.0,100.0
+5168,latent_5168,14686,0.029372,0.016820846,5.6790204,"Descriptions involving comparisons to prior images, noting interval changes or stability.",The explanations with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons of the current imaging findings with prior studies and specifically note interval changes or stability of certain medical conditions or artifacts. This is a common practice in radiology reports for assessing the evolution of a condition or verifying the correct position of medical devices.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5169,latent_5169,3913,0.007826,0.016338632,5.246892,Prompt to compare findings without a specified prior report.,"The excerpts with the highest activations consistently involve text that includes a prompt for comparison to a prior report, often with indicators like 'N/A', suggesting incomplete or omitted information. This implies that the pattern involves missing prior comparison data coupled with a request to compare.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5170,latent_5170,42632,0.085264,0.040532652,3.44985,Comparison of medical device positioning or surgical changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally mention details regarding the position or status of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or surgical changes (e.g., lead extraction) and their stability or changes in comparison to prior images. This reflects a pattern where the focus is on medical device evaluation across timescales and post-intervention imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5171,latent_5171,6834,0.013668,0.012926352,5.5910215,Comparison of current and prior imaging showing stable findings or improved pulmonary conditions.,"Highly representative samples highlight consistent mentions of stable findings over time with a comparison against the prior imaging and detail whether any changes, especially concerning improvements or reductions in pulmonary edema or congestion, are noted.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5303030303030303,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5172,latent_5172,3734,0.007468,0.006706256,4.656936,Evaluation or comparison to prior images with findings stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention describing or evaluating findings in relation to prior images, even if the actual findings are unchanged. This pattern emphasizes the process of comparing series of radiographs over time, particularly calling out changes or stability without acute findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5173,latent_5173,5123,0.010246,0.015835943,6.722511,Explicit instruction to compare with prior images without additional explicit indications.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently contain explicit instructions to compare current images with prior images in the presence of actual or potential pathological findings, without additional explicit indications besides the comparison instruction, making the need for evaluation against prior images a key differentiator.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.65996599659966,0.66,0.6632653061224489,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5174,latent_5174,11926,0.023852,0.04263335,7.4340253,Reports focus on unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Descriptions with high activations consistently mention a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings, specifically noting intervals and unchanged conditions over time, rather than naming ""previous findings"" or unrelated previous information.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5256410256410257,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5175,latent_5175,24766,0.049532,0.02988569,6.475019,Interval changes in pleural effusions or pulmonary conditions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically mention findings in comparison with prior imaging studies and describe changes in pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pulmonary edema. Less representative samples do not focus on interval changes or comparisons related to respiratory issues.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6887643946467477,0.7,0.6710526315789473,0.5930232558139535,86.0,114.0
+5176,latent_5176,19720,0.03944,0.028417552,4.9748163,Observing interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"In order to exhibit high activation, comparisons between current and prior imaging studies must clearly indicate either the detection of changes or the stability of specific pathologies, particularly lung opacities, devices, or effusions. Examples showing evaluation for changes but concluding unchanged status are less representative of the pattern.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5177,latent_5177,8123,0.016246,0.011832202,7.956138,New or increased pathological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation involve radiological findings that describe either an increase or new occurrence of specific pathologies like fluid, effusions, or opacities, compared to prior images. Phrases indicating changes such as 'new', 'increase in', 'more than before', suggest an emphasis on progression or the development of new abnormalities.",0.5528031290743155,0.5714285714285714,0.6,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.26,100.0,100.0
+5178,latent_5178,3158,0.006316,0.007561644,5.8887177,No significant change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activations describe radiological findings where no significant changes are observed when compared to prior imaging. Key phrases emphasize stability or the lack of interval change, a common theme in follow-up radiology reports assessing disease progression or stability.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5179,latent_5179,9907,0.019814,0.011694254,6.944828,Interval changes in pathology compared to previous images.,The pattern observed in high activation examples is a detailed comparison with prior images focusing on changes in pathologic findings.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.5684210526315789,0.5684210526315789,95.0,105.0
+5180,latent_5180,4909,0.009818,0.012122966,5.239694,"Explicit requests for comparison with previous imaging results, often denoted with placeholders.","The pattern is identified through examples in which a comparison with prior imaging is explicitly sought. This is consistent across high activation examples, where an explicit call for comparison based on a prior image, sometimes noted with placeholders, influences the tone.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4198391100212327,0.515,0.5082872928176796,0.92,100.0,100.0
+5181,latent_5181,203142,0.406284,0.27829581,4.311061,Comparative analysis between singular current and prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions and evaluations between singular current images compared to single prior images, emphasizing any changes, removals, and stable findings from one specific prior study. This specific comparison framework while using singular past reports appears to trigger higher activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5182,latent_5182,7527,0.015054,0.012249818,4.9075546,Reports indicating stable findings or no significant interval change from prior images.,"Highly representative examples contain language indicating no or minimal interval change when comparing current images to previous examinations. This language identifies stable findings over time, ensuring the reader that no significant new developments have occurred, using terms like 'unchanged', 'no relevant change', or 'stable appearance'.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4714285714285714,0.33,100.0,100.0
+5183,latent_5183,5881,0.011762,0.009773893,5.084786,Clear lungs with mention of ambiguous or unclear radiological findings.,"In these examples, the descriptions frequently mention the presence of 'clear lungs' but also reference opacities, findings, or indications that suggest potential abnormalities. This is indicative of a pattern where images are evaluated as having normal lungs but still require further analysis due to ambiguous or unclear elements.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5184,latent_5184,4708,0.009416,0.0114690205,5.0105476,"Enlarged heart, pulmonary congestion, or edema.","The patterns include enlarged heart size, increased pulmonary congestion or edema, and cardiomegaly in most explanations with high activation levels. Conversely, low activation levels correlate with findings that do not focus on these cardiovascular conditions, such as normal heart size or absence of pulmonary congestion.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.724938111074992,0.725,0.7184466019417476,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5185,latent_5185,16379,0.032758,0.016735662,4.095278,Description of changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"In the set of images and descriptions provided, the pattern involves describing changes or stability in findings when compared to prior studies. The focus is on whether devices, conditions like pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or structural features remain unchanged or have changed compared to prior imaging, indicating a monitoring of known conditions rather than identifying new observations.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5963408560719248,0.615,0.5804195804195804,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5186,latent_5186,30165,0.06033,0.03065001,4.872275,Positional or technical limitations affecting image evaluation.,"The pattern with non-zero activation levels suggests references to positioning, especially patient rotation, and technical evaluation are recurrent factors influencing the activation levels. Examples contain descriptions of the positioning such as rotated positioning or technical limitations affecting image evaluation.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6535361904044588,0.655,0.6371681415929203,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5187,latent_5187,3984,0.007968,0.012229244,9.083085,Emphasis on comparison with a prior frontal image is specifically requested.,The examples with higher activations emphasize a direct request for a detailed comparison with a 'prior frontal image' as part of the task. This requirement for direct comparison is absent in examples with lower activations or focuses on aspects like changes or findings in the current imaging rather than a specific comparison.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5188,latent_5188,5123,0.010246,0.010012942,7.5068755,"Comparison with prior images, noting unchanged findings.","Examples with activations aligning with this pattern involve reports making comparison to a prior imaging study, frequently noting stable or unchanged findings. These comparisons are indicative of monitoring for changes over time, which is common in follow-up imaging or post-procedural evaluations.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5068493150684932,0.37,100.0,100.0
+5189,latent_5189,27307,0.054614,0.027041053,5.3322105,Comparison highlighting interval changes in lung or cardiac findings.,"Higher activation occurs when radiology reports compare current findings with prior images, especially highlighting interval changes in atelectasis, opacification, or improvement in pulmonary findings. Reports indicating notable change from prior studies receive higher activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4845360824742268,0.4795918367346938,98.0,102.0
+5190,latent_5190,5292,0.010584,0.010299017,5.062927,Comparison to a prior study with unchanged findings.,"Highly activated examples involve explicit comparisons with previous imaging studies where detailed findings are either unchanged or interval changes are noted, often emphasizing stability or minor changes without acute issues.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5319148936170213,0.25,100.0,100.0
+5191,latent_5191,10991,0.021982,0.021362154,4.780924,Comparison of current and prior radiographic images.,"The pattern observed is a comparison of radiographic findings between current and prior images. Reports explicitly compare radiographic findings across timeframes, noting changes, stability, or absence of changes relative to past images.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4580152671755725,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5192,latent_5192,30741,0.061482,0.03017142,4.6625705,Observations of tube and device positioning or adjustments in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to describe changes in the positioning of the tubes or devices (such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, or NG tubes) in comparison to prior studies, indicating a focus on monitoring mechanical placements and their adjustments over time.",0.7342511472674176,0.7346938775510204,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.69,0.69,0.69,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5193,latent_5193,6972,0.013944,0.013265967,6.5066447,Comparison-focused findings showing interval changes or developments.,"Examples with high activation consistently include descriptions of changes or developments in radiological findings when compared to prior images. This pattern is emphasized in multiple examples with follow-ups or intervals, indicating a focus on comparative analysis with earlier studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5823607698607698,0.5879396984924623,0.5691056910569106,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+5194,latent_5194,4862,0.009724,0.012307734,4.4779453,Comparison to prior images without explicit prior report details.,"The high-activation examples consistently request or provide a narrative comparing current findings with findings from prior images, despite some reports having 'N/A' or missing prior reports explicitly. This indicates a focus on change or stability over time in the imaging.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5195,latent_5195,38595,0.07719,0.046049986,7.9878078,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,Higher activation levels correspond with examples that include specific instructions or prompts related to providing a detailed description of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. This reflects an understanding of the model's strong response to tasks requiring diagnostic reasoning or analysis of changes over time.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4027391617753063,0.42,0.3430232558139535,0.9516129032258064,62.0,138.0
+5196,latent_5196,8912,0.017824,0.01248916,5.7028885,Comparative analysis of current and prior images when descriptions were requested.,"The examples with non-zero activations consistently mention providing a description of the findings by comparing the current images to prior images, even when the comparison wasn't initially provided. This indicates a pattern focused on interpreting changes via comparisons when reviewing images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5197,latent_5197,4361,0.008722,0.010787515,5.876459,Comparison to prior imagery shows no significant interval change.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a clear comparison against a prior imaging, but notably include conclusions of no significant interval change or normal findings despite concerns. This pattern shows situations where the current image does not show concerning changes from the prior despite initial medical concerns or indications.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,100.0,100.0
+5198,latent_5198,10990,0.02198,0.011639946,4.2634954,Focus on interval change or stability of specific pathologies or devices.,"Examples with high activations consistently use comparisons to identify stability or changes in specific pathologies, particularly device positioning or known abnormalities, with frequent references to interval changes or stability, which suggests importance assigned to tracking specific changes over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5199,latent_5199,4345,0.00869,0.01049641,4.8752193,Placeholder text with specific identifiers given in brackets or as underscores.,"The pattern is characterized by the presence of specific numeric identifiers like patient age, technique, or condition, often not completely specified, indicating placeholder text or partially anonymized details, in examples with high activation. These details suggest template implementations or other placeholder charting in medical reports.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3800623052959501,0.5125628140703518,0.5078534031413613,0.97,100.0,99.0
+5200,latent_5200,3359,0.006718,0.0056398744,3.2998693,"""Mediastinal and hilar contours appear within normal limits"" in imaging reports.","The examples with high activation levels describe specific findings in radiographic images that mention the mediastinal or hilar contours being within normal limits, often in cases dealing with no acute findings or routine checks of the heart and lungs. This phrase reflects a common pattern in radiological assessments where certain structures are explicitly ruled normal, indicating the point of focus is stability or absence of acute change in these regions.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.516452411841019,0.59,0.9090909090909092,0.2,100.0,100.0
+5201,latent_5201,9384,0.018768,0.0134367235,3.790266,Statement of unchanged or stable surgical/medical hardware findings.,"These examples emphasize findings that are particularly identified as unchanged or seen again with surgical or medical hardware like tubes or clips. The pattern is often noted in radiology reports where hardware positions are stable, unchanged, or 'again seen' on subsequent imaging studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5677579995761814,0.5879396984924623,0.6607142857142857,0.37,100.0,99.0
+5202,latent_5202,6433,0.012866,0.007161944,3.1470206,Observations on interval changes or unchanged findings relative to prior imaging.,"This pattern identifies reports that include a detail indicating interval changes or findings unchanged compared to prior imaging studies, described in brief sentences. Highly activated examples often notice slight changes in imaging findings that are indicative of a certain attention to specific clinical issues.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5203,latent_5203,16165,0.03233,0.016281832,4.979631,Comparison detail or specific reference to prior studies in contextual analysis.,"High activation examples consistently involve language identifying what comparisons are available or noting the specific compared studies and differences or similarities, even with missing larger context ("", _.""). In contrast, low activation examples often lack complete comparison detail or focus on the current findings alone.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4133333333333333,0.45,0.4666666666666667,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5204,latent_5204,14187,0.028374,0.01357191,3.74111,"Atelectasis, scarring, or linear opacities often observed in emphysematous or hyperexpanded lungs.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of atelectasis, scarring, or linear opacities in the lungs, often in combination with hyperexpanded lungs indicative of emphysematous changes.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5757575757575758,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5205,latent_5205,5106,0.010212,0.007856158,6.177553,Changes in medical devices or pathological conditions between studies.,"Highly activated examples involve descriptions of changes over time, focusing on the status of tubes (e.g., PICC lines, chest tubes, endotracheal tubes) and their associated clinical interventions or conditions, such as pneumothorax or pleural effusion. The pattern specifically highlights stability or changes in positioning or condition relative to prior imaging.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.484375,0.4848484848484848,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,98.0
+5206,latent_5206,5549,0.011098,0.012505518,4.756978,Frequent comparisons to prior imaging and interval changes.,"The highly activated examples emphasize descriptions derived from comparisons with prior imaging studies, even though the text may not always mention explicit comparisons. Additionally, the assistant's explanations often include observations of stable findings, slight interval changes, or continuous assessments after a pertinent event while highlighting any new or resolved conditions in the area of interest. This distinct reporting style reflects analysis in relation to previous images.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.475,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5207,latent_5207,4243,0.008486,0.012091874,7.330491,Discussion of interval changes or stability from recent prior studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe specific radiological findings as compared to immediately prior radiological studies. This pattern involves using temporal descriptors, identifying changes or stability from recent images, highlighting interval changes, or referencing specific dates in close proximity to the current findings.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5208,latent_5208,3905,0.00781,0.012924373,5.128786,Comparative analysis using current and prior frontal and lateral chest images.,"This selection of examples shows the specific use of frontal and lateral chest images or a combination of these along with prior images for detailed comparison, often with instructions to provide a description based on these comparisons. Many mention specific indications, techniques, and comparisons, indicating the importance of detailed comparative analysis in these reports.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.432,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5209,latent_5209,7511,0.015022,0.014768167,9.951636,Use of frontal and lateral chest images with comparisons to prior images.,"The explanation focuses on the use of both frontal and lateral chest images with comparisons to prior frontal images, where new findings like opacity or consolidation are noted alongside evaluations of cardiac and mediastinal contours. This detailed imaging description is linked to identifying changes in lung conditions over time.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5031446540880503,0.851063829787234,94.0,106.0
+5210,latent_5210,5520,0.01104,0.008274932,4.7297244,Evaluation of changes or stability over time through imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve follow-up or subsequent imaging studies, where changes in findings are explicitly compared or described between previous and current exams. This pattern highlights the importance of assessing developments, stability, or changes in medical conditions through imaging comparisons.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4923076923076923,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5211,latent_5211,32089,0.064178,0.034359824,5.1982393,Changes in radiological findings compared to previous examinations.,"Examples showing higher activation levels discuss findings that indicate slight changes or improvements in imaging, as compared to previous studies. This suggests that the model responds to radiology reports indicating dynamic changes or improvements rather than static assessments.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.595959595959596,0.6,0.5833333333333334,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5212,latent_5212,3701,0.007402,0.0076256474,6.1312094,Description of radiology findings compared to prior images.,"Samples with higher activations tend to indicate a description of findings in comparison to prior instances, specifically highlighting changes, stable conditions or notable observations such as pleural effusions, consolidation changes, or device placements. This pattern is typical in follow-up reports.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5213,latent_5213,4306,0.008612,0.0107872095,5.955147,Focus on confirming absence of common chest pathologies.,"Examples with high activations focus heavily on descriptions of the absence of common chest pathologies such as pneumothorax, pleural effusions, and focal consolidation. These examples emphasize normal cardiomediastinal contours without the presence of other acute pathologies, indicating a focus on confirming normality despite the clinical concerns or patient conditions.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,0.6944444444444444,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7291666666666667,0.74,0.6714285714285714,0.94,100.0,100.0
+5214,latent_5214,4384,0.008768,0.016064998,5.3269672,Image comparison with previous radiographs in detailed radiology reports.,"These examples focus on comparing current imaging findings with previous images, specifically using phrases like 'compared to the prior' or 'as compared to' for detailed analysis. Additionally, the overall structure of reports and how they incorporate past imaging data is a significant aspect of this pattern.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5215,latent_5215,12532,0.025064,0.015789766,4.6101704,Explicit comparisons with prior images to assess changes.,"In the examples given, the primary distinguishing factor in reports with higher activation levels is the explicit comparison to prior images or studies. These examples typically indicate progression, resolution, or stability of pathologies by contrasting current images with previous ones, which is a typical practice in radiological descriptions to assess treatment response or disease progression.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5216,latent_5216,3854,0.007708,0.008225838,4.7071514,Direct comparison of current findings with a prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the provision of a description of current radiology findings in direct comparison to prior imaging, despite not having explicit prior comparisons available. This implies the task involves examination of new images against older ones to assess changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4190268700072621,0.44,0.4565217391304347,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5217,latent_5217,6845,0.01369,0.014163003,3.2451506,Comparison of findings with prior imaging studies.,Highly activated examples consistently require radiographic comparisons between cross-sectional and planar imaging or specific previous radiologic studies to evaluate current findings. This involves analyzing changes or stability in medical conditions over time using prior imaging.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5218,latent_5218,5199,0.010398,0.017601198,3.546403,Detailed comparison of interval changes or findings with prior reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels include detailed comparison with prior reports to describe interval changes, improvements, or new findings, revealing the model's focus on detecting specific alterations between studies over time.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4148936170212766,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5219,latent_5219,4872,0.009744,0.010305915,5.958477,Low lung volumes affecting radiological findings.,"These examples highlight findings related to low lung volumes, which often result in particular radiological appearances such as accentuated bronchovascular markings, apparent cardiomegaly, or atelectasis. This pattern is commonly noted in radiology reports when lung volumes are low due to positioning, pathology, or technical limitations.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.849624060150376,0.85,0.8888888888888888,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5220,latent_5220,9936,0.019872,0.01250457,4.7053833,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in consecutive medical imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels often reference specific changes compared to previous radiological findings, particularly emphasizing any significant 'interval changes', stability or resolution of previously observed conditions. This indicates that the model is trained to detect and respond to reports involving interval changes in medical imaging findings, whether stable or demonstrating resolution.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5211267605633803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5221,latent_5221,28368,0.056736,0.035676666,7.677108,Explicit comparison to prior images with significant change or stability noted.,"All examples with high activation mention changes in image findings compared to previous studies, indicating significant changes or updates like worsening or stable findings. These often involve comparisons indicating progression or stability of findings, especially when the report language highlights changes explicitly.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.3448275862068966,0.5970149253731343,67.0,133.0
+5222,latent_5222,2583,0.005166,0.0062607005,4.2250676,Providing description of findings compared to prior images without full prior report context.,Highly activated examples often involve providing a description of radiological findings in absence of full prior report details or lacking specific history/context. These generally contain the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.',0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4266688410524027,0.4673366834170854,0.4802631578947368,0.73,100.0,99.0
+5223,latent_5223,9832,0.019664,0.013262512,5.478213,Detailed comparison with previous imaging revealing changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples focus on a detailed comparison between the current and prior radiological imaging, noting changes or the persistence/status quo of specific elements, such as tubes, catheters, effusions, pneumothorax, or cardiac silhouettes. This pattern showcases follow-up and monitoring of patient condition over time with explicit comparison statements.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5224,latent_5224,82996,0.165992,0.0945031,4.333245,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes or stability.","Examples with higher activations consistently describe specific comparisons made to prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability of findings over time. These examples highlight changes or the lack thereof, sometimes mentioning dates or details about past examinations. Examples with lower activation have either no comparison or don't focus on changes derived from past imaging.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5701754385964912,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5225,latent_5225,3089,0.006178,0.01510343,9.987184,Findings/exam changes linked to specific health evaluations.,"The examples with higher activation levels reference findings or examinations in relation to specific health conditions or changes (like 'interval changes', 'evaluate for change', 'assessment for pneumonia'). These reports contain acute or notable changes in the patient's condition that warrant particular attention by the medical staff, which aligns with the pattern of high activation levels.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5226,latent_5226,5249,0.010498,0.016603243,4.4888573,Detailed comparison instructions in radiology study findings.,"Examples showing high activation levels consistently feature structured directives to provide a comparative description of findings relative to previous radiology studies, often with instructions like ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" This detailed directive appears to directly influence the model’s activation.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4874242424242424,0.4874371859296482,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,99.0
+5227,latent_5227,5336,0.010672,0.010353519,5.2233353,Frontal and lateral chest views with no prior comparisons.,"Examples with higher activations feature mentions of chest imaging techniques with both frontal and lateral views, while also stating that no prior images are available for comparison. This encompasses a notable portion of patterns within this dataset, as these examples frequently contain such elements in conjunction.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5510204081632653,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5228,latent_5228,4388,0.008776,0.009595872,3.7944894,Detailed radiological findings in comparison to prior image.,"Examples where the assistant explains lung findings and provides descriptions specifically in comparison to a prior image show higher activations. This suggests that mentioning detailed findings on lungs, heart, and absence of abnormalities in a direct comparison context drives activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4081632653061224,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5229,latent_5229,16409,0.032818,0.020965224,3.8137887,References to comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions of findings compared against prior imaging studies, a key pattern in radiology workups where disease progression or stability is assessed over time. This aligns with previous data analysis on comparison references.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5161290322580645,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5230,latent_5230,7434,0.014868,0.0086682765,5.8235874,Focus on stability or unchanged findings from prior imaging.,The examples with high activation levels extensively discuss comparison with prior imaging studies but also emphasize stability or lack of significant change in the reported findings. This structure suggests a pattern where stability across time and absence of new acute changes are key elements.,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.4951456310679611,0.5543478260869565,92.0,108.0
+5231,latent_5231,3154,0.006308,0.009539534,5.514083,Instruction to compare current and prior imaging findings.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently contain the directive to 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This suggests the pattern emphasizes forming a narrative or analysis directly comparing current and prior images.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5232,latent_5232,3224,0.006448,0.0094677545,5.603252,Complex comparative analysis involving both frontal and lateral images.,"Examples with high activation involve tasks that require detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, leading to complex synthesis or deducing changes, especially where multiple planes or image types are involved (both frontal and lateral images referenced). Low activation examples tend to be straightforward comparisons or lack lateral images.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4992756385817766,0.5025125628140703,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,99.0
+5233,latent_5233,6628,0.013256,0.019112814,4.613229,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging indicating stability or unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activation level feature evaluations and comparisons with prior imaging or reports, identifying stable conditions, unchanged positions of medical devices, or rulings out acute processes in conjunction with prior observations. This pattern involves reiterating unchanged developments or stability compared to prior information.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.573170731707317,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5234,latent_5234,5519,0.011038,0.008566029,5.106268,Normal radiological findings with non-specific indications.,"The most activated examples describe clear lungs, normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, and lack of acute findings such as effusion or pneumothorax without significant pathological findings, following a general pattern of normal or unremarkable radiographic appearances.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6535361904044588,0.655,0.6371681415929203,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5235,latent_5235,2932,0.005864,0.007300873,4.6546717,Description comparing current findings to prior imaging.,"The activation pattern strongly highlights descriptions that focus on comparing current radiological findings to previous imaging, noting changes or stability in findings such as pleural effusions or atelectasis. These comparisons frequently cite stability or slight changes in pathologies in context with prior exams.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3784461152882206,0.38,0.3909090909090909,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5236,latent_5236,10999,0.021998,0.025471829,4.4002066,"Detailed comparison between current and prior images, noting change or stability.","The highly activated samples frequently include specifics about the comparison of current and prior images, along with terms consistent with clinical improvement or deterioration. Phrases like ""comparison to prior,"" ""unchanged,"" ""improved,"" ""similar to prior"" or the explicit mention of ""prior image"" are often present and signal a focus on evaluating interval changes in radiology.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5237,latent_5237,2266,0.004532,0.008060811,7.56186,Endotracheal tube placement assessment in comparison imaging.,"Analysis of endotracheal tube positioning in radiology reports is consistently mentioned in activation examples, highlighting its relevance in comparison imaging, particularly in post-intubation scenarios and respiratory complications. This pattern is critical given the clinical importance of proper tube placement to ensure patient safety and effective ventilation.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5851075444917567,0.62,0.7857142857142857,0.33,100.0,100.0
+5238,latent_5238,6124,0.012248,0.010776962,5.418899,"Stable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in imaging.","The examples with higher activation consistently refer to structures such as cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours appearing unchanged or normal, regardless of other findings. This recurring mention of stability or lack of change in regions like the cardiomediastinal silhouette or hilar contours seems to correlate with the observed pattern.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.4375,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5239,latent_5239,11616,0.023232,0.02155102,6.170865,Aortic tortuosity or calcification noted in the findings.,"These examples highlight a pattern where the particular abnormal contour of the thoracic aorta and/or calcification is described, often with phrases like 'tortuous aorta', 'unfolding', 'calcification'. This is a distinct characteristic noted across the radiological findings in the samples with higher activation levels.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4557253506384761,0.545,0.7368421052631579,0.14,100.0,100.0
+5240,latent_5240,6418,0.012836,0.011430226,3.9307704,Comparison of findings over time or studies with noted stability or change.,"Examples like #3, #5, #8, #10, #11, #21, #26, and #49 consistently involve descriptions that address variations or comparisons with previous imaging, specifically indicating changes over time. This includes the enlargement or stability of observed features across multiple/comparative studies which are specified as 'no change noted', 'improvement noted', or similar language signaling the detection of stability or difference over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5241,latent_5241,28813,0.057626,0.039261937,5.6622906,Detailed descriptions of tube placement or changes in position.,"The examples with higher activations involve detailed descriptions of the positioning and condition of stomach or chest tubes, such as nasogastric or endotracheal tube tips. These details include spacing from anatomical landmarks or change in tube positioning, highlighting the significance of tube placements and changes to medical monitoring in chest radiology reports.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.596516764983784,0.605,0.647887323943662,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5242,latent_5242,15087,0.030174,0.0136665525,3.1200569,Evaluation for interval change comparing current vs. prior images.,"Many examples mention the comparison between current and prior images, describing unchanged findings or improvements, which always involve assessing the interval change in findings between the examinations. Such language highlights stability or progression and uses terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'interval change'. Some examples uniquely incorporate implicit or explicit temporal references, even if actual changes are minimal or assessments are limited due to technique or habitus.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5243,latent_5243,7364,0.014728,0.0126643265,4.6280255,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images or studies.,These examples all involve describing findings on radiographic images with either specific reference to prior imaging for comparison or as part of a diagnostic approach to monitor changes. Descriptions involving both current and prior imaging are highlighted in these samples.,0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5244,latent_5244,13859,0.027718,0.015726756,6.204444,Focused critical condition evaluation or procedural follow-up comparison.,"Examples focus on specific clinical indications, typically involving critical conditions requiring close monitoring such as airway status, pleural effusion evaluation, or device placement accuracy. Reports highlight detailed assessments against previous imaging or recent procedural outcomes, emphasizing specific details in acute care settings.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679197,0.555,0.5329341317365269,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5245,latent_5245,4608,0.009216,0.009328967,7.7802553,Descriptions of radiological change or stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe radiological comparisons between current and prior studies, emphasizing either significant findings, assurances of stability, or changes in conditions. This suggests that the activation pattern is highly related to assessing changes or stability in imaging over time using comparative language or reference to previous studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.4298245614035088,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5246,latent_5246,3435,0.00687,0.007791785,4.919338,Explicit request for comparison with prior imaging in the prompt.,"High activation occurs in examples where the prompt explicitly requests comparison of radiological findings with prior imaging. These examples consistently include instructions or contexts indicating comparison to previous studies, showing sensitivity to requirements that emphasize comparative analysis over isolated assessment.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4800309768779732,0.53,0.5185185185185185,0.84,100.0,100.0
+5247,latent_5247,15055,0.03011,0.024621228,7.267907,Explicit instructions to compare current and prior images.,"Higher activation levels consistently correlate with explicit instructions for direct comparisons between current and prior images. The specificity of 'please compare' or 'as compared to previous' actively engages the model to highlight differences in imaging findings from one date to another, which leads to higher activation. While the lower activation examples lack explicit directives or comparisons, despite sometimes providing prior images for context, they are not directly instructed to perform a comparative analysis which reduces activation.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5248,latent_5248,6380,0.01276,0.010127557,3.516794,Detailed comparison of current vs. previous findings in specific pathological contexts.,"Samples with lower activation levels do not engage in extensive or detailed comparison of current radiology findings with previous exams. High activation samples have a specific emphasis on evaluating radiological changes in view of patient's clinical status, differentiating these changes in the context of the specific condition under review, highlighted by ""comparison to prior"" phrasing often indicating a detailed review and finding.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,100.0,100.0
+5249,latent_5249,3311,0.006622,0.009078924,5.3277683,Precise descriptions of tube or catheter placement.,"All examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of tubes, catheters, or medical devices positioned within the body, often specifying their exact locations, such as alongside venous lines terminating or ending at specific anatomical landmarks.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6317135549872123,0.64,0.7,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5250,latent_5250,5529,0.011058,0.012230101,4.6929445,"Description or comparison of findings to prior images, noting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels typically involve providing a comprehensive description of findings based on both current images and comparisons with prior images. The assistant is expected to make or report comparisons, often using phrases like 'compared to', 'no relevant change', or 'similar to prior', indicating a focus on detecting changes or stability over time.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3896856881293866,0.4,0.4206349206349206,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5251,latent_5251,23802,0.047604,0.028934274,4.505572,Comparison to prior images emphasizing unchanged or persistent findings.,"The examples describe findings by comparing current imaging with prior images, noting changes in specific pathological findings or lack thereof. The presence of terms like ""again noted"", ""unchanged"", ""since prior exam"", and phrases indicating comparison of present and previous studies highlights this pattern.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6296667000300271,0.63,0.6226415094339622,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5252,latent_5252,2537,0.005074,0.007768049,6.0257454,Minimal or absent comparison details in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently lack details in the 'COMPARISON' field, often indicating 'None', 'N/A', or being left blank altogether. This pattern suggests that less emphasis or concern is placed on changes over time, aligning with their high representativeness of the pattern being analyzed.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666667,0.51,0.5055555555555555,0.91,100.0,100.0
+5253,latent_5253,3320,0.00664,0.008899428,5.8271284,Requests for comparison between current and prior images in image-based reports.,"Highly activated examples contain requests or instructions to provide a comparison description between current and specified prior images, typically spelled out with 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This style prompts a specific evaluative process focusing on changes or stability of findings over time, indicating a pattern of comparative analysis in the reports.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5254,latent_5254,17321,0.034642,0.01839313,3.213866,Comparison indicating stable findings or mild interval changes.,"The activation levels indicate an association with consistent findings that describe either a pathological change or an unchanged stable condition, often with comparison to prior images. This pattern involves tracking progression or stability in radiological findings, such as unchanged heart size, consistent nodular opacities, or comparison indicating mild changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5913978494623656,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5255,latent_5255,9738,0.019476,0.013954819,6.0926547,Comparison to prior imaging studies noting changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activations frequently involve descriptions of radiological findings that compare current imaging with prior studies, noting changes or stating stability of certain features, such as masses, opacities, or effusions. Common phrases include 'compared to the previous', 'no significant change', or 'unchanged since prior'.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5256,latent_5256,8756,0.017512,0.013733333,4.8150473,Findings described without direct comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with the highest activations often lack a direct comparison or historical context provided, focusing on providing a stand-alone description of the findings relative to an unstated or assumed baseline. The examples also sometimes focus on procedural or device-related details, with less emphasis on observed change over time.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5880959736381424,0.6,0.6515151515151515,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5257,latent_5257,19554,0.039108,0.021640578,5.2863092,Pulmonary vascular congestion and related findings in imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels highlight findings related to pulmonary vascular congestion, which is often mentioned in radiological reports when interpreting changes in lung opacities and heart size. The discussion of relative changes suggests these reports focus on dynamics of pulmonary blood flow evident in the imagery.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7362012987012987,0.74,0.8157894736842105,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5258,latent_5258,4766,0.009532,0.013999453,4.646849,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5259,latent_5259,20513,0.041026,0.021468645,4.7541428,"Evaluation of interval changes in position of lines, tubes, or chronic findings.","These examples involve descriptions of interval changes evident from current and prior imaging related to medical devices and conditions where small adjustments in position or appearance are recorded using monitoring tubes and chronic conditions like stable pleural effusions or atelectasis, but significant acute pathologies are absent. These reports typically focus on precise mechanical or positional changes between consecutive imaging studies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6215848028456823,0.625,0.6050420168067226,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5260,latent_5260,2649,0.005298,0.010280041,6.233326,Detailed comparison with prior imaging revealing changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples involve a pattern in which comparisons with prior studies show specific changes or stable findings, often focusing on cardiomediastinal silhouettes, lung changes, or pleural effusions, frequently paired with technical elements like image angles or comparison details. Lower activation examples either lack such comparisons or contain unrelated findings like new pathologies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5261,latent_5261,9336,0.018672,0.012395651,3.8951237,"Comparisons made with prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability.","Examples with high activations often involve explicit descriptions of changes or stability in findings through direct comparison with prior imaging, highlighting the importance of temporal changes in the interpretation of radiological studies.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5775288109307735,0.605,0.5695364238410596,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5262,latent_5262,6249,0.012498,0.008665292,3.596054,Comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on stability or changes in pathology.,"The examples with high activation level all emphasize the comparison of current radiographic findings to prior images, along with significant diagnostic observations such as changes in opacification or effusion, medication-related patterns, or device positions. They routinely involve terms like 'compared to prior', 're-demonstration', and 'no new findings' indicating stability, progression, or changes in observed pathologies.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5841584158415841,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5263,latent_5263,32588,0.065176,0.02934131,5.099978,Reports indicating interval progression or significant change in pathologies.,"The examples show a significant activation level when there's mention of new or progressive changes in pathologies, particularly when comparing current findings against prior images. Situations indicating worsening or significant changes tend to activate the description process more fully.",0.595393307257714,0.6122448979591837,0.6666666666666666,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.6041666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5264,latent_5264,1854,0.003708,0.0029959863,7.857224,Worsening or new findings indicating pathological progression.,"The highly activated examples consistently emphasize the presence of rapidly evolving or worsening pathologies, such as new or enlarging opacities, increased effusion, or atelectasis. These findings are often highlighted in reports when they suggest progression rather than stability, which is usually more concerning clinically and therefore more activating.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5343695093931612,0.5606060606060606,0.6037735849056604,0.3265306122448979,98.0,100.0
+5265,latent_5265,3549,0.007098,0.009959234,8.943231,Provide a comparative description of current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently request a description comparing the current and prior images, even explicitly asking to provide a description or findings in comparison. They highlight a task of directly making and documenting comparisons, focusing less on providing a diagnostic conclusion.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4495412844036697,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5266,latent_5266,11242,0.022484,0.023463795,4.2628465,Comparative analysis with prior images showing device position or cardiopulmonary changes.,"The examples with higher activation heavily rely on making observations based on comparisons with prior imaging, specifying the presence or change in medical devices, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary conditions like atelectasis and edema. Recognition of these patterns in the context of previous medical history or significant findings indicates the dataset's focus on interpreting continuity or change in these conditions as indicative of the sought pattern.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5267,latent_5267,16135,0.03227,0.017121894,4.2094584,Description includes findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation explain findings in relation to prior imaging, despite using incomplete or placeholder elements in later details, suggesting the prominence of the pattern of emphasizing prior comparison in radiological interpretation or impression sections.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5268,latent_5268,14730,0.02946,0.012517724,2.2794046,Greater attention to vascular or respiratory pathologies with underpenetration or reduced image clarity.,"Image descriptions do not explicitly compare findings with prior images. The activation in certain examples aligns with imaging patterns indicating vascular or respiratory pathologies disproportionately affected by poor image clarity, underpenetration, or low lung volumes, potentially due to the need for greater diagnostic emphasis in such cases.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.5689655172413793,0.33,100.0,100.0
+5269,latent_5269,5792,0.011584,0.01787338,8.960041,Systematic findings descriptions using multiple image views.,"The samples exhibit a pattern where imaging is discussed with comparison to previous frontal and lateral views, specifically highlighting technical details and findings in meticulous and systematic descriptions with multiple modalities or positions involved. High activation occurs in samples emphasizing detailed technical description and use of multiple imaging views (PA, lateral, etc.).",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5270,latent_5270,4411,0.008822,0.018323228,6.258642,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5271,latent_5271,21811,0.043622,0.021679848,3.1253107,Stable findings on comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples show stable findings when compared to previous images, indicating no significant changes despite the presence of existing abnormalities. Such reports often imply ongoing monitoring without immediate concerns or interventions needed.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5272,latent_5272,13327,0.026654,0.036417436,5.0308776,Cardiac or vascular findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation notably include specific references to changes in cardiac or vascular structures such as cardiomegaly or tortuosity, and the comparison to prior images. The use of comparative language alongside descriptions of cardiac or vascular findings seems to trigger higher activation levels.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5273,latent_5273,4592,0.009184,0.00820803,3.4187949,"Mentions of technique as 'frontal image' or 'lateral image' alongside repetitive, similar findings such as pulmonary vascular abnormalities.","Prompts consistently mention a systematic approach to comparing the findings on current and prior imaging, but references directly imaging input more often, prioritizing findings like pulmonary vascular congestion, interstitial changes, and the cardiac silhouette. High activations indicate focus on these physiological features when imagery is given as input, particularly when the terms used are frequently repeated within prompts.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5274,latent_5274,8592,0.017184,0.013722944,12.065901,Change in position or management of medical tubes.,"Examples with high activation levels identify changes in medical tubes like endotracheal, nasogastric, or surgical drain tubes. Descriptions include explicit mentions of tube placement or changes of position, indicating tube management as a recurring theme in these cases.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4736149493354389,0.6,0.2115384615384615,0.22,50.0,150.0
+5275,latent_5275,4297,0.008594,0.0061103767,5.516518,Focus on elevation of the hemidiaphragm.,"Examples with descriptions of diaphragmatic elevation or comparable terms show high activation levels, indicating a consistent focus on this specific finding when it dominates the report analysis. Elevated hemidiaphragm is a radiological sign that may be noted for various reasons, often involving volume changes, positioning, or pathology in the thoracic or abdominal region.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.566951566951567,0.62,0.9,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5276,latent_5276,2643,0.005286,0.0076822857,5.7363553,Detailed comparison with prior radiographs focusing on changes in findings.,"The high activation examples are characterized by direct descriptions of findings and comparisons made with prior imaging, focusing on lung clarity, structural changes, and stability of cardiomediastinal contours. These reports highlight detailed analysis and comparison, often leading to diagnostic decisions.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5128205128205128,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5277,latent_5277,9220,0.01844,0.01017848,5.823029,Radiological description emphasizes interval changes.,"These examples compare current findings with previous imaging but specifically emphasize anatomical or pathological changes, such as improvement or persistence of conditions, as opposed to mere existence of a prior comparison.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.4787234042553192,0.4891304347826087,92.0,108.0
+5278,latent_5278,3459,0.006918,0.011190936,4.3084154,Emphasis on providing comparison of findings between current and prior images.,The shared characteristic in examples with high activation is the focused instruction to specifically provide a comparison in the radiological findings between the current and prior images. These examples necessitate a detailed analysis of changes over time as emphasized by the use of the term 'comparison' in both the present and prior reports.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4337276071022201,0.465,0.4761904761904761,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5279,latent_5279,4362,0.008724,0.011622465,6.1442323,Comparison to prior imaging studies with noted changes or stability.,"The pattern that seems to have significant activation is the explicit comparison of current radiological findings to previous imaging studies, which includes both explicit mentions of previous images and references to changes or stability in radiological findings.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.630450849963045,0.65,0.6027397260273972,0.88,100.0,100.0
+5280,latent_5280,5811,0.011622,0.011165893,4.2579103,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5281,latent_5281,11712,0.023424,0.011892556,2.7846494,Explicit descriptions of comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples increased activation predominantly based on indication of comparative analysis between current and prior imaging works, including phrases like ""on prior CT"", ""as compared to"", ""unchanged"", or dates referencing earlier studies. These comparisons often highlight stability or changes in specific features over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5282,latent_5282,3867,0.007734,0.0073901983,4.0172887,Comparative analysis with prior imaging for interval changes.,"The activation pattern prominently highlights examples featuring explicit directives to compare current imaging findings with prior studies. This signifies the importance of evaluating changes or stability over time in chest radiographs, which is a recurring demand in medical imaging reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5283,latent_5283,4162,0.008324,0.01055506,4.1823735,Verification or confirmation of findings through comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation often identify findings from the imaging and specifically note how these findings are confirmed by comparisons to prior imaging or reports. This validation step, emphasizing stability or changes over time, usually describes the stability or slight changes in abnormalities, whether in organs, structures, or devices, compared with prior imaging findings.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.475,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5284,latent_5284,42158,0.084316,0.050462198,4.257716,Descriptions focus on interval change in radiological findings.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings with explicit references to interval changes compared to previous imaging. The reports focus on observations of what has changed or remained the same since the last comparison, a common clinical approach to monitor patient's progress or treatment effectiveness.",0.727428326914848,0.7346938775510204,0.6875,0.88,25.0,24.0,0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5285,latent_5285,6634,0.013268,0.012529911,6.923503,Complex comparisons between current and prior imaging involving resolved or unchanged findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention both current and prior images, involving detailed comparison and changes over time regarding the findings, especially in complex medical cases. Phrases like 'compared to prior' and documentation of findings' resolution or stability are noticeable.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4945054945054945,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5286,latent_5286,7783,0.015566,0.008514578,4.128019,Emphasis on unchanged findings in image comparisons.,"The examples with notable activation describe situations where findings remain unchanged when compared to prior images, often using clear terms like 'unchanged', 'remains', or 'similar', emphasizing stability across observations.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4931506849315068,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5287,latent_5287,6172,0.012344,0.013390255,4.502768,Analysis of interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"The examples consistently describe interval changes in the findings as observed by comparing current and prior frontal images, particularly noting any changes in conditions like pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or lung opacities.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5288,latent_5288,18549,0.037098,0.020842254,3.3369386,Change or confirmation of findings between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with noticeable changes between the current and prior images, especially those requiring clinical consideration or intervention, exhibit higher activation levels. This involves distinct changes or confirmations such as equipment removal, notable lesion progressions, or new findings like pneumothorax or effusion.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5289,latent_5289,6247,0.012494,0.012656378,8.476591,Evaluation of medical device placement or changes.,"The examples with high activation all involve the evaluation of lines, tubes, or catheters in terms of their placement or changes since prior studies. This pattern captures the consistent focus on positioning and potential changes in medical devices when comparing radiological images.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.609375,0.61,0.6195652173913043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5290,latent_5290,8352,0.016704,0.021423737,4.5981584,Observations of change or stability from prior images.,"The pattern evident from examples with higher activation levels is the specificity of chest pathology observed in the context of a comparison with prior images and explicit details of changes or stability of the observation. Phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph', 'unchanged', or 'again seen' highlight the importance of comparison and change/stability in findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4130434782608695,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5291,latent_5291,33292,0.066584,0.038993314,6.265261,Low lung volumes with vascular crowding or atelectasis noted.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of clinical findings related to low lung volumes and associated vascular crowding, atelectasis, or mild effusions. This seems to trigger higher activation levels in contrast to examples that do not emphasize these specific findings, indicating a focus on these conditions as a pattern for activation.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5675675675675675,0.4242424242424242,99.0,101.0
+5292,latent_5292,7765,0.01553,0.017592225,5.317327,Frequent referencing of prior imaging or reports for comparison.,"The examples consistently emphasize the specification of prior reports in the context of assessing current imaging findings. This indicates the pattern of comparisons made with archived images or previous imaging results to track changes, which is a common task in radiological assessments and follow-ups.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4705454545454545,0.545,0.5257142857142857,0.92,100.0,100.0
+5293,latent_5293,6324,0.012648,0.0113314325,6.4169717,Comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on stability or absence of acute changes.,"Examples with high activation levels refer to comparisons between current and prior radiological images or reports, where it explicitly mentions the stability or change in a previously noted condition and often specifies that no new acute processes were observed or that changes were consistent with a non-acute progression.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5294,latent_5294,71997,0.143994,0.08589003,4.918051,Comparison of imaging findings to detect interval changes.,"These examples consistently involve the task of comparing current imaging findings with prior imaging studies. The pattern involves analyzing the stability, changes, or similarities in medical imaging over time, emphasizing any changes discerned. The similarity across examples is based on the specific task of identifying interval changes.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.539209790026933,0.5505050505050505,0.5384615384615384,0.7070707070707071,99.0,99.0
+5295,latent_5295,2112,0.004224,0.0046282895,4.779915,Emphasis on evaluation of changes between current and prior images with sparse technique details.,"Examples with high activation typically include references to a current and prior frontal and/or lateral chest image comparison while omitting explicit technique descriptions or detailed elaborations of findings, placing emphasis on the evaluation of potential pathological changes in the images provided.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5296,latent_5296,2938,0.005876,0.011482375,9.657559,"Radiology descriptions based on comparisons with prior images, focusing on interval changes and interventions.","The examples mostly describe scenarios where current radiographs are compared to prior images, primarily focusing on assessing interval changes, particularly related to interventions such as tube placements, evidence of fluid statuses, or resolving conditions. This is indicated by the frequent inclusion of requests to evaluate positions of tubes, line placements, or interval changes compared to previous images.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4078683259735046,0.41,0.4196428571428571,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5297,latent_5297,6480,0.01296,0.0124216415,3.5690851,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with focus on stability or change.,"The examples with the pattern involve a detailed comparison between current and past imaging, typically describing changes in the observed anatomical or pathological features. This frequently includes specific notations about the unchanged, improved, or worsened status of seen abnormalities, often with references to specific medical devices or previous findings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4480128462464873,0.45,0.4431818181818182,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5298,latent_5298,6876,0.013752,0.011667288,3.434517,Low lung volumes with streaky basilar opacities suggestive of atelectasis in comparison with prior images.,"Common patterns among examples with high activation scores include references to low lung volumes and streaky basilar opacities indicative of atelectasis in the radiological comparisons. These features are repeated in descriptions of images analyzed against prior images, noted for consistency even in varied clinical scenarios.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5628703094140882,0.585,0.6545454545454545,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5299,latent_5299,10573,0.021146,0.02122505,8.618422,Reports comparing current findings with prior images for interval changes.,The examples that have high activation levels consistently involve the use of comparison to prior imaging to identify changes in medical conditions of the patient. The pattern specifically involves language that indicates a comparison or evaluation of interval change in patient conditions from prior imaging studies.,0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5753715498938429,0.595,0.5664335664335665,0.81,100.0,100.0
+5300,latent_5300,4681,0.009362,0.011530782,4.426042,"Focus on comparison with prior images, using terms like 'unchanged' or 'interval' to indicate continuity or change.","The examples with higher activations consistently emphasize the use of prior comparison and the presence of words suggesting continuity or stability ('unchanged', 'interval', 'previous'). This focus on comparing with prior imaging and noting stability or change is a recurrent theme in the activating examples.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4482758620689655,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5301,latent_5301,11260,0.02252,0.013221373,2.593664,Prompts requesting comparison to prior image findings.,"The examples with high activation all include specific instructions to ""provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image."", indicating the comparison element is significant for the pattern recognition.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5302,latent_5302,24200,0.0484,0.035072967,6.093087,Atelectasis or pleural effusion findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings of atelectasis or pleural effusion, often in the context of unchanged or persistent conditions compared to prior studies. Terms like 'atelectasis', 'pleural effusion', or 'persistent' characterize these descriptions in various imaging contexts.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5303,latent_5303,10950,0.0219,0.01544565,3.395471,Multi-view chest image comparison with prior imaging for subtle changes.,"Examples that have an activation are analyzing frontal images in combination with lateral images compared to prior records, frequently indicating subtle changes or additional findings, suggesting the importance of multi-view analysis in detecting nuanced or complex issues.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4046278924327705,0.405,0.4095238095238095,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5304,latent_5304,7823,0.015646,0.014793836,8.028572,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings in radiology reports that are stable or unchanged in comparison to prior imaging studies, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar to prior'. This pattern reflects a common clinical context where monitoring changes over time is essential, indicating no new concerning abnormalities or changes since the last image.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5305752132099437,0.542713567839196,0.5671641791044776,0.38,100.0,99.0
+5305,latent_5305,15152,0.030304,0.021598687,8.6303,Consideration for follow-up or further imaging due to unresolved or new findings.,"Examples 1-48 generally describe findings that could indicate initial or unresolved pathology after comparison to prior imaging studies. A significant factor across high-activation samples is recommending additional follow-up or alternative imaging for clarification or due to new findings like nodules or opacities. This pattern often indicates findings that are clinically significant but not definitive, requiring further investigation.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.680218080784252,0.695,0.48,0.8421052631578947,57.0,143.0
+5306,latent_5306,3627,0.007254,0.009235916,4.400305,Comparison using frontal and lateral views in complex cases.,"This set of examples highlights findings using frontal images compared to prior frontal images, but the key presence of lateral images indicates detailed evaluation of chest anatomy for complex cases where a single view might be insufficient. This is evident in higher activations where comparisons are more emphasized, especially when different views (frontal and lateral) are used.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5307,latent_5307,9802,0.019604,0.016122047,3.2951796,Focus on unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the comparison between current and prior images, alluding to a specific consistency or stability of findings over time. This indicates a focus on assessing changes or lack thereof in radiological findings over different examinations.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4782608695652174,0.33,100.0,100.0
+5308,latent_5308,14824,0.029648,0.017149884,6.219219,Radiology findings described in comparison to previous images.,"The examples with significant activations involve descriptions made in comparison to previous imaging studies. The pattern here is characterized by examining differences or similarities observed in consecutive radiological examinations, which require explicit mention of previous findings for context. High activation levels appear in reports emphasizing specific comparisons, such as 'increased opacity' or 'unchanged from prior', indicating the focus on changes or stability over time, while lower activation examples often lack these explicit comparative remarks.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5703732605020159,0.5829145728643216,0.5639097744360902,0.75,100.0,99.0
+5309,latent_5309,6170,0.01234,0.02718197,6.1348114,Findings explicitly compared to prior images with detailed descriptions.,"Examples with high activation levels include comparisons to prior images within the available description, where the findings of the current study are gauged by review alongside a prior image. This signifies the importance of explicit comparative descriptions in determining activation levels, indicating a pattern of reports that actively compare findings against prior images or studies.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3922214561148139,0.405,0.3661971830985915,0.26,100.0,100.0
+5310,latent_5310,2608,0.005216,0.009088967,4.701704,Focus on providing comparative findings with prior images.,The examples with high activation mention comparison with prior reports or findings and explicitly instruct to provide a description based on the findings from this comparison. The pattern emphasizes revisiting past reports and providing comparative analysis details.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.5,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5311,latent_5311,20192,0.040384,0.017469427,2.9551764,Comparison with prior imaging and interpretation of changes.,"Examples with higher activation demonstrate descriptions of findings comparing current imaging to prior studies. These reports employ specific comparison phrases, evaluating for changes in medical conditions using previous imaging as a reference.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5312,latent_5312,4202,0.008404,0.008922561,5.923296,Descriptions comparing current and prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to involve instances where a frontal image is compared to a prior image, inclusive of a description or explanation of the findings in the radiology report. These comparisons often reference aspects such as the presence or absence of pathology, etc.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4010088272383354,0.43,0.4513888888888889,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5313,latent_5313,11330,0.02266,0.009446631,3.337377,Presence of explicit comparison between current and prior images.,"The pattern of activation is based on the presence of both current and prior images, enabling a comparative analysis. Examples with high activations involve prompts that specifically ask for a comparison between the current and prior images, pointing to findings that are stable or changes in specific observations, suggesting that the system recognizes this comparison as a key trigger for higher activation.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.556699950205729,0.5728643216080402,0.5547445255474452,0.76,100.0,99.0
+5314,latent_5314,136323,0.272646,0.22149505,5.241303,Describes interval change compared to prior image studies.,"Examples with moderate to high activation frequently include findings related to comparisons from previous imaging studies, particularly in terms of change (e.g., 'unchanged', 'worsened', 'improvement', etc.). Lower activation examples either do not reference a comparison or note no significant change.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5585585585585585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5315,latent_5315,9246,0.018492,0.016926229,5.7123346,Focus on changes compared to prior studies in radiology reports.,"The activated examples highlight changes or stability in findings when compared with previous or prior imaging, indicating a focus on ""comparison to prior"" in the reports. These examples often mention detailed changes or lack thereof since a past study, using phrases like 'compared to', 'since the prior', or 'as compared to'.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6548376658397153,0.68,0.6168831168831169,0.95,100.0,100.0
+5316,latent_5316,19180,0.03836,0.015067724,2.9706168,Comparison of images focusing on medical device placements or stabilization.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature comparisons to prior images and descriptions of tubes, catheters, or endotracheal tubes and their placements or positions relative to anatomical landmarks. Specific descriptions include terms like 'Unchanged', 'compared to prior', and details about devices.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.613831841319993,0.615,0.6292134831460674,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5317,latent_5317,6212,0.012424,0.008297028,4.7009654,Significant new or unresolved findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with activations tend to describe imperfect comparison due to inconsistencies in radiological findings, such as new opacities or changes not seen previously, often noting discrepancies or updates in patient conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3959659152195016,0.44,0.3695652173913043,0.17,100.0,100.0
+5318,latent_5318,3919,0.007838,0.007935497,5.465412,Specific placement and adjustment of vascular catheters or tubes.,"These examples emphasize language related to vascular catheter placements and endotracheal tube adjustments, specifically the detail of their precise anatomical locations and necessary repositioning or evaluation. The highly activated samples include specifics like measurements relative to the carina, which is crucial in radiology for ensuring correct placement of tubes and lines in critically ill patients.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6262626262626263,0.63,0.6625,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5319,latent_5319,4743,0.009486,0.016934885,6.3650594,Reports detailing explicit radiographic findings and changes.,"The pattern in these examples relates to detailed radiological findings being articulated in comparison to both current and prior images, highlighting intervals or changes in certain features of the images. High activation correlates with reports mentioning explicit ""findings"" from the radiographs provided in the prompts.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4298384542286981,0.46,0.4726027397260274,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5320,latent_5320,3889,0.007778,0.008506115,4.8972964,"Comparison of current imaging findings to prior, noting changes or stability.","This pattern involves analyzing and describing current imaging findings in direct comparison to prior examinations, specifically noting any changes or stability over time. This is common in radiological assessments that monitor progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4568965517241379,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5321,latent_5321,5515,0.01103,0.008961826,4.0444665,Presence of focal pulmonary consolidation or masses indicating significant pathology.,"The consistently higher activation levels appear in reports concerning focal pulmonary consolidations, masses, or focal lesions that could signify progression of a disease condition. These findings require careful attention since they may indicate significant clinical conditions such as infections, tumors, or significant changes in known pathological states.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4247151233543533,0.48,0.4473684210526316,0.17,100.0,100.0
+5322,latent_5322,11538,0.023076,0.029433254,6.890244,Description based on comparison to prior image.,"The highest activation levels are associated with reports that mention a step-by-step evaluation, where a description is provided comparing a current radiology study with prior images. The reports specifically request or are structured to provide descriptions relative to previous studies.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4611064944222004,0.465,0.4700854700854701,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5323,latent_5323,25863,0.051726,0.024830233,4.6144953,Comparison to previous imaging to assess interval change or stability.,"These examples focus explicitly on comparing current imaging with previous findings to assess changes or stability, which is a frequent practice in radiology to monitor disease progression or stability. The reports highlight new or unchanged findings compared to prior radiographs, emphasizing continuity and longitudinal tracking of medical data.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+5324,latent_5324,4725,0.00945,0.010627772,5.2090983,Focus on surgical or device-related interventions and their status.,"The highly activated examples involve imaging reports that focus on patient history, current image comparisons, and device placements. These examples document observations about the positioning and status of medical devices like endotracheal tubes or PICC lines, often in the context of monitoring interventions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5577777777777778,0.5577889447236181,0.5544554455445545,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+5325,latent_5325,7833,0.015666,0.010135912,2.9149182,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with observations of stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a detailed comparison of current images to prior studies, taking into account the techniques used, previous findings, lung, heart or mediastinal observations, and changes or stability over time. This pattern is characteristic of radiological evaluations that emphasize consistency, change detection, and historical context in image analysis.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3914373088685015,0.3969849246231156,0.375,0.3,100.0,99.0
+5326,latent_5326,4079,0.008158,0.009660869,5.886229,Identification of significant findings or interval changes on imaging comparison.,"The high activation examples contain significant findings or interval changes when comparing current vs prior radiological images, even if the changes are not necessarily acute or life-threatening. This reflects a focus on evaluating and describing longitudinal changes across imaging studies, which are important in assessing patient progress or response to treatment.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4066496163682864,0.42,0.3857142857142857,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5327,latent_5327,3226,0.006452,0.007818094,10.715855,"Evaluation of findings in comparison to prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","High activation examples consistently address changes or stability in patient imaging compared to previous radiographs, highlighting new findings, unchanged pathology, or specific changes (e.g., since prior). Lower activation examples lack such comparative evaluations, focusing instead on current findings without historical context.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.4756097560975609,0.975,80.0,120.0
+5328,latent_5328,79357,0.158714,0.086995974,4.4495764,Detailed interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with increased activation levels focus on comparison between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting interval changes in pathology. The most activated examples contain specific, comparative analysis of changes in findings over time, identifying any stability or change relative to past imaging.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5876288659793815,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5329,latent_5329,9949,0.019898,0.020720609,5.715501,Instruction for comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"In the examples, the prompts consistently mention comparing current images to previous ones across different indications or findings, explicitly instructing to compare the current radiology study with prior imaging. This pattern of language, emphasizing a comparative task in the presence of image inputs, indicates a focus on temporal comparison rather than static analysis.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5330,latent_5330,39575,0.07915,0.056556787,6.5206523,Reference to stability or change in cardiac/thoracic devices or conditions compared to prior images.,"The pattern emphasized here is explicit reference to changes in cardiac or thoracic devices or conditions, like pleural effusions, pneumothoraxes, and changes in size or appearance of heart size, often in terms of it being stable or unchanged compared to prior images. These elements often involve changes or stability verified by reference to prior studies.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6726342710997443,0.68,0.6384615384615384,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5331,latent_5331,2603,0.005206,0.0069087627,7.387972,"Normal or unchanged cardiac silhouette, clear or stable lungs.","Highly activated examples reference descriptions of radiological findings, focusing on the normal appearance or minor changes of the cardiac silhouette and explicitly state there is no significant change from previous comparisons. This pattern of findings shows consistent minor changes or stability among other pathologies while maintaining a normal or unchanged cardiac silhouette.",0.6743464776251662,0.6938775510204082,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,24.0,0.7011873869623338,0.715,0.6503496503496503,0.93,100.0,100.0
+5332,latent_5332,3867,0.007734,0.008654627,3.7184753,Comparative analysis of stability and change in cardiopulmonary conditions between current and prior images.,"High activation examples involve observations of stability or change over time by directly comparing current findings to previous imaging studies, focusing on pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, cardiomegaly, and differential stability or worsening of cardiopulmonary conditions. These examples emphasize detailed comparative analysis over time, highlighting both persistent and changing conditions.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6223303811271577,0.645,0.5973154362416108,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5333,latent_5333,5209,0.010418,0.015735056,5.419056,Comparison to prior imaging for evaluation of change.,"These examples demonstrate the pattern of describing radiological findings with reference to a previous examination. This is a common practice in radiology to assess stability or changes over time, comparing current findings to those previously recorded, using phrases like 'compared to previous', 'similar to prior', etc.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4682539682539682,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5334,latent_5334,20799,0.041598,0.02075366,4.360597,Findings detailed by comparing current and prior frontal images.,"Activation levels are high for examples where findings from current images are compared to prior images to evaluate any changes or stability. Specifically, the reports emphasize comparing current frontal and lateral chest images against previous frontal images, often indicating changes or stability in pathologies or cardiac structures.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5335,latent_5335,5158,0.010316,0.00795,7.504441,Reports of lungs being clear without consolidation or effusion.,"The pattern seen is descriptions of radiology findings that mainly indicate the lungs being clear without additional concerning findings like consolidation or effusion, typically using phrases such as ""lungs are clear."" Such phrasing is common in reports documenting normal results or slight changes in the chest region.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.8846153846153846,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.802403442218092,0.8040201005025126,0.7606837606837606,0.89,100.0,99.0
+5336,latent_5336,18182,0.036364,0.018909091,4.4591293,Use of previous radiology reports to contextualize current findings.,"The presence of a previous report for reference in examples featuring an activation level greater than zero indicates that this context or comparison against prior data is essential for understanding the pattern since the past imaging results or clinical history can provide a baseline or context, indicating changes or stability which affect the radiologic interpretations temporally.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4944324324324324,0.5276381909547738,0.52,0.78,100.0,99.0
+5337,latent_5337,29634,0.059268,0.029423127,6.5705843,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve the analysis of multiple radiological images, often comparing current imaging with prior studies to assess changes such as 'interval improvement', 'stable appearance', or 'new findings'. This pattern is essential in radiology reports to track the progression or resolution of conditions over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3865474024661411,0.3869346733668342,0.2751677852348993,0.7454545454545455,55.0,144.0
+5338,latent_5338,4302,0.008604,0.0100326445,4.6074214,Emphasis on findings from current frontal and lateral chest images with no explicit prior comparison.,"Examples exhibiting the pattern specify the usage of frontal and lateral chest radiographs with a focus on describing findings with no explicit prior study comparisons mentioned. The activation is higher when current images are evaluated without detailing prior image comparisons in the report, indicating the model's attentiveness to stand-alone image descriptions.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5526315789473685,0.21,100.0,100.0
+5339,latent_5339,3446,0.006892,0.007400145,4.7442384,Interval comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"The examples have a pattern where they compare current imaging findings with those from a prior study, focusing on interval changes or stability of findings related to structures or devices like pacemakers or tubes, and whether earlier findings like atelectasis or opacities have persisted or changed.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5340,latent_5340,4326,0.008652,0.010173927,6.230053,Detailed comparison focusing on tube placements and changes.,"All examples with higher activation levels prominently involve detailed findings or changes in specific features of the images, particularly related to the use and positioning of tubes (e.g., endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or catheters) and explicit descriptions of how these details have changed or remain unchanged compared to previous imaging. This pattern indicates a focus on detailed analysis and tracking of fine instrumentation details from one image to the next.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4523809523809524,0.19,100.0,100.0
+5341,latent_5341,19908,0.039816,0.020443255,4.7306595,Comparison of current and prior images to evaluate changes and procedural interventions.,"These examples focus on comparing current imaging studies with prior to assess changes over time, including detection of removal or placement of medical devices, resolution, or worsening of conditions. Highly activated samples often highlight findings like pneumothorax resolution or minimal change since prior studies, suggesting continuity in reporting stable findings or procedural interventions.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5564796694933681,0.5879396984924623,0.5555555555555556,0.8585858585858586,99.0,100.0
+5342,latent_5342,7142,0.014284,0.020921951,6.4958873,Comparison of current image findings with prior image.,"Highly activated examples consistently request descriptions of a current radiological image with explicit comparison to a prior image, using specific phrases like 'comparison to the prior frontal image'. This indicates an attention to changes over time in certain radiological features, without the need for prior report data.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4168797953964194,0.43,0.4461538461538462,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5343,latent_5343,12402,0.024804,0.015120561,3.2358518,Evaluation of changes in findings based on image comparisons.,"These examples show an analysis where the report provides specific findings and draw conclusions based on comparisons between current and prior images. Notably, reports indicating stability or resolution of findings based on the historical evaluation of images are highly representative of this pattern.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5344,latent_5344,6533,0.013066,0.009510961,3.5949378,Comparison indicating stable findings across imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve comparison with prior findings, using phrases like 'stable' or 'unchanged', and typically have no significant change in findings between studies. This is linked to stable disease processes indicated by repeated lack of new pathological findings compared to earlier exams.",0.3982456140350877,0.4285714285714285,0.3571428571428571,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5345,latent_5345,3677,0.007354,0.016760858,5.7296815,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The high activation samples consistently involve descriptions of imaging findings with explicit comparisons to prior images, referencing changes or the lack thereof. This is common in follow-up radiological assessments, where stability, progress, or changes since prior imaging are crucial aspects needing emphasis.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5346,latent_5346,10780,0.02156,0.012567071,4.137444,Focus on changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently make direct comparisons between the current and previous images to identify changes such as removal or placement of devices, changes in lung condition, or pleural effusion. This repetitive pattern of noting changes against 'prior images' is central to these reports and reflects a specific reporting style.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5347,latent_5347,5500,0.011,0.00843121,6.3177257,Detailed comparison and stability notes in radiology findings.,"Examples marked with higher activations focus extensively on minute details regarding changes or continuity of specific anatomical features, tubes, or findings within the chest radiographs, particularly changes like tube placements or comparisons related to prior images and stability. They also detail follow-up or similar related information reflecting stability or minor changes of particular findings over time.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5348,latent_5348,8899,0.017798,0.02201101,8.545668,Comparison involving current lateral and prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples tend to ask for observations based on a current lateral image in conjunction with comparison to a prior frontal image, while low activated ones either lack such comparisons or utilize solely frontal images. This suggests that the pattern centers on this specific imaging combination for comparative analysis.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4912280701754385,0.28,100.0,100.0
+5349,latent_5349,14815,0.02963,0.016110137,3.2072172,"Focus on findings compared to prior images, highlighting changes.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological findings that compare current images with prior ones, particularly emphasizing changes or observations based on past comparisons, whether the change is explicitly stated as stable, improved, or resolved. This is a pattern reflecting the radiologist's task of tracking progression or resolution of findings over time, using explicit prior comparisons as context.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5818033455732354,0.59,0.5703125,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5350,latent_5350,8105,0.01621,0.013309889,5.499146,Analysis of current and prior images for changes.,"These examples consistently request descriptions of imaging findings in comparison to prior frontal images using the format 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This implies a pattern of analysis based on historical comparison, which often facilitates tracking changes over time, crucial in diagnostic radiology.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4705882352941176,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5351,latent_5351,4388,0.008776,0.013136667,6.5415688,Use of image comparison directives in radiology reports.,"These examples include prompts asking the assistant to provide an analysis of findings either with or without a previous comparison image, yet they describe expected normal appearances or clearly laid-out techniques. This occurs in radiological descriptions where there is a requirement to systematically identify any anomalies or consider potential clinical questions in the absence of overt disease appearances made evident through comparison images.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5352,latent_5352,4281,0.008562,0.0087392125,5.655608,Descriptions emphasize comparison with prior imaging to highlight changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe a process where findings from current images are compared to prior images, indicating significant changes or stability in medical conditions. This pattern is consistently present in higher activation examples, showcasing the importance of comparing images across time to evaluate patient progress or static conditions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3931643220742746,0.395,0.4054054054054054,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5353,latent_5353,41177,0.082354,0.04868258,6.683215,Focus on multifocal opacities in lung fields.,"Pattern recognition seems to be focused on identifying radiological studies that include ""multifocal"" opacities. These references to multiple areas of opacities suggest a possible infectious or inflammatory process spread over different lung regions, commonly found in specific diagnoses like multifocal pneumonia or less commonly sarcoidosis. Examples using terms like ""multifocal pneumonia"" have higher activations. Other descriptions don't emphasize multifocality.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4813119755911518,0.575,0.5,0.1764705882352941,85.0,115.0
+5354,latent_5354,2780,0.00556,0.011941292,8.886806,Position evaluation of support devices compared to prior studies.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve findings where medical support devices or tubes are compared with prior positions or against expected positions. This suggests the pattern focuses on adjustments or assessments regarding medical intervention devices. Less-active cases do not focus on such device comparisons.,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5355,latent_5355,3667,0.007334,0.006569743,5.699998,Low lung volumes and associated findings.,"The examples consistently describe findings related to low lung volumes. These reports frequently note low lung volumes and their radiological consequences, such as accentuation of certain thoracic structures, crowding of bronchovascular markings, and bibasilar opacities or atelectasis. Identifying low lung volumes and their associated implications is a common theme in the medical imaging field.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5356,latent_5356,3953,0.007906,0.01031102,5.8006725,Presence of directive prompts for comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels include clear prompts or explicit instructions directing the user or an assistant to compare current radiological findings with prior studies. These usually appear as 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' Such directives indicate a focus on comparative analysis, making them key indicators of the pattern.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+5357,latent_5357,2874,0.005748,0.007575714,4.59031,Comparison between current and prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"The pattern is characterized by a focus on comparing the current images with prior ones to evaluate for any changes or differences in conditions such as lung consolidation, pleural effusion, and cardiac silhouette. The model activates highly when specific changes or stability are noted and reported in relation to these comparisons.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4297719087635054,0.43,0.4326923076923077,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5358,latent_5358,1827,0.003654,0.005260339,4.8235536,Describing chronological change or stability over time in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels are characterized by clear and logical comparison steps where imaging is assessed in sequential order, primarily involving reference to chronological changes or stability over time. This chronological comparison is essential, making it distinct from mere statement of findings or presence of conditions.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5229309985407546,0.5376884422110553,0.5259259259259259,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+5359,latent_5359,25915,0.05183,0.02903975,5.315296,Comparison of device or tube positions to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve present tense comparison of medical device (tube, line, etc.) positions in radiological images, usually indicating stable or unchanged positions compared to prior reports. These involve straightforward descriptions with emphasis on medical instrumentation rather than lung or cardiac abnormalities.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6463414634146342,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5360,latent_5360,4262,0.008524,0.007928001,6.6166506,Findings given without comparison to prior images despite prior presence.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of findings where no comparison is made to prior images, despite their presence in the prompt. This indicates that providing findings without referencing the prior image content seems to trigger higher activation.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5361,latent_5361,3517,0.007034,0.012541793,6.5027814,Instructions for comparing current and prior radiologic images.,"The examples with high activation levels often include the phrase ""Provide a description of the findings... in comparison to the prior frontal image"" combined with the context of various radiologic techniques and no explicit prior comparison.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4353094562466447,0.4422110552763819,0.4508196721311475,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+5362,latent_5362,5197,0.010394,0.008639268,4.5745797,Significant interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior reports.,"The data indicates high activation levels are linked to descriptions that mention changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies, specifically those that document notable findings like atelectasis, opacities, or other pathologies. These reports often include explicit comparisons discussing changes or stability of conditions.",0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5363,latent_5363,4484,0.008968,0.0106606465,8.530279,Significant historical medical events or trauma impacting imaging indication.,"The examples with high activation levels include references to the patient's medical history or indications related to trauma, acute changes, or specific medical procedures that led to the current imaging study being performed. This suggests that the model is activated by the context provided by historical medical events, especially post-procedural evaluations or changes in clinical status.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4561403508771929,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5364,latent_5364,3125,0.00625,0.00610385,3.5747778,Reports highlighting absence of new or acute pathologies compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation values focus on conclusions about the absence of acute or new pathologies, often phrased in terms like numbers or adjectives indicating normality, and with comparisons to previous states or images, which implies a lack of noteworthy progression.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5346534653465347,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5365,latent_5365,21158,0.042316,0.030325612,4.428859,Comparison of tube/device placement and imaging changes over time.,"Highly activated examples often reference changes between current and prior imaging studies, particularly concerning the positioning or evaluation of medical tubes and devices. Consistent phrases include discussions on tubes like NG tubes, PICC lines, and findings like opacities, effusions, or consolidation in present and past imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5609756097560976,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5366,latent_5366,4187,0.008374,0.017129058,9.127787,Detailed comparative analysis of imaging findings over time.,"Highly activated examples discuss detailed, comparative analyses of radiological findings between current and prior images. This includes specific changes or stabilities observed over intervals, often identifying even subtle medical equipment positioning or slight variations in pathological conditions, thus indicating a focus on precise image interpretation rather than general findings.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5367,latent_5367,9702,0.019404,0.010846941,7.3125386,Unchanged or clear pulmonary findings on chest radiographs compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation typically describe clear and unchanged lung fields on radiographs, which is highly relevant for evaluating stability or the absence of acute pathology, especially in the context of evaluating for pneumonia or other conditions in follow-up studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5251580422780973,0.585,0.2875,0.4693877551020408,49.0,151.0
+5368,latent_5368,2190,0.00438,0.0060330294,9.868715,Focus on description without prior comparisons.,"The higher activated examples mostly request a description of the current images with explicit absence of prior comparison, noted by 'COMPARISON: None' or similar phrases, highlighting a contrast-focused evaluation without prior references, emphasizing the present findings only.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6408045977011494,0.65,0.7205882352941176,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5369,latent_5369,9825,0.01965,0.010524107,3.2275417,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing unchanged or stable findings.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels frequently utilize comparison to prior imaging studies, specifically detailing findings that are unchanged or stable. This might involve mentioning ""compared to prior,"" ""no change since,"" or referencing any interval since the previous exam. This pattern emphasizes detecting changes or stability over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5897435897435898,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5370,latent_5370,17812,0.035624,0.016574148,2.6118667,Assessment of change compared to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern seen in high activation examples involves descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, alongside changes or intervals noted in the imaging. This is a typical structure in radiological analyses where a comparison is explicitly made with past images to assess stability or progression of certain conditions.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4744006501422185,0.4773869346733668,0.4782608695652174,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+5371,latent_5371,6169,0.012338,0.011806708,4.37363,Emphasis on comparison of current findings against prior images.,"This dataset contains multiple instances of radiology reports emphasizing changes or stability in patients' conditions based on comparison with prior imaging studies, which is a common clinical practice. The pattern is specific to reports that emphasize either observed changes or stability relative to past images, which tends to be highly relevant in assessing ongoing patient conditions and treatment effects.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5372,latent_5372,8764,0.017528,0.011697942,5.2371044,"Descriptive analysis of current images compared to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The highly activated examples describe observations based on current images compared to prior imaging, specifically noting stability or changes in the findings. This comparison to previous reports or images is key, with terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or 'stable' being focal components in the text. Lower activation examples lack such detailed comparative observations or reference to prior conditions.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6260150106303952,0.635,0.6030534351145038,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5373,latent_5373,4837,0.009674,0.009740451,4.5078063,Comparison with prior images showing interval changes.,"The examples with high activations consistently involve a combination of comparison with prior imaging and findings indicative of interval changes. These distinct linguistic patterns include referencing previous states and highlighting any changes, which appear to trigger higher activation levels in the model.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5374,latent_5374,21015,0.04203,0.044328704,5.581499,Chest imaging with structured report sections for comparison.,"These examples use comparative phrases and specific imaging studies to evaluate findings over time. This analysis pattern is typical in medical imaging, where comparing current scans to prior ones is crucial for assessing stability or progression. The structured approach includes the 'PRIOR_REPORT,' 'INDICATION,' 'TECHNIQUE,' and 'COMPARISON' clauses, reflecting academic and clinical reporting standards.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3869455463397043,0.49,0.4945054945054945,0.9,100.0,100.0
+5375,latent_5375,6249,0.012498,0.015229611,3.7600348,"Comparison including prior reports, often with censored details, and both frontal and lateral views.","The examples with high activation generally include both frontal and lateral chest images, and specifically highlight prior radiology reports with some missing or redacted information (e.g., 'PRIOR_REPORT: EXAM [[IN]] ATION: CHEST ...'). This suggests a pattern of reports focusing on explicit previous examinations alongside current findings, allowing for detailed comparisons related to ongoing clinical questions or known issues.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5136268343815513,0.565,0.5393939393939394,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5376,latent_5376,6931,0.013862,0.016047709,4.6069613,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently indicate a comparison between current and prior imaging studies. These findings highlight the value placed on detecting changes or stability in imaging over time, which is a critical aspect of radiological assessments. By including phrases about comparison, these reports emphasize the importance of prior imaging for interpretation.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5377,latent_5377,5516,0.011032,0.012870059,5.3553014,Discussion of interval changes in relation to prior images.,"These examples exhibit a pattern where the findings describe changes or provide analysis in relation to prior radiological images. The focus is on identifying interval changes, such as the stability or progression of identified issues, which is reflected in the activation levels indicating engagement with the comparative analysis during interpretation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5378,latent_5378,17527,0.035054,0.026896209,7.8695264,"Comparison with prior chest imaging reveals interval changes, device status, and specific condition persistence or resolution.","Highly activated examples involve detailed evaluations or alterations of conditions in chest radiographs, specifically considering historical changes via comparison with prior images. Changes such as resolution, persistence, or worsening of specific conditions are highlighted, including presence of devices or lung opacities.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5379,latent_5379,3058,0.006116,0.00998099,6.3851786,Explicit request for comparison of current to prior images.,"Most highly activated examples explicitly request the annotated field to include a 'description of findings in comparison to prior image,' despite the presence or absence of a prior report. This pattern of explicit instruction to compare images is emphasized in these examples.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.648,0.67,0.6133333333333333,0.92,100.0,100.0
+5380,latent_5380,26565,0.05313,0.03183734,6.2377477,Direct comparison to prior imaging focusing on interval change.,"Reports with significant activations consistently involve direct comparison to prior radiographic images, evaluating interval changes in specific pathologies or conditions. This pattern is noted in medical imaging for monitoring dynamic clinical conditions over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5381,latent_5381,2981,0.005962,0.008264897,4.589572,"Detailed chest image analysis from multiple views (frontal, lateral).","Examples with high activation levels consistently mention detailed descriptions of chest images obtained from different perspectives (frontal and lateral) or describe direct observations from such images, implying a pattern where multiple views and detailed analyses are integral. This is consistent with the pattern in radiology studies where diagnosis involves comparing findings from multiple angles to improve accuracy.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.5486111111111112,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5382,latent_5382,9237,0.018474,0.010625193,4.8874254,Changes over time in radiographic findings compared to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve references to changes over time, especially in terms of conditions either improving or worsening, while making explicit comparisons to prior radiographic findings. Words denoting improvement, stability, or progression of identified issues indicate the pattern.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6180387563341907,0.625,0.5984251968503937,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5383,latent_5383,18122,0.036244,0.031413905,4.724778,Comparative analysis with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison of current imaging findings against previous studies, particularly noting stability, change, or resolution of previously identified abnormalities. This suggests that the model strongly responds to language indicating comparative analysis in radiologic contexts, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', and 'resolved'.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5384,latent_5384,4307,0.008614,0.011864086,5.4459095,Absence of comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently lack comparison to prior studies, emphasizing evaluations that do not rely on past images. This suggests a focus on present findings without historical context, using phrases like 'None available' or 'No comparison'.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5385,latent_5385,2519,0.005038,0.007865793,5.4468827,Instructions to compare current and prior images with noted changes or stability.,"All examples with high activation levels specifically instruct to compare current image findings with prior images, reflecting on changes, improvements, or stability in conditions (e.g., opacities, pleural effusions, atelectasis). The consistent theme is the directive to compare current findings to previous ones, often identifying changes in physical attributes, indicative of an evaluative or comparative task focus in the context of follow-up imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5775862068965517,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5386,latent_5386,3929,0.007858,0.009952757,6.423043,Detailed examination with specific patient history and precise comparison to prior exams.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve detailed radiological examinations where specific patient histories or conditions are provided in conjunction with multiple, precise comparisons to prior specific examinations. This pattern indicates a focus on complex cases where a rigorously detailed comparison is warranted.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5387,latent_5387,9244,0.018488,0.011879442,4.2789903,Unchanged position of medical devices between imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to refer to devices like pacemakers or tubes in unchanged positions across imaging studies. This points to a common pattern in radiology reports regarding the stability or continuity of these medical devices between observations, which may be important for monitoring during follow-ups.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6294266551841123,0.645,0.7457627118644068,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5388,latent_5388,21234,0.042468,0.026336154,4.559005,Focus on unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally describe stable findings upon comparison with previous images, typically mentioning unchanged conditions or known pathologies with no new abnormalities, indicating focus on stability in patient condition.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5389,latent_5389,7518,0.015036,0.011873454,4.4993324,Stable radiological findings in comparison to previous studies.,"The examples generally contain references to specific or stable findings based on prior imaging that are unchanged in the current study. This consistency in findings over time is a key pattern here, indicating stability or lack of progression of a condition.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4143260930457589,0.425,0.3972602739726027,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5390,latent_5390,5992,0.011984,0.011489293,6.239111,Descriptive comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The salient pattern is the use of carefully constructed sentences to compare current radiological findings with prior imaging, confirming changes or stability in these findings. Descriptive terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'decrease', 'improved', 'new', 'persistent', or 'stable' are commonly used to capture this comparison, thus indicating discussion of the evolution of findings over time.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5391,latent_5391,26123,0.052246,0.020586366,2.2968218,Comments on changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with activations show use of comparative descriptors to identify changes in patient's condition compared to prior imaging, like 'increased', 'improved', 'worsened', 'unaltered', or describing positions ('as compared to previous', 'position changes'). This suggests that the pattern involves descriptions focusing on interval changes between current and previous images.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5392,latent_5392,25047,0.050094,0.029077264,4.6661816,Significant radiologic findings involving medical device positioning or interval changes.,"Samples with higher activation levels often describe alterations, changes, or updates in medical devices or conditions between radiographic examinations, particularly detailing where devices like tubes or catheters have been repositioned or changed and comparing those changes to previous imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5393,latent_5393,4220,0.00844,0.011257272,3.8711889,Comparative description required due to insufficient prior report info.,"The most activated examples focus on scenarios where there's a direct comparison between current and prior images, but lack adequate priors or information available within the given report, prompting the need for a detailed comparative description. This engages the model in extrapolating or interpreting findings based on incomplete previous context, which might not be directly supported or referenced.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4799239724400095,0.5577889447236181,0.5340909090909091,0.94,100.0,99.0
+5394,latent_5394,2673,0.005346,0.007190448,7.55183,Higher activation when prior imaging is unavailable for comparison.,"Reports with missing or unavailable prior imaging show higher activation levels, indicating the pattern where comparisons with prior images cannot be made. This is reflected in terms such as 'None available for comparison' or 'No priors'.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5395,latent_5395,3035,0.00607,0.009008942,4.820417,Comparison with prior imaging and device positioning.,"Examples with high activation often contain direct references to comparison with specific prior imaging, identifying changes or stable findings over time. They frequently mention devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) and their positions relative to previous imaging, reflecting a pattern of monitoring ongoing developments in patient management using past studies as a reference.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5396,latent_5396,26329,0.052658,0.023828788,4.4613414,"Focused findings with direct comparison to previous imaging, highlighting changes or specifics.","The activation levels are higher for reports that contain specific findings or changes noted in current imaging in direct comparison to prior images. This signifies detection of clinically relevant changes or specifics that capture attention, such as new opacities, catheter placements, or nodular changes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5397,latent_5397,20453,0.040906,0.022419685,2.4197402,Structured reporting with specified comparison to prior imaging or noting absence of comparison.,"The given examples show frequent mention of comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. Many examples include the template 'comparison: none' or 'prior report', while highly activated examples often reference prior imaging directly or show 'N/A' in place of prior imaging details.
+These factors suggest a strong pattern involving a structural inclusion of comparative statements about imaging, especially the consistency in noting prior imaging or explicitly indicating its absence.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4356363636363636,0.515,0.5085714285714286,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5398,latent_5398,7891,0.015782,0.014314254,4.149594,Indication references to historical pulmonary or cardiovascular conditions.,"The examples indicate that the pattern involves the use of specific historical indications related to respiratory and cardiac conditions, such as 'history of CHF', 'previous CABG', 'prior effusion', or 'history of pneumonia'. Studies provide insights into the patient's prior treatment or clinical condition, involving ongoing comparisons between previous and current radiographic observations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5399,latent_5399,4873,0.009746,0.018241446,6.271706,Use of both frontal and lateral image references in radiology description.,"Examples with high activation levels often reference specific imaging views or modalities, particularly the inclusion of 'frontal image' and 'lateral image'. These references indicate the specific mention and use of multiple imaging angles in the radiology report, highlighting their importance in the description process.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.620572260193872,0.635,0.5971223021582733,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5400,latent_5400,2603,0.005206,0.008149624,5.5684757,Implicit comparison required despite 'No comparison' statement in notes.,"The high activation examples consistently require comparing current image findings to prior images, despite the provided notes claiming 'No comparison', 'None', or lacking comparison information in the report section. This misalignment emphasizes the necessity for recognizing explicit indications of comparison with prior images, which is missing in these reports but inherently understood as a task requirement.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5401,latent_5401,5318,0.010636,0.0077544814,5.312344,Comparative evaluation of current and prior radiographic findings.,"The examples with high activation involve comparative descriptions between current and prior radiographic images, particularly focusing on changes or stability in the findings such as device positions, pathological features, or anatomical structures, emphasizing longitudinal assessment through imaging.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5402,latent_5402,6149,0.012298,0.008611299,5.226666,Description of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide a comparison between current and prior imaging, specifically noting stability or improvement in findings such as parenchymal opacities, device positions, or specific anatomical features despite the presence or absence of changes in specific disease states.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.39324197091746,0.42,0.3620689655172414,0.21,100.0,100.0
+5403,latent_5403,29677,0.059354,0.029994437,3.3469026,Descriptive stability or changes in specific findings as compared to prior radiological examinations.,"Examples with higher activation levels often contain a detailed, stable report of radiological findings when there is an explicit comparison made with a prior image or report, and they comment on changes or stability. This includes references to specific findings like lung nodules or pleural effusions and devices like tubes with noted locations or changes from previous reports.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5649405772495755,0.59,0.5608108108108109,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5404,latent_5404,1891,0.003782,0.0069172387,6.5594573,Emphasis on comparative findings with prior imaging study.,"The examples with high activation consistently require providing comparative descriptions focusing on radiological changes that include a prior imaging study for contrast. They often mention the instruction to 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior' indicating this task forms the basis of the expected pattern, with emphasis on comparison to past images regardless of the findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4615384615384615,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5405,latent_5405,6413,0.012826,0.010587154,3.7844887,Detailed comparisons to previous imaging reflecting change or stability.,"Examples with high activation dominantly exhibit detailed comparison with prior images, specifically indicating changes or stability in observed conditions. These include terms like 'no new', 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', and 'similar appearance'. This reflects a pattern in radiology reports emphasizing continuity or change over time between imaging.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4371717171717172,0.4371859296482412,0.4356435643564356,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+5406,latent_5406,12297,0.024594,0.017476827,5.1416273,Focus on stability or change in findings when compared with previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain explicit descriptions of prior imaging comparisons, which discuss stability, changes in findings, placements of medical devices, or consistent clinical interpretations across these studies. Such descriptions indicate a focused evaluation on progress or changes by referencing previous images.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6968004468203941,0.715,0.6442953020134228,0.96,100.0,100.0
+5407,latent_5407,2535,0.00507,0.0054041534,6.1097684,Comparative evaluation of medical device placement in radiological studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels often focus on comparative evaluation of medical device placement, such as tubes and catheters, especially following recent interventions or changes in the patient's clinical condition. This includes whether the placement is stable, has changed, or requires adjustment, an important aspect when imaging critically ill or intubated patients.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4629629629629629,0.25,100.0,100.0
+5408,latent_5408,5757,0.011514,0.010570559,4.363689,"Higher activation with frontal, lateral, and prior images used for comparison.","Examples show that activation is higher when multiple reference images (frontal and lateral) are utilized in comparison to just frontal images. Most examples include both current and prior images, and comparative analysis enhances activation levels, particularly with PA and lateral views compared to upright or AP views.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3799603174603174,0.5,0.5,0.94,100.0,100.0
+5409,latent_5409,2818,0.005636,0.008571138,7.1003714,Noting changes or stability by comparison to prior imaging using consistent terms.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference changes or similarities to a prior imaging study. These examples often use consistent language such as 'again noted', 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'as compared to previous', highlighting the comparison with past images or reports and the focus on changes or stability in findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5410,latent_5410,4859,0.009718,0.012300487,4.3692207,Presence of both current and prior images for comparison.,"The pattern in these examples is the presence of both a current and a prior image being given for comparison. This aids in assessing changes in condition based on the radiographic images provided, which is critical in radiographic diagnosis. Highly activated examples consistently include prior images for comparative evaluation, signaling that the model is identifying the importance of having both current and prior images for evaluation.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4472222222222222,0.5175879396984925,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,99.0
+5411,latent_5411,4148,0.008296,0.012480826,5.441616,Frontal and lateral chest images used for evaluation.,"Examples with high activation levels often provide findings from both a frontal and lateral chest image. This highlights a more detailed evaluation with the use of multiple views in radiographic assessment, which is a common radiological practice to better analyze thoracic structures.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5543293718166383,0.58,0.5540540540540541,0.82,100.0,100.0
+5412,latent_5412,3242,0.006484,0.007849261,4.557428,Radiological reports with consistent findings across image comparisons.,"The high activation examples all involve radiological studies which specifically include prior imaging references and comparisons, particularly emphasizing no significant change or presence of acute findings. This suggests the pattern focuses on stable or consistent findings across imaging studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6108629623012328,0.6111111111111112,0.6170212765957447,0.5858585858585859,99.0,99.0
+5413,latent_5413,43112,0.086224,0.035903245,3.087794,Descriptions comparing current findings to prior images with specifics.,"Examples with activation typically reference specific anatomical features or abnormalities within the lungs and mediastinal structures, comparing them to prior images or studies. High activation levels often occur with mentions of specific notable features and changes from previous findings, especially related to tubes, opacities, or specific medical devices described in context of a patient's clinical status.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5414,latent_5414,2879,0.005758,0.006744895,6.6161146,Improvement or change in lung or pleural pathology over time.,"The examples that activate the pattern often describe either the presence or improvement of specific lung or pleural pathologies such as consolidation, effusion, or opacities, typically with comparisons to prior images. The descriptions frequently involve changes over time or reference conditions like atelectasis, increased opacities, or improvements like resolution of consolidation.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4255514705882353,0.5,0.5,0.14,100.0,100.0
+5415,latent_5415,10483,0.020966,0.014780165,4.69061,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with a prior frontal image.,"Several examples with high activation levels include an explicit comparison of the current imaging findings with both frontal and lateral views against a designated prior image. This implies clear instructions to report differences between two views and the reference image, emphasizing situations where both current and prior views are considered in evaluating changes, thus reinforcing this particular systematic radiological approach.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5365853658536586,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5416,latent_5416,3756,0.007512,0.015111566,4.636226,Comparisons describing changes or stability related to medical devices in sequential imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve comparisons with both current and prior images, often focusing on describing changes or stability in medical devices and procedural outcomes, such as placement of tubes or changes in patient treatment interventions.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4523809523809524,0.19,100.0,100.0
+5417,latent_5417,14259,0.028518,0.014490513,4.940136,Focus on the status or changes in medical device placement in chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the placement, re-positioning, or status of artificially placed devices (e.g., tubes, catheters, lines) as observed in chest imaging. These reports focus on details regarding medical devices rather than just diagnostic findings related to the patient's condition.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5418,latent_5418,2979,0.005958,0.0060364217,8.349891,Stability or lack of change in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"These examples exhibit references to comparisons with prior imaging studies explicitly stated or implied, particularly focusing on stability or unchanged findings, such as phrases 'unchanged', 'stable', 'constant', 'no significant interval change', relating observations from current to previous images.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4025974025974026,0.4191919191919191,0.373134328358209,0.2551020408163265,98.0,100.0
+5419,latent_5419,5220,0.01044,0.007917155,4.239899,Progression or stability of pulmonary opacities or effusions.,"These examples consistently discuss findings related to pulmonary opacities, atelectasis, effusions, or edema, which change over time or in specific areas when compared to prior images. The highlighted pattern shows progression or stability of lung pathologies, especially related to opacification or effusion.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5631067961165048,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5420,latent_5420,6148,0.012296,0.012661713,6.603691,Findings indicating notable/non-routine chest conditions or device malfunction.,"Examples with low activation levels often lack significant radiological findings, or exhibit changes compared to prior images that are described as either stable or mild without suggesting significant health concerns. Conversely, those with higher activation levels identify specific conditions or noteworthy findings that urgently require further evaluation, such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, or newly identified opacities in lung regions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4132250056420672,0.415,0.4044943820224719,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5421,latent_5421,12557,0.025114,0.026900463,3.4933913,Interval changes or status updates in radiological findings or clinical context.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to describe changes in patient status or device placement, in relation to either radiographic or clinical context. This includes interval changes observable on radiographs and explicit descriptions of how the described elements relate to prior conditions, situations, or procedures.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5422,latent_5422,19480,0.03896,0.028848186,3.7548478,Explicit direction to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations tend to explicitly instruct to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to a prior image, while lower activations are less explicit about this requirement or lack a clear comparison instruction. This pattern is seen when directions explicitly state to ""provide a description of"" findings as compared to previous imaging.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5423,latent_5423,3320,0.00664,0.009721683,8.6024275,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette without acute cardiopulmonary findings.,"Examples with high activation levels detail a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and the absence of acute cardiopulmonary processes such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, often within a context of specific indications for the scan or explicit evaluation of certain structures or symptoms.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6985227615315044,0.7,0.6754385964912281,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5424,latent_5424,4403,0.008806,0.0106855,6.520616,Use of detailed comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve references to both current and prior imaging for detailed comparison. They include structured sections indicating findings and impressions, and make explicit comparisons with prior studies, often noting changes or stability to provide clinical context.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4757281553398058,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5425,latent_5425,63783,0.127566,0.07658496,4.401279,Description of specific changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently detail findings that have changed between current and prior imaging studies, indicating a focus on identifying specific changes in the radiological findings across multiple examinations.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5426,latent_5426,3866,0.007732,0.009904126,5.9062576,Describing or comparing current and prior image findings.,"Most examples contain specific requests to provide a description or comparison of current and prior images, often for assessing changes or stability in patient condition like pneumothorax, atelectasis, etc. The model seems to activate on prompts which emphasize comparing current observation to past imaging results without re-evaluating details of existing conditions or devices.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.5,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5427,latent_5427,6249,0.012498,0.0144929895,6.204587,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels focus on comparing current and prior radiographic images, emphasizing interval changes or the lack thereof. These examples typically mention comparison explicitly and detail specific findings, indicating the importance placed on detecting changes over time.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5428,latent_5428,9255,0.01851,0.0115302745,5.2101574,Comparison of interval changes or stability since previous imaging.,"There is a focus on evaluating interval changes between current and prior images, particularly in relation to persistent or altered conditions such as opacities, effusions, pneumothorax, or device positions. The language consistently centers around stability, improvement, or progression compared to a previously documented baseline.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5429,latent_5429,11875,0.02375,0.021806737,7.205778,Inadequate or atypical comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Higher activation levels appear when reports either lack comparison to prior studies or the comparison provided is minimal or not typical, emphasizing the need for detailed change descriptions. This is shown by examples where more emphasis is placed on findings or changes between the current imaging and the prior exam, rather than usual provision of comparisons.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3657696837908852,0.475,0.4863387978142076,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5430,latent_5430,4070,0.00814,0.007835677,3.5893366,Task includes comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels feature tasks where the user is asked to provide a description or assessment of the findings in comparison to prior imaging, including specific references to images for comparison. The presence of explicit instructions to describe findings in current images relative to prior ones is a distinct pattern.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5431,latent_5431,3615,0.00723,0.0068956367,7.9754076,Lack of specific comparative information in comparison sections.,"The common pattern in highly activated examples is missing comparative information, indicated by obscure or omitted comparison sections denoted with placeholders like blanks, underscores, or generic descriptions rather than specified dates or images.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3811999617237089,0.515,0.5077720207253886,0.98,100.0,100.0
+5432,latent_5432,18740,0.03748,0.03340889,6.2795177,Evaluation of radiological findings for acute processes and changes over time.,"These examples demonstrate evaluation of radiological findings where a specific acute process is noted or suggested. Descriptions include terms like ""interval"", ""new"", ""previous"", ""improvement"", or ""unchanged"" to depict changes over time or stability based on comparison with previous images, indicating ongoing evaluation of findings for potential urgent care.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+5433,latent_5433,5749,0.011498,0.009142663,7.1337166,Interval changes in position of medical devices on imaging.,"The pattern in these examples is the description of interval changes in medical devices, such as catheters, lines, tubes, or implants, on chest images when compared to prior images. The reports focus on the position or change in such objects, often noted alongside existing conditions or other findings in the images.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4835267743125514,0.545,0.6451612903225806,0.2,100.0,100.0
+5434,latent_5434,15344,0.030688,0.018096942,6.6691017,Explicit mention of 'no relevant change' despite detailed comparisons.,"Examples that exhibit the pattern discuss findings as compared to previous radiographs, indicating interval changes or stability. Highly activated samples specifically involve stating 'no relevant change' since last imaging, despite identifying detailed variations in components like tube positions or pleural thickening. This suggests the model focuses on stability despite detailed changes.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4056267463146739,0.5326633165829145,0.5,0.075268817204301,93.0,106.0
+5435,latent_5435,3914,0.007828,0.009842152,5.0882435,Focus on stability or no significant change from prior images.,"The dominant pattern is the description of the stability or lack of change in cardiomediastinal and pulmonary findings when compared to prior radiographs. This is a common approach in radiology to focus on stability or progression of disease, which is crucial for patient management decisions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5384615384615384,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5436,latent_5436,3908,0.007816,0.011325572,7.0481386,Radiology process comparing prior frontal images for progression or resolution.,These examples each ask for evaluations in comparison to prior frontal images and have language indicating they are part of a radiology process evaluating a progression or resolution. This includes clear labeling of previous studies and changes or stability over time.,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5437,latent_5437,3439,0.006878,0.0102602905,5.3322716,"Description of imaging findings relative to prior studies, noting stability or minimal changes.","Examples that have non-zero activation focus on descriptions of findings from imaging studies and their comparison or evaluation for changes in the new image against the prior studies. This includes noting unchanged findings, ensuring previously known conditions remain stable, or identifying minimal changes or intervals of stability.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4482758620689655,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5438,latent_5438,9795,0.01959,0.029774167,7.076181,Pattern of detailed comparison with prior dated imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include a detailed comparison with prior imaging, specifying descriptions of the findings with comparisons highlighting changes or stability since a dated previous study.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.44,0.4375,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5439,latent_5439,3545,0.00709,0.009553898,8.788709,"Detailed comparisons to prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes.","The examples with higher activations consistently provide specific directives about evaluating findings in the context of past imaging studies. These exams focus on changes over time, often using comparative language to highlight intervals, stability, or progression, alongside scrutinizing for acute changes. This thoroughness in comparison, along with emphasis on 'interval change', is prevalent in these activated examples, pointing to a pattern of close examination of temporal progression in imaging findings.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6161616161616161,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5440,latent_5440,12369,0.024738,0.02257581,5.8257947,Comparison with prior images emphasizes change or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiology reports that focus on comparisons with prior images, and emphasize findings or changes relative to those prior images. Such reports utilize comparative language to evaluate stability, improvement, or progression of conditions, highlighting interval changes or the stability of certain findings over time.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5441,latent_5441,4328,0.008656,0.01117492,9.472386,Description of findings showing no new acute changes or stable findings as compared to prior imaging.,"These examples that have high activation levels are consistent with queries that are asking for a description of findings without the presence of acute abnormalities or changes from prior imaging, especially regarding the absence of any changes or new acute pathology. The pattern focuses on repeating normal findings or emphasizing unchanged conditions as compared to prior studies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3105523426368284,0.465,0.4680851063829787,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5442,latent_5442,2381,0.004762,0.005744357,5.3554816,Focus on the position and interval change of tubes or lines in chest images.,"These examples frequently involve explicit comparison between the current and prior imaging findings, with a focus on detailing changes or the stability of the position of medical devices, such as tubes or lines, in the chest area. The reports emphasize the significance of any interval change in positioning or appearance of these devices from prior imaging, which is crucial in patient management and treatment outcomes.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.6164383561643836,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5443,latent_5443,32862,0.065724,0.035232216,5.5157027,Descriptors of unchanged or stable findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on findings described by comparison to previous images, with unchanged findings, slight improvements, or minor new changes explicitly mentioned. These descriptions use detailed comparisons to assess stability or minor changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5721744471744472,0.5778894472361809,0.5974025974025974,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+5444,latent_5444,3530,0.00706,0.010370508,5.6289377,Presence of stable mediastinal and hilar contours in radiographic comparison.,"High activation examples focus on detecting changes or comparisons in images, especially involving the cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours, which are parts of the chest radiographic findings. While normal variants are noted in both high and low activation examples, high activation closely examines small changes, likes persistent cardiomegaly, site of previous opacification, or device positions, for comparison with past images.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6496847162446202,0.65,0.6415094339622641,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5445,latent_5445,20407,0.040814,0.024563659,6.305344,Comparison of multiple images with prior frontal images.,"The presence of multiple images provided for analysis (frontal and lateral) along with explicit comparison instructions to prior frontal images is a common pattern in radiological evaluations. This dictates the format and context in which findings are described and interpreted, requiring detailed image-to-image analysis.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+5446,latent_5446,3612,0.007224,0.010316619,5.163808,"Noting consistency with prior findings, especially device positions or anatomical features.","The high activation levels in these examples are linked to detailed observations and comparisons in chest radiographs, focusing on stability or changes in conditions such as devices, opacities, or anatomical features noted previously, typically with phrases like 'again seen' or 'unchanged.' This suggests that identifying and noting the consistency or subtle changes in known features or devices between current and prior images is significant.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.5547445255474452,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5447,latent_5447,5284,0.010568,0.014158671,5.3222475,Comparison of current and prior radiological findings.,"These examples usually involve the assessment of radiological findings against previous imaging studies with a comparison aspect included, using indicative phrases that denote analysis over time, like changes, interval changes, or comparisons with prior films.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4825174825174825,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5448,latent_5448,2498,0.004996,0.006589925,4.8335185,Chest imaging shows normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve standard chest imaging (PA and lateral views) where the description includes evaluation of clear lung fields, unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette, and details indicating absence of acute pathology like consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. Patterns highlight normal results with specific reassurance of no concerning findings.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7260551948051948,0.73,0.8026315789473685,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5449,latent_5449,5554,0.011108,0.017931404,4.5931063,Emphasis on comparing findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit instructions or contexts for comparison with prior imaging. These examples consistently ask for comparison even in reports with minimal changes or findings, addressing changes over time rather than just reporting on a single study.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4815662745717218,0.5025125628140703,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,99.0
+5450,latent_5450,26801,0.053602,0.029787263,5.9066644,"Focus on pneumothorax, clear lungs, and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.","Examples with activation mostly involve descriptions focusing on pneumothorax, basilar atelectasis, and clear lungs without effusion, especially accompanied by a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or referring to prior normal comparisons. The activation pattern highlights findings involving specific pulmonary structures and states without acute changes.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5749893747343684,0.575,0.4789915966386555,0.7125,80.0,120.0
+5451,latent_5451,3350,0.0067,0.010353244,6.268997,Persistent subcutaneous emphysema compared to previous imaging.,"Elements that suggest extensive subcutaneous emphysema predominantly activate the pattern. Several examples show this finding as unchanged or persistent compared to earlier imaging, which is key for identifying this pattern.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3736884584342211,0.515,0.8,0.04,100.0,100.0
+5452,latent_5452,8874,0.017748,0.020016007,8.8430395,Details on catheter or tube placement compared to prior imaging.,The pattern is focusing on device-related findings like tubes and catheters with specific locations and their stability or changes compared to prior imaging. The examples with high activation levels focus on such device placements or adjustments over time.,0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6867408390323568,0.6868686868686869,0.6947368421052632,0.6666666666666666,99.0,99.0
+5453,latent_5453,12725,0.02545,0.020548536,4.8996816,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies.,"Activated samples predominantly contain complex clinical scenarios with multiple simultaneous comparisons between current and prior imaging, involving detailed descriptions of findings like pleural effusion or atelectasis, whereas deactivated samples lack such detailed comparative analysis or focus on single and simple findings.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4143260930457589,0.425,0.3972602739726027,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5454,latent_5454,6676,0.013352,0.019883806,5.356763,Detailed comparison with multiple prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation scores consistently make comparisons with multiple previous studies, using the term ""comparison"" in the context of evaluating findings over time. This indicates that the pattern involves evaluation based on multiple previous observations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5703324808184143,0.58,0.6142857142857143,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5455,latent_5455,57013,0.114026,0.08213657,3.7749832,Radiology findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples rated high for activation often describe findings in radiology studies in comparison to prior imaging, explicitly mentioning 'comparison' or using comparison language. This highlights the importance of detecting differences or stabilities over time in a clinical context.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5456,latent_5456,22339,0.044678,0.01927076,2.5290897,Comparison of current and prior radiographic findings.,"These examples involve detailed comparison of current image findings with previous images. The language repeatedly emphasizes changes or stability in this context. The most representative examples focus heavily on comparison and stability statements, detailing imaging conduct, and improvements or deteriorations, often mentioning medical devices or tubes.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5457,latent_5457,31585,0.06317,0.02533997,2.1949904,Comparison findings involving changes or stability in pulmonary structures.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, describing changes or stability in specific pulmonary or thoracic structures, notably the aortic tortuosity or other cardiopulmonary features. The presence of these carefully documented comparisons aligns with the pattern focus.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6005965772643393,0.605,0.5867768595041323,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5458,latent_5458,5428,0.010856,0.010576785,4.1119175,Stability or lack of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"These examples contain references to image comparisons or prior reports but retain the general pattern of having unchanged findings compared to previous examinations. Specifically, they emphasize the stability or lack of significant interval change when compared with prior imaging studies, which is a common element in radiology reports.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5121951219512195,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5459,latent_5459,16877,0.033754,0.01897861,5.4453363,Includes detailed comparison to prior studies with specific historical and procedural context.,"Examples with higher activation levels include specific patient histories, prior examination comparisons, and detailed auxiliary information like placement of tubes or evaluation for specific conditions; whereas those with lower activations mostly lack detail and comparative context or have no explicit referencing to prior conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5460,latent_5460,21536,0.043072,0.025186805,5.2277126,Evaluation of medical devices or interventions in radiology images.,"In examples with high activation levels, references to specific devices or healthcare interventions are made, such as positioning, removal, or the functional assessment of medical devices. This indicates a focus on evaluating the status or change of medical apparatus in the context of radiological findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5461,latent_5461,4686,0.009372,0.008577682,3.3818114,Comparison to prior radiographs with descriptions of change or stability.,"The provided examples focus on the description of radiological findings in comparison to previous imaging studies. The activation is high when the reports include explicit references to prior images and describe changes or stability of findings over time, such as comparisons to previous exams or detailing interval change.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4085213032581454,0.41,0.4,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5462,latent_5462,3252,0.006504,0.014456552,5.9885836,Explicit inclusion of 'PRIOR_REPORT' indicating past imaging review.,"The highly activated examples all include the mention of 'PRIOR_REPORT' at the beginning or throughout the report, indicating a direct association with prior examinations for comparison. This suggests that the pattern is specifically linked to reports indicating not only the existence of prior images but also explicitly labeling them as 'PRIOR_REPORT', emphasizing its importance in these activations.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4640605296343001,0.49,0.4930555555555556,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5463,latent_5463,4591,0.009182,0.008863596,4.6890283,Use of prior imagistic description as context for current comparisons.,"The pattern in these examples indicates a scenario where data implies a step-by-step examination comparison without actual prior images or descriptions being available. Zero values suggest no use of prior reports or lack of comparison available, whereas non-zero values hint at assumed comparisons used for validation or reassurance.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5464,latent_5464,5379,0.010758,0.011556283,5.6806345,Reference to device positioning or status in radiology findings.,"The examples which exhibit activation describe findings involving the presence and/or positioning of medical devices such as catheters, ports, PICC lines, or tubes. These examples focus on the status or interval change of such devices, often mentioning their current positions within the patient's body.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6549913747843696,0.655,0.6565656565656566,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5465,latent_5465,4005,0.00801,0.009355816,4.4598727,Extensive findings and detailed comparisons in radiology reports with prior images.,"The high-activation examples generally include a detailed comparison with prior images whether available or not, show extensive radiologic findings that directly relate to the patient's pathology, history, or treatment, while low-activation examples often lack specific pathological changes or focus more on clinical technique without significant findings.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3982048143614851,0.41,0.4296875,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5466,latent_5466,5475,0.01095,0.008370635,3.2420516,References to comparison with prior frontal images.,Reports often include descriptions of imaging findings compared with prior examinations to assess any changes or stability over time. This pattern emerges with consistent comparison phrases or presence of 'prior image' descriptors.,0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5059809608392773,0.555,0.5337423312883436,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5467,latent_5467,5931,0.011862,0.009060475,3.2671897,"Detail in imaging technique, including multiple views.","Samples with high activation levels consistently reference additional technical details, indicating that providing and comparing multiple imaging techniques such as 'frontal and lateral views' is significant in the model's pattern recognition.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4698869881351633,0.5202020202020202,0.5125,0.8282828282828283,99.0,99.0
+5468,latent_5468,3113,0.006226,0.00849255,4.5640936,Detailed comparison or analysis of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention or require detailed descriptions or comparisons with prior imaging studies, using terms like 'comparison', discussion of changes or stability in specific findings, and reference to 'prior reports'. This pattern of detailed comparison and evolution of findings is key to these examples.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.41486834537771,0.415,0.4123711340206185,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5469,latent_5469,25106,0.050212,0.04688066,6.0122375,"Comparison with prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability in findings.","Each example describes findings compared to previous radiological examinations, indicating improvement, unchanged status, or new developments in imaging abnormalities. Such comparison-focused language is common in radiology reports to evaluate progression of conditions.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.584,0.61,0.5733333333333334,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5470,latent_5470,19317,0.038634,0.04021221,8.890605,Detailed comparisons between current and prior images indicating interval changes or complex conditions.,"Examples with positive activations consistently involve complex comparisons or changes noted between multiple types of radiologic views (often frontal and lateral) and any noticeable interval changes. This pattern likely involves reports communicating detailed changes, such as loculated effusions, placements, or progression of a recognized condition, where interpretation or intervention is required.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5471,latent_5471,8427,0.016854,0.012621752,6.6976275,"Focus on chronic interstitial or patchy opacities, often compared with prior imaging.","Some examples with non-zero activations describe the presence of interstitial markings or patchy opacities which are stable, worsened, or similar compared to prior imaging. These findings commonly suggest chronic conditions like atelectasis or pulmonary edema. The consistent theme is these findings are compared with prior studies and deemed unchanged or evolving, indicating a focus on the stability or progression of these particular findings.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5472,latent_5472,7758,0.015516,0.017730312,5.126126,Comparison with prior images to note changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels specifically focus on comparing imaging study findings with prior studies, often using explicit comparisons or identifying changes with reference to prior examination. This is a structured approach to interpret findings in a patient's clinical context, indicating changes in health status or stability of prior findings.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5473,latent_5473,2825,0.00565,0.0068195863,4.375583,Instructions focusing on findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation explicitly instruct the assistant to provide findings in relation to a prior image or specify a lack of comparison, indicating that instructions for comparing the current and prior image activate the model significantly. This task specifically highlights descriptive comparisons to prior data, which appears to be the pattern identified by the activation level.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5474,latent_5474,16113,0.032226,0.027606135,6.808387,Images evaluated against prior imaging without prior_report context.,"Examples with high activation levels require interpretation of images that are compared with prior images but do not contain a prior_report field, unlike other examples that provide detailed prior report context. This may show that interventions are required when there is insufficient context from previous observations.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6262626262626263,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5475,latent_5475,26926,0.053852,0.03758152,5.787591,Interval changes in medical devices or interventions between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe changes in medical intervention or device placements between current and previous imaging, displaying interval modifications such as catheter placement or removal, tube retraction or insertion, which often indicate clinical decisions or status changes.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7033248081841432,0.71,0.8,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5476,latent_5476,3461,0.006922,0.010620803,4.1759067,Description of normal findings across organ systems.,"Prompts with higher activation levels contain clear normative radiological findings, indicating the absence of acute abnormalities in areas such as heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, lungs, pleural spaces, and bone structures. They consistently state 'normal' or 'within normal limits'. This pattern identifies expected normal conditions rather than pathological findings.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6698679471788715,0.67,0.6770833333333334,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5477,latent_5477,10220,0.02044,0.019720139,6.9205947,Emphasis on stable cardiomediastinal silhouette while evaluating change in lung or effusion-related findings.,"The examples rated with activation levels focus on comparative findings related to previous exams, especially emphasizing changes or lack of changes in lung opacities, effusions, and device positions while highlighting stable heart size or unchanged cardiomediastinal contours. These highlight interval assessment and stability of certain findings, often indicating non-acute changes in the radiology context.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5070422535211268,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5478,latent_5478,5239,0.010478,0.01593298,4.0926394,"Normal or stable heart, mediastinal, and hilar contours in chest imaging with no acute abnormalities.","The examples with high activation consistently describe normal or stable cardiomediastinal structures without acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities, often emphasizing normal heart size or normal mediastinal and hilar contours, suggesting this is central to the pattern being identified by the model.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7010718741248059,0.7035175879396985,0.6752136752136753,0.79,100.0,99.0
+5479,latent_5479,6928,0.013856,0.010682041,5.483065,Stability or similarity in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,This pattern often refers to unchanged findings or positions of various medical devices (such as endotracheal tubes or Port-A-Caths) or anatomical features in radiographic comparisons. Reports stating stability or similarity compared to prior imaging typically exhibit higher activation levels.,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4615384615384615,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5480,latent_5480,18579,0.037158,0.019371752,3.6374767,Changes in the position or status of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally describe changes or observations in lines, tubes, or other inserted medical devices compared to a prior imaging study. These devices are often important indicators for patient management and can suggest clinical action or troubleshooting.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.595026032719296,0.6130653266331658,0.6896551724137931,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+5481,latent_5481,10126,0.020252,0.010665573,2.9068313,Standardized descriptive response using image comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels usually mention both current frontal and lateral images and the requirement to describe findings in comparison with prior images. These examples all involve a procedural format where an ""ASSISTANT"" provides a standardized response with evaluation of normal anatomical features, i.e., normal lungs, cardiac silhouette, and other common chest findings indicating no acute abnormalities.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3868916419649869,0.395,0.4146341463414634,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5482,latent_5482,5569,0.011138,0.019479316,6.3437886,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5483,latent_5483,6134,0.012268,0.010716075,8.394324,Explicit analysis of changes or stability in findings between current and prior exams.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention language and feedback related to comparison between the current and prior images, indicating interval changes, stability, or regression of previously noted conditions. While most examples include a prior report or comparison, those with high activation particularly emphasize descriptions of change or continuity over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4471105273792685,0.4472361809045226,0.4056603773584906,0.4777777777777778,90.0,109.0
+5484,latent_5484,29786,0.059572,0.03055925,5.1743283,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with descriptions of stability or changes.,"The samples with higher activations often involve a precise report detailing specific changes or lack thereof, after comparing current findings against prior images. These comparisons frequently use terms like 'interval change,' 'unchanged,' and 'stable,' emphasizing that the task involves reporting continuity or change over time to discern progress or stability in medical conditions.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5485,latent_5485,3243,0.006486,0.007744097,6.717837,Presence of a prior report and comparison findings involving cardiopulmonary devices or pathologies.,"Examples with higher activation typically involve the presence of a prior report in combination with new findings that demonstrate continuity or change, often discussing devices such as pacemakers or central lines, changes in pleural effusions or congestive heart signs, or specific complications in cardiac or respiratory assessments. There is a notable emphasis on comparing current findings with prior studies and evaluating devices or pathologies as stable or changed.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5486,latent_5486,14479,0.028958,0.016958734,6.7505608,Position and progression of medical devices between images.,"These examples show the evaluation of medical devices such as tubes or lines, with specific attention given to their position and progression between the current and prior imaging. Provision and comparison of detail regarding device placement is a distinct feature of these observations.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.5,0.7647058823529411,68.0,132.0
+5487,latent_5487,33467,0.066934,0.03001332,3.4165885,Detailed evaluation of radiological changes over time between current and prior images.,"Prompts that lead to higher activations mention a detailed radiological finding change over time between current and prior images. They involve specific evaluations of consistency or change, often with clinical context and clear differential diagnosis based on image comparisons.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5488,latent_5488,9455,0.01891,0.011596063,3.9464853,Evaluation of tube or line placements in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or assessments related to tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, etc.) and line placements as compared to prior imaging studies. This often implicates immediate postoperative states or patient management scenarios involving monitoring of equipment positions, which is a common concern in acute care settings.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6698679471788715,0.67,0.6770833333333334,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5489,latent_5489,2922,0.005844,0.00659046,6.489521,Post-surgical changes or device placements in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the identification and assessment of post-surgical changes, tube placement, or device positioning on radiographic imaging. These findings are frequently discussed in post-operative settings or when evaluating the functionality and proper placement of medical devices.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5662650602409639,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5490,latent_5490,11618,0.023236,0.014693386,8.349212,Presence and positioning of medical devices in comparison studies.,"Examples with increased activation levels focus primarily on a consistent pattern in the provided findings: identification or presence of medical device placements, such as catheters, tubes, and sternotomy wires, which are often noted in follow-up or comparison radiology reports.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5523645114040594,0.5678391959798995,0.4,0.5671641791044776,67.0,132.0
+5491,latent_5491,2616,0.005232,0.008691478,7.442781,Lack of prior comparison available in reports expecting one.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently indicate that there is a lack of prior comparison available, though a comparison is typically expected. This is especially noted when current and prior images are referenced or requested for comparison without available prior imagery.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4835267743125514,0.545,0.5266272189349113,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5492,latent_5492,3732,0.007464,0.010895815,4.132191,Comparisons across multiple imaging views or prior reports.,"These examples show a pattern where multiple imaging modalities or views (frontal and lateral) and previous images or reports are heavily utilized for comparative analysis. The radiology reports are focused on assessing changes or stability across different time points or views, emphasizing comparison as a core component of the findings.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4306008042029879,0.515,0.5084745762711864,0.9,100.0,100.0
+5493,latent_5493,4152,0.008304,0.011190506,4.091852,Detailed assessment of vascular abnormalities and line placements.,"The common pattern among examples with high activation levels is the detailed description of existing abnormalities, especially cardiac or vascular issues, followed by descriptions of line placements, interval changes, and detailed attention to pulmonary and pleural conditions. They often describe complex findings rather than mere abnormalities or normals.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5983935742971888,0.61,0.6666666666666666,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5494,latent_5494,16711,0.033422,0.016458893,3.0874841,Increased lung markings or interstitial prominence with pulmonary edema or congestion.,"The examples showing higher activation levels frequently mention increased lung markings or interstitial prominence, particularly associated with pulmonary edema or congestion. This pattern reflects a clinical focus on assessing changes in lung opacification or vascular markings which are common indicators in evaluating pulmonary conditions.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5839368005266623,0.605,0.6909090909090909,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5495,latent_5495,8946,0.017892,0.012470265,5.5897007,Absence of direct comparison with prior images.,"The examples indicate that the model has higher activation levels when there lacks a direct comparison with prior imaging. This is inferred because instances like examples 2, 3, 6, 7, 31, which explicitly mention there's no comparison with prior images, tend to have activation levels above zero, while examples providing clear instructions or relying on prior reports, direct comparisons, result in lower activation levels.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6262626262626263,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5496,latent_5496,3325,0.00665,0.008195716,4.3142157,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images.,These examples highlight the importance of comparing current imaging findings to previous studies. The instruction often includes phrases like 'Provide a description...in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This suggests that making a direct comparison with previous imaging is crucial for identifying changes or stability in the radiological findings.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5497,latent_5497,13658,0.027316,0.017779216,7.011974,Description of tube or line placement.,These examples with high activation levels contain descriptions of medical devices (like tubes or lines) and their accurate placement as a key finding. This pattern is prevalent in radiology reports where placement of devices such as an endotracheal tube or a Dobbhoff tube is explicitly commented upon. The importance is on the observation of placement stability or changes in these devices over time.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6329352608422376,0.635,0.5714285714285714,0.6436781609195402,87.0,113.0
+5498,latent_5498,62118,0.124236,0.07779363,9.452886,Comparison-based description of interval changes in imagery findings.,"The pattern here involves evaluating changes over time in radiological findings, with a focus on resolving or changing patterns of pulmonary edema, infection markers, or effusions based on comparative analysis of current and prior images. Activation tends to be higher when adjustments relevant to clinical conditions or expected changes over time are highlighted, especially with specific mentions of features improving or worsening.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.607487922705314,0.61,0.4774774774774775,0.726027397260274,73.0,127.0
+5499,latent_5499,2902,0.005804,0.0067929924,3.7980149,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe stable or unchanged conditions based on comparisons with prior imaging studies, specifically noting that new or active disease conditions are not evident. Phrases such as 'no interval change', 'unchanged', 'stable', or similar are commonly used in these high activation examples, indicating the pattern of evaluating stability in the patient's condition from previous imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.3902439024390244,0.32,100.0,100.0
+5500,latent_5500,2951,0.005902,0.010494783,5.513766,Consistent semantic structure for comparison descriptions.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a description of findings in comparison to prior images despite a lack of explicit findings like pleural effusion, pneumothorax, pulmonary consolidation, etc. These examples focus on consistent semantic structure, specifically providing ""description of the findings... in comparison to the prior frontal image"" even when other details are not explicitly changed or added in the narrative.",0.4283333333333333,0.4285714285714285,0.44,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.492411041240498,0.4924623115577889,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,99.0
+5501,latent_5501,3467,0.006934,0.0149236135,6.666487,High activation when no prior imaging comparison is available.,"Examples with high activation often lack an explicit prior image for comparison, which emphasizes descriptions relying solely on current findings without comparative context. Reports that state 'None' for comparison align with the pattern of high activation. Conversely, those that compare current images against previous studies have lower activation, suggesting the need for interpretation based solely on present data increases activation.",0.7751355861493534,0.7755102040816326,0.7407407407407407,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5626373626373626,0.5628140703517588,0.5576923076923077,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+5502,latent_5502,4485,0.00897,0.011182924,10.05691,Persistent cardiac or significant pulmonary findings in radiology.,"The pattern observed in highly activated examples commonly references a history of significant cardiac or pulmonary findings in the context of radiological assessments. These include mentions of specific conditions like cardiomegaly or other specific findings like stability or changes in infiltrates, alongside considerations for possible or recurring serious conditions like pneumonia or edema, often backed by multiple imaging comparisons. This aligns with key concerns of serious clinical conditions being persistently examined across different studies or visits.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.402475458813487,0.405,0.415929203539823,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5503,latent_5503,23360,0.04672,0.018921748,2.958555,Stable or unchanged findings across serial imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on stable or unchanged findings across serial imaging compared to previous studies, often suggesting benign or non-progressive pathology, and discuss specific areas of anatomy or pathology in detail, highlighting stability using terms like ""unchanged.""",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5504,latent_5504,30453,0.060906,0.028068021,3.4536774,Detailed comparative findings with prior imaging studies.,"Examples that provided detailed comparisons with prior images in terms of specific findings, such as improvements, unchanged features, or advancements in device placement, show higher activations. This pattern signifies that the model responds more to detailed interval changes in radiology reports when compared to existing imaging.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7013695808876532,0.71,0.6567164179104478,0.88,100.0,100.0
+5505,latent_5505,4574,0.009148,0.012701138,3.1047444,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5506,latent_5506,5290,0.01058,0.011122097,4.860394,Comparison of current and prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly involve direct comparison between current and previous radiology images, specifically when there is a noted interval change or image comparison detail provided. These texts include explicit descriptions of changes or stability in findings over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3949848746218655,0.395,0.3939393939393939,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5507,latent_5507,5012,0.010024,0.008862902,5.516302,Comparative analysis of current and prior images in radiology.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on providing descriptions of findings specifically with references to both current and prior images, indicating a pattern of comparative assessment between different images to identify changes or stability. These descriptions often emphasize consistency or change in specific medical conditions or features between current and prior frontal images.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3776613167376351,0.43,0.4556962025316455,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5508,latent_5508,4784,0.009568,0.012259523,5.131074,Concurrent use of frontal and lateral chest images.,"The pattern involves the indication of image type used in the findings. Examples with terms like 'PA and lateral views' or 'frontal and lateral views', are highly activated since they denote multiple perspectives used concurrently, which allows for comprehensive evaluation of the pathology and ensures accurate comparisons.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5509,latent_5509,7881,0.015762,0.020041311,8.192519,Changes or confirmations in medical tube placement from prior imaging.,"Reports indicating changes in the placement of medical tubes, whether new placement, removal, or repositioning, show increasingly high activation. This focus on tube repositioning often involves medical tubing like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes being mentioned in the impression or findings sections of the radiology reports.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6180387563341907,0.625,0.6712328767123288,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5510,latent_5510,33006,0.066012,0.030742181,4.7580156,Comparison to prior imaging with detail on stability or change.,"Higher activation levels correspond to examples where there is a detailed comparison made between current and prior imaging findings, often including specific changes or the stability of findings (e.g., 'unchanged', 'improved', 'interval change'), which suggests a focus on longitudinal assessment of the patient's condition.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5511,latent_5511,2533,0.005066,0.0064498656,5.0707846,Analysis based on comparison with prior image.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiological descriptions that favor an analysis based on a comparison between a current image and a prior image. These frequently include a directive to assess changes or stability when compared with previous imaging, highlighting the interpretative aspect related to potential changes in clinical findings.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5512,latent_5512,18899,0.037798,0.030231148,9.915804,Description based on comparison with prior images and evaluation of interval changes.,The examples with higher activations involve radiology report analysis that requires providing descriptions based on comparisons with prior images and specifically evaluating interval changes. Examples with references to previous studies for comparison were less activated unless they explicitly mentioned identifying changes over time.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4242947610823258,0.425,0.3538461538461538,0.5974025974025974,77.0,123.0
+5513,latent_5513,4743,0.009486,0.012041228,4.9300427,High activation correlates with structured comparison instructions or lack of prior comparisons.,"The samples with high activation (above 5.0) suggest an emphasis on the examination findings being described in comparison to prior studies, particularly where new findings are unlikely or marked by stability. There is a recurrent pattern in the instructions or their lack (""COMPARISON: None."") and a focus on the technique or imaging view specified, indicating the task is heavily centered around current-to-prior image comparison with available or absent prior references. Examples with 'COMPARISON: None' or highly structured instructions correlate strongly with high activation, highlighting the nature of instruction as key.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4692770373864843,0.55,0.5280898876404494,0.94,100.0,100.0
+5514,latent_5514,5041,0.010082,0.006359977,6.4950805,"Evaluation of positioning of medical devices (e.g. tubes, PICC lines) via comparison.","The higher activation examples involve clear instances of medical equipment like PICC lines, tubes, or similar devices being evaluated and positioned in the context of comparison with earlier images. This may indicate that the presence and focus on such medical apparatus in radiological studies lead to higher activations. Many examples with lower activation levels focus purely on lung and cardiac structures without detailed device placement examinations.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.421152732986025,0.475,0.288135593220339,0.2125,80.0,120.0
+5515,latent_5515,22410,0.04482,0.038194515,5.557303,Multi-view and comparison-based analysis in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention the use of multiple imaging views (often both frontal and lateral) and comparisons to prior imaging in providing a detailed radiological assessment. This pattern is seen in reports where thorough differentiation of the findings is crucial, likely indicating the complexity or ambiguity of the case, necessitating multi-view analysis and historical comparison.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.369047619047619,0.47,0.4833333333333333,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5516,latent_5516,5147,0.010294,0.006967788,4.7393007,Inadequate or absent comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels lack a comprehensive comparison with prior imaging, often incomplete data on changes over time. Descriptions focus on current observations without detailed analysis of progression.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5442708333333334,0.58,0.5512820512820513,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5517,latent_5517,4135,0.00827,0.0061758775,8.311427,Multiple or comparative radiological images with descriptive prompts.,Examples with high activation demonstrate instances where multiple images—both current and prior—are provided for analysis along with descriptions or indications linked to these images. This pattern is indicative of scenarios requiring comparative analysis or multiple radiology data points for comprehensive evaluation.,0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3867201320910485,0.48,0.4754098360655737,0.9157894736842104,95.0,105.0
+5518,latent_5518,16862,0.033724,0.013697264,2.7785292,Description of interval changes in specific radiological findings compared to previous studies.,"Highly activated examples provide radiological findings with clear comparisons to previous images that highlight changes in specific abnormalities, such as specific increases or decreases in size or opacity of pathologies, while less activated examples do not report these changes as specifically or do not involve comparative analysis of imaging changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.5904761904761905,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5519,latent_5519,4430,0.00886,0.012147783,4.316718,Instructions include prior imaging or report details.,"Highly activated examples typically involve study instructions that include prior imaging or explicit details about previous reports, reflecting a pattern of re-evaluation or follow-up.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4775615626192363,0.555,0.5310734463276836,0.94,100.0,100.0
+5520,latent_5520,6278,0.012556,0.014548023,4.5914426,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation involve comparison to previous imaging studies, highlighting interval changes such as improvement, worsening, or stabilization of specific findings. This consistent focus on comparing current findings with prior images where contrasts in findings are highlighted explains the pattern observed in high activation levels.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5521,latent_5521,6628,0.013256,0.009502732,5.0901675,Explicit interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve comparison of current imaging with prior studies, indicating changes or stability in findings across time, often using explicit language to describe interval changes or consistency with previous findings, such as 'compared to', 'no change', or specific comparison statements.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4476190476190476,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5522,latent_5522,8258,0.016516,0.015264974,5.1649327,Comparison of current and prior chest images for diagnostic assessment.,"Examples with positive activation levels depict radiology reports that emphasize the need to provide or compare findings with any available prior imaging studies, advocating the importance of assessing interval change or stability in findings. This reflects a usage pattern focused on comparative analysis in diagnostic interpretation.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4676131322094055,0.505,0.5032679738562091,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5523,latent_5523,5359,0.010718,0.01804337,5.790349,Presence of the phrase 'Given the current' in the imaging report context.,"Examples with high activation consistently incorporate phrases that reference the provision or examination of the images, noticeable in examples where the phrase 'Given the current' is included, implying a recognition of the input context involving both current and prior images for comprehensive analysis in the model's workflow.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5524,latent_5524,60925,0.12185,0.06906448,7.114643,Detail and specificity in comparative findings of radiology studies.,"The samples showing significant activations focus on detailed observations of changes or stability in comparison to previous exams, often highlighting specific changes or lack thereof in pathologies, devices, or anatomical structures over time. The reports with higher activations provide detailed comparisons and specific descriptions of interval changes.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.4690265486725664,0.654320987654321,81.0,119.0
+5525,latent_5525,4643,0.009286,0.00911282,3.6484606,Comparison with prior images focusing on changes or stability.,"The pattern indicates assessments that involve comparing current images with prior ones, particularly focusing on changes or stability of findings, including tubes, opacities, effusions, or structural changes. This pattern is evident in radiology when monitoring progression or resolution of findings over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5526,latent_5526,2567,0.005134,0.008751932,5.7250924,Emphasis on absence of acute findings or stability of condition.,"Examples with high activation levels often include descriptions of the current and prior imaging findings with emphasis on negative results or findings that rule out severe or acute conditions, such as the absence of consolidation, effusions, or pneumothorax. These reports focus on confirming stability or lack of significant change in the imaging results.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.5,0.5,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5527,latent_5527,15511,0.031022,0.02822109,5.645775,Emphasis on device or catheter stability and position changes.,"The examples that describe the findings with a high activation level often involve the assessment of changes and stability of findings between current and prior imaging regarding medical devices, catheters, or tubes, and their correct positions or complications such as pneumothorax. These elements require precise follow-up or indicate a no-change status, which is crucial for patient care monitoring.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5454545454545454,0.3,100.0,100.0
+5528,latent_5528,18698,0.037396,0.017307917,4.665754,Detailed comparative description of progressive thoracic findings.,"Examples highlighting instances with relatively higher activation levels consistently involve the presence and assessment of pleural effusions, consolidation, pneumothorax, or other lung conditions. Additionally, they involve intense descriptions of changes over time, focusing on the observation of progression or resolution compared to prior imagery, potentially suggesting a pattern of more detailed historical comparison with a focus on progressive thoracic findings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.6125,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5529,latent_5529,7118,0.014236,0.0103368135,5.8383536,Focus on changes in cardiopulmonary conditions over time in comparison studies.,"High activations often feature comparative assessments between current and prior imaging studies. The pattern suggests specific attention to changes or developments in pulmonary edema, effusions, atelectasis, cardiomegaly, vascular congestion, and other cardiopulmonary abnormalities, indicating a focus on progression or resolution of conditions related to congestive heart failure or pulmonary issues.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5530,latent_5530,8406,0.016812,0.009645384,5.075595,Comparison descriptions highlighting interval changes in findings.,"The pattern observed is descriptions of changes over time when comparing current images to prior studies. Often the pattern includes recognizing stability, interval improvement, or worsening of certain findings like effusions, opacifications, or device placements with explicit comparisons or references to the previous imaging results.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.51728320194057,0.5175879396984925,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,99.0
+5531,latent_5531,5181,0.010362,0.011324114,4.7382064,No prior radiological reports; comparison based on current images alone.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to lack prior reports, suggesting the pattern involves the absence of prior radiological findings, leading to a reliance on direct comparison with current images.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6547842401500938,0.655,0.6631578947368421,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5532,latent_5532,7915,0.01583,0.0103683425,3.9318922,Description and analysis of interval changes between current and prior images.,"These examples with higher activations utilize specific comparative phrases and observations regarding past and present images, such as 'unchanged from', 'compared to the previous exam', or detailed findings discussed in terms of 'interval change'. This use highlights monitoring progress or stability, a hallmark of radiological diagnostic practice over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5315315315315315,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5533,latent_5533,4009,0.008018,0.014574603,8.03946,Uses clear current vs. prior imaging comparisons with detectable changes.,"Higher activation examples consistently include a direct and clear comparison between current and prior imaging studies. This usually involves observable changes like improvement, persistence, or worsening of a condition, often with specified dates or detailed comparative analysis provided.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6142187930559382,0.615,0.6263736263736264,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5534,latent_5534,5282,0.010564,0.0117733255,7.272586,Detailed changes/stability noted on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations consistently depict situations where changes or stabilities in radiological findings are being described in detail. These examples often mention specific comparisons to prior imaging studies, including noting unchanged conditions or slight developments such as effusions, fractures, or opacities, using explicit comparison dates or results. This precision and clarity in comparison contribute to higher activations.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4294013901857039,0.45,0.4193548387096774,0.26,100.0,100.0
+5535,latent_5535,4692,0.009384,0.0099029,7.840142,Narrative of notable changes or device positions over time.,"Highly activated examples often include specific findings or changes in clinical symptoms or device positions over time, as evidenced by comparison with prior imaging. This indicates that the model activates strongly when changes in sequential examinations are highlighted, especially regarding devices or specific conditions.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5536,latent_5536,3687,0.007374,0.0049372823,3.6532881,"Description of findings by comparison to a prior image, noting changes.","The examples with higher activation levels involve providing comparison descriptions based on current imaging in relation to a prior image, often explicitly stating changes such as intervals, improvements, or exacerbations in conditions observed between the images.",0.4283333333333333,0.4285714285714285,0.4166666666666667,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4491185897435897,0.45,0.4456521739130434,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5537,latent_5537,12532,0.025064,0.013689928,3.837615,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings in radiology images explicitly in comparison to prior studies, detailing specific interval changes or stability, such as maintained device positioning, unaltered pathologies, or changes in opacity or other features, potentially highlighting the interest in analyzing changes over time for these types of studies.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5794380684553216,0.585,0.6103896103896104,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5538,latent_5538,15625,0.03125,0.03278365,5.5120993,Descriptions involve comparisons with prior imaging for stability or interval change.,"These examples involve the request to provide radiological findings that explicitly involve comparison of current imaging with prior studies, emphasizing significant changes or the stability of conditions over time, particularly in the context of assessing equipment like tubes or monitoring conditions like effusions and opacities for stability or change.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5539,latent_5539,28400,0.0568,0.02547366,5.4105196,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"Activation levels are higher when the current findings are compared to previous imaging studies, particularly when there is a focus on changes or stability over time, such as the resolution or persistence of abnormalities. This pattern suggests a focus on longitudinal assessment to track patient progress or disease stability.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.3846153846153846,0.8450704225352113,71.0,129.0
+5540,latent_5540,26499,0.052998,0.033390753,7.597076,Detailed comparison of changes relative to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples compare current imaging results with previous studies while noting specific changes or stability. They show a pattern of documenting changes (e.g., device positions, effusion levels, lung consolidation) comprehensively and in detail, which is typical for assessing disease progression or treatment efficacy.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5925209542230818,0.605,0.3805309734513274,0.8269230769230769,52.0,148.0
+5541,latent_5541,3089,0.006178,0.010704035,4.811356,Comparison to prior imaging with contextual interpretation.,"Instances showing comparisons to previous images but also include interpretation and adjustments based on medical context, like changes in symptoms, procedures, or significant findings related to a patient's recent history (e.g., surgeries, symptom changes, device placements) result in higher activations, indicating the pattern involves using prior imaging to contextualize current physical status.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.494949494949495,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5542,latent_5542,17121,0.034242,0.018309947,4.813003,Comparisons primarily focusing on current versus prior frontal images.,"The pattern emerges from statements that involve comparing current and previous images, with an emphasis on analyzing frontal images even when lateral images are available. The higher scores arise when explicit requests are made to describe findings or changes focusing on frontal images, indicating a reliance on these for identification of changes over time.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5543,latent_5543,11697,0.023394,0.014770944,7.132145,Comparison with prior radiological images to assess change or stability.,"Samples with activations at 2 or higher consistently include explicit comparison of current radiological findings with prior images using phrases like 'compared to', 'in comparison with', and mention of prior studies with reference to dates. This reflects a linguistic pattern where radiologists make interval assessments in reports to indicate stability or change.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5379256965944272,0.5477386934673367,0.4928571428571429,0.7840909090909091,88.0,111.0
+5544,latent_5544,80478,0.160956,0.12369984,8.513581,Acute interval changes or new findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples that show higher activation often mention acute changes compared to prior imaging, such as interval changes in opacities, consolidation, or effusions, suggesting a focus on new or worsening pathology in comparison to past reports.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5920525798897031,0.595,0.6144578313253012,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5545,latent_5545,6889,0.013778,0.0105203595,3.9512408,Detailed descriptions of findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,"The most highly activated examples frequently discuss changes or stability in health conditions, specifically focusing on comparisons to prior reports or images. This pattern is significant in radiology where continuity and change in medical findings over time requires explicit reference to previous examinations for accurate assessment.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5353535353535354,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5546,latent_5546,6894,0.013788,0.017117856,7.8552566,Comparison primarily focuses on frontal images from current and prior studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to utilizing both the current and prior frontal images specifically, often without including analysis from the lateral view, for comparison of radiographic findings. Less activated examples either lack the specific pairing of frontal images for comparison or utilize lateral views alongside frontal ones.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3776613167376351,0.43,0.4556962025316455,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5547,latent_5547,14934,0.029868,0.021705715,6.5186567,Stability or changes of medical devices or known conditions.,"In this group, activations are higher for examples that involve descriptions of stability or changes in known medical devices within the patient. This includes positioning of tubes, catheters, or other implants, and their stability or change as compared to previous evaluations. Examples with 3+ activations often involve device positioning and anatomical assessment of known issues (e.g., stable pleural effusion, stable atelectasis) rather than just description of standard radiological findings.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5548,latent_5548,31177,0.062354,0.02928687,2.355959,Reports emphasize comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe changes or stability over time in radiological findings by comparing current images to prior ones. Key elements include using phrases about stability (e.g., 'unchanged'), progression, or descriptive changes of pathologies (e.g., pleural effusion, nodule size) in context with past studies. Less activated examples either lack such comparisons or do not highlight them as the main focus.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5549,latent_5549,4077,0.008154,0.0096811,5.016829,Temporal changes or resolution in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The pattern of higher activation in these examples is associated with detailed description of changes over time, typically involving interval changes or resolution in terms of size, position, or appearance of medical devices or thoracic structures, often using terms like 'interval improvement', 'unchanged', or 'compared to prior'. This temporal comparison pattern is a common feature in radiology studies where assessing the progression or stability of medical conditions is crucial.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5734035549703753,0.595,0.5655172413793104,0.82,100.0,100.0
+5550,latent_5550,4714,0.009428,0.01008277,3.2254655,Request to compare current frontal and lateral images with a prior image.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature a request to provide a description comparing current imaging findings with prior images. This often involves identifying any changes or stability in features, particularly when both current frontal and lateral views are referenced along with prior frontal images.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5321100917431193,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5551,latent_5551,12130,0.02426,0.016174223,6.7349834,Detailed comparative imaging findings with explicit interval changes.,"The highly activated samples consistently highlight findings described in detail in relation to the comparative analysis with previous imaging, focusing on changes or developments from prior conditions. Recurrent themes include specific changes detected compared to past images, such as catheter placements, opacities, and cardiomediastinal changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5552,latent_5552,3609,0.007218,0.0075311884,4.408662,Detailed description of findings in current imaging compared to prior studies and presence of unchanged medical devices or interventions.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe findings in current imaging in comparison with prior images, discussing statuses like unchanged or improved conditions, alongside specific descriptions about medical devices (e.g., pacemakers or tubes) or interventions present since the prior imaging study. This pattern underscores the importance of chronological comparisons in understanding patient progress or medical interventions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4848484848484848,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5553,latent_5553,2815,0.00563,0.012360952,6.343054,Assessment of change in pleural effusions or atelectasis compared to prior imaging.,"The examples assess changes in images compared to prior imaging findings, particularly focusing on changes related to pleural effusions, atelectasis, or cardiopulmonary conditions. In the pattern, comparisons often highlight interval changes or stability in these features, indicating a monitoring of longitudinal changes, which aligns with post-treatment or progression scenarios.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6698679471788715,0.67,0.6770833333333334,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5554,latent_5554,45087,0.090174,0.039148595,3.1440067,Comparison with prior imaging studies to assess changes.,"These examples highlight cases where the radiology findings are compared with previous imaging studies to assess changes or stability. Reports frequently phrase changes using terms like 'interval decrease' or 'unchanged', showing a linguistic emphasis on monitoring progression or resolution of observed conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5555,latent_5555,4720,0.00944,0.015139841,4.9848566,Comparison of findings between current frontal and lateral images.,The analysis involves a recurring focus on comparison across different imaging views (frontal vs. lateral) regarding specific techniques used or their absence in relation to previous imaging.,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3910845588235294,0.47,0.3928571428571428,0.11,100.0,100.0
+5556,latent_5556,6243,0.012486,0.016903266,5.719173,Comparison with prior images in given tasks.,"Examples with higher activations frequently involve instructions specifying the use of both the current and ""prior"" images for comparison. The emphasis on comparing imaging findings with previous examinations, despite the absence or presence of specified prior data, is indicative of higher activations.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4026666666666667,0.44,0.46,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5557,latent_5557,21145,0.04229,0.025152944,4.71404,Stable chest imaging findings with normal structures and no acute abnormality.,"The examples with high activation typically have a description of normal lung, heart, and mediastinal contours without acute abnormalities, along with the low lung volumes or specific mention of normal structures like endotracheal tube placement. This aligns with a pattern of identifying findings where everything appears stable or unremarkable without acute issues detected in the radiographic examination.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5558,latent_5558,39092,0.078184,0.054229636,7.0139008,Comparison showing interval change or stability in findings.,"The higher activation examples involve findings or reports that identify changes from previous imaging or indicate conditions as resolved or re-evaluated. This usually involves descriptions of progress or stability, generally using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'same', or 'significant interval change'. The pattern is indicative of assessments based on changes over time, often crucial in radiological evaluations.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,0.6756756756756757,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,100.0,100.0
+5559,latent_5559,3806,0.007612,0.01478945,7.121485,Detailed interval changes in pulmonary features compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on describing changes over time in specific features between current and previous chest radiographic images. These include interval changes in pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, atelectasis, etc., particularly when enhancing a comparison to inform a clinical judgment.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.52,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5560,latent_5560,6690,0.01338,0.007889973,6.057773,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels request explicit descriptions of findings in current radiology studies compared to prior images, often with phrases like 'in comparison to the prior' or 'provide a description.' This suggests a consistent pattern of detailing the differences or similarities in successive imaging studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.3511450381679389,0.647887323943662,71.0,129.0
+5561,latent_5561,6945,0.01389,0.0103228735,5.2887106,New or significant changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,Examples with activation levels exhibit specific instances of abnormalities or significant changes in imaging findings when comparing current images with prior ones or noting specific interventions like tube placements. The activation pattern is associated with the identification of new or significant changes in the imaging findings.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5562,latent_5562,5657,0.011314,0.012149798,4.12153,Reports focus on positioning and changes in medical devices.,"The active examples often include discussions of specific medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, particularly noting their positioning and any interval changes observed in their placement over time.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.515625,0.33,100.0,100.0
+5563,latent_5563,8781,0.017562,0.015163383,4.0559564,Stable or unchanged findings comparison to prior images.,The data examples show high activation levels for reports that consistently describe stable or unchanged findings in comparison with prior studies or images. This pattern is indicative of the model's focus on recognizing descriptions of stability in imaging findings against past records.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5564,latent_5564,7906,0.015812,0.012600439,5.128938,Changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples focus on changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior images, often indicating new or resolved conditions, exaggeration, improvement, or stability of existing findings. This is common in radiology reports where the current state is assessed in light of historical imaging to provide context for diagnosis or treatment.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5565,latent_5565,3429,0.006858,0.0055091307,4.9478035,Interval change or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels all emphasize interval changes or stability in radiological findings through comparison with past images. Descriptions often highlight improvement, worsening, or no significant changes in conditions like pneumothorax, effusions, or cardiopulmonary features relative to prior studies, demonstrating a pattern focused on longitudinal analysis of imaging data.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.5882352941176471,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5566,latent_5566,5278,0.010556,0.00998648,9.365404,Detailed evaluation with prior report status or comparison to previous imaging.,"The pattern of high activation levels corresponds to cases that include specific evaluations or examinations in conjunction with comparisons to previous imaging, often noted with explicit time stamps or details about the status of the prior report (PRIOR_REPORT). The examples frequently include detailed follow-ups or status verification requests, indicating evaluations based on changes or diagnoses related to prior imaging.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5567,latent_5567,11006,0.022012,0.013497633,4.185031,Focus on interval changes or device position comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize comparison or reference to prior imaging to indicate notable changes or lack thereof in the patient's condition, such as removal or repositioning of support devices, changes in opacities, or progression of previously identified conditions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.579599513220489,0.62,0.5740740740740741,0.93,100.0,100.0
+5568,latent_5568,9862,0.019724,0.016703079,8.251473,Explicit comparison between current and prior images highlighting changes.,"The examples that garner higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior images specifically addressing changes or stability in specific findings. The explicit linguistic pattern involves qualifiers like 'new', 'unchanged', or 'as compared to' when noting these differences over time or in response to treatment.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5999599959995999,0.6,0.5980392156862745,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5569,latent_5569,9867,0.019734,0.014584742,3.4340866,Description of unchanged or resolved findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight radiological evaluations that describe stability, unchanged findings, or resolution of findings in comparison to previous imaging.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6262626262626263,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5570,latent_5570,28266,0.056532,0.033267405,3.8596575,Reports comparing findings with prior images for changes.,"Reports with activation levels above 0 typically included a notable change or stable appearance in comparison to prior imaging, particularly with specific findings such as lesions or pleural effusions. Reports with an activation of 0 frequently didn't note such comparisons or changes, and many involved descriptions of equipment positioning or stable findings without specific comparative outcomes.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4676131322094055,0.505,0.5032679738562091,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5571,latent_5571,6709,0.013418,0.008689266,6.0934405,Focus on changes in support devices or procedural findings.,"The examples (especially 40 and 30) with high activation levels describe changes or new findings in support devices or procedural elements, like the insertion and positioning of nasogastric tubes or pacemaker leads, between current and prior images. This closely mirrors the pattern of radiological reviews focusing on interventional or supportive device status where procedural updates or changes are noted as compared to previous studies.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5857142857142857,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5572,latent_5572,2982,0.005964,0.007957282,7.897942,Comparison with previous imaging showing no significant change.,"Descriptions of imaging studies make extensive comparisons with prior reports, explicitly noting stability or changes over time. Stable findings are particularly emphasized to denote non-progression or benignity of observed features.",0.6524822695035462,0.6530612244897959,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.6057682332192136,0.62,0.6935483870967742,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5573,latent_5573,4466,0.008932,0.009349296,4.0779276,Specific imaging descriptions and changes compared to prior.,"The examples with high activation levels contain detailed descriptions with specific radiographic or clinical findings presented along with the images. The distinction appears to depend on the presence of specific, identifiable imaging changes (e.g., cardiomegaly, opacities) across multiple views or the comparison stressed between prior and new findings that guide a clinical decision-making process.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4077380952380952,0.4170854271356783,0.432,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+5574,latent_5574,3650,0.0073,0.0111775175,6.843469,"Focus on imaging technique, referencing specific views (frontal, lateral).","Examples with high activations consistently include some form of positional reference or critique related to image views, indicating a pattern focused on the consideration of different imaging views (frontal, lateral) and the comparison of findings, even when not explicitly stated as a comparison to a prior image.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3633056133056133,0.51,0.5051020408163265,0.99,100.0,100.0
+5575,latent_5575,3040,0.00608,0.012391097,7.43187,Changes or stability noted in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples frequently mention comparisons to prior imaging studies, particularly highlighting changes or stability in findings such as position of medical devices, presence or resolution of opacities, or atelectasis. The pattern suggests relevance of identifying changes over time in comparative imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5576,latent_5576,4211,0.008422,0.012689173,6.2488456,Utilization of current frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior frontal image.,Examples with high activations consistently utilize both frontal and lateral chest images along with a direct comparison to prior frontal images. This imaging and comparison combination appears critical to the pattern.,0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5209447415329769,0.57,0.5426829268292683,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5577,latent_5577,2898,0.005796,0.004498144,6.426699,Explicit comparison to prior images indicating change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly compare current radiological findings to previous images, indicating changes or stability over time. These include use of phrases like 'interval change', 'compared to prior', or 'from the previous study'. The distinction involves specific phrasing and focus on time-based comparative evaluation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5578,latent_5578,30296,0.060592,0.048190236,5.339725,Comparison with previous imaging explicitly noting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide detailed comparisons to previous imaging studies, explicitly noting interval change or stability. These mentions often emphasize change in specific conditions or findings based on prior images.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5579,latent_5579,5141,0.010282,0.006586642,5.4389825,Findings demonstrating stability or interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention findings consistent with interval changes or comparisons to prior imaging studies, focusing on elements of stability or change in prior findings, such as lesions or conditions. Lower activation levels often lack such detailed comparative analysis or show no significant changes in pathology.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5580,latent_5580,22073,0.044146,0.02423161,5.983645,Comparison to prior image indicating stability or minor changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference comparing current images to prior studies, especially when noting changes or stability of findings over time, such as pleural effusions or tube placements, without suggesting significant new pathological changes.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6491228070175439,0.65,0.5833333333333334,0.7777777777777778,90.0,110.0
+5581,latent_5581,5101,0.010202,0.010161745,6.0235023,Description of findings in reference to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve either a direct reference to comparing current images with prior studies or instruction to describe findings based on such comparison. The focus is on identifying stability or change over time in radiology imaging, a frequent pattern in longitudinal patient management.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4704066425377901,0.4974874371859296,0.496551724137931,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+5582,latent_5582,4695,0.00939,0.012499433,4.841634,Comparison with prior images to assess changes or stability.,"Samples with high activation all involve instructions to compare new findings against prior images, indicating that the pattern of interest involves making explicit comparisons with previous radiological studies to assess changes or stability.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5583,latent_5583,11956,0.023912,0.0142828645,4.111676,Detailed comparison of current and previous imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently provide a detailed analysis of the findings while referencing prior studies for comparison. This includes mentioning changes or stability compared to previous images, often emphasizing any progression or resolution of findings. Examples with lower activations either lack a comparison or provide minimal analysis without detailed mention of changes compared to prior imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.594059405940594,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5584,latent_5584,9181,0.018362,0.022476664,8.194002,High detail comparison involving current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal.,"The examples achieving high activation levels mention multiple types of radiographic images being compared, specifically both frontal and lateral views in relation to a prior frontal image. The pattern that stands out is the presence of both current frontal and lateral images compared against prior frontal images, reflecting comprehensive comparison between two dimensions (frontal and lateral) of the current state with past records for detailed analysis.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5585,latent_5585,25322,0.050644,0.03647407,5.3249197,Detailed comparative analysis over multiple past imaging studies.,"Higher activation levels correspond to detailed descriptions of findings compared across multiple imaging studies and detailed imaging techniques. These examples often include complex clinical indications, multiple comparison points (potentially dated), and refer to specific detailed radiographic observations rather than inquiries into general themes or patient history. This complexity seems to be characteristic of a pattern where the AI identifies thorough comparative image analysis as significant.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5586,latent_5586,2920,0.00584,0.014498843,5.8547215,Instruction to compare current with prior frontal images.,Prompts with higher activation levels consistently include an explicit direct instruction or reference to compare current images to prior frontal images. This task-specific instruction to evaluate interval changes against previous imagery triggers the observed high activation.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5587,latent_5587,11639,0.023278,0.012395966,3.5872602,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with significant activation levels involve detailed descriptions of changes, comparisons, or evaluations between current and prior imaging studies. This includes noting changes in medical devices or pathologies, using specific phrases indicating comparison to previous images.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3637115158195345,0.365,0.3516483516483517,0.32,100.0,100.0
+5588,latent_5588,2763,0.005526,0.011772026,9.25843,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' or similar placeholder indicating comparison focus.,"The higher activation level examples frequently include the use of a specific term 'PRIOR_REPORT' or closely related placeholder variations, which indicates a focus on detailing comparison between current and prior imaging studies explicitly using this placeholder.",0.64349376114082,0.68,0.6097560975609756,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.45368492224476,0.495,0.4967741935483871,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5589,latent_5589,6760,0.01352,0.012436179,4.9196396,Focus on interval changes or stability compared with prior imaging.,"These examples often reference interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies to highlight whether certain medical devices, pathologies, or conditions have changed or remained stable over time. This includes observations of medical tubes, lines, opacities, and effusions, thus the pattern emphasizes the comparison of findings over time.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4815662745717218,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+5590,latent_5590,6106,0.012212,0.014220515,4.855377,Descriptions of unchanged or interval changes in condition when compared to prior images.,"These examples describe radiological findings in terms of the presence or absence of specific conditions, such as focal consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, while they notably include comparison with a previous study. This approach helps in determining changes in patient condition over time, especially looking for interval changes or stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5591,latent_5591,13796,0.027592,0.017440319,4.7018147,Assessment of medical device position and changes over serial imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include detailed evaluations of the placement and position of various medical devices (such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, or feeding tubes) in the context of their change compared to previous studies. Key elements of these reports, compared to lower activation ones, include specific attention to device positioning and any subtle changes noted over time, which are crucial in post-operative or intensive care settings.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7794486215538847,0.78,0.7545454545454545,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5592,latent_5592,3751,0.007502,0.008387234,8.682543,"Presence of streaky, patchy, or linear opacities in the lungs.","The examples with higher activation expressly present streaky, patchy, or linear opacities often attributed to causes like atelectasis or potentially early infection. These features are noted alongside other findings such as small pleural effusions. This pattern points to a specific style of description common in radiology reports diagnosing these lungs conditions.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6236395076797885,0.63,0.6756756756756757,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5593,latent_5593,24613,0.049226,0.02973693,5.1785116,Use of comparison to prior imaging to assess for changes.,"These examples show a pattern where radiological findings are compared to prior images, and phrases like ""improvement"", ""unchanged"", or ""compared to the previous"" are used to indicate stability or change in observed findings. The pattern is related to monitoring of ongoing conditions or progression of diseases, as indicated by changes or stability in radiographic findings over time.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4473684210526316,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5594,latent_5594,9729,0.019458,0.011404647,3.82988,Identification and documentation of changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes in patient findings, such as tube placements, lung opacities, and other abnormalities, between current and prior imaging. This highlights the model's focus on the identification and documentation of specific changes or developments between consecutive imaging studies.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5595,latent_5595,4903,0.009806,0.011264402,4.4130015,Comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging studies.,The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a process of making comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging studies. This includes any description of changes or stability in medical conditions as seen in radiological images over time.,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5596,latent_5596,4960,0.00992,0.015352214,8.537588,Comparison examining prior unchanged imaging and technical variations.,"The highest activation levels consistently involve scenarios where findings are explicitly compared to a prior study, recognizing no significant acute changes but acknowledging different technical aspects such as patient positioning or imaging angles (AP vs. PA), without any new findings noted. Patterns that suggest continued monitoring despite technically unchanged results are emphasized.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5161094224924012,0.5175879396984925,0.5135135135135135,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+5597,latent_5597,4881,0.009762,0.007802873,5.424138,Analysis of interval changes using current and prior imaging.,"The most activated examples describe using current images compared with prior images to identify interval changes in specific clinical conditions, often detailing radiological changes over time. High activations seem linked with detailed radiological image analysis for interval changes, particularly using terms such as 'comparison', 'prior study', and 'interval change'.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4109136006614303,0.43,0.4485294117647059,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5598,latent_5598,12215,0.02443,0.013203409,7.1974864,Mild tortuosity of the thoracic aorta in chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings of mild tortuosity of the thoracic aorta, sometimes paired with a description of the cardiac silhouette or possible arterial changes. This specific vascular detail appears frequently in radiological commentary due to its significance in assessing vascular conditions.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5686274509803921,0.78,0.6153846153846154,0.1702127659574468,47.0,153.0
+5599,latent_5599,28533,0.057066,0.027977375,4.5466967,Comparison of medical device placement in current versus prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain explicit descriptions of changes or placements of medical devices, tubes, or catheters in comparison to prior studies. This pattern involves tracking or assessing the position of medical interventions in subsequent imaging, often with terms like 'interval placement', 'unchanged position', 'advanced', or 'removed'.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7189883580891208,0.72,0.75,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5600,latent_5600,3949,0.007898,0.011830042,5.985606,"Findings emphasize absence of pathology, reporting normal structures (lungs, heart silhouette).","Examples with high activation levels commonly describe findings that are generally unremarkable and often emphasize the absence of pathological findings, such as clear lungs, normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, and absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax. This pattern is consistent with reports that highlight stability or lack of acute changes compared to prior studies.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6836634781953754,0.685,0.6637168141592921,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5601,latent_5601,3833,0.007666,0.01084215,4.6312785,Findings are compared to historical imaging for changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation frequently describe findings using a combination of current and prior imaging, stressing the importance or presence of comparison statements. They often compare the current image to historical images to note changes or stabilities, reflecting a pattern where comparison to prior images is integral to the report's purpose.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5602,latent_5602,6025,0.01205,0.009163733,4.7711706,Interval change evaluation in radiologic comparisons.,"The pattern observed here involves analyzing current and prior images for subtle changes or intervals, particularly focused on lung and heart conditions. The examples often specify additional evaluations based on interval changes or stability noted in the comparison with previous images.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4238332623562714,0.425,0.4175824175824176,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5603,latent_5603,5913,0.011826,0.008814547,7.748106,Technical challenges in comparing frontal and lateral chest images with prior images.,"Every example refers to a specific layout of images: a current frontal image along with a prior frontal image, often including a lateral image as well. The samples with high activation focus on providing detailed comparisons between these images, contrasting findings such as spatial locations or changes in pathology over time, which might involve technical challenges due to positioning or equipment limitations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5454545454545454,0.55,0.4945054945054945,0.5056179775280899,89.0,111.0
+5604,latent_5604,4415,0.00883,0.011340736,6.3447604,Assessment or description of interval changes.,"These examples all emphasize the detection of 'interval changes', 'evaluation for interval change', or indicate stable findings over time in the context of radiological follow-up. This concept of assessing changes between imaging examinations is central to the pattern.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5482003010127292,0.5527638190954773,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,99.0
+5605,latent_5605,3511,0.007022,0.010357222,7.0251102,Imaging findings described in comparison to prior radiographs.,"These examples highlight findings based on comparative imaging analysis between current and prior images. They often underscore changes or stability, using language emphasizing comparison, like 'compared with', 'no change', or 'as before'. This consistent comparison technique supports tracking changes over time, which indicates how radiologists monitor conditions.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5606,latent_5606,7791,0.015582,0.0131945815,5.6939216,Stable findings when compared to prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples consistently reference descriptions of findings in comparison to prior similar frontal images, with a focus on stability or changes since the last study. This pattern indicates the presence of an unchanged, stable, or minor progression in imaging findings upon comparison among relevant sample images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4761904761904761,0.3,100.0,100.0
+5607,latent_5607,5282,0.010564,0.011951447,6.1544285,Unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette in radiology reports.,"There is frequent reference to the evaluation of the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, often described as normal, stable, or unremarkable, while assessing the presence of other conditions such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or pulmonary edema. It suggests the pattern relates to describing these specific contours in the context of normal findings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5608,latent_5608,8849,0.017698,0.01399063,7.1664433,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples all involve descriptions of interval changes, comparison statements between images from different dates, and use of specific descriptors like 'worsening,' 'improved,' or 'unchanged.' These comparisons assess changes, specifically looking at progression or resolution of existing findings within radiographic or imaging studies.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.5422535211267606,0.7857142857142857,98.0,102.0
+5609,latent_5609,3787,0.007574,0.010102633,3.4713752,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5610,latent_5610,6698,0.013396,0.011141151,4.4403415,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing interval changes in pleural effusions or cardiomegaly.,"Examples with higher activation scores discuss specific changes over time in pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or lung pathologies, comparing them to previous imaging studies to emphasize interval improvements, increases, or the presence of new findings. These discussions involve details about pleural effusions, atelectasis, and interstitial or pulmonary edema, especially with comparative descriptions to distinguish interval changes.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7548467792370231,0.755,0.7684210526315789,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5611,latent_5611,12054,0.024108,0.014571335,3.3883047,Comparative imaging focused on stability or changes in medical devices and pathologies.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve the comparison of current and prior imaging focusing on changes or stability of specific conditions such as devices, tubes, or known pathologies. Stability or changes in findings like effusions, atelectasis, or device placement are highlighted against prior studies, indicating the importance of comparative analysis for ongoing clinical monitoring.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.498302119777732,0.507537688442211,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,99.0
+5612,latent_5612,6400,0.0128,0.018671196,3.9938488,"High activation with current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal views for comparison.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include both a current frontal and lateral view along with a prior frontal view, indicating an emphasis on comprehensive comparison using multiple views (frontal and lateral) and prior imaging for thorough evaluation and interpretation.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.568536342515765,0.61,0.5679012345679012,0.92,100.0,100.0
+5613,latent_5613,4075,0.00815,0.0126991,4.4600368,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' with detailed comparison narrative.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a 'PRIOR_REPORT' field followed by a comprehensive comparative description. These examples emphasize narrative accuracy of changes or stability in imaging characteristics compared to prior studies, which is not evident in examples with low activation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4716981132075472,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5614,latent_5614,4364,0.008728,0.009111043,5.0803494,Presence of significant pathology or notable changes in radiographic findings.,"The provided examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions of significant pathologies or abnormalities like masses, effusions, pneumothoraxes, or significant changes from previous exams. Reports with low activation levels describe findings like normal structures, no significant changes, or are purely an evaluation of tube placement.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5615,latent_5615,8022,0.016044,0.010399542,3.7769253,Instructions to compare current imaging with prior studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve instructions to compare current imaging with prior imaging studies. This is evident from phrases like ""compared to prior"", ""since prior"", or explicit mention of examining changes from past images, highlighting the importance of temporal comparison in finding abnormalities.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.472579001019368,0.4773869346733668,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,99.0
+5616,latent_5616,9057,0.018114,0.014209118,5.9533024,"Stable cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours over multiple comparisons.","The activation levels indicate a pattern where reports consistently describe stable cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours, even when addressing other findings. Those samples with lower activations do not emphasize this stability or lack a descriptive comparison of these contours over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5454545454545454,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5617,latent_5617,4181,0.008362,0.010751233,5.4540043,Reports with negative findings or normal observations on imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently report negative findings or normal observations in the radiological analysis, such as no evidence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or focal consolidation. These suggest that the pattern being identified is the absence of acute findings in imaging studies.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5618,latent_5618,7701,0.015402,0.0129193375,8.631627,Use of comparison to previous radiographic imaging.,"Examples with high activation frequently involve explicit comparison to previous radiographic images, frequently highlighting specific interval changes or the lack thereof. By contrast, examples with low activation levels tend not to emphasize comparison with previous radiographs, or they describe radiographic findings without reference to prior images.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.5064102564102564,0.8777777777777778,90.0,110.0
+5619,latent_5619,84402,0.168804,0.07814002,2.321591,Comparisons to prior images assessing interval changes or stability.,"The examples rated high in activation either explicitly provided comparison to prior images or indicated specific areas or features that were further evaluated for interval changes. This suggests a pattern focused on assessing changes over time or stability of previously observed features, often for tracking disease progression or resolution.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5620,latent_5620,3530,0.00706,0.008450696,8.312245,Comparative description of current versus prior imaging findings with emphasis on changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples focus on describing findings through explicit comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability. Such comparisons often note stability in specific features or the introduction of new elements, like lines or devices. The examples are tasked with interpreting features in the context of prior imaging, indicating no acute changes or noticing subtle adjustments, rather than describing unrelated new pathologies or findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5621,latent_5621,19980,0.03996,0.026747044,5.291975,Radiological findings described in relation to changes from prior images.,"These examples consistently highlight the description of changes in radiological findings by comparing current images with prior studies, focusing on changes in placement or appearances such as tubes, lung volumes, opacities, or device placements. There is an emphasis on stability or change compared to previous images.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5622,latent_5622,28686,0.057372,0.039087556,4.911023,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Higher activations are associated with comparisons involving previous radiographic images, often examining interval changes or stability in specific features, such as lung volumes, opacities, or medical device placements. Terms like 'compared to prior' and references to past imaging are indicators.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5623,latent_5623,5739,0.011478,0.02020181,8.726886,Comparison-based evaluation instructions in prompts.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently show explicit instructions or scenarios suggesting that descriptions should be provided based on current and prior images, indicating a comparison-based evaluation is needed.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4685662596110357,0.53,0.5178571428571429,0.87,100.0,100.0
+5624,latent_5624,5923,0.011846,0.0073361425,3.2663898,Explicit comparison of findings to prior imaging results highlighting changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically describe findings that are explicitly compared to findings on prior imaging, emphasizing stability, improvement, or change over time. This comparison pattern is a common aspect in radiology to assess temporal changes and evaluate treatment progression or disease stability.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4648795979095296,0.465,0.4660194174757281,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5625,latent_5625,2222,0.004444,0.009282663,7.732321,Normal cardiomediastinal findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples generally mention an absence of acute pathology, with normal findings (e.g., clear lungs, normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, no effusion or pneumothorax, intact osseous structures). These examples consistently refer to comparisons with prior imaging and stress the lack of acute intrathoracic processes.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5492957746478874,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5626,latent_5626,2901,0.005802,0.00767322,4.761237,Patterns of change or stability compared to prior images.,"Highly representative examples compare current imaging study results with previous imaging, emphasizing either unchanged or observed changes in findings over time. Attention is given to comparison phrasing and image reference patterns.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4290865384615384,0.43,0.4351851851851852,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5627,latent_5627,5134,0.010268,0.006585816,5.495369,"Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging, focusing on interval changes.","Instances with activations mostly higher than 0 compare current radiological findings with prior images, identify interval changes, and utilize multiple views or modalities. Reports with a focus on detailed comparison tend to exhibit the pattern.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6261682242990654,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5628,latent_5628,5953,0.011906,0.010653787,5.766293,Explicit request for comparison with prior frontal image.,"The examples with high activation specifically request comparisons of current imaging findings with a prior frontal image, explicitly stated in the prompt. This pattern involves directly stating the comparison requirement and sometimes further details such as 'compared to the prior frontal image' or similar phrases, noticeable in the task of completing a radiology report.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5629,latent_5629,7986,0.015972,0.010071662,4.053171,Comparison of current lateral and frontal images against prior images for lung assessment.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve front and lateral images and reference prior images or clinical history related to potential lung issues (e.g., infiltrates, pneumonia). These are likely significant when assessing changes in lung opacities or structures, often in the context of respiratory infections or conditions.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4716981132075472,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5630,latent_5630,9758,0.019516,0.013949543,8.956216,Improvement or resolution of findings in follow-up imaging.,"The highly activating examples consistently describe changes over time in radiological findings, often involving resolving or improving conditions when compared to previous images. The pattern emphasizes improvement or stability in conditions such as edema, opacities, or device positioning, contrasting with examples that describe no change or worsening of conditions.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6991978609625669,0.73,0.5694444444444444,0.640625,64.0,136.0
+5631,latent_5631,4727,0.009454,0.009923122,6.4794917,Descriptive comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve providing descriptions or findings that explicitly state comparisons between current and prior imaging results. This involves identifying changes or stabilities in the radiological findings between two time points, often using specific language to articulate these temporal comparisons.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5632,latent_5632,9788,0.019576,0.011135072,3.0857923,Complex textual interpretation of findings associated with <image> identifiers.,Images with higher activations display the pattern where the task involves interpreting text associated with an <image> identifier. The presence of detailed findings or interpretable elements following <image> suggests complexity beyond simple or generic descriptions.,0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.5,0.5,0.9,100.0,100.0
+5633,latent_5633,4777,0.009554,0.009481274,4.3159347,Pattern involves using current and prior frontal images with lateral images for comparison.,"The high activation examples consistently mention both a current and prior frontal image, and refer to views (frontal and lateral) specifically in comparison to a previous exam, indicating a focus on studies that provide comparison between different imaging angles and historical data. This pattern is significant in radiology reporting for evaluating changes or stability over time through both orientations and previous exams.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5634,latent_5634,32894,0.065788,0.027583517,4.0770464,Reports highlight interval changes since prior imaging studies.,"Samples with higher activation levels prominently mention the comparison of findings with previous examinations, often emphasizing changes, stability, or improvement in radiological findings over time. Such comparison phrases as ""in comparison with prior"" are crucial in these reports.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.5981308411214953,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5635,latent_5635,4626,0.009252,0.010825227,8.371355,Assessing changes or stability against prior imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels generally involve some form of comparison to prior imaging studies. They often include analysis of specific changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical features between the current and prior images.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5636,latent_5636,3458,0.006916,0.0070397733,5.3561087,"Emphasis on findings compared to prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels involve a detailed description of findings in a current image compared to a prior image, emphasizing changes or stability from the previous examination. This comparison aspect seems crucial in determining the activation pattern or model's focus on identifying temporal changes in the images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4090758360329566,0.4090909090909091,0.4059405940594059,0.4183673469387755,98.0,100.0
+5637,latent_5637,5402,0.010804,0.010236172,5.4203467,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette indicating no acute process.,"The data examples frequently reference the stability or change of certain features, most notably focusing on heart size or cardiomediastinal contour. Normal cardiac silhouette in radiology reports often implies no acute cardiopulmonary changes, while findings that deviate lead to detailed assessments. This pattern highlights mention of heart or mediastinal features to indicate health status or disease.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.6363636363636364,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5638,latent_5638,2852,0.005704,0.005702178,4.027917,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]] : N/A' indicates focus on comparison with previous images.,The examples with high activation levels have clear mentions of 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]] : N/A' indicating that the provided imaging description is meant to be compared with previous reports indicating a requirement to outline changes or findings over time. This pattern denotes that the information is intended to be explicitly compared to prior studies.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.58,0.58,0.58,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5639,latent_5639,4008,0.008016,0.01144859,4.5802107,Stable imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The common pattern among highly activated examples is the reiteration or comparison of current findings to prior imaging, specifically noting stability, unchanged appearance, or lack of significant change. These reports highlight the stability of certain clinical features or devices over time, with typical structures like the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal/hilar contours, or inflammation markers remaining unchanged.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5426455566905005,0.5477386934673367,0.5641025641025641,0.44,100.0,99.0
+5640,latent_5640,12363,0.024726,0.01346454,5.3006606,Comparative description of radiological findings to prior images.,"The pattern observed is the involvement of comparative description between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on the evolution or stability of specific findings such as heart size, pleural effusion, or interstitial markings. This is commonly indicated by explicit phrases like ""compared to prior studies"" or ""as before"" to highlight progression, regression, or stabilization of clinical findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.7070707070707071,99.0,101.0
+5641,latent_5641,2135,0.00427,0.0066247396,7.9049034,Descriptions of pulmonary vascular congestion in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples exhibit a strong pattern of describing pulmonary vascular congestion and comparing the current state of findings with prior images, often describing changes or lack thereof (e.g., 'increased', 'stable', or 'unchanged'). The focus on congestion suggests an emphasis on vascular patterns.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6286078098471987,0.65,0.7884615384615384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5642,latent_5642,5139,0.010278,0.016706066,6.2255898,Mention of both current frontal and lateral chest images with comparative analysis to prior images.,"These examples consistently reference multiple imaging modalities, including frontal and lateral views, and frequently use comparative language indicating that descriptions of current findings are provided relative to previous images. This specific combination of multiple image types and the emphasis on comparisons are key indicators of the pattern seen.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5205479452054794,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5643,latent_5643,13154,0.026308,0.023005366,7.151897,Detailed comparison with multiple prior images.,"The examples with high activations provide detailed findings and emphasize the evaluation of current images against multiple prior images, ensuring a consistent description of changes or stability over time. These examples explicitly direct the assistant to identify and document findings in comparison to past images to determine progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4533463727776524,0.455,0.449438202247191,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5644,latent_5644,7250,0.0145,0.011063754,4.799773,Emphasis on normal or stable cardiomediastinal contours and clear lung findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe the normality or stability of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, or note clear lungs without acute findings. This focus on stable or unremarkable radiological findings, particularly related to cardiomediastinal structures and lung fields, is emphasized across highly activated reports, indicating the pattern centers on the assurance of lack of acute or worsening conditions.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7106242248863166,0.72,0.6617647058823529,0.9,100.0,100.0
+5645,latent_5645,20720,0.04144,0.01732297,4.868952,Description of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations often mention comparisons to prior imaging and detail changes or stability of specific findings between multiple studies, particularly when highlighting potential changes such as opacities, effusions, or device placements. The pattern indicates importance in assessing changes over time in radiological findings, often related to treatment or disease progression.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5646,latent_5646,6083,0.012166,0.0178081,5.909773,Comprehensive comparison of current images with previous studies.,"The pattern identified is the explicit comparison of current imaging with previous radiological studies. The high activation examples frequently mention comparison not only in passing but also include multiple views of the current imaging along with prior reports, indicating a comprehensive comparative analysis.",0.4283333333333333,0.4285714285714285,0.4166666666666667,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.3769470404984423,0.38,0.3604651162790697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+5647,latent_5647,4519,0.009038,0.009976207,4.3685827,Comparison of findings in current imaging to prior studies.,"These examples often refer to findings in current imaging compared to prior studies, focusing on changes over time, persistence, resolution, or improvement of findings. Many examples include language that indicates comparisons, such as 'in comparison to the prior study', 'improved', or 'unchanged', and often suggest further evaluation or follow-up based on these comparisons.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5648,latent_5648,4265,0.00853,0.010827481,6.1223435,Pleural effusions or lung opacities suggesting disease change.,"These examples all emphasize findings related to changes in pleural effusion or lung consolidation, specifically identification and comparison of opacities or effusions that may suggest infection or aspirational processes. Descriptions frequently involve baseline comparison where effusions or previous lung abnormalities are compared to current state.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5649,latent_5649,4924,0.009848,0.008016671,4.766319,Limited or no prior imaging available for comparison.,"The key pattern in these examples involves scenarios where there is no prior comparison or comparison with only limited or unavailable prior images, and findings are made based on the current images alone, often with uncertain statuses or new detections.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6594551282051282,0.66,0.6481481481481481,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5650,latent_5650,25466,0.050932,0.027159361,3.3303747,Changes or stability in chest findings as compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations describe findings that involve comparison to prior imaging studies, but specifically those examining changes in chest pathology over time or interventions (e.g., change in presence or position of tubes, effusions, or opacities). They also emphasize stability or changes in these findings compared to prior imaging.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5651,latent_5651,27708,0.055416,0.021379419,1.925732,Explicit comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels include explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging, focusing particularly on detections of interval changes. They utilize terminology such as 'unchanged', 'as compared to', and descriptive phrases showing stability or change from prior examinations. Intervals and dates of prior studies are often cited, indicating a focus on tracking changes over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.5661764705882353,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5652,latent_5652,138107,0.276214,0.15939775,3.5122747,Comparison of current imaging with prior to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention findings that compare current images with prior ones, specifically noting changes or stability across exams. These changes are outlined in the context of a clinical assessment to monitor progress or stability, a standard practice in radiological studies when prior images are available for comparison.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5653,latent_5653,5140,0.01028,0.012961933,9.547656,High activation is linked to detailed comparison findings in reports.,"The pattern in this dataset emphasizes reports that continuously compare current images with prior ones while also including explicit descriptions of findings, suggesting a strong correlation between the activation level and detailed comparison notes in the radiology report.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4957264957264957,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5654,latent_5654,4199,0.008398,0.0045683165,4.2173543,Stability or change in cardiac silhouette or mediastinum across comparisons.,"The presence of multiple comments indicating stable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, unchanging cardiomegaly, or the absence of significant acute changes between comparisons shows that the reports highlight the importance of identifying or noting consistency and stability in findings across imaging studies. These activations likely respond to both changes and stability observed in sequential radiographs.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5655,latent_5655,13934,0.027868,0.012029738,2.5128536,Presence of both current frontal and lateral images with a prior frontal reference.,"The pattern centers around the presence of both a given frontal and lateral image in a chest imaging study along with a prior frontal image to reference. This combination, in the context of radiology, often implies a comprehensive evaluation of the chest, allowing for detailed comparison and nuanced updates in the report. These criteria are crucial in studies set up for interval changes and detailed comparison, especially when evaluating change over time in a patient's condition based on chest imagery.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4411764705882353,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5656,latent_5656,7145,0.01429,0.020453518,9.094923,Mild cardiomegaly and tortuous thoracic aorta in imaging.,"These examples consistently include findings of mild cardiomegaly and tortuosity of the thoracic aorta, which might occur together due to shared etiologies, such as age-related changes and chronic cardiovascular conditions. These patterns are related to structural changes in the heart and vessels often noted in radiology.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5960257670051315,0.63,0.8095238095238095,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5657,latent_5657,2661,0.005322,0.0046650786,4.9388595,Structured comparison of current and prior imaging with detailed assistant instruction.,"Examples with high activation scores consistently include references to a structured sequence of current and prior imaging evaluations, typically detailing specific findings while providing a comparison to previous imaging studies. The inclusion of phrases indicating explicit instruction to the assistant for image comparison further aligns with high activation cases.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4617049231007032,0.4723618090452261,0.4765625,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+5658,latent_5658,10932,0.021864,0.021481626,5.5604258,Minor changes or stability in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently require the comparison of the current image(s) with prior studies to identify changes or stability over time. They often involve describing minor changes (or lack thereof) in cardiac silhouette, lung opacities, or extrathoracic findings. This distinguishes them from the lower activation level examples, which do not emphasize this comparison or change assessment.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5684464070654356,0.57,0.5625,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5659,latent_5659,4313,0.008626,0.00925246,4.5879683,Findings related to cardiac changes and opacities in serial imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation predominantly focus on the comparison of findings related to cardiac silhouette size and lung opacities, indicating a focus on pulmonary cardiopulmonary evaluations, often with reference to pleural effusions and similar cardiac findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5161094224924012,0.5175879396984925,0.5227272727272727,0.46,100.0,99.0
+5660,latent_5660,6439,0.012878,0.014044116,4.7496634,Structured radiology report format with detailed indications and comparisons.,"Examples with higher activations involve detailed descriptions including specific indications, prior examinations, and comparison findings within structured report formats, suggesting systematic documentation characteristics increase pattern exemplar quality.",0.3055555555555556,0.44,0.4680851063829787,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3946535566139191,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.9292929292929292,99.0,100.0
+5661,latent_5661,4206,0.008412,0.015307207,8.190386,Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly in imaging comparison.,"These examples highlight a pattern in radiology reports focusing on stable or unchanged cardiomegaly, often in the context of comparing current and prior imaging. This repeated mention suggests cardiomegaly is a notable finding in longitudinal assessments, especially in patients with chronic conditions like heart failure. The reports frequently use 'stable', 'unchanged', or similar descriptors regarding the cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac structure in comparison with earlier studies.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.576271186440678,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5662,latent_5662,4311,0.008622,0.006511755,4.458813,Use of multiple views and comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern in reports with high activation levels often includes a description of imaging findings using multiple views (either frontal and lateral) and explicit comparisons made to previous examinations, often necessitating detailed observations across different angles or follow-up checks. This pattern indicates thorough assessments involving direct comparisons with prior images.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.4782608695652174,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4381225346916768,0.505,0.5029585798816568,0.85,100.0,100.0
+5663,latent_5663,15722,0.031444,0.015399192,3.643171,Explicit comparison in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve explicit findings from imaging studies in comparison with previous ones. Activation peaks when changes or the lack thereof are explicitly stated, reflecting the model's focus on consistency and evolvement of findings over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5523370638578011,0.575,0.5517241379310345,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5664,latent_5664,20548,0.041096,0.022808015,5.5471463,Interval changes in size of pleural effusions or pulmonary edema.,"Highly representative samples describe the resolution or worsening of pleural effusions and pulmonary edema across chest radiographs. This often involves noting changes in their extent (decrease or increase) compared to prior imaging studies, alongside other stable or unchanged features.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5583508036338225,0.605,0.8,0.28,100.0,100.0
+5665,latent_5665,5839,0.011678,0.00943389,6.620837,"Low lung volumes noted with implications, such as atelectasis or consolidation.","The highly activated samples describe findings related to lung volumes and their implications, such as atelectasis or consolidation. These reports emphasize observation of low lung volumes as a significant detail indicating potential respiratory issues.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.6296296296296297,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5666,latent_5666,21033,0.042066,0.022662569,5.956487,Explicit request for description of findings in comparison to 'prior frontal image'.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve requests for descriptions of the findings in the current radiology study in comparison to a specific 'prior frontal image', often involving detailed comparison of previous and current changes in the lungs, presence of hyperinflation or effusions, or changes in catheter positions. The instructions are explicit in specifying comparative analysis with prior images, emphasizing such alignment strongly associates with the activation pattern.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4377820760799484,0.455,0.4285714285714285,0.7159090909090909,88.0,112.0
+5667,latent_5667,3792,0.007584,0.010385928,5.041597,Persistent lung or cardiac condition findings described with consistent language.,"Examples with moderate to high activation describe findings in lung or cardiac conditions, usually chronic or persistent ones (like emphysema, atelectasis) that have consistent descriptors used across multiple reports, including the context of the changes described in comparison to prior studies.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5668,latent_5668,22862,0.045724,0.033083048,6.1954865,Explicit narrative on change or stability in imaging comparison.,"The majority of examples that show high activation levels contain findings that include changes or stability in medical imaging, specifically described with descriptors denoting comparison or progression, such as 'unchanged', 'new', 'increased', or similar terms, often associated with monitoring of treatment or disease status.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6711813982619588,0.685,0.6312056737588653,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5669,latent_5669,133106,0.266212,0.18466154,6.4355664,Focus on unchanged findings or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions that note unchanged positions, sizes, or appearances, emphasizing stability in existing conditions despite any new symptoms or indications. The pattern reflects a focus on stability or minor changes relative to prior imaging, rather than new findings or acute changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5670,latent_5670,2280,0.00456,0.005816776,5.600844,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation refer to descriptions comparing current radiological findings with prior imaging studies, even when no change is detected. The presence of comparison with prior exams is a recurring pattern seen within the high activation examples, which emphasizes an ongoing assessment approach.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5671,latent_5671,4042,0.008084,0.009487362,4.691669,"Focus on comparative analysis of radiology findings, excluding procedural details.","The examples showing high activation levels consistently include current and prior image descriptions, comparisons to prior studies, and often do not include descriptions of machine handling attributes such as positioning. These attributes collectively focus on radiological findings and comparative analysis without including procedural details.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5672,latent_5672,5063,0.010126,0.00774459,4.8615203,"Radiology findings highlighted by comparison to prior imaging, focusing on cardiopulmonary changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels focused on changes or stability in cardiopulmonary structures such as the cardiac silhouette, pulmonary opacities, pleural effusions, or atelectasis, often in comparison to prior imaging studies. This suggests the pattern involves identifying specific findings in relation to comparative images.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5673,latent_5673,16777,0.033554,0.015646387,2.9869065,Focus on unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that explicitly highlight unchanged findings from prior radiographs as part of their conclusions. This pattern is indicated by phrases such as 'unchanged from prior', 'no relevant change', and descriptions focusing primarily on stable conditions as seen in previous imaging.",0.5916666666666667,0.5918367346938775,0.6,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.520870821400512,0.5226130653266332,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,99.0
+5674,latent_5674,16424,0.032848,0.017108323,3.021845,Describing specific interval changes from prior imaging.,"Higher activation samples describe findings in comparison to prior imaging and note specific interval changes such as new opacities, tube placements, or stability of certain conditions. This indicates the model associates detailed interval change discussions with the pattern.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5675,latent_5675,13700,0.0274,0.018988667,4.767186,Evaluation of tube or catheter position compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve detailed assessments of the positioning and changes of tubes or catheters (e.g., endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, nasogastric tubes) in relation to previous imaging, highlighting stability or minor adjustments of tube/catheter locations.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6706442704770592,0.675,0.7272727272727273,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5676,latent_5676,15630,0.03126,0.020883244,7.7105412,Analysis of changes or stability in the comparison with prior radiological images.,Example activations with higher levels (like 3 to 6) consistently discuss changes or stability in comparisons across sequential imaging studies. Lower activation examples often involve clear findings without dynamic progression or are unrelated to imaging progression. The focus is on documenting the changes or stability of specific features in the chest radiographs versus prior images.,0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.4701492537313433,0.8181818181818182,77.0,123.0
+5677,latent_5677,6379,0.012758,0.0094758775,4.8369265,"Detailed comparison with prior images, noting specific changes or stability.","Despite having 'comparison' prompts in all examples, the feature that consistently leads to higher activation appears to be the presence of comprehensive and explicit comparisons between current and previous images, including detailed descriptions of changes or stability over time. This is exemplified in multiple examples where specific temporal changes or stabilizations are consistently noted in higher activated examples.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4534883720930232,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5678,latent_5678,10002,0.020004,0.011696152,4.84591,Stability or unchanged status post-intervention in imaging.,"The examples largely involve radiology reports that address ongoing or previous medical treatment interventions seen in imaging, including s/p (status post) procedures or device placements. These examples show stable positions or conditions post-procedure, a pattern seen in radiological monitoring of treated patients.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5081967213114754,0.31,100.0,100.0
+5679,latent_5679,21546,0.043092,0.026915638,8.667342,Comparison of tube/catheter positions to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve changes in the position of tubes or catheters compared to prior studies, indicating that changes in device positioning in radiological comparisons are significant cues for the pattern being investigated.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6135098497303222,0.665,0.3614457831325301,0.6818181818181818,44.0,156.0
+5680,latent_5680,18604,0.037208,0.021158194,4.958068,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently note changes or lack of changes in comparison to prior imaging studies. These entries engage in longitudinal evaluation, often noting the stability or change in certain pathologies or medical devices, a crucial aspect in tracking patient progress.",0.6063424947145877,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5681,latent_5681,6141,0.012282,0.012693361,5.3433275,Comparison findings or stability assessments relative to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature descriptions that explicitly compare current images with prior ones using terms like 'in comparison to prior study', 'unchanged from prior', or similar language, indicating a focus on periodical progression or stability of findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5682,latent_5682,4396,0.008792,0.009086509,3.832426,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies using frontal and lateral images.,"These examples consistently describe comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, particularly mentioning either frontal, lateral, or both types of images and the use of prior reports or studies in the comparison. The pattern emerges because the phrases 'current' and 'prior' are consistently used, pointing out changes or stability using these images as references.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5683,latent_5683,8469,0.016938,0.012783755,7.019593,References to radiographic views and comparison with previous images to assess stability or change.,"The more representative examples consistently mention specific techniques used for obtaining radiographs like 'frontal and lateral view' or 'PA and lateral' and compare them to prior images to describe stability, changes, or assessment of findings. This focus on the type of radiological view as part of the comparative findings pattern is prevalent in the provided data.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3778502612424874,0.485,0.4918032786885246,0.9,100.0,100.0
+5684,latent_5684,19307,0.038614,0.023011073,7.143353,Description of temporal changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a description of changes in radiological findings in comparison to prior images, emphasizing temporal changes across evaluations. They often involve specific changes such as re-expansion, worsening/opacification, or other significant contrasts to prior exams.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5042016806722689,0.7142857142857143,84.0,116.0
+5685,latent_5685,8139,0.016278,0.012003695,6.2331433,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently feature unchanged or stable findings in comparison to historical images. This terminology indicates lack of significant progression, often suggesting that no immediate clinical intervention is required.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5686,latent_5686,6586,0.013172,0.009460922,4.4988127,Comparison across prior and current imaging studies.,"These examples involve radiological studies that compare features seen across multiple imaging modalities or dates, focusing on any changes or lack thereof in findings such as lesions, devices, or abnormal opacities. Terms that describe comparison like 'unchanged', 'interval improvement', 'no significant change', and specific comparison phrases indicate this pattern.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.5,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5687,latent_5687,6119,0.012238,0.010090117,5.7976046,Descriptive comparison of current and prior images emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature a noteworthy pattern: they provide descriptions comparing current radiology images with previous ones, explicitly highlighting any changes or stabilities, implying how the medical status of the patient has evolved over time. The comparisons utilize language focused on changes or stabilities, addressing both improvements and concerns. This specific comparative narrative style likely triggers the activation in assessments of radiology findings.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5688,latent_5688,4721,0.009442,0.00831992,9.273869,Comparison to prior radiology findings for interval changes or stability.,"The pattern involves the comparison of current radiological findings against previous images, with a focus on interval changes or stability of specific features such as pathologies or medical device positions. Phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'since prior', and explicit observations of interval changes or confirmations of stability underscore this.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.4370860927152318,0.868421052631579,76.0,124.0
+5689,latent_5689,7449,0.014898,0.01159261,4.719566,Findings are compared with prior imaging to assess change or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels include specific descriptions of the findings in relation to prior imaging, demonstrating how specific abnormalities or notable features have changed or remained stable compared to previous studies. This pattern is often employed in radiology to track the progress or stability of medical conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5690,latent_5690,16522,0.033044,0.020135941,4.535206,Reports focused on tube or device placement monitoring.,"These examples frequently mention tubes or medical devices like catheters, chest tubes, and nasogastric tubes, with their placement being evaluated or noted. They indicate a focus on post-procedure reviews, device placement, and monitoring interventions using serial imaging.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.4657534246575342,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5691,latent_5691,3933,0.007866,0.01196864,4.5897803,Detailed comparison between imaging studies and previous findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve instructions that require detailed descriptions of current images in comparison with prior images or include complex medical scenarios suggesting detailed analyses. They often require specific changes or confirmations between current and previous findings, indicating a need for thorough comparison and description.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3583959899749374,0.36,0.3444444444444444,0.31,100.0,100.0
+5692,latent_5692,7081,0.014162,0.0109533295,4.1099734,Clear lungs or normal cardiac silhouette with use of frontal and lateral chest views.,"The examples with high activation consistently describe radiographic findings using frontal and lateral chest views, while also including comparisons to prior imaging. Descriptions often conclude with remarks of stability or improvement in findings like cardiac sizes or lung conditions.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6067315304272325,0.615,0.6619718309859155,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5693,latent_5693,6376,0.012752,0.011341837,3.7762544,Consistency or continuation of prior conditions without new significant changes.,"Examples with high activation often involve an explicit comparison with prior images, and they describe observations of either unchanged or unresolved conditions over time, such as unchanged positions of medical devices or stable cardiopulmonary features despite prior concerns. This pattern highlights a continuity or resolution without new pathologic conditions forming while comparing with past medical imagery.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5694,latent_5694,4306,0.008612,0.009339506,6.446107,High activation levels are associated with comparison against prior evaluations of patient condition.,"Examples with high activation levels involve scenarios where there's direct comparison or evaluation of the patient’s condition (such as images or clinical indications) against prior assessments or known benchmarks, especially in the context of determining changes in the patient's health status.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5695,latent_5695,14801,0.029602,0.01778373,5.1847286,Partially comprehensive findings compared to prior images.,"The given samples exhibit partial comparisons to previous radiological images. Phrases such as 'compared to the previous radiograph', increments or stability of conditions from earlier studies, and noting unchanged imagery position are highlighted as significant indicators associated with the observed activation levels.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5696,latent_5696,5131,0.010262,0.013724668,5.7004886,Comparison to prior images is specifically articulated.,"Examples generally have higher activation levels when there is specific reference to and comparison with prior imaging. This motif revolves around the language associated with comparative analysis, where current findings are balanced against previous images. Notably, presence and clarity of prior comparisons contribute significantly to activation levels.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5697,latent_5697,8272,0.016544,0.014000293,4.1293325,Analysis includes detailed comparisons with prior imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention descriptions of images in comparison to prior images and detail changes or stability in findings compared to previous imaging studies. This pattern reflects a typical approach in radiology where current imaging is analyzed in the context of past images to identify new findings or note that conditions have remained stable over time.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5698,latent_5698,55309,0.110618,0.049845602,2.0804584,Instructions to compare current and prior images.,"Examples with activation primarily involved explicit instructions and considerations for comparing current imaging findings against prior imaging studies, with potential focus on changes or stability in observed conditions. These examples use direct language, an emphasis on providing outcome assessments through comparative analysis between current and past images.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5699,latent_5699,58414,0.116828,0.048544858,2.308907,Comparison of interval changes in serial imaging studies.,"The pattern largely involves reports comparing current and prior radiographic images, focusing on written descriptions of findings that emphasize 'changes', 'interval changes', 'unchanged', 'resolved', or 'improved'. These reports are linked to patients with conditions warranting serial imaging to monitor disease progression or stability, excluding those with no available past comparisons.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5895833333333333,0.6040609137055838,0.582089552238806,0.78,100.0,97.0
+5700,latent_5700,3950,0.0079,0.009230114,5.0352283,Low lung volumes noted in imaging findings.,"The activated examples predominantly refer to low lung volumes or issues related to respiratory insufficiency impacting lung volume, which appear significantly in the descriptions of the radiology study findings. This condition often limits the ability to fully assess radiographic changes and can be linked to specific clinical scenarios that lead to decreased lung expansion.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.627906976744186,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5701,latent_5701,5664,0.011328,0.008006967,3.6510155,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to note changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently compare findings in current images to prior studies, often noting changes or stability over time. This pattern reflects a focus on evaluating interval changes in radiological reports, providing continuity and context by referencing past imagery.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5702,latent_5702,3415,0.00683,0.010229199,4.863045,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples describe specific findings identified in comparison to prior imaging. The focus is on descriptions of interval changes (e.g., improvement or worsening in conditions like emphysema, nodular opacities) and potential pneumonic processes, while examples with no comparison findings exhibit low activation.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3815210559396605,0.385,0.3647058823529411,0.31,100.0,100.0
+5703,latent_5703,10371,0.020742,0.015523991,4.0698338,Comparison with prior imaging and identification of changes.,"Examples with activations around 5.0 or 4.0 often include comparisons with prior imaging studies. Reports with specific comparison parameters or explicit statements such as 'compared with previous', 'compared to prior', or detailed comparisons of radiological findings in terms of interval changes tend to have high activation levels. This suggests that explicit comparisons with prior studies and evaluation of changes are key aspects of these highly activated reports.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,100.0,100.0
+5704,latent_5704,6424,0.012848,0.018059574,9.499118,Describes interval changes with specific mention of devices or conditions since prior imaging.,"These examples describe radiological findings with specific comparisons to previous reports, particularly highlighting interval changes (e.g., placement or removal of devices, change in effusion size, or evaluation of pulmonary conditions). The pattern focuses on specific alterations or developments in imaging findings relative to prior images.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6949313595559001,0.695,0.7010309278350515,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5705,latent_5705,7618,0.015236,0.011775554,6.4017954,Simultaneous comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve simultaneous evaluation of current frontal and lateral views with reference to previous images, explicitly noting the previous images in the prompt setup. This pattern indicates a focus on comparing the current state across multiple views against prior findings, which is crucial in monitoring changes in condition over time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5706,latent_5706,7078,0.014156,0.01630858,5.757131,Comparisons to prior images with missing or minimal findings.,"The pattern described appears to relate to cases where a description is required comparing current images with priors, especially where the comparison is stated as none available or non-specific, and the Assistant output provides some unremarkable findings. The mention of specific comparison findings seems less relevant than the pattern of having comparisons stated with gaps.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5707,latent_5707,4658,0.009316,0.008848557,3.2459786,Enlarged cardiac silhouette/cardiomegaly findings.,"High activation examples consistently describe findings of enlarged cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly. This is a notable pattern in radiology reports, typically flagged for further clinical evaluation due to its association with various cardiac conditions.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.6136363636363636,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5708,latent_5708,6140,0.01228,0.01799746,5.6335473,Comparison with prior imaging for assessing change or stability.,"Examples with higher activations consistently mention comparisons between current and prior images, irrespective of the overall findings. The pattern likely emphasizes the importance of comparative analysis in radiology, revealing changes or stability in patient conditions over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5709,latent_5709,4071,0.008142,0.01166495,6.886674,Observations related to tube placement or adjustment with comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological observations concerning intubation, tube placement or adjustment, such as Dobbhoff, NG, or chest tubes, alongside the comparative analysis of their placement relative to prior imaging. This pattern reflects the clinical emphasis on accurate tracking of these medical devices in patient care.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.607853123169769,0.615,0.6575342465753424,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5710,latent_5710,2770,0.00554,0.006589604,4.345779,Descriptions of interval changes or complications suggesting acute processes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently illustrate findings related to the evaluation of foreign bodies, complications like pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, using past studies for comparison. The presence of these clinical themes suggests an acute cause or change being tracked post-intervention or procedure.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4466145833333333,0.49,0.4772727272727273,0.21,100.0,100.0
+5711,latent_5711,6298,0.012596,0.016648179,4.7268143,Comparisons to prior images/reports highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Descriptions of radiological findings are compared explicitly to images or reports from prior studies, with particular attention to any changes or stability, reflecting the importance of identifying interval changes in patient condition.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4358974358974359,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5712,latent_5712,8064,0.016128,0.00908541,5.0406647,Detailed comparison with prior imaging leading to specific interval findings.,"The pattern for higher activation in these examples revolves around providing explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, especially when such comparisons lead to specific interpretations or findings derived from observing interval changes over time. This practice is common in radiology reports to assess progression, stability, or resolution of observed conditions. It involves substantial discussion of previous studies and interval changes in the context of medical findings.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3854166666666666,0.41,0.35,0.21,100.0,100.0
+5713,latent_5713,18129,0.036258,0.01585466,2.4814656,Detailed interval changes identified between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve assessments that compare current and prior imaging findings. These comparisons specifically focus on detecting changes such as interval developments, progression, or stability of particular findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5410446815520693,0.542713567839196,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,99.0
+5714,latent_5714,7056,0.014112,0.012129567,6.2639565,"Normal or unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, or hilar contours.","The examples with high activation focus on substantial descriptions of imaging findings where cardiac size, mediastinal, or hilar contours are normal or unchanged when compared to the prior images. Reports highlighting such details often reflect stable conditions without significant pathological progression, which seems to match the pattern of interest for this dataset.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5024623077505872,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+5715,latent_5715,4975,0.00995,0.010686706,4.5568604,Interval change in cardiopulmonary features compared to prior images.,"The examples with significant activation levels describe radiographic findings in comparison to prior images, indicating changes in features like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or pulmonary congestion, particularly noting increase or worsening conditions over time. This contrasts with normal findings or lack of significant changes seen in examples with low activation.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4594594594594595,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5716,latent_5716,5764,0.011528,0.010907568,7.3609633,"Comparison of current findings to prior imaging, focusing on changes in disease status or device positioning.","These examples focus on reports with direct comparisons to previous images, emphasizing interval changes or stability in findings, often highlighting changes in fluid levels, consolidation, or medical device positioning. Such comparisons enable assessing disease progression or resolution.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5717,latent_5717,5421,0.010842,0.0119932825,5.9399786,Absence or no change in comparison to prior imaging.,Examples with high activation levels frequently include references to the absence of comparison to prior imaging or indicate no significant changes when comparisons are made. This indicates that the pattern captures situations where comparison to prior imaging either does not exist or yields no substantial alterations.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5346534653465347,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5718,latent_5718,3329,0.006658,0.009006091,5.7210793,Explicit comparison with prior imaging or reports.,"The pattern for high activation is the presence of a prior report or study being explicitly used to compare findings in the current study. This explicitly indicates follow-up and reassessment of previous findings, focusing on their stability or progression in comparison with the previous imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5719,latent_5719,4351,0.008702,0.00727025,4.744549,Comparison for interval changes or stability in radiologic studies.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve descriptions of interval changes or comparisons with prior images indicating stability or change, with a focus on whether there has been any significant interval change. This format is particularly common in follow-up imaging studies where monitoring for changes is a primary objective.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5289883834775476,0.555,0.5374149659863946,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5720,latent_5720,8561,0.017122,0.011276589,5.3039427,Describing unchanged or stable findings from previous comparisons.,The examples with higher activation levels tend to describe imaging findings where previous conditions are stable or unchanged. This suggests that the pattern involves identifying unchanged radiological findings compared to prior images or stable conditions across multiple examinations.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4298544362874946,0.435,0.419753086419753,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5721,latent_5721,4406,0.008812,0.008777617,3.7904854,Detailed descriptive comparison of current and prior radiological images.,"The highly activated examples require detailed descriptions of radiological findings correlating current imaging with prior imaging to note changes, while less or non-activated examples often lack this comparative analysis. The pattern is the emphasis on describing changes observed over time by comparing different imaging studies.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4274766402729332,0.4321608040201005,0.4146341463414634,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+5722,latent_5722,3688,0.007376,0.012930971,5.5553126,Focus on comparison to prior images to assess interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the comparison between current and prior imaging in the context of notable changes or stability over time. These reports focus on identifying and tracking differences or consistencies across studies, which is a critical aspect in assessing conditions like effusions, consolidations, and unresolved medical interventions.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4378531073446328,0.457286432160804,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,99.0
+5723,latent_5723,5272,0.010544,0.010889676,3.657986,Comparative analysis with prior imaging results.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently analyze current imaging findings in direct relation to previous or prior reports, emphasizing the changes or stable features compared to earlier imaging. Reports typically have explicit comparisons over time to assess progression or stability of findings, often focusing on details like retaining consistent medical devices or monitoring known abnormalities.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4019740149771109,0.435,0.4557823129251701,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5724,latent_5724,8983,0.017966,0.012266487,5.408197,Comparison with prior studies indicating interval changes or stability.,"Analysis of the activation scores indicates a pattern where radiographic interpretations frequently reference the comparison of present findings with prior studies, explicitly explaining stability or changes such as resolution or new lesions. Examples with high activation scores consistently involve comparisons stating stability or interval resolution/findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5725,latent_5725,3516,0.007032,0.0070302123,6.53899,Examination findings compared to prior imaging focusing on cardiomediastinal changes.,"The examples with higher activation seem to frequently involve comparisons of the current radiological findings with previous studies. These comparisons often note stability or changes, which indicates a report focus on tracking or evaluating progression. Furthermore, specific findings relative to cardiomediastinal, hilar structures or cardiac size are often emphasized, especially noting their normalcy or mild enlargement.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3724061139791477,0.38,0.3461538461538461,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5726,latent_5726,5738,0.011476,0.017587962,5.951303,Descriptive findings in a radiology study emphasized by comparison to a prior imaging report with notable changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve a clear specification of imaging technique and indication for study, followed by findings described relative to a prior imaging report, indicating notable changes or stability of conditions compared to previous studies. The radiology reports often conclude with a summary impression of these findings.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4818181818181818,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5727,latent_5727,4170,0.00834,0.012335633,5.453585,Comparison of implanted device or tube positioning with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe positioning or status changes of implanted devices or tubes, like catheters or endotracheal tubes, using comparisons with prior imaging. The focus is on recognizing changes or stability in these devices that are clinically significant and routinely reported in radiology findings.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5544022437157611,0.575,0.631578947368421,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5728,latent_5728,28539,0.057078,0.02405749,1.6835933,Explicit description of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The activation indicates reports which involve specifying the observation of interval changes or the lack thereof explicitly, often describing alterations or stability of medical devices or patient condition between radiographs. This implies the model strongly attends to discussions about interval changes compared to prior images.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.5375,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5729,latent_5729,11994,0.023988,0.014754614,3.9225779,Frequent references to comparison of current and prior imaging.,"These examples highlight a pattern in radiology reports revolving around the concept of comparison between current and prior imaging, whether indicating changes, stability, or absence of prior imaging. The references to context surrounding the images—the circumstances of the patient and their prior radiographs—serve as part of this baseline pattern in radiological evaluation.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5730,latent_5730,6130,0.01226,0.008714851,3.339989,Comparative analysis with prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve explicit descriptions of changes or lack thereof when compared to previous frontal images. This pattern suggests that the model is identifying examples where comparative analysis with prior imaging is the focus, often expressed through phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph' and descriptions of interval changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5731,latent_5731,29368,0.058736,0.049569365,5.6514664,Focus on unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern consistently involves providing interpretations of current imaging findings compared to a prior image, with an emphasis on the unchanged aspects of findings from the previous exam. These include stability, no significant change, unchanged devices or pathologies, or references to comparisons without notable changes. The activation indicates sensitivity to reports involving such comparative analyses, where changes are minimal or findings are stable.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5732,latent_5732,4056,0.008112,0.00779373,3.88943,"Direct comparisons between current and prior images, noting changes.","The examples with high activation levels include reports that specifically describe direct comparisons between current and prior radiological images, focusing on changes in findings. These often mention explicit changes or stabilities over time, such as 'unchanged', 'interval change', 'compared to prior'. These comparisons are common in follow-up or monitoring scenarios of specific medical conditions.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5242718446601942,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5733,latent_5733,5525,0.01105,0.009835175,3.897114,Comparison of current imaging with prior reports or images.,"The high activation examples consistently involve instructions to compare current imaging with prior reports or images, using phrases like 'compared to prior' or 'description in comparison to prior.' This reflects a pattern of emphasizing changes over time between imaging studies.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5734,latent_5734,6339,0.012678,0.008363458,6.1705246,"Interval improvement, persistence, or resolution of findings compared to prior image.","The pattern seen in most active examples involves detailed comparisons to a prior image showing resolution, improvement, or persistence of specific radiological findings. These comparisons, made possible by viewing multiple images over time, are a core part of radiological assessment.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4472222222222222,0.5175879396984925,0.2909090909090909,0.2191780821917808,73.0,126.0
+5735,latent_5735,9685,0.01937,0.021745617,7.348882,Analysis of serial imaging with emphasis on changes over time.,"The examples with high activation describe findings based on imaging that involves both current and prior images for comparison, and typically highlight changes or stability in specific findings, especially concerning the lungs, heart, or presence of devices. Alongside comparisons, these often include assignments to provide a descriptive analysis of differences or similarities in findings.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5736,latent_5736,3709,0.007418,0.009680651,4.485156,Emphasis on evaluating interval changes or stability in imaging.,"These examples involve the examination of current images alongside prior images or reports specifically to evaluate changes. The consistent use of terms like ""comparison"" or ""/ eval"" indicates a focus on interval change or stability, even in the presence of specific clinical indications like effusions or other pathologies. High activation levels suggest greater emphasis on analyzing changes over time, particularly related to specific clinical queries or indications.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4919354838709677,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5737,latent_5737,2291,0.004582,0.006409388,8.467615,Frequent mentions of bibasilar opacities or atelectasis.,"Highly activated examples focus on descriptions of bibasilar opacities or atelectasis, often noted in comparison to previous imaging. These findings are often indicators of respiratory pathology, prompting significant attention in radiological assessments. Bibasilar mentions are specific and occur frequently in these examples, demonstrating the model's focus on such patterns.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6992481203007519,0.7,0.7222222222222222,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5738,latent_5738,4196,0.008392,0.013686245,5.2521815,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior frontal images prompts higher activation.,"Subjects that explicitly request or incorporate comparisons between current and prior frontal images are seen to exhibit higher activation levels. This indicates a pattern where direct image comparison prompts detailed interpretative summaries in radiology, leading to more substantial activation.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5739,latent_5739,5006,0.010012,0.013802899,6.565336,Comparison with prior imaging reveals specific changes or stability.,"Radiology study descriptions that have high activation levels consistently include specific findings and observations made in comparison with prior imaging studies, particularly when indicating changes or stability of features. This pattern involves describing alterations or consistencies in specific anatomical and pathological observations between current and past images with a clear emphasis on comparisons.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4217473287240729,0.425,0.4117647058823529,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5740,latent_5740,11101,0.022202,0.012588867,7.4542284,Detailed reporting of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to focus on providing detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons to prior imaging, especially when these differences involve nuanced findings like changes in opacity, positioning of tubes, or subtle anatomical shifts. These reports emphasize specific, often slight changes observed between current and previous images which require careful assessment and documentation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5275176737361611,0.5527638190954773,0.32,0.6037735849056604,53.0,146.0
+5741,latent_5741,4245,0.00849,0.00628083,3.7875624,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5742,latent_5742,6830,0.01366,0.010646497,4.884696,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically refer to stability or unchanged findings over time and specify anatomical structures like cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours as stable. This is often a part of radiology reports where structures are noted to be unchanged from a prior examination, especially when compared to previous imaging.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3969077568134172,0.61,0.6949152542372882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5743,latent_5743,25127,0.050254,0.030850867,7.653929,Chronic condition history mentioned and ongoing assessment.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention specific prior health conditions and their progression (e.g., ongoing lung issues like bronchiectasis, history of infection, or long-term conditions such as congestive heart failure). These reports often evaluate the patient's current state in light of chronic or pre-existing health issues, consistent with how ongoing conditions can influence radiological interpretations.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6013564235976288,0.615,0.5594405594405595,0.851063829787234,94.0,106.0
+5744,latent_5744,6180,0.01236,0.011040914,4.2905626,Explicit description of changes or stability between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples typically describe radiological findings by explicitly stating changes or the stability of specific anatomical or pathological factors between current and prior images, often using phrases like 'no change', 'increased', 'improved', 'new', or 'resolved'. This pattern is indicative of focusing on variations and stability in medical imaging.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4716981132075472,0.5,100.0,100.0
+5745,latent_5745,5111,0.010222,0.014720573,5.1181183,Evaluation based on current imaging without reference to prior comparisons.,"Cases with high activation levels focus on interpreting current imaging without prior comparison, and primarily focus on describing current findings without referencing any prior images or specific changes from previous exams. Textual markers like 'provide a description' or 'comparison: none' may indicate the prompt for an evaluation purely based on current imaging.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5961538461538461,0.31,100.0,100.0
+5746,latent_5746,10834,0.021668,0.012079452,3.1006577,Details on interval placement or updates of medical devices from previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation focus on detailed comparisons to prior imaging, specifically describing interval placements or updates to devices such as tubes or catheters, which is a pattern seen in radiology reports concerning post-operative or procedural follow-up.",0.3555555555555555,0.4081632653061224,0.2727272727272727,0.125,24.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.4347826086956521,0.2,100.0,100.0
+5747,latent_5747,4636,0.009272,0.0129907625,4.9395905,Lungs are consistently described as clear in radiology findings despite differing indications.,"These examples involve radiological assessments where the lungs are variously characterized as 'clear', or free from acute pathological findings, despite other potential anomalies mentioned or specific indications listed in the reports. This suggests a frequent observation of normal lung conditions across various clinical contexts.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6874919951843028,0.695,0.782608695652174,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5748,latent_5748,4953,0.009906,0.016524278,8.875466,Reports highlight findings with comparisons to prior studies or specific acute concerns.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently outline requests for radiological findings with a comparison to prior imaging or to evaluate specific acute changes or acute findings, suggesting these are meant to generate reports which emphasize current findings against specific prior reports or anticipated acute issues.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4416263204225352,0.4874371859296482,0.4904458598726114,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+5749,latent_5749,3276,0.006552,0.012594758,6.5519238,Comparative analysis between current and prior images is emphasized.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the task of comparing current radiographic images to prior ones, where radiologist descriptions are consistently requested to be made in relation to previous studies, often involving qualitative assessments or impressions based on differences observed.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4068343004513217,0.425,0.4444444444444444,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5750,latent_5750,17500,0.035,0.016808586,3.9786239,Explicit statement of stability or comparison with prior images.,"The pattern is based on references to changes, stability, or comparison with prior imaging. The higher activation levels are associated with explicit statements that findings remain unchanged, have resolved, or are compared to prior images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5078125,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5751,latent_5751,6164,0.012328,0.008073869,5.7275877,Evaluation of medical tube placements in chest radiographs.,"These examples focus on the evaluation and adjustment of medical tubing positions, such as endotracheal or enteric tubes. The descriptions specifically look at where tubes terminate and whether they need repositioning. This pattern aligns with emergencies or changes in patient status where tube placement is critical to patient care.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5172413793103449,0.3,100.0,100.0
+5752,latent_5752,10074,0.020148,0.02230123,8.313898,Pleural effusions presence or change in size.,"Highly activated examples consistently show findings related to pleural effusions, either they are present, unchanged, or their size has increased or decreased in subsequent images. This pattern likely indicates that the model is focusing on pleural effusion changes as a significant feature.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6382802811078958,0.65,0.734375,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5753,latent_5753,5938,0.011876,0.010329101,5.9367466,Pattern of referencing prior imaging to assess interval changes or stability.,"The provided examples show a consistent pattern of using comparative language and referencing prior images. Examples with higher activation levels particularly focus on highlighting changes or stability in the context of previous imaging. These examples often use terms like 'compared to', 'no change', 'stable since', or mention specific times when referencing previous reports, which are crucial indicators in identifying patterns of comparison and interval change in radiological description.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5754,latent_5754,3287,0.006574,0.0095750205,5.232513,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently reference a stable or unchanged finding or device position between the current and prior images. This involves any radiological findings, device positions, or associated annotations indicating stability or minimal changes since previous evaluations, reflecting focus on stability over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4026760276760277,0.4070351758793969,0.3902439024390244,0.32,100.0,99.0
+5755,latent_5755,8157,0.016314,0.009721212,6.5339384,Comparison of medical device positioning and disease progression with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed comparisons with prior images, particularly noting changes in positions or conditions related to medical devices such as tubes and catheters, as well as changes in disease conditions. Reports with low or zero activation either have non-comparative content or mention lack of significant change without specific spatial details about medical apparatus.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.3740458015267175,0.7313432835820896,67.0,133.0
+5756,latent_5756,6894,0.013788,0.013408155,6.512948,Comparison of current and prior radiology images.,Highly representative samples describe situations where both current and prior radiological images are available and used for comparison. Reports without either previous comparison data or explicit instructions to contrast with past imagery result in lower activations.,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3959659152195016,0.44,0.461038961038961,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5757,latent_5757,8686,0.017372,0.016268056,6.63409,Reference to interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit higher activations generally contain findings that are consistent with changes or resolution relative to a prior exam, indicating a degree of change or stability that the model is picking up on as significant in the context of radiological reporting.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5758,latent_5758,22825,0.04565,0.023671154,3.4520686,Interval changes in pulmonary findings or medical device positions vs prior images.,"These examples consistently focus on interval changes in pulmonary conditions or medical devices using comparison to prior images. The reports describe stability, growth, or resolution of findings and alterations in medical devices, emphasising comparative analysis to identify changes over time.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6449201070240804,0.645,0.6407766990291263,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5759,latent_5759,2439,0.004878,0.006931185,4.1152515,Focus on cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in reports.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, emphasizing any changes or stability in these features compared to prior imaging. This pattern indicates the model is sensitive to detailed descriptions of these anatomical features in longitudinal comparisons.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5394524959742351,0.5404040404040404,0.5321100917431193,0.5918367346938775,98.0,100.0
+5760,latent_5760,2447,0.004894,0.007832903,5.702792,Focus on changes in findings compared to prior images in radiology descriptions.,"These examples all request a description of radiological findings compared to prior image studies, emphasizing changes or stability in specific features such as effusions, opacities, or devices. This highlights the importance of temporal comparison in evaluating the progression or resolution of health issues.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5761,latent_5761,6119,0.012238,0.01613781,6.9152904,Comparison of current and prior imaging with emphasis on interval changes.,"This pattern involves the use of current and prior imaging for assessing changes over time. It often includes explicit mention of previous radiographs for comparison and references to intervals since the last imaging study, with emphasis on changes or lack thereof in findings.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.424985624640616,0.425,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5762,latent_5762,3800,0.0076,0.010180902,6.493545,Detailed comparison with acute or significant clinical findings or interventions.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include dense and detailed clinical contexts with findings related to significant acute processes or important observations, as reflected by higher values. These often involve discussion of tube placements, catheter positions, or significant changes suggesting acute processes or pertinent histories. It's about the context richness and immediacy for potential clinical interventions.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4142857142857143,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5763,latent_5763,4328,0.008656,0.010039807,7.422187,Use of temporal comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern observed in the examples is the use of phrases indicative of direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies to note changes or stability in the findings. These comparisons typically note any ""interval changes,” making them crucial for identifying temporal changes in medical conditions or treatments.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5764,latent_5764,6869,0.013738,0.0096390555,6.0759993,Focus on comparison with prior radiographs and noting interval changes.,"Reports describe findings by referencing previous radiograph images or evaluations for comparison, explicitly noting stability or changes in findings, or explicitly stating that comparisons with previous studies were not made due to absence. This aligns with radiological practice of using past imaging to identify or confirm changes.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5667945405673426,0.585,0.5602836879432624,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5765,latent_5765,52485,0.10497,0.07528399,5.7544622,Evaluation of findings in current images compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels typically involve descriptions of the comparison between the provided images and prior ones, often pointing out changes or stability in medical conditions across the images. A pattern of detecting evolution or stability in medical findings, specifically in context to the use of past images as a reference, is common.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4649001435843884,0.4824120603015075,0.4852941176470588,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+5766,latent_5766,14441,0.028882,0.021926159,5.5115356,Stable or minimal change compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is the presence of comparison with prior images, emphasizing stability or minimal changes over time. This indicates repeated imaging to monitor a known condition without acute changes, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and phrases indicating comparison to prior tests.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6838025295797634,0.69,0.6484375,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5767,latent_5767,6031,0.012062,0.010071846,6.451792,Lungs clear without focal consolidation mentioned in reports.,"This pattern involves the description of radiological findings based on both current and prior images, but specific to mentions of 'lungs are clear' or 'no focal consolidation' and similar descriptions of absence of abnormalities in lungs. These phrases cause high activation due to their affirmative nature in describing absence of pathology.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5768,latent_5768,14653,0.029306,0.021015938,6.863295,Focus on pulmonary abnormalities or changes such as effusions or pneumothorax.,"High activations were seen with cases referring to the presence or assessment of pulmonary abnormalities such as effusions, pneumothorax, and changes in pulmonary vascular congestion or consolidation. These cases often involve monitoring changes in these conditions, which is typically pertinent to acute or post-procedural evaluations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5769,latent_5769,25409,0.050818,0.028271968,4.3861885,Emphasis on stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"This series of examples consistently involves detailed comparisons of current and prior images, along with specific mention of unchanged or stable findings, and relates them back to prior conditions or existing knowledge. Instances of potential change or concern are described with respect to previous observations. These reports are focused on stability or lack of change over time, signifying no acute deterioration in conditions compared to the previous images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.59375,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5770,latent_5770,5965,0.01193,0.008696143,4.021949,Explicit instructions to compare current and prior images in detail.,"High activation examples consistently involve explicit directives to make detailed comparisons with previous imaging studies, with emphasis on assessing changes or stability in specific medical conditions or findings. This indicates a pattern where the requirement for specific comparative evaluations triggers higher model activation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5771,latent_5771,11316,0.022632,0.0141878445,4.104859,Notable interval change or new finding compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve a description of a new finding or interval change when comparing the current radiological image to a prior image. This is a common radiological pattern where changes, or lack thereof, in pathologies or devices are explicitly noted against prior imaging studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6689669221562986,0.675,0.7397260273972602,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5772,latent_5772,3726,0.007452,0.015034192,5.6977057,Presence of a 'PRIOR_REPORT' segment requiring detailed current-prior image comparison.,Examples with high activation often have prompt phrases indicating the need to compare current imaging with prior studies. These samples include a 'PRIOR_REPORT' segment and require a detailed comparison between the current and prior images. References and comparisons are vital elements for determining findings in the context of radiologic exams.,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4873067063590507,0.535,0.5217391304347826,0.84,100.0,100.0
+5773,latent_5773,12720,0.02544,0.01695244,3.3478014,Description of tube placement in comparison studies.,"These examples contain prompts that specifically reference determinations or evaluations of tube placement within the body, often in the context of endotracheal or nasogastric tubes. The pattern involves detailed descriptions of tube positions relative to anatomical landmarks, which is often a key focus in radiological assessments.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5851573900354388,0.5979899497487438,0.65625,0.42,100.0,99.0
+5774,latent_5774,58962,0.117924,0.07820828,6.329125,Detailed comparison to prior or baseline imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve describing or analyzing the radiological findings in relation to prior imaging. This linguistic pattern is emphasized by phrases like 'interval change', 'comparison to previous', or mention of stability or change from prior imaging, indicating a focus on changes over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5775,latent_5775,82710,0.16542,0.10740209,5.614052,Description of pulmonary changes consistent with pneumonia or related conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to involve descriptions of findings related to pneumonia, especially where there are changes compared to previous imaging. Terms like 'streaky opacity', 'atelectasis', 'bilateral pleural effusions', and 'bronchovascular crowding' appear with higher activation levels when linked to pneumonia or related conditions.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6057682332192136,0.62,0.6935483870967742,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5776,latent_5776,7375,0.01475,0.008617535,7.6454396,Complex comparisons across multiple prior imaging studies.,"The high activation examples primarily contain references to multiple prior imaging studies, indicating complex cases with multiple comparisons. The pattern involves descriptions of imaging findings that compare across several previous examinations, reflecting a comprehensive analysis over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.3333333333333333,0.5692307692307692,65.0,135.0
+5777,latent_5777,29263,0.058526,0.05881514,5.8882775,'Unchanged' state of medical devices and findings compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples are descriptive of findings specified in chest images compared to prior studies, which incorporate unchanged medical devices and unchanged pathological observations. These findings often provide context to evaluate ongoing or chronic conditions by stating 'unchanged' in relation to past imaging studies without indicating deterioration or improvement.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5970149253731343,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5778,latent_5778,75160,0.15032,0.09908971,7.4902186,Direct request to compare current images with prior images.,"These examples explicitly instruct to provide a description of findings in comparison to a prior image or mention conditions like previous frontal images, which is typical in radiological assessments for evaluating changes or stability of findings over time.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5405405405405406,0.625,96.0,104.0
+5779,latent_5779,5129,0.010258,0.012731341,10.803828,"Evaluation of interval change in lung details (opacity, effusion) with prior imaging comparison in both frontal and lateral views.","Examples with activation levels focus on changes in lung parenchyma, opacity development, pneumothorax, or effusion observed in both frontal and lateral chest images when compared with prior imaging or explicitly mentioned comparison dates. This type of contextual analysis is indicative of radiologists who evaluate interval changes by looking at specific pulmonary details such as effusions or opacities.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5847404627892432,0.585,0.5894736842105263,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5780,latent_5780,10503,0.021006,0.010495863,4.7858233,"Focus on change or stability in lines, tubes, or surgical hardware.","The examples with higher activation levels reference changes or stability in medical devices, lines, surgical alterations, or hardware placement in patients. These discussions typically include positioning details of tubes and implants or note existing surgical conditions. The examples use language that discusses devices, their placement, removal, or unchanged status.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5781,latent_5781,6376,0.012752,0.009675633,4.1627703,Describing findings with comparisons to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of the radiological findings with comparisons between current and prior images, emphasizing changes or stability. This is characterized by specific language assessing findings against previous imaging, which is a key task in radiological practice to identify new developments or confirm stability.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5782,latent_5782,18877,0.037754,0.023100669,5.3348575,Explicit comparison of new findings to prior imaging studies.,"The common pattern among these examples is the explicit mention of a prior report and the comparison made to prior imaging studies, often noting changes or stability in findings such as opacities, sizes of cardiac silhouettes, or presence of pneumothorax. This pattern is frequently seen in radiology reports where changes over time are crucial for patient evaluation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5783,latent_5783,3936,0.007872,0.0086584315,5.6442466,Presence of missing details or placeholders in text.,"Prompts with higher activation levels consistently contain incomplete details or placeholders, marked by gaps represented by underscores or missing words (e.g., 'INDICATION: _'). These examples reflect possible issues in language generation, where the model produces output with omitted specifics, leading to fragmented or non-specific descriptions.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3551783129359126,0.51,0.5050505050505051,1.0,100.0,100.0
+5784,latent_5784,5700,0.0114,0.014789658,6.3843417,Changes over multi-view image comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe specific findings through a combination of current and prior images, but only when they mention changes or persistent abnormalities over image reviews and contain multiple types of images or views for evaluation such as frontal, lateral, AP views.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4171502256608639,0.435,0.4518518518518518,0.61,100.0,100.0
+5785,latent_5785,6316,0.012632,0.009253251,4.091825,Explicit comparison with prior images to note changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit comparison with prior imaging studies or reports, highlighting interval changes, stabilities, or specific findings noted in relation to previous images, frequently referencing specific features or unchanged conditions like 'unchanged cardiomegaly', 'no interval change', or 'same findings as before'.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5786,latent_5786,2686,0.005372,0.007597942,6.8664694,Consistent with clear lungs and no pleural effusion descriptions.,"In each of the highly activated examples, there's a focus on describing chest imaging findings, often with 'clear lungs' or 'no pleural effusion' language. The reports mention various techniques and frequently compare current views with prior images, emphasizing stability or normal findings.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6342593752348505,0.635,0.6483516483516484,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5787,latent_5787,12464,0.024928,0.014038622,3.3653026,Comparison of changes or stability in radiological findings with prior images.,"The pattern is rooted in the comparison of the current imaging findings with previous studies, particularly noting changes or stability in pulmonary conditions, pleural effusions, atelectasis, abnormalities in the cardiac silhouette, or any significant updates in these radiological parameters.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5788,latent_5788,232727,0.465454,0.4577205,6.90384,Stable positioning or unchanged state of medical devices or thoracic findings compared to prior images.,"High activation examples consistently feature descriptions about the stable, unchanged, or persistent state of medical devices (e.g., PICC lines, catheters) and thoracic structures based on comparison with previous images, often framed through expressions ""unchanged"", ""remains stable"", ""persist"", or similar language. This reflects a pattern of analyzing stability and positioning of medical interventions or notable findings over time.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.63996399639964,0.64,0.6428571428571429,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5789,latent_5789,7316,0.014632,0.03837722,6.55699,Language assessing interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Most examples with high activation levels mention a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, which is explicitly highlighted in the assistant's comments. This reinforces the focus on assessing interval changes between consecutive imaging studies as a key pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5790,latent_5790,4797,0.009594,0.011001753,5.9310584,"Comparison of current to prior frontal images, emphasizing findings change or stability.","The pattern involves radiology reports that focus on new or unchanged observations compared to prior imaging, often describing specific findings like atelectasis or opacities, alongside consistent comparisons, indicating detailed temporal analysis.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5791,latent_5791,13374,0.026748,0.0147305,5.962321,Analysis and repositioning of Dobbhoff tube placement.,"The examples with the highest activation levels all involve the placement or repositioning of a Dobbhoff tube, which is a particular focus in radiological evaluations of chest imagery, likely due to its importance in patient care for tube feeding. The structured analysis of tube positioning against prior images emphasizes the model's pattern recognition for this task.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,1.0,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7539975399753998,0.785,0.9148936170212766,0.524390243902439,82.0,118.0
+5792,latent_5792,6807,0.013614,0.012489538,4.334259,Presence of structured report format with distinct sections.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently utilize structured reporting formats that separate the report into distinct sections like findings and impressions. This pattern is typical in radiological report structuring, where the observation, conclusions, and suggestions are explicitly delineated. In the dataset, instances showing this structured format consistently have higher activation levels compared to those that do not.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3227011234601367,0.4321608040201005,0.4611111111111111,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+5793,latent_5793,10732,0.021464,0.017860968,4.748302,Changes in presence or position of medical devices compared to prior images.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions of removal or changes in devices or tubes, such as catheters, endotracheal tubes, or nasogastric tubes, as compared to previous radiographs. These changes in medical devices reflect significant patient care transitions and are thus a recognized pattern.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4897959183673469,0.24,100.0,100.0
+5794,latent_5794,6313,0.012626,0.022136826,4.377851,Stable or unchanged findings between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain references to comparative descriptors indicating stable or unchanged findings between current and prior imaging, often using terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'no interval change', or explicitly referencing comparison with previous studies. This pattern suggests the model is focusing on text descriptions related to stability or lack of change over time.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+5795,latent_5795,4710,0.00942,0.010301669,5.279839,Comparison of current versus prior image findings; focus on interval changes.,"Examples either have observations of changes over time by comparing current and prior images or note the stability of previous findings, using terminology like 'unchanged', 'as compared to', or specify intervals. This language is indicative of analyzing and emphasizing temporal changes in medical imaging reports.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5796,latent_5796,8475,0.01695,0.009385534,3.4145691,Comparison of current and prior studies with significant interval changes or stabilities.,"The pattern highlighted involves comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, but with significant findings like abnormalities, alterations, or stabilities being relevant to the activation level. Cases where the comparison yields no changes or insignificant findings are less representative. High activation is often associated with detailed observations regarding stability or specific interval changes compared to prior imaging.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4951456310679611,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5797,latent_5797,5415,0.01083,0.0073094848,5.2704544,"Aortic tortuosity, unfolding, calcification in chest imaging descriptions.","These samples consistently mention either elongation, unfolding, calcification, or tortuosity of the aorta. The textual descriptions include references to these specific structural and pathological details, lending emphasis to details often monitored in patients with chronic conditions or a history of cardiovascular issues.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9230769230769232,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8191136569189026,0.82,0.872093023255814,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5798,latent_5798,6955,0.01391,0.013970133,5.1259336,Pulmonary vascular congestion in the findings.,"The examples frequently mention pulmonary vascular congestion, despite various techniques and conditions described. High activation levels correlate with the presence of pulmonary vascular congestion or redistribution in the findings, indicating this pattern is a significant feature.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6009060511271707,0.63,0.782608695652174,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5799,latent_5799,2978,0.005956,0.008515742,6.671855,Reports of tube/device placement relative to carina.,"All high activation examples focus on describing endotracheal tube or other medical device placements (like PICC lines, NG tubes) relative to anatomical markers such as the carina. They often involve precise measurements indicating the distance of device terminations from the carina, and the positions seem to be more detailed when described relative to prior imaging.",0.8357963875205254,0.84,1.0,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5402820738386447,0.595,0.8064516129032258,0.25,100.0,100.0
+5800,latent_5800,4177,0.008354,0.009913131,7.3468986,Evaluation of findings in relation to previous imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate either descriptions of radiological findings or changes in the context of prior image comparisons or evaluations. These passages often utilize language describing existing, unchanged or newly identified conditions, which are systematically compared to previous imaging to assess for continuity or change. The descriptions also frequently refer to comparisons of current imaging findings with previous ones, essential in radiological evaluations.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4501504305425874,0.47,0.4782608695652174,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5801,latent_5801,173743,0.347486,0.25541222,6.269155,Interstitial edema with trace pleural effusion and heart enlargement.,"Combined findings of interstitial edema, pleural fluid, Kerley B lines, and heart enlargement are typically associated with fluid-related diseases like heart failure. The high activation suggests these details are common triggers for the pattern where fluid accumulation is identified radiologically.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.15,100.0,100.0
+5802,latent_5802,22880,0.04576,0.020400234,2.2671041,Attention to subtle changes in sequential imaging comparisons.,"These examples often involve references to subtle, incremental, or nuanced changes between current and previous imaging findings. The activation levels are higher in cases where the differences between past and current images are explicitly noted, often involving terms like 'unchanged', 'slightly more', 'interval', or references to changes in specific findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5803,latent_5803,5964,0.011928,0.015122376,5.2768326,Comparisons of findings to prior studies to assess stability or change.,"The majority of examples with high activation explicitly describe comparisons of current imaging findings with those from prior studies. This common practice in interpreting radiology findings indicates an evaluation of stability or changes in known conditions over time, as seen in repeated use of terms like ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" ""compared to prior,"" etc.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5804,latent_5804,12834,0.025668,0.025388248,7.026251,Comparison across multiple images and over time in radiology studies.,"Highly activated examples contain descriptions of multiple view comparisons, highlighting radiological findings over time. These reports emphasize both image and patient history changes, indicative of the medical pattern being assessed (e.g., thorough monitoring of potential acute processes or cardiopulmonary changes). There are detailed spatial descriptions and time comparisons commonly found in detailed follow-up assessments.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.416383701188455,0.45,0.4662162162162162,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5805,latent_5805,4255,0.00851,0.0077007324,5.123504,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The activations are highest for examples that demonstrate explicit verbal comparisons between current and prior radiological images, assessing any changes or stability in findings. Instances without such comparisons show a lower activation, indicating this is the key pattern being identified.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.518796992481203,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5806,latent_5806,6652,0.013304,0.008568538,7.045737,"Interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging, especially mentioning medical devices.","These examples generally describe the comparison between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting any changes or stability in pulmonary conditions, medical devices, or other notable anatomic features. The activation pattern shows that when reports discuss comparisons with prior imaging and note specific interval changes or the insertion/removal of medical devices, activation is higher, as opposed to normal findings or lack of specific mention of changes.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.4659090909090909,0.5394736842105263,76.0,124.0
+5807,latent_5807,7452,0.014904,0.011273025,4.788558,Explicit assessment or comparison with prior imaging.,"Radiology reports mention comparison to prior imaging to assess changes in conditions or findings. Higher activations are associated with explicit mentions of specific 'comparison' or direct contrast between a current and prior study, including changes in radiographic findings or stability of conditions.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5808,latent_5808,28249,0.056498,0.031402014,5.879834,Prompt requires comparison of current to prior radiographic imagery.,"This pattern highlights the model's focus on prompts that require comparison of current radiographic images to prior imagery, with or without an existing report. The high activation levels in some examples with limited or missing prior comparisons suggest that the model recognizes and attempts to interpret changes in radiological findings between studies.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5809,latent_5809,14417,0.028834,0.018989611,6.563755,Comparison with prior imaging revealing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss changes or stability in imaging findings by explicitly referencing prior reports, often describing either persistent or new findings. This pattern is used to track the progression or resolution of observed phenomena, indicating the contextual change compared to earlier studies rather than standalone findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5070422535211268,0.7578947368421053,95.0,105.0
+5810,latent_5810,1850,0.0037,0.006313318,8.879951,Comparison of unchanged or expected presence of lines and devices against prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently have explicit instructions or sections requesting description of findings compared to prior imaging studies, often involving expected or unchanged status of lines, tubes, and support devices, particularly in critically or chronically ill patients.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3523985741884574,0.405,0.2790697674418604,0.12,100.0,100.0
+5811,latent_5811,3435,0.00687,0.0150341755,7.461459,Use of current frontal and lateral images compared to a prior frontal image.,Examples with high activation highlight the presence of a frontal and lateral image compared to a prior frontal image. These examples consistently discuss findings in relation to multiple views currently available and compared to specific past studies.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.39324197091746,0.42,0.4436619718309859,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5812,latent_5812,44186,0.088372,0.07612822,6.027506,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","The examples with higher activation consistently describe normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in current radiological imaging findings. This indicates that the pattern the model is identifying is related to descriptions where the heart and mediastinum are mentioned specifically as normal or stable, without additional concerning findings related to them.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.7049926248156204,0.705,0.7070707070707071,0.7,100.0,100.0
+5813,latent_5813,3535,0.00707,0.0067627626,5.38727,Use of detailed comparison with prior imaging to indicate changes over time.,"Radiology descriptions often focus on changes over time to assess disease progression or treatment effects. The highly activated examples consistently reference the patient's current imaging in relation to prior studies, using terms like 'compared to', 'no change', or 'interval change'. This pattern emphasizes the comparison to previous images for assessing stability or change of findings, capturing the model's focus in given contexts.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.46,0.46,0.46,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5814,latent_5814,13592,0.027184,0.016210923,4.657979,Evaluation relies on image descriptions without prior report details.,The high activation examples focus on providing a detailed description based on current and prior images but lack explicit prior reports to compare with. These examples involve ongoing evaluation of conditions based on available current and previous radiological exams without relying heavily on structured previous reports for assessment.,0.517757809157039,0.5306122448979592,0.5625,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5875,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5815,latent_5815,3756,0.007512,0.017498907,7.9361157,Detailed assessment of cardiac silhouette size accentuated by lung volumes.,"Examples show evaluations of imaging in comparison to prior studies, highlighting changes or stability in findings such as atelectasis, effusion, edema, or device placement. While prior-imaging comparisons are frequent, this set uniquely involves detailed assessment of cardiac silhouette size in relation to lung volumes, which impacts interpretations like humidity baring.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3794549266247379,0.445,0.3428571428571428,0.12,100.0,100.0
+5816,latent_5816,81035,0.16207,0.08242956,3.6207104,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern involves examining minor or no change in various chest imaging findings, including cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, mediastinal contours, opacities, pneumothoraces, etc., in comparison to prior images. The examples highlight stability or minor changes in pulmonary or cardiac findings when compared to historical images, suggesting a benign or unchanged status.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5817,latent_5817,15136,0.030272,0.022462903,5.513766,Focus on the position and status of medical devices on imaging.,"All samples with a high activation level consistently involve descriptions of radiographic findings that involve hardware or devices such as pacemakers and central venous catheters, with a focus on their positioning and stability over time. These examples demonstrate a specific interest in observing and noting the stability, positioning, and condition of such medical devices.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6047529706066291,0.605,0.6105263157894737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5818,latent_5818,15686,0.031372,0.018928481,9.325016,Interval removal/change of medical devices between imaging studies.,"Examples exhibit changes in the placement or removal of medical devices such as tubes or catheters, reflecting actions taken between imaging studies which can indicate patient management details or interval procedural changes.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7178832963318864,0.7828282828282829,0.4838709677419355,0.7317073170731707,41.0,157.0
+5819,latent_5819,13145,0.02629,0.018123144,7.884627,Radiographic findings indicating change or stability of monitored conditions.,"These examples often mention stable conditions or changes (e.g., tube position, size of cardiac silhouette, pulmonary edema) in comparison to prior studies, especially focusing on findings that require monitoring of interval change. Examples with higher activation describe cases where specific changes over time are noted and require attention.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.46,0.46,0.3511450381679389,0.6666666666666666,69.0,131.0
+5820,latent_5820,3617,0.007234,0.009626507,6.2013984,Radiology study descriptions focus on comparison to prior images or note absence of prior comparisons.,"The pattern reflects evaluating radiology studies against a prior frontal image with emphasis on the presence or absence of notable changes or abnormalities, while often specifying if there is no accompanying comparison (e.g., ""COMPARISON: None""). This indicates a high degree of focus on monitoring the stability of known conditions or confirming normality as per prior benchmarks.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4540998217468805,0.51,0.5060975609756098,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5821,latent_5821,1918,0.003836,0.0071046245,8.842049,Descriptions involving placement and condition of medical devices.,"Samples with higher activation levels describe observations related to devices or instruments, such as catheters, tubes, or surgical implants, often noting their positions or changes over time. This pattern highlights findings beyond anatomical anomalies, focusing on the placement and status of medical devices.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.60996099609961,0.61,0.6122448979591837,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5822,latent_5822,6584,0.013168,0.0116684595,10.003492,Stable findings compared to prior radiographs despite pathologies.,"Highly activated examples consistently compare findings with prior radiographs, emphasizing unchanged or stable conditions despite the presence of pathologies, such as atelectasis or effusions, which are often described as 'similar' or 'stable'. This pattern suggests a focus on continuity and stability in patient imaging over time.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5357142857142857,0.4736842105263157,95.0,105.0
+5823,latent_5823,16092,0.032184,0.01944863,4.061014,Unchanged cardiac silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern identified is the description of imaging findings that include an evaluation of the cardiac silhouette, particularly when it is unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging. Reports often mention the heart size or outline not changing, and those with higher activation frequently note findings like 'mildly enlarged cardiac silhouette', 'cardiomegaly is stable', or similar stability in heart-related imaging features compared to previous studies.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5737704918032787,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5824,latent_5824,11865,0.02373,0.016561326,2.3750024,Absence of explicit prior report comparison emphasizes current findings.,These text prompts typically lack prior reports for direct comparison and request descriptions of current imaging findings. The model seems to activate more strongly for examples where detailed evaluation and comparison to prior imaging studies are absent or not emphasized.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.551131611627848,0.5527638190954773,0.5568181818181818,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+5825,latent_5825,3493,0.006986,0.011079958,4.598344,Prompt for comparison with prior images.,The highly activated examples consistently prompt for a description of a radiological study in comparison to previous images. This reflects a task-oriented structure where the expectation is to evaluate changes or stability over time in sequential radiographic examinations.,0.4689754689754689,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.8695652173913043,23.0,25.0,0.4835164835164834,0.53,0.51875,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5826,latent_5826,4256,0.008512,0.009714138,4.7269635,Stability or change of findings compared to prior images.,"Activation levels are highest when reports include specific comparisons of current imaging findings to prior images, especially when discussing stability or changes in previously observed conditions. This suggests the pattern is recognizing references to stability or change over time compared to past images.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.2857142857142857,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3458132045088566,0.35,0.3214285714285714,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5827,latent_5827,4448,0.008896,0.012066648,6.5829973,Evaluates interval changes and their implications.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve evaluating findings over time, specifically mentioning changes observed in prior and current radiographs or CT scans. This emphasis on investigating interval changes and their implications is strongly linked to the pattern being analyzed.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5828,latent_5828,50915,0.10183,0.05198716,5.469854,Evaluations emphasizing changes or stability in current findings compared to past imaging studies.,"The common theme in higher activation examples involves examining and comparing current medical images of the chest with previous or alternate imaging for changes, often specifying details regarding the lungs, heart, and any medical devices (like PICC lines or catheters). They often recommend follow-up or diagnose stability/progression of observed conditions based on past imaging's findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5829,latent_5829,34972,0.069944,0.04041066,7.6858134,Contrast and comparison of current radiology findings to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels include comparisons of current radiological findings to prior imaging studies. This pattern involves evaluating changes over time, using expressions of comparison or stability, such as 'compared to', 'than prior', or 'unchanged'. These comparisons help in identifying progression of certain conditions or stability over time.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.3144654088050314,0.8333333333333334,60.0,140.0
+5830,latent_5830,42449,0.084898,0.045586053,7.0226583,Reports emphasizing comparison to previous findings for assessing stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently utilize and rely upon comparisons or contrasts with previous imaging studies to describe stability or changes in findings, often highlighting the stability or progression of identified abnormalities. They frequently mention terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'comparison with prior.'",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.3987341772151899,0.8289473684210527,76.0,124.0
+5831,latent_5831,21897,0.043794,0.027157815,6.1528354,Correlation of findings with specific clinical indications or histories.,"The activation pattern in these examples reflects reports that identify specific findings in imaging studies or descriptions that correlate with the images, even when providing comparative analysis with prior images. References to pneumothorax, efforts to evaluate potential new or ongoing pathologies (like pneumonia), specific illness histories like malignancy or surgical status, and indications seem consistent in higher activations.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+5832,latent_5832,2731,0.005462,0.0068343757,7.4715505,Structured comparison with prior radiology images or reports.,"The highly activated examples involve a setup where the user must provide descriptions of radiology images in context with a prior frontal image or report. They often feature predefined templates as prompts with explicit instructions to compare current and prior images or reports in some cases, multiple image views are involved. Specific terminology such as 'PRIOR_REPORT,' 'FINDINGS,' and 'COMPARISON' is common in these examples, indicating a structured approach to comparison.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.5477707006369427,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5833,latent_5833,4701,0.009402,0.007054195,4.8559327,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, hilar contours, and pulmonary vasculature.","The examples with higher activation levels discuss findings related to the normalcy of cardiac, mediastinal, and pulmonary structures. Specifically, these samples highlight the lack of acute abnormalities or focal consolidation in the chest radiograph and emphasize unchanged mediastinal or hilar contours, often noting normal pulmonary vasculature while indicating other potential issues. The pattern revolves around descriptions of unchanged or normal core thoracic structures despite other pathologies.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.8275862068965517,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7719844949456562,0.775,0.7235772357723578,0.89,100.0,100.0
+5834,latent_5834,8012,0.016024,0.011109516,3.7124047,Evaluation of stability or change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The analyses reveal a pattern of assessing radiological stability or change in findings compared to prior images, especially noting unchanged or stable conditions like pleural effusions, cardiac size, specific lesions, etc. Despite different conditions, the focus on interval change or stability ties these examples together.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5835,latent_5835,14930,0.02986,0.02148348,5.5880914,Changes or stability in medical device positioning in serial imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe observations concerning the positioning or changes related to medical devices, such as PICC lines, NG tubes, or pacemakers, in comparison to prior imaging. Specifically, changes or stability in the position of these devices between studies are noted, implying a pattern involving device tracking or evaluation.",0.6938775510204082,0.6938775510204082,0.68,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5836,latent_5836,1945,0.00389,0.0056011686,11.826154,Evaluation or discussion of medical device positioning in imaging.,"The examples with significant activation levels consistently involve the description and evaluation of medical devices or tubes (e.g., NG tube, PICC line, Dobbhoff) within the patient's body in relation to previous imaging reports. The focus is on positioning, presence, or changes in these devices over time, often with specific guidance or recommendations conveyed to medical practitioners.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5998399359743898,0.6,0.6041666666666666,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5837,latent_5837,13431,0.026862,0.020922918,7.04243,Detection of interval changes or new placements in medical devices or structures.,"The examples with higher activation levels all identify specific changes or new placements in medical devices, tubes, or structures compared to prior imaging, using terms like 'new', 'placement', or positions relative to anatomical locations, which indicate changes over time or procedures performed on patients.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.5760869565217391,0.5888888888888889,90.0,110.0
+5838,latent_5838,2706,0.005412,0.009219588,5.0035696,Comparison analysis using current and prior images with unspecified technique or indication.,"The examples exhibiting high activation describe a process of using current frontal and lateral images in conjunction with a prior frontal image to provide a diagnosis. These cases frequently ask for a comparative analysis with specific instructions and indeterminate indication or techniques, signaling an ongoing evaluation or observation process.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4277921869568705,0.465,0.4768211920529801,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5839,latent_5839,24084,0.048168,0.029052073,5.4103637,Describing imaging findings in comparison to prior images.,"All of the examples with activation involve findings in recent imaging described in comparison to prior imaging, specifically noting changes or lack of changes in condition. This pattern is indicative of a process that assesses stability or progression of medical conditions over time using imaging.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5285714285714286,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5840,latent_5840,38904,0.077808,0.057763483,4.7395635,Assessment of interval changes against prior imaging.,"These examples primarily describe interval changes when comparing current images to prior ones, identifying any alterations in radiological findings such as improvement, worsening, or stability of a condition. Key phrases like 'interval change', 'stable', 'unchanged', and dates of previous studies are frequently used.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5841,latent_5841,6224,0.012448,0.008281263,5.1399083,Changes in medical devices between imaging studies.,"Patterns with high activation levels involve a description of changes, typically removals or movements of medical devices (such as tubes, catheters, or lines), between the current and prior imaging studies. These examples frequently feature comparison phrases and detailed descriptions of changes or status regarding these interventions.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5981105978757275,0.615,0.6949152542372882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5842,latent_5842,9683,0.019366,0.013231382,7.2547417,Explicit comparison to prior imagery indicating stability or change.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation levels contain comparisons to prior imaging studies. These comparisons are often explicit and outline changes, stability, or lack thereof, between the exams, indicating a pattern of assessment over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4199419941994199,0.42,0.4183673469387755,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5843,latent_5843,13478,0.026956,0.014308405,3.8388615,Stable or unchanged cardiopulmonary findings on imaging.,"The pattern observed indicates a focus on the evaluation of current radiological findings in comparison to previous studies, specifically noting stable or unchanged conditions, and the management of cardiopulmonary findings such as effusions or edema. The detailed description provided clearly aligns with stable cardiovascular or mediastinal findings on imaging when compared with prior studies, reflecting the standard practice of monitoring in radiology.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4770642201834862,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5844,latent_5844,3521,0.007042,0.013367952,6.7548394,Comparison of findings across multiple current images and prior images.,Examples with high activation levels consistently mention describing findings across multiple current images (both current frontal and lateral) with explicit requests to compare with prior images. High activation is associated with evaluation involving both current and previous multifaceted views.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5845,latent_5845,6950,0.0139,0.010522038,3.7562852,Comprehensive evaluation status with stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically include a complete description of observations across current radiographic images using frontal, lateral, and prior images while maintaining a stable cardiomediastinal silhouette without major abnormalities like consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, or changes in heart size. This descriptive pattern aligns with radiological assessments emphasizing the absence of acute changes compared to prior studies, and the focus on stability or minor details.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.6197183098591549,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5846,latent_5846,3665,0.00733,0.009171167,4.887584,Low lung volumes with resulting crowding or opacification.,"The high activation levels consistently occur in examples where radiology image descriptions include observations of low lung volumes and the resultant effects, such as bronchovascular crowding or basilar atelectasis. This pattern highlights the importance of recognizing lung volume differences and their diagnostic implications in chest radiography.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7442262845106447,0.745,0.7752808988764045,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5847,latent_5847,2750,0.0055,0.006655276,5.0002007,Emphasis on comparing current study to prior images.,"Examples with 0 activation often lack either a specific comparison between current and prior images or significant differences from prior studies. In contrast, examples with higher activations focus on explicitly consulting or comparing current radiological findings to prior studies and thoughtfully analyzing changes or stabilities noted in those comparative findings.",0.2610837438423645,0.28,0.3333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4010088272383354,0.43,0.4513888888888889,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5848,latent_5848,5715,0.01143,0.010492792,4.654997,Detailed findings based on comparison with prior images showing interval change or detail significance.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight a detailed comparison between current and prior images, especially in the context where this comparison leads to clinically significant interpretations or changes over time. The presence of the phrase 'compared to the prior study' or equivalent often coincides with high activation levels.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3637115158195345,0.365,0.3516483516483517,0.32,100.0,100.0
+5849,latent_5849,9513,0.019026,0.019339422,6.1403556,Findings compared between current and prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe findings in comparison to both current and prior imaging studies (e.g., ""compared to study from [date]""). This implies that the presence of comparative evaluation of images is a strongly activating feature.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4455086198205464,0.45,0.4576271186440678,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5850,latent_5850,41145,0.08229,0.055806726,4.7901835,Descriptions of 'interval' changes compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of findings that compare current imaging with prior images, particularly noting 'interval' changes such as improvement, progression, or stability of identified pathologies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5563613068545804,0.5628140703517588,0.5866666666666667,0.44,100.0,99.0
+5851,latent_5851,10544,0.021088,0.011459255,2.7370632,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The pattern is identified through the consistent appearance of detailed comparisons between current and prior radiological exams. Statements often describe stability or change in specific findings compared to previous images, emphasizing follow-up details which inform about progression or improvement of conditions.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5852,latent_5852,4846,0.009692,0.008712603,5.3121243,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings focusing on devices and pleural/lung changes.,"The examples consistently compare findings from current imaging against prior studies, and the activation level is higher when there are explicit mentions of changes in medical devices like pacemakers, endotracheal, or other tubes, as well as changes in pleural effusions or lung volumes in the comparison.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5135135135135135,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5853,latent_5853,22621,0.045242,0.02755986,5.433295,"Tracking interval changes in atelectasis, effusions, opacities, or cardiomegaly.","Highly activated examples describe changes over time in effusions, atelectasis, opacities, or cardiomegaly, indicating potential interval developments. The stable or unchanged descriptions and comparisons focus particularly on these aspects, which are indicative of ongoing issues that require monitoring.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5854,latent_5854,11370,0.02274,0.028194986,6.485528,High when comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"Activation levels are consistently high when there is a structured comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability in medical conditions. This correlates with how radiologists track progress, recurrence, or stabilization of findings over time, using terminology focused on describing images in the context of previous exams.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4898379892697624,0.5125628140703518,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,99.0
+5855,latent_5855,4805,0.00961,0.0114376,9.2589855,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5856,latent_5856,4196,0.008392,0.008815084,4.5226994,Longitudinal assessment comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison of current imaging with prior imaging, emphasizing findings and changes over time. This pattern indicates reports focused on longitudinal assessment, which may require more detailed analysis and are likely to be a focus area.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5857,latent_5857,3770,0.00754,0.008093677,4.6795154,Significant pathological changes using multiple image views.,"The examples with high activation levels describe significant pathological or interval changes between current and prior chest images, utilizing a front frontal image and typically a lateral image as well. The pattern involves the presence of multiple views for comprehensive assessment, indicating clinical significance.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4385964912280701,0.25,100.0,100.0
+5858,latent_5858,6627,0.013254,0.008607984,3.2020488,"Interval changes compared to prior chest images, focusing on device placement and cardiopulmonary conditions.","Examples describe findings referenced in comparison to previous radiographic exams, emphasizing changes in medical devices or cardiopulmonary conditions, consistent with tracking interval changes that could imply progression, stability, or improvement.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.475,0.38,100.0,100.0
+5859,latent_5859,14683,0.029366,0.017467184,6.6393647,Explicit temporal comparisons using frontal and lateral views.,"Examples with high activation levels often compare current findings to both frontal and lateral images from previous studies, focusing on the comparison process itself, indicating temporal changes or stability over time in specific findings. These examples highlight differences and similarities explicitly between multiple orientations (frontal and lateral).",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.4776119402985074,0.7619047619047619,84.0,116.0
+5860,latent_5860,20541,0.041082,0.016315421,2.4692945,Direct comparison of image findings between current and prior images.,"Examples that activate feature references to image comparisons, especially when they invite descriptions of findings from images taken at different times for direct visual comparison.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5702932877740674,0.585,0.5620437956204379,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5861,latent_5861,3280,0.00656,0.0069762915,5.0490427,"Report findings focus on comparison to prior images, showing stability.","The highly activated examples consistently feature references to comparative analysis with previous imaging, emphasizing stability over time or changes like improvement in conditions without acute processes. This aligns with common radiological reporting that leverages prior comparison to monitor progress or lack of acute issues.",0.4595588235294118,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4064012406748843,0.445,0.3877551020408163,0.19,100.0,100.0
+5862,latent_5862,10780,0.02156,0.011872422,5.4237556,Focus on monitoring and support devices in radiological comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently show descriptions focusing on the status and positioning of devices such as lines, tubes, and catheters, often mentioning 'monitoring and support devices' or similar phrases indicating device stability or alterations. This pattern reflects radiology findings focused on changes in these medical devices across imaging studies.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6349178565177165,0.635,0.5636363636363636,0.7126436781609196,87.0,113.0
+5863,latent_5863,4639,0.009278,0.0121099055,4.81288,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+5864,latent_5864,5390,0.01078,0.011254761,4.7230883,Reports emphasizing interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe changes in radiographs or CT scans over time, emphasizing interval findings compared to prior films, such as worsening, improvement, or stability of observed conditions. This highlights the model's focus on temporal change descriptions in radiological assessments.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+5865,latent_5865,6311,0.012622,0.011322207,4.9253483,Focus on stability or change compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe clear changes or wish to describe the image findings in comparison to a prior image. The task seems to model descriptions that address changes over time, even when the comparison outcome is stability or slight changes, rather than apparent pathology alone or simple findings.",0.4412280701754386,0.4693877551020408,0.4722222222222222,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4686730435233429,0.4824120603015075,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,99.0
+5866,latent_5866,8127,0.016254,0.016003719,6.409755,Comparative description of radiology images with prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve an assistant providing a description of findings in a radiological study using given images, and specifically making comparisons to prior imaging studies, often without additional prior imaging information. This indicates that the pattern focuses on synthesizing descriptions from both current and past imaging views, emphasizing interpretative synthesis.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4298544362874946,0.435,0.4453781512605042,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5867,latent_5867,12648,0.025296,0.012649239,4.1217804,Emphasis on stability or resolution of findings on follow-up imaging.,"High activation levels in the examples consistently involve references to notable findings that are stable, unchanged, or have resolved over time compared to previous imaging studies.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5556190278354798,0.5678391959798995,0.6060606060606061,0.4,100.0,99.0
+5868,latent_5868,20931,0.041862,0.023407698,4.8507266,Inconsistent comparison to prior imaging without significant acute findings.,The highlighted examples contain varying levels of reference to prior imaging but do not consistently exhibit a strong pattern of significant change or findings specific to acute pathologies upon comparison.,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5869,latent_5869,4597,0.009194,0.010984347,4.278944,Image analysis compared to prior image without prior report influence.,"The examples with higher activations involve the comparison of current imaging with prior studies to check for updates in observed findings, but specifically involve scenarios where comparisons are made in absence of a prior report, requiring verbalized analysis from the images themselves, frequently indicated by 'provide a description'. This stands out as a pattern because it involves image-driven interpretation without prior textual influence.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5870,latent_5870,4717,0.009434,0.013505709,4.8699217,Explicit request for or reference to comparison findings without detailed context.,"The examples highlight the importance of comparison between current and prior images with either the indication or direct mention in findings, but they notably omit key contextual data, such as specific diagnoses, treatment results, or comprehensive findings beyond comparison requests.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.503030303030303,0.83,100.0,100.0
+5871,latent_5871,23579,0.047158,0.022270255,2.7038097,Comparison for change or stability with previous imaging.,"The pattern revolves around analyzing the current radiology findings in reference to prior imaging for any changes. High activation samples often involve descriptions of changes or stability in the findings like improvement, reduction, or resolution of abnormalities relative to previously noted conditions. This comparison focuses on changes over time made visible through longitudinal imaging studies.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+5872,latent_5872,3866,0.007732,0.009353876,5.100467,Description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate findings that involve comparing current imaging results with previous studies. They focus specifically on interval changes, such as removal or addition of medical devices (e.g., chest tubes, lines), unchanged pathological conditions, and variations related to treatment or disease progression. This pattern includes explicit comparisons to prior examinations to assess for changes in the patient's condition or treatment effectiveness.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+5873,latent_5873,13719,0.027438,0.025188249,6.383554,Comparison with prior imaging for stability or change in conditions.,"Examples focus on interpreting current frontal or lateral images with reference to prior images, specifically noting stability or changes in conditions identified previously. They highlight descriptions given in terms of comparison in the context of previously described radiological findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3970256644118466,0.405,0.4227642276422764,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5874,latent_5874,8540,0.01708,0.026468558,6.7839546,Findings described in comparison to prior images.,"Activated examples consistently reference previously obtained images for comparison, using explicit terms like 'compared to previous' or providing explicit prior image dates. These reports detail findings relative to prior images to assess changes or stability, which is a common pattern in medical imaging reports.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+5875,latent_5875,34770,0.06954,0.03637885,4.8943014,Interval changes compared to prior studies in chest imaging.,"The observed pattern involves comparing current chest imaging findings to previous studies and highlighting any changes or stability, with explicit references to 'comparison' and descriptions of changes over intervals. Activation levels increase with the incorporation of detailed comparisons or interval changes over various previous examinations.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5360824742268041,0.52,100.0,100.0
+5876,latent_5876,7304,0.014608,0.008985764,3.6882617,Mention of tortuous thoracic aorta.,"The pattern exhibited by the high-activation examples is the notable discussion or reference to the thoracic aorta being tortuous. This particular finding appears more consistently in higher activation examples, implying that this model is particularly responsive to descriptions involving aortic tortuosity in the images presented.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,1.0,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5511165974638088,0.6,0.7941176470588235,0.27,100.0,100.0
+5877,latent_5877,10059,0.020118,0.012069115,3.7195807,Comparison involving both current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal.,"Highly activated examples focus on scenarios where there is a frontal and lateral view for comparison with a prior frontal imaging. The prompt includes 'the current frontal image', 'the current lateral image' and 'prior frontal image', indicating each view distinctly for documentation and comparison. The explicit comparisons to 'prior frontal' images correspond to high activation levels.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5368421052631579,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5878,latent_5878,77308,0.154616,0.08937134,4.445195,Emphasis on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"A key observation from these examples is how they mostly discuss changes or lack thereof over time with special emphasis on stable versus changing conditions comparing current and prior reports. The lower activation cases emphasize stable findings with minimal detail, contrasting the higher activation cases which explore interval changes or new findings explicitly.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5819110370193962,0.605,0.5714285714285714,0.84,100.0,100.0
+5879,latent_5879,4498,0.008996,0.012950837,5.864748,Comparison with prior image emphasizing the cardiac silhouette.,"These examples highlight changes or consistencies between the current radiograph and previous studies, but with significant emphasis on the specific feature described as the 'cardiac silhouette'. The activation levels are higher in examples that describe changes or stability of findings together with the cardiac silhouette's unchanged state.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5880,latent_5880,3474,0.006948,0.010385741,4.7228146,Focus on comparing current and prior images for changelog.,"Highly activated examples mention multiple images for current and prior, along with the instruction to provide descriptions for comparisons, indicating a focus on identifying changes or continuity across multiple imaging angles and time points.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5881,latent_5881,11668,0.023336,0.015360991,5.248337,Focus on changes in lung volumes in chest radiographs.,"Activated examples focus on specific radiographic findings indicating changes in lung volume, suggesting potential pathology such as opacification or effusion development. Keywords like 'low', 'elevation', and 'volume loss' are consistent in activated cases, indicating the focus on volume changes affecting lung function or appearance in chest imaging.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.625,0.35,100.0,100.0
+5882,latent_5882,8036,0.016072,0.013708042,4.9576035,Detailed comparison of current and prior findings emphasizing progression or stability of opacities or effusions.,"The examples showing activation describe a series of changes noted in the radiological report relative to prior imaging, with wording that emphasizes progression or stability of opacifications, effusions, or other lung pathologies in relation to previous studies. The reports which do not show activation have less emphasis on comparison or change over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5888888888888889,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5883,latent_5883,3394,0.006788,0.010538978,7.684051,Focus on stability or change in cardiac and mediastinal contours compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples focus on imaging comparisons across prior studies, particularly emphasizing changes in cardiac and mediastinal contours. The reports provide detailed findings on the heart's size and mediastinal stability compared to previous images, highlighting any remarks of change or stability regarding these features.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4941176470588235,0.42,100.0,100.0
+5884,latent_5884,4445,0.00889,0.011273944,7.8433394,Interpretation of change or stability in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"High-activation examples consistently involve descriptions of changes or stability relative to prior reports, highlighting intervals of status quo or developments. These examples use terminology indicating comparison like 'unchanged', 'resolved', 'increased', 'decreased', or 'new', emphasizing comparison with previous images to assess progression or stability, a typical practice in radiology to monitor a patient's condition over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.5661764705882353,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5885,latent_5885,6428,0.012856,0.02416378,7.5014234,Comparison of current images with prior images in diagnostic description.,"The examples that show high activation levels consistently include both current and prior imaging for comparison. Additionally, the instructions ask to provide descriptions comparing findings to prior imaging. This clear emphasis on comparison with 'prior frontal image' is a recurrent element in these examples.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5886,latent_5886,2584,0.005168,0.005579075,6.7867985,"Evaluation based solely on current images, often without prior image comparison.","The examples with high activation levels typically involve using current images for evaluation without previous images for direct comparison, particularly in assessing new findings, placement of devices, or describing specific lung or cardiac conditions. This suggests emphasis on standalone analysis rather than comparative reporting when prior images are unavailable or not the focus.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4782608695652174,0.22,100.0,100.0
+5887,latent_5887,18189,0.036378,0.025702871,4.299637,Comparative imaging evaluating interval changes.,"The pattern identified in the samples with high activation involves situations where multiple types of imaging are referenced, particularly when prior and current imaging are compared, often in a context suggesting changes or interval observations. This contrasts findings without previous comparison and those with a less specific imaging focus.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5888,latent_5888,11773,0.023546,0.014638115,4.517374,Detailed and explicit comparison with prior imaging highlighting stability or changes.,"Highly activated examples predominantly feature reports that provide a detailed comparison with prior imaging, particularly when changes or improvements in conditions are noted, or when previously seen conditions remain stable. This reflects a comprehensive longitudinal monitoring in the narrative.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5889,latent_5889,4449,0.008898,0.009676708,5.2169657,Comparisons of current and prior radiology images for interval changes.,"The analyzed examples center around radiology study descriptions, comparing current and prior imaging. This comparison is performed potentially with and without prior reports, for detecting interval changes like placement adjustments, tube positioning, and notable findings' evolution such as effusions or opacities. The consistent reference to ""comparison with prior image"" indicates this pattern.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3958333333333333,0.42,0.4428571428571428,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5890,latent_5890,26165,0.05233,0.022017825,2.3703437,Stable line/catheter positions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation predominantly involve findings that reference changes from prior imaging. There are consistent mentions of line/catheter placements and their positions being equivalent to previous observations, indicating stability, which correlates with changes documented over time as a key finding. This aligns with the fact that higher activations focus particularly when lines or catheter placements are explicit comparisons against prior imaging.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5238095238095238,0.22,100.0,100.0
+5891,latent_5891,112212,0.224424,0.15213694,5.550122,Complex analysis of findings through comparison with past imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe cases where multiple images (current and prior) are used for comparison. These examples seem to focus more on providing specific findings and contrasts between the current and previous imaging studies, which involves a more complex description of findings than those examples without such comparisons.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5892,latent_5892,37729,0.075458,0.0396497,5.282046,Comparison shows significant change or persistence in imaging findings.,"The samples with higher activation levels generally involve detailed and explicit descriptions of changes in the imaging findings compared to prior exams, where significant changes or recognized persistent findings are highlighted. The pattern reflects an emphasis on evaluating new developments or the stability of conditions over time.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+5893,latent_5893,7575,0.01515,0.011513034,4.1236844,Focus on presence or placement of medical tubes or devices.,"The focus is on the description and interpretation of imaging findings while often highlighting the presence and adjustments of medical devices or tubes, such as endotracheal, enteric tubes, or central lines. This reflects a continuity of care aspect and monitoring of device placements.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6791979949874687,0.68,0.6636363636363637,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5894,latent_5894,11327,0.022654,0.023409119,4.563437,Description of specific cardiac observations or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels include consistent or specific references to findings or changes in heart size, position, or structure. Other examples describe findings related to the lungs, vascular structures, or devices without highlighting significant cardiac detail or variation.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.475,0.19,100.0,100.0
+5895,latent_5895,50394,0.100788,0.046691425,4.584663,Explicit comparison to prior imaging and assessment of changes.,"High activation levels are associated with descriptions involving current imaging studies explicitly stated to be compared to prior images, as well as indicating the absence or presence of changes since prior imaging. Phrases like 'is unchanged', 'compared to prior' or 'remaining stable' contrast against other examples where comparison is less explicit or absent.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5896,latent_5896,6430,0.01286,0.015242014,6.1665173,Comparative analysis with prior images is emphasized in the instructions.,"The examples with high activation involve a direct instruction to compare or provide a description in comparison to a prior frontal image repeatedly mentioned in the instructions or rationale, suggesting the importance of comparative analysis with previous images rather than just description of current findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4725620020199753,0.53,0.5180722891566265,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5897,latent_5897,21642,0.043284,0.029645339,3.644475,Explicit comparison between current and prior images with stated changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples mention both current and prior frontal images and provide a description that includes specific changes or lack thereof compared to prior imaging. Such examples typically involve explicit analysis of changes in clinical features, eschewing vague findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5146966854283928,0.515,0.5142857142857142,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5898,latent_5898,3130,0.00626,0.014035687,9.706312,Comparison of current frontal images to prior frontal images for interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently provide comparisons between current and prior images, specifically described as frontal images. This pattern focuses on identifying changes or stability in the radiological findings between current and past images, often indicating specific pathologies in the context of previous conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5899,latent_5899,3647,0.007294,0.009095345,4.2982903,Interval change comparison of chest imaging findings.,"The examples that show high activation levels consistently exhibit a pattern of interval change compared to prior imaging, emphasizing differences over time such as 'unchanged', 'decreased', or 'stable' relative to past studies. This recurrent emphasis on comparison helps in identifying progression or resolution of chest findings.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+5900,latent_5900,16704,0.033408,0.020289125,6.8028045,Reports focused on interval changes in comparison with prior images.,"The examples exhibit explicit comparisons made with prior images to assess interval change or stability, often marked by phrases such as 'provide a description of findings in comparison to the prior frontal image' and variations acknowledging changes or stability in specific findings, suggesting a pattern focused on evaluating interval changes in radiological imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.4435483870967742,0.6626506024096386,83.0,117.0
+5901,latent_5901,7117,0.014234,0.014729817,4.8780565,Use of comparative analysis with prior chest images focusing on pulmonary changes.,"The samples with high activation levels include phrases specifically referencing comparisons to prior imaging, focusing primarily on changes in lung clarity, pulmonary markings, interstitial changes, or presence of pathology, along with any kind of procedural descriptions or specific lung or pleural changes. These are key elements in monitoring the progression or stability of pulmonary and chest pathologies over time.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4145871373503753,0.4170854271356783,0.4285714285714285,0.48,100.0,99.0
+5902,latent_5902,2646,0.005292,0.008735432,6.554982,Normal heart size and absence of pleural or pneumothorax findings.,"The high activation samples tend to describe the heart as normal and note the absence of abnormalities like pleural effusion or pneumothorax. These cases seem to focus on confirming a normal state in relation to lungs or cardiac silhouette, often in scans without significant findings that prompt further investigation. They consistently describe these regions as 'within normal limits' or 'normal'.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,100.0,100.0
+5903,latent_5903,4966,0.009932,0.008826756,5.7960258,Unchanged or consistent pacemaker lead positions across images.,"Highly activated examples often mention the presence of pacemakers or pacer leads, specifically noting their consistency or unchanged placement across images, which likely represents a key focus of interest or pattern in these analyses.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5655080213903744,0.61,0.8055555555555556,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5904,latent_5904,12344,0.024688,0.012910731,4.6940413,"Stable, worsened, or unchanged pleural effusions or lung opacities compared to prior imaging.","Higher activation examples involved descriptions of pleural effusions or lung opacities being highlighted as stable, unchanged, or worsened from prior studies, emphasizing temporal consistency or exacerbation, which seems to correlate with activation.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.628178072555522,0.63,0.6511627906976745,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5905,latent_5905,3808,0.007616,0.006455244,7.665346,Stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the stability or improvement of specific features (e.g., cardiomediastinal silhouettes, pleural effusions) when compared to prior imaging studies. These statements often conclude with a note of 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'improved', highlighting the comparative nature of the findings and stable conditions over time.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5342465753424658,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5906,latent_5906,9350,0.0187,0.012123898,4.1667457,Frequent references to stable radiological findings from prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently focus on comparative descriptions of radiological findings against prior images, emphasizing stability or change and including explicit mentions of the comparison and consistent use of radiological jargon related to unchanged or stable findings, while low activations describe new findings without comparative stability emphasis.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5907,latent_5907,4630,0.00926,0.0070020133,8.5402975,Mentions of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation levels above 0 frequently mention changes in imaging findings when compared to previous images. This contrasts with those examples rated 0.0, which either do not provide comparative information or describe no significant changes. The common theme in higher activation cases is the discussion of interval changes when such a comparison is available.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6542999574137629,0.655,0.5922330097087378,0.6931818181818182,88.0,112.0
+5908,latent_5908,15424,0.030848,0.015816202,3.9917374,Identification and comparison of unchanged or worsened pneumothorax or tube placement.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero typically contain findings of pneumothorax or tube placement issues, either with unchanged or worsened findings compared to previous images. These often refer to previous state descriptions, employing terms like 'unchanged', 'progressed', 'interval', etc. indicating potential concerns with static conditions, placement, or complications.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3922393641888733,0.48,0.4166666666666667,0.1,100.0,100.0
+5909,latent_5909,11076,0.022152,0.0217973,4.464253,Explicit directives for image comparison with prior studies.,"Among these examples, those with high activations typically include a prior report or a clear reference to previous imaging studies and include a directive to provide a comparison with findings from those prior images. This pattern allows radiologists to track changes over time to assess progression, stability, or resolution of noted conditions. The examples with lower activations don't consistently highlight comparison with prior imaging or lack a clear indication for comparison.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+5910,latent_5910,4140,0.00828,0.009678193,4.9160876,Emphasis on current versus prior imaging findings.,"Examples demonstrating significant activation levels frequently reference findings explicitly based on comparison with current and prior X-ray images, often mentioning changes or consistencies over time, as indicated by improved, resolved, unchanged, or similar pathological observations. This highlights the model's focus on recognising patterns of stability or alteration in radiographic features over time, indicating comparisons between past and current imaging.",0.4405919661733615,0.4489795918367347,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4153526859114309,0.4522613065326633,0.4697986577181208,0.7,100.0,99.0
+5911,latent_5911,16674,0.033348,0.013839112,5.477024,Descriptions of unchanged or stable findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically discuss changes between current and previous imaging studies, including intervals that demonstrate stability or improvement of findings like effusions, catheter positions, or consolidation. The use of phrases such as 'interval placement', 'unchanged from', and 'improved since prior', suggests the model responds to language indicating temporal stability or change compared to previous conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5074659434521026,0.605,0.2222222222222222,0.4102564102564102,39.0,161.0
+5912,latent_5912,3870,0.00774,0.009580972,4.913434,Use of both current lateral and frontal images with prior frontal image.,"Patterns identified involve the use of current and lateral images in addition to frontal images in comparison to prior studies. This setup often involves more comprehensive analysis and identification of complex or nuanced findings, resulting in high activations for these complex analyses.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5913,latent_5913,63817,0.127634,0.0893953,6.4236465,Changes in device placement or post-surgical findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to describe changes due to interventional procedures like tube placements or recent surgeries. They often include specifics of device positions or post-surgical findings, indicating a focus on immediate post-interventional changes rather than routine comparisons of unchanged findings.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5914,latent_5914,12000,0.024,0.019080918,5.9143553,Monitoring device position descriptions across images.,"The samples with a higher activation level involve descriptions where there is an interval placement or change in position of monitoring/support devices. This includes endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, or central catheters described in positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina and stomach. The focus is on tracking these devices across time or radiographic studies.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,100.0,100.0
+5915,latent_5915,20243,0.040486,0.020082647,2.7940154,Interval changes in lung conditions compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation all involve the identification of significant changes or intervals in findings compared to previous imaging studies, highlighting worsening conditions such as pneumonia and pulmonary edema, often under evaluation for interval change due to specific clinical indications like hypoxia or respiratory distress.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6323436831104732,0.635,0.6626506024096386,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5916,latent_5916,7085,0.01417,0.010165731,3.1187081,Comparison to previous imaging.,Entries with higher activation levels consistently include a comparison with previous studies.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+5917,latent_5917,31763,0.063526,0.0439961,5.9682755,Descriptions highlighting stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples mention imaging findings in stable or unchanged states from prior examinations, focusing on comparisons to determine changes. They prioritize comparison against previous studies, relying on explicit phrases like 'similar', 'unchanged', or 'stable' to describe findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5568825910931174,0.5577889447236181,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,99.0
+5918,latent_5918,1082,0.002164,0.0036337983,6.917789,Comparative analysis with prior images.,"The examples with high activation consistently include phrases that describe the current images in comparison to prior images, indicating that this is a common feature in these samples. It is a standard practice in radiological assessments to provide comparative analysis to assess stability or changes over time.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5919,latent_5919,2738,0.005476,0.0071240542,10.845163,Evaluating positions and stability of devices or structures between imaging studies.,"These examples focus on identifying changes or stability in device positions or structures, such as catheters, tubes, bones, and body contours, when comparing current images to prior radiographs. The comparison is essential in tracking device placement over time.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,100.0,100.0
+5920,latent_5920,4981,0.009962,0.012037591,6.0344343,Assessment of radiology findings considering limitations in imaging technique or positioning.,The examples highlight scenarios where the cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung conditions are evaluated considering certain limitations like technique or positioning. The model activates more for language emphasizing thorough comparison against imaging limitations or contextual analysis of technical aspects.,0.297470895222802,0.3,0.2727272727272727,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+5921,latent_5921,5875,0.01175,0.010385382,8.762412,Interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Reports with higher activations consistently mention comparative observations involving changes or stability of findings from current to prior imaging. This pattern highlights the interest in detecting interval changes or the lack thereof as crucial findings, particularly when new conditions or continued stability post-treatment are being assessed.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5922,latent_5922,4585,0.00917,0.008363599,3.9670582,Description of interval changes compared to prior images.,"These examples consistently include a directive to compare current imaging studies with prior frontal images, focusing on interval changes. Such prompts require evaluating changes over time, which is a foundational aspect in radiological assessments to track the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,100.0
+5923,latent_5923,2808,0.005616,0.008363318,4.566638,Comparisons emphasizing unchanged or stable findings from prior studies.,"Most instances with higher activation levels involve findings described in relation to prior studies and include terms like 'unchanged' or 'similar,' indicating stability, improvement, or lack of significant interval changes in medical conditions. This consistency in comparison emphasizes the focus on assessing stability or minor changes in subsequent imaging studies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4285714285714285,0.3,100.0,100.0
+5924,latent_5924,36869,0.073738,0.04803298,4.0264187,Provision of findings with specific medical indications requiring comparison to prior images.,"The pattern identified here involves providing detailed findings from current radiographic imaging alongside a prior report, with noted incremental changes or stability. Often, these examples involve specific medical conditions or post-operative statuses being monitored over time, using comparative language or direct comparisons to prior studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5925,latent_5925,5142,0.010284,0.008832624,4.268092,Presence of both frontal and lateral images for detailed findings comparison.,"Examples with high activations involve the presence of both frontal and lateral images, allowing for detailed descriptive findings. This is consistent across multiple cases. The pattern emphasizes the combination of image views while describing findings 'in comparison to prior', indicative of comprehensive radiological evaluation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+5926,latent_5926,32273,0.064546,0.028016709,3.9354157,Emphasis on stability or no significant interval change from prior images.,"Examples with higher activation consistently mention the presence of comparisons with prior images, especially when no acute changes are identified and/or findings are stable, which includes documentation of no significant interval changes or stable post-operative states. This pattern signifies the model's activation towards descriptions of stability or lack of change compared to previous images.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.581081081081081,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5927,latent_5927,9547,0.019094,0.01491232,5.201299,Detailed comparative assessment between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve detailed comparative descriptions of current and prior images, as indicated by direct references to image comparisons and specific phrasing for such comparisons. These emphasize changes or stability over time, a pattern consistently aligning with high activation scenarios.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4448750968968017,0.445,0.4432989690721649,0.43,100.0,100.0
+5928,latent_5928,11814,0.023628,0.013230318,5.8644385,"Postoperative changes, wires, and catheters in chest imaging.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of recent surgical changes, presence of wires and catheters, and a focus on post-operative detail, often evoking terms like CABG or sternotomy. These are radiological details linked to surgical procedures, indicating a pattern focused on postoperative changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5929,latent_5929,4893,0.009786,0.009073936,5.6466756,Focus on comparison with prior imaging results in chest studies.,"The model indicates a pattern where radiological studies consistently involve comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or changes in findings, despite different clinical and technical contexts.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3821439604572134,0.4,0.4253731343283582,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5930,latent_5930,3336,0.006672,0.0070821363,5.914368,Focus on evaluation of tube and line placement in imaging.,"The examples that exhibited high activation involve emphasis on procedural details, such as evaluating tube placement, PICC line positioning, or other intervention-related observations in various chest imaging. This focus on placement and stability of lines/tubes is a recurring factor in activated examples.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.55,0.33,100.0,100.0
+5931,latent_5931,2519,0.005038,0.007014594,7.494319,Descriptions of minimal or no relevant changes in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently report comparisons with prior imaging studies, noting little to no relevant change in findings. This pattern highlights the importance of stability or minor changes over time, especially in cases involving continuous monitoring of known conditions such as pleural effusion, atelectasis, or device placement.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6429918290383407,0.645,0.6260869565217392,0.72,100.0,100.0
+5932,latent_5932,6503,0.013006,0.009529317,5.4566903,"Bilaterally present pleural effusions, often with mild pulmonary edema.","The examples show consistent presence of mild to moderate pleural effusions, which are often associated with pulmonary edema. The effusions are frequently bilateral, sometimes with one side being more prominent than the other. This is a recurrent theme across various patient scenarios and imaging techniques.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6419270833333333,0.67,0.8863636363636364,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5933,latent_5933,2554,0.005108,0.0064976085,6.3767633,Use of both frontal and lateral chest images in evaluating findings.,High activation examples include evaluating for pneumonia and using comparative tolerance features with multiple simultaneous views.,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5934,latent_5934,2846,0.005692,0.007856468,4.587973,Comparison of current study findings with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels require providing a description that compares the findings in the current radiology study with a prior image. The pattern involves explicitly drawing differences or similarities between the current and previous studies, often within a context provided by a medical indication.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5935,latent_5935,3245,0.00649,0.010393865,4.7479286,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison with prior imaging demonstrating minimal or no change in various anatomical or pathological features, such as cardiac silhouette, lung opacities, atelectasis, or other described features. The lack of significant progression or change relative to prior study is a standout pattern.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4555555555555555,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5936,latent_5936,15389,0.030778,0.028335815,6.0358815,Descriptors of stability or interval changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly describe findings that are compared to prior imaging studies. They often indicate stability or changes in conditions over the interval between the current and previous examinations. This pattern typically involves expressions of comparison and interpretation of progression or stability over time, focusing on medical evaluation and monitoring.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.3076923076923077,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5937,latent_5937,8572,0.017144,0.019421613,5.489269,Frequent mention of medical devices or interventions with comparison to prior imaging.,Examples with high activations consistently discuss changes or comparisons following recent medical interventions. These reports frequently reference comparisons with prior studies to evaluate post-procedural changes and mention various medical devices like tubes and lines which have been placed or repositioned during the interim period.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5938,latent_5938,9225,0.01845,0.010820009,6.29088,Emphasis on changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The activation levels here seem to be influenced by the presence of changes noted in previous and current imaging studies, particularly when notable findings like pulmonary edema or pleural effusions are emphasized. This suggests focus on specific changes in consecutive imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.3305785123966942,0.6557377049180327,61.0,139.0
+5939,latent_5939,57216,0.114432,0.07283731,7.5944734,Dynamic changes or interventions noted between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe explicit changes in the patient's status, either clinical or related to the intervention, such as interval placement or changes in medical devices, or specific mentions of alterations since prior studies, indicating the model's focus on dynamic changes over time rather than static conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5876288659793815,0.57,100.0,100.0
+5940,latent_5940,4424,0.008848,0.011613702,5.0592976,Instruction to compare findings to prior image when prior is unavailable or unspecified.,"The pattern identified involves tasks where a description of radiological findings in comparison to a prior image is explicitly instructed, but the prior comparison is either missing or described as not available. This is illustrated by frequent mentions of a comparison being made to 'prior' images alongside an absence or indication that comparisons are not actually available for that assessment.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6138613861386139,0.62,100.0,100.0
+5941,latent_5941,52087,0.104174,0.058732245,8.115414,Focus on detection of change or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions that highlight specific interval changes or stability in pulmonary or mediastinal findings when compared to prior images. This often indicates the detection of meaningful changes or non-changes in the condition of the patient compared to previous examinations, which is crucial in the progression of disease or evaluating treatment response.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.3576158940397351,0.8709677419354839,62.0,138.0
+5942,latent_5942,2961,0.005922,0.008633109,6.5029116,"Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, no significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.","The examples illustrate a specific focus on findings that reflect a stable or unchanged state compared to prior imaging. Particularly, unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, heart size, or the absence of new pleural effusions or infiltrates are notable. These descriptions emphasize stability and lack of new significant changes.",0.4250070086907766,0.64,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5158902691511387,0.5276381909547738,0.5441176470588235,0.37,100.0,99.0
+5943,latent_5943,3369,0.006738,0.010226782,4.8682895,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples tend to describe findings with a comparison to previous imaging studies, indicating changes or stability in these findings. This pattern reflects the use of language that emphasizes variations or continuation from prior states, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'since prior', or 'compared to previous'.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3924330295498481,0.395,0.4070796460176991,0.46,100.0,100.0
+5944,latent_5944,15888,0.031776,0.014788448,5.115246,Comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Activation levels are higher when there is a clear directive to compare the current radiological findings against previous images, and a detailed change is noted such as improved or worsened conditions. Lower activation levels are observed when no substantive comparison is noted or when there is insufficient comparative data (e.g., 'comparison: none').",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4375617541992855,0.445,0.3971631205673759,0.6829268292682927,82.0,118.0
+5945,latent_5945,4547,0.009094,0.006118064,2.5752275,"Evaluation of changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images, particularly with medical devices.","The examples with higher activations consistently include direct analysis or comparison of current radiological findings with prior images, usually depicted in phrases that explicitly reference previous studies. This pattern prominently features the use of comparisons to assess changes or stability over time, which can often include evaluation of medical devices like ETT or central lines as well, showcased by their unchanged or new positions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.481101744259639,0.4824120603015075,0.4777777777777778,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+5946,latent_5946,24278,0.048556,0.026310872,5.922087,Requests for descriptions comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', suggesting a focus on the analysis of current versus prior imaging findings, even if control or baseline information is relevant (""comparison: none"") or if there's actually no prior image provided.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4045082081830131,0.4623115577889447,0.4753086419753086,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+5947,latent_5947,5960,0.01192,0.008645992,6.598325,Significant interval change or development compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of image findings that note significant changes or developments from prior studies, especially those indicating partial resolution, excision, or significant alterations in medical devices or pathology. Phrases such as 'interval removal', 'has decreased', and 'is unchanged in position' are key indicators of this pattern.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6247847652334815,0.635,0.7014925373134329,0.47,100.0,100.0
+5948,latent_5948,2710,0.00542,0.0048670117,3.639132,"Standard findings: clear lungs, normal cardiac silhouette, no abnormalities.","The highly activated examples involve describing standard radiological findings, focusing on clear lungs, normal heart size, and no pleural abnormalities, without mention of any acute cardiopulmonary issues or significant changes compared to prior images. These examples simplify reporting by emphasizing normalcy or stability, making them more representative of a 'standard normal finding' pattern.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7362012987012987,0.74,0.6935483870967742,0.86,100.0,100.0
+5949,latent_5949,17115,0.03423,0.017992476,7.570106,The model reacts to detailed descriptive findings when comparison with prior images is involved.,"Examples with higher activation levels indicate reports where there are descriptive findings or interpretations before whatever compares prior images. The model likely associates high activation with a pattern of comparison involving previous studies, which are specified separately. Higher activation occurs when prior data is available but not prominently summarized, and when detailed description of current findings is given.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4514516835407167,0.4623115577889447,0.2480620155038759,0.7619047619047619,42.0,157.0
+5950,latent_5950,2376,0.004752,0.0051159644,5.459939,"Stable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with absence of acute abnormalities.","Examples with high activation levels describe normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with no acute abnormal findings. This consistent pattern indicates that the model is activated by stability and lack of significant interval change when comparing current findings to past radiography results.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6874919951843028,0.695,0.648854961832061,0.85,100.0,100.0
+5951,latent_5951,7269,0.014538,0.017968176,6.2301893,Detailed comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels involve cases where there is a recurring focus on descriptions of changes or stabilities between current imaging and prior reports, often noting interval changes, stability, enlargement, or persistence of findings. Descriptions are frequently made for tests or regions under focus, but the crucial factor triggering activation is the comparative analysis with prior imaging.
+",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4037926801773591,0.405,0.3956043956043956,0.36,100.0,100.0
+5952,latent_5952,6521,0.013042,0.009615003,7.9385858,Consistent positioning of medical devices in comparison to prior images.,"Many examples mention positions or features that are unchanged when compared to prior images, specifically referring to medical devices and structures such as pacemakers, catheters, lines, and tubes. This suggests a pattern focusing on the consistent positioning of medical apparatus over time.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4126984126984127,0.268041237113402,97.0,103.0
+5953,latent_5953,10025,0.02005,0.013416232,3.158889,Descriptions of findings compared to prior images to assess changes.,"The examples frequently refer to findings on current radiology images being compared to prior images to assess for stability or changes over time. This involves using language that describes the interval changes between current and previous findings or lack thereof, commonly used to evaluate the progression or resolution of conditions seen in imaging.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4878048780487805,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5954,latent_5954,13457,0.026914,0.014077053,3.875091,Detailed anatomic report with explicit device and structure comparisons.,"High activation examples consistently mention specific anatomic details and changes, particularly regarding the positioning or state of medical devices or physiological structures such as tubes, catheters, endotracheal placements, etc. This pattern suggests a focus on monitoring specific medical interventions or anatomical assessments against a prior standard.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.5923076923076923,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5955,latent_5955,22436,0.044872,0.028971847,4.7507668,Mentions of diagnostic equipment or medical devices in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels reference specific diagnostic equipment or implantable devices such as chest tubes, pacemakers, ET tubes, etc., and their positions or conditions. These references are often critical in follow-up radiologist reports to assess positioning and function related to patient treatment outcomes or surgical interventions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5361305361305362,0.5577889447236181,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,99.0
+5956,latent_5956,12505,0.02501,0.035262328,5.342193,Described incremental or stable radiological findings on interval comparison.,"In examples with non-zero activation levels, there is a consistent description of incremental changes or stasis in radiological features compared to previous studies. This pattern highlights interval comparisons and ongoing monitoring of specific findings, such as unchanged, stable, or persistent conditions, rather than new or acute changes.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3882555170757602,0.395,0.3670886075949367,0.29,100.0,100.0
+5957,latent_5957,13484,0.026968,0.011025756,2.923182,Structured radiological comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing a detailed description of findings in comparison with prior images. These examples typically enumerate findings, highlight changes or stability, and offer impressions in relation to previous studies, addressing updates or progress. Conversely, examples with low activation do not structure the response with such clarity or comparison.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5958,latent_5958,13946,0.027892,0.018039888,8.706329,Discussion of interval change in condition compared to prior imaging.,"This analysis focuses on comparing findings to prior imagings which can explicitly change or highlight stable pathologies. Considerations like unresolved, stable, or worsened conditions often juxtapose with earlier data, reflecting the progression or regression of findings.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.3870967741935484,0.7741935483870968,62.0,138.0
+5959,latent_5959,13309,0.026618,0.015863359,4.3945932,Tracking of clinical changes via serial imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations predominantly involve analysis of present and prior imaging to identify changes over time, such as resolution or worsening of conditions. This encompasses mentions of stability, resolution, interval change, and comparison to previous radiographs, which are common in radiology reports focused on monitoring and verifying changes in patient conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5226274224414436,0.5527638190954773,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,99.0
+5960,latent_5960,4385,0.00877,0.00808951,10.13191,Identifying unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where prior imaging, findings, or changes are mentioned as 'unchanged'. This signifies that these reports emphasize stability or consistency over time, which is indicative of the activation pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4074074074074074,0.3548387096774194,93.0,107.0
+5961,latent_5961,3309,0.006618,0.008982953,5.5276995,Specific setup referencing current and prior images for comparison.,"All high activation examples include a detailed setup specifying the current and prior images, emphasizing the review process of radiographic images. This pattern suggests an importance placed on the combination of systematically referenced multiple images for comprehensive diagnostic evaluation.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.502274092508367,0.565,0.5380116959064327,0.92,100.0,100.0
+5962,latent_5962,5745,0.01149,0.010757248,4.36479,Comparisons with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss findings in the context of comparing current images to prior images, particularly focusing on changes or stability of identified conditions. These examples use phrases like 'compared to prior', 'similar to prior', or 'provide a description in comparison to prior', indicating a clear comparison of current findings against previous data.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3554655870445344,0.3567839195979899,0.3669724770642202,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+5963,latent_5963,9284,0.018568,0.014227296,4.137195,Complex medical history or indication for imaging interpretation.,"The prompts with high activation levels consistently involve specific context or medical indications for chest imaging that include detailed interpretation tasks, often with complex medical histories or conditions that require nuanced image analyses.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+5964,latent_5964,6736,0.013472,0.008613182,3.1242774,Minimal prior report details requiring independent description.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically lack available prior report details or possess incomplete comparison information, leaving the assistant to independently describe and compare the findings. Examples with enough comparison and prior information in the narrative show lower activation, indicating a different focus in those scenarios.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,100.0,100.0
+5965,latent_5965,5035,0.01007,0.012981305,6.5222993,Providing descriptions of changes compared to prior imaging.,"Primarily, these examples mention providing a description of current findings compared to prior imaging, indicating a focus on interval changes or continuity in patient's condition over time. Secondary findings such as lung volumes and atelectasis are occasionally noted but the core pattern involves verbal comparative analysis of imaging.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5371156957928802,0.5376884422110553,0.5327102803738317,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+5966,latent_5966,21778,0.043556,0.02797263,5.0896316,Comparison to previous image findings.,Activation levels are higher in examples where the radiological findings are explicitly compared with previous studies indicating some change or stability. This pattern of referencing prior comparisons regardless of explicit changes ensures a focus on the evaluation of potential changes.,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5967,latent_5967,3851,0.007702,0.0100100655,6.292531,Explicit directives to compare current to prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include specific instructions or notations to compare current imaging findings to prior images, denoting terms like 'compared to the prior study', highlighting the importance of interval change or stability in medical assessment, which is a relevant pattern in radiological reports.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,100.0
+5968,latent_5968,4670,0.00934,0.010265194,4.0145392,Requires comparison of current lateral image with prior imaging.,"The activated examples include instructions to compare both the current frontal and lateral images with prior images. This inclusion of both current and prior lateral views for comparison is critical for detecting the pattern, which distinguishes these examples in a radiological context focusing on detailed changes over time.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,100.0
+5969,latent_5969,11029,0.022058,0.033998247,5.7461743,"Reports of stable device placement (e.g., PICC lines, tubes) across images.","The pattern observed in the examples is centered around descriptive findings and comparison to prior imaging studies but specifically emphasizes the report of device placements, such as pacemakers, endotracheal tubes, or central venous lines, without abnormal findings. This aspect commonly generates reports in radiology when comparing new and prior studies focused on line or tube placements.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.25,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.4247151233543533,0.48,0.4473684210526316,0.17,100.0,100.0
+5970,latent_5970,5295,0.01059,0.0133196935,5.080005,Evaluation of interval change in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings that compare changes or stability in radiological images, indicating evaluation of interval changes between current and prior images. This focus on evaluating changes or stability over time is critical for these reports.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5971,latent_5971,187292,0.374584,0.28303826,3.950861,Changes or stability in findings over time on comparative imaging.,"The pattern observed is that these examples describe changes or stability over time by comparing current findings with previous imaging. These reports use date references, like 'compared with study of', 'since the prior', or directly describe interval changes, indicating a consistency in tracking progress, resolution, or new developments over time.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5997536945812808,0.61,0.5833333333333334,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5972,latent_5972,6401,0.012802,0.014015906,4.419075,Reports emphasize comparison to prior images.,"The pattern involves providing findings and comments on radiology images by actively comparing them to prior images, regardless of the specific radiological findings present. This is evidenced by high activation levels in reports where direct comparisons are made, even when the specific findings might vary.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3311389071757735,0.365,0.4068965517241379,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5973,latent_5973,12954,0.025908,0.013907547,3.4079776,Comparison with prior imaging is emphasized.,"Nearly all examples with positive activation levels include phrases indicating a comparison with previous radiology reports, such as 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', 'again noted', and 'in comparison'. Such comparisons are a key aspect of tracking changes over time in radiological assessment.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5974,latent_5974,27543,0.055086,0.024788668,2.673454,Observations of change or stability across current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions based on the current and prior images, suggesting a direct observation of change or stability in specific pulmonary or device-related conditions. These examples often use phrases like 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', or explicit mention of change in lung condition, device placement, or similar aspects over time.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.553030303030303,0.73,100.0,100.0
+5975,latent_5975,31908,0.063816,0.03866392,9.321238,Changes in patient status or intervention visible in imaging comparison.,"Highly activated examples involve either a comparison to a previous image or description of changes, focusing on interventions or clinical status changes. Moderately activated examples mention stability or minor interval changes.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.2454545454545454,0.5510204081632653,49.0,151.0
+5976,latent_5976,5446,0.010892,0.012508181,7.427074,Emphasis on comparative analysis with previous radiographs.,The examples with higher activation levels focus on describing findings by comparing current and previous radiographs. Sentences start with ‘As compared to’ or similar language indicating the analysis involves directly contrasting images for changes over time.,0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+5977,latent_5977,9867,0.019734,0.010939107,5.599441,Focus on comparing radiographic findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on comparative analysis between different images and consistently reference specific radiological findings' stability, updates, or lack of change over time. They often use phrases indicating a stable or unchanged condition of pathological findings from prior imaging studies.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4631984585741811,0.4723618090452261,0.4761904761904761,0.6060606060606061,99.0,100.0
+5978,latent_5978,10841,0.021682,0.013178206,4.666168,Temporal evaluation of change in medical imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in imaging findings over time based on explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies. This pattern is indicative of a focus on temporal evaluation in medical imaging, often essential in tracking disease progression or regression.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4580152671755725,0.6,100.0,100.0
+5979,latent_5979,5598,0.011196,0.013868571,4.400043,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently contain specific instructions to compare current image findings with prior images, highlighting any interval changes or lack thereof. This indicates the model's pattern of focusing on comparative imaging analysis with meticulous attention to changes over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5564516129032258,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5980,latent_5980,31036,0.062072,0.032132905,7.283569,Stable findings on sequential imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe stability or comparisons across sequential medical imaging studies, often with terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or showing interval changes. This reflects a pattern of interest in tracking progression or stability of existing medical conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.3297872340425531,0.484375,64.0,136.0
+5981,latent_5981,3260,0.00652,0.009453307,6.4640427,Analysis involves comparing current with prior imaging.,"The examples that show higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where the report requires a comparative analysis of the current imaging findings with a previous study. Reports that focus solely on current findings without explicit comparison tend to show lower activation levels. This pattern highlights the importance of observing changes over time or confirming constancy in prior known conditions, using phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'remains unchanged', or 'show slight improvement'.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+5982,latent_5982,3464,0.006928,0.0072271433,4.615093,Comparison and evaluation of monitoring equipment or tube placements.,"The examples with high activation levels involve evaluation or comparison of current and prior images, often mentioning monitoring/support devices or tube placements: ET tubes, PICC lines, NG tubes, or cardiac devices. Evaluations often describe positions, placements, or changes with specific measurements and the presence/absence of pathology or complications (e.g., malposition).",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+5983,latent_5983,4663,0.009326,0.012635988,4.6354666,Comparison involves current and prior imaging findings with interval change evaluation.,"The highly activated examples describe the evaluation of radiological findings using both current and prior images, emphasizing any interval changes or stability without the availability of direct comparative context or specific prior study details. The language suggests active interpretation and synthesis of current findings with limited prior context.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4996408045977011,0.507537688442211,0.504,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+5984,latent_5984,7747,0.015494,0.012667024,6.657667,Comparison requested with no prior images available.,"The high activation levels correspond to descriptions that include instructions or requests to compare current images to prior ones, often specifying that no comparison is available. This suggests an emphasis on making new observations without historical context.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7411035432769573,0.7437185929648241,0.7058823529411765,0.84,100.0,99.0
+5985,latent_5985,23244,0.046488,0.040579017,5.037369,References to the presence or evaluation of pneumothorax.,"These examples consistently refer to recognition of pneumothorax as a key finding or concern. They include varied contexts of the keyword 'pneumothorax', such as comparison studies, interval changes, or stability of pleural conditions, which demonstrates the model's sensitivity to this specific pathology in chest radiology.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4649122807017544,0.53,100.0,100.0
+5986,latent_5986,3691,0.007382,0.0073234765,5.0909977,Recognition of interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels primarily describe findings that have changed or remained stable, as compared to a prior imaging study, involving specific variances like worsening or improvement of conditions such as effusions, atelectasis, or device positioning.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+5987,latent_5987,8689,0.017378,0.029273875,5.903645,Explicit reference to comparison with a prior radiology study.,"Examples with the highest activation consistently reference whether a prior imaging study is used for comparison, even if specified as 'none available' or 'N/A'. This framing sets up a standard structure for comparing the new image with the old, a common practice in radiology to determine interval changes.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+5988,latent_5988,12121,0.024242,0.018396312,7.3526673,Comparative analysis with prior imaging indicating stability or change in condition.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include mentions of assessments or improvements of a medical condition based on the comparison with prior imaging, often indicating stability or change in specific findings. The emphasis is on tracking changes over time through comparisons, such as 'compared to prior', 'unstable', or 'resolving'.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.5702479338842975,0.69,100.0,100.0
+5989,latent_5989,4879,0.009758,0.014761132,5.015601,Comparisons of multiple concurrent and prior radiographic images.,"The examples with higher activation consistently include multiple image views (often specifically mentioning current and prior images) and reference comparisons between these images, which indicates that the pattern is related to examining and comparing different image sets for variances. This is likely relevant in assessments that require change detection over time across different perspectives.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+5990,latent_5990,15231,0.030462,0.020055285,3.7422435,Analysis involves both frontal and lateral images compared to prior imaging.,"These examples often discuss the integration of findings from images taken at different angles, specifically using both 'frontal' and 'lateral' views for comparison with prior imaging. This integration helps identify interval changes more comprehensively in chest examinations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4588235294117647,0.39,100.0,100.0
+5991,latent_5991,17685,0.03537,0.019917691,7.2100773,Evaluation of endotracheal tube or catheter placement in relation to previous studies.,Examples with higher activation levels describe cases where there is a focus on tube or line placement and its assessment with respect to previous positioning. These cases often mention the exact position in relation to anatomical landmarks such as 'above the carina' or in relation to a prior study.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5960257670051315,0.63,0.4533333333333333,0.5074626865671642,67.0,133.0
+5992,latent_5992,39757,0.079514,0.034332562,2.330719,Comparison of current findings with previous images showing stability or resolution.,"Examples with positive activation involve descriptions of changes or stability of conditions when comparing current images with prior studies, particularly emphasizing consistent or resolving pathologies, improved conditions, unchanged states, or specific observations noted over time.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.60984393757503,0.61,0.6145833333333334,0.59,100.0,100.0
+5993,latent_5993,2113,0.004226,0.013780609,10.32526,Detailed comparison with prior images indicating no significant changes.,"High activation examples consistently utilize detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing continuity or lack of significant change. This suggests the model activates strongly on scenarios where the comparison reveals stable or unchanged conditions over time.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5961538461538461,0.31,100.0,100.0
+5994,latent_5994,25419,0.050838,0.023359312,2.1406698,Emphasis on stable findings in comparison with previous images.,"The examples have higher activations when reports describe stable or unchanged findings compared to previous studies, indicating that emphasis on the comparison of images with prior exams is a key pattern.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+5995,latent_5995,36707,0.073414,0.03993868,4.143301,Radiological comparison involving recent or interval placement/adjustment of tubes or catheters.,"Examples showing activation discuss the placement or adjustment of medical devices (e.g., NG tubes, catheters) over multiple time points, which are pivotal changes in clinical evaluations involving radiographic imaging. These adjustments or placements are dynamic events and imply non-static conditions compared to examples where static conditions are described without a device being introduced or adjusted recently.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5696729957805907,0.5879396984924623,0.6440677966101694,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+5996,latent_5996,3241,0.006482,0.012046103,4.8518577,Comparison across current and prior images to assess changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve references to specific comparisons with prior imaging studies, indicating a focus on change or stability over time in the radiology findings. These reports often reference multiple images to identify progression or resolution of abnormalities, critical for ongoing clinical assessment or treatment decisions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5359888190076869,0.585,0.5515151515151515,0.91,100.0,100.0
+5997,latent_5997,8680,0.01736,0.013030135,5.27103,Comparison shows stability or lack of new findings.,"These examples generally revolve around comparisons made between current and prior imaging that lead to identifying stability or changes in findings. However, high activation levels in examples consistently involve descriptions of unchanged findings or stability in major structures, despite comparison.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+5998,latent_5998,5149,0.010298,0.008616786,2.8306298,Directives for interpreting or comparing image findings.,The high activation levels correlate with directives for generating radiological findings or comparing current and prior images. This pattern reflects situations where the model is expected to apply skills in interpreting image-based data and noting changes over time.,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3405089190513241,0.4221105527638191,0.4529411764705882,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+5999,latent_5999,30726,0.061452,0.025455544,2.2314215,Consistency in specifying comparison with prior exam.,"These examples contain consistent references to comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, which is a common practice in radiology reports to evaluate changes over time using specific language to describe stable or changed findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6000,latent_6000,13115,0.02623,0.01793643,6.5533533,Descriptions emphasizing cardiac enlargement or aortic abnormalities.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize descriptions where there's a noted cardiac enlargement or aortic abnormality (such as tortuosity, unfolding, or dilation) in the radiology findings, often noting these alongside normal mediastinal and pulmonary findings. These cardiac or aortic descriptors are prominent and suggest a pattern focusing on abnormal cardiac size or aortic structure interpretations contrasting normal structures.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.6376811594202898,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6001,latent_6001,28910,0.05782,0.0294807,3.4833455,Use of both current frontal and lateral images in comparison to prior reports.,"Most examples with higher activation levels describe a technique involving both current frontal and lateral images being compared to prior imaging reports. The examples explicitly mention making descriptions based on current frontal and lateral views alongside comparisons to prior studies, focusing less on specific pathologies and more on the process of analysis across images and time references.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.504097623635196,0.5125628140703518,0.5135135135135135,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+6002,latent_6002,8915,0.01783,0.011665839,4.5103703,Evaluation focused on interval changes or stability compared to previous studies.,"These examples prominently feature examination findings that are compared to previous studies for interval changes or stability in conditions. Activation levels are higher in reports focusing specifically on changes noted in findings compared to prior studies, whether it is stability or growth in lesions, devices, or any cardiopulmonary measures.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6003,latent_6003,2877,0.005754,0.0068361363,6.518089,Findings in imaging reports focusing on interval change or stability of chronic findings.,"The examples revealing activation are describing findings assessed in the context of interval changes or stability, especially focusing on interstitial processes or other notable changes like edema or nodules, indicating a pattern of chronic conditions being monitored over time.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5777539177339776,0.5829145728643216,0.5702479338842975,0.69,100.0,99.0
+6004,latent_6004,5169,0.010338,0.013020305,8.566288,Activities related to post-surgical or post-intervention evaluation with comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples frequently involve situations where there is a need to compare current imaging findings to previous images, often in the context of prior surgeries or interventions. These examples include specific status post (s/p) references such as post-thoracotomy, post-VATS, or post-radiation that require careful examination for interval changes or complications, indicating an emphasis on evaluation of surgical or post-treatment changes.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.5853658536585366,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6005,latent_6005,34171,0.068342,0.04077719,7.1241646,Limited evaluation due to image exclusion or incomplete visualization.,The pattern is observed in examples mentioning findings based on the provided descriptive image but note limitations or absence of certain evaluations due to image exclusion or incomplete visualization articulated explicitly in the report.,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5528455284552846,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6006,latent_6006,8596,0.017192,0.030498978,6.196055,Detailed radiological findings and comparisons indicating condition progression or stability.,"Samples showing high activation levels incorporate explicit indications and imaging techniques, comparison with prior images, and detailed findings often related to the evaluation or progression of existing conditions. They contain dense, characteristic radiological lexicon and use clear structural formatting of radiology reports.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6007,latent_6007,41024,0.082048,0.043549497,3.1935077,Evaluating changes in imaging findings through comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activations consistently compare current imaging findings to previous studies, highlighting changes or stability in conditions, such as catheter positions, pulmonary opacities, or pleural effusions. The pattern clearly involves the language of comparison to evaluate change over time.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5924955677277659,0.615,0.5782312925170068,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6008,latent_6008,9853,0.019706,0.013169792,4.727619,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently display a pattern of describing findings that are unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging, often highlighted in reports where the comparison is essential to assess the progression or stability of known abnormalities.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5444444444444444,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6009,latent_6009,21348,0.042696,0.04147569,5.400279,Explicit comparison to prior images for assessing changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels refer specifically to the use of images in comparison with previous images as a point of reference, focusing on describing changes or affirming stability in findings. This pattern is reflective of radiology reports that compare current radiographic images with prior ones to establish progression, regression, or stability of observed features.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6010,latent_6010,67135,0.13427,0.0697965,3.233958,Comparison with prior imaging and evaluation of changes.,"The examples with higher activation values typically involve providing a description of radiological findings along with a direct comparison to prior images, highlighting stability or changes in observed conditions. This focuses on an evaluative process between current and previously captured data, essential in understanding both progression and persistence of medical conditions from imaging studies.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6011,latent_6011,12558,0.025116,0.014606391,5.767714,Comparative analysis with prior images.,"Examples with notable activation involve a pattern of comparing current radiological imaging to prior studies, explicitly detailing changes or stability over time. This suggests that the model activates on comparisons involving previous imaging, which is crucial for assessing progression or stability of findings.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4076171004691882,0.435,0.4545454545454545,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6012,latent_6012,3793,0.007586,0.0076372665,5.407499,Focus on interval comparison with prior imaging for detecting changes.,"The highly activated examples mention radiological examinations comparing the current and prior images, using historical findings to assess changes over time. This pattern focuses primarily on the need for interval evaluation and comparison to identify pathological changes.",0.28,0.28,0.28,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4642929703372612,0.4673366834170854,0.4695652173913043,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+6013,latent_6013,4367,0.008734,0.01566812,5.787714,Mild or small changes in pulmonary or pleural findings.,"These examples all feature references to small changes or mild findings, particularly those related to pulmonary edema, atelectasis, or pleural effusions, using descriptive terms like 'mild', 'small', 'minimal', or 'trace'. Such language indicates a low threshold of change that is nonetheless worth noting and monitoring.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6014,latent_6014,64545,0.12909,0.06785733,5.3828983,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern involves findings that are described as unchanged or stable, demonstrating little to no change when compared to prior images. Reports emphasize stability of key features like the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal contours, lung field opacities, or noted pathologies such as effusions, fibrosis, or surgical changes.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6015,latent_6015,6281,0.012562,0.013173387,5.887637,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"Higher activation levels are observed in radiology reports that include explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies and demonstrate interval changes. Comparison phrases are explicitly present in many examples, and the presence of such phrases is consistent with higher activation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6016,latent_6016,6474,0.012948,0.010145548,6.786599,Emphasis on stability or enlargement of cardiac silhouette when comparing images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a detailed interpretation of cardiac silhouette (enlargement or normality) or mediastinal/hilar contours and their stability in comparison to prior images. This pattern implies focused attention on the heart and surrounding structures during comparative analysis as a key element in the data.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.509090909090909,0.28,100.0,100.0
+6017,latent_6017,4919,0.009838,0.009800187,6.2133026,Tracking interval changes by comparing current imaging to prior images.,"These samples are highly activated when imaging findings are compared to prior images, typically in scenarios where changes are tracked (e.g., development, stability, or resolution of findings). This pattern indicates the model prioritizes reports with descriptions that offer qualitative or quantitative comparisons to prior imaging studies.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6018,latent_6018,7018,0.014036,0.009232714,5.7462,Reference to stability or progression in findings on comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples that show comparison with prior imaging and contain specific phrases documenting stability or progression of certain findings, such as atelectasis, effusion, or vascular changes, exhibit higher activation. The pattern highlights interval change or lack thereof against prior studies, emphasizing continuity and management of pathological states.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.51728320194057,0.5175879396984925,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,99.0
+6019,latent_6019,3781,0.007562,0.0065819086,4.5956554,Comparison and detailed documentation of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the directive to provide a description of radiology findings in comparison to a prior image, specifically focusing on significant interval changes or adjustments, often related to acute conditions or post-procedural evaluations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6020,latent_6020,17158,0.034316,0.022182163,4.996835,Emphasis on stability or changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The activated examples describe scenarios where imaging findings are evaluated in light of previous imaging reports, emphasizing the stability or changes observed. The pattern is focused on comparing current findings to prior imaging and highlighting any relevant differences or the lack thereof. Examples with low activation lack this detailed comparative analysis or highlight unchanged findings without specific detail.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4651162790697674,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6021,latent_6021,6724,0.013448,0.011359327,4.292503,Evaluation of interval change or stability compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation involve radiology reports that consistently describe an interval change or stability of a known condition when compared to prior imaging, reflecting a focus on temporal changes or confirmation of findings over time.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5285714285714286,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6022,latent_6022,5205,0.01041,0.007066633,3.3392925,Higher activation with unclear or absent prior image comparisons.,"Examples with high activation are predominantly those with explicit requests to provide descriptions based on current and prior imaging, along with scenarios where either comparisons are not directly available or there is confusion regarding prior image references. It appears the model shows more activation when there is ambiguity or lack of direct comparison in requested reports.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5858562029828838,0.605,0.5734265734265734,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6023,latent_6023,11982,0.023964,0.018145321,5.1988792,"Focus on changes in tubes, catheters, or surgical interventions between imaging studies.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to descriptions of changes or intervals related to chest tubes, catheters, or surgical interventions noted in the radiology studies compared to prior images. This pattern is indicative of follow-up and assessment in patients with ongoing or previous surgical or interventional procedures.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6024688774976462,0.62,0.7068965517241379,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6024,latent_6024,4371,0.008742,0.011421577,4.8039336,"Focused analysis on pleural effusions, other pathologies compared to previous imaging.","The examples frequently include detailed changes or stability compared to previous imaging, focusing particularly on pleural effusions, consolidation, cardiomegaly, pneumothorax, and other lung and cardiac features. The consistent use of comparison with previous imaging distinguishes these examples.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.66,0.66,0.66,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6025,latent_6025,10017,0.020034,0.011236923,4.2494755,"Detailing changes or stability in medical devices, tubes, or conditions in comparison with prior imaging.","The examples with higher activations frequently mention specific pathologies or conditions related to heart or lung devices, tubes or interventions and often describe comparisons to prior imaging, with a notable emphasis on the status and implications of these comparisons. These features appear to trigger higher activation levels in the model.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.5897435897435898,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6026,latent_6026,8984,0.017968,0.016871171,3.8487484,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"The cases with high activation levels consistently mention both current and prior imaging comparisons, indicating interest in highlighting differences or stability between imaging studies. Higher emphasis is observed when there's a clear instruction or need to describe changes from a prior image indicating a medical follow-up context.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6027,latent_6027,4265,0.00853,0.010483467,6.337396,Synthesis of radiology reports from multiple views and prior comparisons.,"Examples with high activation all involve providing a radiology report based on a series of images, particularly where multiple views (frontal and lateral) and comparisons to prior images are specifically mentioned. This pattern reflects the complexity of report synthesis from multiple inputs compared to simpler single-view or less context-rich exams.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6028,latent_6028,3588,0.007176,0.0075762593,7.8219304,Focus on tube and line placement or adjustment in radiological assessments.,"The pattern shows high activation levels in reports that focus heavily on the placement, position, or adjustment of tubes and lines, such as endotracheal tubes (ETT) and central venous catheters. These findings are always emphasized as critical components in radiological assessments likely due to their direct impact on patient management.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6029,latent_6029,40728,0.081456,0.03959569,2.9346628,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in current vs. prior images.,"Samples with higher activation levels often mention comparisons with prior imaging and emphasize stable or unchanged findings. This pattern highlights temporal stability over changes across imaging sequences, which is commonly indicative of non-acute or chronic conditions being monitored over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6030,latent_6030,4615,0.00923,0.013760347,6.5370116,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging studies to assess stability or change.,"These examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing current imaging findings against a prior image sample within the same examination or day. They specify techniques (frontal and lateral views), and incorporate descriptions of consistent or subtle changes between images, with emphasis on the presence or absence of conditions like pneumothorax or pleural effusion, assessing stability or changes specifically against previous images.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4298544362874946,0.435,0.4453781512605042,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6031,latent_6031,3389,0.006778,0.007958398,6.497636,Use of multiple image views and specific comparison requests.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports that describe findings contingent on multiple images (frontal, lateral) and include specific comparisons to prior images. These components allow for detailed descriptive analysis, especially when changes over time or stability of conditions are discussed, often involving a systematic review format ('Provide a description...').",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4134897360703812,0.505,0.5027932960893855,0.9,100.0,100.0
+6032,latent_6032,112653,0.225306,0.14425917,5.3861904,Comparative assessment with previous imaging studies.,"These examples mainly involve radiology reports where findings are compared to prior studies, aiding in identification of interval changes or stability. This characteristic is highlighted regardless of imaging type or purpose, indicating a focus on comparative evaluation with previous images.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5146154675870995,0.55,0.5324675324675324,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6033,latent_6033,4238,0.008476,0.009436532,3.6475868,Radiological comparison with prior images for interval change assessment.,"Examples with high activation involve radiological assessments that compare current findings with prior images. This pattern is typical in reports where changes in medical status over time are important, especially with conditions requiring follow-up or monitoring.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6034,latent_6034,20024,0.040048,0.016919818,2.1316743,Findings compared to prior images showing changes or stability.,"In these examples, the radiological findings are compared with previous studies to identify changes over time, often describing stability or changes in specific lesions or conditions such as cardiomegaly, pneumonia, or atelectasis. The presence of a prior imaging study for comparison is a key feature of these examples, highlighting the focus on tracking and evaluating the progression or resolution of findings.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.6,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6035,latent_6035,5221,0.010442,0.011576326,3.599433,Explicit comparison with previous images when prior imaging is discussed.,"Highly activated examples consistently present previous imaging comparisons alongside findings from current imaging. The pattern focuses on evaluative descriptions of change or stability in findings when prior images are available for comparison, not merely the presence of comparisons.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4757281553398058,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6036,latent_6036,6327,0.012654,0.017417118,3.7858377,Emphasis on interval changes using prior image comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently use detailed comparisons of current and prior images to assess interval changes in findings. This indicates that the model activates more for cases where prior comparisons are emphasized, detailing what has changed or remained stable over time.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3877960658370132,0.39,0.375,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6037,latent_6037,3560,0.00712,0.0067787617,4.219477,Explicit comparison of radiographic findings to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern consistently provide interpretations of chest radiographs in direct comparison to prior imaging. They highlight findings related to stability or changes in lung opacities, device placements, or other relevant radiographic changes against previous studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6038,latent_6038,28649,0.057298,0.052999515,5.24816,Change or maintenance in lung/chest status upon comparison.,"Activation scores indicate a pattern exhibiting frequent or notable changes in lung or chest conditions upon comparison with prior imaging, often related to interventions, complications, or notable findings like pneumothorax or new pneumonia, especially after procedures or presenting with specific symptoms. These aspects prompt a notable change in the comparative analysis in radiology reports, triggering higher activations.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.5671641791044776,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6039,latent_6039,8909,0.017818,0.013499609,7.41405,Assessment of rib fractures or related injuries in comparison studies.,"These examples contain frequent references to rib fractures, which appear in various contexts such as historical mentions, direct observations on radiographs, and minute comparisons, suggesting a focus on identifying or monitoring rib fractures as part of the imaging assessments.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6725042324664872,0.705,0.9069767441860463,0.4148936170212766,94.0,106.0
+6040,latent_6040,29934,0.059868,0.052399285,5.3749146,Emphasis on changes in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations focus on the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, highlighting changes in medical devices, anatomical structures, or associated pathologies since the last image. This pattern involves tracking the status or evolution of conditions over time through successive imaging studies, often noting stability or changes detected.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6041,latent_6041,6555,0.01311,0.012724568,5.4757557,Comparison to previous imaging and interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe radiological findings with relation to previous studies, mentioning changes or stability compared to past images. This is a common pattern in radiological reporting to monitor conditions over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6042,latent_6042,29800,0.0596,0.029670214,3.9594617,Describes interval change or findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples showing high activation generally involve a comparison with prior images, combined with interval change descriptions regarding new findings or changes since the prior study. This comparative context and the mention of 'interval change' suggest a pattern in these reports where previous imaging provides context for assessing progression, stability, or resolution of observed features.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6043,latent_6043,3915,0.00783,0.008146552,6.1997538,Task-oriented comparison with prior imaging focusing on interval changes for specific complex contexts.,"Examples with higher activation showcase the presence of a directive to compare current images with prior ones, but crucially, they also explicitly state an intent to evaluate interval changes relevant to patient indications, such as evaluating new conditions or therapy responses, often related to complex medical equipment positioning or treatment outcomes. These examples emphasize a task-oriented approach beyond standard comparisons, often in contexts of medical complications or post-operative evaluations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.45,0.45,0.45,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6044,latent_6044,4101,0.008202,0.0072963433,3.799169,Request for comparison description between current and prior chest images.,Examples often refer to chest images with comparisons requested between a current image and a prior image. Some examples include prior reports with indications but retain a consistent request to perform comparative analysis. This indicates a pattern where comparative analysis is emphasized even if no previous images are available.,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3457272799808505,0.385,0.4228187919463087,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6045,latent_6045,5709,0.011418,0.010392737,4.127997,Compare current images with prior; report generation required.,"Examples with higher activation share a common prompt structure that involves providing a detailed description based on both current and prior imaging findings, as well as the explicit indication to describe findings in comparison to previous images. They often contain incomplete or fragmented report templates, emphasizing the need for report generation based on the images.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.4805194805194805,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6046,latent_6046,22337,0.044674,0.026271692,4.737658,Chronic changes over time or stable conditions in chest radiographs.,"Reports use terminology related to detailed changes over time often attributed to chronic conditions such as cardiomegaly, aortic tortuosity, and stable atelectasis. These terms suggest stability or comparison, but the distinct pattern here is the repeated observation of chronic or gradually changing conditions while excluding acute findings.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6262626262626263,0.63,0.6083333333333333,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6047,latent_6047,4207,0.008414,0.013847719,4.6825733,Emphasis on comparison despite unavailable prior images.,"Prompts with high activation levels emphasize the need for comparison in reports where direct information is either unavailable (due to the absence of prior images) or intentionally omitted. The model reacts particularly when asked to provide comparisons with prior images when the data is missing or not directly provided, highlighting a demand for comparison despite absent direct historical data from images.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5544554455445545,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6048,latent_6048,11759,0.023518,0.01394291,3.5071585,Interval changes in consecutive chest imaging comparisons.,"Examples that receive higher activation levels commonly involve a description of interval changes noticed in follow-up imaging reports, indicating the presence and the course of certain conditions such as atelectasis, effusions, pneumothorax, and so on. These changes are compared explicitly with prior imaging studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6049,latent_6049,15381,0.030762,0.019847283,5.32765,New or progressive findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples that show high activation levels involve new or undefined findings such as new opacities, intervals of atelectasis, or progression of previously noted findings, especially in comparison to prior imaging. This reflects the model's attention to new or clear changes in the condition as the central element of its activation.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6052232007288187,0.61,0.6410256410256411,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6050,latent_6050,5521,0.011042,0.0101721585,6.997066,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples focus on specific radiological findings and evaluate those findings against past examinations, often noting 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant interval change,' as well as revealing specific pathologies like pneumothorax or pleural effusion in the context of stability or comparison.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5285714285714286,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6051,latent_6051,69187,0.138374,0.07964331,5.24114,Mention of pleural effusion changes or stability.,"The examples show changes or stability in pleural effusions, either one-sided or bilateral. Many reports describe alterations in volume, new appearances, or unchanged conditions of pleural effusion, usually connected with other findings like atelectasis or infection.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5946666666666667,0.62,0.74,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6052,latent_6052,22092,0.044184,0.03082577,5.2041802,Focus on medical equipment placement and changes.,"Examples with activations indicating the pattern often involve findings specific to medical equipment placement, such as tubes or catheters, and their interaction or changes with respect to prior imaging or clinical expectations. This pattern emphasizes technical adjustments and critical changes in medical devices in patient management.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6698679471788715,0.67,0.6770833333333334,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6053,latent_6053,2997,0.005994,0.010914767,6.624209,"Stable or interval changes in atelectasis, effusion.","The highly activated examples frequently involve findings related to stability or interval changes in conditions such as atelectasis or pleural effusions. Terms relating to stability (e.g., 'unchanged',' stable') or interval changes of atelectasis ('increased', 'moderate') are consistently used in these examples.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6862030569895738,0.69,0.7435897435897436,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6054,latent_6054,30235,0.06047,0.027267419,2.9385335,Comparisons highlighting changes or stability in serial imaging.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve descriptions comparing current imaging findings to prior imaging, focusing on phrases like 'compared to previous', 'interval change', and terms indicating stability or change over time. These examples emphasize analysis of changes or stability over comparative images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6055,latent_6055,5558,0.011116,0.008294783,6.780481,Detailed comparisons between current and prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"These examples have high activation levels when the description includes a detailed comparison of the current and prior images, highlighting specific changes or stability in certain features or medical devices. The assistant's task often involves identifying even subtle differences that can indicate progression or stability of a patient's condition, which aligns with these prompts.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4201680672268907,0.5882352941176471,85.0,115.0
+6056,latent_6056,12398,0.024796,0.016454237,7.6519423,Stable cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours over time.,"These examples describe findings such as 'cardiac silhouette enlarged but stable in size' or 'mediastinal contours unchanged', which signify stability or lack of significant change in certain critical anatomical areas over time or between imaging studies.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5901639344262295,0.61,0.5416666666666666,0.4642857142857143,84.0,116.0
+6057,latent_6057,5573,0.011146,0.0086541185,2.841012,Focus on comparative analysis of present and past imaging findings.,"Most examples reference comparisons between current images, prior readings, or findings to evaluate changes over time. High activation corresponds to explicit directives for comparison or assessment for changes.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.40625,0.43,0.45,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6058,latent_6058,10124,0.020248,0.02857254,5.5129805,Comparison to suggest evaluations for potential conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include imaging findings that suggest or confirm evaluations for certain conditions, even when no meaningful change occurs between current and prior images. The presence of a comparison to potentially pathologic conditions appears to elicit higher activation.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3075192913249593,0.4723618090452261,0.4571428571428571,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+6059,latent_6059,10050,0.0201,0.013979258,4.3787527,Reports focus on comparison of findings to prior imaging studies.,"In these examples, high activation levels correspond to cases describing findings that often include comparisons to prior radiological studies, particularly those noting progression or stability in observable conditions, using terms like 'comparison', 'impression', and repeated mentions of comparatives such as 'since prior' or 'comparison with study of'.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6060,latent_6060,9953,0.019906,0.015626976,4.515993,Stable cardiomediastinal or hilar contours in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically include stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior chest imaging. These examples often feature descriptions of cardiomediastinal or hilar contours being unchanged, indicating routine and expected comparisons within radiological assessments.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.6190476190476191,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6061,latent_6061,9097,0.018194,0.011137976,3.334802,Evaluation of device position relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with high activations consistently describe the position of medical devices (tubes or lines) relative to anatomical landmarks, such as the carina or heart, indicating a detailed evaluation of their placement which is crucial in radiological interpretation of chest images.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5066983122362869,0.5276381909547738,0.5517241379310345,0.32,100.0,99.0
+6062,latent_6062,3585,0.00717,0.010827909,5.7411485,Stable cardiomediastinal/hilar contours compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation tend to mention the comparison of findings between current and prior images, and frequently note the unchanged or normal-mediastinal/hilar/cardiomediastinal contours. This suggests the pattern focuses on the stability of these anatomical features compared to previous studies.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,100.0,100.0
+6063,latent_6063,4033,0.008066,0.012857262,4.5721374,"Analysis involving current frontal, current lateral, and prior frontal images.","These examples consistently include both frontal and lateral chest images in addition to a prior frontal image, suggesting a pattern of comprehensive comparison utilizing multiple views to assess radiological findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6064,latent_6064,28555,0.05711,0.028749686,4.110482,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"The most common feature in higher-activation examples is the explicit mention of imaging findings in comparison to prior studies or discussions of interval changes, often using phrases like 'compared to', 'unchanged', or given specific intervals. This indicates that the pattern is responsive to analyzing progression or stability in imaging findings over time.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6065,latent_6065,15462,0.030924,0.028424008,4.8622284,Structured report with prior comparison and explicit findings.,"Highly representative samples mention a detailed description of findings and explicitly provide a comparison to prior above in a structured format before the findings. Additionally, these prompts include historical context, pertinent findings, and a direct impression that compares to prior reports, either explicitly or implicitly.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6066,latent_6066,3984,0.007968,0.008639629,3.7139142,Direct instructions to compare findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a direct request for a detailed comparison of findings with prior images or studies, often instructed by phrases like ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" This indicates the model is highly activated when instructions require evaluating or describing detailed changes over time between images.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6067,latent_6067,28502,0.057004,0.031356916,5.092075,Changes or stability in specific radiological findings against prior imaging.,"The pattern here involves the mention of change or stability compared to prior radiological findings, particularly when there is an analysis regarding presence or change in opacities, effusions, or other specific chest pathologies. This is indicated by descriptions of changes such as pleural effusions, lung opacities, or other findings when compared to previous imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.5166666666666667,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6068,latent_6068,5405,0.01081,0.008037074,4.2500043,Explicit details of changes or stability in findings between current and past images.,"The pattern identified pertains to explicit comparisons between current and prior images provided in the radiology reports. High activation examples frequently involve explicit details regarding changes or stability in findings between current and past images, which suggests that the model is detecting and giving importance to details about changes over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6069,latent_6069,2634,0.005268,0.009618014,5.9744163,Comparison of medical equipment position between images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to significant details about the position and comparison of tubes and medical equipment in the chest area, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, catheters, and nasogastric tubes. This suggests that the pattern involves detailed evaluation and comparison of medical equipment placement between the current and prior images, indicating stability, changes, or complications.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3583360991260095,0.42,0.2894736842105263,0.11,100.0,100.0
+6070,latent_6070,3602,0.007204,0.008951505,6.075523,Complete comparison findings between current and previous imaging.,"The pattern among the examples is that they often involve a description of findings comparing current imaging results with prior studies. However, the activation level never correlates with the presence of clear differential findings between current and past imaging, suggesting a pattern more linked to the completeness or clarity in comparative description phrases even in cases where details might be repetitive or partially obscured due to syntax variations.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.2142857142857142,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3732718894009216,0.405,0.3272727272727272,0.18,100.0,100.0
+6071,latent_6071,4530,0.00906,0.0132940095,4.433363,Multiple imaging views (frontal/lateral) provided for description.,"High activation is observed in cases where multiple imaging views, such as frontal and lateral, are provided for description and comparison. This likely indicates the model's strong response to prompts that involve comprehensive multi-view analysis, highlighting detailed examinations across different image perspectives.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6072,latent_6072,16972,0.033944,0.022546943,4.1962333,Reference to prior imaging with focus on device placement or changes.,"This pattern involves radiological descriptions combining references to prior imaging for comparison with detailed changes or stabilities in medical devices, specifically monitoring components like tubes or catheters, and any adjustments or insertions noted therein. The consistent use of prior comparison when evaluating medical device positioning and changes contributes to the activation pattern distinction.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6073,latent_6073,8778,0.017556,0.014561187,3.7578146,Requests for comparative radiology descriptions even without prior reference.,"The data consistently describes instances where radiological findings are attempted or requested to be contextualized in comparison with prior or baseline images, despite sometimes explicitly stating that no such comparison is available. This pattern aligns with standard radiological practices of noting changes or consistencies over time when possible.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5413333333333333,0.57,0.5466666666666666,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6074,latent_6074,12912,0.025824,0.016459662,8.745328,Comparative evaluation of medical device positioning or stability.,"Most highly activated examples specifically involve medical device evaluations or observations regarding the stability or positioning of existing devices in radiological comparisons, using terminologies like 'no change', 'stable', or 'unchanged'. These findings consistently highlight focus on changes (or lack thereof) related to medical devices between current and prior studies.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.58,0.3707865168539326,0.5409836065573771,61.0,139.0
+6075,latent_6075,5786,0.011572,0.016537542,5.505852,"Explanation of findings in comparison to prior imaging, focusing on 'prior report' status.","Examples with high activation focus on descriptions of chest imaging reports where the radiologist is specifically asked to provide findings in comparison with prior images, with a notable emphasis on 'prior report' and examination technique being absent or stated as not applicable. The prompt often involves the mention of prior frontal images specifically being compared.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4022713687985654,0.425,0.4460431654676259,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6076,latent_6076,3856,0.007712,0.008096431,3.959158,Historical context with medical abbreviations/shorthand.,Patterns in the activation levels suggest that the key feature for high activation is the presence of a historical context or follow-up scenario dense with medical abbreviations or shorthand. These elements indicate a specific format or emphasis in the dataset.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6077,latent_6077,7905,0.01581,0.015861945,6.642585,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiographic findings in complex medical cases.,"The highly activated examples often involve patients with multiple or complex medical conditions as described in their indications, and these cases typically need detailed monitoring and analysis. Lower activation examples appear to depict standard or routine assessments without such complex backgrounds.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.238095238095238,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6078,latent_6078,3757,0.007514,0.014102091,5.497413,Focus on observations from multiple imaging views for comparison.,"Examples that exhibit the pattern include references to specific imaging views (e.g., frontal, lateral) and requests for descriptions of changes or comparisons between the current and prior imaging. The descriptions focus on observations without specific prior report data or explicit comparative findings detailed.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6079,latent_6079,16574,0.033148,0.015183327,3.806666,Comparison focuses on stability or changes in thoracic contour and lung findings.,"The consistent pattern in these examples is the evaluation of thoracic structures with particular emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging for changes in conditions such as cardiomediastinal contour, pleural effusions, or lung opacities. The evaluation is usually conducted in the context of trauma or post-surgical states and often reiterates stability or changes over time, hinting at ongoing assessment rather than acute findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6080,latent_6080,5338,0.010676,0.009816847,4.2911525,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting stable findings or changes.","In these examples, the consistent element in activation is the presence of direct comparison with prior studies observing changes in findings. This often involves repeated reference to changes or lack of changes over time using comparison reports, indicating stability or progression.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4907407407407407,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6081,latent_6081,16420,0.03284,0.019671991,5.450022,Unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation describe or imply unchanged findings in comparison to the prior images. These reports demonstrate stability or lack of change over time, indicating that the model identifies unchanged findings as the common pattern among high activation cases.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5384615384615384,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6082,latent_6082,2357,0.004714,0.006516487,6.4570546,Direct instruction to compare current images with prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include the task of comparing current imaging with prior studies. This statement directly instructs providing a comparison, which matches the pattern observed in Example 2 specifically.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5176470588235295,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6083,latent_6083,7438,0.014876,0.015747221,4.427495,Explicit detailed evaluation of findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed descriptions or comparisons between current and prior images in radiological studies. This pattern reflects a focus on evaluating changes over time, often noting specific alterations such as worsening opacities or stability in findings. The present tense and explicit descriptions of changes compared to priors are key indicators in these cases.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4316441299128017,0.4321608040201005,0.4339622641509434,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+6084,latent_6084,16455,0.03291,0.01686979,5.9448566,Minimal change or improvement compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently reference prior imaging, indicating that the pattern may involve comparison with earlier studies. However, they do not show a high activation level because they lack notable, significant changes or improvements in findings, and that is the specific pattern of interest.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6323436831104732,0.635,0.5978260869565217,0.6043956043956044,91.0,109.0
+6085,latent_6085,4157,0.008314,0.014949077,5.403402,Explicit comparison to prior images regarding findings or stability.,"Examples with high activation involve references in the findings or impression sections to changes or stability noted between current images and prior images. These often discuss direct comparison aspects concerning specific findings, indicative of follow-up or monitoring context.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3649841246031151,0.365,0.3636363636363636,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6086,latent_6086,11656,0.023312,0.013207463,4.734519,Comparison of current and prior radiology images for change assessment.,"The examples have high activation when comparing a current radiology image with a prior one. Observations about differences or lack of changes between the two images seem crucial. High activation examples include detailed comparisons indicating stability or changes over time, which is a key concept in radiological analysis.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6087,latent_6087,14856,0.029712,0.01647653,4.9732423,Pulmonary vascular congestion without overt edema.,"The pattern is focused on findings that discuss pulmonary vascular congestion and cardiomegaly, without accompanying edema or acute changes. This is often observed in radiology analyses when mildly increased cardiovascular findings are noted without the urgency of acute pulmonary edema or effusion.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6796196775527077,0.69,0.796875,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6088,latent_6088,13202,0.026404,0.018618291,4.580015,Emphasis on interval changes between imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on comparing current chest imaging findings with prior images, often emphasizing any changes or stability in pathological findings over time. This suggests that the analysis of interval changes or the detection of stable findings across temporal studies is likely part of the desired pattern.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4301075268817204,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6089,latent_6089,4918,0.009836,0.0118719535,3.8401,Requests for description of comparisons between current and prior images.,"Patterns of high activation involve requests or instructions to provide a description of the current images in comparison with previous ones, especially when these are explicitly stated in the text. The instructions involve analyzing changes, stability, or improvements between images, which likely triggers the activation pattern.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4136519526496294,0.47,0.4814814814814814,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6090,latent_6090,22796,0.045592,0.019708397,3.1648195,Significant changes or progression in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a detailed description of changes in radiological findings when compared to previous images, indicating a clear shift or progression in findings. These examples use explicit comparison language to highlight changes, such as interval increase in a pleural effusion or new findings like additional atelectasis or effusions.",0.4583333333333333,0.4693877551020408,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5186110027311744,0.5326633165829145,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,99.0
+6091,latent_6091,6510,0.01302,0.015230658,6.713396,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette without abnormalities.,"The examples that exhibited higher activation levels involve bilateral evaluation of frontal and lateral chest images provided, with descriptions that mention no pleural effusion, no pneumothorax, and the cardiac silhouette as normal or mildly enlarged. These examples consistently mentioned the cardiomediastinal silhouette as being normal or stable, which is the pattern recognized here.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6092,latent_6092,5602,0.011204,0.009173012,3.710396,Absence or inadequacy of prior comparison imaging data.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the lack of availability, inadequacy, or missing status of prior comparison images, making it difficult to detect changes. This is a significant issue in radiology reporting as comparisons are essential for detecting potential changes or anomalies over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6093,latent_6093,1975,0.00395,0.0053734975,6.800164,Evaluating changes in findings across multiple image comparisons.,"High activations are associated with cases where multiple images were compared, such as with prior radiographs or CT scans, to evaluate for changes in findings. Comparisons lead to substantial narrative on progression, resolution, or consistency of pathology, which the model is highly activated upon.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5047236895570906,0.507537688442211,0.5043478260869565,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+6094,latent_6094,16779,0.033558,0.022660716,8.0235195,Descriptions of interval changes or procedural interventions between compared images.,"The cases with higher activations reference changes or comparisons between subsequent images, often highlighting subtle or specific changes such as therapeutic interventions or recently placed devices, including intervals showing improvement, reduction, or worsening of conditions. The attention is drawn to phrases describing specific interval changes or new interventions observed in comparison to prior studies.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5226130653266332,0.5226130653266332,0.4561403508771929,0.611764705882353,85.0,114.0
+6095,latent_6095,10158,0.020316,0.016880449,5.766829,Findings comparison to prior imaging.,"Comparison with prior images is a common practice in radiology to assess changes or stability in findings such as lesions, masses, and other anatomical features. High activation values are associated with examples where descriptions explicitly involve assessments based on previous imaging findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6096,latent_6096,11757,0.023514,0.012372561,3.024844,Detailed comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on describing pulmonary or other medical findings in relation to prior images or evaluations, using phrases like 'in comparison with the study of' and descriptions of changes such as 'increased opacity' or 'unchanged'. This linguistic structure implies detailed observation and comparison with previous reports.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4622572417102305,0.4623115577889447,0.4653465346534653,0.47,100.0,99.0
+6097,latent_6097,48257,0.096514,0.08420094,6.7291074,Comparative analysis with prior imaging for changes or stability.,"These examples consistently compare current imaging findings with prior images. The distinct pattern involves analyzing changes or stability between current and historical radiological studies, with language indicating 'comparison' and descriptions addressing differences or consistency with previous reports.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6098,latent_6098,3846,0.007692,0.012565603,4.8648844,Explicit descriptions of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation all include explicit descriptions of changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior imaging. These examples typically reference specific, observable changes (or lack thereof) from previous studies, which is a common practice in radiology to determine the progression or resolution of a condition.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4118226600985222,0.4120603015075377,0.4134615384615384,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+6099,latent_6099,10039,0.020078,0.02045464,3.337696,Explicit directives to compare current and prior images in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include a directive to provide detailed findings and comparisons between the current and prior images. This suggests high attention to evaluating any changes or stability in medical imaging, which is a critical aspect of radiological analysis.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6100,latent_6100,10768,0.021536,0.0253858,4.546395,"Descriptions of unchanged findings compared to prior images, indicating stability.","The pattern describes comparisons with prior images leading to findings that are unchanged or similar over time, indicating stability or no interval change. The radiology observations emphasize unchanged areas or structures, sometimes noting previous procedures or conditions (e.g., surgery wires or medical devices) as seen in unchanged positions, highlighting stability rather than acute changes.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4918032786885246,0.3,100.0,100.0
+6101,latent_6101,25000,0.05,0.068647854,9.374398,Comparison of medical devices' positions with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve changes or comparisons related to medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) in the thoracic area, often detailing their positions and any adjustments needed compared to prior images. This aligns with the significant clinical attention given to the positioning of such devices over time.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.614448051948052,0.62,0.6578947368421053,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6102,latent_6102,4920,0.00984,0.009366789,4.042577,Involves description of findings using lateral and frontal images.,"These examples specify the use of frontal and lateral images for comparison, often emphasizing changes or findings in current images relative to the prior frontal images.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6103,latent_6103,46671,0.093342,0.04784995,3.864164,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate interval change or stability.,"The examples highlight radiological reports that reference findings in relation to or in comparison with prior studies, either noting changes or stability. This evaluation often highlights potential pathologies based on interval changes or stability of findings. Use of past and current comparison as a narrative device is consistent across activated examples, emphasizing ongoing assessments for clinical significance.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5107240008369951,0.5276381909547738,0.5182481751824818,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+6104,latent_6104,47057,0.094114,0.05082433,4.70295,Focus on changes or stability compared to previous imaging.,"The samples with higher activation levels frequently mention changes or stability of pulmonary or cardiac features compared with the patient's previous imaging, often focusing on ongoing medical devices, pleural or lung opacities, and cardiomegaly, indicating typical attention to comparing current with past images for potential changes.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6105,latent_6105,3109,0.006218,0.014415722,7.0760813,Mentions and descriptions of atelectasis.,"Examples with high activation consistently describe findings related to atelectasis, with common references to ""atelectasis"" or related terminology in the findings which likely contributes to the model recognizing a pattern associated with these instances. This is why examples explicitly commenting on atelectasis have high activation scores regardless of their specifics in other disease findings or indications.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8785302156088672,0.88,0.8114754098360656,0.99,100.0,100.0
+6106,latent_6106,17120,0.03424,0.020510653,6.1585836,Significant interval change in radiological findings between current and prior images.,"The consistent element in these samples is a marked change in the findings between the current and prior imaging. This often involves a worsening condition or a significant new finding rather than stability or minor changes. Examples mention changes in pneumonia, edema, or pneumothorax severity.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6937059074590144,0.695,0.7241379310344828,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6107,latent_6107,7501,0.015002,0.028956883,6.782933,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting stability or change.,"These examples assess the radiology findings with emphasis on comparison to previous imaging. The focus is on changes observed over time, indicated by descriptors like 'unchanged', 'interval', 'stable', or specific terms pointing out differences such as 'improvement', 'increase', 'reduction'. Radiology reports often highlight stability or changes in clinical findings, especially in follow-up scenarios.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6108,latent_6108,11089,0.022178,0.014645589,5.091284,Findings of pulmonary vascular congestion or pulmonary edema.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include findings of pulmonary vascular congestion and pulmonary edema or relate to conditions suggesting heart and lung interaction. These are common patterns associated with issues like heart failure, fluid overload, or pulmonary hypertension.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.8518518518518519,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8649696181640869,0.865,0.8762886597938144,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6109,latent_6109,1990,0.00398,0.0051934784,7.925286,Instructions to compare current images to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include references to current images as well as prior image studies, emphasizing the need to describe findings by comparing the prior and current images, even if no changes are observed. This pattern highlights a focus on the comparison aspect as part of the image evaluation process.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4781212364512244,0.48,0.4821428571428571,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6110,latent_6110,3228,0.006456,0.011679448,6.092513,Reports compare current images with prior images for changes or stability.,"These examples are primarily focused on evaluating radiological findings in comparison to prior images. The presence of a 'prior frontal image' is a key element, and the task is to identify 'changes or stability' in medical conditions, such as placement of lines, lung conditions, etc. These reports detail either ""no change"" or ""interval change"" observed in comparison.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6111,latent_6111,3244,0.006488,0.006726828,4.3776274,Focus on interval changes in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations consistently include observations of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies. This typically involves a focus on any new findings, changes, or stability over time. This pattern is indicative of radiological focus on changes between sequential imaging studies, which provide insights into disease progression or response to treatment.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5701754385964912,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6112,latent_6112,3188,0.006376,0.012982813,4.994643,Comparative analysis of current and prior images in radiology prompts.,"The examples consistently involve an approach where findings from a current image are to be described relative to one or more prior images across various viewpoints, with these comparisons being explicitly requested in a structured format, often with placeholders for historical imaging dates or references. This is indicative of a pattern of requesting comparative analysis between historical imaging studies and current imaging.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6113,latent_6113,2476,0.004952,0.012904424,10.84408,Presence of explicit comparison between current and prior images in scenarios involving acute processes or evaluations for structural changes.,"This set of examples involves the presence of both current and prior image comparisons consistently across examples and relates to scenarios involving imaging for acute processes, structural assessments, or evaluations for changes in specific conditions, which are expected to be assessed. The activation levels correlate with the linguistic pattern of explicitly mentioned prior images, indicating a focus on descriptions involving current exam results compared with historical findings.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.5,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6114,latent_6114,22962,0.045924,0.02272501,3.7205927,Comparison of device placement or image findings with prior studies.,"The examples that show higher activation typically involve findings or changes in radiological devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or structures that are explicitly compared to a prior image or report. They focus on evaluating or verifying the proper placement and changes between images.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.545442098633588,0.585,0.5534591194968553,0.88,100.0,100.0
+6115,latent_6115,14104,0.028208,0.038227722,7.0440855,Specific comparative analysis with prior images in structured reports.,"Most examples with high activation levels focus on structured radiology reports that include detailed, specific, comparative analysis with previous images or studies. These reports often specify changes in lung or cardiac features, presence or alteration of medical devices, or stable features over time. This context-driven, comparative analysis seems to trigger higher activation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6116,latent_6116,4735,0.00947,0.011064414,5.267432,"Image findings described in comparison to prior images, often highlighting interval changes.","Highly activated examples involve providing descriptions or comparing findings of images with prior images, often mentioning the need for evaluation of interval change, indicating that comparison is key to the results described.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6117,latent_6117,4158,0.008316,0.009480836,5.3441415,Requests for detailed image comparison without auxiliary information.,"The examples with higher activation often have a comparison with prior imaging and include a request for a detailed description of findings in the radiology study, along with consistent reference phrases indicating a review of changes since the previous image, but often lack additional auxiliary information to help with decision making, as indicated by the typical phrasing including 'Provide a description of the findings'.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6118,latent_6118,5222,0.010444,0.012935903,7.009186,Specific measurements of tubes/lines in relation to carina.,"Activation levels are higher for examples that provide explicit measurements of tubes, lines, or catheters in relation to anatomical landmarks, particularly at or around the carina. These specifics are crucial in reporting to ensure accurate placement within the body, and the examples use exact distances or positions from the carina.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7406369955389562,0.75,0.9032258064516128,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6119,latent_6119,2697,0.005394,0.008668403,5.892206,"Aortic tortuosity, enlargement, or associated findings.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe aortic tortuosity, enlargement or associated findings in chest imaging. Phrases such as 'tortuous', 'calcified and tortuous', or similar descriptors around the aorta appear commonly in these examples, suggesting a pattern that triggers higher activation, likely focusing on these aortic characteristics.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6116923740696796,0.64,0.8043478260869565,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6120,latent_6120,8351,0.016702,0.013431473,6.906997,Comparative description of imaging findings with prior studies.,"These high-activation examples consistently describe the findings by referring to previous imaging studies and noting stability or changes over time, specifically highlighting descriptions in direct comparison to prior images often using phrases like 'since prior' or 'compared to'. This pattern involves thorough temporal comparison for clinical assessment.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6121,latent_6121,4793,0.009586,0.012550493,4.9134746,Emphasis on descriptive comparison to prior imaging specifically requested.,"Examples with high activation all involve cases where there is an explicit mention of providing a description in comparison to previous imaging studies, typically asking to detail interval changes, this focus on comparing current findings specifically linked to a trigger like post-procedure change or clinical indication correlates with high activation.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6122,latent_6122,8569,0.017138,0.012608201,4.8495245,Comparison of radiographs for changes in medical device placement.,"The examples with higher activations involve comparisons between current radiographs and previous ones, leading to observations about changes (or lack thereof) in tube placements or other interventions/devices. This pattern suggests the model is focusing on changes in medical apparatus or device positioning in sequential imaging.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5710848415106182,0.59,0.6551724137931034,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6123,latent_6123,3285,0.00657,0.008920613,7.644449,Focus on complex medical procedures and related evaluations.,"The examples that have high activations contain references to specific, complex medical procedures (e.g., CABG, sternotomy, coronary artery stenting) and subsequent or related evaluations/changes. These specific medical histories seem to drive the awareness for describing changes in context over exams.",0.6524822695035462,0.6530612244897959,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6124,latent_6124,4392,0.008784,0.010046705,9.101216,Stable cardiopulmonary findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels possess clear descriptions of consistent or stable cardiac or lung findings across multiple imaging comparisons. These findings reiterate that there is no change or only stable appearances in the current study compared with previous imaging, which is a typical structure in follow-up radiology reports.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5542168674698795,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6125,latent_6125,11215,0.02243,0.013766197,5.202065,Reports lack or have minimal historical image comparison.,The examples with higher activation levels often lack a 'comparison' section or detail explicit comparisons with previous imaging results. The focus seems to be on standalone findings without historical context included in the reports. This pattern differs from typical radiology reports which often rely on comparisons to note changes or stability across imaging studies.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6126,latent_6126,163344,0.326688,0.29172382,5.936146,Emphasis on interval or comparison changes in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to summarize changes and findings in relation to prior imaging studies. They compare intervals, highlight interval changes, or confirm stabilization or progression, focusing on elements like tubes, pleural effusions, and changes in lung opacities or structure.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5108755979596691,0.5326633165829145,0.5211267605633803,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+6127,latent_6127,43371,0.086742,0.04681454,6.628227,Monitor for change or device placement compared to previous imaging.,"In cases where a prior examination is available for comparison, findings often note changes or stability in a condition, device placement, or features like effusions or atelectasis. Activations are higher when there's specific mention of change or monitoring of specific elements like a catheter or effusion compared with a prior image.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5793334052421529,0.61,0.5569620253164557,0.9166666666666666,96.0,104.0
+6128,latent_6128,45546,0.091092,0.0631021,5.403117,Comparison of multiple chest views to prior imaging studies for changes.,"Instances with higher activation frequently discuss findings upon multiple views, noting specific changes and comparisons with previous imaging, even if those findings seem trivial or stable. Notably, lung conditions and medical devices aren't consistently tied to high activation levels, which doesn't significantly alter context as long as changes or stable monitorings from previous instances are acknowledged.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6129,latent_6129,5098,0.010196,0.016823566,5.02075,Current frontal and lateral image findings are described.,"These examples consistently provide findings based on both frontal and lateral images, often with reference to prior images when applicable. The presence of both current frontal and lateral views is a common procedural instruction for thorough radiological examination and reporting.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6130,latent_6130,32486,0.064972,0.037311636,4.373352,Emphasis on lung opacities and changes over time in imaging context.,"The examples showing higher activation levels focus on descriptions that clarify changes in lung opacity or condition over different imaging sessions or identify unchanged states in other anatomical structures. Comparisons with previous images or mention of changes in opacities such as pneumonia or consolidation, often linked to specific clinical concerns, appear important, as they suggest designing workflow adaptations for progressing conditions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6260158472165787,0.628140703517588,0.6547619047619048,0.55,100.0,99.0
+6131,latent_6131,49309,0.098618,0.054884803,3.6808765,Emphasis on stable findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples show references to the stability of specific findings, like effusions or devices, compared to previous imaging. Emphasis is on describing a 'no change' or 'stable' status relative to prior images, which aligns with the known pattern in imaging reports when tracking chronic conditions or verifying the position of medical devices.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5977011494252874,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6132,latent_6132,7736,0.015472,0.010025743,4.1347995,Radiological focus on device positioning or movement in chest imaging.,"These examples describe findings in relation to the placement, positioning, or change in medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or pacemakers identified within the chest radiographs. Keywords like 'ET tube', 'catheter', 'pacemaker', or 'lead' frequently occur, indicating focus on device assessment.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7386340674883816,0.7386934673366834,0.7281553398058253,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+6133,latent_6133,12208,0.024416,0.018680466,4.895526,Comparison with prior imaging showing differences or stability.,The examples with high activation levels describe an explicit comparison with prior imaging studies. They often describe changes or lack thereof in the findings of current images relative to previous exams. Some even specify elements such as unchanged enlargement of structures.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5463917525773195,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6134,latent_6134,29292,0.058584,0.045954954,6.811135,Detailed radiographic changes or findings compared to previous images.,"The examples describe radiology reports where findings are compared against both current and prior images. The pattern is the focus on detailed imaging findings, such as ""multifocal airspace opacification,"" ""new consolidation,"" or ""stable cardiomegaly,"" which deviate from unchanged or normal status, unlike reports noting stability or normalcy which have lower activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6135,latent_6135,7949,0.015898,0.0122465445,4.6726522,Patchy opacities or infiltrates in lung fields.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe the presence of patchy or regionally distributed opacities in lung fields, often in association with atelectasis, pleural effusion, or other pathologies. The use of terms like 'patchy', 'linear', or complex opacities denotes this diagnostic focus.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6233915681556648,0.64,0.7413793103448276,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6136,latent_6136,14378,0.028756,0.036445484,5.066159,Comparison with prior studies highlighting changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently discuss the findings in the context of comparisons with prior studies, often identifying stability, progression, or new developments of specific findings. This pattern is indicative of radiological evaluations that emphasize changes over time.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5149878746968675,0.515,0.5148514851485149,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6137,latent_6137,4676,0.009352,0.016668018,5.6419053,Comparison of findings with prior frontal image.,"These examples consistently provide descriptions comparing current images to prior imaging studies, using linguistic structures that involve varying techniques or indications and representations of unchanged or stable findings, indicative of interval comparisons.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6138,latent_6138,8444,0.016888,0.016117562,5.436926,Comparison with prior imaging studies to assess changes or stability.,"The pattern involves specific comparisons to previous imaging studies to identify stability or changes in findings. This is a typical approach used in radiology reports enabling clinicians to track the progress or resolution of conditions over time. Examples with high activation levels use language indicating comparisons with prior studies, showing evidence of changes or consistent findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6139,latent_6139,3835,0.00767,0.010940192,5.7941375,Comparison indicating stability or minor changes from previous imaging studies.,"These examples consistently involve radiological descriptions including terms such as '_without relevant change_' or '_unchanged_' in relation to previous studies, focusing on stability or minor changes in current imaging results compared to prior examinations.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4895405865278751,0.49,0.4893617021276595,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6140,latent_6140,13284,0.026568,0.017117077,4.0442996,Direct comparison to prior images highlighting unchanged findings.,"High activation levels are linked to scenarios where past and current imaging studies are directly compared to discern changes or lack thereof, often with specific commentary on unchanged elements between images. These examples emphasize unchanged or stable features in comparison with previous imaging studies.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5211267605633803,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6141,latent_6141,14370,0.02874,0.016842214,4.6538115,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,This set of examples manifests a moderate presence of prior image comparisons to assess stability or changes in identified pathologies. Intermediate activations often describe unchanged findings or stability over time relative to older radiographic images.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5476358860375834,0.5477386934673367,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,99.0
+6142,latent_6142,14440,0.02888,0.012470834,2.611018,Evaluating changes in cardiac or pulmonary findings compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples involve interpretations of current and prior images, focusing on changes or stabilization of conditions such as cardiomediastinal contours, pleural effusions, or other specific cardiopulmonary findings like opacities and vascular markings. The presence of detailed comparative language indicative of interpreting changes from previous imaging studies is a consistent factor leading to higher activation levels.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6143,latent_6143,9875,0.01975,0.013062983,4.096003,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+6144,latent_6144,7236,0.014472,0.010444202,3.6637359,Reports focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The pattern is recognized by descriptions in the radiology reports that emphasize a comparative analysis with prior images, providing details on interval changes or stability of findings. This pattern focuses on tracking changes in medical conditions using prior imaging as a baseline.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4495045540986888,0.45,0.4528301886792453,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6145,latent_6145,18257,0.036514,0.015478882,3.8339052,Descriptions of unchanged or slightly changed medical device placement since prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation involve radiologic reports describing either unchanged or slightly changed conditions since prior imaging studies, particularly focusing on the placement and assessment of medical devices such as tubes or catheters, in addition to ongoing stable or improved non-critical findings.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.660377358490566,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6146,latent_6146,3428,0.006856,0.009023872,6.512328,Reports indicating stability or no acute findings on imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to include phrases indicating that findings are compared to previous imaging but conclude with statements indicating that there are no significant abnormalities or changes seen in the new imaging (e.g., 'lungs are clear without...', 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax', 'cardiac silhouette is normal'). These reports often highlight stable conditions or lack of acute findings, framed in the context of previous images when available.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.5882352941176471,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6147,latent_6147,3431,0.006862,0.009841605,10.422731,Low lung volumes or unchanged findings in comparison to prior studies.,"These examples often involve either description of unchanged, low or normal lung volumes, or references to partial or no significant changes compared to previous studies. Consistently, the examples use language that highlights low lung volumes and comparison to previous studies, making these aspects key to understanding the activation pattern.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6068152031454783,0.61,0.5932203389830508,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6148,latent_6148,6423,0.012846,0.010261541,4.1081,Analysis includes detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"The high activation examples prominently feature a pattern of interpreting the current radiological findings in conjunction with comparisons to prior studies, inclusive of summaries or changes observed over time. This exemplifies an explicit narrative of changes or stabilities relative to previous imagings, which is a key interpretive method in radiology reporting.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.5486111111111112,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6149,latent_6149,3258,0.006516,0.007323386,4.448089,Description of tube positioning relative to the carina in centimeters.,"This pattern involves the localization and placement of tubes and devices, typically described by their distance from the carina. These examples provide measurements in centimeters above the carina for tubes like ET or nasogastric tubes, and verify tube placement in medical imaging studies.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5442877332641112,0.605,0.8888888888888888,0.24,100.0,100.0
+6150,latent_6150,135961,0.271922,0.1947663,6.444737,Reports describe interval changes in medical devices or effusions compared to prior images.,"The pattern observed here is related to radiology reports that describe changes in findings compared to prior images. Reports showing changes like increased size of pleural effusion, resolution of pneumothorax, or interval removal of devices tend to have higher activations due to detailed assessment of interval changes, which potentially indicate disease progression or improvement.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7535447996967016,0.7537688442211056,0.7741935483870968,0.72,100.0,99.0
+6151,latent_6151,23524,0.047048,0.019050807,1.987658,Explicit comparisons to previous images with stability or improvement noted.,"The samples with high activation consistently require users to interpret current imaging findings by explicitly comparing them to previous studies, often with specific mentions of improvement or stability over time.",0.3269827204253434,0.3673469387755102,0.2307692307692307,0.125,24.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6152,latent_6152,3988,0.007976,0.009938108,7.1015024,"Radiology findings described in comparison to prior studies, noting stability or changes.","These examples focus on the presence of comparative language in radiology reports, specifically highlighting interval changes or stability in findings across repeated imaging studies. High activation examples consistently emphasize findings that are unchanged or changed between current and prior studies, reinforcing the importance of trend analysis in radiological evaluation.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4392523364485981,0.47,100.0,100.0
+6153,latent_6153,10235,0.02047,0.015090563,5.060551,Detailed analysis of interval changes using prior images in radiology reports.,"The examples show a high activation level when there is a detailed comparison with prior images, particularly when evaluating for interval changes, persistence or resolution of conditions such as effusions, atelectasis, or opacities, as well as tube placements. The frequent mention of comparison with previous images helps identify key consistent or changed aspects that could affect patient management.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4646464646464646,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6154,latent_6154,8997,0.017994,0.011095251,4.1996803,Use of 'comparison' to evaluate changes or stability from prior studies.,These examples often use the word 'comparison' to reference prior studies or specific indications based on prior evaluations. This is a thematic pattern in radiology where the condition or positioning in previous studies is used to provide context or assess changes in current imaging.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6155,latent_6155,14573,0.029146,0.0141443275,4.286225,Radiology reports emphasizing stability or no change from prior imaging.,"The examples reflect findings that are either unchanged, noted as 'stable', or imply no significant changes in comparison with prior imaging mostly at the end or throughout the report. This terminology is characteristic of radiological follow-ups where the stability of a condition is emphasized to indicate an absence of significant progression or regression in medical conditions on repeat imaging.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6549913747843696,0.655,0.6534653465346535,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6156,latent_6156,3819,0.007638,0.009002274,3.5393162,Detailed medical history or indications provided.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve provided indications or history, detailing specific medical conditions or symptoms for the imaging study; whereas, lower activations lack such detail or it's unclear.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+6157,latent_6157,29723,0.059446,0.028512303,4.963723,Status or position of medical devices and comparison to prior images.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently refer to the status, position, or stability of medical devices such as pacemakers, central venous catheters, or endotracheal tubes within the body, as well as changes between current and prior images. These reports emphasize device positions and continuity or differences with previous studies.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.59375,0.8260869565217391,92.0,108.0
+6158,latent_6158,3496,0.006992,0.00619142,4.233332,Comparison with prior image emphasizing stability or unchanged findings.,"The pattern focuses on describing the comparison between current and prior radiographic images, identifying changes in findings or confirming stability, and noting previous relevant dates or periods for comparison. The activation examples highlight discussion of comparisons with prior studies, stating findings like unchanged positions of devices and stability of pathologies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4358974358974359,0.34,100.0,100.0
+6159,latent_6159,2460,0.00492,0.010502626,7.5565,Difficulty in comparing current and prior radiological images due to lack of comparison data.,"High activation levels in these examples are consistently associated with the presentation of the instruction in the format 'Given [image]...Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', where the comparison aspect is critical. These radiology image prompts lack a proper prior image reference or indicate 'None', making direct comparison difficult or omitted.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5551215277777778,0.59,0.5576923076923077,0.87,100.0,100.0
+6160,latent_6160,4693,0.009386,0.008481174,2.9779756,Retrocardiac opacities or abnormalities mentioned.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention a consistent presence of opacities, atelectasis, or other abnormalities in the retrocardiac area or behind the heart. These observations frequently stand out in reports where activation is high, indicating a pattern of interest or concern with retrocardiac findings.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5059742647058824,0.57,0.75,0.21,100.0,100.0
+6161,latent_6161,77467,0.154934,0.0933804,6.3676014,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature descriptions of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies. Phrases such as 'unchanged', 'no interval change', or 'new since prior' are commonly used. They often specify particular aspects of a patient's anatomy or medical apparatus that have remained stable or changed, such as wire placement, tube positioning, or pleural effusion, indicating a focus on direct and specific comparisons.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6162,latent_6162,4997,0.009994,0.012975279,4.368034,Comparison of current findings with prior images indicates changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe providing radiological findings in relation to a prior or comparison image, indicating stability, change, or no change. This check for interval changes is a common feature in radiology reports, particularly when evaluating suspected pathologies or known conditions over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4130434782608695,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6163,latent_6163,20503,0.041006,0.02804189,5.2907686,Evaluation of resolution or unchanged status of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The consistent high activation levels in examples indicate a pattern where changes from previous studies are explicitly evaluated, especially noting resolution or worsening of specific conditions. This type of comparison, particularly mentioning improvement or unchanged status, is often highlighted in radiology reports to track disease progression or stability.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6262626262626263,0.63,0.6083333333333333,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6164,latent_6164,4577,0.009154,0.015223076,5.2920346,"Use of multiple views (frontal, lateral, prior images) for comprehensive analysis.","The pattern recognized in highly activated examples involves the provision of additional distinct views (frontal, lateral, and prior images), allowing for comprehensive evaluation of changes over time. This includes the systematic assessment of changes in cardiac or thoracic conditions using multiple chest imaging angles.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.5208333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4451198603447738,0.555,0.5291005291005291,1.0,100.0,100.0
+6165,latent_6165,4888,0.009776,0.009141538,5.0553923,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,"The key examples demonstrate a pattern of considering findings on both current frontal and lateral chest images, often in comparison with prior frontal images for evaluation of changes over time. High activation tends to focus on the process of comparison and documenting such changes or the stability of findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4659090909090909,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6166,latent_6166,2994,0.005988,0.005988444,3.5718029,Full description of radiology findings with comparison to prior images and clinical indication.,"The sample texts that exhibit activation showcase descriptions which typically include a combination of both current and prior imaging findings along with relevant clinical indications, suggesting a standardized format involving elements of comparison, technique, indication, and findings written out comprehensively. The assistant prompts for a structured description emphasize writing out a full account including indications, techniques, and findings compared to prior imaging, contributing to their high activation levels.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4149853746343658,0.415,0.4158415841584158,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6167,latent_6167,12788,0.025576,0.0164458,4.449475,Focus on comparison of current and previous imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation scores involve the identification of changes or stabilities in comparison to previous radiology reports, with details about specific conditions like effusions, pneumothorax, or persistent opacities being referenced directly. This suggests fixation on comparing images or checking for progression or improvement rather than establishing new diagnoses or first-time findings without a prior frame of reference.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5859213250517599,0.615,0.5751633986928104,0.88,100.0,100.0
+6168,latent_6168,4050,0.0081,0.0076544876,4.650714,Comparison to prior imaging is central to the evaluation.,"Examples with activation levels above 5 require comparison between current and prior imaging studies as a key element, indicating that the model identifies this comparison as central to the relevant pattern.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4597285067873303,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+6169,latent_6169,36247,0.072494,0.03585109,3.7170045,Statements noting interval changes or improvements in pathologies.,"The examples with slightly higher activations use radiological symptoms or findings like 'atelectasis', 'pneumothorax', or 'opacity' that were critical in previous evaluations, are now noted as having changed or improved, which provides important interval information relevant to the pathology or treatment course.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.640625,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6170,latent_6170,14684,0.029368,0.017840946,4.011517,Consistent references to interval changes in imaging results.,"The pattern seems to involve radiological reports that consistently mention changes or lack of changes over time by comparing current images with prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes or stability. Each example therein typically addresses specific radiological findings in the context of a temporal comparison.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4185899542455573,0.425,0.4050632911392405,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6171,latent_6171,11606,0.023212,0.019197818,7.5932517,Comparison of radiographic findings to identify or rule out acute processes.,"The highly activated examples consistently focus on evaluating radiographic findings specifically for 'acute processes'. These findings are often related to potentially life-threatening conditions which require immediate attention, such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pneumonia, or acute cardiopulmonary changes. Terms like 'evaluate acute process' or 'no acute intrathoracic process' are frequently emphasized.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6172,latent_6172,42878,0.085756,0.03887058,2.9477167,Interpretation involves comparison with previous imaging findings.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve additional radiological assessment or commentary made in light of comparison with previous imaging studies. These examples frequently mention changes or stability in particular findings relative to past images.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6173,latent_6173,6383,0.012766,0.009446405,5.861777,Comparison of current image to prior imaging with attention to changes.,"This pattern identifies studies where findings from a current image are compared to prior images. Illustratively, reports often include language that tracks changes based on previous images or stability over time, which is a common analytical approach in radiology to assess disease progression or stability.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6174,latent_6174,8134,0.016268,0.010093677,4.86761,Activation increases when both frontal and lateral images are compared with prior images.,"The annotated examples reflect varying levels of activation, with the highest activations corresponding to the use of both frontal and lateral images for comparison with prior imaging studies. The pattern is more representative when the radiological descriptions include both perspectives while assessing changes over time, particularly focusing on specific lung or cardiac conditions being evaluated in comparison with previous images.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4096385542168674,0.34,100.0,100.0
+6175,latent_6175,7148,0.014296,0.030383365,5.3304496,Explicit comparison of current image findings to prior studies.,"The consistent pattern across the examples with higher activation is the explicit comparison of current images with prior studies. This includes descriptions of changes, stability, or resolution of observed conditions. Examples with direct and elaborate descriptions of differences or similarities compared to baseline studies showed high activation.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6176,latent_6176,3676,0.007352,0.007399346,4.2616134,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting unchanged findings or new subtle differences.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently contain explicit language about the comparison with prior imaging studies, which is essential to evaluate potential changes in diagnostic findings. The comparison phrase is consistently highlighted, stressing its diagnostic significance in tracking disease progression or stability.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6177,latent_6177,3225,0.00645,0.0095292125,4.589557,Tasks involving current and prior images for comprehensive comparison.,"High activation samples involve tasks that specifically require comparison between multiple images, particularly when frontal and lateral images are both involved, enabling a more comprehensive assessment of radiographic changes over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4391434465525757,0.5125628140703518,0.5087719298245614,0.87,100.0,99.0
+6178,latent_6178,5058,0.010116,0.017702803,6.347179,Describing radiological changes by comparing with prior images or views.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparative evaluation of radiological findings using a series of images or views, particularly focusing on changes in anatomical structures or presence/absence of pathologies in comparison to prior images. These examples highlight a pattern of thorough assessment of serial studies for alterations over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4277921869568705,0.465,0.4768211920529801,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6179,latent_6179,12036,0.024072,0.01868519,7.540575,Reports focusing on comparing current to prior imaging.,"The pattern found in the examples with higher activation levels involves the explicit direction to provide a description of findings in comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing the evaluation of changes or stability between images. These reports often use format instructions prompting an action to describe this comparative analysis, demonstrating a focus on prior studies in evaluating current findings.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6180,latent_6180,4018,0.008036,0.012270827,4.9817195,Mention of cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette.,The examples that are activated involve descriptions that specifically reference the presence of cardiomegaly or an enlarged cardiac silhouette in the chest imaging. This is a radiological finding often associated with various pathologies affecting the heart and is distinctly noted in these examples.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.6071428571428571,0.34,100.0,100.0
+6181,latent_6181,5862,0.011724,0.013641591,6.0197773,Comparisons note interval changes in radiological findings or device placements.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically describe comparisons in radiology findings, noting changes or stability in certain features over time. They specifically mention increased or unchanged densities/opacities/nodules or device placements compared to previous imaging, and these changes are considered relevant and worthy of detailed mention.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6182,latent_6182,4722,0.009444,0.009409268,4.062058,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples reflect an analysis where findings are unchanged, stable, or show insignificant change compared to prior imaging studies, with emphasis on describing consistency over time using phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar to prior'.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6183,latent_6183,3923,0.007846,0.0096110515,4.211207,Normal cardiomediastinal contours amidst other lung findings.,"Across the examples, the pattern of normal mediastinal, hilar, and cardiomediastinal contours in the presence of some lung pathologies is noticeable. This can be common in radiology where the heart and central structures remain unaffected by peripheral lung issues. Phrases like 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal', 'mediastinal and hilar contours are within normal limits', and 'cardiac silhouette normal' are consistent and prominent.",0.6722408026755853,0.673469387755102,0.6818181818181818,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5989974937343359,0.6,0.6111111111111112,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6184,latent_6184,7929,0.015858,0.017578391,5.732794,Radiology report comparing current and prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently involve situations where a current radiological image is compared to prior images, emphasizing interval changes or comparisons at stated or implied time points. This pattern is significant as it helps in evaluating the disease progression or stability over time, which is a critical aspect of radiological assessment.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6185,latent_6185,4392,0.008784,0.010385322,4.535862,Focus on limited or no direct radiographic comparison available.,"These examples refer to the lack of comparison radiographs or the inability to make comparison due to missing 'prior frontal images', indicating a focus on situations where direct radiographic comparison is limited or emphasized.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.599774838164931,0.601010101010101,0.5909090909090909,0.6565656565656566,99.0,99.0
+6186,latent_6186,58598,0.117196,0.07668714,4.871603,Descriptive stability or change in pathology when compared to prior studies.,"Patterns emerge in radiology prompts that emphasize comparison with prior studies, particularly highlighting stability or change in pathological states. Examples often discuss conditions like pleural effusions or cardiomegaly with references (implicitly or explicitly) to whether these conditions have progressed, improved, or remain unchanged. Descriptors often include 'stable', 'unchanged', 'increased', referring to historical images.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6419437340153453,0.65,0.6153846153846154,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6187,latent_6187,28024,0.056048,0.035099443,4.329324,"Comparison of current radiological images with prior images to evaluate changes, specifically acute pathologies.","The pattern in the examples is notably the comparison of current images, often including frontal or lateral views, with prior images. Additionally, examples with higher activation often describe specific acute findings and details in the context of this comparison, such as consolidations, effusions, or changes in cardiac silhouette, which are significant for evaluations of disease progression or post-operative changes.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.4380952380952381,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6188,latent_6188,11679,0.023358,0.022735246,5.173797,Comparison of radiographic findings with previous imaging studies.,"These examples focus on the comparison of current chest images against prior studies, specified by references to findings or context (e.g., 'the previous radiograph', specific historical data, or direct comparison language). This substantiates whether observed changes or stability in radiographic features appear in relation to past studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6189,latent_6189,13957,0.027914,0.016354762,3.160412,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"The activation pattern is high when detailed descriptions are provided for both cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, often when these structures are stated as being 'normal', 'unchanged', or 'within normal limits'. These findings are typically highlighted in stable imaging studies or those with mild, non-significant changes.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7261467889908257,0.7286432160804021,0.6890756302521008,0.8282828282828283,99.0,100.0
+6190,latent_6190,252071,0.504142,0.42199033,4.1673155,Presence of medical lines or devices in chest radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation describe the presence of support or monitoring devices, lines, or tubes such as endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, catheters, or pacemakers within chest radiographs. This pattern indicates a radiological finding that's likely critical or a focal point of the imaging study.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5967335416876701,0.6,0.6219512195121951,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6191,latent_6191,3118,0.006236,0.013567021,7.1612644,Comparative evaluation of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples highlight the need to evaluate current and prior radiographs to describe interval changes in lung and other thoracic structures. The prompt consistently asks for comparisons with prior images and discusses findings in terms of such comparisons. High-activation samples specifically do not report significant changes, indicating the emphasis is on the act of comparison rather than findings alone.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3983669961323592,0.405,0.4214876033057851,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6192,latent_6192,9438,0.018876,0.01781097,6.4883785,Assessment or change in device position compared to prior imaging.,"These examples often mention the positioning or removal of medical devices, such as catheters, tubes, or lines, in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern relates to assessments of device placements, which are common in follow-up radiology reports after initial procedures like intubation or placement of lines.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4269949066213922,0.46,0.4230769230769231,0.22,100.0,100.0
+6193,latent_6193,3654,0.007308,0.0064572617,4.2341194,Description of findings as unchanged or stable compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings as unchanged or stable compared to previous studies, highlighting that there is little or no interval change. This is a common wording pattern in radiological assessments that evaluate consistency over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,100.0,100.0
+6194,latent_6194,3821,0.007642,0.011515146,4.325487,Reference to comparison in absence of prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently do not list any prior imaging study despite references to comparison and use of phrases such as 'comparison: N/A', which draws significant focus as it contrasts with other examples where prior imaging was noted or explicitly compared.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4285714285714285,0.3,100.0,100.0
+6195,latent_6195,4907,0.009814,0.009870404,4.1271243,Comparisons highlighting interval changes in thoracic pathology or devices.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently compare current radiographic findings against prior images, emphasizing interval changes such as those related to lung volumes, opacities, pleural effusions, and pulmonary edema. Comparisons often involve specific devices or conditions (e.g., tracheostomy tubes, peri-procedural changes) while illustrating changes in pulmonary opacification or effusion.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6196,latent_6196,6160,0.01232,0.023120508,6.114194,Detailed comparison to prior imaging focusing on stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve providing a detailed description of new or stable findings, often using phrases like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'compared to prior'. These reports consistently focus on comparison with previous images to evaluate changes or stability in the condition of the chest. Descriptions that reflect stability or focus on describing findings in comparison to prior studies exhibit higher activation levels.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.45,0.45,0.45,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6197,latent_6197,279149,0.558298,0.8195008,9.816842,Stable cardiomediastinal finding with mild non-acute changes on follow-up comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on analyzing current findings in comparison to prior images without mentioning pneumonia, consolidation, or similar acute conditions, and predominantly describe findings related to heart and aorta conditions such as tortuosity, cardiomegaly, and atelectasis without acute cardiopulmonary disease.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5796553173602353,0.6,0.6785714285714286,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6198,latent_6198,5625,0.01125,0.009887473,5.3547864,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings with no significant interval change noted compared to prior images. This pattern is highlighted by unchanged or stable conditions, suggesting a focus on consistent documentation of findings across imaging studies for diagnosis or treatment evaluations.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.6,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6199,latent_6199,32880,0.06576,0.03120889,3.7398975,Detailed interval changes in conditions or devices since prior imaging.,"Activation increases when there are detailed findings that describe interval changes in conditions or devices since a previous study, such as placement of new lines or tubes, resolution or changes in fluid or pleural effusions, progression or improvement in consolidation, and other specifically mentioned comparisons. Reports also often emphasize stable conditions for certain elements while highlighting modifications in others. This level of detail appears directly linked to the pattern we wish to understand.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6249156060113525,0.625,0.6213592233009708,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6200,latent_6200,6323,0.012646,0.01568308,4.143427,Multi-view and prior image comparisons.,The samples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons of both frontal and lateral views with prior imaging data. This implies the model focuses on assessments requiring multi-view analysis alongside historical imaging to detect clinical changes or confirm stability.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3727623435375093,0.435,0.4601226993865031,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6201,latent_6201,12366,0.024732,0.016189432,3.7776845,Comparison emphasizes interval changes or findings stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels all emphasize intervals or longitudinal changes, typically compared to prior images. Specific or subtle patterns of stability or change in thoracic findings, such as atelectasis resolution or unchanged opacity, are highlighted.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+6202,latent_6202,2061,0.004122,0.0066012642,5.5289025,Detailed findings in comparison to prior images with medical recommendations.,"Examples that exhibit the pattern frequently mention specific findings and descriptions that are effectively summarized in comparison to prior imaging, but also include a detailed analysis of changes, such as specific placement of tubes or catheters, or noting changes in opacities and lung volumes. This comprehensive comparison often includes consistent medical conclusions or recommendations based on the radiological findings over time and space.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.25,100.0,100.0
+6203,latent_6203,9967,0.019934,0.013831617,4.3455377,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging for changes.,"The higher activation levels appear in reports that emphasize comparing current imaging findings with previous examinations. The focus is on interval changes, stability, or catheter repositioning, indicating that the pattern is related to a comparison of findings between current and previous studies. Descriptions often include explicit detail about changes or stability in pathology or medical devices.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6204,latent_6204,18445,0.03689,0.017899802,3.6690755,"Comprehensive evaluation integrating current with prior scans, emphasizing interpretation.","These examples frequently include analysis of current and prior imagery together with additional insights, such as recommendations of further studies or emphasizing critical findings like changes in important features. Reports with activation involve rich elaboration using additional interpretation steps without only deferring to the assistant for comparison to prior findings.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6205,latent_6205,5137,0.010274,0.019226909,6.756969,Comparing medical device or tube placements between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often reference previous radiographic findings, including changes or stability in device or tube placement within the thoracic cavity, highlighting the importance of monitoring medical device positions over time in imaging procedures.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6206,latent_6206,8261,0.016522,0.016022319,7.418776,Assessment or confirmation of medical device placement.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to placement or positioning of medical devices, which is emphasized in radiological reports for confirming proper device placement, assessing for changes or complications, or ensuring functionality. Descriptions often emphasize specific device names, positions, and comparison with previous studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6085909273384182,0.61,0.625,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6207,latent_6207,46747,0.093494,0.04576755,3.579795,Absence of significant interval change compared to previous study.,"These examples show descriptions that either indicate no significant changes in findings or minor changes from prior imaging studies. The stable or unchanged positions of tubes and lines or slight improvements in pathology are described, emphasizing a lack of significant change from previous findings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5863019995403356,0.595,0.6338028169014085,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6208,latent_6208,4086,0.008172,0.010367345,7.3043604,Detailed clinical indications related to patient history or specific symptoms.,These examples typically reference specific clinical indications which describe a more detailed patient history or specific symptoms. This could suggest a pattern in which more detailed or specific indications trigger higher activation levels in such analyses.,0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5414346544382574,0.58,0.5506329113924051,0.87,100.0,100.0
+6209,latent_6209,37124,0.074248,0.039236277,4.9479175,Detailed interval change analysis in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels feature significant analysis of changes or stability between current and prior imaging studies. They include detailed comparisons and draw conclusions on the interval change or lack thereof, relating this to clinical implications.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6848030018761726,0.685,0.6761904761904762,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6210,latent_6210,27804,0.055608,0.053149737,5.334725,Comparison to prior imaging with descriptive changes or stability noted.,"In multiple examples with high activation, there is a notable emphasis on the comparison of current findings with prior imaging. Reports often use phrasing like 'in comparison with' to describe differences or stability in medical imaging findings across different time points.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6211,latent_6211,4153,0.008306,0.007828575,3.4595644,Importance of comparison with prior images in evaluations.,"The high activation levels consistently align with instances where radiology reports explicitly request or include a comparison with prior images. This pattern heavily influences the task of evaluating changes or stability in a patient's condition, thus driving the higher activations.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6212,latent_6212,14342,0.028684,0.019413225,3.4404497,Radiographic assessment includes cardiac or mediastinal evaluation with devices or lung findings.,"The representative examples primarily involve the evaluation of cardiac and mediastinal structures in combination with other findings like devices' placements or lung conditions, often noting stability or changes in these areas across exams. Patterns relate to detailed cardiomediastinal assessment across repeated imaging.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5634191176470589,0.62,0.5697674418604651,0.98,100.0,100.0
+6213,latent_6213,5683,0.011366,0.010118277,6.214193,Describes changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Reports with higher activation levels frequently compare current and prior radiological findings, noting stability, improvement, or progression of specific conditions using language like 'unchanged', 'resolved', 'improvement', or 'interval increase'. This reflects a common practice in radiology to monitor changes over time in patient imaging.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6214,latent_6214,32802,0.065604,0.039384853,10.695586,"Changes in medical device placement (e.g., tubes, catheters).","These examples describe findings related to medical devices such as tubes and catheters, noting changes or interventions in their placement. Such observations are relevant for assessing patient management in radiology studies.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7272727272727273,0.6956521739130435,23.0,27.0,0.6927200810695957,0.765,0.4745762711864407,0.6363636363636364,44.0,156.0
+6215,latent_6215,6678,0.013356,0.013281819,5.722359,Description involving comparisons with previous imaging studies.,"The higher activation levels correspond to situations where the description involves providing a comparison with a prior imaging study, demonstrating a change or stability in the current condition. These examples use phrases like 'compared to the prior study', 'stable compared to prior', or explicitly refer to differences or stability with previous imaging for diagnostic interpretation.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5185936443542934,0.555,0.535483870967742,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6216,latent_6216,4630,0.00926,0.01074915,6.0179524,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention both frontal and lateral chest images (current and prior) and the requirement to compare these images or provide detailed descriptions of changes over time in relation to previous specific findings, suggesting the model is picking up on structured comparison of multiple views and temporal evaluation.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.4491525423728814,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6217,latent_6217,4419,0.008838,0.008599472,4.1261353,Use of language describing comparison with prior imaging results.,"Higher activations in these examples correspond to cases where findings are explicitly compared with prior imaging studies to assess stability, change, or progression, often with direct indications of comparisons, stability, or changes in patient condition highlighted. This pattern is evident in medical imaging reports as these statements uniquely require retrospective assessment of changes over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6218,latent_6218,33566,0.067132,0.033972688,2.9956036,Comparison with previous imaging for description of stability or changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe radiological findings that are evaluated in the context of comparison with prior studies, coupled with references to changes or stability over time. Comparisons include previous studies or radiographs and convey stable or evolving findings, reflecting the importance of consistency or progression analysis in radiological assessments.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6219,latent_6219,5123,0.010246,0.0126099745,4.0286803,Lack of acute changes or findings in comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention findings that focus on clear or unchanged elements in the context of prior imaging studies, often reducing the emphasis on any new abnormalities or urgent changes. These findings tend to include stability in patient status, no new or acute changes, or unremarkable evaluations, especially in the context of routine follow-ups or postoperative stability.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.4625,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6220,latent_6220,40745,0.08149,0.07973528,5.8647537,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples exhibiting clear comparison to prior imaging and focus on interval changes or stability in findings (such as unchanged heart size, unchanged opacities) exhibit higher activation. This pattern suggests emphasis is placed on direct comparison to previous studies for assessing stability or changes.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4665861513687601,0.47,0.4741379310344827,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6221,latent_6221,10681,0.021362,0.012369444,5.0959425,Stable findings on imaging compared with prior studies.,"The examples demonstrating activation levels highlight patterns of comparison between current and prior imaging studies, with a focus on stable, unchanged, or resolved findings, which correspond to unchanged pathologies or non-progression of conditions over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4884910485933503,0.5,0.5,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6222,latent_6222,16361,0.032722,0.01721257,5.672019,Presence and placement of medical tubes or devices in thoracic imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of tube placements or medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube, central line) in relation to anatomical landmarks or for specific medical evaluations, even if other findings or comparisons are also present. This suggests the model is specifically responding to the presence and description of these procedural elements in the imaging context.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.5730337078651685,0.6144578313253012,83.0,117.0
+6223,latent_6223,17633,0.035266,0.015159566,3.212736,Emphasis on comparison with prior findings or interval changes.,The examples with high activation levels often explicitly refer to findings and their changes or stability over time by comparing current imaging observations with those from prior examinations. This implies a focus on evaluating changes or lack thereof in medical conditions.,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6224,latent_6224,6592,0.013184,0.022889717,7.817174,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a comparison between current and previous imaging findings, typically highlighting changes or stable conditions between studies. This incorporates reports which specifically request a comparison and analysis of differences or consistencies with prior images.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3116712217835813,0.32,0.2692307692307692,0.21,100.0,100.0
+6225,latent_6225,8986,0.017972,0.014940933,5.802475,Use prompt phrase 'Given the current frontal image (image) Provide a description of the findings...',"The patterns of activation indicating phrases ""Given the current frontal image [[only]]"" are highly rated, while examples with alternate phrasing or supplementary images tend to be rated lower. This suggests focusing on this specific wording of the task prompt.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6222222222222222,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6226,latent_6226,9872,0.019744,0.017892811,3.7757812,Comparison of current to prior imaging for stability or change in findings.,"These examples consistently contain elements such as ‘comparison to prior’, lat, ap, and suggesting either stability or change in findings. They follow a structure of instructing description from current images in relation to prior imaging, indicating assessment of interval change or stability.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5263157894736842,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6227,latent_6227,3106,0.006212,0.008895119,4.1707973,Tasks involving comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Higher activation levels are associated with the task of providing a description of findings by explicitly making comparisons to prior images, as these involve comparing new imaging results with earlier ones to note changes or stability, a common task in radiographic assessment for ongoing conditions.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6228,latent_6228,16347,0.032694,0.01610252,4.189211,Descriptions indicate worsening or progression of findings.,"It appears that increased activation is often associated with multiple radiological findings and descriptions that indicate progressive or worsening conditions, new appearances, or complexities in the imaging. Terms like 'worsened', 'new', 'suggestive of', or 'concerning for' suggest possible changes or developments identified in images.",0.3704031900753212,0.4081632653061224,0.3076923076923077,0.1666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5395729141859174,0.565,0.6226415094339622,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6229,latent_6229,32202,0.064404,0.02724093,2.3801353,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"This set of examples focuses on the constancy of certain features or devices compared to prior images, highlighting stability or no change in findings.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5308641975308642,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6230,latent_6230,26398,0.052796,0.022672577,2.7133653,Stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"The most representative examples involve comparison to previous radiological findings and analysis of features of the cardiac/mediastinal silhouette, with outcomes indicating ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" or some degree of stability in those chest structures despite addressing diverse pathologies. The comparative analysis specifically highlights mediastinal/cardiac silhouette stability or ""normal"" appearance related to various conditions.",0.5,0.5102040816326531,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5370370370370371,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6231,latent_6231,46921,0.093842,0.038867608,2.0816202,Imaging stability or no new findings on comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation represent stable imaging findings when compared to prior studies. This often indicates a lack of progression in disease or the benign nature of identified lesions. Phrases indicating stability or no new changes compared to prior images are commonly used, showing a focus on changes or lack thereof in patient condition over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6232,latent_6232,5654,0.011308,0.011043788,5.797922,Detailed comparison of imaging findings across frontal/lateral views with reference to prior images.,"Examples with high activation highlight comprehensive descriptions of radiology findings across frontal and lateral views, including descriptions of pleural effusions, pneumonia, atelectasis, or anatomical conditions against prior images. This pattern shows a detailed comparison from previous studies where changes or stabilizations are documented.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6233,latent_6233,8066,0.016132,0.010892225,4.0931907,Explicit mention of interval changes based on prior imaging.,"Prompts with lower activation levels focus on findings and impressions without considering previous reports, whereas higher activation examples directly refer to prior imaging studies, including phrases like 'compared with the earlier film' or 'PRIOR_REPORT', and analyze interval changes. This indicates a pattern centered on analyzing interval changes between current and prior imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4230185241421196,0.43,0.4102564102564102,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6234,latent_6234,14688,0.029376,0.020499986,3.9964244,Reports of stable or unchanged imaging findings with normal cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"All examples describe imaging studies with either none or negligible differences or changes concerning stability among findings (e.g., 'normal', 'no change', 'unchanged') often in terms of cardiac size, mediastinal contour, or other structures. Examples suggest limited or absent pathology as a stable baseline in comparisons wherever applicable, often without acute pathology.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6235,latent_6235,2706,0.005412,0.007713528,8.104253,Clear lungs and unremarkable cardiac silhouette.,"The high activation examples consistently involve the presence of clear lungs without focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, as well as the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes being described as unremarkable or normal. This reflects a pattern focusing on identifying normal findings in radiology reports.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.8461538461538461,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.684044233807267,0.685,0.7078651685393258,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6236,latent_6236,5678,0.011356,0.016505787,4.474234,Structured prompt with placeholders and image-based comparison instructions.,"These examples highlight a specific linguistic pattern seen in radiology reports where the prompt structure involves empty placeholders for prior reports, techniques, and indications, combined with the phrasing 'given the current frontal image' followed by instructions to provide descriptions of findings in contrast to prior images. This structured prompt involves specific comparisons using visual images as reference points, indicating a systematic analysis and reporting method.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5901197281846619,0.62,0.577922077922078,0.89,100.0,100.0
+6237,latent_6237,2478,0.004956,0.0072940574,6.8892913,Describing or comparing findings relative to a prior image.,"Highly activated examples are those that involve providing a description or comparison of findings relative to a prior image, particularly when the report requests the radiologist to specifically compare current findings to previous ones in order to detect changes or monitor progress.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3551938350239836,0.385,0.4195804195804196,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6238,latent_6238,9337,0.018674,0.015883189,5.660663,Emphasis on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated samples consistently involve descriptions of radiological studies where comparison between current findings and prior images is emphasized. These can include findings about improvement, stability, or worsening of conditions compared to previous scans, using terms like 'interval increase', 'unchanged', 'improved', or explicit dates for comparison.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6239,latent_6239,2187,0.004374,0.0076428624,4.7110825,Radiological assessment involves detailed comparison with prior studies for changes.,"The examples consistently describe findings from chest radiography that compare current images with prior ones, focusing on assessing changes or stability of observed conditions. Common themes include evaluating cardiomediastinal contours, pulmonary structures, and presence or absence of pneumothorax and effusions. The detailed comparison aspect is emphasized with phrases indicating stability or equality to previous exams.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6240,latent_6240,16531,0.033062,0.02002168,9.395395,Detailed changes in imaging findings compared to previous reports.,"The pattern in these examples involves detailed comparisons of current imaging observations with past reports, specifically noting any changes, and often involves complex findings such as tube placements, effusions or changes in lung status. These observations are significant, hence affecting the activation level due to their clinical relevance in detecting or ruling out complications and guiding subsequent patient management.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.28,0.6363636363636364,44.0,156.0
+6241,latent_6241,7507,0.015014,0.011013209,4.7335734,Comparison of current chest radiographs to prior studies showing stable findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often mention a frontal radiograph with or without a lateral image for description, specifically focusing on a direct comparison to a prior study, evaluating changes or stability over time. The instances tend to identify normal findings or mild changes compared to prior imaging, which might explain the pattern associated with stability in findings versus acute processes.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.36,0.4,0.3,0.15,100.0,100.0
+6242,latent_6242,58392,0.116784,0.07171918,6.1199455,Presence of unusual anatomical position or deviation in findings.,"The activation levels are close to zero for all samples except when unusual anatomical positioning is noted, indicating the model does not show a pattern uniformly across these examples unless significant anatomical deviations are present. The given examples are primarily standard radiological findings with only slight augmentation in instances of uniquely noted anatomy.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.5733333333333334,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6243,latent_6243,5247,0.010494,0.013581808,5.5564337,Presence of both current lateral and frontal images compared to a prior frontal image.,"Examples with higher activation involve at least three images: a current frontal image, a current lateral image, and a prior frontal image. The presence of a current lateral image alongside these suggests a pattern of detailed multi-view analysis crucial for understanding the activation, likely tied to the requirement of a comprehensive view to identify certain pathologies or changes.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4387755102040816,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6244,latent_6244,4814,0.009628,0.011730637,4.398735,Comparison of findings between current and prior chest radiographs.,"These examples involve interpretation of current and prior chest radiographs with explicit comparisons provided, focusing on identifying differences or new findings relative to previous imaging. The format commonly includes phrases like 'as compared to the prior', indicating direct analysis against past images which is useful in evaluating progression or improvement of clinical indications.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6245,latent_6245,12360,0.02472,0.015072247,5.187617,Reports prominently detailing interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations involve descriptions that focus on providing comparisons between the current imaging results and prior studies to explicitly identify changes over time, indicating interval changes in specific features or conditions like effusions, pneumothorax, or device positioning.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.604301948051948,0.61,0.5887096774193549,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6246,latent_6246,44444,0.088888,0.06610873,7.0295277,Record interpretations affected by technical limitations or positioning differences.,"Highly representative examples discuss technical issues in imaging or limitations in positioning that impact interpretation. Examples with higher activation refer to changes in findings that could be attributed to these technical factors, like patient rotation or imaging angle, which consistently appear in higher activation samples.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6247,latent_6247,24985,0.04997,0.033013027,5.4191155,Use of both frontal and lateral chest imaging for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological evaluations using both frontal and lateral chest imaging, which allows for more comprehensive assessment contributing to detailed comparisons and findings. This pattern emphasizes dual imaging perspectives in comparison evaluations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6248,latent_6248,5523,0.011046,0.00736062,6.1634984,High activation when there is no prior image for comparison.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the absence of a comparable prior image or explicitly state 'comparison: none'. This suggests that the model activates more strongly in scenarios where no prior images are referenced for comparative analysis in radiology studies.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.5959595959595959,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6249,latent_6249,3081,0.006162,0.0068366094,5.33297,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies with emphasis on changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation discuss findings by comparing current images to prior ones and emphasizing changes or stabilities in medical conditions over multiple modalities or views, particularly noting the stability or alteration of conditions like effusions, masses, or post-procedure states. This emphasizes pattern recognition in temporal changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6250,latent_6250,25213,0.050426,0.034394152,6.755848,Focus on stability or subtle changes in radiologic findings over time.,"The examples represent cases where the radiology study findings are compared to prior imaging with a focus on evaluating the unchanged status or noting subtle changes over time. There is an emphasis on documenting the stability of pathologies such as nodules, pleural effusions, or structural features like cardiomediastinal contours using the language of comparison to previous reports or images.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6251,latent_6251,2417,0.004834,0.0043141246,8.700742,Evaluation for pneumothorax or chest tube placement changes.,"The examples with higher activation consistently reference evaluations for pneumothorax or other acute thoracic changes, such as chest tube placements or modifications of ventilation status. These evaluations typically signify an acute respiratory or thoracic condition that could explain the reported activation levels.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4668088363954505,0.507537688442211,0.3432835820895522,0.2987012987012987,77.0,122.0
+6252,latent_6252,4073,0.008146,0.011484279,4.715594,References to device positions or normal cardiomediastinal contours.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include a clear reference to the presence or position of lines or tubes (e.g., catheters), or cardiomediastinal contours, along with a conclusion about the absence of significant abnormalities like consolidation or pneumothorax.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5725902694901612,0.615,0.5705521472392638,0.93,100.0,100.0
+6253,latent_6253,4197,0.008394,0.006464646,6.6213093,Analysis of thoracic findings on portable AP chest radiographs compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve evaluations of radiological findings related to changes in cardiopulmonary and mediastinal structures based on portable chest radiographs. These often include reviews of heart size, tube placements, pleural effusion, or possible consolidations, and comparisons with prior imaging studies. This pattern suggests an emphasis on thoracic changes observable via portable AP chest radiographs when prior data is available for comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.4469696969696969,0.7023809523809523,84.0,116.0
+6254,latent_6254,22478,0.044956,0.037264057,4.9627867,Emphasis on interval changes from prior imaging in the analysis.,"Examples with higher activations consistently compare current and previous medical imaging to identify changes over time, often focusing on disease progression, device positioning, or improvement/deterioration of specific findings. This pattern helps in ongoing monitoring and management of the patient's condition.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6255,latent_6255,4648,0.009296,0.011636083,4.373943,High activation corresponds to explicit comparison with previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include a comparison statement that explicitly references prior imaging or a progress report, this is pivotal in understanding the observed patterns between baseline and subsequent changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6256,latent_6256,26862,0.053724,0.02100331,2.2066045,Explicit comparison with prior image findings in context.,"High activation samples consistently report findings from current imaging and compare these to prior studies, indicating the importance of noting changes or stability over time for evaluation. Those examples with low activation lack direct comparison with previous studies in the assistant's findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6257,latent_6257,8033,0.016066,0.009367038,3.865008,"Comparison of current findings to prior imaging, indicating notable differences.","Examples with activation levels imply clear comparisons between current and prior images, highlighting changes or improvements in medical condition or findings. Activation levels close to zero lack explicit and eminent changes between current and prior images or emphasize unremarkable findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5684464070654356,0.57,0.5795454545454546,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6258,latent_6258,44000,0.088,0.05323634,5.747921,"Detailed comparison with prior image findings, focusing on unchanged features.","Examples with higher activation levels typically involve specific descriptions about new or unchanged findings when comparing current images to prior studies. This includes referencing unchanged features and explicitly comparing them to previous exams. Various descriptors highlight these comparisons, indicating stable or unchanged findings.",0.650733752620545,0.6530612244897959,0.7,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5256137147494421,0.5276381909547738,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,99.0
+6259,latent_6259,4752,0.009504,0.009707137,6.3545084,Normal or stable cardiac and mediastinal contours across comparative imaging.,Patterns with high activation levels refer to the presence of cardiac or mediastinal findings such as a normal heart size or unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours when comparing current imaging to prior studies. These are stable findings often repeated in radiological reports.,0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6189887756152817,0.63,0.5970149253731343,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6260,latent_6260,3519,0.007038,0.011906066,6.2346315,Instructions to compare current images with prior images using template prompts.,"The high activation examples focus on instructions to compare the current imaging findings with prior frontal images, often with placeholder prompts to provide previous study comparisons and descriptions of findings. This repetitive template usage hints at a structured pattern for radiological studies involving assessment of interval changes.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5200918150913793,0.5829145728643216,0.5497076023391813,0.94,100.0,99.0
+6261,latent_6261,5273,0.010546,0.014549941,6.524331,High activation with detailed findings compared across multiple images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparisons between multiple imaging studies. Furthermore, they include detailed descriptions and changes related to specific procedures, devices (e.g., pacemakers), or medical conditions (e.g., pleural effusion, pneumonia) rather than just absence or normality of findings. The combination of direct imaging comparison and detailed specification amplifies activation.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4210917287840365,0.435,0.4503816793893129,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6262,latent_6262,5181,0.010362,0.017614271,4.939026,Current imaging findings compared against prior studies.,"High activation levels correspond to situations where current imaging is explicitly compared against prior studies, often indicating consideration of change or stability in the context of an underlying health condition, such as pneumonia or other serious concerns. Texts that lack such comparisons or state the lack of previous comparisons available tend to have lower activation levels.",0.5271929824561403,0.5510204081632653,0.5277777777777778,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6263,latent_6263,4620,0.00924,0.009446577,4.0670733,Detailed examination findings with interval changes or specific anatomical assessments.,"Highly activated examples often include specific descriptions of anatomical structures, findings (often changes or intervals), and sometimes make direct comparisons to prior reports, especially when assessing significant conditions or changes that necessitate comparison. These evaluated texts seem to be triggered by a pattern where detailed comparison with past images emphasizes particular clinical suspicions such as pneumothorax or pneumonia. Examples with high activation often reference interval changes or detailed anatomical findings. However, those with low activations often lack descriptive findings beyond what is supported by imaging comparison.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4125178880771258,0.415,0.4247787610619469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6264,latent_6264,4357,0.008714,0.012595524,7.217247,Detailed unchanged or stable findings when comparing radiographs to prior images.,"The activation levels are higher in reports involving comprehensive descriptions that compare current and prior imaging concerning specific findings, irrespective of the technique used. These include consistent narration about various findings related to cardiopulmonary conditions, emphasizing 'stable', 'clear', 'normal', or relatively unchanged conditions, in addition to further descriptions of other non-significant findings, indicating a focus on detailed comparison rather than solely acute findings.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5428571428571428,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6265,latent_6265,3640,0.00728,0.00803634,10.469747,Comparison of changes in subtle or faint opacities across studies.,"The examples with higher activations often involve a comparison between current and prior imaging, with a focus on the stability, change, or appearance of opacities. These opacities are frequently described as faint, subtle, or needing follow-up, which highlights a particular interest in minor changes or early signs of pathology that might not be readily apparent without careful comparison.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6266,latent_6266,17494,0.034988,0.020789506,3.744847,Explicit comparison of current imaging with prior studies for stability or change.,"These examples emphasize comparison with prior imaging studies to assess for changes in various health conditions, particularly highlighting stable or unchanged findings over time. The activation is higher when this comparative aspect is strongly present or explicitly noted, indicating the model's focus on longitudinal assessment in medical imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.5661764705882353,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6267,latent_6267,3427,0.006854,0.012536616,8.016775,Comparison of position or status of internal devices and tubes with previous images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve situations where radiological study findings are compared to prior imaging results, especially focusing on the updating status of devices, tubes, or lines within the body, such as PICC lines, pacemakers, and tracheostomy tubes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5370370370370371,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6268,latent_6268,7096,0.014192,0.02513968,4.681199,Structured comparison requests in radiology report prompts.,"Examples show a consistent internal structure of prompt and request to give a comparative description of radiological findings, focusing on comparing current and prior images. This pattern of structure coheres with radiology report templates, indicating its purpose to elicit detailed comparative evaluations.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6269,latent_6269,3863,0.007726,0.017638544,6.480754,Comparison identifies new or changed pathological findings or interventions.,"The high activation samples consistently compare the findings in the current imaging study against prior images and show either new pathological findings or changes in conditions, especially in the context of tubes or lines, pleural effusions, and pulmonary conditions. Lower activation examples either lack these comparisons or show no change.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.6043956043956044,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6270,latent_6270,5783,0.011566,0.018683566,4.8770623,"Provision of findings compared to prior images, despite insufficient data for a meaningful comparison.","The examples with an activation level above 0 all involve situations where a comparison of current and prior images is requested and provided. Specifically, these examples reference 'prior images' in the prompt, even when no useful comparison can be made due to underpenetration or lack of significant change.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6271,latent_6271,4652,0.009304,0.011010241,5.2681518,Focus on interval change or stability compared to prior images.,"These examples emphasize changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior imaging, particularly focusing on key medical indicators such as pleural effusions, pulmonary status, or specific lesions, and often in contexts where post-operative or significant medical history adjustments are observed. High activation is associated with precise descriptions of differences or lack thereof compared to previous studies.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.5158730158730159,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6272,latent_6272,4801,0.009602,0.009144171,4.6585026,"Focus on interval changes to lung bases (e.g., opacities, effusions, atelectasis).","Examples with high activation levels frequently describe changes at the lung bases, such as opacities, effusions, or atelectasis, often comparing them to previous images. This signifies a frequent focus in chest radiography reports evaluating for interval changes or persistent issues located near the lung bases.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6504854368932039,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6273,latent_6273,135049,0.270098,0.17449838,6.9204926,Comparative analysis with prior imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include detailed comparative phrases like 'as compared to', 'unchanged from', and references to prior imaging reports, reflecting a focus on temporal changes in the patient's condition based on imaging comparison. Lower activation examples often lack such explicit comparative analysis.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.616,0.64,0.5933333333333334,0.89,100.0,100.0
+6274,latent_6274,11554,0.023108,0.021197757,6.301242,Attention to interval change compared with prior imaging findings.,"The samples with high activations consistently describe changes in imaging findings in comparison to previous examinations, indicating attention to interval change or stability is crucial. This comparison often follows or suggests notable findings such as new devices, opacities, or stability in pathological features. This pattern emphasizes variations between current and prior imaging reports as significant.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6275,latent_6275,10688,0.021376,0.011356234,3.9447215,Comparison of support device placement between images.,"The examples with the highest activation consistently reference changes or stability in medical devices or support devices, such as lines, ports, or tubes, between current and prior imaging studies. They emphasize device placement, positioning, or state (e.g., ""PICC line"", ""endotracheal tube"").",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5961538461538461,0.31,100.0,100.0
+6276,latent_6276,5559,0.011118,0.021171598,6.173785,Comparison between current and prior frontal images.,"The examples consistently involve the comparison of current and prior frontal images, emphasizing changes or stability in observed medical conditions. Key phrases like 'comparison', 'prior frontal', and '[[_prior]]' reflect this consistent theme across highly activated samples.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5429001640181765,0.575,0.5490196078431373,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6277,latent_6277,51748,0.103496,0.050614532,3.625212,Reference to prior imaging studies emphasizing unchanged findings.,"The examples that have higher activation levels consistently include reference to prior imaging for comparison, regardless of whether any change has occurred. Unchanged findings or stable conditions are common elements, highlighting the interest in interval stability over significant change in pathology.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4743589743589743,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6278,latent_6278,4340,0.00868,0.0086371545,4.9474816,Comparison with prior frontal images in radiology reports.,"Examples consistently mention 'prior' or 'comparison', indicating an assessment of changes over time from previous imaging reports or studies. This pattern is commonly seen when reports need temporal context, reflecting stability or changes in findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4109136006614303,0.43,0.4485294117647059,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6279,latent_6279,4731,0.009462,0.008618379,5.0627866,Imaging changes compared to prior studies emphasizing specific conditions.,"The patterns identified within the examples revolve around comparative evaluations with prior radiographic exams that detail changes in specific conditions such as atelectasis, opacification, effusion, pneumonia, and cardiac measurements. This is a typical format in radiology for longitudinal assessment of imaging findings, expressing changes over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6280,latent_6280,3770,0.00754,0.010947909,5.0470395,Report generation with direct instructions to compare to prior imaging.,These examples strongly focus on the creation of radiology reports by comparing current imaging findings with previous studies. The activation pattern prioritizes examples wherein the phrase structure emphasizes a task format instructing to 'provide a description' and specific comparison terms such as 'in comparison to the prior frontal image.',0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6281,latent_6281,3215,0.00643,0.009558751,5.9939384,Detailed comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where a detailed comparison between current and prior radiological images is described. These examples often highlight changes in medical devices (like catheters or pacemakers), or consolidation patterns indicating progressions or changes in health conditions, such as worsening pneumonia or the stability of lesions. The prompts focus on generating descriptions that assess the current study against prior established baselines.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4235294117647059,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6282,latent_6282,4126,0.008252,0.0106215365,3.7059536,Emphasis on lateral view in image comparison and detailed description.,"In these examples, descriptions or comparisons are made between images, typically noting differences in lung conditions or equipment placement. Specifically, reports that use lateral images and detailed textual descriptions without explicit comparison to prior results show higher activation. The lateral view may be important for nuanced interpretations or additional details within reports.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6283,latent_6283,6077,0.012154,0.008503571,6.918851,Detailed comparison or interval finding changes in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings of changes or stability in the images when comparing them to previous studies. The key emphasis in those reports is the detailed comparison between the current and prior images to evaluate either improvements, deteriorations, or stability of medical conditions visible in the radiographic studies.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6284,latent_6284,7984,0.015968,0.016370345,9.317685,Comparison findings indicating significant changes or abnormalities.,"High activation examples involve descriptions of changes or significant abnormalities found in comparison to previous imaging studies, often emphasizing enlargement or alterations in the heart size, mediastinal shift, or significant new findings like pleural effusion or infiltrates. These examples often stress importance by commenting on alterations in key structures or pathologies identified with regard to prior images",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4528301886792453,0.24,100.0,100.0
+6285,latent_6285,4531,0.009062,0.015895145,6.6148176,Explicit comparison to prior imaging with focus on stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit descriptions of stability or changes in anatomical features when compared to prior imaging studies. Language often involves assessments such as 'unchanged', 're-demonstrated', or comparison of 'previously noted' findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.464665415884928,0.465,0.4666666666666667,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6286,latent_6286,3224,0.006448,0.008849019,4.1530113,Absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities with normal cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"Examples with high activation levels refer to findings in radiology studies where the heart and mediastinal contours are described as 'normal' or 'unremarkable', and there is an explicit mention of 'no acute cardiopulmonary abnormality'. This pattern of wording suggests a focus on the absence of serious or immediate issues related to the heart and lungs.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5471698113207547,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6287,latent_6287,5306,0.010612,0.015610951,5.0458703,Providing comparative descriptions in radiological findings.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to provide explicit instructions for comparisons between the current radiological imaging and prior image studies. These examples emphasize providing descriptions or findings in comparison, which marks the distinct feature that triggers high activation.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3693080047428038,0.375,0.3949579831932773,0.47,100.0,100.0
+6288,latent_6288,5251,0.010502,0.019827848,4.848755,Comparison request without specified prior imaging context.,"Highly activated examples consistently request or reference comparison with prior imaging studies, often lacking a specific comparison technique or specific prior study. This reflects an unusual pattern in prompts where comparison information is requested or implied but not adequately provided.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6289,latent_6289,4981,0.009962,0.013453885,6.9739623,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette focus in findings.,"The explanation relates to the finding that radiology reports have a pattern that includes stability or normalcy in the cardiomediastinal silhouette as a major focus, often mentioned alongside various other findings (or lack thereof) with clear comparisons to prior images or imaging contexts. Such mentions are frequent regardless of the other findings present, signifying normal cardiomediastinal contours or size as a part of the report.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7773053952829234,0.78,0.7295081967213115,0.89,100.0,100.0
+6290,latent_6290,9113,0.018226,0.015264881,7.0319166,Use of both current and prior images for comparison.,"The examples with higher activation consistently involve images being compared to their prior versions. The presence of both current and prior images, and the task of providing a current description in comparison to those prior images, appears to be relevant for higher activations.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6291,latent_6291,9258,0.018516,0.014215864,6.823496,Comparison to prior images indicating unchanged or stabilized findings.,"These examples focus on radiological interpretations where findings are stable, unchanged, or improved compared to prior images, or new pathologies are noted in temporal comparison. The use of terms indicating interval changes are key to identifying reports that fit the provided pattern.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6292,latent_6292,57807,0.115614,0.06919953,4.4125524,Comparison with prior imaging studies noting changes in pneumonia or effusions.,"High activation levels correspond to instances involving detailed radiological comparisons with previous studies and often describe changes in clinical context or radiographic findings like effusions, cardiomegaly, or pneumonia, indicating a model focus on comparison over time and relevant changes.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5842696629213483,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6293,latent_6293,24555,0.04911,0.04372595,6.1711483,Comparisons of current and prior imaging for interval change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a comparison with prior imaging studies to determine changes in findings. This reflects a pattern where the focus is on identifying changes over time, whether improvement, worsening, or stability of existing conditions, using explicit comparisons with previous images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4703754424950259,0.4824120603015075,0.4846153846153846,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+6294,latent_6294,102645,0.20529,0.13987246,6.680349,Comparison of findings on current radiological images with prior images.,"These examples involve describing findings on current radiological images with explicit comparison to prior images. They commonly assess for consistency, changes, or stability of features like cardiac silhouette, effusions, and opacifications, frequently using terms like ""compared to,"" ""slightly decreased,"" ""stable,"" and ""unchanged.""",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5797760578738796,0.605,0.5704697986577181,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6295,latent_6295,4910,0.00982,0.01972107,6.3736763,Explicit references to prior radiological studies with assessment of interval changes.,"Higher activation levels are seen in examples with explicit references to prior reports or studies in their assessment, focusing on interval changes, improvements, or conclusions drawn from comparing current findings with prior images.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6296,latent_6296,36337,0.072674,0.035070945,3.4051504,References to cardiac silhouette size or cardiomegaly compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels reference cardiomegaly, which means heart enlargement. Often these reports acknowledge that the heart size is 'normal', or 'mildly enlarged', and compare this to previous standings (e.g., top normal, mildly enlarged). This finding is part of assessments that consider cardiac silhouette and size.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,100.0
+6297,latent_6297,3398,0.006796,0.009084093,8.222097,Comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on stability or lack of prior availability.,"The patterns observed in these examples consist of descriptions which perform a comparison of findings in current and prior imaging studies, but with an emphasis on unchanged conditions compared to previous examinations, or scenarios where there is no prior image for comparison. This emphasis explains why these descriptions have lower or inconsistent activation levels.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6298,latent_6298,9083,0.018166,0.012705397,4.6429224,Pleural effusion changes or atelectasis in sequential imaging comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels often highlight the detection of changes or abnormalities in imaging, such as the presence or alteration in pleural effusion, atelectasis, or consolidation. These findings are typically framed within the context of intervals or comparisons made against previous studies. The pattern seems to emphasize findings that required action or notable changes from past imaging.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.55,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6299,latent_6299,3511,0.007022,0.008869835,4.370017,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"The pattern of high activation levels in these examples is associated with reports that include detailed comparisons of current imaging findings with multiple or specific prior examinations, typically marked by phrases like ""stable compared to prior"" or mentioning detailed interval changes minimally seen in subsequent studies.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.404866094871346,0.405,0.4020618556701031,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6300,latent_6300,20872,0.041744,0.019945126,4.802283,Comparison to prior image for changes in tube placements and structures.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the task of providing a comparison between current and prior images to identify changes or stability in findings. Key indicators include phrases ""in comparison to the prior image"" and references to evaluating specific tube placements or anatomical positions (e.g., NG tube).",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.4818181818181818,0.5520833333333334,96.0,104.0
+6301,latent_6301,5082,0.010164,0.01443548,4.3635144,Lack of 'PRIOR_REPORT' affects comparative findings descriptions.,"The highly activated entries all lack a provided 'PRIOR_REPORT' which directly influences the content of the assistant's reflection description. The model appears to activate on the availability or absence of prior reports, which guides the comparative aspect of the analysis.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3901612903225806,0.4271356783919598,0.4496644295302013,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+6302,latent_6302,7482,0.014964,0.0120054055,3.5661616,Detailed comparison of current with prior frontal imaging findings.,"Examples with high activations contrast current radiology studies with prior frontal images, comparing visual findings to deduce if changes have occurred or if the findings are stable. The pattern focuses on detailed descriptions of comparisons without additional study of past comparisons, emphasizing change, stability, or resolving conditions.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3623057417589315,0.365,0.3448275862068966,0.3,100.0,100.0
+6303,latent_6303,2857,0.005714,0.0063779023,6.359523,Emphasis on interval changes through comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples exhibit detailed commentary on interval changes using comparison with prior radiographs, often focusing on changes in radiological findings like pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, and device placement. The emphasis is on specific changes or stability over time between images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4555902812783546,0.46,0.4661016949152542,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6304,latent_6304,11569,0.023138,0.02246374,4.9740715,Descriptions of radiographic changes in medical devices or fluid levels.,"The examples with high activation often contain mentions of interval changes or comparisons directly tied to medical support devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or changes in pleural fluid levels, implying a focus on monitoring procedural or diagnostic progress. Specific references to these interventions or changes seem crucial to the pattern.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5866518802298619,0.59,0.6097560975609756,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6305,latent_6305,9708,0.019416,0.012448836,5.7658687,"Comparison of current image findings with prior, emphasizing unchanged medical devices or surgical changes.","The examples showing high activation levels involve radiology reports with a detailed description of the current image findings, including comparison to prior images when available, particularly in the presence of certain medical devices or surgical changes (e.g., tracheostomy, PICC line, surgical interventions) which remain unchanged. This pattern highlights a focus on evaluating the stability or changes of specific artifacts or post-surgical anatomy in follow-up imaging.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5913978494623656,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6306,latent_6306,2547,0.005094,0.0068125995,5.8142223,Comparison of current and prior image findings.,"The text consistently refers to comparing the changes between multiple images, particularly focusing on current versus prior (such as 'current frontal image' and 'prior frontal image'), which involves the analysis of differences or similarities in findings. This comparison aspect is reiterated across examples.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4501504305425874,0.47,0.4782608695652174,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6307,latent_6307,5086,0.010172,0.006600732,3.8396854,Comparison of medical device positioning with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels repeatedly involve discussion of the evaluation or adjustment of positioning for medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, often in relation to a prior image to assess for placement changes. This indicates a heightened focus on monitoring support device positioning over time.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6491228070175439,0.65,0.6666666666666666,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6308,latent_6308,103596,0.207192,0.17268789,5.254539,Detailed tracking of changes in specific pulmonary or cardiac conditions across images.,"The samples with higher activation levels typically involve the use of comparison with prior images. However, a significant focus in these cases is on specific changes in the pulmonary or cardiac conditions, such as alterations in lung volume, presence of pneumothorax, or changes in cardiomediastinal contours. The focus is on tracking changes in specific anatomical areas or devices over time, often involving iterative or detailed tracking over multiple exams.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5390625,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6309,latent_6309,5701,0.011402,0.010725173,3.5456517,"Comparative analysis between frontal, lateral, and prior images.","The activation levels increase when the reports involve at least two types of imaging views (frontal, lateral, and prior) and provide comparative findings between them or detail changes such as the appearance of cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung opacities, or pleural effusions changing from prior studies.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4336222431991761,0.505,0.5029239766081871,0.86,100.0,100.0
+6310,latent_6310,4369,0.008738,0.009072226,6.259051,Normal heart and mediastinal contours with clear lungs.,"The explanation relates to reports indicating normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours and/or heart size with a focus on the lungs being clear. This is indicative of no acute cardiopulmonary process, typical in evaluations focused on ruling out immediate concerns.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5625,0.58,0.6333333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6311,latent_6311,8715,0.01743,0.0134325875,3.7698061,Descriptive emphasis on the absence of pathological findings in the report.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve a clear description of the absence of significant pathological findings. Phrases like 'lungs are clear', 'no focal consolidation', 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax', and 'cardiac silhouette is normal/unremarkable' are often present, which suggest a pattern of emphasizing normalcy or the absence of abnormalities.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6872761934204086,0.6934673366834171,0.6535433070866141,0.83,100.0,99.0
+6312,latent_6312,11364,0.022728,0.016475372,5.60749,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit or frequent comparison of the current imaging findings to those documented in prior studies. This suggests that a notable pattern in reports with higher activation is the emphasis on analyzing changes over time, especially looking for progression or stability of medical conditions based on past imaging comparisons.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5454545454545454,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6313,latent_6313,2463,0.004926,0.0069789495,5.7264385,Normal findings and stability in imaging with no acute abnormalities.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve assessments where there are no changes or no acute abnormalities found in the radiographic study, with a clear description of normal findings. These reports often compare current images with prior images, emphasizing stability or lack of acute pathology.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6932746700188561,0.695,0.6695652173913044,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6314,latent_6314,6827,0.013654,0.0118502155,4.6992044,Mildly enlarged or top normal cardiac silhouette.,"The pattern shows references to mildly enlarged or top normal sized cardiac silhouettes in the context of evaluating various conditions, often without acute cardiopulmonary findings. This describes a common observation where heart size is noted but not a significant finding. This is distinguished from ""mild"" or ""moderate"" descriptions indicating more substantial issues.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6030800984361355,0.625,0.7358490566037735,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6315,latent_6315,2494,0.004988,0.008821372,7.586722,Comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The pattern consistently involves making comparative assessments between current and previous imaging findings, especially focusing on changes or stability over time. This is emphasized by explicit instructions or contexts regarding comparison with prior images or reports.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6316,latent_6316,10939,0.021878,0.015673729,2.8884487,Pattern of comparing current findings with prior radiology images.,"These examples consistently reference the comparison with prior imaging studies to assess for changes. The presence of terms like 'comparison to prior', 'as compared to the previous', and similar phrases indicates that the model is detecting patterns that involve direct assessment against previous radiologic data to determine change or stability in findings.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5064935064935064,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6317,latent_6317,3774,0.007548,0.0112577565,5.5936627,Detailed comparisons to multiple prior images or extensive prior histories.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently showcase the use of detailed descriptions comparing the current images to a set or series of prior images or radiographs while exhibiting patterns or images of medical significance (e.g., progression or stability of patient's conditions). This results in a higher activation meaning that more detailed comparative reporting aligns with the pattern recognized by the model as significant.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.4424778761061947,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6318,latent_6318,7827,0.015654,0.011802619,5.4944453,Comparisons to prior imaging focusing on pneumonia evaluations.,"These examples discuss evaluations for pneumonia particularly when there are comparisons made with prior imaging studies, focusing on unchanged cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes or findings specifically relating to pneumonia and cardiovascular assessments in the context of previous examinations.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4651162790697674,0.2,100.0,100.0
+6319,latent_6319,4863,0.009726,0.008767225,2.70795,Requests for descriptions of image findings.,"The examples exhibit a recurring structure where findings are described either alongside radiological terminology (frontal, lateral views) or alongside focal descriptors (e.g., image comparisons followed by request for a description), indicating the pattern is driven by providing imaging evaluations lacking explicit textual descriptions while indicating the need to provide them.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6320,latent_6320,4030,0.00806,0.015536167,4.6987824,Describe findings from images without prior context or detailed indication.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing interpretations or comparisons of imaging studies in the absence of any prior detailed reports or explicit indications or context. This pattern emphasizes the need for the model to derive conclusions based solely on the given images and immediate findings, often without prior history or medical indication details.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6321,latent_6321,16473,0.032946,0.019629743,6.547611,Attention to inappropriate or adjusted tube placement in radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve explicit comparisons or directions to adjust the placement of tubes or lines, notably vague or 'inappropriate' endotracheal tube positioning, which indicates that the tube needs adjustment. This leads to a focus on specific detailed changes or issues in the context of tube placement.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6787360105332456,0.695,0.734375,0.5164835164835165,91.0,109.0
+6322,latent_6322,6421,0.012842,0.0119587695,5.039465,Focus on providing descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The key observation linking high activation examples is explicit instruction or implicit focus on providing descriptions of radiology findings regardless of changes when comparing current and prior images. This emphasis on precise description and comparison, even in the absence of significant change, activates the recognition pattern.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6323,latent_6323,2938,0.005876,0.0076687275,5.0253434,"Reference to stability or changes in cardiomegaly, effusions, or pulmonary findings.","The examples that exhibit high activation consistently feature explicit references to changes or stability in radiological findings when compared to previous images. This often involves discussions of conditions such as cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, effusions, and atelectasis, indicating the significance of highlighting stability or change over time in these specific aspects. These are crucial in determining the clinical progress of conditions often monitored using serial imaging.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6324,latent_6324,3187,0.006374,0.009008702,9.630823,Detailed interval change assessment compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves evaluating and describing changes over time. High activation examples describe interval changes in findings compared to prior images, emphasizing any progression, improvement, or stability in conditions such as pneumonia, pleural effusion, or cardiopulmonary statuses. This is crucial in follow-up assessments which are common in radiology.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3645833333333333,0.39,0.3166666666666666,0.19,100.0,100.0
+6325,latent_6325,40576,0.081152,0.04345262,7.662856,Explicit comparison of imaging findings to prior studies with noted changes.,"Samples with higher activations consistently describe changes in imaging findings compared to initial or previous studies, highlighting interval improvements or persistence of specific ailments or placements, like pneumothorax resolution or device constancy. These examples describe imaging results in an explicit comparison context.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6697027324592133,0.67,0.5565217391304348,0.810126582278481,79.0,121.0
+6326,latent_6326,5748,0.011496,0.021098785,6.0964384,"Comparison of current with prior, emphasizing changes or stability, often tagged N/A.","The examples indicate information about comparing frontal and lateral images with previous images, emphasizing changes or stability, while often tagged as N/A for impressions or indications unless changes are significant. The use of comparative language with imaging dates is prevalent.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6327,latent_6327,4403,0.008806,0.007503493,4.7464166,Changes in intubation or tube placement observed in comparison to prior studies.,The examples that demonstrate high activation levels often involve comparison with prior studies and focus on changes in positioning or condition of intubation or tube placement. These scenarios are crucial radiological assessments as they help determine the correctness of current interventions and changes in patient status.,0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5217391304347826,0.24,100.0,100.0
+6328,latent_6328,9469,0.018938,0.012594527,7.2083526,Stable conditions across multiple chest X-ray comparisons with no significant interval changes.,"Examples cited have multiple views of chest X-rays and comparisons to prior studies, but do not change over time, often showing stable or unchanged conditions. This can be seen in phrases like 'unchanged from', 'remains stable', or similar descriptions in the comparison context.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4262295081967213,0.26,100.0,100.0
+6329,latent_6329,5734,0.011468,0.010426722,6.1998863,Stable findings across multiple imaging reports.,"The consistent pattern in highly activated examples involves references to conditions suggesting chronic changes or findings that remain stable across multiple imaging examinations. These references often include evaluating stability of specific findings in relation to prior reports, with assessments such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or specific comparisons across different time points.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+6330,latent_6330,10378,0.020756,0.0132051995,5.4773054,Reference to positioning or change of medical devices via comparison.,"The high activation examples demonstrate conditions where medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes, pacemakers) are assessed for placement or change in position based on comparison with prior imaging. Usage of words like 'unchanged', 'position', or 'removal' often appears in these reports alongside devices.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.5901639344262295,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6331,latent_6331,8284,0.016568,0.009964305,5.957581,"Frontal and lateral chest views without prior comparison, clear chest findings.","The highly representative examples include findings of both frontal and lateral chest radiographs without comparison to prior images, indicating diagnostic evaluation focusing on the current view alone. This pattern involves detailed description of the chest structures' status, without changes noted relative to past imaging, often flagged by absence of consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax despite being evaluated with 'no comparison'.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5904358109082519,0.645,0.6829268292682927,0.3255813953488372,86.0,114.0
+6332,latent_6332,5681,0.011362,0.00814396,4.554499,Assessment involving comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples specifically provide comparative analysis of current and prior images, highlighting changes or stabilization of findings, even when there is no prior to compare (indicated by 'none') but still involves a directed comparison analysis or intent.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3770457185091331,0.41,0.4383561643835616,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6333,latent_6333,13177,0.026354,0.016723787,4.3014307,Instruction to compare current and prior images for changes.,"Most examples with high activation levels include the phrase ""Given the current... and the prior..."" followed by ""Provide a description... in comparison to the prior..."" indicating a task of comparing current and prior images to describe changes or stability in conditions.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6334,latent_6334,3543,0.007086,0.010581558,5.1911974,Description and comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples describe reports comparing current images to prior ones, often mentioning changes or stability in medical findings or interventions. This pattern includes queries for changes in pathological features, catheter placements, or the presence of new equipment, while remaining neutral or unchanged in the absence of noted previous comparisons.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4543548387096774,0.4874371859296482,0.4899328859060403,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+6335,latent_6335,3468,0.006936,0.011238152,5.304441,Presence of 'PRI' or 'PRIOR' indicating comparison with prior images or reports.,"The highly activated examples present a pattern where there is an emphasis on comparison with prior radiological findings, often using 'PRI', 'PRIOR', 'INDICATION', or explicit instructions on how to compare current images with ones from a previous imaging session. This repetition or similar format suggests focus on direct image comparison and historical context provided in reports.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4569031273836766,0.555,0.5297297297297298,0.98,100.0,100.0
+6336,latent_6336,6591,0.013182,0.013200269,6.370213,Changes in lung opacification compared to prior images.,"These examples distinctly feature descriptions about the status or changes in the presence of opacification in the lungs or chest, often comparing 'increased', 'new', or 'worsened' opacification between the current image and a prior image. Such analysis is typical when identifying possible consolidation, atelectasis, or pleural effusions.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.67499187479687,0.675,0.6732673267326733,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6337,latent_6337,8933,0.017866,0.012144705,2.841982,Use of current images in comparison to prior images for evaluation.,"Instances with activations indicating significant pattern presence involve explicit instructions to compare current images with prior ones, often including both current and prior frontal images as inputs. This demonstrates a focus on comparative assessments across imaging sequences.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6338,latent_6338,5149,0.010298,0.010727063,8.096819,Noting changes compared to prior medical imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels feature evaluations of radiological images where specific comparisons are made with prior studies to note sagings or unchanged findings. This includes examining changes in medical devices, lung conditions, or fluid presence over time using language indicators like 'comparison', and mentioning previous dates or other historical reports.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6339,latent_6339,7622,0.015244,0.01458136,4.5078096,Comparisons with previous imaging to identify interval change.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include findings that compare current imaging with prior studies, focusing specifically on the discernible interval changes or stability in observed pathology over time. This pattern of interpretation provides detailed comparative analysis, highlighting newly observed changes, such as nodule size increase, improvement in pneumonia, or installation of medical devices. It contrasts with examples with low activation levels where no prior comparisons are available or made.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6340,latent_6340,19780,0.03956,0.018305484,3.0161352,Identification or assessment of tube placement or stabilization.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on identifying and describing the state of tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, or chest tubes) using precise positioning terms (e.g., 'above the carina'). These reports often discuss changes in tube placement or stability when comparing current and prior images, reflecting a focus on monitoring medical support devices in radiological interpretations.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.6071428571428571,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6341,latent_6341,3838,0.007676,0.015946722,6.306308,Explicit instruction for comparison with prior images emphasized.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature language that integrates prior imaging studies, specifically with explicit instructions to compare these with current images when dictating radiology results. Such instructions indicate a structured approach focusing on trend analysis in patient's radiological findings, utilizing prior reference points to evaluate stability or change.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.3333333333333333,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4242947610823258,0.425,0.4299065420560747,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6342,latent_6342,15436,0.030872,0.019954348,5.8093963,Stable heart size and normal lung appearance without effusion or pneumothorax.,"The highly activated examples tend to exclude specific findings such as effusion, pneumothorax, or significant focal opacities indicating pathological conditions, and state normal or stable conditions of heart or lung structures. They often emphasize the clear appearance of the lungs or unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette while also not referencing pathological considerations.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.651541682527598,0.6532663316582915,0.6823529411764706,0.58,100.0,99.0
+6343,latent_6343,40032,0.080064,0.05250512,7.36196,Low lung volumes increasing broncho-vascular markings or heart silhouette.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe scenarios with reduced or low lung volumes that exaggerate structures like the heart or bronchovascular markings. This is a radiographic pattern, frequently noted when there is low inspiratory effort.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8019047619047619,0.805,0.8192771084337349,0.7391304347826086,92.0,108.0
+6344,latent_6344,30282,0.060564,0.029978149,6.2453303,Evaluation of rib abnormalities or fractures.,"The samples show analyses focused on evaluating rib abnormalities in radiological studies, primarily assessing for fractures or related issues. Many examples specifically mention the evaluation of bony structures for indications like rib fractures, prior surgeries affecting the ribs, or chronic conditions involving bone health.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4624204688510088,0.605,0.6923076923076923,0.1071428571428571,84.0,116.0
+6345,latent_6345,4255,0.00851,0.0044213533,3.8035965,Interval change evaluation in successive imaging studies.,"This pattern is evident when multiple images are provided for comparison, with specific attention to identifying any interval changes or stabilization of known findings. The examples heavily emphasize cross-checking against previous studies to evaluate for 'interval change,' and often ask for a comparative analysis.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6346,latent_6346,76775,0.15355,0.095891885,6.60418,Evaluation of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with notable activation levels describe changes or the stability of conditions when analyzing current imaging relative to prior studies. The pattern involves evaluating interval changes and determining stability or progression of conditions, commonly indicated by ""unchanged,"" ""interval,"" ""stable,"" ""resolution,"" and specific measurements.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,0.6756756756756757,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6289424860853432,0.655,0.6013071895424836,0.92,100.0,100.0
+6347,latent_6347,51903,0.103806,0.043858517,2.0952158,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging for assessing changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a description of the findings compared to previous radiology studies, indicating a focus on detecting changes or lack thereof in follow-up imaging. Such references typically involve phrases like 'in comparison with', 'as compared to the previous radiograph', and mentioning stable or unchanged findings, suggesting the pattern gives weight to comparative descriptions that assess progression or stability in medical imaging.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5510480054090602,0.585,0.5548387096774193,0.86,100.0,100.0
+6348,latent_6348,3837,0.007674,0.010898913,5.9179807,"Patterns involving comparison of multiple images, including lateral images.","Examples with high activation levels involve providing a comparative analysis narrative, typically using expressions like 'compared to', when examining multiple images, including lateral images, to evaluate changes or stability in medical conditions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4793388429752066,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6349,latent_6349,11620,0.02324,0.015375268,7.1753616,Low lung volumes causing accentuated features in chest imaging.,"The examples largely describe low lung volumes, leading to observations such as accentuated cardiac silhouettes and crowded bronchovascular markings. This pattern is frequently noted in radiology images with limited inspiratory effort or low lung volume.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5281840637229053,0.575,0.5777777777777777,0.2826086956521739,92.0,108.0
+6350,latent_6350,8281,0.016562,0.016134964,5.616156,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"High activation levels correlate with the presence of explicit instructions to compare the current image findings with prior images, usually with phrases like 'comparison' or 'compared to' alongside specific observations about changes or lack thereof in findings in the context of the radiology report.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6351,latent_6351,8485,0.01697,0.016821831,6.138129,Evaluation or comparison of changes in imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation typically involve the evaluation of current and prior imaging for any changes indicative of progression or stability of a condition, using phrases like 'evaluate for interval change', 'comparable to prior', or 'in comparison with the earlier study'. This pattern focuses on identifying changes or lack thereof in imaging findings between current and prior films.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4466145833333333,0.49,0.4935897435897436,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6352,latent_6352,5845,0.01169,0.013964124,4.710221,Reports highlighting procedure-related changes or interventions.,"The examples demonstrating higher activation levels involve a procedure or recent change in treatment, such as placement of medical tubing or supporting devices, which are then emphasized in findings and impressions, often marked by terms indicating interval change, alteration, or procedural placement. Reports that merely describe or compare existing images without reference to interventions often show low activation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4561403508771929,0.26,100.0,100.0
+6353,latent_6353,5893,0.011786,0.008444625,6.3396044,Description of interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight a pattern where there is a consistent mention of changes or stability in findings compared to previous images. This typically involves noting whether there is interval change, as well as assessing new or persistent opacities, effusions, heart size changes, and devices, thus emphasizing longitudinal monitoring of conditions or statuses.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4005994005994006,0.415,0.2549019607843137,0.3880597014925373,67.0,133.0
+6354,latent_6354,6258,0.012516,0.02205319,5.8422337,Comparison detecting changes or stability in abnormalities.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include abnormalities such as pneumothorax, atelectasis, or consolidation which are detected by comparing current and previous frontal and lateral images. They focus on detecting changes or confirming stability over time, often indicating significant interval alterations or specific abnormal findings.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3357487922705314,0.34,0.3095238095238095,0.26,100.0,100.0
+6355,latent_6355,8715,0.01743,0.02461937,6.4178305,Explicitly instructing comparison to prior images or description of unchanged findings.,"These examples frequently include an explicit call to describe or compare findings with prior imagery and often highlight unchanged findings, residual findings, or stability in the response text by the 'ASSISTANT'. This pattern is indicative of comparison and report generation in radiographic interpretations.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4388129123587553,0.445,0.4545454545454545,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6356,latent_6356,1569,0.003138,0.0034144106,5.983811,Presence of median sternotomy wires for evaluation.,"The pattern is observed in scenarios related to the presence of surgical hardware, specifically ""sternotomy wires"" indicating prior thoracic surgery like CABG or valve replacement. Reports often mention stability or changes in these wires as a point of comparison to previous images.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,1.0,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6357,latent_6357,6905,0.01381,0.011199784,6.1615314,Detailed comparison to prior images indicating interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve specific radiological findings in the context of thorough comparisons to previous imaging, notably descriptions of either persistent or improved findings compared to earlier studies, indicating interval changes or stability.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.677386833350136,0.68,0.652542372881356,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6358,latent_6358,5943,0.011886,0.010303027,5.4067836,"Complex multi-view assessment involving prior, frontal, and lateral images.","High activation examples describe findings from multiple views, often labeled frontal, lateral, and prior, allowing a comprehensive view of changes or anomalies noted on one or more images, typically explained by historical medical indications, or prior examinations mentioned in reports. Complex cases with detailed information from multiple angles trigger higher activation.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.442866801893171,0.485,0.4903225806451612,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6359,latent_6359,6313,0.012626,0.0098441895,3.1274152,Imaging findings stable or with minor interval changes compared to prior.,"The pattern involves a description of radiological findings comparing current images to prior ones, often discussing stability or minor changes, but notably without a significant interval change. This is typical in follow-up imaging reports checking for progression or resolution of clinical symptoms or post-operative states.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4058198380566802,0.4070351758793969,0.3956043956043956,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+6360,latent_6360,5304,0.010608,0.009830653,3.9711301,Presence of medical devices or surgical modifications in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe changes like presence of tubes or catheters, surgical modifications, or notable medical devices (e.g., chest tubes, Port-A-Cath, intra-aortic balloon pump) in the radiology report, indicating a radiographically notable intervention or support measure in the patient's management.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5494505494505495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6361,latent_6361,16108,0.032216,0.012906016,1.8627986,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels involve detailed descriptions of radiological findings, particularly those involving complex discussions of multiple devices, significant pathology interpretations, or notable changes compared to prior images. Statements like 'consistent with', detailed device placements, and intricate findings seem to trigger higher activations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6362,latent_6362,2389,0.004778,0.009645401,7.6625843,Use of both frontal and lateral images in comparison to prior images.,"High activation levels point to examples that require a comparison analysis between current and prior images, involving both frontal and lateral views, and reference to a prior report or findings. These examples often have comparison data embedded or require synthesis with prior reports for evaluation.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6096486838154338,0.61,0.6037735849056604,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6363,latent_6363,4249,0.008498,0.011703051,3.7369223,Explicit comparison with prior imaging to describe changes or stability in findings.,"Activation levels are high when there is a clear instruction to compare current findings with prior imaging studies, using such comparisons to identify changes and infer the stability or progression of conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4646464646464646,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6364,latent_6364,3839,0.007678,0.007488469,3.7535362,Explicit request to compare with prior image.,"The examples analyze whether there is an explicit request to provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior image, typically resulting in a higher activation. The request is triggered by phrases such as 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' and the presence of comparative language or findings indicating interval changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.514018691588785,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6365,latent_6365,12535,0.02507,0.0181945,5.1699276,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The provided examples with high activation levels demonstrate explicit usage of comparison between current and prior images, often indicating changes or stability in specific conditions like pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette changes, or pulmonary abnormalities. This can be seen in phrases like 'unchanged intensity', 'increased from prior', or explicating no change relative to previous findings, which signifies the model's focus on analyzing differences over time in imaging studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6366,latent_6366,5863,0.011726,0.0078237625,8.624402,Uncertainty or interpretative language in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve statements where findings are interpreted in context with specific qualifiers like ""likely"", ""most suggestive of"", or ""compatible with"", indicating a level of uncertainty in the diagnosis that requires interpretation.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.4336283185840708,0.7205882352941176,68.0,132.0
+6367,latent_6367,8082,0.016164,0.014792554,5.999574,Radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern observed is the occurrence of radiological findings reported in comparison to prior imaging. These samples frequently include explicit mentions of previous exams and use comparative language, such as 'unchanged from prior', for analytical descriptions of changes in the current imaging.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4850746268656716,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6368,latent_6368,5822,0.011644,0.013904443,4.7974586,Unchanged findings in comparison to prior examinations.,"The pattern involves references to unchanged findings or stability regarding previous examinations. The examples consistently mention stable, unchanged, or consistent findings compared to prior imaging studies across different anatomical structures, which is a significant aspect in longitudinal radiological evaluations.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5937711577522005,0.595,0.6067415730337079,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6369,latent_6369,2966,0.005932,0.0058724256,4.6505947,Noting tube and catheter positions in radiology reports.,"The examples exhibit high activation levels when the findings include descriptions related to positioning or status of tubes and catheters, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or lines within the body. This pattern is evident in samples highlighting unchanged or newly noted placements, suggesting the model is attuned to detecting and evaluating such medical devices in radiological images.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.648735447611401,0.65,0.6704545454545454,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6370,latent_6370,4354,0.008708,0.0103571545,4.7766037,Obfuscated patient details and history with incomplete comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels involve incomplete or modified patient details that obscure specific ages, histories, or comparison dates. This pattern features use of underscores or brackets to obfuscate certain report elements, suggesting anonymization or partial data.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3684411980479091,0.505,0.5025906735751295,0.97,100.0,100.0
+6371,latent_6371,2667,0.005334,0.0062165465,7.420052,Instruction to compare current study to prior image findings.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently contain the instruction to ""provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image "" even when there is no actual prior comparison, emphasizing a pattern of comparing current findings to prior images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6372,latent_6372,5078,0.010156,0.010231744,4.162884,Explicit comparison to previous imaging showing interval stability or changes.,"Highly activated samples consistently reference the comparison of current imaging findings to previous images, indicating stability or changes over time. The analysis focuses on the interval changes in medical imaging findings, exemplified by the reports detailing changes like improved aeration, unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette, or reported interval decreases which help track the progression of a condition based on comparison with previous findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5094339622641509,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6373,latent_6373,4037,0.008074,0.008593389,5.2821465,Key comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The activation pattern suggests favorability towards inputs that explicitly contain both current and prior imagery descriptions, and make contextual comparisons between them. This is evident from the presence of phrasings that compare changes in the findings regarding the patient's condition in the provided images.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3539126211110259,0.3618090452261306,0.3852459016393442,0.4747474747474747,99.0,100.0
+6374,latent_6374,13414,0.026828,0.01417938,4.5711923,Observation of changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The patterns with higher activation levels frequently involve descriptions of changes between current and prior imaging studies, specifically acknowledging alterations in lung opacities, pleural effusions, and mediastinal shift along with the stability (or instability) of medical devices like chest tubes and catheters. These examples provide detailed comparison language indicating changes over time, directly relating findings to prior states and often mentioning stability or change.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6375,latent_6375,2655,0.00531,0.007038515,5.478529,Detailed comparison with prior radiographs indicating changes or stability.,"Reports that have high activation levels consistently highlight detailed comparisons with previous radiographs. They indicate explicit documentation of changes or stability in findings over time, often stating 'As compared to the previous radiograph'. This suggests a pattern where detailed comparative analysis triggers notable activation levels.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4791666666666667,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6376,latent_6376,11429,0.022858,0.016336376,6.4053965,Use of direct comparison language with prior imaging studies.,"The activation levels indicate a pattern related to the use of direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, especially when identifying interval changes or consistency over multiple exams. Typical language patterns focus on stability, interval changes, and specific findings, with comparisons often emphasized through phrases like 'compared to', 'since prior', or explicitly dated prior studies.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6377,latent_6377,6313,0.012626,0.011049962,6.32834,Emphasis on interval changes or stability when comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation focus on describing interval changes referencing previous reports or images, using phrases like 'compared to prior','interval change', and explicit mentions of prior conditions (improvements or progression). This indicates a specific emphasis on tracking changes over time, which is typical when monitoring the progression or resolution of a specific condition.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4670002021427127,0.4673366834170854,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,99.0
+6378,latent_6378,6278,0.012556,0.015297304,5.536188,Comparisons with prior images noting stability or changes.,"These examples focus on comparing current imaging with previous or prior studies. The examples with higher activation contain explicit comparisons indicating either no significant changes or identifiable changes compared to previous images, which are articulated in the findings.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4578761107009191,0.4623115577889447,0.4700854700854701,0.55,100.0,99.0
+6379,latent_6379,5093,0.010186,0.0073835454,4.378302,Detailed interval change description between current and prior images.,"Activation levels are high in examples featuring detailed radiological comparisons and descriptions focused on interval changes between current and prior imaging, particularly changes about medical devices and lung conditions. This pattern shows that radiological comparisons mentioning specific anatomical locations or devices between sequential images are indicative of the pattern.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4600914705046381,0.4723618090452261,0.463768115942029,0.32,100.0,99.0
+6380,latent_6380,11156,0.022312,0.01419433,4.1055207,Detailed evaluation of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with moderate or higher activation consistently involve the process of comparing current imaging findings to prior images, specifically noting stability or change in conditions. This pattern of determining interval change or stability explicitly between images is the focus in these examples.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3632057156169915,0.385,0.3174603174603174,0.2,100.0,100.0
+6381,latent_6381,6135,0.01227,0.011573173,4.0995827,Frontal and lateral chest views showing no significant findings or changes.,These examples describe clear lung fields and unremarkable findings in multiple views (frontal and often lateral) and don’t exhibit major changes or findings suggestive of acute pathology. The reports often emphasize stability and lack of significant findings.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6549913747843696,0.655,0.6534653465346535,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6382,latent_6382,6507,0.013014,0.012371223,5.657127,Changes in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activations are associated with a change in radiological findings compared to prior images, especially in cases where there is noted improvement or worsening of conditions such as effusions, opacities, or device placements. The use of comparative phrases like 'interval improvement', 'unchanged', and 'increase' are indicative of this pattern. Examples with changes in the medical findings compared to previous images exhibit higher activation levels.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5094339622641509,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6383,latent_6383,21425,0.04285,0.020281851,2.5418987,Active comparison with prior imaging indicating evolving conditions or new findings.,"Examples with intermediate activation scores include those where imaging findings are compared to prior studies, but the emphasis is not strictly on long-term stability or clear resolution of pathology. Instead, these cases present new or evolving conditions, such as changes in catheter placement or subtle changes in opacities, highlighting active clinical management decisions and nuanced changes rather than purely stable states or identical comparisons.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6286631874749097,0.63,0.6160714285714286,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6384,latent_6384,5110,0.01022,0.009508649,4.5393353,Emphasis on describing changes in findings by comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation typically involve providing comparisons between the current radiology images and prior images, with an emphasis on discerning changes or stability. The prompt requests a descriptive comparison for detailed analysis rather than stating findings without comparison.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6385,latent_6385,5745,0.01149,0.012940852,5.755145,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging emphasizing subtle changes in lung and cardiac findings.,"These examples discuss detailed comparisons of the current imaging findings with prior radiographs or other studies, particularly changes in lung findings like opacities, effusions, or cardiac size. They focus on the subtle changes between consecutive imaging (e.g., 'minimally increased', 'unchanged', 'new poorly defined opacities', 'stable opacity'), which is a recurrent theme across these reports. It emphasizes interpretation and progression or regression of thoracic findings over time.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6386,latent_6386,13502,0.027004,0.014708038,5.9613695,Presence or references to pleural effusion.,"High activation levels correspond with findings related to pleural effusions and their associations like atelectasis or changes in effusion status. Pleural effusions are referenced in terms of their size, whether they are bilateral or unilateral, and changes compared to prior images, indicating patient changes or outcomes in interval imaging reviews.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7197477729956961,0.72,0.7263157894736842,0.696969696969697,99.0,101.0
+6387,latent_6387,4522,0.009044,0.0095382845,4.827521,"Combination of current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images for analysis.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently include both frontal and lateral views in the current imaging, along with a prior frontal image. This combination offers a comprehensive view often used for in-depth comparative analysis in radiology.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6388,latent_6388,16447,0.032894,0.016953891,3.8369994,Focus on detailed pulmonary findings without reliance on prior comparisons.,"The samples with higher activation levels emphasize findings within the lungs, such as volumes, conditions, and specific lung pathologies/results. They include descriptions of lung density, opacity, or other specific pulmonary observations which are given preeminent focus over the composition or status of other thoracic elements.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6536650286650287,0.6582914572864321,0.7105263157894737,0.54,100.0,99.0
+6389,latent_6389,45795,0.09159,0.05624334,6.1341534,Radiological descriptions involving comparison with prior images.,"Examples with 2.0 or higher activation often refer to findings that compare the current radiographic image with prior images, potentially noting improvement, resolution, or no change. These comparisons help evaluate the progression of medical conditions over time.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6390,latent_6390,24104,0.048208,0.021299822,3.4314945,"Evaluation of lung fields showing clear lungs without consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","These examples are predominantly associated with radiological evaluations of lung fields, specifically identifying clear lungs or the absence of consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. Many of them explore the same clear bilateral lung findings regardless of patient history or indications for imaging.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.559322033898305,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6391,latent_6391,12184,0.024368,0.017467853,5.3930316,Comparison with prior imaging and changes noted.,"Highly active examples consistently mention the comparison of current imaging with previous studies, indicating the importance of observing changes over time for diagnosis and assessment of medical conditions, which aligns with the presence of 'comparison' and noted changes in imaging findings.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.584070796460177,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6392,latent_6392,5453,0.010906,0.007624924,3.8396995,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activation examples often involve explicit mentions of changes or stability in imaging features, especially with comparisons to prior reports. The presence of specific findings like intervals in device placements, resolution or persistence of specific conditions, or stability of specific markers across images is a consistent pattern in these reports.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6393,latent_6393,11592,0.023184,0.013354085,3.7339427,Change in pulmonary opacities or pleural findings over time.,"The examples with higher activations focus on varying or specific changes in pulmonary opacities, fluid accumulation, or other abnormal thoracic findings, often with emphasis on the development or progression since prior imaging. This suggests that noticeable changes, particularly in lung or pleural findings, prompt higher activations.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.6206896551724138,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6394,latent_6394,3275,0.00655,0.010222134,4.4105277,Prompts request description based on a frontal and lateral image comparison.,An examination of models reveals that higher activation levels occur with prompts containing a specific repeated phrase pattern about providing a description of the findings with both frontal and lateral images for comparison. Prompts solely involving a frontal image for comparison without a lateral seem less activated.,0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.539894512400404,0.59,0.5542168674698795,0.92,100.0,100.0
+6395,latent_6395,15903,0.031806,0.029212207,8.77976,"Detailed assessment of lung volumes, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or subtle mediastinal changes compared to prior image.","High activation samples often describe slight changes in lung volumes, the orientation/alignment of the heart or aorta, and describe mediastinal or hilar contour characteristics relative to prior images. These subtle and nuanced comparative interpretations are often required in complex thoracic evaluations, leading to these activations.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6396,latent_6396,38560,0.07712,0.056035925,6.237083,Comparison with prior images without significant change.,Higher activations are associated with cases where there is a reference to imaging comparisons (usually with specific emphasis on specific images) yet there isn't highly significant change between the comparisons; patterns that evaluate change without new significant findings show higher activation.,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4861111111111111,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6397,latent_6397,7149,0.014298,0.02421739,6.6099563,Normal pulmonary and cardiac findings in chest imaging.,"Highly representative samples describe the pulmonary features as normal, including descriptions like 'lungs are clear' or 'lungs are well expanded', alongside mentions of heart size as normal or within upper limits. This pattern occurs in radiology reports emphasizing the absence of acute thoracic pathology.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5694444444444444,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6398,latent_6398,8017,0.016034,0.016019536,4.2435074,Emphasis on significant interval change in radiological features.,"Samples with activation tend to include changes over time in radiological features, like changes in fluid accumulation or improvement of pathological conditions. This indicates an emphasis on observing interval change or improvement compared to previous imaging studies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4145806589644843,0.4472361809045226,0.4038461538461538,0.21,100.0,99.0
+6399,latent_6399,7716,0.015432,0.009938171,5.627763,Reports emphasize comparison to previous imaging findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe the findings of the current image in reference to previous reports, highlighting changes or consistency. These examples emphasize comparing imaging findings over time, assessing interval changes, or stability by referring back to prior imaging reports, sometimes specifying exact changes or updates from previous exams.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.465648854961832,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6400,latent_6400,4519,0.009038,0.015825486,6.089153,Tasks focused on spot assessment or evaluation with references but without explicit prior images.,"Higher activations focus on the consistent task of interpreting current and prior image comparisons, where the primary distinguishing factor is: providing a comparison description, reliance on description without explicit prior images mentioned, and frequently involving cases with immediate clinical implications (symptoms or procedures). These examples consistently describe tasks with clear defined description instructions often with symptoms or history linked to spot assessment, but do not provide prior images which may bias more check-focused features.",0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.6190476190476191,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5997403060315197,0.6030150753768844,0.6296296296296297,0.51,100.0,99.0
+6401,latent_6401,3851,0.007702,0.008655735,6.757157,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The pattern involves the identification of normal and clear findings on the available radiographic or imaging views, emphasizing the absence of any significant pathological findings such as embolism, effusion, or consolidation. These reports highlight the clarity of lungs and the normalcy of cardiomediastinal and mediastinal structures.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.8888888888888888,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6680201230879236,0.675,0.7464788732394366,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6402,latent_6402,4934,0.009868,0.013831619,6.182802,Descriptions focus on image changes over time or stability.,These examples with higher activations focus on providing a description that specifically emphasizes comparisons to the prior image even when no significant change is noted. This pattern involves the use of terminology describing intervals or stability over time in radiological findings.,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4390044879640963,0.45,0.4609375,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6403,latent_6403,8715,0.01743,0.011972962,5.038909,Complex radiographic findings or changes.,"The activation levels suggest few patterns stood out; however, high activations coincided with descriptions of significant radiographic observations, often complex in nature including device placement or significant medical findings. These observations involve evaluative descriptions beyond normal findings or straightforward comparisons. This aligns with radiology's interpretative nature when considering substantial pathological findings or complex cases.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5289883834775476,0.555,0.5374149659863946,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6404,latent_6404,6669,0.013338,0.017017124,6.261766,Inferences based on comparing current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize imaging studies that involve comparisons between current and prior images. There is a recurrent mention of previous imaging studies across various examples, which implies a pattern focused on temporal assessment and changes between images.",0.2694805194805195,0.28,0.2105263157894736,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4046278924327705,0.405,0.4,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6405,latent_6405,21882,0.043764,0.021977752,4.7361903,"Comparative evaluation of stability, improvement, or worsening over time.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of comparison with prior images that indicate either stability, worsening, or improvement in medical conditions. This suggests that the pattern the model activates on is the ability to detect changes or the lack thereof across radiological studies, focusing specifically on observations of change or stability in conditions over time rather than initial findings.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6504683840749415,0.6683417085427136,0.6137931034482759,0.898989898989899,99.0,100.0
+6406,latent_6406,11667,0.023334,0.015849274,4.508402,Normal cardiopulmonary findings without acute abnormalities.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide a clear assessment that confirms no acute abnormal findings in cardiopulmonary areas like no focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, indicating a pattern of normality being the primary focus.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5840097402597402,0.59,0.618421052631579,0.47,100.0,100.0
+6407,latent_6407,2838,0.005676,0.008151285,4.985857,Comparison of radiology findings to prior images with focus on changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve cases where the comparison with prior imaging, specifically highlighting changes or stability over time, is emphasized. This often includes phrases like 'in comparison to prior', 'unchanged from previous', 'provide a description in comparison to prior', etc., indicating a strong focus on temporal assessment and stability of findings.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6408,latent_6408,4275,0.00855,0.011157811,6.0329905,Detailed comparison of current and prior chest radiographs.,"Examples with high readings emphasize detailed comparisons between current and prior chest radiographs, often identifying specific interval changes or the lack thereof. This pattern is characteristic of radiology evaluations concerned with detecting changes over time, using terms like 'compared to', 'remained unchanged', 'as before', etc.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.404866094871346,0.405,0.4077669902912621,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6409,latent_6409,8013,0.016026,0.0106355315,6.536014,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves the use of phrases indicating stability or unchanged findings with respect to prior imaging, whereas new findings are described against a past baseline. Reports often highlight consistent descriptions of unchanged features across exams or note stability in measurements, common when managing chronic conditions or monitoring progress. Notably, findings with new pathologies compared to past stable conditions result in activation, emphasizing stability versus change.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.4329896907216495,0.5185185185185185,81.0,119.0
+6410,latent_6410,23142,0.046284,0.02325799,4.3541737,Finding descriptions that highlight subtle changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The representative examples emphasize changes in the chest radiograph compared to prior images, where the findings often note subtle or no significant changes. These subtle nuances are essential in radiological comparisons, focusing mainly on identifying any notable changes or stability from previous exams, making it the focal point of description.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5470085470085471,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6411,latent_6411,61846,0.123692,0.09144529,8.97329,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging and stability of findings.,"These examples consistently refer to the comparison of the current imaging findings with prior images, especially focusing on the stability of findings, lack of new developments, or mild changes since the last examination. This pattern highlights the radiology practice of evaluating any changes over time, often with explicit references to timeliness in comparisons.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4409609428118153,0.445,0.4140625,0.5955056179775281,89.0,111.0
+6412,latent_6412,5922,0.011844,0.011883294,4.6773815,Detection of pleural effusions on imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels exhibit a distinct pattern of identifying small to moderate pleural effusions, often with accompanying terms like 'adjacent atelectasis', 'layering', and references to bilateral configuration. The consistent mention of these effusions, regardless of their manifestation on either side of the chest, appears to trigger higher activation levels.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8443423464135975,0.845,0.8053097345132744,0.91,100.0,100.0
+6413,latent_6413,5908,0.011816,0.011433421,6.867645,Assessment of interval changes compared with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve evaluating findings in relation to intervals or previous imaging assessments, especially for monitoring changes in medical devices or anatomical indicators like cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, or other conditions. This dynamic comparison highlights stability, slight adjustments, or progression over time, which is essential for clinical decision-making based on radiological evidence.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6414,latent_6414,2763,0.005526,0.008969921,7.198822,Focus on changes observed between current and prior images.,"The examples indicate that higher activation levels correspond to cases where there is a clear change noted between the current and previous imaging, or where the comparative analysis is emphasized. Lower activation levels generally occur when no comparison or change is noted, and the analysis is more of a standalone assessment.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.43,0.43,0.43,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6415,latent_6415,49042,0.098084,0.044131253,4.291725,Thorough comparison and evaluation across multiple imaging views.,"Examples with higher activation levels revolve around detailed descriptions of findings and interpretations across multiple imaging planes (frontal and lateral views) and comparison with prior studies, suggesting emphasis on comprehensive evaluations despite missing indicators or technique information.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6416,latent_6416,6865,0.01373,0.009514965,5.9333625,Presence and stability of medical devices when compared to prior studies.,"Higher activations consistently involve references to medical devices like catheters, PICC lines, pacemakers, or other prosthetics, which are confirmed to be correctly placed, removed, or unchanged in position when compared to prior imaging.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7199719971997199,0.72,0.7244897959183674,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6417,latent_6417,6748,0.013496,0.010017008,6.442774,Direct comparison to prior imaging studies highlighting changes or stabilities.,"Examples with high activation levels feature the linguistic pattern of directly comparing current imaging findings with previous or prior studies, using explicit words such as 'compared', 'unchanged', or mentioning dates that indicate timeline reference. This is consistent with radiological practice where current observations are contextualized with regard to past records.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6418,latent_6418,7244,0.014488,0.009121033,4.895089,Comparisons of current and prior radiological findings with emphasis on stability or changes.,"These examples consistently emphasize the comparison of current radiological findings with prior studies. They detail whether specific conditions such as opacities, devices, or lung effusions have changed from earlier images, often highlighting stability or minor changes. Such comparative evaluations are standard practice in radiology, focusing on changes or lack thereof over time.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6419,latent_6419,5779,0.011558,0.01954899,4.812028,Comparative analysis of pleural effusion changes with prior imaging.,"This set includes repeated references to comparative language, focusing on instances where interval changes (increase, decrease, improvement) in pleural effusion, or entirely stable pleural effusions are discussed by contrasting current with previous imaging findings. This comparative evaluation drives the activation pattern.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6073853989813243,0.63,0.75,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6420,latent_6420,7008,0.014016,0.011867376,6.347697,Discussion of interval changes between imaging studies.,"These examples frequently discuss interval changes or lack thereof between imaging studies, with wording such as 'interval increase', 'interval placement', or 'no relevant change'. This is a common feature of radiology reports, indicating a comparison across time points or examination shifts.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5584623323013416,0.5678391959798995,0.5503875968992248,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+6421,latent_6421,1962,0.003924,0.0041355183,5.03106,Specific interval change between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels include specific content changes between current and prior imaging findings using the constrast: previously noted anomalies are now improved, worsened, or show stability. This contrasts with examples that focus solely on current findings or lack specific mention of interval change.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5540540540540541,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6422,latent_6422,5559,0.011118,0.009802235,5.1995583,Comparison focus on position of medical devices.,"High activation levels are associated with reports where the findings describe devices, like catheters or tubes, being compared to previous positions either explicitly noted or discernible from changes indicated in current images. These examples focus on the evaluation of medical interventions rather than natural pathologies.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.614448051948052,0.62,0.6578947368421053,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6423,latent_6423,7247,0.014494,0.011745959,5.704711,Prompt specifically requests findings in comparison to prior images.,"The activation levels are high when reports specifically involve instructions to provide a description of current findings in comparison to previous imaging, which is an integral part of radiology assessment to identify changes or stability in a patient's condition. Reports that do not explicitly prompt for comparison analysis have lower activation.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4696969696969697,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6424,latent_6424,2752,0.005504,0.0064882175,5.0809007,Use of both frontal and lateral views compared to prior images.,"The consistent pattern observed is that these examples include radiological descriptions that involve the analysis or assessment of images taken from different angles (e.g. frontal and lateral), especially comparing them to prior images. This often involves assessing for interval changes related to certain conditions or medical interventions, which is critical in follow-up imaging studies.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4146341463414634,0.415,0.4105263157894737,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6425,latent_6425,4850,0.0097,0.009856217,3.3603103,Importance of describing interval changes or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The pattern observed involves reports focusing on the comparison between current and prior imaging, with specific emphasis on assessing for interval changes, stability, or new findings. Examples with high activation levels highlight either recent changes or emphasis on stability as a key aspect for interpretation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6426,latent_6426,67576,0.135152,0.07131286,4.2722287,Reports with detailed assessments of device changes or notable pathological changes.,"Examples with high activation frequently include reviews of major changes, such as insertion/removal of tubes, changes in effusions or atelectasis, and adjustments in medical devices. These reports offer detailed assessments and are used to track significant clinical developments in patient management.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6836634781953754,0.685,0.6637168141592921,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6427,latent_6427,7993,0.015986,0.016947461,3.9179323,Comparison to prior imaging explicitly described.,"The presence of a prior image or report and a comparison between the current and previous examinations is explicitly named in all the provided examples with high activation levels. This signifies an emphasis on identifying changes over time, with high activation attributed to text explicitly instructing to compare multiple image datasets, especially with prior imaging available.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6428,latent_6428,3324,0.006648,0.0101198265,5.6202435,"Presence and positioning of tubes, catheters, or devices in chest imaging.","The examples with high activation levels emphasize findings related to devices, catheters, or tubes in the chest, such as endotracheal tubes, vascular catheters, or pacemakers. These are recurrent themes in radiology descriptions of chest images, particularly in the context of determining the stability or placement of these devices in comparison to previous studies.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3580645161290322,0.3969849246231156,0.2941176470588235,0.1515151515151515,99.0,100.0
+6429,latent_6429,3428,0.006856,0.010280025,5.050706,Reports emphasizing interval changes or stability via imaging comparison.,Activation is high for reports detailing interval changes or stability by comparing current findings with previous imaging studies. This linguistic pattern is used to emphasize continuity or alteration in healthcare monitoring.,0.64349376114082,0.68,0.6097560975609756,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5863019995403356,0.595,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6430,latent_6430,7151,0.014302,0.019418841,9.157232,References to low lung volumes and implications thereof.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings in chest imaging where lung volumes are explicitly noted as low, leading to secondary effects such as accentuated interstitial markings or poor lung expansion. This feature is registered alongside stable or unchanged lung appearances or cardiomediastinal silhouettes, often in the context of non-acute processes.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4536904057897553,0.515,0.5454545454545454,0.18,100.0,100.0
+6431,latent_6431,76280,0.15256,0.087696,7.207218,Active comparison and detailed radiological descriptions increase activation.,"Examples with non-zero activations usually involve detailed descriptions or identification of specific anatomical structures, use of comparison with previous imaging or a structured way of describing radiological findings. This suggests that the model reacts to rich contextual and comparison information in narratives rather than minimal or unchanged findings.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.40625,0.43,0.3662790697674418,0.9264705882352942,68.0,132.0
+6432,latent_6432,3766,0.007532,0.0095422305,3.8394024,Comparison of current and prior chest images in the evaluation process.,"Samples related to thoracic or chest imaging with references to both current and prior images consistently receive high activation scores. This pattern suggests the model focuses on cases where an explicit review of past and present imaging, likely to track changes or monitor progress, is central to the analysis.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6433,latent_6433,23991,0.047982,0.026256334,7.3828425,Task requests comparison with prior images when no prior images available.,"High-activation examples consistently include a task request to compare findings to prior imaging despite there being no prior imaging available to conduct this comparison, which appears to be an explicit contradiction in the setup provided, leading to confusion in pattern determination.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.2991452991452991,0.6481481481481481,54.0,146.0
+6434,latent_6434,13786,0.027572,0.01474734,4.0713835,Detailed comparison of findings with prior images indicating stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention direct comparisons made between current and prior imaging findings and explicitly provide a detailed analysis of any stability or changes, such as 'interval decrease', 'unchanged', or 'no significant interval change'. This kind of comprehensive comparative description between imaging studies is a distinct pattern associated with higher activations.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4491185897435897,0.45,0.4456521739130434,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6435,latent_6435,7731,0.015462,0.010250204,5.507346,"Changes or placement of tubes, catheters, or devices in the chest.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or interventions involving tubes, catheters, or devices, highlighting their placement or changes over time. This pattern likely shows a focus on describing interventions related to medical devices within the radiological examination context.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6222222222222222,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6436,latent_6436,7931,0.015862,0.023671001,4.9920435,Accurate identification or changes of medical devices in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples show high activations where the findings specifically mention anatomically correct placements or changes in tubes, lines, or catheters in follow-up examinations relative to earlier imaging. The reports often describe these devices within the context of monitoring or treatment procedures, particularly on the right side or within crucial circulatory locales like the SVC or RA.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.6075949367088608,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6437,latent_6437,51479,0.102958,0.051081758,3.2477765,Comparison reveals interval changes in imaging findings.,"Samples with higher activation levels often include findings related to changes in lung or chest conditions from prior reports, suggesting ongoing comparison and evolution of patient conditions over time. Such comparisons often highlight interval changes even if those changes are not significant, pointing out observations like 'the heart remains moderately enlarged' or 'low lung volumes exaggerate interval increase'.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4334886128364389,0.4472361809045226,0.4264705882352941,0.29,100.0,99.0
+6438,latent_6438,7653,0.015306,0.014720055,4.7160435,Stable or mildly enlarged cardiac silhouette noted alongside comparative findings.,"Reports with high activation levels frequently describe the presence of an enlarged or stable cardiac silhouette, often alongside descriptions of other thoracic findings such as aortic tortuosity, opacities, or effusions. The pattern suggests a focus on cardiac changes or stability in conjunction with a comparative observational commentary on pre-existing or new findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6384100226630338,0.645,0.6986301369863014,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6439,latent_6439,44893,0.089786,0.054012626,6.2642803,Significant changes or new findings when compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern emerging from the examples is that of changes being noted in the comparison of current imaging to prior studies, with stable findings often indicating normalcy. Higher activations seem to correlate with significant findings or changes noted upon comparison.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6417669466939125,0.645,0.6790123456790124,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6440,latent_6440,28478,0.056956,0.03330608,5.4186993,Changes detected between current and prior images.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently discuss changes observed between current and prior radiological images. These changes include improvement or progression in medical conditions, changes in devices, or persistent abnormalities, highlighting the importance of temporal comparison in assessing patient progress.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6441,latent_6441,5027,0.010054,0.014825397,5.1035213,Comparison of current and prior radiographic images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve description of findings from a current image set that are compared to findings from a prior image set. The pattern indicates the use of comparison phrases ('prior report', 'comparison with previous') on images taken from different time points to confirm changes or stability in findings.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4037033162464692,0.43,0.4507042253521127,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6442,latent_6442,4745,0.00949,0.017082445,5.3843503,Radiological changes over time in cardiopulmonary findings.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on comparing current imaging findings with previous studies which indicate changes in either heart size or presence of pulmonary pathology such as pleural effusions, effusions, or consolidation. This focus on changes over time is essential in evaluating the patient's progress, stability, or worsening in radiology.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.5572519083969466,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6443,latent_6443,4479,0.008958,0.007209231,5.1246395,Detailed comparison with prior images using formal annotations.,"The high activation examples consistently feature detailed comparison with prior images using specific imaging views such as 'frontal', 'lateral', and 'prior', along with identifiable annotations like 'PREAMBLE', 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'EXAMINATION', or 'FINDINGS'. These elements suggest a formal presentation involving review and detailed comparison with a prior image in official radiological documentation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5285714285714286,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6444,latent_6444,3945,0.00789,0.011463591,6.647392,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The main distinction between the examples with high activation levels and those with low activation is the presence of specific instructions to compare current images with prior ones, often using placeholders for missing data, which suggests a focus on detecting changes or persistency of conditions via serial imaging comparisons. This is essential for managing ongoing treatment processes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6445,latent_6445,7421,0.014842,0.010691662,4.729331,Tasks requiring comparisons with prior images.,"Higher activations correlate with examples where the task explicitly involves comparing current images with prior ones, signified by the presence of a 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'COMPARISON', and the directive to compare findings such as ""Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior image."" This reflects tasks focusing on changes or stability over time in radiological observations.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4140625,0.49,0.4941860465116279,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6446,latent_6446,16072,0.032144,0.019572662,7.5993776,Detailed evaluation of thoracic internal components through comparison imaging.,"The examples have very low activation levels, indicating that they do not strongly reflect the pattern of interest. However, the ones with higher activation levels mention changes or stability of findings through imaging comparison, with notable attention to tube positioning, pleural effusions, and descriptions of pulmonary, cardiac, or pleural findings in the context of comparison, which all use detailed observations usually related to evaluating internal chest components.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.4788732394366197,0.8095238095238095,84.0,116.0
+6447,latent_6447,5831,0.011662,0.0090654325,4.0755215,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often feature clear comparisons to prior radiographic images despite variably available prior reports. These comparisons help assess changes over time, stability of conditions, or confirmation of diagnoses.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4871134020618556,0.4874371859296482,0.4903846153846153,0.51,100.0,99.0
+6448,latent_6448,53684,0.107368,0.104776606,11.841249,Comparative analysis against prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"The pattern extracted from the provided samples shows instances where current imaging findings are explicitly compared with a prior image or examination. The activation level is highly sensitive when this comparative analysis involves a definitive change or emphasis on interval changes between studies, such as 'increased', 'new', or 'unchanged'. Phrases like 'compared to' or 'in comparison with...' are key indicators for comparative analysis of imaging studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4084507042253521,0.7073170731707317,82.0,118.0
+6449,latent_6449,5783,0.011566,0.010058874,4.1025553,Patterns involving multiple imaging views or comparisons with previous images.,"The examples are rated based on whether they involve multiple views (frontal, lateral) or previous examinations for comparison. Highly rated activations consistently involve assessments utilizing previous imaging or other views to evaluate changes, using terms like 'comparison' or indicating interval changes.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4253384282709796,0.515,0.5083798882681564,0.91,100.0,100.0
+6450,latent_6450,4405,0.00881,0.012372691,4.493619,Integration of detailed prior imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation levels feature detailed prior reports embedded within the narrative, identified by phrases such as 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'PRIOR_REPORT: EXAMINATION'. This suggests a focus on cases where extensive prior imaging reports are integrated into the analysis of the current radiology study.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4356863658719681,0.455,0.4671532846715328,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6451,latent_6451,7100,0.0142,0.023305742,5.143537,Comparisons with prior images to assess changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature comparisons with prior imaging studies as part of their findings, evaluation, or assistant instructions. This indicates a linguistic pattern that emphasizes changes or stability over time in comparison to previous imaging.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.412650987001711,0.425,0.4418604651162791,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6452,latent_6452,1667,0.003334,0.0050684996,5.333915,Explicit comparison to prior radiographic findings or reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve reports where radiographic findings are explicitly compared to previous studies or reports, including the use of phrases like 'compared to', 'as before', 'interval change', and inclusion of specific findings from prior imaging.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6453,latent_6453,3090,0.00618,0.009002397,4.360034,Summary of imaging findings with current and prior images.,"These examples, with a high activation score, generally involve a summary of the imaging findings when provided with both a current and a prior frontal image<image>. The task requires summarizing a detailed comparison with previous images underscoring any changes or stable findings being highlighted, albeit often without substantial new or differential findings documented despite the comparative commentary.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4577218728162124,0.515,0.509090909090909,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6454,latent_6454,9641,0.019282,0.022141214,7.789558,Detailed radiological observations based on multiple views or images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe situations where explicit radiological findings or changes are detailed, often include measurements, observations of opacities, consolidations, tubes’ positions, or anatomical descriptions determined from multiple views and images. They avoid declarative conclusions based on subjective interpretation, focusing instead on detailed, objective descriptions, which increase activation in this pattern.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6455,latent_6455,3044,0.006088,0.00943322,6.764592,Description of changes or stability in radiology findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on detailing findings in current and prior radiology images, with a particular emphasis on noting changes or stability compared to previous images. These reports often include a narrative that explicitly highlights the comparison to prior studies, emphasizing ""comparison"", ""prior"", or ""unchanged"" phrases.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6456,latent_6456,2319,0.004638,0.008145205,5.3960385,Emphasis on current findings over detailed prior history and comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight descriptions that focus on evaluating the current state of the radiological findings with minimal information from prior reports. They emphasize direct observations without detailed prior history or intricate comparison with multiple previous imaging studies, focusing primarily on the current imaging's findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6457,latent_6457,38570,0.07714,0.03502222,3.3942776,Reports highlight comparisons between current and prior images.,"Reports with activations prominently reference both current and prior imaging, noting changes or the stability of specific features. This pattern is indicative of comparative imaging analysis, common in tracking disease progress or treatment efficacy, using phrases like 'compared to the previous', 'since the prior', and 'unchanged'.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5146154675870995,0.55,0.5324675324675324,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6458,latent_6458,8146,0.016292,0.015634835,8.450909,Repeated references to unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size across comparisons.,"These examples often contain references to unchanged heart size, mediastinal contours, or other structures across comparisons with prior images. The activations highlight a repetition of 'unchanged' phrases in contrast to new infiltrates or devices noted in other portions of the reports.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4468414647638013,0.5,0.5,0.19,100.0,100.0
+6459,latent_6459,6604,0.013208,0.015303853,3.9927566,Request to describe findings compared to prior frontal image.,"The higher activation levels consistently correspond to examples in which the prompt specifies a request to provide a description of findings in the current images in comparison to prior images, particularly when it explicitly mentions the 'prior frontal image'. This suggests a recurrent pattern of needing to make explicit comparisons in the prompt setup.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4320486815415821,0.475,0.4838709677419355,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6460,latent_6460,15786,0.031572,0.028678758,8.227477,Unchanged cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples consistently mention both comparisons with prior examinations and the unchanged findings from previous imaging studies. The focal points are stability or lack of significant change in cardiopulmonary structures over time, as depicted in serial imaging.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4102564102564102,0.3555555555555555,90.0,110.0
+6461,latent_6461,3158,0.006316,0.009719021,3.9156983,Detailed interpretation and comparisons of current to prior complex radiographic findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe detailed interpretations of radiographs, comparing current findings to previous imaging studies. These examples frequently contain findings that are consistent with the patient's clinical indications, such as changes in medical devices or progression of disease, and often highlight the importance of assessing stability or progression in complex cases. This type of comprehensive radiographic reporting is representative of cases that require high-level diagnostic insight.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4329569892473118,0.4673366834170854,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,99.0
+6462,latent_6462,27974,0.055948,0.023346158,2.5982156,Unchanged findings in cardiac or pulmonary conditions.,"Low activation examples mostly include findings regarding cardiomegaly or unchanged findings in cardiac or pulmonary conditions. The high activation examples describe varying lung conditions like right lung collapse, increased alveolar consolidation, or changes in pulmonary edema and pleural effusions, likely linked to acute changes in the lung or pleural space.",0.4820295983086681,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6463,latent_6463,17005,0.03401,0.01586923,3.9620576,Comparisons of cardiomediastinal features over time using prior images.,"Examples with lower activation levels either involve no prior comparison or non-cardiac specific imaging techniques. High activations focus on phrasing related to comparability across time-points, showcasing unchanged cardiomediastinal contours or enlarged aortas.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6464,latent_6464,5382,0.010764,0.013827176,5.9964623,Comparison of current vs prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain comparative evaluations of current versus prior frontal images, making such references a key characteristic of the activation pattern.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5604395604395604,0.6,0.5625,0.9,100.0,100.0
+6465,latent_6465,21856,0.043712,0.024491262,4.780624,Comparisons with prior imaging from the same day.,"Examples are characterized by the mention of image comparisons, often evaluating interval changes over a short span with previous examinations on the same day. This pattern is indicative of urgent or critical assessments where patient conditions are dynamically monitored.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.4210526315789473,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6466,latent_6466,7429,0.014858,0.01187005,5.794881,Use of 'no evidence' indicating absent findings in radiological assessments.,Samples with higher activations commonly mention 'no evidence.' This phrase is frequently used in radiology reports to describe the absence of findings that the imaging was intended to investigate. It signals a detailed check for specific pathologies or abnormalities and confirms their non-existence.,0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6611455108359133,0.6683417085427136,0.7428571428571429,0.52,100.0,99.0
+6467,latent_6467,6081,0.012162,0.013671345,4.5655556,Request to evaluate for interval change in acute pathologies using prior comparisons.,"This pattern involves providing a description or interpretation based on current and prior imaging while evaluating for specific changes or the presence of pathologies. However, it differs from a general comparison to earlier studies in its strong focus on interval changes, specifically looking for acute processes or changes like pneumonia or edema over time.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.4857142857142857,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6468,latent_6468,15458,0.030916,0.017029865,2.8839786,Presence of explicit instructions or detailed findings prompts higher activation.,"The presence of moderate activation in the cases where prior reports or explicit instructions involve evaluations of consistency or change suggests that detailed comparisons or additional task details influence the activation. This pattern is exhibited when detailed analysis or intervention is inferred, likely drawing more cognitive processing from the model.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6469,latent_6469,4821,0.009642,0.0059816167,7.673083,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples often involve references to changes in specific clinical findings or interventions compared to prior imaging studies, such as placement or adjustment of medical devices, changes in lung opacities or fluid levels, or a noted stability or modification in cardiomegaly or pleural effusions. The reports frequently use terms indicating interval change or comparison like 'unchanged', 'interval', or 'improved'.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3984962406015037,0.4,0.3284671532846715,0.6164383561643836,73.0,127.0
+6470,latent_6470,18207,0.036414,0.025060717,5.477218,Instructions for comparison with prior images highlighting stability or change.,"The findings with higher activation levels consistently focus on interval changes or comparisons with prior images. These comparisons describe stability or changes in pathologies (such as opacities, effusions, etc.), indicating that the model associates instructions to compare current with prior images as representative. References to changes from previous imaging are keywords indicating the pattern.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6471,latent_6471,9140,0.01828,0.011964007,4.119904,Use of 'provide a description' request in imaging report assessment.,"Examples with low activation levels typically contain clinical findings described directly without using a 'provide a description' request pattern. The test asks for providing a description, indicating active engagement in interpreting comparisons between current and prior images, which aligns with high activation levels.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6472,latent_6472,10837,0.021674,0.012405183,6.983767,Presence of pulmonary edema or vascular congestion.,"The pattern identifiable here appears in examples with varying degrees of fluid accumulation in the lungs, such as pulmonary edema and vascular congestion. This is highlighted by references to these conditions in the findings and impressions, using terms like 'pulmonary edema', 'vascular congestion', 'fluid overload', and 'effusions'.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5918478408750782,0.625,0.5573770491803278,0.4146341463414634,82.0,118.0
+6473,latent_6473,7469,0.014938,0.007477239,4.4511905,Updates on device placement or pathology changes compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve detailed comparisons between the current imaging and prior studies, specifying changes such as placement or removal of medical devices (e.g., tubes, pacemakers) or changes in pathology (like opacities or effusions). Lower activations tend to lack such detailed comparison or relate changes to non-urgent clinical conditions.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6474,latent_6474,3598,0.007196,0.009462564,6.299708,Reports explicitly comparing current to prior imaging studies or including prior reports.,Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve direct comparisons with prior imaging studies or explicitly include prior reports labeled as such. This reflects an emphasis on the precision of comparative analysis in radiology.,0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5146154675870995,0.55,0.5324675324675324,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6475,latent_6475,7309,0.014618,0.018429624,6.8776984,Comparison to prior images with explicit 'PRIOR_REPORT' requests.,"The high-activation examples consistently include the instruction to provide a description of the findings in comparison to a prior image and employ specific attention to 'PRIOR_REPORT' instructions, suggesting a pattern requiring analysis of changes or stability over time, despite inconsistencies in image references within low-activation examples.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6476,latent_6476,36580,0.07316,0.042330388,4.0088825,Comparison with prior imaging and stability of findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve consistent evaluation of the current study in relation to a previous radiological study, often involving stability or slight changes in findings, and usually mention the technical approach of having both current and prior frontal or lateral images for comparison. They emphasize stability with statements like 'unchanged,' 'similar to prior,' or explicitly stating comparison to prior imaging.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4567901234567901,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6477,latent_6477,11751,0.023502,0.012216463,3.9827368,"Findings compared to prior imaging, indicating stability or change.","The presence of comparison with prior imaging seems to be a consistent element across examples with higher activation levels, indicating a pattern of interest in identifying changes over time in the patient's condition rather than single findings.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6478,latent_6478,5147,0.010294,0.0106181055,6.1512756,Stable findings without acute changes in imaging comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels tend to describe findings indicative of stable conditions or no acute changes when compared to prior images. These examples avoid detection of new abnormalities or acute worsening, often focusing on stable findings or unchanged positions of medical devices. This suggests a focus on non-critical progress in patient conditions.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6479,latent_6479,3897,0.007794,0.007927705,4.318012,Findings described in comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation level is attributed to prompts requiring a description of findings in a comparison to prior imaging studies, often highlighting stable or resolved conditions. This pattern includes radiology assessment of an interval change or stability concerning past examinations, using phrases like 'unchanged from prior' and explicit mentions of prior images for evaluation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6480,latent_6480,9196,0.018392,0.023348538,5.3021474,Detailed comparison of current and prior images to determine changes.,Examples with high activations emphasize the necessity of directly comparing current images to prior images. They instruct providing a detailed radiological description comparing current findings with previous or established baselines to identify any progression or changes.,0.204406364749082,0.22,0.1111111111111111,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4395604395604395,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6481,latent_6481,4646,0.009292,0.011168908,4.7561216,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation often describe findings that explicitly compare the current images to prior imaging studies, but with either no significant interval change, stable findings, or resolution/improvement of previous abnormalities. The pattern relates to stable or unchanged radiographic findings when compared to prior imaging.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.2692307692307692,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4802339181286549,0.4898989898989899,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,98.0
+6482,latent_6482,25761,0.051522,0.029646274,5.1698284,"Precise comparative analysis with prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability.","Reports with higher activations focus heavily on evaluating and noting specific changes or the stability in clinical features, such as pleural effusions, opacities, or device positioning, by directly comparing current and previous images. They also often include precise descriptions of placement and observations for medical devices like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, often in reference to previous studies.",0.6435601198117245,0.6530612244897959,0.625,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.6596825396825396,0.665,0.632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6483,latent_6483,39105,0.07821,0.035143513,2.8039718,Stability or improvement of radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The key pattern is a direct comparison between current imaging and prior studies, with emphasis on findings remaining unchanged or showing improvement. Examples highlight unchanged or resolving features, indicating stability or improvement, used to assess clinical management and outcomes in radiological interpretation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4691358024691358,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6484,latent_6484,21068,0.042136,0.031506542,5.4084663,Reference to status post procedures or devices with comparison to prior images.,"The examples show consistent patterns of reporting status post procedures or implanted devices along with a comparison to prior radiographs, reflecting on any changes or stability of these findings.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6269785260610949,0.63,0.6101694915254238,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6485,latent_6485,74375,0.14875,0.08771914,5.1403775,Stable or changed position of medical devices and intervals in lung conditions compared to previous imaging.,"The prompts frequently mention comparisons between current and prior imaging and focus on documenting changes in specific medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, and feeding tubes. These comparisons often highlight stability or changes in device position and lung condition, reflecting a pattern common in reports of patients with ongoing interventions or chronic conditions.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.648735447611401,0.65,0.6339285714285714,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6486,latent_6486,4463,0.008926,0.0070469375,4.4043274,Chronic or stable lung or cardiac conditions with emphasis on lack of acute change.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve image descriptions that include changes in lung status regarding diseases or conditions like atelectasis, pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or other specific details that suggest chronic or persistent state rather than immediate or acute changes. They tend to focus on iterative assessments of stability or changes over time, as in chronic illnesses, while excluding acute processes, infections, or dramatic shifts.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6016949152542372,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6487,latent_6487,2508,0.005016,0.0091079455,6.494098,Comparison of current and prior images for findings.,"Activation levels are higher when the task involves comparison or analysis of current images against prior images. These often reference a 'prior report', 'PRIOR_REPORT', or involve explicit analysis between images through comparative language, indicating a focus on assessing changes or stability over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.5308641975308642,0.86,100.0,100.0
+6488,latent_6488,5430,0.01086,0.012639304,5.7018003,Focus on cardiac size or cardiomediastinal/hilar contours.,"Examples with descriptions of cardiomediastinal, hilar contours, or heart size, often include clarifications about their stability or changes compared to prior imaging. These examples discuss impressions and findings related to cardiac or mediastinal contours while mentioning previous examinations ensuring comparison.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6116918003138381,0.635,0.5906040268456376,0.88,100.0,100.0
+6489,latent_6489,10121,0.020242,0.016620489,3.4658763,Comparative evaluation against prior imaging for interval change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to prior imaging studies for comparison, often using specific past dates or noting details about previous imaging characteristics that help in identifying interval changes or stability of findings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4806201550387597,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6490,latent_6490,5307,0.010614,0.022144277,4.7399454,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+6491,latent_6491,4864,0.009728,0.008391045,6.2313156,Emphasis on comparison with prior images for changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently make comparisons between current and prior images to describe changes or stability in findings, focusing on the comparative and interpretative nature of radiological assessments rather than the presence of specific abnormalities.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4615384615384615,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6492,latent_6492,3373,0.006746,0.010988853,4.4574313,"Comparison between new and prior image findings, highlighting interval changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels specifically require analysis of images in comparison to previously obtained images not provided directly in the prompt but indicated indirectly through missing prior examination records or explicit instructions to compare against provided or implied past reports, focusing mainly on changes or stability in findings over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.468671679197995,0.47,0.4666666666666667,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6493,latent_6493,9195,0.01839,0.014475435,5.6808248,Detailed interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation show detailed description of interval changes between current and prior images. Key terms include ""interval removal"", ""unchanged position"", or ""interval changes"", indicating that the model is highly activated by comparisons that quantify and qualify changes over time. This might relate to specific model training that emphasized change detection.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4941176470588235,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6494,latent_6494,26378,0.052756,0.027418358,4.0027776,Monitoring stable cardiomediastinal silhouette across radiology exams.,"Examples with higher activations frequently reference changes or stability over time, with particular focus on the cardiomediastinal silhouette, cardiac enlargement, or feature consistency across multiple views. These reports often mention unchanged or stable conditions, indicating a pattern of monitoring specific cardiomediastinal features across studies.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.4842105263157895,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6495,latent_6495,7640,0.01528,0.013859432,4.2734857,Prompt explicitly requests comparison to prior images.,"The pattern in these examples is setting up the task with 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,' suggesting the importance of directly comparing current images to past ones, with the prompt explicitly mentioning this requirement.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5402298850574713,0.575,0.5483870967741935,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6496,latent_6496,5789,0.011578,0.013616113,4.6135297,Comparative radiology descriptions involving interval or post-operative changes.,"This set of examples shows radiology study descriptions mostly in the context of changing circumstances, such as post-operative changes or interval changes in condition. Higher activations are linked to substantial comparative descriptions, especially those involving studies related to acute or dynamic clinical scenarios requiring detailed monitoring.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6497,latent_6497,15206,0.030412,0.0167816,5.071091,Instructions involve explicit comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain instructions related to comparing current X-ray images with prior frontal images while indicating discrepancies, or no change. The lower activation examples do not explicitly ask for such comparison, references are less structured or lack specified comparison instruction.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3964194373401535,0.41,0.4307692307692308,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6498,latent_6498,2115,0.00423,0.006317104,4.51488,Description of findings compared to previous imaging study.,"Examples with high activations involve comparison radiology descriptions where imaging is evaluated against a prior study. Specific differences or interval changes are detailed, allowing for assessment over time, which implies tracking progress or suspected conditions using past images, reflecting in statements like 'comparison to prior'.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3823906002862092,0.385,0.367816091954023,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6499,latent_6499,9846,0.019692,0.01289124,4.821863,Overall normal thoracic imaging findings with stable or unchanged observations.,"These examples present a pattern of normal, unchanged or stable findings in various thoracic imaging studies, often seen in radiological descriptions when there is no significant interval change or acute findings. Such reports might note mild or incidental observations, but typically convey a lack of acute alteration from prior images.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6545768566493955,0.655,0.6666666666666666,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6500,latent_6500,6477,0.012954,0.014388561,6.0338917,Task requires comparison of current with prior radiological images.,"The pattern involves the model's task to generate comparative descriptions of a current radiological image against a previous image, often characterizing changes, or stability in findings. This typically occurs with specific conditions like presence of 'cardiomegaly', 'effusions', use of comparative language, or addressing specific indications/history. These scenarios trigger higher activations due to the necessity of comparative evaluation and the complexity or clinical significance of findings.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6501,latent_6501,3381,0.006762,0.0089485645,5.6794496,Comparative analysis with previous imaging to note clinical changes or stability.,"The examples with high activations repeatedly request comparison of current imaging against prior studies to note changes or stability in clinical findings, often related to lung conditions or devices, which is a linguistic pattern seen in radiology evaluations focusing on clinical progress or stability over time.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4027391617753063,0.42,0.4402985074626865,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6502,latent_6502,5392,0.010784,0.010987236,8.186661,Comparison across multiple previous radiographs.,"High activation levels are associated with examples where findings are described in comparison to multiple radiographs, usually including specific details of changes over multiple intervals. This pattern involves clear documentation of intervals and explicit notes on changes or stability over time.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5611792598701165,0.5656565656565656,0.5822784810126582,0.4646464646464646,99.0,99.0
+6503,latent_6503,4181,0.008362,0.008006033,6.082118,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"The examples reflect situations where current imaging findings are assessed and directly described in comparison to previous studies, indicating changes in clinical characteristics. Such descriptions often involve assessments of unchanging or changing features like lines and tubes positioning, opacities, pulmonary changes, etc., frequently noted in follow-up or interval change evaluations.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4501504305425874,0.47,0.4782608695652174,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6504,latent_6504,2758,0.005516,0.0092250975,7.99317,Comparison of current imaging to prior studies for temporal analysis.,"The highly activated examples involve instructions to compare current imaging with prior studies, suggesting an emphasis on temporal changes and status evaluations between different time points.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6505,latent_6505,2990,0.00598,0.014098636,6.3789487,Image comparison to assess interval changes or ongoing pathologies.,"Highly activated examples involve evaluations that integrate findings from recent images correlated against prior imaging, often focusing on changes in pathology. These examples examine interval changes in conditions, ruling out acute pathologies, and observing progress or deterioration in known conditions. This reflects a focus on interpreting evolving or ongoing conditions in radiology studies.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6506,latent_6506,10279,0.020558,0.017438449,5.1419697,Absence of acute changes when comparing current and prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples provide descriptions where findings are communicated through direct comparison with prior images, focusing specifically on absence of acute changes and stable conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5285714285714286,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6507,latent_6507,4828,0.009656,0.014664699,4.7879167,Evaluation or description of acute changes or worsening conditions.,"The high activation levels correspond to examples indicating an acute process or evaluation of changes, often due to symptoms like cough, chest pain, dyspnea, or complications like intubation, pneumothorax, or infection. Most of these samples acknowledge these urgent or worsening conditions for comparison.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3598090277777778,0.41,0.2954545454545454,0.13,100.0,100.0
+6508,latent_6508,31748,0.063496,0.044886567,5.389775,Reports emphasize potential interval changes in patient condition.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings that highlight potential interval changes in patient condition, such as tube or catheter placements and changes in opacities or consolidation. These patterns differ from low activation examples, which generally present stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging without emphasis on potential interval changes.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6541552232733191,0.66,0.626984126984127,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6509,latent_6509,6306,0.012612,0.010567467,5.657412,Tortuous aortic or vascular structures on chest imaging.,"These examples consistently describe imaging findings with reference to aortic tortuosity or tortuous vascular structures. The term 'tortuous' is repeatedly used within these descriptions to highlight vascular irregularities, a focal point of these reports.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,1.0,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.532750713853076,0.595,0.8518518518518519,0.23,100.0,100.0
+6510,latent_6510,40798,0.081596,0.048293445,7.9398518,Explicit interval changes or stability in comparative radiographic analysis.,"These examples focus on the role of providing explicit comparisons between current and prior radiographic images, emphasizing interval changes or stability, which are critical elements in follow-up radiological assessments. Reports with no comparison barely exhibit pactable activation, emphasizing the non-comparative status.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.4957264957264957,0.6666666666666666,87.0,113.0
+6511,latent_6511,5622,0.011244,0.009829794,4.2142467,"Findings in comparison to prior views, noting changes or stability.","These samples focus on observations recorded from chest imaging studies compared to prior imaging, highlighting changes in conditions like pneumonia or identifying stability in factors such as catheter placement. This is evident from repeated references to prior reports, comparison statements, and evaluations of changes or lack thereof in specific conditions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4867256637168141,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6512,latent_6512,10492,0.020984,0.013695686,4.649475,Explicit instruction to describe findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,"These examples show an emphasis on evaluating radiological findings by comparing current images to prior studies. The activation is high when explicit language asks the assistant to provide descriptions specifically oriented around such comparisons, which are explicitly phrased within the task prompt.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6513,latent_6513,20707,0.041414,0.02788674,4.432775,Describe findings with emphasis on notable changes compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels often contain direct instructions to describe findings from current imaging compared to prior, emphasizing notable changes, or presence of pathology. This common pattern in radiology reports highlights comparative analysis, signaling interval changes or stability of findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4922571681192371,0.4924623115577889,0.4895833333333333,0.4747474747474747,99.0,100.0
+6514,latent_6514,50743,0.101486,0.065535106,8.774587,Descriptive changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The activation levels are highest when there is explicit discussion of changes in findings between current and prior images, or the comparison reveals stability or specific alterations in pathological features. Instances without strong linguistic references to changes or comparisons, or without significant findings triggering further evaluation, have lower activations.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4781212364512244,0.48,0.35,0.6176470588235294,68.0,132.0
+6515,latent_6515,3849,0.007698,0.0068118814,4.843413,Improvement or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The standout pattern in these examples is the language used to describe findings as improved, unchanged, or stable compared to prior images, especially when noting resolution or improvement of conditions. This pattern captures how radiologists assess progress or change over time using comparative language.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5937711577522005,0.595,0.6067415730337079,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6516,latent_6516,3549,0.007098,0.004916394,10.024728,"Stable positioning of cardiac devices, such as pacemakers or ICDs, on chest radiographs.","Examples with activation levels of 5 highlight references to cardiac devices such as pacemakers or ICDs in stable positions, indicating the model's focus on instances where these medical devices are present and unchanged in chest radiographs.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5257452574525745,0.72,0.2962962962962963,0.1777777777777777,45.0,155.0
+6517,latent_6517,27701,0.055402,0.027157389,3.3652868,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples often include findings of not change or stability when compared to previous studies. The most representative samples specifically use phrases recognizing the stability of observed phenomena, often relating to cardiopulmonary features or specific pathologies noted previously, such as unchanged catheter placements, pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette or pulmonary features.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5866518802298619,0.59,0.6097560975609756,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6518,latent_6518,45655,0.09131,0.05711541,5.999292,Procedural or device-related findings in prior-to-current image comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels are those where the radiology report involves a specific comparison and change or stability in the context of detailed patient history or technical specifics of procedure-related findings. More than just noting general stability, they often reference technical medical equipment findings like tube placements or other procedural outcomes, suggesting more detailed procedural context.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5728211733212112,0.5728643216080402,0.5773195876288659,0.56,100.0,99.0
+6519,latent_6519,29172,0.058344,0.035133544,4.1545177,Focus on detailed interval changes or device positions in chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include the comparison of current and prior images, focus on the specific positioning and characteristics of devices, and significant interval changes or findings regarding the lung or pleural state, such as changes in pneumothorax or opacities, emphasizing monitoring and progress tracking in clinical conditions.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5931237920862578,0.6,0.5793650793650794,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6520,latent_6520,28073,0.056146,0.035008233,6.438978,Change in opacities over time compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples include changes in opacity compared to prior images, usually indicating progression or resolution of disease, like pneumonia. This specific mention of change aligned with dates or specific priors triggers higher activation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.664320248503219,0.665,0.6813186813186813,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6521,latent_6521,11428,0.022856,0.016475419,6.5078425,Emphasis on placement of support devices or implantable devices.,"Activated examples often include observations about the position, presence, or placement of support devices, lines, or implantable cardiac devices such as a Port-A-Cath or pacemaker. These are frequently emphasized in radiology reports, separate from other clinical findings.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7532169927727834,0.755,0.717948717948718,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6522,latent_6522,3520,0.00704,0.008935404,4.879938,"Explicit, detailed comparison with prior frontal images in findings.","Highly activated samples focus on describing the findings from comparison with prior frontal image(s), including straightforward comparative analysis, explicit detailing of new changes or stability, and sometimes addressing requests despite no explicit prior report comparisons. Contrast that, lower activation examples involve other descriptions or scenarios but with minimal comparative analysis or context reliance on prior imaging.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4411764705882353,0.3,100.0,100.0
+6523,latent_6523,5061,0.010122,0.008303495,7.0708494,Evaluation of chest images without prior comparison for acute changes.,"Examples with highest activation include clear references to evaluation criteria without prior comparison, focusing on a diagnostic task in chest imaging such as ruling out pneumonia or detecting consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. The emphasis is on describing findings from current images to determine acute conditions without comparison.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.6271186440677966,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6524,latent_6524,14783,0.029566,0.01705512,4.9835396,Findings related to device or catheter placement in chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on radiological findings related to devices, such as catheters or tracheostomy tubes, which are prominently mentioned in these reports. These findings often relate to the position, change, or impact of these devices within chest imaging studies.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5697674418604651,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6525,latent_6525,13911,0.027822,0.01648592,4.0172806,Evaluation of tube or line placement in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples show high activation when there is a focus on the placement or reassessment of medical tubes, lines, or devices in the context of chest imaging. The reports often mention comparisons with previous studies to ensure proper positioning or changes in these medical devices, such as ET tubes, catheters, or other devices.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.6,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6526,latent_6526,15374,0.030748,0.018944727,3.959124,Stability or unchanged position of indwelling medical devices.,"The unchanged positions or conditions of various support devices or structures like pacemakers, catheters, or pleural catheters across consecutive radiographic examinations indicate stability in these interventions. These reports highlight changes or stability specifically regarding indwelling medical devices, seen across examples with higher activation.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.575166034793364,0.605,0.723404255319149,0.34,100.0,100.0
+6527,latent_6527,28734,0.057468,0.04014506,8.554649,Repeated emphasis on unchanged findings compared to previous studies.,"Radiological reports often include findings that are unchanged, stable, or improved from a previous study, indicating no significant progression of the pathology observed. These examples highlight reports that emphasize consistency with prior examinations, showing no notable changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.4675324675324675,0.3711340206185567,97.0,103.0
+6528,latent_6528,18286,0.036572,0.024425503,3.4200084,Focus on findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently emphasize the presence of previous imaging for direct comparison, using phrases like 'Compared with', 'Comparison is made', or similar references to historical imaging data. This comparative element, where changes in medical status or condition are assessed against prior images, appears to be a key linguistic pattern driving higher activation.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6529,latent_6529,6704,0.013408,0.025580417,7.0141497,Interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,Higher activation levels are consistently associated with comparisons to prior radiographs where specific interval changes or stable findings are noted. This structured comparison often includes clinical significance regarding stability or progression of findings.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6530,latent_6530,9258,0.018516,0.012511558,3.856184,Directive to compare current images to prior images in multiple views.,"The examples with high activation levels include a clear directive to analyze current imaging findings, given a specific set of images from multiple views, in direct comparison to a prior image. While low activation levels often lack detailed comparative analysis or omit prior images.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4848484848484848,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6531,latent_6531,52616,0.105232,0.044418976,2.0789542,"Descriptions highlight interval changes or stability compared to prior images, focusing on medical devices or effusions.","The examples primarily show instances where imaging findings are described in direct comparison to prior images and typically highlight interval changes in medical devices, effusions, or pulmonary opacities. Highly activated examples tend to emphasize new placements or modifications of devices, changes in effusion status, or stable findings in context, marking clear interval changes as a key focus.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6494391025641025,0.65,0.6630434782608695,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6532,latent_6532,11268,0.022536,0.01470394,6.897933,Interstitial changes or vascular congestion mentioned.,"The consistent observation across the examples with higher activation is the description of interstitial changes, vascular congestion, or prominence noted across the examples. These findings generally point towards pulmonary or cardiopulmonary processes regarding vascular areas.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5093580308167259,0.555,0.4629629629629629,0.2941176470588235,85.0,115.0
+6533,latent_6533,4364,0.008728,0.007748276,5.44395,"Description of radiology findings often includes comparisons to prior images, even if nonexistent.","The examples that show high activation involve providing descriptions of findings from current radiology studies, often with comparisons to prior images, even when explicitly stating there is no prior for comparison. This practice helps detect subtle changes by contrasting with previous studies and dictates consistent reporting style.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4104124408384043,0.455,0.4709677419354838,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6534,latent_6534,7872,0.015744,0.02102826,4.754092,Comparison with prior imaging showing changes or stable findings.,"For examples with high activation levels, the presence of comparative statements referring explicitly to previous studies is noted. These statements include differences in findings or changes such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'improved' from prior imaging studies, reinforcing the need to assess temporal changes in imaging findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4561403508771929,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6535,latent_6535,6652,0.013304,0.012290791,5.7075925,Identify significant changes or confirm stability with prior images.,Examples with higher activations consistently involve comparison to prior images and focus on identifying significant new findings or unchanged significant findings. Lower activated examples tend to lack significant changes or specific comparisons.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5242718446601942,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6536,latent_6536,3482,0.006964,0.013680581,5.8126087,Focused discrepancy analysis across views in findings description.,"Examples with high activation levels have descriptions that justify focused analysis of specific findings and discrepancies across multiple views or comparisons to prior images, emphasizing changes and any instructions for next steps, indicating salient clinical decision-making entries for concise summarization.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4590358704719533,0.465,0.4556962025316455,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6537,latent_6537,5071,0.010142,0.007946884,3.2214727,Focus on describing interval changes or stability between current and prior images.,"Higher activations are present in examples where there is a specific request to compare current imaging findings to previous studies or a prompt to provide such a description. The emphasis is on analyzing changes or stability over time, often specifying elements like line placements, reduction or persistence of effusions, and other interval changes between images.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.5634920634920635,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6538,latent_6538,3443,0.006886,0.010486511,5.7468405,Comparison of current radiological images with prior images for changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe specific findings in radiological images compared to prior, using language that indicates close observation of changes or stability between exams, often connected to a specific pathology or clinical question relevant to past reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6539,latent_6539,23411,0.046822,0.022557452,3.8202329,Attention to stable or unchanged findings in comparison with previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically include instances where not only is there a comparison with prior studies, but also a specific detailed description of the current and unchanged status or stability of notable findings. This highlights the focus on the stability or lack of significant change in findings when comparing current and prior imaging, which is significant for assessing chronic conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5477272727272727,0.5477386934673367,0.5510204081632653,0.54,100.0,99.0
+6540,latent_6540,3761,0.007522,0.007620171,9.660753,Detailed descriptions of central venous catheter placements.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions of central venous catheter (CVC) placements or changes, noting their position and sometimes any complications related to their placement. Reports include specifics like the line tip location and any differential changes seen compared to prior imagery, which typically involves a comparison element marking stable positioning or alteration.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5793714268787583,0.645,0.7352941176470589,0.2873563218390804,87.0,113.0
+6541,latent_6541,27116,0.054232,0.038734302,7.6513147,"Detailed comparisons of imaging changes over time, especially regarding effusions, devices, or lung pathology.","The examples with higher activation levels predominantly feature detailed comparisons between the current imaging findings and prior ones, often indicating specific changes (or lack thereof) in medical devices, lung abnormalities, or effusions. This emphasis on comparing current and previous states and noting interval changes signifies a complex assessment and decision-making process reflective of the pattern being studied.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6542,latent_6542,3362,0.006724,0.012608366,6.8969684,Comparisons with prior imaging are explicitly involved in the analysis.,"The examples predominantly focus on the presence or use of comparison with prior imaging studies, particularly mentioning techniques and findings relative to previous examinations. This reflects a pattern where the language refers explicitly to comparative evaluation in radiological reporting.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6543,latent_6543,3266,0.006532,0.008160005,4.464338,Prompts specifying comparison with current and prior images.,"This pattern of high activation levels seems to be related to the presence of explicit instructions or prompts that specifically reference comparisons between current and previous images. These examples repeatedly involve frontal and lateral views that are compared with 'prior frontal image', emphasizing a template format for instructional input.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4579046354685253,0.51,0.5061728395061729,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6544,latent_6544,5743,0.011486,0.011537368,5.8706956,Low lung volumes with enlarged cardiac silhouette.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe cases with the combination of low lung volumes or mild respiratory issues in conjunction with mild to moderate cardiac silhouette enlargement, often with vascular engorgement or tortuous aorta.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4103078193183158,0.5,0.5,0.11,100.0,100.0
+6545,latent_6545,23319,0.046638,0.02826457,4.795754,Stable or unremarkable cardiopulmonary findings in comparison studies.,"Radiology examples with higher activation levels consistently include the presence of normal cardiomediastinal, cardiac, and hilar contours, lack of significant findings (e.g., pleural effusion, pneumothorax) across multiple compared studies, and findings like atelectasis, resolution of previous issues, or stable appearance compared to prior images, demonstrating consistent unremarkable findings over time.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6546,latent_6546,54576,0.109152,0.076927,8.314945,Unchanged or stable findings or device positioning compared to previous imaging studies.,"The samples highlight either unchanged medical devices or stability concerning previous images, without significant interval changes or new findings. The repeated emphasis on unchanged positions or findings suggests that devices or stability of findings are crucial markers for activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5656565656565656,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6547,latent_6547,1875,0.00375,0.0050912825,4.7477446,Emphasis on comparison with prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve a pattern where findings are described and compared to a 'prior frontal image,' highlighting the necessity for direct comparison to assess changes. Instances where comparison is not possible or less emphasized tend to show lower activations.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3839144728326991,0.405,0.4306569343065693,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6548,latent_6548,3025,0.00605,0.0075734896,3.9041126,Description of tube or catheter positioning in comparison to prior images.,"These examples involve a request to compare findings from current images with those from prior studies, but high activations are associated particularly with descriptions or specifications of tube or catheter positioning (e.g., endotracheal or nasoenteric tubes, central venous catheters) and changes or stability in this context, rather than changes in pathological findings alone.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.4909090909090909,0.27,100.0,100.0
+6549,latent_6549,19924,0.039848,0.025816912,8.013014,Descriptions of changes or stability compared to prior chest imaging.,"The pattern observed in the examples with higher activation levels is related to the presence of comparisons between the current and previous study of chest images, often highlighting changes or stability in pulmonary and cardiac features such as opacities, effusions, and devices. The focus is on evaluating interval changes.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.5597014925373134,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6550,latent_6550,26278,0.052556,0.020772455,3.2642932,Noting changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The pattern primarily involves the presence of comparison between the current and previous imaging results, where changes such as new findings or differences in observed abnormalities are noted. Examples with higher activations typically detail changes or stability of findings between the referenced images.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6551,latent_6551,9524,0.019048,0.014751916,7.159681,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern observed is descriptions that involve examining and comparing findings across a current and a prior image. The examples with higher activations provide more detailed comparisons between images, using clearer terms of stability, changes, or improvements, often in the context of new and previous medical conditions or procedures.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4242424242424242,0.43,0.4125,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6552,latent_6552,38205,0.07641,0.077955455,6.576905,Findings described in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern arises in cases where findings are provided in comparison to prior imaging, helping to monitor changes or stability especially after interventions, traumas, or presence of medical devices. The comparison is crucial in assessing the stability or progression of conditions, guiding further clinical decisions.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6553,latent_6553,4561,0.009122,0.008996316,6.671783,Explicit comparison of current imaging with prior reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently include prior radiology reports for comparison, indicating the importance of evaluating any changes from previous imaging findings. This pattern involves explicit reference to previous images, suggesting ongoing monitoring and the stability or change of findings over time.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4128960421095252,0.42,0.4344262295081967,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6554,latent_6554,1862,0.003724,0.0061396887,6.6891727,Focus on assessing interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples consistently involve the comparison of new radiological findings to previous images or reports, indicating a pattern focused on assessing changes over time, termed 'interval changes', or stability of specific medical conditions. This linguistic pattern is central in follow-up studies to monitor patient progress or treatment response.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5538956323270048,0.57,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6555,latent_6555,39865,0.07973,0.04915718,3.9892967,Descriptive comparison focusing on changes in specific conditions from prior reports.,"These examples involve detailed comparison between the current image findings and those in prior reports, often indicating changes (or stability) in specific conditions such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, or other findings like small pneumothoraces. Activations near zero seem to lack such detailed comparisons focusing on changes in specific conditions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4803921568627451,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6556,latent_6556,3219,0.006438,0.011028389,7.62388,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior image.,"High activation examples consistently refer to observations of unchanged findings in radiological images, often implying stability or maintenance of previous conditions, despite potential or existing pathologies. This includes phrases like 'unchanged', 'little interval change', and references to known device placements or cardiopulmonary conditions remaining steady.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.475,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6557,latent_6557,6570,0.01314,0.011056281,4.8956895,Presence of detailed device placement or subtle specific changes.,"The higher activation examples often present findings that are unique, specific or contain technical details about device placements or changes in conditions. These reports acknowledge subtle details or notable changes from previous examinations, including specific locations, devices, or types of opacities noted.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.2916666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3997599039615846,0.4,0.3958333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6558,latent_6558,4582,0.009164,0.01091352,6.2829857,Detection of interval change or stability in imaging findings over time.,"The examples with a high activation level consistently include descriptions comparing current images with previous ones, particularly focusing on identifying significant changes over time that highlight disease progression, improvement, or stability, such as interval changes in opacities or structural alterations. This suggests that the pattern the model identifies is significant changes seen on imaging over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6559,latent_6559,5257,0.010514,0.012387844,5.26,Emphasis on comparisons and stated interval changes in imaging findings.,"High activation levels consistently correlate with references to comparison between current and prior imaging findings, and these are explicitly mentioned in the reports. When comparison results are noted but no significant change is mentioned, or when comparisons are absent, activations are lower.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4411764705882353,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6560,latent_6560,92395,0.18479,0.13010323,4.5419927,Comparative analysis using frontal and lateral imaging views.,"Examples with higher activations focus on evaluating findings with reference to multiple imaging views, such as both frontal and lateral chest radiographs, and emphasize comparison to prior images. This practice is essential in radiology to confirm findings and exclude acute changes. Analyzing current images against prior ones reduces the likelihood of missing subtle findings or changes over time, which aligns with the activation theme suggesting a focus on comprehensive evaluation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6561,latent_6561,5281,0.010562,0.014702943,6.983534,Comparison of detailed findings between current and prior images.,"The samples with high activation frequently include a description of imaging findings comparing changes with prior examinations, using detailed language to specify any differences or stability between the current and previous images.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6562,latent_6562,28194,0.056388,0.02836951,4.5504117,Discrepancy in suggested need for a comparison with previous imaging versus explicit statement of no prior or lack of prior comparisons.,"In cases with activation levels above zero, the majority of reports incorporate verbatim phrases or suggest specific comparisons with a ""prior frontal image"" and include intervals or modifications in structure or pathology as seen in the current image compared to prior imaging. These samples either suggest interval changes or stabilization in the findings after explicit comparisons, despite conflicting comparison language indicating no past references available.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4297719087635054,0.43,0.4270833333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6563,latent_6563,1899,0.003798,0.0054060724,5.2859225,Comparison or lack of with prior imaging influences report narrative.,"These examples identify the comparison or lack thereof with previous radiological imaging as a recurring theme. The highlighted radiology reports often reference findings in comparing current and previous images, emphasizing intervals, stability, or lack of notable changes. Additionally, some examples involve descriptions without available prior comparisons, suggesting that the comparison (or absence) is a direct contributor to the activation level.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3859344224307728,0.47,0.4827586206896552,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6564,latent_6564,15518,0.031036,0.030019421,6.8907185,Descriptions of stability or changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations typically discuss comparisons to prior radiological studies or emphasize descriptions of stability or changes over time, suggesting a pattern focused on temporal evaluation or consistency across imaging sessions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6565,latent_6565,34931,0.069862,0.031327084,3.1226668,Include low or decreased lung volumes in findings.,"The highlighted examples are all statements involving lung volume measurements or descriptions, often with diagnostic implications such as crowding or compression. ""Low lung volume"" descriptions are consistently present in the higher activation set, indicating a likely area of interest.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.6346153846153846,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6566,latent_6566,3041,0.006082,0.009391625,6.795169,Current findings compared to previous imaging studies.,"These examples consistently reference the comparison of current imaging findings with prior radiological studies, which often indicates stability, progression, or resolution of observed anomalies. They demonstrate the language used in radiological evaluations that emphasize the continuity of monitoring over time.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6567,latent_6567,3844,0.007688,0.010724919,4.203858,Continuously observed interval changes or monitoring in radiology descriptions.,"These examples consistently include patterns of examining findings based on comparison with prior images but highlight situations where there is an interval change or monitoring over time, indicating progressive conditions. Examples with non-zero activations often involve specific attributes across examinations, such as evaluating catheter positions, which require ongoing comparison and attention to detail.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4869565217391304,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6568,latent_6568,5152,0.010304,0.012725082,6.74075,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging results.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature reports where findings are evaluated against prior imaging, often highlighting changes or stability over time. The examples use terms such as 'compared to previous', 'from prior', or 'stable appearance', emphasizing comparison as a key pattern.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6569,latent_6569,4319,0.008638,0.009661122,5.699094,Notable findings related to heart size or cardiac silhouette stability.,"These examples predominantly feature radiological findings where heart size is enlarged or described in relation to cardiomediastinal silhouette while the broader cardiopulmonary status is discussed, with particular attention to the heart's stability or change. These points are commonly reported in patients with heart disease.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5749893747343684,0.575,0.5742574257425742,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6570,latent_6570,3230,0.00646,0.011396007,6.4345145,Findings related to the placement or status of medical devices in imaging.,"The examples show higher activation levels when there are specific findings related to the positioning or status of medical devices and tubes (e.g., endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, pacemakers) within the body as observed on current and prior imaging, often discussing changes, placements, or adjustments.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6396757081373237,0.64,0.648936170212766,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6571,latent_6571,4644,0.009288,0.008962306,5.3318005,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and heart size despite other findings.,"The examples exhibit reports where no acute intrathoracic process or significant change is described, highlighting normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes, normal heart size, and absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, frequently using terms like 'normal', 'unchanged', and 'stable'.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6572,latent_6572,8038,0.016076,0.016833322,6.10449,Interval change or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The observed pattern involves deducing changes in the patient's condition based on a comparative analysis with previous imaging studies. Descriptions often focus on any interval change in clinical findings, using phrases like 'compared to previous', 'stable', and 'no change', which are common in follow-up studies to ascertain stability or progression of medical conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.5798319327731093,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6573,latent_6573,12551,0.025102,0.009717921,2.66439,Presence of cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently report cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette, often accompanied by associated findings such as pulmonary edema, or pleural effusion. These are significant patterns indicating chronic or acute cardiac conditions.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5957446808510638,0.28,100.0,100.0
+6574,latent_6574,4709,0.009418,0.007551818,4.7841625,Descriptions comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"This pattern involves radiology reports requesting comparisons between current images and prior images or studies. This is evident in both the prompt and the assistant’s output, signifying the importance of serial evaluation in identifying changes in clinical status.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6575,latent_6575,8830,0.01766,0.010334099,4.1896076,Changes in placement or removal of tubes or devices over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of elements that change over time, such as the placement of tubes or other devices. These changes are highlighted in relation to prior reports, using specific observations about positioning or removals, e.g., extubation, nasogastric tube placement, and repositioning of catheters.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5626666666666666,0.59,0.68,0.34,100.0,100.0
+6576,latent_6576,3590,0.00718,0.006176616,5.897642,Descriptions comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels include explicit references to findings in images compared to prior imaging studies. These comparisons often describe unchanged findings, interval changes, or stability in certain conditions or pathologies over time, which is essential in tracking disease progression or treatment response.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6577,latent_6577,7255,0.01451,0.016613232,4.9518967,"Recognizing opacities, consolidations, or pleural effusions in chest imaging.","The representative examples show that the pattern involves identifying opacities, consolidations, or pleural effusions—changes indicating pathology (e.g., pneumonia, edema) on chest imaging. These changes are clearly reported and notable, distinct from non-pathologic findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6142187930559382,0.615,0.6055045871559633,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6578,latent_6578,10646,0.021292,0.015984915,4.5505238,Noting interval changes when comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation predominantly focus on changes in findings when comparing current radiographic studies to prior images, often noting 'interval change'. This reflects the importance of noting significant alterations in radiological exams over time, especially in conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6338925248877856,0.635,0.6216216216216216,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6579,latent_6579,4004,0.008008,0.008103816,6.931709,Comparison of chest imaging findings across both frontal and lateral views.,"The examples consistently describe findings from both a frontal and a lateral chest image, emphasizing the evaluation of chest imaging across different angles. The examples with the highest activation levels include descriptions involving both the frontal and lateral view, portraying stable appearances or changes visible across multiple views.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.5655737704918032,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6580,latent_6580,5074,0.010148,0.015168538,8.560439,Comparison to prior images with findings noted as stable or changed.,"High activation is consistently associated with reports that include comparisons to previous imaging studies with specific changes or stability in findings, indicating a focus on interval changes or diagnoses based on prior imaging.",0.4820295983086681,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.5405405405405406,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6581,latent_6581,4690,0.00938,0.010422395,4.034273,"Evaluation using current and multiple prior images, often assessing changes in known pathologies.","Examples with high activation levels involve complex patterns derived from multiple imaging modalities and prior reports. Reports frequently use comparisons to prior images, documenting changes in various aspects such as mediastinal contours, indications of new devices, or alterations in known pathologies. Higher activations often include requests to evaluate specific changes or abnormalities in response to prior data.",0.2525252525252525,0.26,0.3,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6582,latent_6582,7941,0.015882,0.01327434,6.247155,Longitudinal stability in image findings or device placement across comparisons.,"The more highly activated examples consistently involve stable findings and device placements over multiple imaging studies with explicit acknowledgment of little to no change in pertinent features, indicating chronic or non-progressive conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4859813084112149,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6583,latent_6583,46317,0.092634,0.04198216,2.5810003,Placement or adjustment of medical devices in imaging.,"These examples consistently describe the presence of medical devices such as PICCs, pacemakers, tubes, or catheters that have either been placed or repositioned in comparison to previous imaging. This pattern is captured through terms like 'placement', 'retracted', 'terminates', or 'position'.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5138888888888888,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6584,latent_6584,20989,0.041978,0.027208567,6.4103312,Recognition of interval change or stability compared to previous images.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern indicate either an interval change or stability in findings by comparing the current imaging study to images taken previously. The reports emphasize unchanged states or improvements when compared to earlier images, which is closely aligned with the context of continued medical assessments or interventions over time.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6968004468203941,0.715,0.6442953020134228,0.96,100.0,100.0
+6585,latent_6585,14782,0.029564,0.016452245,4.7212114,Focus on changes or stability of features compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently involve identifying changes or stability in features such as devices, tubes, cardiomediastinal silhouettes, and pleural effusions when compared to previous imaging. They often mention specifics like 'unchanged', 'resolved', or 'new' findings relative to prior images, focusing on any developments or consistent patterns in the patient's condition.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6586,latent_6586,14289,0.028578,0.021282107,4.4992676,Unremarkable or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette.,The pattern observed is that normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal contours or cardiac silhouette are mentioned in the context of describing radiological findings. This phrase frequently appears in radiology reports to indicate stability or absence of acute changes in the heart and surrounding structures.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6324195594211902,0.645,0.6058394160583942,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6587,latent_6587,4755,0.00951,0.015876446,5.805778,Explicit comparison to prior imaging results using structured report formatting.,"Examples with a high activation level frequently mention a direct comparison between current and prior imaging studies, with explicit references to findings noted in the previous report, usually indicated by consistent phrases like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This pattern is evident across diverse examples, showing a consistent structure and language centered around comparative analysis of images.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4061996779388084,0.41,0.4224137931034483,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6588,latent_6588,3661,0.007322,0.011349138,5.3516965,Use of both frontal and lateral views in imaging reports.,"Examples all involve using multiple views (frontal and lateral) in radiographic description, which is a common approach in radiology to provide comprehensive imaging evaluation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.535031847133758,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6589,latent_6589,2080,0.00416,0.0057529765,5.081882,Absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax; normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Clear examples with higher activation levels consistently exhibit an absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax alongside noted cardiomediastinal and hilar contours being unremarkable or normal, emphasizing the stability or lack of acute issues.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7023133782386034,0.705,0.6722689075630253,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6590,latent_6590,6007,0.012014,0.008882092,5.2171264,Cardiomediastinal and hilar contours within normal limits.,Text that describes the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as being 'within normal limits' or 'normal' is a consistent finding in these examples. These descriptions emphasize the absence of acute or significant changes in these anatomical areas. The examples with higher activation values cite these specific normal descriptions consistently.,0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.674601386698706,0.675,0.6635514018691588,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6591,latent_6591,17094,0.034188,0.019432174,6.1832976,Reports focusing on cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac size.,"The samples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings of the cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac size, indicating that the pattern emphasizes on reports that highlight noteworthy features of the heart and mediastinum rather than just the presence of typical lung conditions or device placements.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6592,latent_6592,5907,0.011814,0.010157856,7.961708,Describing image findings and changes compared to prior images.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently involve providing a radiological description based on a given set of images, particularly comparing frontal and lateral views with prior images to identify changes. This includes descriptions of findings like heart, vessel contour, or absence/presence of pathological changes, especially in the context of providing radiological descriptions or interpreting changes.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4270833333333333,0.45,0.4642857142857143,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6593,latent_6593,4226,0.008452,0.015632072,6.570732,Comparison and description of interval changes in radiology findings.,"The examples reveal a consistent pattern where radiologic findings are compared against previous studies and show changes such as improvement, worsening, stability, or interval changes in some conditions or placements. This comparison is a critical part of the report, utilizing terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'increased', 'removed', 'improved', etc.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4259259259259259,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6594,latent_6594,17416,0.034832,0.016712142,3.587552,Detailed comparison to prior imaging showing stability or change.,"Examples with higher activation invariably contain detailed comparisons describing findings that have changed or remained stable relative to previous imaging, often including fracture identification, pleural changes, or device placements. The emphasis is on comparison resulting in observations regarding stability or change.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5510204081632653,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6595,latent_6595,27165,0.05433,0.030129861,4.462854,Presence of both current frontal and lateral images in the prompt increases activation.,"Higher activations are observed when the model is prompted to describe findings based on viewing both frontal and lateral images of an examination, even in the absence of a prior for comparison. This suggests that the model strongly associates lateral views with differential diagnosis or anatomical insight.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6354166666666667,0.65,0.6071428571428571,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6596,latent_6596,12444,0.024888,0.018487299,3.9027433,Emphasis on changes or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The data examples with higher activations involve interval changes, comparisons with prior imaging, and explicit descriptions of stability or change, indicating a focused analysis on variances from established benchmarks or baselines, notably the emphasis on temporal changes in findings.",0.4292114695340502,0.4693877551020408,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6597,latent_6597,7506,0.015012,0.021188209,8.795869,Tracking size or change in pleural effusions over time.,"These examples discuss changes in medical imaging findings over time, specifically focusing on the presence, absence, or changes of pleural effusions. This is highlighted by the frequent mention of stability or change in effusion size from prior imaging, denoted by terms like 'small', 'unchanged', or 'interval'. The pattern emphasizes the importance of tracking effusion size in radiology reports.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5604395604395604,0.6,0.75,0.3,100.0,100.0
+6598,latent_6598,6474,0.012948,0.013683604,3.33394,Stability or change observed in comparison with prior images.,"The examples with low activation levels either include normal radiographic findings or identify inconsistencies in radiological descriptions that don't focus on changes over time. Higher activations occur when direct comparisons are made, identifying changes, resolution, or stability of features over time. The comparison to prior imagery and its focus on stability or change in the condition of the patient or equipment greatly correlates with increased activation in the provided samples.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3861751618122977,0.3869346733668342,0.3804347826086957,0.35,100.0,99.0
+6599,latent_6599,8585,0.01717,0.009411622,5.3798203,Findings provided without prior image comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve provision of findings without available prior images for comparison. These prompts emphasize the need to evaluate radiographs without a history for direct comparison, focusing more on findings rather than progressions or changes relative to past exams.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4140625,0.49,0.2826086956521739,0.1585365853658536,82.0,118.0
+6600,latent_6600,13077,0.026154,0.013213413,2.4687536,Presence and description of medical devices or tubes in chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention the presence of medical devices, lines, or tubes identified in the chest imaging, emphasizing their status or positioning. Descriptions specifically focus on aspects like ports, PICC lines, pacemaker leads, or drainage tubes, highlighting their placement, changes, or interaction with other anatomical structures in follow-up comparisons.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4212484497726333,0.44,0.40625,0.26,100.0,100.0
+6601,latent_6601,3467,0.006934,0.005813579,4.384064,Focused on descriptions comparing current images with prior ones.,"Highly active samples are focused on generating descriptions based on direct and sequential image comparisons (frontal, lateral, prior), using prompts asking for findings' descriptions specifically related to the images provided and their differences from prior studies.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6602,latent_6602,6967,0.013934,0.021534191,6.325583,Detailed imaging comparisons revealing stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels often contain specific radiological findings described in detail and referenced through comparisons between current and prior images to assess for stability or changes. This pattern focuses on identifying and delineating the temporal changes in imaging findings that are crucial for ongoing patient evaluation, purely through visual and comparative analysis.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5895720909021813,0.595,0.5772357723577236,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6603,latent_6603,6155,0.01231,0.01174641,6.083892,Unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently evaluate radiological findings in comparison to prior images and emphasize 'unchanged' status of these findings. This linguistic pattern is common in radiology reports where comparing current and previous states helps determine the stability or progression of a condition.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.4266666666666667,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6604,latent_6604,5116,0.010232,0.012470528,6.5463195,Use of multiple comparison images to evaluate changes in findings.,"Samples with high activation involve the comparison of current and prior imaging to track changes specifically in the cardiopulmonary system or surrounding bony structures. This is evident in examples highlighting stability, interval changes, or the resolution of findings, implying a clinical focus on the assessment of progression or treatment efficacy.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6605,latent_6605,6350,0.0127,0.010955144,3.891237,Detailed comparison with prior imaging highlighting changes.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize descriptions of chest imaging findings using prior images for direct comparison and explicit reference to any changes, or lack thereof, in specific findings. The reports tend to focus on changes in lung opacity, cardiopulmonary status, or effusions compared with earlier imaging.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4731182795698925,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6606,latent_6606,1357,0.002714,0.0039382814,5.3791904,Detailed findings related to device placements or unchanged clinical details compared to prior images.,"The pattern is evident from examples where the assistant provides descriptions comparing current findings to prior images in highly specific contexts related to positioning of medical devices, catheter placement, or stability/changes of specific parameters like heart size or presence of medical tubes. These cases involve conditions requiring careful monitoring, often with descriptions of unchanged positions or findings in relation to prior images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6607,latent_6607,21066,0.042132,0.031424887,8.26249,Worsening or significant interval changes in lung-related findings upon comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve a progression or change related to a previous condition, often worsening or interval changes in lung conditions like pneumonia, effusions, or opacities, rather than stability or no significant change. This indicates that the pattern strongly responds to descriptions of worsening conditions or newly noted changes compared to prior imaging.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6484110885733604,0.675,0.625,0.4938271604938271,81.0,119.0
+6608,latent_6608,18419,0.036838,0.021508172,3.2893734,Stability or minor changes of findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations involve reports that primarily describe clear, expanded, and unchanged lung appearances or mild abnormalities in imaging studies that connect current findings to prior exams. This suggests that the pattern focuses on the clear identification or confirmation of stability and benignity based on precise comparisons to prior reports, aligning with typical clinical verification processes.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4645739910313901,0.4723618090452261,0.4666666666666667,0.35,100.0,99.0
+6609,latent_6609,7896,0.015792,0.011190654,4.15205,Use of comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging, focusing on stability or change in findings over time.",0.161869002920317,0.1632653061224489,0.1851851851851851,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.2809553739786298,0.285,0.2470588235294117,0.21,100.0,100.0
+6610,latent_6610,11463,0.022926,0.017030915,3.716304,Comparison of current radiographic findings with prior studies showing stable or unchanged features.,"These examples consistently compare a current radiographic finding with prior studies, emphasizing stable or minimal changes in findings, often noting medical devices or consistent anatomical appearances. Key phrases include ""unchanged"", ""similar to prior"", and ""again seen"", highlighting their importance to the pattern identified.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.56,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6611,latent_6611,4399,0.008798,0.009465019,4.1916633,Descriptive comparison with prior images in radiology reports.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activation levels involves the use of a specific prompt format for radiology reports which mentions comparison to a prior image or multiple prior studies. This format is often used to assess changes in clinical findings over time, frequently specified in the provided text and requests for describing findings based on comparison with prior radiological images.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6612,latent_6612,41572,0.083144,0.058640745,4.644852,Evaluating interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Samples with low activation levels either have no significant interval changes noted from prior imaging, or lack any comparison with prior studies, suggesting the pattern involves evaluating changes over time or stability of specific findings between current and prior imaging.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6613,latent_6613,15317,0.030634,0.013498335,3.817771,Variation between current and prior imaging with significant clinical findings.,"Examples with high activation levels typically feature comparisons between current and prior imaging studies that show notable changes, such as the presence of significant clinical findings like new insertions or progressions of pathologies. These variations between previous and current reports are central to the pattern observed.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5952380952380952,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6614,latent_6614,4923,0.009846,0.007744504,4.9727616,Implicit context-based comparison where prior comparisons are stated as none.,"Examples with a comparison element include explicit or implicit analysis of current imaging findings relative to prior imaging, despite some examples stating 'None' for comparisons. This implies a context or implicit comparison to a baseline, which leads to moderate activation in cases despite the stated absence of prior images.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6615,latent_6615,3405,0.00681,0.008794555,6.815546,Reference to prior imaging with focus on stability or interval changes.,"The relevant examples consistently include phrases indicating comparison with prior imaging, and the pattern also frequently involves the mention of interval changes or stability of findings such as ""increased"" or ""unchanged,"" particularly regarding fluid or anatomical positioning. These are common features of reports that reflect ongoing monitoring or evaluation for new developments.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4911774385458596,0.4924623115577889,0.4909090909090909,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+6616,latent_6616,3859,0.007718,0.008963871,4.308955,Interval change in device status or positioning from prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe interval changes, removal, placement, or adjustments of devices such as tubes and catheters from prior imaging studies. This focuses on identifying procedural updates rather than purely anatomical or pathological changes.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4824230220656095,0.5326633165829145,0.5789473684210527,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+6617,latent_6617,2673,0.005346,0.005127187,7.3028746,Comparisons with prior imaging highlighting change or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a detailed comparison with prior imaging, clarifying changes or stabilities in findings. This includes specific mentions of increases or resolutions of conditions and adjustments in medical device placements. Phrases indicating change, or null changes, like 'has progressed', 'unchanged', or 'increased bilateral opacities' are relevant to this activation pattern.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6618,latent_6618,9553,0.019106,0.014092243,5.165991,Comparison of thoracic features over time noting stability or changes.,"Examples with high activations involve descriptions of chest radiographs comparing current and prior images, often with comments on the stability or changes in lung opacities, heart size, and other thoracic features. The language frequently involves noting normal limits or unremarkable status of cardiomediastinal silhouettes and lungs, indicating stable conditions across radiographs.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6619,latent_6619,11752,0.023504,0.012610226,4.9893727,Detailed comparative description of imaging findings relative to prior studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe radiological findings by comparing them to prior images, elaborately noting interval changes or the stability of observed features over time. Examples revealing little to no activation lack detailed, comparative descriptions or discussions of changes over time in the context of the prior images.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6363636363636364,0.64,0.6166666666666667,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6620,latent_6620,6516,0.013032,0.010357917,4.8998876,Radiological findings described through comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels describe the evaluation of current images in comparison to prior imaging studies or reports, with descriptions focusing on specific changes or lack thereof. This can include descriptions like 'compared to prior', 'interval removal', or 'consistent with prior examination', highlighting the comparison aspect of the radiological assessment.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.3333333333333333,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4379767161782416,0.44,0.4464285714285714,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6621,latent_6621,4011,0.008022,0.008237273,5.2347283,Increased activation with explicit image comparison and change description.,"The pattern here involves the inclusion of both current and prior images, with emphasis on explicitly comparing the two to assess stability or change over time. The activation level is higher when specific observations about stability or changes are noted, implying comparison with a prior examination is crucial.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4426451758680425,0.445,0.4513274336283185,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6622,latent_6622,7877,0.015754,0.012536449,4.3817005,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples all involve radiology reports that compare current imaging findings to those from previous studies or reports, noting any interval changes or improvements. Phrases like 'compared to prior study', 'unchanged from prior', or 'interval improvement' indicate a focus on changes over time through sequential imaging evaluations.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6623,latent_6623,40093,0.080186,0.032810736,2.2624943,References to changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to comparison with prior imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability over time. They employ language indicating temporal comparison to assess disease progression or stability, often using previous dates or remarks on interval changes.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6354166666666667,0.65,0.6071428571428571,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6624,latent_6624,21023,0.042046,0.044862896,6.158875,Detailed comparisons of current and previous radiological findings.,"Examples with activations of 5.0 or above show a consistent pattern of using detailed comparative descriptions of radiological findings relative to previous images, often noting changes or stability in specific medical conditions or devices. These reports highlight the importance of tracking progression or stability of certain findings.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6625,latent_6625,6747,0.013494,0.010392385,4.212832,Focus on device positioning or silhouette description without detailed change comparison.,"The more representative examples request a comparison of images and do not explicitly make the comparison due to the lack of prior imaging information. Instead, it attempts to restate or describe current positioning of devices or lung/aorta conditions like tube or cardiovascular silhouette more prominently, without detailed changes compared to prior studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6626,latent_6626,5155,0.01031,0.00981215,8.207853,"Detailed comparison with prior, focusing on ambiguity or stability in findings.","The examples with high activation levels frequently contain detailed descriptions about changes in pathology or stability over time, particularly regarding pulmonary opacities, effusions, and lines or tubes positioning, often concluding with an unclear, excluded or unchanged status, indicating ambiguity or stability in findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5537190082644629,0.7052631578947368,95.0,105.0
+6627,latent_6627,2260,0.00452,0.007889758,6.8009696,General or non-specific comparison descriptions requested.,Examples that have high activation levels contain prompts that request a comparison or description of radiological findings using less specific or generic details about the patient's indications or technique. This often involves providing a summary of changes without detailed findings.,0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5161290322580645,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6628,latent_6628,5192,0.010384,0.014089352,5.7602625,Pulmonary vascular congestion in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe pulmonary vascular congestion or engorgement along with negative indicators for pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation. These specific terms and findings are recurring in samples with high activation scores, showing a pattern where interest is centered around pulmonary vascular changes rather than overt acute pathology.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5775288109307735,0.605,0.7142857142857143,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6629,latent_6629,3740,0.00748,0.00928375,3.8077052,Focus on interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,Many examples note a comparison with old imaging and provide a description focusing on interval changes or the assessment of evolving pathology. This pattern reflects a specific style of radiological interpretation centered on temporal changes observed over multiple studies.,0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3499349934993499,0.35,0.3529411764705882,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6630,latent_6630,3817,0.007634,0.01103784,6.5268393,Use of both frontal and lateral images compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include both frontal and lateral images in conjunction with reference to prior images for comparison, whereas those with lower activation levels focus primarily on the frontal image only or lack comprehensive comparison details.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6631,latent_6631,3853,0.007706,0.01023879,4.777811,Detailed descriptive findings and recommendations from imaging.,"The pattern observed seems tied to a detail-oriented focus on describing the findings, particularly with direct references to images, detailed radiological observations, and assistant recommendations. These examples may include comparisons to prior imaging but focus on providing detailed observations specific to each image quickly, prioritizing comprehensive image-led commentary rather than diagnostic conclusions.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4622572417102305,0.4623115577889447,0.4653465346534653,0.47,100.0,99.0
+6632,latent_6632,4617,0.009234,0.013841504,4.553762,Prompt to compare current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation often include explicit prompts to provide a description of the radiological findings in comparison to prior images. These prompts specifically ask for a comparison, indicating a focus on the assessment of changes over time rather than just identifying current findings.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.363606946391975,0.41,0.4415584415584415,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6633,latent_6633,5865,0.01173,0.011419944,5.1477327,Description requests comparison with specified frontal and lateral views.,"Instances with higher activations show a consistent pattern of specified image views (frontal, lateral) alongside descriptions requesting comparisons to prior images. This explicitly highlights the importance of comparative analysis, even when actual comparison data may not be provided.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6634,latent_6634,24929,0.049858,0.028257724,6.6963024,Notable tube or line placement or positioning changes.,"Activation levels are elevated in examples where there is a notable change or positioning related to tubes or lines, such as a feeding tube or PICC line, noted in the radiographic report. This suggests that the model is sensitive to medical devices placement and changes in positioning as a notable finding.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.9166666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5529508153394825,0.5728643216080402,0.631578947368421,0.36,100.0,99.0
+6635,latent_6635,2331,0.004662,0.0074301963,6.2598805,Current radiology findings are described without resolution of comparison.,This collection of examples reveals a pattern in which descriptions of the current radiological findings are regularly compared with those from a prior imaging study (though the instructions may state otherwise). The unresolved status of comparison indicates that this is not a component of the activation pattern.,0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.589386418565971,0.605,0.5755395683453237,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6636,latent_6636,5598,0.011196,0.009024673,4.438264,Comparisons between current and prior frontal and lateral chest images.,"Higher activations involve multiple views (frontal and lateral) of chest images compared to a prior study, leading to detailed evaluative language about stability and changes, often including specific structural details of the lungs, heart, or mediastinum. Lower activations lack these detailed comparisons or involve only descriptive terms without the same depth of analytical comparison.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4792588285851513,0.485,0.4876033057851239,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6637,latent_6637,16228,0.032456,0.02164618,7.2585964,Unchanged bilateral lung pathology on interval imaging.,"The most significant examples of this pattern involve findings in both lungs, such as bilateral opacities, atelectasis, effusions, or pneumothoraces that remain unchanged on comparison studies. This suggests stability of bilateral pathological findings over time, irrespective of specific pathologies.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5,0.21875,96.0,104.0
+6638,latent_6638,22000,0.044,0.020555567,4.315724,"Mention of current and prior images for comparison, with imaging perspective explicitly noted.","In this set of examples, the presence of multiple imaging perspectives, particularly 'current frontal image' and 'prior frontal image', and often in conjunction with either lateral images or additional detail in the prompt, leads to higher activation scores when these are directly acknowledged or referenced for comparative purposes.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4206928513497856,0.5,0.5,0.87,100.0,100.0
+6639,latent_6639,43027,0.086054,0.069362335,4.283773,"Description of findings compared to prior imaging, indicating changes.","The examples with high activations consistently involve descriptions of changes compared to a prior image or radiograph, specifically noting 'interval changes' or 'comparison with previous studies'. This is evident by the presence of phrases like 'compared to prior', 'as compared to the previous radiograph', and 'stable since prior'.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4448829925390237,0.455,0.4383561643835616,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6640,latent_6640,8427,0.016854,0.016947465,3.9192703,Task of describing imaging study findings with comparisons to prior images.,"The examples with high activation involve the task of describing medical imaging findings. They consistently reference instructions to make comparisons between provided images and prior images, highlighting changes or stability over time in a clinical setting, often within the context of diagnostic queries or understanding conditions' progression or resolution.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6641,latent_6641,12563,0.025126,0.018747538,4.6157107,Reports emphasize unchanged anatomical features in radiologic comparisons.,"The activation of these reports is influenced by the presence of comparative descriptions of findings between current and prior images, common phrases that indicate no significant changes, and unchanged normal anatomical features despite new findings elsewhere. Reports often note stability based on imaging history, such as 'unchanged', 'similar', or 'stable', indicating no interval worsening of previously existing conditions.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6572235104345197,0.66,0.635593220338983,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6642,latent_6642,7421,0.014842,0.012164951,5.395428,"Comparison of current imaging with prior studies, emphasizing changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels include detailed comparisons of current imaging findings with prior examinations. They emphasize changes or stability over time, which is a critical component of radiological assessments, especially in follow-up cases to monitor disease progression or resolution.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6643,latent_6643,4350,0.0087,0.006948234,4.686841,High activation when both frontal and lateral views are described.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include or mention a combination of both frontal and lateral imaging views. This specific mention or usage pattern differentiates them from other examples without such a combination of imaging technique descriptions, irrespective of the findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5116279069767442,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6644,latent_6644,10229,0.020458,0.011998437,5.5584264,Interval changes in medical device placement between images.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently mention changes in medical devices like catheters or lines (e.g., removal, repositioning) between current and prior images. This pattern is notable for its focus on updates in equipment positioning or status, reflecting dynamic patient management aspects tracked through serial imaging.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6129302228266555,0.63,0.7241379310344828,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6645,latent_6645,11936,0.023872,0.012448874,3.9823873,Describing findings based on interval change comparison using current and prior images.,"The activation levels are high when the task is to provide a description of findings based on comparison between current and prior images, specifically focusing on interval changes or stability of conditions in the clinical context provided. These involve reviewing changes in radiographic markers such as opacities, effusions, or instrumentation positions, especially when an explicit comparison rationale is provided or expected.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6646,latent_6646,4435,0.00887,0.010961455,4.0564046,Comparison to prior imaging indicating interval changes or stability.,"All examples exhibit a pattern where findings are compared to prior images. The comparison indicates whether there are interval changes like improvement, worsening, or stability of findings. Phrases such as ""compared to prior"" or ""interval change"" are frequent, focusing on the evolution of conditions rather than isolated snapshot analysis.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6647,latent_6647,25600,0.0512,0.039308842,5.825276,Focus on interval changes or stability in lung/pleural conditions compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe imaging findings with a detailed comparison to prior studies, emphasizing changes or stability in specific lung or pleural conditions, often related to interventions like surgery or medical devices, or chronic conditions, such as atelectasis or effusion. Consistent descriptors like 'interval change', 'stable', 'persistent', or 'compared to prior' are frequently used to indicate these comparisons.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.43,100.0,100.0
+6648,latent_6648,6544,0.013088,0.014405658,5.9746084,Frequent references to comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Patterns involving comparisons with prior imaging are prevalent in highly activated examples, emphasizing updates or modifications from previous studies. The specific focus is on changes, such as ""no change"", ""stable"", ""interval"", or ""compared to prior"", which are key elements of ongoing clinical monitoring.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6649,latent_6649,14883,0.029766,0.025963025,5.1572347,Focus on stability or change between current and prior chest images.,"Highly activated examples contain detailed comparisons between current and prior chest images, focusing on assessments whether findings such as device positions, cardiomegaly, or effusions show significant change or stability over time. Less activated reports either lack comparison or don't emphasize this assessment of change in relation to previous studies.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5591956681450845,0.595,0.5605095541401274,0.88,100.0,100.0
+6650,latent_6650,9664,0.019328,0.013042163,5.3128047,Comparison to prior radiological studies for change assessment.,"These examples with higher activation involve descriptions that compare current findings with prior studies, emphasizing stability or change. This comparison pattern is frequently observed in radiology reports to assess progression or resolution of identified pathologies, often using terms like 'compared', 'prior', 'unchanged', or specific changes noted between current and prior imaging.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4277921869568705,0.465,0.4768211920529801,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6651,latent_6651,3569,0.007138,0.009719523,4.437173,Significant observations or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with low activation predominantly include normal or stable findings even when compared to prior images, often focusing on unremarkable changes or normal aspects, indicating they do not highlight acute or notable changes. In contrast, high activation examples describe significant observations, changes, or notable findings whether stable or new, when referencing prior images or studies.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,100.0,100.0
+6652,latent_6652,4196,0.008392,0.010768452,4.6661787,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours compared to prior imaging.,"These examples feature descriptions of radiological findings with a focus on comparisons to prior imaging and stability in cardiopulmonary anatomy, particularly cardiomediastinal and hilar contours. Normal or unchanged findings are often highlighted, indicating a consistency across previously noted conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5818181818181818,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6653,latent_6653,4814,0.009628,0.01588646,7.2931275,"Reports referencing unchanged or correctly placed hardware (e.g., tubes, lines) compared to previous images.","Activation is high when findings contain descriptions involving any hardware or lines (e.g., catheters, tubes) and indicates either their placement, termination, or positioning within the body as compared to prior studies. Remarks frequently describe unchanged positioning or need for repositioning and provide relevant anatomical context.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4173805197427244,0.495,0.4814814814814814,0.13,100.0,100.0
+6654,latent_6654,7414,0.014828,0.011687919,3.53644,Presence of new or resolved pulmonary changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with the lowest activation levels have findings documenting no significant changes or normal findings from the prior imaging. In contrast, instances with higher activation levels demonstrate changes or findings that indicate an interval change or noteworthy differences from prior imaging, such as a decrease or increase in pleural effusions or consolidation resolving/new formation, often with a specific clinical indication.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4190268700072621,0.44,0.4032258064516129,0.25,100.0,100.0
+6655,latent_6655,6247,0.012494,0.009964182,6.636509,Stable or unremarkable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation focus on descriptions indicating there are no acute or significant changes in the chest radiographic images being compared. The reports frequently mention normal cardiac, mediastinal, or lung findings and lack of acute issues such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or consolidation—all pointing to overall stable conditions. The reports prioritize clarity in indicating stability or normalcy of features assessed via comparison to prior images.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.475,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6656,latent_6656,18120,0.03624,0.018483367,5.5983677,"Unchanged normal findings despite atelectasis, pleural effusion or pneumothorax.","Many examples indicate unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies, but activation levels vary. Examples with higher activations describe conditions like atelectasis and pleural effusion, conflicting with low activation levels in examples describing unchanged findings. Thus, the pattern is a linguistic structure where findings are briefly compared to prior images, but activation suggests the focus is on unchanged normal findings in the presence of abnormalities such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5185483870967742,0.5477386934673367,0.5263157894736842,0.3225806451612903,93.0,106.0
+6657,latent_6657,5332,0.010664,0.008564254,2.3430634,Explicit request for comparison to prior imaging and findings.,"The activating pattern is related to the presence of instructions or requests for comparison and providing findings. This pattern distinguishes between general descriptions and those that clearly request detailed comparisons to prior images, often leading to specific findings or action items, which is more domain-specific in radiological report compilations or assessments.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4519170333123822,0.455,0.4608695652173913,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6658,latent_6658,9912,0.019824,0.025041373,7.5744553,Aortic tortuosity or unfolding with comparisons to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include findings of aortic tortuosity or unfolding, a notable abnormality in the context of chest imaging, alongside other findings such as cardiac silhouette size or lung opacities. These reports mention the aorta being tortuous or unfolded as part of the findings with comparisons to prior imaging.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3799603174603174,0.5,0.5,0.06,100.0,100.0
+6659,latent_6659,29303,0.058606,0.053598005,4.8072977,Comparison of monitoring/support devices in radiology images.,"These examples consistently discuss the presence of monitoring or support devices and their management such as positioning or removal, as compared to prior imaging studies. The examples often mention tubes, catheters, tracheostomy, endotracheal tubes, or PICC line placements and their maintenance or changes, which are critical in patient care monitoring and documentation in radiological studies.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6791979949874687,0.68,0.7,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6660,latent_6660,5719,0.011438,0.016096959,6.598855,Comparison of current and prior imaging reveals changes in lung opacities.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve a comparison between current and prior images, highlighting changes or stability in observed lung opacities. This pattern suggests focusing on changes in lung opacities between imaging studies, reflecting radiological assessments of disease progression or resolution.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.586622351474865,0.5979899497487438,0.6515151515151515,0.43,100.0,99.0
+6661,latent_6661,22996,0.045992,0.04042484,4.977857,Normal cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours despite other findings.,"Examples with high activation levels demonstrate a focus on findings related to cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours. These reports often mention the heart or mediastinal structures being within normal limits despite other findings, which corresponds with a distinct linguistic pattern.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6430718706580776,0.6432160804020101,0.6346153846153846,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+6662,latent_6662,5314,0.010628,0.008931844,6.4271283,Comparison of current and prior images to describe changes in findings.,"Highly activated examples include direct comparisons with prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability, often noting specific radiological features such as atelectasis, opacities, or anatomical positions. Language structure includes phrases like 'compared to prior', 'since prior', or 'in comparison with'. Patterns often follow specific medical indications.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6663,latent_6663,9508,0.019016,0.009994224,4.451905,Detailed interval changes or progression in findings.,"The activation levels seem to highlight examples that include interval progression, new developments, or changes in condition, particularly when comparing current images to prior ones. This is often emphasized in radiology reports to describe clinical significance of changes observed.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.475,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6664,latent_6664,5205,0.01041,0.009260602,5.367654,Statements describing findings with a previous image comparison.,"These examples consistently involve evaluation in relation to a previous image or provide a baseline when other data really isn't available. Additional details or comparisons are typically absent due to lack of prior studies but focus on current central line, tube placements or other indicators within the lungs or heart.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6665,latent_6665,5736,0.011472,0.0121456785,3.857895,Focus on cardiomediastinal silhouettes and lung changes compared to prior images.,"While many examples mention providing a description in comparison to a prior image, the ones with high activation explicitly focus on findings related to the presence or absence of changes in cardiomediastinal silhouettes and any lung or pleural changes compared to prior studies. This pattern emphasizes the stability or changes in lung fields and cardiomediastinal structures while often omitting more peripheral observations.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4596774193548387,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6666,latent_6666,4184,0.008368,0.013356047,7.232842,"Comparison between current and prior imaging findings, with focus on changes.","This set of examples primarily emphasize the provision of a radiological description focusing on the comparison of current imaging findings to prior ones, when available. The pattern is demonstrated by specific instruction to ""provide a description...in comparison to the prior frontal image"" and the presence or absence of prior imaging for direct comparative analysis.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4455445544554455,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6667,latent_6667,3170,0.00634,0.0070726313,3.9243736,Concise reporting of current image findings without extensive prior comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels demonstrate clear, concise descriptions of findings without the presence of external reporting or prior comparison. The assistant’s summaries reflect direct observations focused on the current image with minimal external comparison remarks, indicating a pattern of clear reporting that emphasizes immediate findings without added context or previous report considerations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6668,latent_6668,5034,0.010068,0.007284576,4.650397,Explicit mention of prior report or comparison in the prompt.,"High activation examples consistently include the presence of a prior report or comparison radiograph explicitly stated in the prompt, even if the comparison is not made in the assistant's response. This pattern suggests focus on cases that specifically state the existence or non-existence of prior imaging in the prompt itself.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4710902752734703,0.56,0.532967032967033,0.97,100.0,100.0
+6669,latent_6669,3305,0.00661,0.009117982,4.7698116,Assessment of interval changes in medical device position or pathology compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve reports that use information from prior imaging to evaluate the interval change in the position or condition of medical devices like tubes and catheters, or assess changes in pathologies. This indicates a pattern focusing on device position assessment and interval change description using previous images as benchmarks.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4248705958840739,0.425,0.422680412371134,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6670,latent_6670,39712,0.079424,0.041163873,4.1673307,Notable changes or consistency in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"Examples with high activation levels incorporate findings directly from comparison with prior imaging, showing that the pattern lies in detailing differences or consistencies over time or after interventions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4814467375442985,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.67,100.0,99.0
+6671,latent_6671,3627,0.007254,0.010033299,8.733069,Cardiomegaly or pulmonary vascular congestion findings in radiology reports.,"These examples often mention findings related to cardiomegaly (enlarged cardiac silhouette) and pulmonary vascular congestion, both of which are common signs in radiographic evaluations of heart failure or pulmonary vascular issues. This pattern highlights cases that involve changes in heart and vascular markings, indicating conditions like fluid overload.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6766357048075942,0.6767676767676768,0.6699029126213593,0.696969696969697,99.0,99.0
+6672,latent_6672,3574,0.007148,0.008568245,4.8272285,Complex radiological technique description without comparison analysis.,Examples with activations closer to 8.0 often lack a prediction of findings in comparison to prior imagery but involve complex discussions on many technique-specific aspects without providing further interpretations on this common comparison basis. This suggests a pattern on expanded analysis of multiple views yet lacking comparative assessment.,0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4381225346916768,0.505,0.5161290322580645,0.16,100.0,100.0
+6673,latent_6673,8211,0.016422,0.017158145,8.722044,Instruction to compare current and prior images for changes.,"The examples which have higher activation levels consistently involve a request to provide new findings compared to prior imaging. They include the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image,' suggesting the model focuses on tasks where details from current and past imaging are explicitly compared to identify changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4348728463904379,0.435,0.4329896907216495,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6674,latent_6674,5531,0.011062,0.012612837,5.4251676,Detailed description of medical device positions or changes post-procedure.,"The most representative examples involve detailed descriptions of positions or changes in medical devices relative to anatomical landmarks or changes following a medical procedure noted in the images. When present, these details such as catheters in proximity to cardiac structures or chest tubes in relation to anatomical spaces contribute significantly to the activation. Positioning and procedural details seem to be the key pattern contributing to higher activation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5223880597014925,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6675,latent_6675,3485,0.00697,0.009346765,6.050618,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+6676,latent_6676,7343,0.014686,0.0107775675,6.254718,Cardiomegaly documented in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples often describe any changes, or lack thereof, in findings as compared to prior images while documenting the presence of cardiomegaly. This pattern suggests that cardiomegaly is a notable finding, with examples indicating its persistence over time.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3959149496097371,0.495,0.4736842105263157,0.09,100.0,100.0
+6677,latent_6677,6141,0.012282,0.011738354,5.182457,Presence of current frontal and lateral images with prior imaging for comparison.,"The pattern focuses on the existence of multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) along with prior imaging reports or studies, suggesting detailed analysis and comprehensive comparison for diagnosis consistency across studies. Activation is highest when there is both current and prior imaging available for comparison.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.50997150997151,0.57,0.5411764705882353,0.92,100.0,100.0
+6678,latent_6678,6754,0.013508,0.008731179,4.7050867,Comparison of current findings against prior imaging studies for consistency checks or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on describing findings in the context of comparing the current image to prior images. They frequently involve identifying stable conditions or noting any changes over time, which implies close attention to consistency and gradual changes in the patient's records.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6679,latent_6679,12926,0.025852,0.020876905,5.5774775,Focus on unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on describing findings in comparison to prior imaging, particularly noting changes or stability regarding lung and chest structures. Key language indicates monitoring, such as 'unchanged from', 'unchanged position', or 'unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours', indicating consistency over time, which is significant for tracking progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4555902812783546,0.46,0.4512195121951219,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6680,latent_6680,12905,0.02581,0.017996896,4.79254,Stable or unchanged findings relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention findings compared to prior imaging to determine stability or changes. This pattern recognizes statements indicating a stable state or lack of significant variation in radiographic findings when compared to previous studies, often involving medical devices or opacities.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5350467289719626,0.5376884422110553,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,99.0
+6681,latent_6681,27402,0.054804,0.026337033,10.13232,Device positioning and findings related to medical support devices on X-rays.,"Examples with high activation levels describe the positioning and findings related to medical devices such as tracheostomy tubes, PICC lines, and other support devices visible on the radiographs. These examples evaluate device placement as part of the radiological assessment, which is distinct from evaluating anatomical or pathological findings without device intervention.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.3181818181818182,0.5,14.0,36.0,0.4517543859649122,0.6,0.1,0.5,16.0,184.0
+6682,latent_6682,79380,0.15876,0.10703122,5.54857,Considerations of post-surgical changes or intervals in treatment results with cardiovascular/pulmonary focus.,"Examples with low activation highlight deflated lung volumes or COPD-like expressions, while higher activation is noticed in examples discussing changes within the aortic anatomy or cardiopulmonary surgeries. The pattern emerges from consistent language that equates changes made, or anticipated to be made, to the cardiovascular or pulmonary systems, particularly post-treatment.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6164536417123149,0.6180904522613065,0.6017699115044248,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+6683,latent_6683,5273,0.010546,0.015573731,5.373578,Provision of findings when referencing prior images without direct prompting for assistant input.,"These examples do not have highly representative activations for the main pattern they are aligned with, indicating that some examples in the list (activation levels near 0) may not align perfectly with the discovered pattern. Nonetheless, analysis of higher activations reveals a clear trend in representative samples involving the direct provision of findings without the use of an assistant BOT; when given prompt reference to prior reports is absent, these samples are less typical.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6684,latent_6684,3608,0.007216,0.011101979,7.717673,Absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities with stable or chronic findings.,"Examples with high activation commonly describe the absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities despite the presence of chronic or stable conditions. They highlight unchanged findings and stabilize descriptions like normal cardiac silhouette, well-expanded lungs, or unchanged implants/devices, focusing on the stability of the condition over time rather than indicating new or acute issues.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6685,latent_6685,6844,0.013688,0.01555896,5.1042223,Assessment of pulmonary changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve the model being tasked with assessing changes or stability in pulmonary opacities, consolidations, or effusions, often in response to or associated with a clinical indication or an existing condition, and indicate a specific focus on changes around lung pathologies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6686,latent_6686,4742,0.009484,0.010279031,6.1594067,Attention to interval changes or stability in device positioning on imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve comparisons of current and prior radiology images, focusing on interval changes or stability in patient condition, use of support devices (e.g., tubes or catheters), or placement of lines and leads. These exemplify detailed analyses of technological devices in situ in the body and their positions relative to previous images—common in patients with ongoing treatment or surgical history.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4354838709677419,0.27,100.0,100.0
+6687,latent_6687,23181,0.046362,0.02563481,5.3091354,Stability or minor changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"These examples focus on descriptions comparing current imaging findings to previous studies, often highlighting stability, minor changes, or unchanged features, like unchanged support devices, cardiomediastinal contours, or pleural effusions. Radiology reports commonly use comparative language to assist in assessing progression or resolution of a condition.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6688,latent_6688,5021,0.010042,0.008407275,3.8650985,Variation or subtle stability in radiological findings over time.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels mention variations or stability across imaging studies without indicating a stable or unaffected outcome like 'unchanged' or 'no acute process.' These often imply subtle alterations or mild stability but not complete stability or improvement signifying a change in clinical outlook. Zero activation examples emphasize findings that denote unchanged findings over time or clearly normal outcomes, emphasizing description without indicating shift or intervention requirement.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4678899082568807,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6689,latent_6689,3495,0.00699,0.006588251,4.6091795,Provide findings comparison between current and imaging studies without prior report.,"The examples with high activation levels involve an instruction to provide a comparative analysis between current and prior images, with no prior report provided, indicating an expectation for identifying changes without historical context. The presence of direct comparative instructions with language focused on describing differences between current and prior imaging likely triggers high activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6690,latent_6690,23225,0.04645,0.021175284,4.852387,Limited or lack of comparison with prior images impacting findings description.,"The examples with activation do not have a proper comparison available to the prior imaging study and do not show significant interval changes or relevant abnormal findings, leading to a lack of representative radiological features that typically engage the activation patterns.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.3968253968253968,0.6172839506172839,81.0,119.0
+6691,latent_6691,8107,0.016214,0.010582707,4.3130774,Detailed description of findings compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples feature descriptions or comparisons to prior imaging studies, indicating an emphasis on observing changes or stability in current imaging compared to previous results. This pattern is often reflected in reports that explicitly mention comparison with previous images, using phrases like 'in comparison with', 'compared to prior', or 'no significant interval change'. These descriptions highlight the continuity and comparison aspect, suggesting it is a central pattern.",0.4489795918367347,0.4489795918367347,0.44,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6692,latent_6692,4096,0.008192,0.012554997,5.9097505,Comparison of current and prior images with specific indications/history noted.,"These cases consistently describe the comparison of current and prior images using frontal and often lateral views, meaning the model responds to patterns of evaluating changes or presence of findings between sequential studies. High activation is seen when specific indications, history, and examination details are documented, typically following structured radiological reporting conventions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4294013901857039,0.45,0.463768115942029,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6693,latent_6693,31724,0.063448,0.0369489,5.2305994,"Describing stability or changes by comparison to prior imaging studies, often involving medical devices.","The pattern is captured in the observed occurrences where findings are described in the context of comparison to prior imaging, which frequently involves evaluation of stability or change in medical devices like pacemakers or tubes, overall cardiomediastinal silhouette or specific lung and pleural conditions. The focus is on determining changes in radiological findings by emphasizing stability and similarity to previous results rather than new or worsened pathological findings.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.5798319327731093,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6694,latent_6694,7444,0.014888,0.010472805,6.62677,Stable monitoring/support device position in follow-up radiology.,"The highest activation example describes monitoring and support devices remaining constant over time, as opposed to other variations in findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5166666666666667,0.31,100.0,100.0
+6695,latent_6695,8705,0.01741,0.011814907,5.714101,Technical description of radiograph views and findings.,"The most activated examples describe lung findings or other abnormalities using specific terms while also mentioning standard views (PA, lateral, etc.) even when compared to prior images. The explicit mention of technique and the identification of issues against a backdrop of technical descriptions of the image positions stand out even when comparison details are missing, indicating the pattern is the description of technical details and findings of the chest radiograph images.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4058435003316893,0.485,0.4913294797687861,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6696,latent_6696,5567,0.011134,0.007428819,6.760661,Comparison with prior imaging and noting changes or stability of conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to specific findings in the images that are compared to prior imaging studies, often noting changes like 'stable', 'improved', or 'increased'. They focus on assessing the progression or stability of conditions, rather than discovering new findings or lacking prior images for comparison.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6697,latent_6697,5638,0.011276,0.0154960295,5.25922,Unchanged findings or features compared to prior studies.,"The samples with high activations consistently compare new findings against prior studies and note unchanged features, typically describing a lack of progression or new findings. This pattern highlights stability over time against the backdrop of a patient's existing condition, which is a key element in serial imaging evaluations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6698,latent_6698,11099,0.022198,0.033389725,6.458701,Comparative analysis of current and prior images with attention to changes in intervention or findings.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on instructions to provide descriptions comparing current and prior images. This tends to involve descriptions of changes in medical devices or residual conditions, likely contributed by the presence of directive phrases for comparison and changes observed across the images.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3790064102564102,0.38,0.3888888888888889,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6699,latent_6699,5205,0.01041,0.008821066,4.2377963,Examination and comparison focused on pulmonary abnormalities.,"These examples consistently focus on alterations or the presence of specific abnormalities in the lungs. This often includes evaluations for pneumonia or other pulmonary conditions, suggesting the usage of language pertaining to lung volumes, opacities, consolidation, effusions, or evidence of pneumonic processes.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3924415611162599,0.41,0.4328358208955223,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6700,latent_6700,6584,0.013168,0.012892987,7.7091866,Consistent emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging for changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain descriptions or instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior ones, even if they lack complete detailed findings. These comparisons are often noted to evaluate for changes or interval developments, crucial for tracking disease progression or treatment efficacy.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5413333333333333,0.57,0.5466666666666666,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6701,latent_6701,11646,0.023292,0.026474893,6.229203,Evaluation of positioning of tubes and lines in the chest.,"These examples show descriptions of radiologic findings evaluating tubes and lines, such as chest tubes, PICC lines, and Port-A-Caths. The focus is on positions and any changes, e.g., advancements, stability, or resolution. This is essential in post-operative or critical care settings where the positioning can impact patient management.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.6140350877192983,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6702,latent_6702,12382,0.024764,0.020266766,3.7480814,Reports comparing unchanged medical device placement post imaging.,"This pattern identifies reports using specific language that describes changes in medical device or structure placement or condition between two radiographic images, often including phrases like 'unchanged' or 'status post'. These changes can pertain to devices, lung opacities, or structural improvements/degradations.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4253652400148668,0.4924623115577889,0.4838709677419355,0.15,100.0,99.0
+6703,latent_6703,20811,0.041622,0.0228315,3.961404,Comparison of current and prior images showing interval changes.,"The examples with positive activation involve descriptions of findings from chest radiographs or CT scans that compare current images with prior images, and they include specific changes or notable findings, typically emphasizing the stability or change in certain medical devices or presence of lung, pleural, or cardiac conditions such as effusions, opacities, or cardiomegaly. The key factor is the description of interval changes regarding pathologies or medical devices.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5700934579439252,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6704,latent_6704,6775,0.01355,0.010066917,4.6994586,Usage of medical imaging comparisons focusing on changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature the use of comparisons to previous radiological examinations and focus on describing interval changes or ongoing stability in observed medical conditions. This often involves detailed observation of changes in lung opacities, shifts in medical devices, or development of other notable features compared to previous examinations.",0.2643968053804119,0.3,0.3611111111111111,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5130434782608696,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6705,latent_6705,6161,0.012322,0.012935954,4.941275,Stability and comparison in radiological findings across previous studies.,"The pattern observed in the examples includes references to detailed findings on the radiograph images, with a focus on stability, comparisons, and lack of significant change in key features across prior studies, but with specific language describing any minor changes or stability in the context of prior observations.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6706,latent_6706,42449,0.084898,0.044832185,4.751613,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves descriptions of radiological findings made via comparison with previous studies, with unchanged or stable findings being emphasized. Examples show instances of unchanged heart size, unchanged opacities, no new pleural effusions, and consistent descriptions of pre-existing conditions in relation to prior findings.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7017113678303293,0.705,0.6694214876033058,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6707,latent_6707,3927,0.007854,0.00652972,4.0141835,Requests to evaluate for pneumonia or respiratory infection.,"The highly activated examples share a pattern where the findings are requested specifically for assessing the presence of pneumonia or other respiratory infections, indicated by terms like 'evaluate for pneumonia', 'assess for pneumonia', 'eval for pneumonia', etc. Often seen in patients presenting with respiratory symptoms like cough or shortness of breath.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6848030018761726,0.685,0.6761904761904762,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6708,latent_6708,5486,0.010972,0.010225502,5.1748066,Explicit mention of findings compared to prior studies.,"The samples with high activation levels involve situations where radiology findings are stated explicitly in relation to prior comparative studies. Specific findings like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'improved', or dates from prior comparisons are common across the high activation examples. These entries often emphasize changes or continuity regarding specific pathologies or treatments compared to previous exams.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5433070866141733,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6709,latent_6709,5540,0.01108,0.01517602,3.8631113,Detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The activation pattern highlights reports referencing both 'current' and 'prior' images, emphasizing comparisons between them. Specifically, higher activations are associated with detailed pathological findings or interval changes observed over time, which are crucial in medical imaging interpretation for conditions monitoring or diagnosis.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.328926282051282,0.33,0.3152173913043478,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6710,latent_6710,22012,0.044024,0.019633316,3.2567813,Comparison of current and prior radiographic findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed observations of changes or stability in radiographic findings explicitly compared to prior imaging studies, often highlighting specific pathologies or devices. Descriptions provide information on effusions, opacities, or equipment changes compared to previous images.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5395729141859174,0.565,0.54421768707483,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6711,latent_6711,4376,0.008752,0.0077241664,4.8700914,Explicit description of image findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activation is observed when radiological reports explicitly mention comparison to previous images as part of the examination process. This is noted in descriptions where changes or the lack thereof between the current and prior imaging are explicitly outlined, reflecting radiologists' standard practice of noting interval changes to help assess disease progress or stability.",0.2387820512820512,0.24,0.2592592592592592,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4444444444444444,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6712,latent_6712,38409,0.076818,0.038525168,3.8344183,Stability or lack of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Reports show stable findings over multiple examinations or explicitly state lack of interval change compared to prior imaging. They focus on detecting or excluding changes rather than identifying new pathology, emphasizing stability or minor variations.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5638634046890928,0.5678391959798995,0.5875,0.47,100.0,99.0
+6713,latent_6713,7036,0.014072,0.01054001,3.3181105,Comparison of imaging findings with prior studies for assessment of stability or changes.,"Examples with activation levels indicate reference patterns where findings are described in relation to or compared with prior imaging, emphasizing stability, changes, or absence of significant variation as seen in phrases like 'unchanged', 'not significantly changed', 'new findings', etc.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4405452141186044,0.45,0.4603174603174603,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6714,latent_6714,7104,0.014208,0.014863425,4.841498,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies or noted lack of prior comparisons.,"Highly activated examples focus on findings where there is an explicit comparison to prior exams or stated lack thereof. The examples with activation level 5 or higher emphasize the aspect of comparison or reference to previous imaging explicitly, whether findings change, remain stable, or are without significant comparison available.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4579046354685253,0.51,0.5061728395061729,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6715,latent_6715,4233,0.008466,0.012608478,6.1897416,Description in comparison to a specified prior frontal image.,"Examples that show high activation levels consistently request that the findings be described in terms of another, specific 'prior frontal image'. The task is to explicitly compare with a previous imaging, and not in a generic sense or without identifiable prior reference.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6716,latent_6716,24988,0.049976,0.02821834,5.664683,Explicit comparison of findings with prior imaging is present.,"Examples exhibiting the pattern contain radiological findings that explicitly mention comparison with prior imaging studies, specifically discussing changes or similarities in organ sizes, configurations, opacities, or specific conditions. This pattern reflects the clinical practice of tracking changes over time for patient diagnosis and management.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6717,latent_6717,3853,0.007706,0.010063122,8.037935,"References to invasive device changes or stability (e.g., NG tube, catheters).","Highly activated examples consistently involve specific references to changes over time, particularly involving invasive devices, therapies, or significant interventions like tube placements, surgical changes, or catheters. Descriptions that focus on the interval changes or interventions, like catheters or tubes, and their unchanged or changed positions or impacts feature prominently in the activated descriptions.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.6296296296296297,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6718,latent_6718,18664,0.037328,0.028464448,4.704186,Evaluations based on interval changes from prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a detailed description and describing interval changes in comparison to a prior image.,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3020511661770982,0.305,0.3274336283185841,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6719,latent_6719,4241,0.008482,0.008709861,5.144869,Focus on cardiovascular devices and their placement or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological studies that focus on describing findings related to heart or mediastinal devices (such as pacemakers) or comparisons that emphasize stable cardiovascular structures in presence of devices. This involves the placement, stability, and any changes in these devices or related anatomical structures.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4912280701754385,0.28,100.0,100.0
+6720,latent_6720,5646,0.011292,0.012333821,7.328089,Low lung volumes and their radiological impact.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe patterns of low lung volumes and their radiological implications, such as accentuated cardiac silhouette, bronchovascular crowding or obscured structures, and comparisons to prior imaging studies often revealing stability or changes of these low lung volumes.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7213143827113577,0.725,0.7922077922077922,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6721,latent_6721,7302,0.014604,0.011088834,4.5136557,Comparison of current and prior images with emphasis on changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe radiology reports comparing current images with prior ones and emphasize changes or stability of findings. Specifically, these discussions involve changes in lung opacities, heart size, device positioning, or new interventions. The analysis often includes specific measurements or clear interpretations of alterations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6722,latent_6722,16936,0.033872,0.017438173,3.1332512,Comparison with previous imaging findings.,"The pattern involves incorporating the latest radiological findings and explicitly comparing them to prior imaging, which often includes specific mention of noting changes or confirming stability. The higher activation values are associated with detailed descriptions of changes or lack of changes based on comparison of images.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6723,latent_6723,5414,0.010828,0.015676707,4.4767814,"Use of explicit ""comparison"" for evaluating changes against prior images.","These examples frequently involve interpreting radiographic findings in relation to prior similar studies. Specifically, those examples marked by high activation include instances that explicitly include the term ""comparison"" for evaluating changes against older images. This indicates the linguistic style often employed to assess radiological changes over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6724,latent_6724,14764,0.029528,0.022711538,4.7503166,Typical radiology findings are presented in standard medical contexts: normal silhouettes and clear lungs without acute processes.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly describe situations where the imagery gained through various radiological practices, including frontal and lateral imaging, involves typical standard findings like normal heart size, well-expanded lungs, absence of focal consolidation or effusion, etc., in contexts related to specific existing medical indications such as pneumonia, pleural effusion, and more; essentially emphasizing normal findings in typical scenarios.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4142857142857143,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6725,latent_6725,10460,0.02092,0.012405913,3.7892394,Focus on interval change or stability through comparison with prior imaging.,"Patterns in the data suggest that emphasis on evaluating interval change by referencing prior imaging studies often leads to a higher activation level. These examples specifically focus on comparing current and prior images, revealing no significant interval changes or maintaining stable pathologies, and involve phrases indicative of comparisons such as 'unchanged', 'as compared', and 'resolved' findings.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6726,latent_6726,2544,0.005088,0.009857737,7.243333,No acute cardiopulmonary process in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples tend to repeatedly describe findings in a chest radiograph in light of a comparison with a prior image, emphasizing normal cardiac and mediastinal appearance with no acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities despite any incidental findings. These observations often reject acute pathology, which might be expected from the prior examination or indications.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5999599959995999,0.6,0.6020408163265306,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6727,latent_6727,434165,0.86833,1.8143997,9.258604,Detailed comparison with prior images highlighting interval changes.,"High activations are associated with findings that explicitly compare current imaging with prior studies, focusing on interval changes. This aligns with examples referencing specific comparisons, usually detailing stability or progression of findings. The comparison aspect is emphasized in the context of evaluating changes over time.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6678743961352657,0.67,0.7023809523809523,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6728,latent_6728,5643,0.011286,0.011253554,6.772812,Specific instructions or inquiries regarding findings from prior imaging reports.,"The highly activated examples involve detailed instructions, concerns, or inquiries related to specific prior imaging reports or historical medical contexts, often mentioning comparison with previous studies. Phrases such as 'PROVIDE a description' or 'EVALUATE for' highlight specific investigative focuses, indicating thorough review or comparison with prior data.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6729,latent_6729,10089,0.020178,0.015260873,4.2456274,Comparison of specific interventions or devices between current and prior images.,"The pattern in these examples reflects situations where previous findings are explicitly compared with current images to note interval changes such as removal or repositioning of tubes, catheters, or the presence of pneumothorax and pleural effusion, particularly when reporting stable or unchanged conditions in repeated imaging studies.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4354838709677419,0.27,100.0,100.0
+6730,latent_6730,6002,0.012004,0.008921251,5.616994,Radiographic stability or change in devices and cardiopulmonary status.,"In these examples, consistent reference is made to the presence and comparison of current and prior imaging, especially with findings related to devices such as tubes, catheters, pacemakers or certain radiological changes that are stable or mildly altered. The comparison of current and prior findings helps to verify stability or change in these features between studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6731,latent_6731,4453,0.008906,0.010884636,4.811735,Task involves comparison with prior image or study.,"The high activation levels correspond to examples that describe findings in comparison with a prior image or study, often including phrases like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image' or 'compared to the previous radiograph'. This indicates a pattern where the task focuses on analyzing differences from prior studies.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3940074065761418,0.46,0.4759036144578313,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6732,latent_6732,3857,0.007714,0.008622937,3.6985407,Emphasizes assessment of changes against prior images.,"The examples marked with higher activation all include instructions for comparing the current imaging findings against a prior radiographic image. They often explicitly mention prior images or use language asking for a description of changes over time, which is distinct from performing standalone analysis. This indicates a pattern of focusing on the evaluation of temporal changes in radiological findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6733,latent_6733,5602,0.011204,0.015873479,5.427559,Presence or change in pleural effusion compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation consistently describe findings of pleural effusions or changes over time, specifically referencing their stability, increase, or decrease as compared to previous findings.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3712324420985838,0.455,0.3333333333333333,0.09,100.0,100.0
+6734,latent_6734,13808,0.027616,0.012683753,3.2509847,Mentions of stable placement of medical devices in comparison to prior.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the placement of medical devices such as pacemakers, AICDs, PICCs, and tubes, or comparisons to prior images where no device insertion changes are noted. Lower activation levels are triggered by general descriptions and confirmed absence of devices or changes, making device description the distinct pattern.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4429590017825312,0.5,0.5,0.18,100.0,100.0
+6735,latent_6735,26815,0.05363,0.023281436,4.1973414,Imaging cases with acute or changing pathologies requiring comparison.,"These examples show patients with acute or changing pathologies, primarily infectious or post-surgical conditions, as opposed to chronic or unchanged findings. High activation levels indicate cases where the clinical context describes active disease processes requiring assessment of interval change or immediate intervention.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6736,latent_6736,3483,0.006966,0.016576197,5.648363,Descriptions comparing findings across multiple image views and prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions that require comparison between current and prior imaging across multiple views, with specific emphasis on changes or stability in findings. The pattern of asking to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior imaging appears in both the prompt and the report content.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4904458598726114,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6737,latent_6737,22178,0.044356,0.031623527,8.043351,Presence of atelectasis or linear/streaky opacities in the lungs.,"Radiological findings like atelectasis, linear opacities, or streaky opacities in the lungs are associated with higher activation levels. These descriptions are often used in radiology reports to describe incomplete expansion or scarring in the lungs, indicative of conditions like atelectasis.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6673051718923279,0.67,0.5979381443298969,0.6823529411764706,85.0,115.0
+6738,latent_6738,22731,0.045462,0.03384036,6.7962418,Focus on positioning or assessment of thoracic medical devices across images.,"Examples with higher activations often involve the presence or assessment of medical devices, catheters, or lines within the thorax, indicating the model is picking up on specific details related to such placements, especially in comparison contexts, where it assesses positioning of devices like PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, and ports across different time points or images to ensure proper placement or find changes.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7905973084093056,0.795,0.7286821705426356,0.94,100.0,100.0
+6739,latent_6739,6633,0.013266,0.009983629,6.7330055,Documentation of tube or catheter placement in radiology studies.,"The representative examples involve descriptions of medical tubes or catheter placement, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, NG tubes, or central venous catheters. These reports focus on the positioning of these tubes within the body, often indicating distance from anatomical landmarks like the carina or clarifying the location in relation to rest of the gastrointestinal system or veinous structures.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6535361904044588,0.655,0.6781609195402298,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6740,latent_6740,10846,0.021692,0.018477885,4.9563217,Comparison to prior image with observed change or stability noted.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit references to previous imaging for comparison, and an observed change or stable finding related to pathologies. These descriptions include phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from', or 'compared to the previous radiograph'.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6741,latent_6741,22229,0.044458,0.019442577,2.3969555,Detailed analysis of subtle pulmonary findings in comparison with prior images.,"Each of the examples with higher activations contains a specific emphasis on the identification of subtle or indirect pulmonary findings such as atelectasis, scarring, or consolidation, that could potentially be overlooked, as indicated by detailed descriptive comparisons to prior images.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5568825910931174,0.5577889447236181,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,99.0
+6742,latent_6742,20304,0.040608,0.023691343,3.718677,Post-intervention radiological evaluation of medical apparatus or anatomical changes.,"While several examples mention comparison to previous images, the most representative examples focus on changes or assessments of devices (like catheters or tubes) or objects within the anatomy over time, often linked to the patient's treatment or intervention history. These examples highlight adjustments in medical apparatus positioning or state, revealing a broader pattern of post-intervention evaluations.",0.4452830188679245,0.4489795918367347,0.45,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5173890608875129,0.5276381909547738,0.5352112676056338,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+6743,latent_6743,13342,0.026684,0.023528574,5.9075365,"Assessment of intervals or stability, using consistent comparative language.","The examples demonstrate a pattern of describing changes or stability of specific features in chest radiographs, using recurring expressions like 'unchanged', 'compared to previous', and 'new'. This radiological language is often found in reports that compare current and prior imaging to assess stability or progression of findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6744,latent_6744,27850,0.0557,0.029661022,2.5139484,Use of 'Given the current' with current and prior image comparison.,"The pattern shows consistent usage of the phrase ""given the current"" in combination with mentioning current and prior images, followed by a request for findings or comparison. This suggests that the model's pattern detection focuses on a structured format for providing comparative image analysis.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6745,latent_6745,7094,0.014188,0.012134235,10.176236,Activation relates to changes in lung conditions or interventions noted compared to prior images.,"The examples show activation when descriptions of current radiology findings are compared to prior images and there are assessing changes related to distinct conditions or interventions in the lung or parenchymal findings over time. Comparisons typically indicate the extent of change relative to the prior image, showing more significant activation when these changes are clearly articulated or are critical findings.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.2988505747126437,0.3421052631578947,76.0,124.0
+6746,latent_6746,17585,0.03517,0.018074801,5.2623286,Evaluation and positioning of support devices in imaging.,"These examples refer to the evaluation of support devices, such as endotracheal or central venous catheters, within chest radiographs. This pattern involves checking the correct placement of these devices with frequent mentions of positioning relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC, often alongside unchanged findings consistent with monitoring the stability of these placements.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5365853658536586,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6747,latent_6747,38785,0.07757,0.039074615,3.8372793,"Presence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or complex changes in comparison studies.","The examples with higher activation levels mention changes or stability over prior imaging studies or include findings like pneumothorax, pleural effusion, atelectasis, consolidations, or tubes, suggesting the model activates on examples with complex or dynamic clinical scenarios present in radiological assessment.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6748,latent_6748,5029,0.010058,0.010045481,6.045178,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior images.,"The consistent pattern across the examples with higher activations is the presence of changes, or evaluation for changes, in the findings between current and prior imaging reports. The descriptions often include phrases indicating interval changes, stability, or comparisons to prior findings, indicating the model is more activated by examples that focus on imaging comparison for changes.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6749,latent_6749,9294,0.018588,0.016434474,5.3363786,Findings in current imaging explicitly compared to previous studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently discuss findings in the current imaging compared to prior studies, utilizing explicit phrases like ""as compared to"", ""in comparison with"", ""compared to the previous"", or by referring to changes identified against previous imaging. This echoes a high emphasis on interval changes or stability in radiological assessments.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5854281825504848,0.6231155778894473,0.575,0.9292929292929292,99.0,100.0
+6750,latent_6750,6991,0.013982,0.013483815,5.1922927,Emphasis on changes compared to prior imaging or clinical status.,"The pattern focuses on reports that emphasize explicit changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging, highlighting differences or the same status in clinical observations. High activation levels correspond to examples where changes or comparisons are stated in detail, indicating a primary focus of interpretation on such comparisons.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4022713687985654,0.425,0.4460431654676259,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6751,latent_6751,7419,0.014838,0.018289689,8.024965,Reports focus on the stability or change of findings relative to prior frontal images.,"Many of the examples with high activation describe a comparison of current imaging findings to previous frontal images, and specifically note either stability or changes in specific findings, such as the stability of heart size, catheter positions, or the resolution/worsening of effusions or opacities. The comparison with earlier imaging is a key element in these examples.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4590358704719533,0.465,0.4710743801652892,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6752,latent_6752,27099,0.054198,0.046859726,6.6224713,Inclusion of both current lateral and frontal views for comparison with prior frontal view.,"The examples with high activation involve both current frontal and lateral images along with a prior frontal image for comparison, indicating a detailed examination using all views to describe findings and compare with previous images. This comprehensive viewing approach hints at a more thorough radiological evaluation, possibly enhancing the ability to detect specific changes.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6753,latent_6753,2801,0.005602,0.0065356162,8.210755,Identification of interval changes or stability from prior imaging.,"These examples consistently involve specific reference to changes or stability in imaging findings, usually after comparison with prior images. The presence or absence of interval change noted through description like ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" or ""new"" alongside context of IV placements and effusions symbolizes the activation pattern.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4554455445544554,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6754,latent_6754,12526,0.025052,0.045548096,8.076661,Concurrent assistant analysis for current and prior imaging study comparison.,"The datasets include reference to the role of assistant in providing a description of the findings in radiology studies, often focused on identifying differences or consistencies with previously studied images. The assistant consistently uses this pattern, particularly when there is comparison requested or available.",0.3982456140350877,0.4285714285714285,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+6755,latent_6755,20040,0.04008,0.023001812,4.642378,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,The instances with higher activation levels consistently include a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies. This pattern is highlighted by explicit statements in the reports that address the stability or change of medical findings between comparisons.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4918178027934126,0.507537688442211,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,99.0
+6756,latent_6756,6383,0.012766,0.015208077,5.8211155,Comparison of current and prior radiological images.,"The pattern is that the radiological reports consistently refer to the comparison of the current image findings with a prior image, indicating any changes or stabilities over time. This comparison serves as the core linguistic structure across the highly activated examples.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5185936443542934,0.555,0.535483870967742,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6757,latent_6757,11815,0.02363,0.019034319,5.8661633,Reporting tube positions and comparison to prior images.,"These examples frequently reference positions of tubes (like endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central lines) and their comparison to previous positions as key descriptions. This pattern reflects the medical practice of closely monitoring medical equipment positioning through sequential imaging.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4290865384615384,0.43,0.4239130434782608,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6758,latent_6758,7701,0.015402,0.0137294,6.7677503,Finding comparison with prior image results indicating stability or change.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve evaluating an image finding, such as a pulmonary or thoracic change, in light of a prior image, with specific descriptions of changes or stability of findings over time or during intervention. The focus is on comparison of the newest results to prior observations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3997599039615846,0.4,0.3958333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6759,latent_6759,2331,0.004662,0.011666429,7.0179744,Comparison with both frontal and lateral views in current imaging.,"The activation levels significantly increase when multiple types of current images are compared to prior images, suggesting that context involving multiple image views (e.g., current frontal and lateral images) compared to previous images provides more detail and is significant for the model's activation.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4806594144854138,0.4924623115577889,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,99.0
+6760,latent_6760,47793,0.095586,0.048208836,3.6372814,Focus on stability of findings or unchanged status with minor changes.,"The pattern here is descriptions of radiological findings that emphasize changes due to patient positioning, presence of medical devices, or minor findings with no major interval changes. These consistent or unchanged aspects and lack of new acute findings show a low level of concern or clinical urgency.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6698679471788715,0.67,0.6634615384615384,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6761,latent_6761,8655,0.01731,0.013347361,7.601793,Comparative analysis of interval changes in imaging studies.,"The examples describe interval changes, or lack thereof, in imaging findings relative to previous images, often noting stability, resolution, or progression of conditions. This comparative analysis is typical in radiological assessments to track the progression or stability of identified anomalies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6762,latent_6762,7423,0.014846,0.010811753,5.4072976,Recommendations or key findings noted in image comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels often address explicit recommendations or action items resulting from the comparison, whereas negative or low activations revolve around stable observations without recommendations. The actual presence of a recommendation prominently marks cases with higher activation as it indicates a focal point rather than a neutral observation.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5604395604395604,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6763,latent_6763,12232,0.024464,0.0134101575,3.4763215,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours.,"The dataset consists of radiology reports that highlight the presence of stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in chest images, indicating no significant change or abnormality in size or shape compared to prior images.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5352112676056338,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6764,latent_6764,4281,0.008562,0.013202697,5.7326093,Interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Representative examples emphasize findings in current imaging being compared to prior radiographs. This pattern highlights stability or interval change of findings, whether improvement, unchanged, or new developments, as crucial information in radiological assessment.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4495412844036697,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6765,latent_6765,10731,0.021462,0.013008901,4.4915786,Detailed comparisons with multiple prior imaging studies.,The pattern is observed when multiple previous imaging studies are compared to assess changes or stability in findings. Higher activation levels occur when the radiology report includes detailed comparisons between current and several prior examinations. These detailed observations indicate frequent re-evaluation and tracking of patient progress and interventions.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5632183908045977,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6766,latent_6766,3765,0.00753,0.0053803916,4.319901,Use of detailed comparison with prior reports or imaging findings.,Examples highlight the presence of prior radiological findings or a certain consistency in the patient's radiological patterns from previous reports. These elements of 'comparison' with a detailed mention of prior examinations or consistent imaging results are the focal points in the pattern that yield higher activation.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6767,latent_6767,1969,0.003938,0.007190379,5.7306776,"Comparison of chest imaging with prior, emphasizing device position and stability of effusions or silhouette.","The provided examples consistently depict scenarios where chest radiology reports focus on comparing current and prior images, issue descriptions concerning devices or tubes, and note stability or change in findings such as pleural effusions or cardiomediastinal silhouette appearances. There is emphasis on stability or minor changes detected through comparison with prior exams or reports.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6768,latent_6768,2834,0.005668,0.010066884,6.8917556,Presence of pulmonary vascular congestion or cardiomegaly.,"The highly activated examples focus on findings of pulmonary vascular congestion, cardiomegaly, and related cardiovascular manifestations. These often relate to assessments of heart and lung interactions, particularly under conditions of fluid overload or heart failure. These conditions affect both the heart size and vascular congestion in the lungs, and many examples include a detailed description of these features.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6408045977011494,0.65,0.7205882352941176,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6769,latent_6769,2557,0.005114,0.0050645815,4.5147905,Detailed description of endotracheal tube position relative to carina.,"The pattern involves comparing the placement of tubes and lines in the current study to previous imaging. Highly activated examples describe endotracheal (ETT) tube placement in detail, such as its measured distance from anatomical landmarks like the carina, often suggesting adjustments or noting stability.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.9411764705882352,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4893017522232984,0.565,0.782608695652174,0.18,100.0,100.0
+6770,latent_6770,3126,0.006252,0.009036393,5.702157,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve detailed comparison between current and prior imaging, particularly situations where clear assessment of interval changes or continuity (such as persistent conditions or stability) in the patient's condition is emphasized. This also includes using explicit comparative phrases and previous dates or findings for validation, but excluding scenarios where no meaningful comparison exists or no change is noted.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3865474024661411,0.3869346733668342,0.3829787234042553,0.36,100.0,99.0
+6771,latent_6771,3128,0.006256,0.0076962295,3.7723138,Detailed comparison of current and previous images for radiological assessment.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a detailed comparison between a current image and a prior image. These comparisons often include descriptions of stability or changes in structures, such as cardiac size, pleural effusions, or pulmonary conditions, and they emphasize the importance of historical reference in evaluating current findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6772,latent_6772,36409,0.072818,0.058930352,5.076329,Radiology study findings compared with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiology reports that highlight the use of comparison between current and previous imaging studies. This includes references to changes or stability in findings across different time points, which is a common practice in longitudinal patient monitoring to assess progression or resolution of a condition.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6773,latent_6773,19953,0.039906,0.028720459,3.729111,Use of qualifiers indicating uncertainty or differential diagnosis.,"These examples frequently employ radiologistic terminology and phrases noting abnormalities or changes, expressed with certain linguistic qualifiers, such as ""probable"", ""likely"", ""could reflect"", or ""may represent"". This use of language reflects uncertainty or differential diagnosis commonly found in radiology interpretations, especially when describing findings based on imaging evidence.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.58491045991046,0.5879396984924623,0.6097560975609756,0.5,100.0,99.0
+6774,latent_6774,2736,0.005472,0.0067332257,5.195047,Unchanged heart size with pleural effusions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention both heart size (normally unchanged or stable) and pleural effusions. These are common findings in radiology reports when describing conditions like pulmonary edema or congestive heart failure, where heart size assessment and pleural effusion changes are critical.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.44234099380705,0.525,0.6086956521739131,0.14,100.0,100.0
+6775,latent_6775,40447,0.080894,0.046289872,6.089002,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation discuss changes in the patient's radiological findings over time and explicitly mention phrases like 'improvement', 'interval change', 'worse', or 'unchanged', indicating an emphasis on evolution or stability of observed conditions compared to prior imaging.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6776,latent_6776,24562,0.049124,0.025758823,5.5411944,Descriptions of interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe changes, often small or subtle, in the imaging findings when compared to previous imaging. This involves noting stability or slight differences in pathologies such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or other abnormalities. The focus is on interval changes and findings that are explicitly compared to prior studies, demonstrating progression, regression, or stability of identified pathologies.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6228786926461345,0.625,0.6086956521739131,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6777,latent_6777,8340,0.01668,0.009499319,4.2740364,Stable comparison without new findings or changes from prior imaging studies.,"These examples all specify a comparison between current findings and prior radiological images but do not show evidence of acute change or significant new findings, often focusing on stability or no change, which indicates a pattern of monitoring for changes over time.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.2857142857142857,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4769230769230769,0.31,100.0,100.0
+6778,latent_6778,71165,0.14233,0.1267894,4.039536,Assessment and diagnostic comments about pleural effusions in serial imaging.,"The examples with higher activations often highlight specific discussions about changes, stability, or other characteristics of pleural effusions, as well as additional references to other changes like atelectasis or cardiomegaly in comparison to prior imagings.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5649405772495755,0.59,0.6730769230769231,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6779,latent_6779,5482,0.010964,0.015219555,4.3411865,Comparison of current and prior images with reported instructions for analysis.,"These examples involve giving a current image (or images) along with a prior image for comparison and requesting a description of the findings. This setup is specific to evaluations that focus heavily on comparing current and past images to assess changes or improvements in a patient's condition, which is a crucial aspect of longitudinal medical imaging analysis.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6780,latent_6780,3895,0.00779,0.014004691,6.5362225,References to comparison with specific prior imaging are frequently stated.,"The highly activated examples all specify that comparisons are made with images from different time points despite an inconsistency or limited information on previous images. This suggests that ""comparison made with prior images"" is a consistent feature that triggers higher activations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3965183752417794,0.415,0.437037037037037,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6781,latent_6781,13309,0.026618,0.012657525,4.2387314,Significant changes in support devices or their unchanged positioning.,"Highly activated examples frequently reference changes in positioning or clear descriptions related to lines, tubes, and support devices remaining unchanged or being newly placed, suggesting that the pattern may be related to the documentation of these interventions alongside significant interval changes.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5652173913043478,0.39,100.0,100.0
+6782,latent_6782,57494,0.114988,0.0723878,5.572233,Detailed interval progression or stability compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention changes in specific radiological findings compared to previous studies, reflecting an interval progression or stability of conditions. This suggests that the model is more responsive to detailed observations of changes over time, particularly in cases involving complex thoracic conditions or interventions.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5823607698607698,0.5879396984924623,0.5737704918032787,0.7,100.0,99.0
+6783,latent_6783,11809,0.023618,0.012461945,3.960086,Detailed comparison with prior imaging indicating interval changes.,High activation levels correlate with descriptions of imaging changes over time and comparisons of the current state of the patient with previous studies. This pattern involves a descriptive evaluation of interval changes and continuity of findings between successive imaging episodes.,0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.589607149222191,0.592964824120603,0.6172839506172839,0.5,100.0,99.0
+6784,latent_6784,3406,0.006812,0.007179279,5.3085213,Focused on the cardiac silhouette descriptions.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation levels involve descriptions of the cardiac silhouette. This feature or aspect of the heart's appearance upon radiological examination is repeatedly mentioned, particularly those with specific attributes such as enlarged or borderline size, as well as comparisons showing stable or unchanged characteristics over time despite various medical conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6214833759590792,0.63,0.6,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6785,latent_6785,16343,0.032686,0.025819376,8.985954,Inclusion of current frontal and lateral imaging views.,"Examples with higher activation scores frequently reference multiple view radiographic examinations, such as both frontal and lateral chest X-ray views, compared to lower-activation examples which often lack lateral view inclusion. Lateral views, when combined with frontal views, suggest comprehensive diagnostic consideration, which may align with the pattern of interest in radiology reporting.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4422994422994423,0.48,0.4512195121951219,0.8409090909090909,88.0,112.0
+6786,latent_6786,5527,0.011054,0.010023002,5.734035,Comparison of device placement or interval change in condition.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize changes in the condition or placement of medical devices (tubes, catheters) and their comparison with previous imaging. The pattern highlights an interval change or modification of an existing condition, with particular attention to changes in medical intervention parameters.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5746446726838883,0.59,0.5652173913043478,0.78,100.0,100.0
+6787,latent_6787,18237,0.036474,0.024376964,4.838762,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies identifying changes.,"Examples with higher activations illustrate findings that compare current imaging with prior studies, noting changes or stability in identified pathologies, like effusions or opacities. The comparison is crucial for assessing disease progression or remission, thus aligning with the intended pattern.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6788,latent_6788,18633,0.037266,0.019799618,3.5419683,Pulmonary vascular congestion or cardiomegaly.,"These examples exhibit changes in the pulmonary, mediastinal, or cardiac findings as opposed to the references used for comparison. The pattern observed is primarily associated with the reports that discuss potential cardiopulmonary conditions linked to changes in the pulmonary vasculature and cardiac size/enlargement.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.525,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6789,latent_6789,2579,0.005158,0.011337939,10.5487995,Radiology findings compared to prior studies with indications for evaluation.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently describe findings in a radiology report compared directly to an earlier or prior image/study. The reports often specify changes or lack thereof relating to specific features from earlier examinations, using phrases like 'in comparison with', 'comparison is made with', or 'compared to'. The reports may also provide reasons for evaluations based on previous concerns or findings like intubation, pneumonia, etc.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6790,latent_6790,15753,0.031506,0.018063722,6.9880757,High activation when new findings or changes are specifically noted against prior images.,"These examples involve scenarios where findings are compared against previous images, often mentioning stability or change in conditions such as atelectasis, pulmonary opacities, effusions, or other prominent features like catheters. However, high activation is present more when changes or new findings (such as nodules or opacities) are specifically investigated or noted, rather than in largely unchanged states.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5946666666666667,0.62,0.4021739130434782,0.6379310344827587,58.0,142.0
+6791,latent_6791,4986,0.009972,0.010439336,5.638184,Presence of current and prior image comparison with specific finding descriptions.,"In examples with higher activation, there is a consistent presence of descriptions comparing current findings to those in prior images, and they often highlight specific features or conditions (e.g., tortuosity, mild interstitial edema) that remain unchanged or resolve. These comparisons frequently involve multiple types of image views (frontal, lateral) and have distinct findings or descriptions.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.4491525423728814,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6792,latent_6792,5057,0.010114,0.017011717,5.327873,Explicit confirmation of clear lungs or absence of focal consolidation.,"The examples with high activation levels often mention conditions of the lungs, such as 'the lungs are clear', 'no focal consolidation' or 'no pleural effusion'. These phrases suggest the need to evaluate the lungs for clarity and absence of specific pathologies, which are common elements in radiology reports to confirm or rule out issues like pneumonia or effusions.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4298384542286981,0.46,0.4259259259259259,0.23,100.0,100.0
+6793,latent_6793,13755,0.02751,0.027177323,6.626684,Use of multiple imaging views and comparisons for notable findings.,"The analysis of examples with high activation levels frequently mentions imaging findings in relation to prior images or reports with a focus on specific pathologies like opacities, pneumothorax, etc., evaluated through multiple images (frontal and lateral). These cases indicate an emphasis on both technical aspects of imaging (frontal/lateral views) and the presence of notable thoracic findings.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4540811834111121,0.535,0.519774011299435,0.92,100.0,100.0
+6794,latent_6794,5385,0.01077,0.01649623,6.434457,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+6795,latent_6795,3137,0.006274,0.016185265,6.0742316,Comparisons indicating stability or no change in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior images, mentioning either no significant change or stabilized findings. This pattern is crucial in radiological analysis for tracking disease progression or stability.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.8888888888888888,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4675324675324675,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6796,latent_6796,3330,0.00666,0.01195589,6.2104506,Prompt requires description of findings relative to prior images.,"These examples involve the presence of comparisons to prior imaging studies and the specific completion prompt ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" The pattern captures the task of generating comparison descriptions for current and prior images.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6797,latent_6797,30781,0.061562,0.026279587,2.5332816,Explicit instructions to describe findings based on comparison of specific images.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero contain phrases like 'given the current frontal image', 'the current lateral image', 'and the prior frontal image', often followed by explicit differences in observations between current and prior exams, indicating a specific change in condition or progression.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,100.0,100.0
+6798,latent_6798,5690,0.01138,0.007189928,4.9743958,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels clearly emphasize a focus on cross-examining current findings with prior imaging reports, especially when specifics about previous exams are explicitly mentioned.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6799,latent_6799,2571,0.005142,0.005917281,4.0801177,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette despite other findings.,"High activation levels occur when the findings describe a normal cardiac or mediastinal silhouette and involve specific descriptions of the cardiomediastinal, heart, or mediastinal regions as being within normal limits, even if other conditions are present or suspected. There is frequent usage of terms like 'top-normal', 'normal', or 'unchanged', often despite other abnormalities.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6800,latent_6800,5893,0.011786,0.008928328,4.49174,Analysis of pleural effusions and cardiomegaly against prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation frequently describe comparisons and evaluations of pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, and pulmonary edema. They also commonly involve analysis of current imaging in coordination with prior reports and radiographs, particularly focusing on cardiac and pleural findings alongside descriptions of changes or stabilities in effusions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6801,latent_6801,5940,0.01188,0.016907183,4.117538,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"The examples describe findings in current images and consistently refer to comparisons with prior images. This comparative evaluation is to assess stability, progression, or resolution of findings, which is common in medical imaging reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4615384615384615,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6802,latent_6802,5047,0.010094,0.013215777,7.171721,Direct medical interventions or procedures.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct ""hands-on"" interventions or procedures affecting the patient, indicated by terms like 'sternal debridement', 'chest tube removal', and 'endotracheal tube'. These terms suggest the model is tuned to detect mentions of significant medical procedures or interventions involving radiological assessments.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3913894842687412,0.425,0.3584905660377358,0.19,100.0,100.0
+6803,latent_6803,18794,0.037588,0.020855835,4.6165066,Image analysis with unspecified prior comparison despite absence.,"Examples exhibit examination of images where a text comparison to prior images is provided despite no prior images mentioned or visible. This suggests a pattern where findings are determined without prior image references, focusing primarily on the current image descriptions.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4269949066213922,0.46,0.4729729729729729,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6804,latent_6804,37333,0.074666,0.040251654,4.8803754,Reports emphasize comparisons with prior images and medical device assessments.,"The pattern observed in highly activated examples is the presence of detailed comparative analysis and consideration of historical context regarding medical devices, abnormalities, or changes from previous imaging studies. The focus on imaging history and specific changes contributes to higher activation scores.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5644107445349681,0.595,0.5620915032679739,0.86,100.0,100.0
+6805,latent_6805,17255,0.03451,0.022678033,4.9845576,Comparison findings indicating interval change or stability of pathologies.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently report findings in radiological studies that suggest either interval change or stability in pathologies when comparing prior imaging results. The presence of descriptions related to change or stability is a common pattern in diagnostic radiology assessments, which often include comparison or follow-up of known findings.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4615384615384615,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6806,latent_6806,8637,0.017274,0.0141525455,5.2520843,Assessment of interval changes or stability in thoracic imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe comparisons of current imaging findings with prior studies to assess for interval changes, such as the status of lung conditions, pleural effusions, and other thoracic structures. This specific pattern recognizes and evaluates changes over time which often involves checking for stability or progression of particular conditions, commonly indicated with language like 'compared with' or 'interval change.'",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4285125244820121,0.4343434343434343,0.4453781512605042,0.5353535353535354,99.0,99.0
+6807,latent_6807,3888,0.007776,0.011351195,4.1427665,Radiology description based on current frontal and lateral images without prior comparison.,"These examples demonstrate a pattern where the radiology task involves providing a description of findings based on both frontal and lateral views of an image, without availability or explicit use of a prior comparison image. This scenario is distinct from those with explicit comparisons to previous studies.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4221802683143111,0.495,0.4827586206896552,0.14,100.0,100.0
+6808,latent_6808,5272,0.010544,0.010116085,3.7889352,Emphasis on descriptive analysis when comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation scores involve comparison or follow-up that emphasizes changes, stability, or findings between a current and a prior images, with the technique or an element of the findings specifically focusing on the relevance of these comparisons.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3494144730257231,0.35,0.3404255319148936,0.32,100.0,100.0
+6809,latent_6809,24451,0.048902,0.03871513,4.9732885,Stable or changed findings explicitly compared to prior imaging.,Examples with positive activations often feature the presence of clear comparisons to prior imaging reports and mention of stability or change in medical conditions noted on those reports. This contrasts with more generalized or preliminary evaluations without detailed comparative language.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6810,latent_6810,37431,0.074862,0.031345155,2.4567566,Focus on comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature comparisons with prior imaging studies to assess changes over time, indicating monitoring of stability or progression of specific conditions such as effusions, pneumothorax, or positioning of medical devices.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5195982094115078,0.56,0.5379746835443038,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6811,latent_6811,4030,0.00806,0.010403952,5.2379365,Comparison prompts with single current view only.,"The highest activation examples consistently show references to the current imaging without additional views, with a prompt to describe the findings in comparison to prior imaging. This pattern emphasizes the request for comparison using minimal current views.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6812,latent_6812,4945,0.00989,0.010996031,4.273382,Focus on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the description of changes, evaluations, or stability in comparison to prior imaging studies, with language emphasizing interval changes, comparisons, and subsequent findings after procedures or expected alterations.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6813,latent_6813,49491,0.098982,0.04740448,3.1669638,Identification of change or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern describe new changes or specific findings comparing current and past imaging. These findings include changes in existing pulmonary opacifications, cardiomediastinal contour stability, and presence or absence of devices, always assessed relative to a prior image.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5600208089478476,0.5728643216080402,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,99.0
+6814,latent_6814,6524,0.013048,0.041006267,7.7398906,Explicit reporting of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The activations are high when the report clearly specifies findings in correlation with prior imaging, often detailing unchanged or stable findings, or explicitly comparing current and past images for the presence of abnormalities.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3719269102990033,0.4271356783919598,0.325,0.13,100.0,99.0
+6815,latent_6815,5015,0.01003,0.015821798,5.2526336,Low lung volumes compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels discuss low lung volumes in comparison to prior imaging. The pattern emerges from the consistent mention of low lung volumes as part of the findings when compared with previous radiographs, reflecting a radiological assessment typically made in situations where changes in lung volumes are of clinical importance.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.44234099380705,0.525,0.6086956521739131,0.14,100.0,100.0
+6816,latent_6816,6550,0.0131,0.013587129,7.1016235,Emphasis on interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe comparisons of imaging studies focusing on changes from prior imaging. They emphasize interval changes in findings such as lung opacities, effusions, or other thoracic abnormalities. This pattern highlights an interest in changes over time as documented in radiology reports.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5564336372847012,0.5577889447236181,0.5545454545454546,0.61,100.0,99.0
+6817,latent_6817,11386,0.022772,0.014620851,3.0119615,Findings described without available prior imaging for comparison.,"The examples with higher activations lack any available comparison studies or explicit mention of previous imaging for reference, whereas those with lower activations often have specific comparisons or references to prior studies. This fits with the pattern that emphasizes the absence of comparative data when describing findings.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.6129032258064516,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6818,latent_6818,4733,0.009466,0.00993642,4.856092,Detailed comparison of current and prior images with specific patient history.,"Activation levels are high for examples where there is an explicit mention of both a current and a prior image comparison along with specific patient history or indication, which typically indicates a comprehensive and detailed evaluation of the imaging study. The pattern revolves around the synthesis of previous reports with current images.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6819,latent_6819,2885,0.00577,0.0062784366,4.235128,Consistent or stable pathological findings compared to a prior exam.,The examples with zero activation discuss the comparison with prior images as part of a standardized radiological evaluation but lack specific findings of either unchanged pathological abnormalities or monitoring over time without major changes. Such consistent references are essential for non-zero activations.,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3355052759393224,0.507537688442211,0.5128205128205128,0.4,100.0,99.0
+6820,latent_6820,27125,0.05425,0.029711943,10.52116,Incomplete or ambiguous radiology report sections.,"Examples that received higher activation values are characterized by lacking sufficient context or clarity, often noted by incomplete or cut-off report sections, thus making them more ambiguous. These cases typically rely heavily on structure markers like 'GIVEN', 'PRIOR_REPORT', and incomplete 'FINDINGS'. The pattern suggests that the model flags incomplete or unresolved radiology reports, indicative of work-in-progress items requiring further analysis or editing.",0.2857142857142857,0.4,0.4081632653061224,0.9523809523809524,21.0,29.0,0.1212121212121212,0.13,0.1173469387755102,0.9583333333333334,24.0,176.0
+6821,latent_6821,9990,0.01998,0.018172918,6.009344,Descriptive focus on cardiac silhouette and mediastinal evaluations.,"Radiology reports in examples with higher activation levels often note the size, shape, or condition of the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal structures. This examination seems to be relevant in cases characterized by changes in lung conditions or chest pathology as noted by the assistant.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5753715498938429,0.595,0.5664335664335665,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6822,latent_6822,4628,0.009256,0.008762343,3.274022,Comparison between current frontal and lateral chest images to prior frontal images.,"Highly activated examples involve comparison between multiple images, usually current frontal and lateral views to prior frontal views. The focus is on comparative analysis which is prevalent when assessing radiological changes over time or with different image angles.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6823,latent_6823,2836,0.005672,0.009125637,7.1659803,Descriptions emphasize stability with prior imaging comparison.,"These examples often describe findings as unchanged or stable, explicitly comparing with prior images to indicate no interval change or stable appearance. This suggests a pattern of radiological interpretation concerned with monitoring stability over time.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4945054945054945,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6824,latent_6824,10304,0.020608,0.016069384,8.394236,Evaluation and description of medical device placement compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently refer to devices, such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, in the context of placement or position assessment and comparison with prior exams. This pattern is indicative of radiology reports focused on procedural follow-up and evaluation of intervention outcomes.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5272727272727272,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6825,latent_6825,6914,0.013828,0.008052355,5.835556,Describing medical device or line position relative to anatomical structures.,"All high activation examples include specifications about line or device positions, particularly in relation to anatomical landmarks like the heart chambers, atrium, or ventricle. This demonstrates a pattern of emphasized attention towards identifying and describing medical device placements relative to anatomical structures in the chest area.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4675397831291367,0.5226130653266332,0.3174603174603174,0.2777777777777778,72.0,127.0
+6826,latent_6826,2959,0.005918,0.008360672,4.670044,Description of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve cases where there is a detailed comparison with prior imaging, specifically focusing on unchanged or stable findings across multiple study points. The assistant's responses are geared towards comparisons where current findings mirror or have minimally changed since the prior assessments, suggesting a stable condition which needs elucidation.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5128205128205128,0.4,100.0,100.0
+6827,latent_6827,3283,0.006566,0.010694396,4.771679,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images compared with a prior frontal image.,"The examples with high activation levels involve both frontal and lateral chest images being provided along with a prior frontal image. This inclusion of multiple views and comparison to prior images is the common factor among these examples, which could suggest the need for a thorough comparison or the presence of complex clinical indications requiring additional views for accurate diagnosis.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.5277777777777778,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6828,latent_6828,3287,0.006574,0.010431952,6.297246,Assessing interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention changes in findings, devices, or tubes specifically in relation to comparison with previous imaging, demonstrating the importance of assessing interval changes in medical imaging reports, especially when tubes or supportive devices are involved.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+6829,latent_6829,2389,0.004778,0.0065752575,5.0648417,Detailed comparison with multiple frontal and lateral images.,The samples with high activation levels extensively describe imaging findings across multiple projections (frontal and lateral) often with specified differences or highlights related to historical findings or the lack thereof. This detailed examination in the context of multiple views seems crucial for the pattern identified.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6830,latent_6830,5189,0.010378,0.0139425015,4.7635036,Comparative analysis with limited prior details.,"The examples with high activation describe scenarios where current imaging is being compared with past imaging. These examples either lack precise previous reports or provide general descriptions, which suggests the use of comparative discussion with indications or impressions, but without detailed prior data or structured previous comparisons, focusing instead on observations in the imaging study itself.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6831,latent_6831,51435,0.10287,0.0421864,1.8782564,Detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior chest images.,"Examples with higher activation scores focused on specific and detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior chest images, highlighting changes in pulmonary, cardiac, or other chest structures. Descriptions include notable alterations such as alterations in opacities, tube placements, or other distinct changes. These descriptions often assist in assessing the progression of medical conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5819798040845106,0.585,0.5726495726495726,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6832,latent_6832,13373,0.026746,0.012128947,3.5754483,Focus on comparison with prior images emphasizing intervals or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current imaging findings with previous studies, emphasizing intervals or changes over time, which is an important aspect when assessing ongoing conditions or tracking treatment response.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+6833,latent_6833,16938,0.033876,0.025770016,4.5450306,Reports highlighting changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings related to comparison to prior imaging, specifically noting changes or stability in radiographic appearances with clear wording about interval changes. The radiology reports use terms like 'unchanged', 'interval', 'as compared to prior', indicating a detailed observation of progression or resolution over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6834,latent_6834,10928,0.021856,0.011770705,4.645845,Interval change in positioning of medical devices or tubes.,"These examples show altered positioning or removal of medical devices like tubes and catheters, compared to prior imaging. This change in placement is a key focus in radiological assessments concerning interval changes or the positioning of medical equipment following procedures.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4450642180840413,0.515,0.5517241379310345,0.16,100.0,100.0
+6835,latent_6835,4684,0.009368,0.013074543,3.52976,Providing descriptions while lacking actual prior image comparison.,"The high activation examples seem to describe the requirement for providing findings in direct comparison to prior images, even when the comparison aspect itself might be missing or incomplete. This indicates a linguistic pattern focused on comparison despite potentially lacking complete information or context, such as missing prior images or details.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4353598881900768,0.495,0.4969696969696969,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6836,latent_6836,4880,0.00976,0.0047983457,2.9267936,Detailed assessment of cardiac and mediastinal aspects during radiological comparisons.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve a detailed analysis of cardiac size, positions of thoracic medical devices, or specific pulmonary vascular patterns, such as cardiomediastinal or hilar changes. These factors appear significant when there are modifications or stability across image comparisons, highlighting particular interest in consistent or altered heart and mediastinal findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6837,latent_6837,14086,0.028172,0.02819949,7.784909,Pulmonary vascular congestion and mild cardiomegaly in chest imaging.,"The examples primarily describe findings related to pulmonary vascular congestion or edema in chest radiographs. The pattern involves evaluation for changes in vascular congestion in the lungs, often accompanied by cardiomegaly, but without significant pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6117108022054827,0.625,0.6984126984126984,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6838,latent_6838,2427,0.004854,0.007582033,6.612835,Explicit instructions to compare images to prior studies for changes.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently contain explicit instructions to compare current images to prior images for changes over time. This linguistic structure cues the model to focus on temporal changes or stability of medical conditions.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5442921440261865,0.5454545454545454,0.5412844036697247,0.5959595959595959,99.0,99.0
+6839,latent_6839,5734,0.011468,0.013566494,11.251072,Focus on interval changes or stability between current and prior examination findings.,"The pattern identified target reports which focus on the description of findings in comparison between current and prior radiographic examinations, especially those emphasizing interval changes or stability in findings, such as new placements or unchanged conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.580839994924502,0.5829145728643216,0.5603448275862069,0.6701030927835051,97.0,102.0
+6840,latent_6840,6264,0.012528,0.008913306,5.7460356,Detailed descriptions of chest hardware and their intervals of change.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe specific types of chest hardware (like catheters or tubes) and their placement or changes over time. These reports focus on vascular lines, chest tubes, pacemakers, and other devices, often containing detailed comparisons of positions or conditions between current and prior studies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5710848415106182,0.59,0.6551724137931034,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6841,latent_6841,8851,0.017702,0.01802282,8.43554,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings and describing changes.,"Reports with higher activations seem to require comparing current and prior images. They mention changes or absence of changes from previous examination findings, indicating the focus is on describing interval changes or stability over time, regardless of specific pathologies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+6842,latent_6842,10075,0.02015,0.019126626,6.957478,Noting 'no comparison available' or explicitly 'none' in reports.,"Examples consistently include descriptions of findings and comparisons to previous imaging studies, specifically acknowledging there is no comparison available. This highlights the importance of noting 'none' or lack of prior studies when evaluating current imaging, indicating a lack of change assessment.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5691374770605601,0.595,0.6862745098039216,0.35,100.0,100.0
+6843,latent_6843,3534,0.007068,0.008434811,7.50954,Provide findings comparing current image with prior.,"The pattern here focuses on the task of radiological comparison with prior images, highlighting descriptions of findings in the context of evaluating changes between the current and previous imaging. References to prior imaging in the form of specific findings, stability, resolution, or progression are consistent across these examples.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4245283018867924,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6844,latent_6844,2388,0.004776,0.009679462,6.9951897,"Structured report format with history, indication, and comparison details.","The examples consistently mention performing a comparison and record patient history or indications that could influence radiology findings. The anticipatory format of stating 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'INDICATION', 'HISTORY', 'COMPARISON', and 'FINDINGS' indicates a structured report setup commonly used in radiology for assessing changes over time and detailing the context of the examination.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3342245288459018,0.365,0.4055944055944055,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6845,latent_6845,4588,0.009176,0.011595976,8.244576,Comparison of current versus prior radiographic images with specific noted changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparison between current and previous radiographic images, often highlighting changes such as the presence or resolution of opacities or anatomical features. These examples also emphasize specific findings that help in differentiating conditions such as pneumonia, atelectasis, and other lung pathologies based on differences noted between the images.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6846,latent_6846,20465,0.04093,0.030909706,4.7837167,Explicit comparative descriptions with prior imaging findings.,"The examples showing higher activation levels consistently provide descriptions that involve findings directly compared to previous imaging. This indicates that the pattern involves such descriptions where current and prior studies are explicitly compared, showing interval changes or stability in findings.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6847,latent_6847,84132,0.168264,0.13354254,7.1223507,Reference to stable findings from prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples exhibiting the pattern consistently involve reference to findings that are stable or unchanged when compared to prior imaging reports. The focus is on descriptions that include phrases like 'stable', 'unchanged', or comparisons to previous studies without significant interval change.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5721744471744472,0.5778894472361809,0.6052631578947368,0.46,100.0,99.0
+6848,latent_6848,3110,0.00622,0.01148663,5.5975704,Comparative descriptions of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples emphasize providing a description of the current radiology findings in direct comparison to prior imagery. This pattern relates to radiology reports suggesting a need to highlight changes or stability in condition over time, commonly used in longitudinal patient follow-ups or for assessing treatment response.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6849,latent_6849,28781,0.057562,0.029855743,3.9148457,Detailed comparison of imaging findings over time.,"These examples consistently mention a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on the interval change in the appearance of features like placement of medical devices or the state of the pulmonary opacities. The high activation levels suggest the pattern is linked to the meticulous comparison of key findings across imaging timelines.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4621848739495798,0.55,100.0,100.0
+6850,latent_6850,2842,0.005684,0.007551733,4.529951,Use of structured information with prior report comparison in radiology findings.,"The pattern observed in these examples is the consistent use of the indication and comparison details across various radiology studies, adapting reports to different patient scenarios while maintaining a structure that highlights prior imaging for comparative analysis. This ensures any interval changes in patient's conditions are properly tracked while accommodating specific technical and patient history details.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4336222431991761,0.505,0.5029239766081871,0.86,100.0,100.0
+6851,latent_6851,5157,0.010314,0.009173115,4.7128115,Radiology findings involve explicit comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the formulation of a 'comparison' or 'evaluation' between a current image and a previous image. This signifies the importance of detecting changes over time, either in terms of improvement, deterioration, or stability.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5301984469370147,0.5555555555555556,0.5379310344827586,0.7878787878787878,99.0,99.0
+6852,latent_6852,8692,0.017384,0.009235406,6.343673,Incomplete or unclear task specification in comparison instructions.,"Sample inputs with higher activation levels consistently refer to the instruction to compare current and prior imaging findings, but contain some error or incomplete specification. This suggests that low activation occurs when information is crisp, complete, and clearly sets the task, while higher activation reflects incomplete or unclear task specification.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.2547094651897921,0.275,0.2378378378378378,0.9166666666666666,48.0,152.0
+6853,latent_6853,42051,0.084102,0.04520646,5.7392597,Detailed comparison to specific prior radiology reports regarding surgical or post-operative changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference specific prior radiology reports with detailed findings, particularly focusing on surgical history and post-operative changes such as the presence of surgical clips or pneumonectomy observation. These examples extensively discuss the comparison between current and prior radiological findings, highlighting changes in surgical status or stability of previous conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6067315304272325,0.615,0.6619718309859155,0.47,100.0,100.0
+6854,latent_6854,3579,0.007158,0.005337479,7.0592837,Findings interpreted without prior imaging comparison.,"Highly activated examples consistently lack a comparison to prior radiographic studies. Instead of evaluations of interval changes or stability based on previous exams, they provide standalone findings which suggest further details required but not apparent from previous imaging lacks.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.569620253164557,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6855,latent_6855,32290,0.06458,0.028220315,2.6260557,Comparison of the current frontal and lateral views with prior images.,Examples with high activation include radiology descriptions that reference both frontal and lateral views alongside comparisons to prior images to determine interval changes in conditions. Descriptions tend to detail changes such as stability or resolution of conditions or devices remaining in place.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6856,latent_6856,3088,0.006176,0.0072312905,4.0284457,Comparison with prior imaging findings or reports.,"The pattern here involves comparing current image findings to prior image findings, often explicitly referencing dates or previous studies in the examination process. This aligns with evidence from prior reports and explicitly requests comparison with prior images in patient contexts.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4977617643847581,0.54,0.5253164556962026,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6857,latent_6857,36329,0.072658,0.06414613,6.2071395,Requires comparing current and prior images.,"The activated examples frequently mention both 'current' and 'prior' images, explicitly requesting a comparison between them. These examples describe findings or impressions that are supposed to be stated in relation to prior images, suggesting a focus on change or stability over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6858,latent_6858,2632,0.005264,0.0069226455,4.3452077,Dynamic changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations involve descriptions where bilateral opacities, effusions, or similar conditions are present in comparison to prior images. This contrasts with those having 'no significant changes' or 'no acute process', which have lower activations indicating that more dynamic changes or new findings result in higher activation.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3795137829315431,0.39,0.3513513513513513,0.26,100.0,100.0
+6859,latent_6859,18525,0.03705,0.019670367,4.729544,Comparison to prior imaging findings.,"High activation values consistently correspond to examples discussing radiological findings compared to prior imaging. Still, the representation of opportunities shows diverse comparisons, such as interval changes, device placement, etc. This theme revolves around the use of the word 'comparison' or phrases indicating comparison to detect and discuss differences in images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6860,latent_6860,7209,0.014418,0.022212815,5.781479,"Use of ""[[<image>]]"" placeholder in reports.","The pattern being highlighted is the reference to specific images used in descriptions, denoted by the use of the placeholder ""[[<image>]]"". These samples distinctly call out these placeholders compared to other examples where such specifics are not highlighted, indicating the focus on image-specific analysis.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5281840637229053,0.575,0.5460122699386503,0.89,100.0,100.0
+6861,latent_6861,1560,0.00312,0.0032225996,5.162554,Use of prior image comparison for current assessment findings.,"The pattern emerging from the activations is the use of comparison with prior imaging studies when assessing current radiographic findings. References to terms like 'in comparison to prior', 'stable compared to previous', or 'compared to prior exam' suggest this mode of assessment, distinguishing it from initial examinations without such comparisons.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4294672457659788,0.445,0.4586466165413533,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6862,latent_6862,7403,0.014806,0.019485688,4.7092295,Focus on placement and adjustment of medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on the appropriate positioning of medical devices or changes in device position over time, such as ET tubes, NG tubes, and PICC lines. These findings are frequently described through explicit measurements and comparisons across sequential imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes that are critical for device management.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6946259167480163,0.695,0.7096774193548387,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6863,latent_6863,4384,0.008768,0.009688799,6.6374283,Persistent or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The common thread in these examples is the comparison of current findings with prior radiographs, often resulting in the detection of persistent or unchanged findings. This involves assessment of medical devices or anatomical structures that have not changed since previous examinations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5728643216080402,0.5728643216080402,0.5757575757575758,0.57,100.0,99.0
+6864,latent_6864,6721,0.013442,0.031420387,7.251023,Radiological findings prompting specific clinical interventions or assessments.,"The pattern identified in highly activated examples is the presence of specific patient management implications or interventions which directly relate to changes observed in radiological findings when comparing current to prior images. This includes interpretations where certain interventions or assessments are implied, typically through updates in the patient's condition or actionable clinical insights based on interval changes seen between current and prior radiographs.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4154204148812395,0.485,0.4516129032258064,0.14,100.0,100.0
+6865,latent_6865,4591,0.009182,0.013949246,5.4756556,Detailed comparison with prior imaging focusing on interval changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels typically involve detailed comparisons of current imaging with prior examinations, with significant attention to changes or stability in cardiomediastinal or other thoracic structures. The comparison often involves changes in pathologies like effusions, consolidation, or device placements, which are not present in low activation examples.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6866,latent_6866,17982,0.035964,0.017886816,6.028843,Focus on position and status of medical tubes or catheters in imaging.,"Examples with higher activations focus on descriptions of monitoring or supportive devices, such as tubes and catheters, their positions within the patient, and any changes in these devices over time, maintaining patient management through radiological devices as a primary focus.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5471698113207547,0.595,0.380281690140845,0.421875,64.0,136.0
+6867,latent_6867,2837,0.005674,0.0058186203,6.5902147,Comparison with prior imaging to note changes in specific pathologies.,"The examples with higher activation often involve descriptions comparing current image findings to prior ones for specific types of radiological details, like pleural effusions, opacities, or cardiomediastinal changes. The presence or changes in these specific pathologies in radiology studies tend to activate the model.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6868,latent_6868,4043,0.008086,0.010145269,6.6563697,Comparison of imaging findings and changes from prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize descriptions comparing current radiological findings with previous imaging studies. They typically highlight changes or stability of specific findings, such as cardiac silhouette size, pneumothorax, pneumonia, pleural effusions, and atelectasis, after referencing previous reports or comparisons. This pattern suggests the importance of discussing changes alongside stability in diagnostic radiology reports.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6869,latent_6869,9821,0.019642,0.011285049,5.3356123,Comparative analysis of interval changes in follow-up studies.,"These examples indicate a comparison of current radiological findings to previous images, with emphasis on interval change or stability, suggesting a pattern of evaluating serial images over time to observe progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6870,latent_6870,48070,0.09614,0.041861318,3.1559994,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples exhibit discussion of interval changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies, especially noting stability or changes in the condition, using comparative phrases such as 'unchanged since', 'improved from', 'decreased size', etc., in relation to previous imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.5671641791044776,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6871,latent_6871,2704,0.005408,0.008204261,6.743955,Moderate cardiomegaly identified in imaging studies.,"These examples identify the presence of moderate cardiomegaly, an enlarged heart condition, as a key finding. Often expressed directly as 'moderate cardiomegaly', this observation is consistent across cases with high activation, highlighting its significance in pattern recognition.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6771718133947235,0.695,0.8679245283018868,0.46,100.0,100.0
+6872,latent_6872,15156,0.030312,0.02288637,4.317025,Mild vascular congestion and interstitial abnormalities in chest imaging findings.,"These examples consistently include detailed descriptions of interstitial or vascular abnormalities, patchy opacities, mild pleural effusions, and phrases like 'cephalization of pulmonary vascularity', which suggest mild vascular or pulmonary congestion on imaging studies.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5561378646487873,0.585,0.673469387755102,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6873,latent_6873,34405,0.06881,0.035608202,4.711654,Explicit radiological comparisons of current with previous images.,"Examples with varying activation levels consistently mention changes over time or comparisons with previous images or examinations. Although not all comparisons result in high activation, the presence of explicit comparison or descriptions of changes in specific conditions, such as device positions or fluid levels, increases activation levels. Other non-comparable cases or general descriptions without changes are deemed less representative of the pattern.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4938728323699422,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+6874,latent_6874,13623,0.027246,0.020805338,5.109874,Abnormal enlargement of cardiac or mediastinal structures.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve findings where the lungs, heart, or mediastinal structures deviation in size,ally enlarged compared to normal. The discrepancies often highlighted include changes in heart size or mediastinal silhouette indicating abnormality or suggesting disease involvement.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5370370370370371,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6875,latent_6875,18067,0.036134,0.020157266,5.628423,Radiological description highlights changes compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern identified is consistent with the presence of comparisons to prior imaging studies, indicating interval changes or stability over time. This pattern highlights the significant value of noting changes or stability in comparison to previous studies, particularly in acute settings or chronic conditions management.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.576271186440678,0.59,0.55,0.8020833333333334,96.0,104.0
+6876,latent_6876,7633,0.015266,0.0148343155,3.721946,Comparison between current and prior radiology images.,"These examples specifically focus on the presence of references to prior imaging studies for comparison, typically noting changes or lack thereof between current and prior images. They commonly use relative descriptors like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', and time-based indications such as the date of prior images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6877,latent_6877,13819,0.027638,0.025326425,6.0023546,Comparison of findings between current and previous imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention a comparison between the current and previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability in the findings. This demonstrates the model's pattern to recognize when a narrative explicitly describes how current findings correspond, differ, or remain stable compared to prior studies.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6878,latent_6878,20943,0.041886,0.019533029,5.024791,Emphasis on comparative interpretation with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often contain requests or implied prompt for a descriptive evaluation of current radiology images against a prior report, in addition to findings of stable conditions. They include assessments of the study conducted in comparison to previous imaging and whether there is interval change. These examples mark a pattern of emphasizing the necessity for diagnostic context through comparative imagery.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.409620682347955,0.4371859296482412,0.4248366013071895,0.7303370786516854,89.0,110.0
+6879,latent_6879,80269,0.160538,0.09678385,4.2093644,Descriptions emphasizing unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples are highly focused on describing findings in comparison to prior imaging, particularly emphasizing stability or lack of significant change in given conditions. The consistent reference to 'unchanged', 'persistent', 'no new findings', and stability in disease are indicative of evaluating images to note whether any significant variances have occurred.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.634771732332708,0.635,0.6421052631578947,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6880,latent_6880,7590,0.01518,0.015027761,8.871317,Explicit interval changes noted between current and prior images.,"The highly activated examples make explicit comparisons between findings in the current image and previous studies, often mentioning interval changes such as positions of tubes or progression of opacities. They clearly use the comparison to inform whether there is a change over time, indicating stability or progression.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5721744471744472,0.5778894472361809,0.5974025974025974,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+6881,latent_6881,17341,0.034682,0.02603967,6.7822275,Evaluating tube placement or changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels reference evaluation of tube placements (often endotracheal tube) in comparison to prior images, occasionally noting incorrect positioning and recommending adjustments. This pattern involves assessing changes or placements in the context of tube management, which is critical in acute care settings like postoperative monitoring or intensive care units.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6948428440646933,0.7,0.6587301587301587,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6882,latent_6882,7623,0.015246,0.009573286,4.155779,"Absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax.","Examples consistently mention the absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, and often highlight normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours. This indicates assessments of the chest radiographs are highlighting clear lungs, normal heart silhouette, and absence of these specific abnormalities.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,0.6756756756756757,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.749599358974359,0.75,0.7314814814814815,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6883,latent_6883,13736,0.027472,0.020411754,4.643032,Direct comparison of current with prior imaging studies showing interval changes.,"Highly activated examples often involve identifying changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies. Reports referencing direct comparisons, whether to highlight stability or a specific change like reduction of pulmonary edema or shift in pleural effusion, exhibit this pattern. This is characterized by explicit reference to prior images and describing interval changes or stability.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4297719087635054,0.43,0.4270833333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6884,latent_6884,2578,0.005156,0.00927685,5.246688,Use of 'PRIOR_REPORT' for comparison with previous examinations.,"The pattern is characterized by descriptions indicating comparison made to prior radiographic examinations using the phrasing 'prior_R [[EPORT]]' or 'comparison to prior'. It often ends with a summary of findings or impression, checking for interval changes or resolution in conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6885,latent_6885,15265,0.03053,0.015662828,3.8803349,Comparisons to prior imaging studies indicating changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to comparisons with prior imaging studies. These comparisons explicitly outline changes, stability, or the absence of significant interval changes compared to prior examinations.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4379767161782416,0.44,0.4464285714285714,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6886,latent_6886,4909,0.009818,0.010882836,4.2799616,Stability in cardiomediastinal or hilar structures compared to prior imaging.,"Multiple examples reference a direct comparison between a given image and a prior image, for which a common pattern is observed: the stability or lack of significant change in cardiac, mediastinal, hilar contours, or other aspects of the chest. Stability of features, especially with mediastinal structures, in follow-up imaging often signify diagnostic consistency in the context of non-acute changes or chronic conditions.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4594594594594595,0.34,100.0,100.0
+6887,latent_6887,15071,0.030142,0.023030667,8.264039,Detailed comparison of current study with previous imaging findings.,"Consistently, high activations are associated with examples where direct comparisons to previous imaging studies, using specific language or description of previous findings, are requested to assess interval changes. This pattern reflects frequent monitoring or evaluation of changes in medical conditions over time, particularly detailed evaluations comparing findings over certain periods or dates.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5793269230769231,0.58,0.5142857142857142,0.6206896551724138,87.0,113.0
+6888,latent_6888,3980,0.00796,0.011200327,5.997705,Emphasis on detailed exam findings in clinical context.,The examples with high activation focus heavily on a detailed analysis of radiological findings in the context of a given medical history or indication. These examples demonstrate a particular emphasis on thorough examination descriptions and the implications of the findings in a clinical context.,0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3606902466280308,0.385,0.4172661870503597,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6889,latent_6889,9167,0.018334,0.010616852,5.385744,Interval changes or new findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with activation levels closer to zero frequently show stable findings or lack substantial change compared to prior studies, whereas those with higher activation involves interval change, new placements, or notable differences compared with earlier exams. Descriptions highlight the interval changes that denote significant assessment or diagnosis updates.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5172413793103449,0.45,100.0,100.0
+6890,latent_6890,20141,0.040282,0.030819843,5.3809342,Evaluation and positioning of medical tubes or lines in imaging studies.,"The examples indicate a consistent focus on the positioning and evaluation of medical tubes, lines, and catheters, often mentioned in the context of their placement and adjustment. The presence of these devices, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and nasogastric tubes, is emphasized in the findings and impressions, highlighting potential changes or evaluations needed due to their current positions.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8149583656322672,0.815,0.8058252427184466,0.83,100.0,100.0
+6891,latent_6891,3623,0.007246,0.010753386,5.513597,"Lung congestion, effusions, or consolidations compared with prior images.","Highly activated examples describe findings of lung issues such as congestions, effusions, opacity, or consolidation, compared with previous radiographic studies, creating a pattern of assessing interval changes or stability of these lung-related findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6892,latent_6892,10017,0.020034,0.013417337,5.14781,Comparison of specific changes in radiological findings between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently discuss findings in comparison with a prior frontal image, emphasizing changes (or stability) in specific radiological details such as pleural effusion, cardiac silhouette size, or mediastinal contours. This relates closely to the investigation of specific changes between subsequent imaging tests.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5914793319309628,0.592964824120603,0.5855855855855856,0.65,100.0,99.0
+6893,latent_6893,21122,0.042244,0.024546696,3.8195953,Comparison of imaging findings to prior studies with emphasis on stability or change.,"The examples often provide interpretations that compare current and prior imaging studies, describing findings that are stable, improved, or changed over time. This contrasts with examples showing detailed descriptions of radiological hardware without specific stability or change analysis, which tend to activate lower.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6894,latent_6894,16825,0.03365,0.017884035,3.9966576,Changes in lung opacities or pleural effusions compared to prior imaging.,"Only examples that mention changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, or similar structural features receive high activation. This implies a focus on opacities or effusions as key features in these radiographic comparisons.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3401489853583355,0.52,0.5285714285714286,0.37,100.0,100.0
+6895,latent_6895,6238,0.012476,0.008923663,4.6100354,Changes in radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"Among examples with high activation values, descriptions frequently involve evaluating changes in findings between the current image and the prior image(s). Despite varied contexts, the pattern consistently involves identification of stability or change in pathologies like pulmonary opacities, pleural effusions, interstitial edema, or device placements, often with comparisons to previous imaging studies.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6227726525969923,0.6231155778894473,0.6132075471698113,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+6896,latent_6896,22074,0.044148,0.017669145,2.3409722,Descriptions of interval change in thoracic findings.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently reference changes in the thoracic findings, including decreased or increased pleural effusion, overall progression in pathology detected, specific descriptions of the extent of changes when comparing to images over time, or absence of new findings. This pattern is indicative of a follow-up comparison to analyze stability or changes over time in lung and pleural conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6245400615754299,0.625,0.616822429906542,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6897,latent_6897,5050,0.0101,0.011657378,3.6413138,Prior report with comparison indicating specific clinical interventions or scenarios.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve the presence of a prior report indicating specific clinical indications, often coded as specific scenarios like post-intubation or post-catheter placement, implying a clinical decision or action that requires comparison with prior imaging studies. These references are explicitly tied to more analytic, decision-supportive contexts rather than generalized comparisons.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4591346153846154,0.46,0.4629629629629629,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6898,latent_6898,4971,0.009942,0.017260997,6.383526,Direct description of radiologic findings from given images without historical context.,"Examples with high activation levels require descriptions focused primarily on the findings in current and prior images without detailed historical or interpretative context. They are straightforward and focused on the images themselves, rather than narrative or comparison-focused descriptions seen in low activation examples.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5173890608875129,0.5276381909547738,0.5352112676056338,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+6899,latent_6899,4968,0.009936,0.008451433,4.8932385,Comparison to prior images with noted changes.,The high activation examples involve the analysis being made from images with at least one comparison to prior images. The comparison element is key in drawing new insights or confirming previous observations and influences the activation strongly.,0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4100294985250737,0.42,0.3918918918918919,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6900,latent_6900,18703,0.037406,0.0232838,6.894831,"Comparison of current and prior imaging findings focusing on changes in lung fields, cardiomediastinal contours, pleural effusions, or device placement.","Most examples describe changes in lung fields, cardiomediastinal contours, pleural effusions, and devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) between a current image and a prior radiographic study. This highlights consistent patterns in assessing interval changes in these specific areas, emphasizing their stability, worseness, or improvement.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5953937130407718,0.61,0.547945205479452,0.8695652173913043,92.0,108.0
+6901,latent_6901,22211,0.044422,0.03267964,5.399319,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the importance of comparing current images with prior reports. These often highlight findings such as 'PRIOR_REPORT' and instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images, which illustrates the process of identifying changes over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6902,latent_6902,7905,0.01581,0.014603236,4.6596556,"Conjunction of current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","The examples with higher activation levels all indicate explicit reference to either the current frontal, lateral, or prior frontal images being used in conjunction. This pattern appears to emphasize the use of both current and prior images simultaneously for a comprehensive comparison.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6903,latent_6903,11932,0.023864,0.013878582,3.8288834,Instructions to describe findings in comparison to the prior image.,The highly activated samples consistently include the instruction to provide a comparison between current and previous imaging. This explicit mention and requirement for comparative analysis distinguishes them from other examples.,0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5062288941229887,0.565,0.5384615384615384,0.91,100.0,100.0
+6904,latent_6904,3883,0.007766,0.011832382,4.6886997,Comparison to prior imaging focusing on stable and unchanged findings.,"Examples that exhibit the pattern consistently use comparative language, focusing on unchanged stability or improvement relative to prior radiographic studies in various thoracic and extrathoracic features. This pattern often confirms absence of acute changes and highlights stability, providing reassurance in clinical management.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4246575342465753,0.31,100.0,100.0
+6905,latent_6905,10801,0.021602,0.015581839,5.0067806,"Focus on changes or findings in pulmonary and pleural space, particularly atelectasis and pleural effusion.",The examples provided often focus on unique changes or findings in the pulmonary and pleural space when variability in clinical presentation is reported. Each example with non-zero activation typically illustrates specific identifying characteristics or detailed comparisons to previous imaging that reflect minor or subtle progresses or changes in pulmonary conditions.,0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6519253361180003,0.6633165829145728,0.6222222222222222,0.84,100.0,99.0
+6906,latent_6906,6211,0.012422,0.0128311375,5.854623,Analysis of chest images compared to prior studies for stability or change.,"There is consistent mention of comparative imagery across these samples. Specifically, the examples with high activation emphasize comparing current frontal and lateral chest images to prior studies, noting stability or changes over time, often including specific findings about the lungs, cardiac silhouette, and mediastinal contours.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6907,latent_6907,5185,0.01037,0.014994103,4.2196856,Presence of double-bracketed image tags [[<image>]].,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature the presence of image tags in double brackets [[<image>]], indicating an emphasis on certain images in the text. This suggests that the pattern highlights instances where images are specifically marked or emphasized for comparison, which appears to trigger higher activation.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.8846153846153846,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.9149978749468736,0.915,0.9108910891089108,0.92,100.0,100.0
+6908,latent_6908,7861,0.015722,0.011274515,4.9508433,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons made between current and prior imaging, highlighting changes or the stability of findings over time. This is a hallmark approach in the evaluation of radiological images, particularly in monitoring patients' conditions for stability or progression of features.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6909,latent_6909,19036,0.038072,0.022077879,3.2633505,Findings described in terms of changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation scores consistently involve reports where findings are described in comparison to prior imaging, focusing on changes such as stability, increase, or resolution of findings like opacities, lymphadenopathy, pneumothorax, or atelectasis. The model seems to be tuned to identify this comparative language pattern, indicating stabilization or change.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+6910,latent_6910,22127,0.044254,0.020590372,4.0518765,Focus on stability or no change since previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently reference stability, no change, or no new findings when comparing the current radiology image to a previous or prior image. These phrases indicate unchanged status between imaging studies, a common and important aspect of monitoring patient conditions in healthcare settings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5131498470948013,0.5175879396984925,0.5185185185185185,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+6911,latent_6911,2814,0.005628,0.006475128,7.500468,Detailed description of chest findings or technique with thorough comparisons.,"Examples with high activation often specify the radiological technique used or findings in detail, such as conditions like atelectasis or pneumonia located in the chest, using technical terms and thorough comparisons to previous studies.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4389901823281907,0.52,0.5113636363636364,0.9,100.0,100.0
+6912,latent_6912,5375,0.01075,0.007381523,3.1529362,Emphasis on interval change observed in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples primarily involve comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes. The frequent use of terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'interval change', and specific findings indicating changes over time, point to a central pattern where the focus is on detecting progress or stability over sequential studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.3866666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6913,latent_6913,28159,0.056318,0.03195722,7.9132056,"Comparison between current and prior radiographic findings, focusing on changes in pulmonary opacities.","Reports with higher activation scores frequently mention specific findings related to pulmonary opacities or changes, such as consolidations, effusions, or edema, and provide specific comparisons to prior imaging studies to discuss interval changes or stability, which is typical in follow-up or ongoing patient assessments.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5358071694774379,0.5628140703517588,0.3555555555555555,0.5245901639344263,61.0,138.0
+6914,latent_6914,2905,0.00581,0.011402106,6.061706,Comparison of current and prior radiology images with explicit mention of the latter.,"The examples with high activation involve descriptions of radiographs comparing current and prior images, while low activation examples often do not have prior images available. The common characteristic in high activation instances is that they involve making a determination based on sequential image comparisons, often explicitly mentioning prior images indicating a consistent focus on changes over time.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+6915,latent_6915,7742,0.015484,0.013328413,4.2009187,Stability or no significant change in pathology or equipment compared to prior images.,"While most instances describe findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, the samples with higher activations involve findings related to no acute changes, indicating stability without deterioration in conditions or equipment positioning. This stable or unchanged status for specific pathologies or objects, such as in Example 25 'no significant change from the prior exam', influences activation.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+6916,latent_6916,5491,0.010982,0.009950164,4.4007773,Report comparisons with significant interval changes or interventions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or comparisons in radiology images, with particular focus on specific anatomical abnormalities or interventions such as new opacifications, placements of catheters, changes in effusion, and other significant alterations from previous films. These reports often include significant observations or changes compared to prior imaging or clinical findings.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.4909433864758016,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+6917,latent_6917,20819,0.041638,0.028774865,5.054433,Focus on unchanged position or condition in serial imaging.,"These examples utilize explicit direction and movement descriptors such as 'maintained position' or 'unchanged' indicating the focus on precise detail about equipment positions, their intervals over time, and resultant anatomical findings. This aids in identifying close monitoring status in various medical tools and devices alongside the radiographic findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5896306676008407,0.59,0.5957446808510638,0.56,100.0,100.0
+6918,latent_6918,3435,0.00687,0.014358735,6.275134,Reports comparing current findings to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels show reports that explicitly compare current findings to prior studies. The pattern is evident in descriptions of stability, unchanged conditions, or comparisons that make use of phrases like 'as compared to prior examination', 'stable from previous exam', and similar.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6919,latent_6919,31095,0.06219,0.029491302,4.470954,Comparative analysis with prior radiographs showing stability or changes in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings in comparison to prior radiographic results, using terms like 'no relevant change', 'unchanged', or detailing differences from previous exams. Lower activation samples do not focus on comparing current and prior findings or mention previous imaging less prominently.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5858562029828838,0.605,0.5734265734265734,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6920,latent_6920,17697,0.035394,0.022671562,5.6858864,Unchanged findings from previous examinations.,"These examples mention radiological findings that remain unchanged or stable from prior examinations, indicating no significant changes. The descriptions often use terms like 'unchanged', 'similar in appearance', 'persistent', or 'stable'.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6921,latent_6921,7360,0.01472,0.010591476,10.256416,Comparison to prior images without specified dates noted in assistant rationale.,"The examples with high activations consistently include descriptions of image findings that mention both a current image and a prior image without providing explicit dates for the prior image comparison within the assistant or rationale context. The pattern involves instructions to compare findings to an unspecified previous study directly in the assistant or rationale text, demonstrating the focus on pattern recognition between current and past imaging without explicit temporal markers.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.375,0.6666666666666666,81.0,119.0
+6922,latent_6922,19784,0.039568,0.020872857,7.986564,Reports noting significant interval changes in comparison to prior studies.,"These examples describe the findings in radiology reports based on comparison with prior studies. They record interval changes that point towards medical conditions, using terms like 'unchanged', 'interval change', or 'compared to prior'. While comparison is a routine part of radiology, reports recording notable interval changes, particularly in pathologies, appear to align with the pattern of interest.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5628946090335114,0.64,0.3188405797101449,0.4680851063829787,47.0,153.0
+6923,latent_6923,20548,0.041096,0.019588389,3.0556002,Normal cardiac silhouette size despite presence of chest pathology.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings of a normal cardiac silhouette size or absence of cardiac enlargement, alongside other lung or chest pathologies such as pneumonia or pneumothorax. Reports are heavily focused on comparative findings, but they differ mainly by including this specific cardiac detail.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.6086956521739131,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6924,latent_6924,2078,0.004156,0.008833926,6.396715,Evaluation based on current images with no comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels typically involve a request to provide an assistant description based solely on the current frontal and lateral images, without any available comparisons to previous images. This suggests the model is reacting to instances where the evaluation is exclusively focused on current images without reference to prior radiography.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6666666666666666,0.67,0.7125,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6925,latent_6925,6568,0.013136,0.0076663913,3.8130486,Routine placement and stability of medical devices in imaging comparison.,"The pattern shows common or routine placement and stability of medical devices and support devices when comparing current to previous imaging. Reports describing normal or unchanged hardware placement exhibit higher activation levels, often detailing unchanged catheter tips or other monitoring aids, indicating clinical stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5205479452054794,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6926,latent_6926,6253,0.012506,0.017366309,7.385284,Situations involving detailed comparisons and follow-up actions in chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve reports comparing current and prior images with descriptions of clinical follow-up actions or assessments for potential complications, such as repositioning of tubes or lines, detailed findings requiring intervention, or reports with missing initial comparisons often leading to uncertainty in assessments.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4217473287240729,0.425,0.4347826086956521,0.5,100.0,100.0
+6927,latent_6927,4350,0.0087,0.011940955,4.1416435,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+6928,latent_6928,9900,0.0198,0.012355485,3.8753524,Persistent or stable elevated hemidiaphragm.,"Examples with higher activations consistently report persistent or stable elevation of the hemidiaphragm, a specific anatomical observation. This repeated pattern indicates a significant feature the model likely uses to identify some underlying pathology or condition, such as chronic processes or atelectasis.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.566951566951567,0.62,0.9,0.27,100.0,100.0
+6929,latent_6929,7003,0.014006,0.009940781,5.15436,Direct comparison and interval change evaluation with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation all explicitly mention making a direct comparison with previous radiological exams and describe any interval change. This involves either describing changes in pathological findings or noting stability, highlighting a focus on continued assessment of condition changes over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5851075444917567,0.62,0.5759493670886076,0.91,100.0,100.0
+6930,latent_6930,4298,0.008596,0.019367114,5.938697,Descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions that compare current images to prior images, reflecting changes or stability in findings over time. The phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image' signals the importance of evaluating changes relative to previous images.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6931,latent_6931,8164,0.016328,0.010162998,7.891724,Findings reported as stable or unchanged relative to prior imaging.,These examples depict a pattern where radiologic findings are reported as 'stable' or 'unchanged' with prior imaging. This pattern highlights consistency over time and occurs frequently in clinical reports.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5301519402238827,0.5728643216080402,0.3648648648648648,0.4153846153846154,65.0,134.0
+6932,latent_6932,4255,0.00851,0.012429075,4.7050595,Unchanged positions of medical tubes or devices in radiographs.,"Highly activated examples include references to specific tubes or lines such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or catheters, their positions, and the lack of changes from prior imaging. These examples clearly highlight placement and orientation of medical devices with radiographic evidence, often using specific measurements or anatomical landmarks (like 'left mid SVC' or '4 cm above the carina').",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4071204249948636,0.495,0.4782608695652174,0.11,100.0,100.0
+6933,latent_6933,35933,0.071866,0.031613223,3.101461,Evaluation of heart size and aortic tortuosity in thoracic imaging.,"Phrases like 'the heart is mildly enlarged', 'the aorta is tortuous', and 'cardiomediastinal silhouette within normal limits' appear frequently in radiology reports that focus on thoracic structures, often contextualizing them as stable compared to prior imaging. These indicators of chronic conditions versus acute changes are typical in the context of repeated evaluations.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5697674418604651,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6934,latent_6934,10606,0.021212,0.01745732,3.786435,Inclusion of lateral view and comparison to prior frontal image.,The representative examples focus on the presence of a lateral view image along with a comparison to a prior frontal image. These cases highlight specific findings in the lateral view or changes observed in relation to the previous frontal images.,0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4836065573770491,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6935,latent_6935,17902,0.035804,0.024427433,5.409664,Low lung volumes and associated features in radiological findings.,"Low lung volumes are frequently cited in the examples with high activation, often noted first in the findings or assistant's report. These low lung volumes result in the crowding of vascular structures, exaggerated cardiac silhouettes, or increased bronchovascular markings, which are secondary findings.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5272727272727272,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6936,latent_6936,9796,0.019592,0.014074377,2.6910906,Lack of explicit comparison to prior imaging changes.,"These examples indicate a pattern where descriptions reflect findings in the current study using specific terminologies, while most notably lacking statements that provide a contrast or change with explicit prior imaging comparisons.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6937,latent_6937,4100,0.0082,0.008800611,6.772124,Request for interval change assessment between current and prior images.,"Current and prior imaging comparison is requested specifically to evaluate or describe changes over time. The emphasis is on identifying interval changes in medical findings or stability, particularly in placement of medical devices or presence of pulmonary conditions like pleural effusions or pneumonia, which may indicate the significance of changes between images.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5797760578738796,0.605,0.5704697986577181,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6938,latent_6938,4211,0.008422,0.010623627,6.351236,Interpretation involves comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Data indicates a focus on interpretation and comparison between current and prior imaging studies, typically with multiple views (frontal and lateral) involved, reflecting a pattern of recurrent scanning for historical comparison and detailed change tracking in patients' conditions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3808049535603715,0.415,0.4421768707482993,0.65,100.0,100.0
+6939,latent_6939,4135,0.00827,0.0048180707,2.0645905,Comparison with prior for stability or change in imaging findings.,"These examples consistently require the comparison of frontal or lateral chest images to a prior image, which involves describing stability or changes over time. This can include assessments of anatomical structures or medical devices, ensuring there are no unwanted introduction of acute changes or developments.",0.2452060383516932,0.26,0.3125,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4013798701298701,0.41,0.4274193548387097,0.53,100.0,100.0
+6940,latent_6940,2835,0.00567,0.007837751,4.9829407,Findings evaluated and compared with prior imaging studies.,"These examples show consistent references to comparison with prior imaging, evaluations of interval changes, or explicit mention of stable or persistent findings over time, indicating changes or observations made in contrast to previous studies.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4825174825174825,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6941,latent_6941,13175,0.02635,0.02078348,4.1998158,"Comparative analysis of current vs prior images, noting changes.","Examples with higher activation levels often utilize comparison language referencing changes between current imaging and prior images, focusing specifically on interval changes or consistencies in conditions across studies. This may include terms such as 'interval', 'unchanged', or similar assessments that compare past and present images within radiological findings.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6942,latent_6942,8391,0.016782,0.010652005,4.2074594,Emphasis on change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The high-activation examples emphasize comparative analysis between current and prior frontal images, focusing on interval changes or stability, and often indicating stability or resolution of findings as opposed to new or worsening findings. Comparisons are frequently used to assess changes over time in repeated radiological examinations.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5433070866141733,0.69,100.0,100.0
+6943,latent_6943,3861,0.007722,0.010124078,7.417033,Identification of stable or improved findings in follow-up imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe stable, improved, or resolved findings when comparing current imaging to prior studies. This similarity between observations indicates that the model activates when stability or positive change is detected in follow-up images, typically marked by terms such as 'stable', 'resolved', or 'improved'.",0.3091811414392059,0.3958333333333333,0.1428571428571428,0.0416666666666666,24.0,24.0,0.3592376571099975,0.415,0.2926829268292683,0.12,100.0,100.0
+6944,latent_6944,3592,0.007184,0.006623739,3.9133193,Instruction requires comparing current findings with prior images without a prior report.,"Prompts with high activation levels explicitly specify the instruction to compare current radiological findings to prior imaging when no prior reports are available or stated in the comparison section. This contrasts with prompts where comparisons or prior reports are mentioned but implicitly indicated that no direct comparison would ensue, resulting in lower activation values.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6945,latent_6945,6544,0.013088,0.018314395,4.102643,Explicit instruction to provide detailed image comparison.,Highly activated examples feature requests for the assistant to provide a description of current findings in comparison with prior images alongside specific indications and techniques used. These examples display comprehensive details in radiological reporting with explicit guidance on structure and content for comparing images.,0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+6946,latent_6946,81656,0.163312,0.09939568,5.1858406,Descriptions of unchanged positioning of medical devices or support structures.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve specific descriptions of the positioning of medical devices or findings that indicate no change over time. There are recurrent references to positions of tubes, catheters, or unchanged placement of medical devices which appear to trigger activation.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.6031746031746031,0.38,100.0,100.0
+6947,latent_6947,14352,0.028704,0.020905387,3.851798,Detailed comparative analysis of changes or stability in imaging findings over time.,"Activation levels are higher when findings are explicitly correlated with prior images by providing detailed comparisons indicating whether specific features have changed, stabilized, or resolved over time. Descriptions reflect interval improvements, changes, or stability of conditions.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6948,latent_6948,3267,0.006534,0.01099387,6.6745563,Assistant tasked with comparing current images to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern in these examples is the request for the assistant to provide a description of findings based on the given current frontal image(s) that must be compared to a previous frontal image, notably when specified or hinted by 'comparison available' or equivalent, leading to the assistant providing a detailed comparative analysis. Comparisons are explicitly requested and incorporated into the task.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6949,latent_6949,8358,0.016716,0.009250249,4.527862,Explicit comparison of interval changes to prior imaging.,"Higher activations are linked to cases where radiological findings make clear, specific comparisons to prior imaging evidence, often indicating changes or stability in pathologies or devices (e.g., size of lesions, removal of tubes). This pattern focuses on explicit assessments regarding interval changes, which is common practice for monitoring known or suspected conditions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+6950,latent_6950,12480,0.02496,0.019129409,4.928603,Focus on interval changes between current and prior images.,The pattern emerges from examples involving a comparison or evaluation of interval changes with an emphasis on significant observations between current and prior imaging. High activation levels occur when there's a focus on changes in patient's condition or the presence of interval findings necessitating clinical attention.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,100.0,100.0
+6951,latent_6951,4661,0.009322,0.008652701,6.5750647,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe cases where findings are compared to prior images or reports, especially where a terminology link such as 'unchanged', 'resolved', or 'since previous examination' indicates stability or resolution of findings over time. These examples indicate a stable radiological course often noted for follow-up purposes.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3926510780443365,0.4,0.3717948717948718,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6952,latent_6952,71550,0.1431,0.08472719,4.644635,Significant change or stability in chest condition or intervention.,"The varied activations in these examples highlight that the pattern does not specifically emphasize findings related to previous exams but focuses on the significant changes or the persistence of certain medical interventions, anomalies, or conditions in the chest. Representative findings include notable changes, stability or new developments in significant anomalies (e.g., pleural effusions, pneumo or hydro pneumothorax) that are clinically relevant.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6680201230879236,0.675,0.6356589147286822,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6953,latent_6953,3461,0.006922,0.015428524,7.277964,Inclusion of comparison or follow-up with previous imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation involve explicit use of prior imaging for comparison purposes or interpretation, indicated by 'comparison', 'compared to prior', and similar terms. Most examples with low activation lack such detailed comparative analysis.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4181017535582291,0.445,0.4615384615384615,0.66,100.0,100.0
+6954,latent_6954,16009,0.032018,0.019971108,5.6953115,Emphasis on changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activations are linked to descriptions that emphasize changes or comparisons made with prior chest radiographs, particularly focusing on changes in lung and pleural effusion appearances. Reports without clear comparison or reference to changes show lower activations.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+6955,latent_6955,20999,0.041998,0.024471544,4.007933,"Use of terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar' in comparison to prior imaging.","These examples have definitive descriptions of findings presented in conjunction with imaging comparison language with multiple descriptive terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'similar', or 'comparison'. This pattern is prevalent in radiology reports that provide reassurance about unchanged findings post-evaluation of prior studies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5329583452137173,0.5404040404040404,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,98.0
+6956,latent_6956,5612,0.011224,0.009517236,6.4005594,"Emphasis on comparing current and prior radiological findings, even if not available.","Examples with higher activation demonstrate descriptions of current radiological findings with explicit directives of providing comparatives against prior studies, even when none are available, indicating a pattern of emphasizing comparisons regardless of actual comparative data availability.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4120307553143374,0.48,0.4880952380952381,0.82,100.0,100.0
+6957,latent_6957,4211,0.008422,0.010737734,5.9528537,Detailed analysis of changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation involve instances of detailed findings or changes detected when current imaging is compared to previous imaging studies, often highlighting new or persistent issues or stability of existing conditions. This shows that the pattern of interest involves changes or notable findings when comparing current and prior images, indicating a focus on change or status of specific medical concerns.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3801070724147647,0.395,0.3478260869565217,0.24,100.0,100.0
+6958,latent_6958,3034,0.006068,0.0060773743,6.441158,Describe findings without prior history or reports.,The examples with higher activation levels are those where there is a lack of accessible patient history or prior reports for comparison. The task emphasizes generating a description of the findings without prior historical context.,0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4270210409745293,0.4773869346733668,0.4390243902439024,0.1818181818181818,99.0,100.0
+6959,latent_6959,4526,0.009052,0.009166299,5.492697,Stable findings upon comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of findings made in comparison to prior images, focusing on the stability or changes in the morphological features of lungs, heart, and mediastinum. They emphasize unchanged or normal conditions upon comparison, suggesting that the pattern is characterized by stable findings in the presence of a comparison report.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5125,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6960,latent_6960,21254,0.042508,0.027332576,5.5643106,Comparison between current and prior imaging to assess interval stability or change.,"Higher activations consistently occurred in descriptions referencing both frontal and prior images, specifically emphasizing the progression or comparison between current and prior imaging that lead to interpretations of stability, improvement, or changes in findings such as positioning of medical devices or resolution of conditions like atelectasis.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6961,latent_6961,43799,0.087598,0.03677378,2.044675,Explicit reporting of interval changes in radiological findings.,"Examples with significant activation levels describe interval changes in radiological findings, such as resolution, improvement, or stability of previously identified pathologies. This pattern explicitly notes changes or lack thereof between current and prior images. Reports that do not exhibit interval changes or comparisons generally have weaker activations.",0.67003367003367,0.673469387755102,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.6190476190476191,0.62,0.6090909090909091,0.67,100.0,100.0
+6962,latent_6962,7071,0.014142,0.008633213,4.897042,Description or stability of hiatal hernia in chest imaging.,"The highly activated examples describe imaging findings of hiatal hernias. This specific pathology is noted as stable or unchanged across these examples, which mentions the redundant or enlarged appearance of the hernia, sometimes compared to prior examinations.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4634763035367396,0.565,1.0,0.13,100.0,100.0
+6963,latent_6963,2832,0.005664,0.011803152,7.5390425,Describing and comparing findings with prior frontal images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve requests to describe or compare findings from both the current and prior imaging series, often noting stability or changes compared to previous images. Phrases like 'compared to', 'comparison with prior', and explicit requests for comparisons feature prominently.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+6964,latent_6964,3844,0.007688,0.01009238,4.190833,Description of findings in comparison to prior examination.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently provide findings on the current radiology study relative to a prior examination. They emphasize changes or stability over time, with or without prior images explicitly available, indicating a pattern about evaluating current findings in relation to historical data.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4401753807942824,0.4422110552763819,0.4464285714285714,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+6965,latent_6965,29805,0.05961,0.042973265,5.9272723,Detailed description of findings compared with prior imaging.,"Higher activations are consistently associated with reports that explicitly denote a description or comparison of the current imaging findings to a prior study. This comparison involves a detailed analysis of changes or stability of specific findings such as effusions, nodules, masses, or other abnormalities, which requires deep structural and content understanding beyond just checking for presence or absence of pathology.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.59,100.0,100.0
+6966,latent_6966,18472,0.036944,0.01525878,3.0578,"Changes or placements of tubes, lines, or support devices on imaging.","The examples with high activation levels include detailed placements or changes involving tubes, lines, or devices in the radiographic images, such as catheters or fiducial markers, often indicating interval changes like removals, placements, or position evaluations. This pattern focuses on procedures or interventions observed via imaging.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.6071428571428571,0.51,100.0,100.0
+6967,latent_6967,5256,0.010512,0.009255958,4.406959,Comparison with prior images focusing on findings stability or changes.,"The pattern in these samples relates to images being compared against prior studies, with a focus on describing interval changes or stability in medical imaging, which is a fundamental practice in radiology.",0.3673469387755102,0.3673469387755102,0.36,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.431578947368421,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6968,latent_6968,5021,0.010042,0.010487939,6.0072584,Explicit documentation of changes over time via imaging study comparisons.,"In this set of examples, there is a consistent pattern of making comparisons between current and previous imaging studies. The key detail for higher activation levels is that findings from previous studies are explicitly noted, and a comparison is made to highlight changes or the absence thereof over time, signifying follow-up or progression monitoring.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,100.0
+6969,latent_6969,2658,0.005316,0.007459868,6.0322533,Lack of explicit comparison information or presence of 'None'/'N/A' for comparisons.,"Examples with high activation involve the provided instruction to describe findings in new chest images in relation to prior images, highlighting the lack or presence of comparison details (e.g., 'None', 'N/A') rather than explicit comparisons or differences.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5534606797320765,0.595,0.5590062111801242,0.9,100.0,100.0
+6970,latent_6970,16905,0.03381,0.020064304,6.269089,"Detailed comparison with previous imaging, noting interval changes or stability.","The pattern in the examples that exhibit the highest activation levels focuses on cases where imaging findings are contrasted with previous examinations, specifically noting any interval changes or stability. These examples often include clear comparisons or descriptions of changes over time or with respect to previous imaging, highlighting phrases like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', and interval changes.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.4912280701754385,0.6666666666666666,84.0,116.0
+6971,latent_6971,26724,0.053448,0.05168164,6.4687934,Comparison regarding the positioning or presence of medical devices such as chest tubes or endotracheal tubes.,"Examples with activations tend to contain descriptions of changes or stability in medical devices or supportive care elements, particularly chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, or vascular catheters. These examples emphasize the positioning, removal, or change in associated conditions, which is key for monitoring patient status non-invasively, explaining the activations observed.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5081967213114754,0.31,100.0,100.0
+6972,latent_6972,3681,0.007362,0.00705544,4.1906285,Emphasis on prior report comparison.,"Highly activated examples contain phrases specifying direct comparisons with ""prior reports"" and incorporate terms referencing previous imaging reports or changes over time. The presence of history, indication, and technique is common, but they do not strongly influence activation levels unless they relate to previous reports.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4800509337860781,0.51,0.5067567567567568,0.75,100.0,100.0
+6973,latent_6973,3556,0.007112,0.0067837867,7.72254,Comparison of current and prior image findings as instructed.,"Almost all examples with higher activation levels include a clear instruction to provide a description of current findings in comparison to previous images, explicitly requesting this comparison task.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4632352941176471,0.6428571428571429,98.0,102.0
+6974,latent_6974,5038,0.010076,0.01488858,8.112706,Descriptions of interval changes compared to previous imaging studies.,"These examples frequently mention comparisons of current imaging findings with prior ones, focusing on interval changes. They include references to previous procedures and their status, reflecting the emphasis on monitoring changes over time in medical imaging.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6975,latent_6975,5889,0.011778,0.016279927,5.094259,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation describe changes or pathologies in chest imaging, often comparing them with prior images. The language focuses on detailed findings, differentiating changes, stability, and technical comparisons between current and past imaging views in relation to specific conditions or suspected pathologies.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4061996779388084,0.41,0.3928571428571428,0.33,100.0,100.0
+6976,latent_6976,2277,0.004554,0.0074796122,5.279429,Immediate comparison after medical interventions such as tube placements.,"These examples focus on immediate changes observed after medical interventions, primarily tube placements or adjustments and the results are compared with prior images taken on the same day or shortly after the intervention. This pattern includes specific measurements like distances from anatomical landmarks, tube length changes, or repositioning descriptions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+6977,latent_6977,3850,0.0077,0.008756599,5.8446574,Detailed report instructions requiring full image comparisons.,Prompts that exhibit the pattern include those where detailed instructions are given for comparing radiological findings between current and prior images. The inclusion of detailed indications and thorough examination techniques are also characteristic. The presence of detailed imaging results comparison indicates a focus on thorough radiological analysis as opposed to focusing on the presence or absence of acute changes.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+6978,latent_6978,3439,0.006878,0.00803965,5.8623943,Detailed description of radiographic findings and changes over time.,"Examples with higher activation indices involve detailed descriptions of radiographic findings, often highlighting specific conditions or changes between images, whereas lower-activation examples tend to involve straightforward or unchanged findings.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.259333400060054,0.26,0.2735849056603773,0.29,100.0,100.0
+6979,latent_6979,19905,0.03981,0.017738793,3.532875,Description comparing current and prior images to assess changes.,"The samples exhibiting high activation levels consistently provide descriptions of findings by explicitly comparing current images to past exams using language like 'in comparison', 'as compared to previous', 'since prior', etc. This focus on change over time is what the pattern is capturing, rather than just describing individual static findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+6980,latent_6980,10149,0.020298,0.01912709,4.1137204,Frequent comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently use phrases such as ""unchanged from prior"", ""as seen on prior"", ""interval improvement"", or ""compared to previous"", indicating explicit comparisons or statements on stability/changes based on prior radiological findings. This pattern suggests the analysis focuses on changes over time as compared to previous studies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.465648854961832,0.61,100.0,100.0
+6981,latent_6981,7363,0.014726,0.008691587,4.3629804,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"High activation examples consistently involve detailed comparison to prior imaging studies, with specific reference to interval changes such as improvement, worsening, or new findings in current images relative to previous ones. They frequently include language indicating change, such as 'interval change,' 'new,' 'improved,' or 'unchanged.'",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6982,latent_6982,87928,0.175856,0.08890367,3.405694,Emphasis on comparison to prior images showing stability or specific progression.,"Examples with activated responses involve reports containing detailed direct or nuanced indications of comparisons with prior imaging findings, especially when these comparisons focus on the stability or change of specific findings, e.g., size of effusions, presence of devices or their change in position, or unchanged disease findings like fibrosis or pleural thickness. This pattern shows an emphasis on tracking changes between temporal studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6016949152542372,0.71,100.0,100.0
+6983,latent_6983,5089,0.010178,0.02588565,6.708157,Request for comparative description with prior images supplied.,"Highly activated examples consistently include an explicit instruction or request for a description of the current study in direct comparison to a prior image, specifying the previous images to compare against. These examples embody a pattern of structured input that explicitly sets up a task for comparing current and past imaging studies without providing actual comparative analysis.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4568578419510096,0.495,0.4967320261437908,0.76,100.0,100.0
+6984,latent_6984,68406,0.136812,0.088365234,5.8400025,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The prominent feature in the representative examples is the use of direct comparisons with prior imaging studies to assess stability or change in findings. This reflects the practice in radiology to determine clinical progression or stability over time, which is crucial for patient management.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5469744364146263,0.58,0.551948051948052,0.85,100.0,100.0
+6985,latent_6985,4453,0.008906,0.01602247,5.7908688,High activation with prior image comparisons and detailed findings.,"Examples with higher activation include direct references to previous reports or comparisons to prior images, specifically involving detailed descriptions and analysis in relation to previous conditions or changes in imaging studies. These examples use structured, formal medical reporting style to relate findings to historical imaging events or descriptions.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4891237127261971,0.525,0.5163398692810458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+6986,latent_6986,5766,0.011532,0.013259122,4.9254208,Provide comparison of radiology findings to prior images.,"The examples with high activation involve a description of radiology findings particularly emphasizing stability or change when compared explicitly to prior imaging. This pattern is emphasized by the directive to 'provide a description of findings in comparison to the prior', which prompts the model to evaluate images with a focus on differences or consistencies over time.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,100.0
+6987,latent_6987,55984,0.111968,0.06516217,4.4500885,"Cardiopulmonary findings suggesting congestion, cardiomegaly, or pleural effusion.","Examples with higher activation often depict findings related to vascular congestion, cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, and atelectasis, which are indicative of cardiac dysfunction or pulmonary capacity-related abnormalities often investigated after thoracic surgeries or with chronic conditions like CHF.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7825136612021858,0.7839195979899497,0.7413793103448276,0.8686868686868687,99.0,100.0
+6988,latent_6988,20780,0.04156,0.023273693,7.5815744,Assessment of medical device positioning or changes post-device removal.,"The pattern observed involves references to or assessments of the positioning of medical devices (like chest tubes, pacemakers, endotracheal tubes, PICC lines) or anatomical changes post-device removal (e.g., pneumothorax after chest tube removal). These examples often discuss the presence, position, or effects of these devices in the context of the radiological findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.375,0.5625,16.0,34.0,0.5577607593571352,0.59,0.3333333333333333,0.64,50.0,150.0
+6989,latent_6989,21300,0.0426,0.026943108,7.714397,Comparative finding analysis between current and prior images.,"These examples demonstrate the presence of radiology reports where findings are compared to prior imaging, specifically emphasizing clear lungs or the presence of opacities, cardiomediastinal contours, or stable devices. High activation is frequently seen when reports describe changes or stability in such findings between current and prior images, indicating the model's sensitivity to comparative analysis within the reports.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4076433121019108,0.8205128205128205,78.0,122.0
+6990,latent_6990,4411,0.008822,0.009157654,5.548882,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve narrative comparisons that highlight differences between the current and prior imaging. This often includes changes such as improved aeration, increased opacity suggesting new pathologies, or apparatus changes. This pattern focuses on various differences detected after the review of serial imaging data.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+6991,latent_6991,3221,0.006442,0.012330094,4.8334394,Presence of bracketed placeholders indicating incomplete or redacted text.,"These highly activated examples frequently use bracketed placeholders like [[OR]], [[par]], [[ch]], [[medial pneumo]] and PRI... OR to denote sections where the radiology report is either incomplete, redacted, or where ambiguous text appears, often arising from AI processing errors or document redaction.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4748756978972805,0.5226130653266332,0.5125,0.8282828282828283,99.0,100.0
+6992,latent_6992,20865,0.04173,0.03305923,6.5388823,Description of tube or device positioning relative to anatomical landmarks.,"The pattern identified is the mention of equipment or devices (e.g., endotracheal tube, enteric tube, venous catheter) and their positioning relative to anatomical landmarks. These examples specifically address the final placement of these devices, which are critical points for patient safety and treatment.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5652173913043478,0.26,100.0,100.0
+6993,latent_6993,36403,0.072806,0.03527849,3.9452455,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples often mention comparisons to prior imaging and highlight specific unchanged or stable features in connection with current findings. The pattern is most evident when there is emphasis on stability or lack of change in conditions such as masses, opacities, catheters, or cardiomediastinal silhouettes, often marked by terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', or 'stable'.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4635084522724972,0.47,0.4615384615384615,0.36,100.0,100.0
+6994,latent_6994,9297,0.018594,0.0249569,4.8135815,Evaluation of interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"Prompts describe the identification of interval changes in radiographic findings by explicitly comparing current images to prior ones, focusing on phrases like 'compared to prior', 'in comparison to the previous study', and indicating 'changes since prior'. These comparisons are essential in radiology reports to evaluate the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3951003125315052,0.4,0.4152542372881356,0.49,100.0,100.0
+6995,latent_6995,6936,0.013872,0.033231247,4.394415,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+6996,latent_6996,26922,0.053844,0.029198254,7.889186,Comparisons of present and prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions that compare current findings to prior radiological studies, emphasizing interval changes. The comparisons focus on changes over time, progression, regression, or stability of conditions.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3319161858487701,0.34,0.2571428571428571,0.9574468085106383,47.0,153.0
+6997,latent_6997,7105,0.01421,0.0377498,7.4415975,Use of both frontal and lateral images for comparison with prior studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve the use of both frontal and lateral chest images for comparison to prior studies, indicating the importance of these dual perspectives in detecting relevant changes between studies, especially in complex cases or when multiple conditions are being monitored.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4421052631578947,0.42,100.0,100.0
+6998,latent_6998,4352,0.008704,0.01483732,6.5101223,Explicit instructions to compare current with prior imaging.,"The examples that demonstrate high activation levels consistently include instructions or requests to compare current findings with prior imaging in order to describe if any changes have occurred. This pattern involves explicit guidance to provide comparative analysis, suggesting that the systemic detection is focused on comparison-oriented tasks.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,100.0
+6999,latent_6999,11076,0.022152,0.016357873,3.7772727,Detailed analysis on multiple imaging views compared to prior study.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve direct observations or comparisons between the current and prior images that indicate a change, stability, or absence of acute findings, with emphasis on descriptive analysis of those findings. This pattern frequently involves elements of observation in multiple imaging views, rather than a single or non-detailed view, enhancing the report's specificity and detail, thus increasing activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7000,latent_7000,15749,0.031498,0.016153198,3.3837335,Pulmonary edema or vascular congestion on comparative imaging.,The pattern identified is instances of pulmonary edema or vascular congestion as compared to prior imaging. This type of pathological finding is common in studies focusing on conditions related to fluid overload or congestive heart issues.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.6521739130434783,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7001,latent_7001,3240,0.00648,0.008431762,7.3475027,Descriptive comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples describe findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on stability, change, or resolving conditions. Often, the comparison is explicitly described, and updates on conditions compared to previous exams are highlighted using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'resolved'.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.39,0.39,0.39,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7002,latent_7002,10673,0.021346,0.012154456,3.404101,Comparison to prior imaging for assessing temporal changes.,"The pattern involves descriptions of findings as compared to prior or previous imaging studies to assess changes over time. Examples with high activation scores include phrases like 'compared to previous exam', 'in comparison with', 'no change since', or referencing 'previous study'. This pattern indicates a focus on temporal changes in radiological findings, often includes changes in medical devices (like PICC lines or pacemakers), lung opacities, effusions, or other radiological observations.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7003,latent_7003,4447,0.008894,0.0066579804,3.5774815,Comparison of current images with prior images to assess changes.,The highly activated examples consistently involve instructions to compare current images with available prior images in order to provide descriptions. This is a regular task in radiological assessments to understand change or stability in patient's condition.,0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3535353535353535,0.36,0.3833333333333333,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7004,latent_7004,13882,0.027764,0.021675419,5.8977685,Focus on comparisons of tube or line positioning with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally involve explicit comparisons of current images with previous ones, particularly highlighting any changes or stability in the positioning of tubes, lines, or catheters, or changes in lung fields, which are specifically mentioned as 'compared' or 'unchanged', without underlying acute processes unrelated to devices.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.67996799679968,0.68,0.6836734693877551,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7005,latent_7005,3280,0.00656,0.010106629,7.1630516,Stability in contour or silhouette when comparing images.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention stability in findings when comparing current and prior images, with frequent mentions of factors like mediastinal silhouettes or cardiomediastinal stability despite other noted changes. This suggests a pattern centered around stability of specific contours when other changes might be present.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.71875,0.73,0.6642857142857143,0.93,100.0,100.0
+7006,latent_7006,17278,0.034556,0.02080394,5.93963,Explicit mention of changes or stability from prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples consistently reference specific changes or stability compared to previous imaging, despite providing minimal comparison details. This involves directly stating 'increase', 'decrease', or 'no change' in findings or device positions over time and between descriptions of imaging studies. Such narrative techniques enable succinct interval assessment statements, evident in the examples with activation levels above 1.0.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7007,latent_7007,4908,0.009816,0.010166813,4.554605,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in serial imaging compared to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples describe interval changes or stable findings over time with specific comparisons between current and prior imaging. This pattern involves evaluating changes or stability in the medical condition of the patient in sequential imaging studies, particularly looking for improvements, deterioration, or constancy in conditions like effusions, pulmonary edema, or anatomical positions of devices.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4348728463904379,0.435,0.4368932038834951,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7008,latent_7008,4373,0.008746,0.01311179,4.91896,"Comparison of current and prior images, focusing on changes.","The examples with higher activations involve a description of the changes observed in a radiology study as compared to a prior study, typically focusing on temporal changes even if minimal or unchanged. These descriptions often mention specific changes ('no relevant change', 'slight improvement'), rather than simply noting the stable findings.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3067771620316233,0.465,0.4710743801652892,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7009,latent_7009,8027,0.016054,0.011247888,4.602072,Detailed evaluation of tube or catheter placement relative to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels focus specifically on the position and placement of tubes or catheters, often involving Dobbhoff or enteric tubes, with regard to prior examinations or technical placement, which is distinct from general anatomical or pathological findings in radiology.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5523370638578011,0.575,0.6363636363636364,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7010,latent_7010,7909,0.015818,0.012318087,5.7238173,Focus on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern identified is the comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies. Examples with higher activation consistently perform comparisons of the present radiological findings against prior studies, as shown by phrases like 'compared to the prior' or references to previously mentioned conditions. This signifies the presence of temporal analysis as a pattern of interest, such as changes in opacities, structure size, or placement.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7011,latent_7011,20218,0.040436,0.02256659,5.4600177,Comparison indicates little or no change from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe radiological findings in relation to prior images, often with an explicit statement or pattern indicating no significant change or similar observation compared to past images. This pattern involves use of phrases that reference stability or lack of notable change in findings relative to earlier studies.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5227272727272727,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7012,latent_7012,12141,0.024282,0.014635134,6.7349367,Comparative analysis with definitive conclusions in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activations feature a structured analysis of findings on current images compared to previous imaging, often concluding with a definitive interpretation or differential diagnosis for any changes observed. Lower activations lack this comparative analysis or definitive conclusion, indicating the key pattern is providing a coherent narrative of changes observed on sequential imaging studies.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.468671679197995,0.47,0.3818181818181818,0.525,80.0,120.0
+7013,latent_7013,6161,0.012322,0.019263547,6.358235,"Detailed descriptions comparing current and prior imaging studies, often showing stability.","This dataset involves consistently examining current imaging in comparison with prior images, highlighting stable conditions or changes over time, as well as emphasizing the presence of descriptions that point to unchanged or newly observed features. Often, there are no acute findings, and the reports are thoroughly descriptive.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7014,latent_7014,4725,0.00945,0.0115455445,5.6533613,"Focus on lung volume, atelectasis, or lung findings in comparison studies.","The examples with significant activation often involve descriptions that focus on comparisons of lung volumes, atelectasis, or other lung findings between current and prior imaging studies. This is a distinctive pattern in radiological assessments, especially when evaluating changes or stability in the lung conditions over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4142824960576706,0.415,0.4205607476635514,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7015,latent_7015,2949,0.005898,0.006040702,9.248064,Findings focus on current analysis with little reliance on prior comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation typically feature absence or irrelevance of prior comparison, focusing instead on analyzing current findings without dependence on previous reports. This contrasts with lower activation levels where prior findings or comparisons are integral to the assessment.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.484375,0.31,100.0,100.0
+7016,latent_7016,2843,0.005686,0.008058648,6.7333245,Specific instruction to compare current images to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently specify instructions to describe radiological findings in the current images while explicitly comparing them to findings in previous or prior images. This involves using terms like ""comparison to the prior"" or ""compared to the previous"".",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7017,latent_7017,4142,0.008284,0.01076981,7.2618527,Emphasis on interval change and comparison with prior images.,"These examples focus on changes over time identified in imaging when compared with prior radiographs, especially focusing on interval developments such as tube placements, effusions, or opacities. They highlight analysis of serial images to evaluate stability, resolution, or progression of findings using comparison language of specific details like lines, effusions, or aeration.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7018,latent_7018,3477,0.006954,0.008828055,4.5980854,Emphasis on comparing findings over time with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed comparisons between current and prior frontal images, emphasizing changes or stability in findings over time, often related to specific pathologies or patient histological status. References to changes in conditions, devices, or positioning related to prior examinations are consistently highlighted.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7019,latent_7019,3569,0.007138,0.009796537,6.7320404,Inclusion of specific comparison details in radiology findings with implications for diagnosis.,"The high activation examples involve findings descriptions that include a mandatory comparative analysis in the reports, focusing on changes or constants in imaging findings, particularly with additional clarification of implications for diagnosis or treatment.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4606741573033708,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7020,latent_7020,32114,0.064228,0.052520245,5.428199,Interval comparison of imaging findings.,"The pattern involves describing the current findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, specifically noting interval changes or stability in findings between the current images and previous sets. This is common in radiology reports to assess changes over time, using terms like 'compared to', 'stable', or 'interval'.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5078125,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7021,latent_7021,4532,0.009064,0.0100835515,5.0327053,Focus on generating descriptive findings based on provided images.,"The examples with higher activation levels revolve around instructions to provide or identify descriptions of findings, comparisons, or insights based on the provided current and prior images. Instructions typically involve summarizing information from previous reports and observing changes or specifics in new images as formulated by the assistant.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4241898148148148,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.85,100.0,99.0
+7022,latent_7022,2439,0.004878,0.0070324535,5.0513287,Prompts asking for detailed comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently prompt comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifically asking for descriptions of findings with the prior image. This involves highlighting differences or stability in medical imaging contexts across timepoints.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7023,latent_7023,4517,0.009034,0.008758784,3.864492,Assessment of stable or repositioned medical devices on imaging.,"The examples with high activation include cases where devices like catheters, tubes, or pacemakers remain stable or are repositioned between imaging sessions. These reports emphasize stability or precise repositioning of devices over changes in patients' pathology.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.5733333333333334,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7024,latent_7024,3769,0.007538,0.007737717,5.777727,Significant findings that are stable or unchanged on comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve scenarios where prior imaging comparisons indicate either stable, unchanged findings or slight, non-concerning variations in the presence of noteworthy details like edema, pleural effusion, or atelectasis. These tend to include descriptions of imaging details that show something significant but are non-concerning upon comparison, often noting unchanged positions or mild changes that suggest stability rather than an acute issue.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.44,0.33,100.0,100.0
+7025,latent_7025,3218,0.006436,0.007288616,5.7201185,Lack of significant interval change or stable findings in imaging comparison.,"The examples present descriptions of findings that are compared to prior or current imaging depending on the available data. Specifically, examples with higher activation describe either a lack of significant change or stabilization of the condition without any acute or progressive findings across various imaging modalities, illustrating that only notable changes or lack thereof are highlighted in the reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7026,latent_7026,5240,0.01048,0.011163262,5.428796,Persistently noted retrocardiac opacity or nodules.,"The examples consistently mention findings of retrocardiac opacity or nodular formations behind the heart within the lung fields, often associated with atelectasis or other processes, in radiological examinations involving both frontal and prior image comparisons.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.622114515731537,0.655,0.8780487804878049,0.36,100.0,100.0
+7027,latent_7027,8010,0.01602,0.009817773,3.785838,"Image comparison indicating change, improvement or stability.","The examples with high activation levels involve comparison to previous images and indicate changes in the current images, typically improvements or resolution of findings. These examples also frequently include stable findings or unchanged conditions when compared to prior images.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7028,latent_7028,3727,0.007454,0.008866498,5.929211,Low lung volumes and related findings.,"High activation levels are associated with descriptions of radiographic observations that mention low lung volumes and the consequent effects, such as bronchovascular crowding or accentuation of cardiac silhouette, indicating a notable pattern of clinical interest or radiological significance.",0.9198717948717948,0.92,0.8888888888888888,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7546995068959474,0.755,0.7383177570093458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7029,latent_7029,42573,0.085146,0.044267744,4.2552295,Unchanged or stabilized findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently refer to findings that are unchanged or stabilized compared to previous imaging, such as unchanged presence of effusions, cardiomegaly, or consolidation. They include explicit references to no interval changes or improvements, indicating follow-ups or monitoring of previous conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.6265060240963856,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7030,latent_7030,4107,0.008214,0.0057220897,6.0993853,Detailed comparison of imaging findings relative to clinical indications.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently show some form of effort or process to draw conclusions from the images, especially involving matching or comparison based on given findings. They particularly involve detailed documentation or extraction of insights concerning patient indications, often using terminology associated with comparative analysis of imaging findings.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7031,latent_7031,3336,0.006672,0.009270824,5.082349,Imagery described without referencing prior comparisons.,"High activation examples often have no prior comparisons available. These instances focus on clear documentation of radiological findings without prior benchmarks, which emphasizes the description of current observable data alone.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.6166666666666667,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7032,latent_7032,7105,0.01421,0.016571509,3.5479803,Use of frontal and lateral views with comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the use of both frontal and lateral views of chest imaging in the radiology reports, with a notable effort to provide a comparison to prior frontal images. High activation examples consistently include detailed findings and impressions for these types of image comparisons.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3995943204868154,0.445,0.4645161290322581,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7033,latent_7033,21348,0.042696,0.028053625,4.944867,"Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, focusing on minor changes or stable findings.","Examples with higher activation levels reflect detailed radiological analyses based on changes or stabilities observed over time, particularly when no drastic alterations were noted between the current and prior images. These examples highlight subtle differences that inform patient management decisions, using comparative statements alongside specific unchanged observations.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7034,latent_7034,21012,0.042024,0.030925924,5.4372544,Case comparisons to prior exams with specific findings.,"This set has higher activations when examples involve direct comparisons with previous images, indicating the model's focus on analyzing longitudinal changes or stability in imaging studies over time, including specific instructions to compare findings with prior images.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7035,latent_7035,12610,0.02522,0.017312797,6.045265,Comparisons with prior imaging to assess for changes.,"Instances with higher activation levels consistently ask for comparisons with prior imaging reports and focus on the consistency or changes observed in these serial evaluations, often with clinical implications for stability or improvement. Phrases such as 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', and 'from prior' indicate this trend.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4005994005994006,0.415,0.4351145038167939,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7036,latent_7036,3503,0.007006,0.00871657,5.1226544,Stability or significant changes in pathology compared to prior studies.,The examples with higher activation levels all involve either findings of stability or changes in pathology when compared to previous imaging. These are often followed by specific descriptions or evaluations. Reports without prior comparisons or without significant changes tend to have lower activation levels.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4225603173407647,0.425,0.4137931034482758,0.36,100.0,100.0
+7037,latent_7037,5733,0.011466,0.01240449,4.290106,Comparative assessment with prior imaging for interval changes.,"The patterns with high activation levels refer to detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies to identify any interval changes or stability of existing conditions, which is a hallmark of monitoring disease progression. These reports frequently use phrases like 'compared to prior', 'interval change', 'unchanged', and refer to specific dates of previous studies or 'prior image'.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4168797953964194,0.43,0.4461538461538462,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7038,latent_7038,7665,0.01533,0.015852889,5.0161777,Comparison or interpretation of radiological changes over time.,"The examples predominantly show descriptions involving interpretation or comparison of current and prior imaging, particularly focusing on change or stability in radiological findings with direct mention of the prior report or comparison. Terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'resolution', 'decreased', 'progressed', and specific indication of prior examinations for comparison are evident.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4087213599408721,0.44,0.4589041095890411,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7039,latent_7039,35905,0.07181,0.04055767,7.4915853,Evaluation of tube and line placement in radiological images.,"These examples describe the evaluation, placement, or repositioning of tubes and lines such as PICCs, NG tubes, or endotracheal tubes, often providing details about their positioning relative to anatomical landmarks. This pattern is common in radiological reports reviewing the position or changes in medical instrumentation within patients.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.694545831068313,0.705,0.5098039215686274,0.8524590163934426,61.0,139.0
+7040,latent_7040,9162,0.018324,0.016562575,5.225397,Comparison to prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss imaging findings from two distinct time points, provide explicit comparisons to prior examinations, and track changes in clinical status or resolution of findings. This pattern focuses on temporal comparison and diagnostic continuity, often crucial in monitoring ongoing conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7041,latent_7041,7449,0.014898,0.011561895,2.9389777,Reference to previous imaging reports for comparison.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to the ""prior report"" in the context of providing a description or comparison. This pattern often appears in radiology reports where findings from new images are reviewed in light of historical data, emphasizing continuity and change over time.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4800309768779732,0.53,0.5185185185185185,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7042,latent_7042,4238,0.008476,0.012904583,5.588626,Assessment of interval change between current and prior imaging.,"Several examples explicitly compare current and prior radiological images to assess changes, focusing on interval changes or stability, such as removing tubes, increasing lung volumes, or altered presence of effusions. These changes are considered significant findings in clinical practice for follow-up assessments.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4242947610823258,0.425,0.4299065420560747,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7043,latent_7043,2654,0.005308,0.007858496,6.5272336,Comparison to prior imaging studies using specific language.,"All examples with high activation levels involve language noting the comparison of findings to previous imaging studies, which is a key component of radiology reporting for assessing progression, stability, or resolution of findings.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7044,latent_7044,38070,0.07614,0.065104686,4.793827,Emphasis on detailed comparison with prior images showing changes or stability.,"The model shows activation for descriptions that specifically call for comparison between a current image and previous images, emphasizing findings such as stability, changes, or persistence of certain conditions. This suggests that the activation is linked to the presence of both radiological findings and direct comparison with prior images to assess these findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7045,latent_7045,1978,0.003956,0.004550425,5.8924932,Observations of low lung volumes in chest imaging.,"These examples all note observations of decreased or low lung volumes in radiographic imaging. This is a specific and common finding in many thoracic evaluations, often associated with additional alterations in bronchovascular markings and potential impacts on heart and mediastinal structures.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7144217039504998,0.715,0.7362637362637363,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7046,latent_7046,6709,0.013418,0.010841708,3.0825112,Explicit comparison to prior radiology studies.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently refer to a description of radiological findings, with explicit comparisons to prior images or reports, suggesting a focus on the phrase 'compared to the prior'. This pattern is pivotal in determining changes over time in patients' conditions, which is often critical in medical imaging interpretation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7047,latent_7047,3794,0.007588,0.012435667,5.969564,Emphasis on interval changes and comparisons with previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently utilize comparison phrases along with indications of interval or interval changes. They emphasize a focus on documenting changes or stability in findings between current and prior imaging, prioritizing detailed comparisons in the clinical context provided.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7048,latent_7048,10069,0.020138,0.016568026,9.059242,Focus on stability of medical devices or surgical modifications in imaging.,"The pattern that emerges is primarily focused on the stability or lack of change in medical devices or surgical modifications, as highlighted by repeated references to the unchanged position of devices like tracheostomy tubes, endotracheal tubes, and surgical clips. These elements are significant indicators of consistency across radiological examinations.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6203703703703703,0.7052631578947368,95.0,105.0
+7049,latent_7049,12213,0.024426,0.0126909455,4.059141,References to medical devices' changes or positions in imaging comparison.,"The highly activated cases consistently include references to changes in specific medical devices' position or function as described in radiology reports, such as removal or placement of tubes, catheters, or other devices. These references are central to the reports as they are medically significant changes in patient management or status.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6157688465380773,0.625,0.6811594202898551,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7050,latent_7050,4166,0.008332,0.006586827,3.6844416,Evaluation of interval change and device placement on comparison images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve subsequent imaging showing changes (or lack of change) in conditions, particularly focusing on placement of lines or tubes, differentiation of pulmonary conditions (like effusions, edema, atelectasis). An emphasis on the observation of any moderate to minimal changes in radiological findings is consistently noted across these examples.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5754774481917919,0.5778894472361809,0.5701754385964912,0.65,100.0,99.0
+7051,latent_7051,26644,0.053288,0.09320624,5.5521708,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette in chest image reports.,"The highly activated examples often describe findings in the chest image where the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours are reported as within normal limits or unchanged, often amidst descriptions of other lung conditions or devices, without highlighting pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation. These reports focus on stability and lack of acute changes in specific cardiac and mediastinal structures.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6621533823644066,0.675,0.6258992805755396,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7052,latent_7052,4786,0.009572,0.015149497,3.9809616,Comparing current imaging to prior without available prior report.,"The highly activated examples involve requests for descriptions of radiology findings in comparison to prior imaging, where the prior report is either not available or explicitly labeled as N/A. This pattern indicates a focus on examining current changes in imaging without reliance on previous reports.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6129302228266555,0.63,0.5915492957746479,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7053,latent_7053,19205,0.03841,0.02175033,7.199043,Stable cardiac or mediastinal contours over time.,"These examples mostly involve radiological reports discussing the stability or lack of significant change in cardiac and mediastinal contours, often with elements such as heart size or specific anatomical features like vascular engorgement or pleural effusion, indicating a consistent and unchanged condition over time. This stability is commonly expressed in descriptions of X-ray findings compared across different times.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.4387755102040816,0.5308641975308642,81.0,119.0
+7054,latent_7054,6416,0.012832,0.009634491,5.0843987,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples emphasize findings that are consistent with a previous imaging report, noting stable or unchanged presentations compared to prior exams. This is often expressed in radiology reports by stating ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" or ""as seen previously,"" which signifies a lack of change from earlier observations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5121951219512195,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7055,latent_7055,4295,0.00859,0.010284499,3.1485906,"Evaluation of radiological findings compared to prior images, noting stability or change.","These examples focus on the changes in the current study as compared to prior images, identifying stability or change in specific conditions or features. The pattern recognizes terms like 'unchanged', 'redemonstrated', and 'improvement', which indicate evaluations based on historical comparisons.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7056,latent_7056,4702,0.009404,0.008336408,5.444939,Descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images with context provided.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently request for a description of findings in comparison to prior images, indicating a need to specifically describe changes or stability of findings between the given and previous images. This suggests a pattern focused on the analysis of image findings, considering the context and indications provided.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.4285714285714285,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7057,latent_7057,3372,0.006744,0.008197875,5.3490286,Detailed descriptions of changes compared to prior imaging.,"The activated examples focus on describing detailed changes and comparisons in radiological investigations with respect to prior reports, specifically noting interval changes or stability of certain medical conditions, devices, or anatomical features over time. This includes specific observations related to cardiac silhouette, pulmonary features, and other relevant medical conditions described in context to prior imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7058,latent_7058,8491,0.016982,0.00957442,4.418077,Stable cardiothoracic post-surgical findings without acute changes.,"The highly activated examples feature thoracic findings such as sternotomy wires, mediastinal clips, or pacemakers combined with no acute pathology like consolidation or pneumothorax. These elements suggest a stable cardiothoracic surgical history without new acute issues, explaining the pattern of activation.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.6572235104345197,0.66,0.6951219512195121,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7059,latent_7059,10731,0.021462,0.013092148,3.408687,Emphasis on changes or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently described changes or comparisons with prior imaging, showing trends, stability, or progression in radiological findings. This aligns with a pattern of valuing detailed comparative analysis over static observations.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7060,latent_7060,9907,0.019814,0.022023868,6.537213,Interval or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently reference evaluations where the comparison is made between current and prior imaging, focusing on interval changes or unchanged conditions, often indicating stability or length of time without change in findings. This is reflective of monitoring chronic conditions or devices (such as tubes or catheters) over time.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4611064944222004,0.465,0.4578313253012048,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7061,latent_7061,5601,0.011202,0.008291833,4.6863904,Clear lungs without focal abnormality or effusion.,"These examples include findings that describe lungs as 'clear' or without pathological consolidation, edema, or pleural effusion. The absence of focal abnormalities in the lungs is noted across multiple examinations, suggesting a pattern focused on identifying clear lungs amid concerns for potential issues like pneumonia or edema.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6635786196680977,0.665,0.6896551724137931,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7062,latent_7062,47531,0.095062,0.058384024,6.6692686,Comparative findings and analysis between current and prior images.,"The presence of a consistent reference to a 'prior frontal image' or 'previous study', along with detailed observations and conclusions about changes or lack thereof in the current findings compared to past images, indicates a strong pattern of comparative analysis between current and prior medical imaging data.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5510480054090602,0.585,0.5548387096774193,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7063,latent_7063,6187,0.012374,0.01544215,4.2956915,Compare current and prior images for interval changes or stability.,"These examples describe findings from current and prior images, focusing on any interval changes or stability. They follow the common radiological practice of comparing current imaging studies to prior ones to assess disease progression, improvement, or stability, often emphasizing unchanged findings or improvements. This pattern often involves using diction such as 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change', or stating findings relative to previous examinations.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7064,latent_7064,3314,0.006628,0.009791525,5.269293,Detailed clinical history with specific demographics.,"In the examples with high activation levels, the radiology reports include a detailed clinical history associated with specific demographic details such as age, gender, and medical condition. This pattern is likely indicative of the model recognizing the importance of context-rich introductions in medical imaging reports.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6098401357959008,0.615,0.5934959349593496,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7065,latent_7065,29382,0.058764,0.032977592,5.7488694,Interval changes in pleural effusions or lung opacities from prior.,"The focus is on cases where changes were noted on the new images compared to the prior, implying an interval development or change, rather than stability or unchanged findings. Descriptions frequently mention pleural effusions, atelectasis, or other conditions that have altered over time.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6995238216495633,0.705,0.7808219178082192,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7066,latent_7066,15811,0.031622,0.022909217,5.3603973,Comparison with prior studies emphasizing stability or minor changes.,"This set of examples primarily focuses on comparing current image findings with prior studies, often emphasizing stability or noting minor changes over time. The examples highlight disease states that are stable, minor increases in findings, or unchanged pathologies despite prior disease or interventions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4895405865278751,0.49,0.4893617021276595,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7067,latent_7067,6079,0.012158,0.010108633,7.3357677,Presence of interval changes in findings compared to prior study.,"The pattern is identified in reports where findings include interval changes, regardless of their nature, noted when comparing current and prior radiological studies. Examples with higher activation levels assess interval changes in findings, indicating progressive or static disease states using descriptors such as 'unchanged', 'new', or 'worsened', as excellent samples of awareness of temporal change.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3743148212519051,0.415,0.3265306122448979,0.16,100.0,100.0
+7068,latent_7068,4057,0.008114,0.0068961866,3.8592768,Imaging reports focused on current findings without explicit prior comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently do not provide specific comparisons with prior imaging in their findings, focusing instead on the interpretation of current images with given indications and technique. Lower activation examples provide detailed direct comparisons and changes noted from prior studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.525,0.21,100.0,100.0
+7069,latent_7069,3445,0.00689,0.009248747,7.04175,Providing comparative descriptions between current and prior radiology images.,"These examples consistently refer to providing detailed descriptions or findings from current radiographic images in direct comparison with those from prior imaging studies. This is indicated by the use of language directing for descriptions of findings relative to ""prior frontal image"" or ""comparison to prior study"" more explicitly in the context of radilogical studies.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.475177304964539,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7070,latent_7070,4628,0.009256,0.010827959,5.089999,Description of findings compared to previous frontal and lateral images.,"The examples that show higher activation levels involve the analysis of multiple images (current and/or prior), often as a series of frontal and lateral views, with the findings explicitly compared to prior imaging. Phrases indicating this comparison are frequently noted, such as 'in comparison', 'compared to previous', and specific dates of prior imaging are often mentioned.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7071,latent_7071,5443,0.010886,0.009644225,6.7504807,Highlighting positioning and changes in medical devices relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels mention the presence and positioning of devices such as pacemakers, catheters, chest tubes, and surgical clips. They describe the stability or change in position of these devices in the context of comparing to prior images. This pattern gets a high activation likely because documentation and tracking of such medical devices relative to previous imaging is crucial in radiology practice.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5187795842766001,0.5276381909547738,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,99.0
+7072,latent_7072,3887,0.007774,0.011055264,5.6827264,"Comparison of current with prior imaging, highlighting consistent findings.","The activation levels highlight a pattern of analyzing chest images in comparison with prior studies, focusing on reporting consistent or unchanged findings. This pattern is common when interpreting radiological data that requires historical context, particularly in evaluating stability or changes in chronic conditions, emphasizing unchanged or resolved symptoms.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4615384615384615,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7073,latent_7073,3065,0.00613,0.0087850485,5.9658394,Image comparisons indicating stability or specific changes.,Examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently involve cases where assessment of new and prior chest images are performed in context of either clarification or specific indication queries leading to a comparison process that underscores stability or change in conditions.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4563106796116505,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7074,latent_7074,4387,0.008774,0.0043357154,2.9563804,Focus on comparison details in findings and impressions.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to changes or stability between current and prior imaging studies, illustrating comparisons specifically in the findings and impressions sections with explicit interval descriptions, showing a focus on detecting changes or no significant changes between images.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7075,latent_7075,5193,0.010386,0.007538417,3.621097,Comparison with prior imaging and interval changes.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation levels commonly involve the evaluation of imaging findings relative to prior studies, indicating changes or stability over time. This pattern is typical in radiology reports when observations are made against a backdrop of previous imaging results, leading to assessments such as 'unchanged' or 'increased opacities.'",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4138129712668153,0.415,0.4220183486238532,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7076,latent_7076,44812,0.089624,0.06666208,5.283063,Examples describe interval changes from previous studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to direct changes over time when viewing current images compared to prior images. These often include specific changes in conditions such as improvement or worsening of findings, such as pneumonia or cardiomegaly. Examples with zero activations often mention conditions lacking significant interval changes or lack comparative context altogether.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.591304347826087,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7077,latent_7077,6873,0.013746,0.011677425,6.6912894,"Focus on tube positioning, often with precise measurements from the carina.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention either endotracheal or nasogastric tubes and their precise positioning relative to the carina, including details such as distance in centimeters. These are critical parameters often assessed to ensure correct placement in chest radiography after procedures or in critical care monitoring.",0.7887931034482758,0.7959183673469388,0.9375,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.7129361413398053,0.725,0.8813559322033898,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7078,latent_7078,5933,0.011866,0.007455254,5.108023,Comparative radiological findings highlighting change or stability.,"Reports with higher activation levels frequently involve describing images and directly comparing them with prior films, focusing on any changes or stability in the patient's condition. These entries typically include explicit differences observed between the current and previous studies, such as resolved or unchanged opacification, or new effusions.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3760983732547713,0.3787878787878788,0.3928571428571428,0.4444444444444444,99.0,99.0
+7079,latent_7079,3789,0.007578,0.010178281,4.5199094,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe multiple views, typically both frontal and lateral, but also involve comparing the current images to prior frontal images. This mixture of comprehensive imaging and comparison to previous records characterizes the observed pattern as emphasized in the examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7080,latent_7080,18263,0.036526,0.030964524,5.3468285,Comparison describing unchanged findings or specific important changes.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight instances where the report mentions both current and previous imaging but emphasizes on either unchanged findings or specific notable changes, without additional detailed post-operative or treatment descriptions influencing the overall conclusion.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7081,latent_7081,7809,0.015618,0.014032844,5.3270497,Descriptions indicating stable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes with no acute cardiopulmonary findings.,"Examples with higher activation consistently describe chest imaging studies using phrases that indicate a lack of acute findings or cardiopulmonary issues, such as ""no acute cardiopulmonary process"" or ""the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes are unremarkable."" These findings emphasize the stability and non-emergent nature of the patient's condition in the context of radiology reports.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.8275862068965517,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7229064039408868,0.73,0.6742424242424242,0.89,100.0,100.0
+7082,latent_7082,3867,0.007734,0.0075717815,6.4447536,Descriptions emphasize interval change or stability in imaging.,"High activation samples consistently included an interval change between current and prior imaging, especially focused on comparing physical changes or placements of medical devices. Descriptions often highlighted these changes, suggesting the model detects reports emphasizing interval progress or stability across multiple evaluations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3834315318976026,0.3869346733668342,0.3647058823529411,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+7083,latent_7083,4963,0.009926,0.010463472,4.131825,Comparison of current and prior images in radiological analysis.,"These examples all involve radiological reports that provide a description or analysis specifically in light of prior imaging studies using terms like 'compared to the prior', 'comparison', and 'since the prior'. This direct referencing is key as it indicates the documentation of changes over time or stability, which is a common pattern in radiology reporting.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7084,latent_7084,2696,0.005392,0.010654547,5.721787,Explicit prompt to compare current and prior images.,"The highest activation levels correspond to studies where there is a clear directive to compare current images with prior ones explicitly, either through the prompt or the instructions provided, to identify changes or to update the status of known conditions.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5235356937484597,0.565,0.5408805031446541,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7085,latent_7085,4222,0.008444,0.008965123,5.10193,Focus on interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on acute or concerning changes noted between current and prior images, highlighting differences that could indicate progression, resolution, or change in a pathological condition, seen in phrases like 'has improved', 'unchanged', 'more discrete', 'no change', emphasizing interval changes and observations.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3997599039615846,0.4,0.3958333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7086,latent_7086,3723,0.007446,0.011181035,4.901962,Detailed assessment of interval changes and subtle lung or mediastinal findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve interpretation where slight or moderate changes are identified from prior imaging. The reports include added details on specific conditions or subtle changes, such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or vascular congestion, often balanced against earlier imaging findings and potentially altered by technique or patient conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3869440130356188,0.3919597989949748,0.3658536585365853,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+7087,latent_7087,4593,0.009186,0.0095385155,5.0041428,Explicit instruction to compare current findings with prior image.,"The presence or absence of the phrase 'Provided a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' appears consistently in examples with a higher activation level. This phrase explicitly instructs to make a comparison, despite the presence of prior images in both high and low activation level cases, the presence of this specific phrase correlates with higher activations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7088,latent_7088,4288,0.008576,0.0076331506,3.8829112,Request for comparison to prior image focusing on interval changes or stability.,"High activation examples consistently ask for descriptions comparing two or more images, often indicating a need for specific interval changes or stability in radiological findings for conditions like pneumonia, edema, or pleural effusion.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5217391304347826,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7089,latent_7089,6635,0.01327,0.013362121,5.7139826,High activation is triggered when tasked with complex interpretative tasks involving image comparisons.,"High activation levels are paired with questions that include a request for generating a description of findings based on a comparison with prior imaging, which involves analysis and synthesis of information rather than simply checking for changes. Such tasks likely exhibit higher cognitive demands for the model, aligning with the activation.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3523133676888851,0.425,0.4550898203592814,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7090,latent_7090,6432,0.012864,0.007956876,2.867326,Detailed comparisons of current and prior imaging indicating interval changes or stability.,"The examples describe radiology reports indicating comparison with previous images and note changes or stability. These examples use phrases like 'in comparison with previous', 'remains unchanged', or 'since prior', indicating detailed observations of interval changes which could be related to new, unchanged, or resolved findings.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6098401357959008,0.615,0.5934959349593496,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7091,latent_7091,4224,0.008448,0.009737943,4.012775,"Lack of explicit prior reports, instructions to describe comparison.","High activation levels are consistently associated with the absence of explicit prior reports, and phrases such as 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' are also prevalent, indicating that the task requires generating a description from the existing and prior images rather than interpreting a provided prior report.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4450642180840413,0.515,0.5087719298245614,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7092,latent_7092,3590,0.00718,0.009670441,7.2405643,Emphasis on findings being 'unchanged' compared to prior imaged state.,"These examples often emphasize specific descriptions of imaging findings and their lack of significant change over time when compared to previous images. The pattern is connected with the task of tracking potentially acute and chronic conditions, emphasizing an absence of progression or deterioration.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4060669978629513,0.465,0.4054054054054054,0.15,100.0,100.0
+7093,latent_7093,5104,0.010208,0.010514359,6.190319,Effects of patient positioning on image interpretation.,"These examples frequently reference adjustments in patient positioning or orientation affecting imaging outcomes or interpretations, particularly in relation to chest radiographs. The pattern is notable in discussions of how variations can alter shadows or contours observed in images (such as mediastinum positions), leading to changes in the interpretation of findings.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3890719616955358,0.4522613065326633,0.3714285714285714,0.13,100.0,99.0
+7094,latent_7094,15664,0.031328,0.026231214,5.682581,Descriptive analysis of changes in lung or focal abnormalities from prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples emphasize clear descriptions of specific changes in lung conditions or identifiable focal abnormalities, whether resolved, unchanged, or slightly progressive when compared to prior imaging. This recurring assessment focuses on directly observable changes over time based on comparative analysis.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.5277777777777778,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7095,latent_7095,151893,0.303786,0.22265367,7.0155993,Interval comparison revealing unchanged or resolved findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature a comparison with prior imaging, focusing on either unchanged findings or interval changes. Common patterns include noting similar or resolved issues, such as stable cardiomegaly, unchanged atelectasis, or diminution of pleural effusion, emphasizing observation over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.636123527021536,0.6381909547738693,0.6666666666666666,0.56,100.0,99.0
+7096,latent_7096,5458,0.010916,0.012466246,5.2844586,Radiology reports using historical image comparisons to assess stability or change.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe changes or findings by comparing current imaging with previous reports or images, and the comparisons result in interval changes, stability, or lack of significant findings. This pattern emphasizes the use of historical image comparison to assess changes over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5550674438906255,0.605,0.562874251497006,0.94,100.0,100.0
+7097,latent_7097,13496,0.026992,0.022379076,3.4745762,Unremarkable cardiomediastinal structures irrespective of indication.,"Almost all samples that have activations equal to 5.0 or greater describe findings that are unremarkable or unchanged, especially in the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, despite various clinical indications or symptoms described in the indications section. Descriptions often include phrases like 'unremarkable', 'no change', or 'normal'.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5675675675675675,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7098,latent_7098,6709,0.013418,0.011421281,4.151576,Observations on medical device positioning relative to prior imaging.,"In the examples with high activation, there is a clear pattern of description focusing on observations related to medical equipment positioning or changes, such as tubes or catheters, relative to a previous state. This typically involves describing interval changes, removals, repositioning, and stability of indwelling medical devices, often in direct comparison to prior imaging, which is a frequent focus in follow-up radiological studies.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.5733333333333334,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7099,latent_7099,2797,0.005594,0.0076698367,6.350443,Interpretation emphasizing comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the need for comparison between current and prior images. These cases frequently involve evaluating changes over time or differences between studies, interpreted to assess new findings or confirm stability, which indicates a focus on ongoing monitoring or new evaluations in the context of patient management.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7100,latent_7100,11634,0.023268,0.010967216,2.7884588,New or interval changes in lung opacity or nodules on comparison imaging.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve descriptions of new or interval changes in lung opacities or nodules when compared to prior imaging studies, particularly opacities suggestive of pneumonia, atelectasis, or similar pathologies. This suggests that the pattern being recognized is the detection of changes indicative of acute or evolving disease processes, particularly in the pulmonary setting.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.6290322580645161,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7101,latent_7101,11117,0.022234,0.020433985,7.62938,Focus on positioning and changes in medical tubes and lines relative to previous images.,"Prompts related to comparison of findings often involve evaluation of changes in specific lines and tubes, particularly the position or presence of endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, and enteric tubes. These elements are frequently described in relation to their safety and proper positioning, making them consistent focal points that align with changes over time as noted in prior imaging studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.6363636363636364,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7102,latent_7102,12835,0.02567,0.013128659,5.477104,Comparison to previous imaging with unchanged or minor interval changes noted.,"The examples consistently highlight comparisons or intervals between prior radiology images and current findings, emphasizing either stability or minor changes between them. Descriptions often include the phrase 'in comparison with the prior study' followed by observations of unchanged findings or noting slight deviations from the previous images.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.4807692307692308,0.625,80.0,120.0
+7103,latent_7103,3901,0.007802,0.009606973,5.100915,"Intervention-related changes or stability (e.g., tube placements/removals).","These examples highlight a pattern where the findings describe changes or stability in line, tube, or catheter placements compared to prior imaging or within the context of current clinical interventions.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3274485077763766,0.36,0.25,0.14,100.0,100.0
+7104,latent_7104,5315,0.01063,0.02025755,5.7413697,"Detailed comparison to prior images or reports, describing changes or stability.","The examples with highest activation levels involve comparison of current imaging with past images or reports, emphasizing changes or stability over time in the findings. Such descriptions are key in radiological studies for monitoring progression or resolution of conditions, indicated by phrases like 'comparison with prior' or dates of previous studies.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.2826903903673594,0.2914572864321608,0.2307692307692307,0.1818181818181818,99.0,100.0
+7105,latent_7105,32278,0.064556,0.03377036,2.2986023,Analysis involving multiple views (frontal and lateral) or prior image comparison.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve multiple views being analyzed (frontal and lateral images) or reference to prior imaging data, often leading to changes or lack of change in specific findings. This contextual comparison across multiple images provides richer data, influencing activation.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.5208333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4018069131386636,0.515,0.5080213903743316,0.95,100.0,100.0
+7106,latent_7106,6423,0.012846,0.008186057,5.392258,Explicit comparison with prior images included.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include the task of comparing current radiological findings with prior images and documenting any changes or stability, which is frequently part of the radiology report workflows where prior imaging is explicitly referenced for comparison.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5372093023255814,0.5778894472361809,0.5471698113207547,0.8787878787878788,99.0,100.0
+7107,latent_7107,76093,0.152186,0.09281778,5.592674,Consistently unchanged imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"These examples feature consistently unchanged findings in comparison to prior images. This pattern is common in radiological assessments where stability is noted between consecutive imaging studies, indicating no progression or resolution of conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6055226824457594,0.615,0.6666666666666666,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7108,latent_7108,2954,0.005908,0.008191348,3.766702,Concise reporting of normal findings in chest radiographs.,"Examples with high activation consistently use concise reporting of normal findings on various aspects of the chest radiograph. This typically includes clear lungs, normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, and absence of effusion or pneumothorax, emphasizing brevity and focus on no abnormality.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.8518518518518519,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7782034479282185,0.78,0.8414634146341463,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7109,latent_7109,24557,0.049114,0.0275589,4.557314,Normal or unchanged cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,Higher activation levels correspond to examples where radiological findings of normal or unchanged pulmonary and cardiac features are reported in comparison to prior imaging studies. This suggests a pattern focusing on stability or lack of progression of features from previous exams.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5222222222222223,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7110,latent_7110,8206,0.016412,0.013046921,5.5279546,"Comparison with prior images, noting device positions and anatomical changes.","This pattern involves comparing current imaging findings with those from previous studies. Many examples refer explicitly to previous imaging, noting stability or change over time, especially concerning the placement and condition of medical devices like tubes and catheters, or anatomical changes identified.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5175438596491229,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7111,latent_7111,8338,0.016676,0.011516204,4.1081367,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images.,"The examples consistently emphasize evaluations made in the context of a comparison between current observations and prior imaging. Specific attention is given to changes, or lack thereof, observed over time, indicating stability or the need for further monitoring, often using explicit referential terms.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7112,latent_7112,40686,0.081372,0.040338136,3.8439438,Interval changes in medical device positioning.,"High activation levels correspond to cases describing changes in medical device placement, such as ET tubes or NG tubes, based on comparison with prior images. The focus is on interval changes related to support and monitoring equipment.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6294266551841123,0.645,0.7457627118644068,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7113,latent_7113,4542,0.009084,0.011143887,3.667307,Comparisons between current and prior radiographic images.,"The pattern is the reference to evaluating current images in comparison to prior radiographs or reports, which is explicitly mentioned in most examples with high activation levels.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4714285714285714,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7114,latent_7114,18597,0.037194,0.032698635,7.812544,Comparison of cardiac enlargement to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels often discuss a comparison between current and prior imaging, specifically noting the cardiac silhouette enlargement or other cardiopulmonary features such as pulmonary congestion or effusions, and emphasizing changes or stability in these features.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6010230179028133,0.61,0.6571428571428571,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7115,latent_7115,6432,0.012864,0.026348406,5.94077,"Complex findings compared consistently with prior imaging, often indicating stable conditions.","These examples mostly contain observations described as comparisons with prior imaging, involving complex findings and detailed radiological implications. The activation seems high when findings are stable, similar, or have specific unchanged conditions across multiple prior studies, usually indicating lack of significant development in patient's condition, but providing systematic documentation of the stable state.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5202385484075625,0.5226130653266332,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,99.0
+7116,latent_7116,3719,0.007438,0.012918504,6.411556,Radiology study findings compared to prior images with specific temporal changes or stability noted.,"Activations are high for examples that discuss findings in comparison to prior imaging, which is a specific requirement of the task prompt. This pattern emphasizes descriptions that evaluate changes or stability over time, as seen in follow-up examinations, and frequently focuses on describing specific differences, similarities, or absence of new events as compared to earlier imaging.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4238332623562714,0.425,0.4311926605504587,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7117,latent_7117,30323,0.060646,0.031990968,4.5805783,Descriptions of changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels include cases where detailed descriptions of changes between the current imaging and previous studies are present. This involves noting stability, improvements, or the resolution of identified conditions across the comparative studies, which is a significant focus of the assistant's task.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.496,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7118,latent_7118,4068,0.008136,0.009336482,8.223782,Focus on description of findings compared to prior images.,"Activations are higher when the request involves providing descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior images, even when explicit prior reports are either absent or minimally provided. This suggests that the focus of the underlying task is on identifying changes or comparisons related to imaging studies without substantial reliance on prior data content.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7119,latent_7119,2330,0.00466,0.0056491448,4.966415,Findings comparison with prior radiographic imaging.,"The examples involve comparing current radiographic image findings to previous images, often implying further evaluation or management. This is common practice in radiology, especially when evaluating the progression or stability of findings, and is indicated in the commands to describe findings in relation to the prior images and phrasing like 'compared to the previous'.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4676258992805755,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7120,latent_7120,6041,0.012082,0.010599421,3.7222655,Frequent use of comparison with prior radiological images.,"The examples with high activation focus on descriptions in radiology reports that explicitly detail the radiographic findings while drawing direct comparisons to prior images. They include descriptors of findings that have remained stable, deteriorated, or improved over time, reflecting the effectiveness of the comparative analysis language pattern.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4891237127261971,0.525,0.5163398692810458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7121,latent_7121,5063,0.010126,0.01259909,6.8815856,"Comparison focusing on interval change, especially related to catheters or tubes.","These examples involve a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on interval changes, particularly related to tubing, catheters, or surgical findings. The descriptions consistently discuss whether tubes are removed, changed, or unchanged, and identify other consistent stable findings from previous reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5555555555555556,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7122,latent_7122,2130,0.00426,0.008855836,10.860171,Comparison with a prior frontal image in the findings description.,"The key feature in the examples exhibiting high activation is the presence or mention of a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, though not necessarily resulting in explicit findings about changes. Reports use terms like 'compared to prior', even when noting stable conditions or changes, which is the focus here rather than the findings themselves.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4279405861099959,0.43,0.4375,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7123,latent_7123,19517,0.039034,0.018323768,3.80305,Emphasis on interval change in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently center around observations where the current findings show either persistence or improvement compared to previous images. The reports emphasize interval change in findings such as atelectasis, pneumothorax resolution, or tube placement, suggesting a focus on change detection compared to prior studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7124,latent_7124,9950,0.0199,0.011378233,3.7070165,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with clear lungs and no focal consolidation.,Examples with high activation illustrate the absence of focal consolidation and that the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes are within normal limits across both provided images. This pattern often accompanies radiology descriptions of a normal or stable chest condition with no acute or severe disruptions.,0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7081320450885669,0.71,0.75,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7125,latent_7125,15193,0.030386,0.017221613,3.7257788,Comparison of interval changes in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the description and comparison of findings to prior imaging studies, particularly noting interval changes such as improvement, resolution, or stability in various radiological features. This pattern emphasizes tracking changes over time to determine clinical significance.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.5714285714285714,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7126,latent_7126,7396,0.014792,0.017789232,6.836391,Detailed comparison with prior imaging for interval changes or confirmation.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve the comparison of current radiological findings to those from recent or specific prior imaging, often detailing changes or lack thereof. The instances also frequently reference conditions needing to confirm positions or interval changes, both of which necessitate careful comparison with prior images.",0.4897959183673469,0.4897959183673469,0.48,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.4448750968968017,0.445,0.4432989690721649,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7127,latent_7127,2787,0.005574,0.010489841,6.1657424,"Findings compared to prior images, noting stability or changes over time.","The pattern involves comparison to prior images to describe stability or changes, with radiological findings focusing on pulmonary structures and mediastinal contour stability. These examples include reference to previous studies for benchmarking current observations, often noting continuity or changes over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4895405865278751,0.49,0.490566037735849,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7128,latent_7128,5051,0.010102,0.008322025,3.6752286,Comparison involving both current frontal and lateral images against prior images.,"The pattern observed in the examples with higher activation levels is the presence of both a prior frontal image and a lateral image for comparison, along with an explicit comparison or evaluation against the prior images. This pattern is consistent with thorough radiological assessments where multi-view imaging is compared to previous studies for a comprehensive analysis.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5303030303030303,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7129,latent_7129,2162,0.004324,0.0062207095,8.309364,High activation correlates with identified changes or abnormalities from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include specific abnormal findings or changes that are noted on current imaging that differ from previous studies, prompting further actions or considerations. These differences in the imaging results, particularly newly identified concerns or worsening conditions, trigger higher activations as they align with the model's focus.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7130,latent_7130,6347,0.012694,0.014525382,6.073538,Interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern here is descriptions or assessments that highlight interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior radiological images, especially with explicit mentions of alterations in devices, effusions, and other anatomical or pathological features. Despite the presence of comparison in all examples, the activation differentiates by focusing on specific detailed changes or stable observations over time, likely due to significant changes or lack thereof in the pathology that were more detailed or significant.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.462094227611469,0.4623115577889447,0.4660194174757281,0.48,100.0,99.0
+7131,latent_7131,5794,0.011588,0.012928722,5.516041,"Comparison with prior imaging studies, particularly where specific comparisons are mentioned.","These examples with high activations mention comparisons with prior radiographic or imaging studies, even if incomplete or partially documented. The pattern likely relates to emphasizing changes or the lack thereof in patient medical imaging over time, often marked by placeholders where explicit dates or previous studies should be.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4580152671755725,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7132,latent_7132,5804,0.011608,0.010171285,4.6233215,Use of structured language describing interval change in findings via comparison with prior radiographs.,"The activation levels for this pattern highlight cases where there is a structured report format focusing on the comparison between current and prior radiological examinations, specifically noting any interval changes, use of standard radiographic views (PA and lateral), and documenting findings based on comparisons to prior studies. This comparison yields high activation because it aligns with typical radiological assessments of change over time, rather than isolated observations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3760064412238325,0.38,0.3571428571428571,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7133,latent_7133,70380,0.14076,0.092649095,8.339066,Assessing interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activations involve descriptions of radiology findings in direct comparison with prior images, specifically noting changes such as stability, improvement, or worsening of specific conditions. These findings are compared to determine interval changes, which is a frequent focus when evaluating a patient's ongoing clinical status.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.4338235294117647,0.7195121951219512,82.0,118.0
+7134,latent_7134,22910,0.04582,0.025369795,6.405187,Comparative changes or stability in imaging findings are described.,"The high-activation examples involve situations where specific changes, stability, or improvements are identified from a comparative analysis of images, including mentions of past and current findings. These descriptions are ultimately used to verify the resolution or progress of conditions inferred from prior and subsequent images.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.4244604316546763,0.7972972972972973,74.0,126.0
+7135,latent_7135,5251,0.010502,0.018289063,5.127206,Instructions comparing current and prior radiographic images using multiple views with missing prior report details.,"Examples with high activations consistently include instructions to provide a description of current radiology findings compared to prior images, with a notable emphasis on the format of using multiple imaging views, including both current and prior images. These examples also frequently reference an absent or non-applicable prior report status.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4908321176235018,0.555,0.5321637426900585,0.91,100.0,100.0
+7136,latent_7136,16820,0.03364,0.017776428,3.406176,Instructions to compare current image findings against prior images.,"Examples with high activation contain explicit instructions to compare current image findings against prior images as well as the incorporation of findings specific to the comparison process, which includes noting changes or stability of medical imagery features over time.",0.4889445139758031,0.4897959183673469,0.4814814814814814,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7137,latent_7137,12120,0.02424,0.013690734,4.13268,Detailed imaging comparison focusing on stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include findings and impressions that offer a comparative view against prior imaging while providing detailed observations on existing conditions. These examples discuss either stability or changes in conditions such as cardiomegaly, opacification, or specific installations like chest tubes or pacemakers, with particular emphasis on consistent imaging technique references and \'comparison\' sections.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7138,latent_7138,42148,0.084296,0.058730956,7.1181116,Comparison with past imaging demonstrates stability or lack of significant new pathology.,These examples emphasize the concept of comparison with prior imaging and detailing whether changes are observed or stability is maintained. Examples with references to previous studies and descriptions of changes or stability between current and prior findings exhibit higher activation. The pattern focuses on the lack of significant new pathological changes compared to past exams while incorporating the notion of stability.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.63996399639964,0.64,0.6428571428571429,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7139,latent_7139,7419,0.014838,0.010113257,3.7179549,"Consistent and unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","Examples with high activation levels describe findings related to the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, with specific references to being 'unremarkable' or noting no significant changes. This suggests the pattern focuses on unchanged or stable cardiomediastinal contours across exams.",0.3625922887612797,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7140,latent_7140,5581,0.011162,0.013481564,7.6580267,Assessment of changes in significant pathologies like effusions or aortic tortuosity in comparison to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples predominantly involve descriptions of radiological comparisons with a focus on findings indicating acute or significant change, particularly pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette changes, or other evaluations such as aortic tortuosity or mass detection. They frequently specify comparisons to prior images to assess these changes.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4343434343434343,0.44,0.425,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7141,latent_7141,14308,0.028616,0.017584754,3.5685625,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"These examples often highlight the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as normal or unchanged regardless of other findings mentioned, including both abnormal and normal findings. This consistency creates a linguistic pattern focused on noting the stability or normalcy of these specific anatomical features frequently in radiological evaluations.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,100.0,100.0
+7142,latent_7142,3526,0.007052,0.00801514,4.6849284,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"The pattern involves explicit requests for comparisons between current imaging findings and prior studies, with a focus on describing the stability or change in various thoracic findings, particularly cardiac size, lung characteristics, and mediastinal contours. It typically emphasizes stability or lack of significant change.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4715077016465589,0.4723618090452261,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,99.0
+7143,latent_7143,3986,0.007972,0.009529262,4.163019,Comparisons involving both frontal and lateral chest images.,"High activation examples refer to both current and prior imaging studies across different views (frontal and lateral) of the chest. These examples emphasize detailed comparisons involving multiple views (frontal and lateral), which typically provide a comprehensive assessment in detecting changes or stability in clinical findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5061728395061729,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7144,latent_7144,4602,0.009204,0.010264216,6.161259,Description of findings through comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"This set of examples mostly emphasizes identifying changes by detailed comparison with previous imaging results, which are consistently referenced in each report. Despite the physical state of the images not being provided, the activation levels suggest involvement of analytical comparison to previous state.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7145,latent_7145,7535,0.01507,0.009605867,3.171817,Explicit details of prior reports for comparison in radiology context.,"The examples with high activation levels involve detailed descriptions of prior reports, specifically with context and indications for current imaging compared to prior. These references typically include explicit prior examination or imaging reports to assess changes or stability over time.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7146,latent_7146,3579,0.007158,0.009012325,5.5577216,Comparisons of current to prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"Prompts with higher activation levels emphasize comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes, particularly using specific findings or conditions such as tube placement, pneumonia, or pleural effusions. They illustrate how the current findings relate to previous imaging, typically indicating stability, change, or the need for further evaluation.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7147,latent_7147,6346,0.012692,0.009300859,4.2683096,Description of radiologic findings in comparison to prior images.,"The representative examples consistently reference findings evaluated in comparison to prior studies, highlighting changes over time. The descriptions often note stability, changes in opacities, consolidation, pleural effusion, and cardiac silhouette comparisons against earlier images. When changes or stability in pathologies or device positions are remarked upon in context to prior images, it affects the activation level positively.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4758064516129032,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7148,latent_7148,23238,0.046476,0.02041252,3.2492635,Evaluation or description of tube placement in the imaging study.,"The high activation examples involve noting positional changes or evaluations of medical tubes (e.g., Dobbhoff tube, endotracheal tube) in imaging studies, indicating this is a key focus point for the model. The examples consistently provide descriptions of these changes or confirmations of stable positions of tubes in relation to prior radiographs.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5806476663819212,0.595,0.6507936507936508,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7149,latent_7149,45931,0.091862,0.048541933,5.5043755,Description of findings in multiple views compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation often describe findings in multiple views of the chest (frontal, lateral) compared to prior imaging. The emphasis is on interval changes or stability in these specific comparisons. These include descriptions of changes in lung abnormalities, device positions, or specific opacifications as seen in multiple views compared against previous studies.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.535031847133758,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7150,latent_7150,4414,0.008828,0.012252619,4.458701,Observations based on comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve observations of findings showing stability, changes, or evaluation based on comparison with prior or recent studies to assess progression or improvement. These comparative elements are essential for understanding medical imaging evaluations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7151,latent_7151,15914,0.031828,0.022082657,6.0145054,Normal cardiomediastinal and pulmonary findings with stable or unchanged status from prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels include cases where there is explicit language regarding normal structures (cardiac, mediastinal, hilar) and lack of acute findings (e.g., consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax), with either no comparison made or the findings being stable/unchanged compared to prior imaging.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5797101449275363,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7152,latent_7152,3606,0.007212,0.009530087,4.973132,Describe changes by comparing current and prior radiology images.,"The examples with high activation involve instructions to provide a description of radiological findings using current and prior images, often with specific abnormalities or interventions highlighted for comparison. This points to a focus on evaluating changes over time or comparing to previous states in a detailed manner.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7153,latent_7153,35479,0.070958,0.030234426,4.1114674,Interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The model's activation levels indicate higher activation when there is explicit attention to comparisons of interval changes in imaging findings between current and prior studies. The pattern identified involves the description of interval changes or stability over time, often explicitly noted using terms like 'since the prior study', 'unchanged', or specific examination dates when comparing chest imaging.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6147592245153221,0.615,0.6095238095238096,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7154,latent_7154,5959,0.011918,0.010919838,5.6692224,Description of stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently compare current radiological images to prior ones, noting changes in specific anatomical or pathological features. The pattern highlights stability or change over time in specific medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathological conditions, often indicating follow-up actions or stability in chronic conditions.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7155,latent_7155,4269,0.008538,0.01049641,3.645453,Comparison using current and prior chest images (frontal and often lateral views).,"The pattern represented by high activation levels in these examples involves the presence and explicit mention of both current and prior imaging studies (frontal and often lateral views), with the assistant providing a description of findings in relation to these prior studies. This often includes providing a comparison and noting changes or stability over time, which is a common request in radiology when following up on conditions or evaluating treatment effects. These examples emphasize the use of prior imagery to provide context.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7156,latent_7156,3171,0.006342,0.0067781806,6.43243,Emphasis on unchanged or stable radiological findings compared to prior images.,"In these examples, comparisons are frequently made to prior images, with many details remaining unchanged or stable. The consistent theme is that the heart size is often noted as normal or changes in heart size or silhouette are cautiously interpreted. This pattern likely indicates a focus on understanding any cardiomediastinal changes over time alongside effusions and consolidations when prior imaging is available.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4477611940298507,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7157,latent_7157,5415,0.01083,0.008390074,6.511356,"Radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or evaluations.","Examples with higher activation emphasize changes or findings compared to a prior or recent imaging study. Not every example specifically indicates dramatic changes, like interval increase or decrease of a radiographic finding (e.g. pleural effusion, pneumothorax, etc.), but they do focus on comparison with prior imaging which is critical for understanding progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7158,latent_7158,26153,0.052306,0.029448723,4.6366816,Instructions to compare current images to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation involve instructions to compare the current findings to prior imaging, indicating an expectation of tracking changes over time. This indicates that the task emphasizes review and synthesis of temporal changes in radiological findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7159,latent_7159,2632,0.005264,0.010390862,8.033305,Comparisons of low lung volumes in thoracic imaging to prior exams.,"The high activation examples consistently deal with conditions where low lung volumes are tested or compared against prior thoracic images. These examples also often mention associated findings like congestion, atelectasis, pleural effusion, or mediastinal conditions while evaluating these reduced lung volumes.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3878543436597156,0.465,0.3793103448275862,0.11,100.0,100.0
+7160,latent_7160,4361,0.008722,0.0075018373,5.7112064,"Clear lungs without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","Reports reference comparison of current imaging with prior images using specific language and consistently mention the presence or absence of focal consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, or edema in the lungs. They also often note cardiac silhouette size and mediastinal contours, but focus especially on the lungs being clear of these conditions.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6829046209879354,0.6834170854271356,0.6666666666666666,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+7161,latent_7161,9040,0.01808,0.016529147,5.4023743,Assessment of stability or improvement in findings as compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels all emphasize findings and changes in the current imaging in comparison to prior exams, indicating stable or improved conditions or no significant changes. This contrasts with others that flag acute alterations or new findings.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7307936507936508,0.735,0.688,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7162,latent_7162,35816,0.071632,0.048946727,5.108716,"Comparison of current findings to prior images, noting changes or unchanged status.","Examples that include a comparison explicitly list differences, new developments, or unchanged status compared to prior imaging, often involving descriptions of tube placements, lung changes, and other procedural aspects. The non-activating examples typically lack significant change or delay comparison entirely by indicating 'None',' but occasionally include minor details.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5319132066495758,0.5527638190954773,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,99.0
+7163,latent_7163,5398,0.010796,0.012688304,6.7894993,Comparison of findings with prior images to assess stability or change.,"The analysis focuses on the comparison of the current imaging findings with prior studies to assess changes, specifically noting the presence or absence of consolidation, effusion, pneumothorax, or major cardiac changes. These samples specifically involve evaluating differences or stabilities over time rather than diagnosing acute issues without reference to prior findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3866477942911064,0.415,0.4405594405594406,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7164,latent_7164,3902,0.007804,0.013604085,5.940112,Comparison of current and prior images with detailed findings descriptions.,"The examples show activation when the provided text involves a radiological description that compares the current imaging with a prior one. Additionally, many examples include extensive descriptive detail about multiple aspects of the radiological findings across images.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3849846246156154,0.385,0.3861386138613861,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7165,latent_7165,18147,0.036294,0.018197414,3.3345897,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples tend to describe clear findings with no significant interval changes or new developments in the thoracic region as compared to prior imaging, often highlighting the stability of the observed condition.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5119047619047619,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7166,latent_7166,8628,0.017256,0.010644443,4.3700914,Low lung volumes noted in imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve observations of low lung volumes. This pattern is observable in situations with reduced aeration or crowding of pulmonary structures, typical in conditions such as atelectasis or similar findings.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6977381592766208,0.705,0.7971014492753623,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7167,latent_7167,180629,0.361258,0.30888832,8.603992,Focus on interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe significant or relevant interval changes or findings when current images are compared to prior imaging, emphasizing the difference or stability in the context of clinical implications.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5727272727272728,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7168,latent_7168,4601,0.009202,0.011462845,4.091526,Radiology descriptions emphasizing tortuous or calcified aorta.,"Examples with high activation predominantly describe vasculature findings such as a tortuous aorta. The pattern includes observations of tortuosity, elongation, or calcification of the aorta. It is notable despite other potential findings or variations in technique and the presence of diagnostic tags in the input text that might typically alter attention.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6392190152801358,0.66,0.8076923076923077,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7169,latent_7169,3980,0.00796,0.010835514,4.8189,Evaluation of interval change in clinical condition or device positioning.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings related to interval changes (e.g., worsening, improvement, or assessment for changes) in clinical conditions such as pneumonia and edema. They often utilize comparison to prior studies and stress on observable changes in the condition or positions of medical devices.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.41,0.41,0.41,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7170,latent_7170,5954,0.011908,0.011250351,6.6851525,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern emerges where findings are described as 'unchanged' or 'stable' compared to prior images. This language generally indicates no progression of disease or change in condition, which is common when the focus is on the constancy or resolution of abnormalities over time (such as heart size, cardiomegaly, atelectasis).",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5949367088607594,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7171,latent_7171,26143,0.052286,0.026826786,4.6267157,Findings related to pulmonary congestion or edema with stable cardiac silhouette.,The pattern suggests a description of findings often related to pulmonary congestion or edema along with stable cardiac silhouette. Other examples of increased activations describe similar pulmonary vascular congestion.,0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4874827518233786,0.545,0.6363636363636364,0.21,100.0,100.0
+7172,latent_7172,32181,0.064362,0.039442006,3.863559,Findings indicative of pulmonary edema or pleural effusion.,"The examples with higher activation often describe the presence of pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or signs of congestion related to heart failure, which are indicative of fluid overload or heart-related issues. Many include findings related to heart and lung vascularity changes or atelectasis versus simple anatomical descriptions without those features.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7173,latent_7173,36222,0.072444,0.03427511,3.2580185,Narration of stability or change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples describe imaging findings with explicit references to changes or stability in relation to earlier images, particularly focusing on stability or changes in lung pathology, cardiac silhouette, or placement of tubes or catheters. The focus on interval changes between recent and past images is a key feature in these reports.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6282243894986123,0.635,0.6062992125984252,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7174,latent_7174,6556,0.013112,0.0140328305,5.7992196,Comparison of medical device positions with prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently highlight modifications or constancy of medical devices (tubes, catheters) relative to prior imaging. These reports often include explicit comparisons indicating movement or unchanged placement of these devices, demonstrating a pattern of focusing on device status over time.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6116531920825202,0.6130653266331658,0.625,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+7175,latent_7175,22318,0.044636,0.026305215,5.518456,Descriptions of interval changes or stability versus prior imagings.,"The examples describe radiological findings with reference to any changes compared to prior imaging studies, interspersed with unchanged conditions for devices or conditions. Sentences begin with phrases about compared states or focus on describing unchanged findings as points of reference, highlighting stability or slight evolution over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6013564235976288,0.615,0.583941605839416,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7176,latent_7176,31014,0.062028,0.042681158,5.684199,Emphasis on interval changes between current and previous radiographic studies.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels describe changes in radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies, such as resolution of pathologies, stability of abnormalities, or minor new findings that reflect some interval change or constant clinical situation without significant progression. This pattern uses specific comparison language and temporal references to previous exams.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7177,latent_7177,159333,0.318666,0.2470776,7.6540666,Detailed observations of subtle changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently detail small or subtle changes in comparisons such as slight improvements, increased cardiomediastinal silhouettes, pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pneumothorax using specific observational phrases. These descriptions suggest specific comparisons across imaging studies.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.7857142857142857,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6429918290383407,0.645,0.6260869565217392,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7178,latent_7178,6041,0.012082,0.015584839,3.7492077,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal images in radiology reports.,"High activation examples specify the use of both current and prior imaging for comparison, with a focus on describing findings across multiple views, specifically mentioning both frontal and lateral images.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7179,latent_7179,4557,0.009114,0.010266464,7.049544,"Blunting of costophrenic angles, suggestive of pleural effusion.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve descriptions of 'blunting of costophrenic angles', often interpreted as indicative of pleural effusion. This specific finding and its implications is a recognized radiological pattern, especially amidst other pulmonary abnormalities or devices.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6216897856242118,0.64,0.75,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7180,latent_7180,2425,0.00485,0.007518806,8.797199,"Presence and assessment of cardiac devices (e.g., pacemakers) in radiology reports.","Examples with high activation consistently describe radiological findings of pacemakers or internal cardiac devices (e.g., ""dual-lead left pectoral pacemaker,"" ""right atrial and right ventricular leads,"" ""BIV ICD"") and mention their positions or stability. Devices like pacemakers are repeatedly noted and compared to prior images, showing the study's relevance to device monitoring.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5354888908100631,0.592964824120603,0.8275862068965517,0.24,100.0,99.0
+7181,latent_7181,36416,0.072832,0.055949356,9.83931,Reports emphasizing changes or stability in comparison to prior studies.,"Pattern involves reports focusing on specific changes or stability in imaging findings when comparing with prior studies, indicating the significance of interval changes or reassessment of previous findings. Examples with significant interval changes or stability in comparison to previous imaging have higher activations, signaling their pertinence to monitoring or evaluating previous observations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6176105828854899,0.63,0.5955882352941176,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7182,latent_7182,8317,0.016634,0.011256893,7.267064,Includes comparison with prior imaging and/or indications of changes.,"Reports with activations greater than zero often include a comparison to prior frontal images or indicate changes observed in comparison with a different radiographic examination. The references to comparison or evaluation of changes indicate a focus on monitoring patient progress or changes over time, which is central to the pattern being explored.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3846153846153846,0.385,0.28125,0.5373134328358209,67.0,133.0
+7183,latent_7183,11604,0.023208,0.020045506,7.0707397,Inclusion of lateral chest radiographs leads to comprehensive analysis.,"The samples with high activation are related to analysis of chest images where lateral views are included. The pattern indicates that the additional insights provided by lateral views, compared to frontal-only or other combinations, lead to more comprehensive analysis.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7184,latent_7184,15839,0.031678,0.019042319,5.0490766,Stable findings or instruments compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation involve findings that show stability or lack significant change when comparing with prior images. In particular, the stable presence of lines or tubes, unchanged health status, and references to prior conditions without acute changes are highlighted in activations marked as 4 or above.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7185,latent_7185,6963,0.013926,0.012457519,5.188035,Specific comparison to prior imaging findings.,"This set of examples has higher activation for reports providing specific descriptions comparing current and prior imaging, using phrases like 'in comparison to prior' and explicitly pointing out stability or changes over time, commonly present in radiology reports when tracking patient progress or disease stability.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3497398959583833,0.35,0.3557692307692308,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7186,latent_7186,2324,0.004648,0.0072745485,8.9989,New or unresolved parenchymal opacities.,"These examples are all related to radiology reports with the presence or concern for new or unresolved parenchymal opacities or abnormalities. The examples use descriptive terms for parenchymal changes like 'new bibasilar parenchymal opacities', 'interval improvement of opacification', or 'parenchymal infiltrates occupying the entire right hemithorax'.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3420864441202551,0.425,0.2413793103448276,0.07,100.0,100.0
+7187,latent_7187,4990,0.00998,0.015469606,5.74588,Presence of brackets [[<image>]] related to PRIOR_REPORT comparisons.,"These examples all feature the use of brackets, often [[<image>]], in conjunction with the word 'PRIOR_REPORT', indicating that the pattern in the data is related to how previous imaging and reports are referenced, using specific formatting features that involve brackets or similar textual markers.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6111811685582178,0.63,0.5902777777777778,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7188,latent_7188,9877,0.019754,0.020524597,7.080248,Unchanged or stable radiographic findings when compared to prior studies.,"Highly representative examples consistently reference findings being unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging studies, indicating stability or lack of progression in specific medical conditions, utilizing explicit comparisons to past findings.",0.6918238993710691,0.6938775510204082,0.75,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4861111111111111,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7189,latent_7189,11974,0.023948,0.028835235,7.5072184,Detailed descriptive comparisons between current and prior images indicating condition changes.,"Examples with relatively higher activation levels include references to actual findings when comparing current and prior frontal images. These findings often indicate changes or stability in the observed medical condition, which is a crucial aspect of clinical evaluations.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4565126050420168,0.4773869346733668,0.4666666666666667,0.28,100.0,99.0
+7190,latent_7190,18968,0.037936,0.02200616,4.64212,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels involved a description of a radiology study where a specific comparison to a prior radiologic image is the focus, requiring detailed evaluation of changes or absence of changes over time. This aligns with a pattern of closely analyzed serial imaging, particularly in the context of changes in devices, lung opacities, or pneumothorax evaluation.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6157688465380773,0.625,0.5954198473282443,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7191,latent_7191,4196,0.008392,0.012264989,4.8269386,Mention of changes compared to prior imaging.,"The explanation is based on reports involving direct comparison between current images and previous ones, or noting changes since prior images, which suggests a focus on interval changes or stability over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4368304022639984,0.4371859296482412,0.431578947368421,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+7192,latent_7192,13426,0.026852,0.023089996,6.9261355,"Comparison with prior images, noting interval stability or changes.","These examples display a pattern of comparing current radiological images to prior ones, often noting stability, changes, or developments in specific findings such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or tumors. The emphasis is frequently placed on the presence or absence of interval changes relative to previous exams.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6704767789105138,0.68,0.6343283582089553,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7193,latent_7193,20652,0.041304,0.019522099,3.7298124,Detailed findings prompting further assessment or follow-up.,"The examples with high activation levels involve detailed descriptions of radiological findings with specific recommendations for further assessment or follow-up actions, often involving subsequent imaging or clinical correlation.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5927089880578253,0.595,0.611764705882353,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7194,latent_7194,4150,0.0083,0.0079214685,4.975139,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the comparison and analysis of current imaging findings against prior or previous radiological studies. This pattern is common in medical imaging analysis, as it helps in assessing changes or stability in patient conditions over time, making comparisons pivotal.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7195,latent_7195,3056,0.006112,0.0115011055,6.826212,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare current images with prior ones, closely following a detailed pattern for comparing radiological findings across temporal studies. The explicit mention of this task aligns with the characteristic pattern being highlighted.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7196,latent_7196,8088,0.016176,0.018202405,7.1393037,Focus on changes in lung opacities over time between images.,"Highly activated examples typically involve a focus on describing specific changes in lung opacities, consolidation, or similar elements over time based on comparison with prior studies. This indicates the model's focus is on assessing interval changes in specific lung findings or opacities between current and previous imaging.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.67499187479687,0.675,0.6767676767676768,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7197,latent_7197,3878,0.007756,0.009337916,3.738908,Comparisons of current studies with previous imaging to assess changes in cardiomediastinal and pulmonary findings.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly include the same pattern: comparing current imaging to prior ones, often assessing changes in cardiomediastinal silhouette or pulmonary observations, even evaluating devices' positions like in examples where changes from prior studies are noted. Frequently, this is combined with indications highlighting issues such as shortness of breath or dyspnea. These provide significant context for identifying subtle changes or consistencies important in specific clinical evaluations.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7198,latent_7198,3406,0.006812,0.011771905,6.9782534,Persistent or changing pulmonary vascular congestion or cardiomegaly compared to prior exams.,"The pattern prevalent among highly activated examples is the explicit use of comparison between the current imaging and prior exams to identify changes in the pulmonary vascular congestion, cardiomegaly, or other cardiopulmonary pathologies. This is evident in examples with reports indicating persistent or worsening cardio-pulmonary conditions.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.6530612244897959,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7199,latent_7199,5857,0.011714,0.014220021,8.844439,Using prior images for comparison in descriptions.,"The examples showing higher activation levels frequently involve comparison with prior radiographs in terms of the description of findings, consistent with the pattern observed in previous tasks highlighting explicit references to prior imaging.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4705882352941176,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7200,latent_7200,17072,0.034144,0.018069765,4.9991837,Stability or improvement of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe changes in imaging findings over time, specifically noting stability or improvement compared to prior studies. This includes terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improved', or references to prior imaging dates, which are key indicators of follow-up observations in patient management.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5747126436781609,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7201,latent_7201,4730,0.00946,0.009362323,3.880969,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on providing a comparison between the current and prior imaging studies. The specific emphasis is on comparative analysis of imaging findings, analyzing changes or stability over time through phrases like 'compared to' or 'compared with the prior film'. This pattern is frequently used to identify interval changes or stability in medical imaging.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7202,latent_7202,16424,0.032848,0.021070082,6.9842606,"Comparison of interval changes in pleural effusions, atelectasis, or cardiomegaly.","The prompt results primarily focus on the presence and changes in pleural effusions, atelectasis, or cardiomegaly, along with taking comparisons from previous imaging into account in radiology studies. This involves assessing interval changes, particularly in chronic conditions or post-surgical states that require monitoring.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6818424057860677,0.6834170854271356,0.6630434782608695,0.6559139784946236,93.0,106.0
+7203,latent_7203,27086,0.054172,0.025104197,3.948132,Comparative stability or resolution of radiologic findings between images.,"The examples with higher activations primarily feature descriptions of radiological findings that involve a comparison of images, with an emphasis on stability, unchanged characteristics, or resolution of a condition over time. These contrasts include phrases like 'compared to prior' and specific changes or lack thereof in radiological features based on historical imaging evidence.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6137895812053116,0.6180904522613065,0.6,0.72,100.0,99.0
+7204,latent_7204,3809,0.007618,0.009005712,5.677756,Change in effusions or edema noted in comparison to prior imaging.,"Radiology findings that identify size or presence changes in fluid collections, particularly pleural effusions or edemas, often receive high activations. Those findings, common in cardiac and respiratory pathologies, are often described in terms of visibility on imaging over time.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.575166034793364,0.605,0.723404255319149,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7205,latent_7205,3273,0.006546,0.010524875,5.081391,Detailed comparison with previous studies for device placements or anatomical changes.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve the evaluation of findings from current and prior imaging reports, particularly focusing on changes in observed conditions. These examples often detail device placements or anatomical observations that must be precisely evaluated in context, not just described in general terms. Common themes are assessments of medical devices, tube placements, and anatomical changes, indicating the significance of comparing current imaging to prior data.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.469150641025641,0.47,0.4673913043478261,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7206,latent_7206,3642,0.007284,0.011162607,5.0743814,"Descriptions of findings relative to prior images, with indications for specific diseases like pneumonia or TB.","Highly activated examples frequently indicated a need for evaluation or diagnosis of diseases that are common and require imaging for confirmation, such as pneumonia or tuberculosis. They often follow the pattern of evaluating findings in comparison to the prior frontal image, specifically linked to clear indications for assessment.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3384668307268926,0.375,0.2641509433962264,0.14,100.0,100.0
+7207,latent_7207,5803,0.011606,0.015341485,3.9902036,Focus on comparative image analysis from a prior study.,"The examples with high activation provide radiological findings in the context of repeatedly comparing current imaging studies with prior ones, emphasizing stability or interval changes in conditions through comparative analysis. This is a key aspect of radiological reports, specifically mentioning image comparisons to track progression or stability.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7208,latent_7208,2741,0.005482,0.006739015,4.9244986,Evaluation or confirmation of medical line placement in comparison to prior.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve the evaluation and positioning of tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, or other medical lines) in relation to prior imaging. These cases focus on adjustments, placements, or confirmations of tube positions compared to previous studies, emphasizing changes or stability in the placement of these medical apparatuses.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6518580186180276,0.655,0.691358024691358,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7209,latent_7209,4363,0.008726,0.01142231,4.870493,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe a clear cardiomediastinal silhouette or normal mediastinal contour and lack focal consolidation or acute abnormalities, often in the context of previous imaging comparisons, suggesting a pattern focused on stable, unremarkable findings against historical imaging.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,100.0,100.0
+7210,latent_7210,25031,0.050062,0.045812804,5.9375563,Description of findings in current images compared to prior image(s).,"Analysis shows that the activation pattern is high when the task involves providing a description of findings in the current image(s) in comparison with a prior image, specifically in scenarios where the current and prior images are explicitly mentioned for comparison, demonstrating that the model focuses on comparative analysis.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4476190476190476,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7211,latent_7211,17558,0.035116,0.034932807,10.463395,Presence and comparison of monitoring devices in chest images.,"Highly activated examples often include descriptions of monitoring devices like tubes, catheters, and pacemakers in the chest images. These reports highlight the positioning, changes, or absence of these devices compared to prior examinations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4756097560975609,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7212,latent_7212,12767,0.025534,0.014836017,3.9592369,Comparison to prior images showing significant change or pathology.,"The model tends to exhibit higher activation when the prompts involve evaluating change from prior images, especially if there's a new significant pathology such as pneumonia or change in tube positioning. These cases highlight variations or new findings since previous examinations, drawing attention to diagnostically relevant differences.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4018169112508735,0.465,0.4,0.14,100.0,100.0
+7213,latent_7213,12033,0.024066,0.019776946,3.5327501,Radiological findings and comparisons indicating interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe changes or comparisons with imaging findings over time. They underline stable or resolving conditions, especially chronic conditions, concerning findings, or anticipated changes post-intervention. This contextualization within prior findings allows for clinical context assessment and determination of significance of change.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7214,latent_7214,13990,0.02798,0.027021317,6.9693727,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior reports or images.,The examples with activation emphasize the use of previous historical reports or comparison statements to provide context for evaluating changes or stability in radiological findings. This pattern underscores the importance of comparison with prior data for accurate interpretation in radiology.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7215,latent_7215,3958,0.007916,0.0076263924,3.904203,Comparisons with prior images to assess disease stability or change.,"These examples show consistent references to the comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting conditions such as unchanged findings, new findings, and interval changes relevant to diseases or treatment monitoring. The repeated mention of prior images, stability, or change in pathologies is the key pattern of interest.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.412650987001711,0.425,0.4418604651162791,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7216,latent_7216,5239,0.010478,0.014205954,6.0056767,Reference to comparison with prior imaging showing explicit findings or stability.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels consistently involve comparing the current radiological findings with prior imaging studies to assess stability or change in specific conditions or certain devices (e.g., changes, placement of tubes, presence of lesions) while making a direct and explicit reference to the comparison findings in the narratives.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.45,0.45,0.45,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7217,latent_7217,3642,0.007284,0.009510725,4.652426,Evaluation of medical device placement in imaging.,"These examples demonstrate a focus on identifying, describing, or confirming the placement of medical devices in imaging studies. They often include terms like 'tube placement', 'lead placement', 'catheter position', or reference tubes, leads, and catheters. The placement, position, and condition of these devices are crucial aspects of the radiological report in these instances.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4477611940298507,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7218,latent_7218,4311,0.008622,0.012456883,5.085602,Requires comparison analysis of current lateral and prior images.,"High activation levels correlate with the mention and implied comparison of current frontal and lateral images alongside prior imaging, specifically when the request is to provide a description based on this comparison. This indicates the importance of comprehensive descriptions based on multiple views and historical comparisons in radiological interpretation.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6269785260610949,0.63,0.6101694915254238,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7219,latent_7219,72567,0.145134,0.081202716,3.767852,Comparison to prior images showing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently reference specific findings or changes by comparing current images to prior imaging studies. This common practice in radiology helps to identify stability or progression of conditions, focusing on consistency or changes in medical devices, opacities, lung volumes, and other key radiological findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6176105828854899,0.63,0.5955882352941176,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7220,latent_7220,30823,0.061646,0.039611645,6.362646,Focus on changes related to support devices or interventions compared to previous images.,"The common pattern among examples with higher activation levels involves detailed discussions on findings of specific support devices or significant changes in finding based on a comparison to prior radiographs. The examples consistently speak to identifying changes that occurred since a prior comparison, especially in the context of medical devices or procedures like tubes or surgery-related interventions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.6714285714285714,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7221,latent_7221,2701,0.005402,0.0070248577,6.474253,Analysis and comparison with prior image findings.,"Highly activated examples are consistently those that include both a current image and a prior image, and focus on providing comparative findings. Such examples emphasize changes or stability in the imaging over time, highlighting a comparison against a prior radiographic study.",0.2452060383516932,0.26,0.3125,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7222,latent_7222,6086,0.012172,0.0139090195,9.242652,Evaluating changes over time between current and prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions that relate observations from current imaging with prior studies, particularly focusing on evaluations for consistency, stability, or changes over time in specific conditions like effusions, edema, heart size, or nodules. This indicates a pattern where analyzing imaging comps for longitudinal assessment is key.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7223,latent_7223,5411,0.010822,0.019145891,6.1260533,Provide findings based on current images without comparison to prior images.,"The pattern identified in these examples is related to the model generating findings descriptions based on given images, without referring to comparison with prior images or reports. These activations indicate the model operates within the context of the current imaging only.",0.656140350877193,0.673469387755102,0.7857142857142857,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5699732455237703,0.5778894472361809,0.6027397260273972,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+7224,latent_7224,5673,0.011346,0.008355085,4.2770257,Stable findings with no acute changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the absence or lack of significant new findings, acute changes, or focal abnormalities in comparison to prior images, except for minor observations like unchanged opacities or silhouette sizes. They note stability or minimal change, indicating benign or non-urgent status.",0.4863731656184486,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5564336372847012,0.5577889447236181,0.5681818181818182,0.5,100.0,99.0
+7225,latent_7225,9541,0.019082,0.012185974,4.347393,Stable mild to moderate cardiomegaly without acute pulmonary changes.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings related to mild or moderate enlargement of the cardiac silhouette, but with minimal or no associated acute pulmonary complications like pleural effusion or focal consolidation. The enlargement is often mentioned as 'stable' which indicates a lack of significant change or progression in subsequent studies, making it a consistent finding yet unassociated with acute changes.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.624249159852875,0.645,0.7735849056603774,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7226,latent_7226,4820,0.00964,0.008675651,3.9781313,Comparisons to prior images noting changes or stability.,"Many of these examples make explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies by focusing on changes or stability in specific findings relative to previous exams. Significant attention is given to how new findings compare, whether they are unchanged, improved, or represent new developments.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7227,latent_7227,11279,0.022558,0.01556413,7.5577154,Request to describe findings by comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with high activations all include requests to provide a description of findings in comparison to a prior frontal image. This indicates that the focus is on the task of generating comparative descriptions based on multiple images, particularly involving prior images as a reference point.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679197,0.555,0.5329341317365269,0.89,100.0,100.0
+7228,latent_7228,10395,0.02079,0.018511984,4.449977,"Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images, common in follow-up examinations.","Examples with high activation describe the presence and stable or unchanged appearance of medical devices or certain conditions like cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours, and frequently reference largely stable or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging studies, indicating no progression of abnormalities.",0.5462962962962963,0.5510204081632653,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5454545454545454,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7229,latent_7229,11453,0.022906,0.013912943,4.9023514,Commentary on condition stability or changes from prior imaging comparisons.,"The higher activation levels are associated with radiological studies that compare current findings, especially the cardiac features or lung conditions, with those from prior images, emphasizing comments on 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'improved' conditions. This involves interpreting progression or stability in conditions, a pattern prevalent in monitoring and follow-up reports.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6560027519779841,0.675,0.6190476190476191,0.91,100.0,100.0
+7230,latent_7230,4302,0.008604,0.009507598,4.1361427,Descriptive comparisons to prior radiological images.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to previous images, with particular emphasis on any changes or stability observed since prior examinations. This involves specific details, often given in past-tense comparative descriptions such as 'unchanged', 'less opacification', or 'increased'.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5175438596491229,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7231,latent_7231,10303,0.020606,0.016081596,5.614975,Findings compared to prior images with noted interval changes.,"This dataset highlights cases where the reports explicitly compare current findings with prior images, especially when changes in the clinical picture or management are likely to be influenced by these comparisons. High activation levels correlate with instances where the reports deal with either interval stability or worsening findings across consecutive imaging studies, often leading to clinical decisions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4848484848484848,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7232,latent_7232,3774,0.007548,0.010987057,5.5462904,Detailed comparison involving both frontal and lateral images with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe situations where multiple images, particularly both frontal and lateral views, are provided alongside at least one prior image for a comprehensive comparative assessment. This pattern indicates a requirement for detailed evaluation requiring multiple views and historical comparison.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7233,latent_7233,18492,0.036984,0.016897118,3.5213385,Task involves describing findings by comparing with prior images.,The examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions or settings where the task is to compare the current imaging study to prior images. Instances where explicit instructions are to provide such comparisons or details on interval changes from previous studies result in high activation.,0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5334201388888888,0.57,0.5448717948717948,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7234,latent_7234,14021,0.028042,0.018231547,3.6159804,Explicit description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations involve comparing current and prior imaging studies explicitly, focusing on detecting interval changes. These descriptions often involve ""unchanged"", ""no significant changes"", or specific comparisons in imaging findings. It is a common approach in radiology to assess the progress of certain conditions or effects of treatments over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6047529706066291,0.605,0.6105263157894737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7235,latent_7235,6526,0.013052,0.013409276,7.2753882,Findings emphasize normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with no acute pathologies.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels frequently involve reports with explicit findings of normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette and associated structures, resulting in no significant abnormalities or acute pathologies. There is a pattern in these reports of emphasizing the normality amidst other findings, which could suggest a specific reporting style or aspect being captured by the model.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.8275862068965517,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7826032002831214,0.785,0.7355371900826446,0.89,100.0,100.0
+7236,latent_7236,10993,0.021986,0.017997129,6.535896,Explicit descriptions of changes or placement of medical devices.,"In the examples with high activations, there is a focus on changes in specific medical devices or detailed pathology that gets explicitly noted by the assistant. These examples all involve descriptions of medical device placements or changes - such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or catheter positions - compared to prior placements or studies. High activations are noted in cases describing tube placement or changes across current and prior studies.",0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7237,latent_7237,7349,0.014698,0.017696636,8.838756,Direct comparison of current and prior frontal chest images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve analyzing a current frontal image in direct comparison with a prior frontal image, particularly focusing on changes or stability in radiological findings. This emphasizes the model's sensitivity to detect and describe changes over time when past and present images are compared.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4566929133858268,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7238,latent_7238,3549,0.007098,0.006481652,3.433064,Radiology reports with explicit image comparison instructions.,The high activation levels are associated with radiology reports that provide explicit instructions to compare findings against prior images. These are characterized by phrases indicating a direct comparison against previous imaging findings.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4427488760436737,0.4522613065326633,0.464,0.58,100.0,99.0
+7239,latent_7239,28700,0.0574,0.03497862,4.466519,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette without new acute findings.,"The examples show a pattern of referencing normal cardiomediastinal silhouette while either explicitly stating there are no signs of consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax or noting mild anomalies that are unchanged from previous studies. The presence of a potential acute finding as status quo across reports tends to have lower activation, indicating they do not exhibit the pattern.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.613831841319993,0.615,0.6036036036036037,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7240,latent_7240,3579,0.007158,0.009925924,5.00765,"Comparison of current and prior images, with emphasis on frontal views.","The examples highlight radiology reports that include frontal images and prior images, with emphasis on direct comparison of findings over time. The higher activation levels indicate that these are particularly common scenarios in such reports.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4608246545021141,0.525,0.514792899408284,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7241,latent_7241,3540,0.00708,0.007963402,5.1887794,Directive for comparison of current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation predominantly mention a phrase structure focused on 'current' and 'prior' images along with an explicit directive to provide a 'comparison' with prior imaging. This linguistic prompt indicates an overarching theme of analyzing changes over time in imaging studies, with language specifically guiding this comparison.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7242,latent_7242,8554,0.017108,0.009812461,4.671306,Atelectasis or linear/subsegmental lung opacities.,"The common element in higher activation examples is the presence of finding descriptions that involve streaky or linear opacities often attributed to atelectasis. Phrases such as 'subsegmental atelectasis', 'right lower lobe atelectasis', and 'retrocardiac atelectasis' appear recurrently in these activated examples, indicating the model is responsive to radiological descriptions of atelectasis.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6398559423769508,0.64,0.6458333333333334,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7243,latent_7243,9564,0.019128,0.0155855175,4.693738,Stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the presence of a cardiomediastinal silhouette or cardiac contour that is stable, unchanged or grossly unremarkable from prior studies. Despite various findings like effusions, atelectasis or pleural conditions, the stable cardio-mediastinal silhouette remains a key descriptive element distinguishing these examples.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.46875,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7244,latent_7244,12868,0.025736,0.024031084,6.0808764,Detailed interval changes or assessments compared to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve a detailed comparison of a current image to a prior image, focusing on interval changes, such as placement of medical devices like tubes or catheters, subtle anatomical changes like consolidated regions or opacities, or updates on previously noted conditions. This pattern is typical in medical radiology reports where precise monitoring of progression or stability of findings between images is critical, using language referring to interval changes or stability between the examinations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.46875,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7245,latent_7245,3456,0.006912,0.009203943,4.8066373,Comparison involves both frontal and lateral images.,The examples showing high activation levels consistently include both frontal and lateral image references when comparing current findings with prior records. This pattern suggests that considerations of these multiple perspectives enhance the evaluation and understanding of radiological changes.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4919354838709677,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7246,latent_7246,8592,0.017184,0.014361938,3.677394,Reports emphasizing changes or stability by comparing to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings that include comparison to prior imaging studies, highlighting new interventions or findings like tube placements, unchanged conditions, or progress like nasogastric or PICC lines, especially when such comparisons result in changed clinical assessments or procedural verifications.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4245117262101805,0.435,0.4488188976377952,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7247,latent_7247,8947,0.017894,0.010160143,2.9183981,Comparison with prior images for interval changes.,"These examples indicate reports where radiographic descriptions are explicitly compared with prior images. The focus is on tracking changes over time or stability using specific vocabularies such as 'as compared to the previous', 'comparison made to prior', or 'unchanged since previous'.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7248,latent_7248,25690,0.05138,0.027022878,5.556407,Detailed comparative assessments of current and prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples focus on providing new or unchanged findings derived from careful comparisons to previous studies, often specifying 'interval change', 'improved', 'unchanged', or mentioning explicit changes in specific conditions or equipment positioning. This indicates the pattern of detailed comparative evaluations from current to previous imaging data, emphasizing the assessment of changes or stability in conditions.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5390070921985816,0.7676767676767676,99.0,101.0
+7249,latent_7249,18640,0.03728,0.025760448,6.8615565,Focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples primarily describe the interval changes observed between the current and prior radiographic images. The reports often include terms like 'changed', 'unchanged', 'increased', 'similar', and 'decreased' in reference to comparisons with previous images. They focus on the changes in specific radiological findings over time.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.680218080784252,0.695,0.6363636363636364,0.91,100.0,100.0
+7250,latent_7250,47233,0.094466,0.06609369,6.2003293,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve the comparison of current imaging with prior studies, indicating stable or unchanged findings. These examples are similar due to consistent changes noted on comparative imaging over time without significant new findings, indicative of monitoring stability or chronic conditions.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.8214285714285714,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6669202678027997,0.6683417085427136,0.6460176991150443,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+7251,latent_7251,62533,0.125066,0.09084861,6.3241477,Evaluation of interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"These examples involve descriptive comparisons to prior imaging, particularly when a notable change in the pathology (e.g., positioning of tubes, changes in opacity) is seen in relation to previous images. Terms like unchanged, improved, increased are often used to describe interval progression, which is a characteristic pattern of evaluation.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5960257670051315,0.63,0.5822784810126582,0.92,100.0,100.0
+7252,latent_7252,6585,0.01317,0.012675042,4.388137,Descriptions with extensive prior imaging comparisons.,"The pattern is characterized by the presence of multiple prior imaging comparisons, such as 'Multiple prior chest radiographs,' which indicates an in-depth analysis of changes over time rather than a single comparison.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7253,latent_7253,61848,0.123696,0.07694866,8.990764,Minimal change in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to involve the use of previous radiological findings for comparison purposes, acknowledging the stability, change, or progression of certain medical attributes. This pattern is evident when descriptions involve a context of uninterrupted state or minimal change from an earlier exam.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.3214285714285714,0.4090909090909091,66.0,134.0
+7254,latent_7254,4810,0.00962,0.009445986,4.916388,Reports emphasize interval change from prior imaging.,"The consistent factor in these examples is the documentation and comparison of interval changes or stability in the findings between the current image and one or more prior images, with a focus on whether there are any new findings or resolution of previously noted abnormalities.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4357913902978281,0.4522613065326633,0.4307692307692308,0.28,100.0,99.0
+7255,latent_7255,2472,0.004944,0.007635341,5.821599,Mismatch between task instructions and availability of prior images for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing the absence of a comparison image in the actual task execution. This mismatch between the prompt request and the task execution is the distinctive factor leading to higher activation levels.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4540888743312589,0.5,0.5,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7256,latent_7256,9334,0.018668,0.011232425,5.0460367,Focus on interval changes in medical devices between images.,"The examples with higher activation frequently involve detailed descriptions of changes in medical devices or tubes (like PICC lines, ET tubes, catheters, or NG tubes) between images. This indicates that the task involves descriptions of interval changes in medical device positioning or presence, often compared to prior imagery.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.604301948051948,0.61,0.6447368421052632,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7257,latent_7257,22312,0.044624,0.018500498,1.9926552,Comparison with prior imaging revealing notable changes.,"The given examples with higher activation often include comparisons with a prior radiology image as a context for explanation of current findings, while also emphasizing findings suggestive of significant changes or abnormalities like effusions, opacifications, or lines/tubes in place. Specific clinical or technical notes like tracheostomy and PICC lines are often included in these examples.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4135804146401108,0.4494949494949495,0.392156862745098,0.2040816326530612,98.0,100.0
+7258,latent_7258,15246,0.030492,0.017779104,3.7341733,Detailed changes or stabilities based on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels effectively document the comparison of current radiological findings with prior imaging studies, explicitly noting changes or stabilities such as unchanged opacities, resolution of effusions, or unchanged legions. Low activation examples often lack detailed comparison or provide general findings without emphasizing changes over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.56,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7259,latent_7259,8467,0.016934,0.01761095,5.078628,Structured comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve a sequential pattern in which both the current and prior images are described, with comparison being made directly or implied from the context or prior reports. High activations also imply a strong reliance on a frontal image followed by a lateral image or reference to previous findings/reports in a structured format.",0.2573263749498193,0.26,0.2857142857142857,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3909755418974631,0.3919597989949748,0.4018691588785046,0.43,100.0,99.0
+7260,latent_7260,15636,0.031272,0.039734848,4.3704104,Descriptive comparisons between current and prior imaging for clinical interpretation.,"Highly activated examples include both current and prior imaging in their comparison, emphasizing differences or stability across studies. These examples often contrast findings directly with prior images, underscoring changes over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7261,latent_7261,30703,0.061406,0.028839028,3.6522799,Reports highlighting heart size changes or cardiomegaly.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes in heart size or configuration, typically with cardiomegaly, and occasionally correlate these changes with other cardiac devices or lines placement. These characteristics appear consistently in higher-activated examples.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7262,latent_7262,7790,0.01558,0.015029282,4.0054445,Stable findings on current imaging when compared to prior studies.,"The reports consistently describe findings that include a comparison to a previous study while noting little to no change in the patient's condition. Terms like 'unchanged', 'consistent', or lack of acute findings are common indicators of stability, often seen in patient records where chronic issues are being monitored.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4170967138158774,0.455,0.4081632653061224,0.2,100.0,100.0
+7263,latent_7263,20703,0.041406,0.02696518,4.2150784,Status of thoracic catheters or medical devices in chest imaging.,"Examples with comparatively high activation levels discuss the presence and status of thoracic catheters and other medical devices, primarily focusing on their stability or any changes since prior imaging. The activation level correlates with specific evaluations regarding these devices.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7264,latent_7264,17815,0.03563,0.022826996,5.7651796,Comparison with prior images despite lack of formal comparison data.,"Highly representative samples make written comparisons between current findings and prior imaging studies, despite the indicated absence of previous reports or comparisons, suggesting a pattern of evaluating temporal changes even without formal prior records.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7265,latent_7265,37222,0.074444,0.031243566,2.4568324,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability in the findings. The absence of such comparisons or descriptions in relation to previous studies results in lower activation levels.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.62996299629963,0.63,0.6326530612244898,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7266,latent_7266,5645,0.01129,0.01067126,8.675987,Lack of required comparison or missing clinical indication.,"The examples exhibit a pattern where there is an absence or absence of relevant patient comparison imaging, technical instructions, or specific indications provided for the imaging, such as 'No prior studies available' or 'Indication: N/A'. This often leads to vague or incomplete context for interpretation.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7267,latent_7267,17842,0.035684,0.020777643,5.4753723,Focus on pleural effusions or pleural fluid management.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the evaluation of pleural effusions or changes in pleural fluid status, as well as handling of thoracic apparatus like chest tubes, demonstrating the model's specific focus on pleural evaluation.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6491228070175439,0.65,0.6363636363636364,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7268,latent_7268,6402,0.012804,0.009148524,3.653894,Description of findings in comparison to prior study findings.,"These examples exhibit images and findings that are annotated with specific techniques and terms like 'portable', 'frontal', and 'lateral', which are common in chest radiographs, but the activation levels indicate the pattern is different from the ordinary comparison format. The focus here is likely on the step of interpreting the findings and describing them as ""compared to."" Activation levels suggest examples with more description of the comparison findings are closer to the pattern.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4042702310330154,0.405,0.411214953271028,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7269,latent_7269,11252,0.022504,0.020856882,6.2870064,Description requires radiological comparison to prior study with change assessment.,"Highly activated examples consistently call for radiological findings to be described with comparison to a prior image study. Specific mention of features that remain unchanged or have evolved (e.g., atelectasis, pleural effusion) adds context to the findings, highlighting temporal progression or stability.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4690265486725664,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7270,latent_7270,4536,0.009072,0.010642176,5.9822607,Comparison to prior images.,"These examples indicate a reference to prior reports or images, a common pattern in radiology reports where findings are contextualized based on previous imaging evidence. The critical factor is the explicit mention of changes or stability in conditions relative to previous exams or images.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5644107445349681,0.595,0.5620915032679739,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7271,latent_7271,15923,0.031846,0.016033461,3.8443205,Stable or slightly unchanged imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Despite variations in specificity, these examples describe findings that are compared to previous imaging studies, focusing on interval changes like unchanged positions of tubes or catheters, stable pathologies, or slight improvements that do not indicate new acute issues. The comparison aspect in these examples demonstrates stability without significant new acute findings.",0.4086206896551724,0.4285714285714285,0.375,0.25,24.0,25.0,0.3896856881293866,0.4,0.3648648648648648,0.27,100.0,100.0
+7272,latent_7272,5011,0.010022,0.014341311,4.478629,Radiology study comparison involving multiple current image views against prior images.,"The highly activated examples focus on articulating changes over time as seen in multiple views (frontal and lateral), not just comparing a single view across studies. This pattern captures using entire updated datasets to assess interval changes, reflecting comprehensive reevaluation rather than simple comparison.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7273,latent_7273,29457,0.058914,0.03280737,5.8181725,Descriptions of changes or stability in findings from prior imaging.,"The examples show patterns where there is frequent reference to previous imaging studies for comparison, specifically focusing on changes in findings. Activation is higher when reports detail changes or stability in specific pathologies, aligning with clinical indications for follow-up or evaluation, often citing dates of previous exams.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6350646346791395,0.645,0.6090225563909775,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7274,latent_7274,32202,0.064404,0.031427205,4.736963,Interval decrease or improvement in pleural effusions or pulmonary findings.,"Examples with high activation involve imaging scenarios where there is a distinct reduction or improvement in thoracic or pulmonary findings related to fluid, such as pleural effusion, or in pulmonary pathology such as pneumonia, as indicated by changes in opacity, fluid levels, or aeration compared to prior images.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4658213730151742,0.545,0.6956521739130435,0.16,100.0,100.0
+7275,latent_7275,42175,0.08435,0.0340118,1.3917289,Consistent or unchanged findings in serial imaging comparisons.,"The pattern is observed through the use of direct image comparisons with specific technical terms or descriptions pointing to consistent or unchanged findings between current and prior images. This is often used to assess stability or progression of a known condition using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'similar', 'marked improvement', or 'no change'.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4947368421052631,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7276,latent_7276,3316,0.006632,0.011539016,6.30719,Descriptions comparing current findings to prior reports or imaging studies.,"Examining the examples with high activation levels, they consistently describe the observations in comparison to titled 'prior reports' or explicitly mention prior imaging studies. There is a clear pattern where findings are compared with previous imaging or findings rather than solely noting current observations. This narrative style of referencing prior reports, exams, or findings is indicative of follow-up radiological assessments.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7277,latent_7277,9611,0.019222,0.016971083,4.0533895,Stable findings or lack of significant interval change when compared to prior images.,"In scenarios with high activation, the reports often describe findings that are stable or unchanged when compared to prior studies. This pattern captures the absence of significant changes in known pathologies, procedures, or features from previous reports.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.3866666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7278,latent_7278,5254,0.010508,0.028694352,7.6058044,Assessment of current and prior radiology images for comparative findings.,The examples feature prompts that involve describing medical images while explicitly indicating previous imaging studies for comparison. This is a common structure in radiology where both the current and prior images are provided for assessment of changes over time.,0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7279,latent_7279,3880,0.00776,0.0074064964,5.1967735,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples show higher activation levels when there is a detailed description of the radiological findings tied closely with specific comparisons to prior imaging, typically outlining changes or stability over time. This involves tracking changes or noting specifics about stability from the previous image, emphasizing the importance of historical comparison in evaluating current findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7280,latent_7280,5556,0.011112,0.011476141,7.232487,Emphasis on comparison and identifying interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with lower activation levels often have no prior comparison or no mention of changes between studies. Those with higher activation levels focus on interval changes or detailed comparisons between current and previous imaging, highlighting differences or stability in certain medical conditions, devices, or abnormalities. It suggests emphasis on evaluating change over time for high activation.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.5634920634920635,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7281,latent_7281,7549,0.015098,0.010924314,5.647422,Comparative assessment of imaging with focus on interval changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve comparative analysis of findings across current and prior imaging studies or reports, focusing on consistency or change in specific parameters, such as positions of medical devices or clinical marks (e.g., catheters, tubes, or cardiopulmonary structures). These examples thoroughly emphasize detailed assessment and elucidation of any observed changes or stability across intervals, typically prompted by specified indications or clinical history.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4615384615384615,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7282,latent_7282,2982,0.005964,0.006976307,6.8286037,Focus on pacemaker or lead placement in radiology findings.,"The examples consistently mention pacemaker or lead placements, especially focusing on their stability or changes in position. The descriptions involve technical sequences related to pacemaker devices and exclude those without comparison or mentions of pacemakers.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7995425458096682,0.805,0.9552238805970148,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7283,latent_7283,3586,0.007172,0.008314606,3.8228016,Comparison of findings with prior imaging highlights changes.,"These examples involve a task contrasting findings based on current and prior imaging, often highlighting changes over time. The pattern emphasizes analyzing differences with an inherent comparison angle, expected in radiology to track progression, stability, or improvement of specific findings and artifacts.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3105523426368284,0.465,0.4680851063829787,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7284,latent_7284,24367,0.048734,0.04696882,5.8470716,Changes in the cardiomediastinal silhouette with associated pleural effusions and atelectasis.,"These examples predominantly discuss findings related to changes in the cardiomediastinal silhouette and associated conditions like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pulmonary edema that also reflect changes on serial imaging. The mentions of pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, consolidations, and atelectasis are common elements in these examples.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5263157894736842,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7285,latent_7285,10496,0.020992,0.02431401,4.46922,Prompts include instructions for comparing the current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activations extensively use the command 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating that direct instructions about adding comparative descriptions trigger higher activations. This reflects an emphasis on analyzing imagery changes over time with specific focus on the comparison aspect of the findings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7286,latent_7286,4895,0.00979,0.018785624,6.1017323,Findings discussed with frontal and lateral image comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to findings or comparisons made using both frontal and lateral images with explicit notice of comparison to prior imaging. These reports discuss findings based on multiple projections and comparisons, often in the context of technical specification detail such as ""PA and lateral"" vs ""frontal only.""",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7287,latent_7287,14835,0.02967,0.019742034,8.186667,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"The high-activation examples consistently involve descriptions comparing current and previous findings, with emphasis on stability or change. They typically describe specific findings (like lung opacities or medical device placement) remaining unchanged or demonstrating expected progression/regression. This commonality underlies reports when stable or anticipated changes are key clinical observations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.3125,0.3378378378378378,74.0,126.0
+7288,latent_7288,12095,0.02419,0.016332392,6.361319,Stable placement of medical devices compared with prior images.,"Examples with lower activations lack any specific reference to a change in medical device placement, while those with higher activations frequently highlight the status, stability, or positioning of medical devices such as tubes or catheters within the patient's anatomy and often compare with prior images.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3749171493616898,0.4522613065326633,0.3448275862068966,0.1,100.0,99.0
+7289,latent_7289,5525,0.01105,0.013884038,7.2065973,Detailed assessment of device positioning or stability changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations mention specific medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) and changes in their position or condition compared to previous images. This pattern is about documenting the stability or alteration of device positioning in follow-up examinations, often using detailed descriptions of current vs. prior images with regard to these devices.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4482758620689655,0.26,100.0,100.0
+7290,latent_7290,4165,0.00833,0.0072763953,4.349803,Comparison to prior imaging with room for evaluation of changes.,"The examples with high activation frequently contrast current findings with previous imaging or reports, indicating changes or lack thereof. This pattern is often seen in follow-up studies where interval changes are noted or ruled out.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.3333333333333333,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4078683259735046,0.41,0.4196428571428571,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7291,latent_7291,3493,0.006986,0.008049626,3.6211183,Descriptions indicating interval change or stability from previous imaging.,"These examples focus on radiologic findings that indicate interval change, stability, or progression of previous conditions when compared to prior examinations. Such comparisons are standard in radiology reports, particularly in follow-ups and evaluations post procedures or treatments.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7292,latent_7292,3295,0.00659,0.01160143,6.3291826,Given current and prior frontal image comparisons.,"The pattern indicates a focus on comparing a current frontal image against a prior frontal image, typically noted for evaluation of interval changes in the context of a specific indication or clinical query. These prompts often explicitly reference the comparison and involve varied indications of stability or change.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4916115912557193,0.575,0.5414364640883977,0.98,100.0,100.0
+7293,latent_7293,6652,0.013304,0.01109105,4.5842834,Interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with non-zero activations describe chest imaging findings in terms of their interval changes, highlighting improvement, new findings, or unchanged conditions from previous studies. This is typical for evaluating the progression or resolution of a particular condition.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7294,latent_7294,10966,0.021932,0.020597652,5.128368,Relating findings to prior reports or specific comparative analysis.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently include a reference to a prior report or comparison with a previous image using a specific date or indication of a previous examination. This might signify that the model is triggered when there is a focus on tracking changes over time in the radiological findings from prior documented reports.,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4424262904452141,0.505,0.5029940119760479,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7295,latent_7295,6695,0.01339,0.012785969,4.701371,Comparison with priors to assess interval change or stability.,"The examples consistently describe the evaluation of current radiological findings in direct comparison to prior images, often in the context of a clinical indication for assessing interval changes or stability, using language like 'compared to prior', 'interval change', or 'evaluation for placement'. These examples emphasize the importance of indicating how findings have changed or remained consistent over time.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4812030075187969,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7296,latent_7296,7590,0.01518,0.012531994,4.9413548,Emphasis on serial comparison of radiographic findings over time.,"The examples with higher activation ratings consistently discuss findings in the context of changes or stability over time, via comparison with prior imaging. This temporal evaluation of imaging highlights the focus on stability or change, which is essential in diagnosing and monitoring conditions.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4022713687985654,0.425,0.4460431654676259,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7297,latent_7297,4701,0.009402,0.009487074,4.3163004,Comparison with prior imaging showing change or stability.,"The high activation samples in this dataset consistently reference comparison to prior imaging or include previous imaging reports as context. This indicates the model activates strongly when current imaging studies are explicitly compared to previous ones, particularly if there is an observed change or stability noted in the findings.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3869962817807255,0.39,0.3720930232558139,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7298,latent_7298,10404,0.020808,0.012360875,4.8544817,Emphasis on comparative analysis with previous imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a comparative analysis between current radiographic findings and prior examinations or reference changes over multiple prior exams. This often involves citing alterations in opacities, structures like pleural effusions, or device placements relative to previous imaging, indicating focus on temporal changes.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7299,latent_7299,20350,0.0407,0.019428976,4.1566157,Stability or change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The prominent pattern across examples with high activation involves identifying changes or stability in findings between current and prior imaging studies. Such reports remark on stability or changes in conditions like opacities, effusions, and device positions, often using phrases like 'unchanged from prior', 'increased since prior', or 'improved compared to prior'.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7300,latent_7300,5792,0.011584,0.012188803,6.518005,Comparison of current and prior radiographic findings.,"These examples commonly involve the comparison of current and prior radiographic imaging findings. They highlight cases where notable changes between the two sets of images are observed, described, or explicitly noted to be 'unchanged'. Phrases like 'compared to prior study', 'in comparison with' indicate this pattern.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7301,latent_7301,12790,0.02558,0.018069616,9.009196,Descriptions rely heavily on comparisons with prior imaging.,"The highlighted examples focus on comparisons of current imaging findings with those of prior studies to detect any changes or stability in conditions. This is indicated by terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'stable', 'interval change', which are explicitly used to describe the comparison process.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3837691935524942,0.395,0.3375796178343949,0.7571428571428571,70.0,130.0
+7302,latent_7302,7790,0.01558,0.021370875,5.820235,Comparison-driven identification of new or resolved medical findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention both past and current imaging, emphasizing a focus on findings relative to previous conditions. High activations include changes in comparisons or stability, both in identifying new pathologies or noting stability relative to prior images.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4212712920648109,0.4371859296482412,0.4090909090909091,0.27,100.0,99.0
+7303,latent_7303,52181,0.104362,0.089825384,7.9519944,Comparative analysis of current and prior images for interval changes.,"The high-activation examples prominently use both current and prior imaging for comparison, aiming to identify changes or stability over time. This task requires detailed comparison between current and past images to inform clinical decisions.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7304,latent_7304,2750,0.0055,0.0065091588,5.3054786,Request for detailed comparison with prior images.,"Highly activated examples include references or requests to compare findings against prior studies which involve complex or detailed comparisons, often requiring interpretation and noting changes over time, implying radiology requires detailed evaluations on previous data to contextualize present findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5130434782608696,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7305,latent_7305,4534,0.009068,0.009636952,4.297889,Reports detailing changes or stability in pulmonary effusions or fluid.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference conditions related to pulmonary effusions or fluid changes, often noting changes in size or persistence. This pattern suggests these reports focus on tracking and comparing the evolution of fluid-related findings over time or in relation to a prior state, making them similar in descriptive analysis.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4390243902439024,0.18,100.0,100.0
+7306,latent_7306,5801,0.011602,0.009621786,5.533871,Focus on position change or assessment of tubes/catheters as compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight a focus on changes in medical devices like tubes and catheters as noted in radiological exams over time. The language specifically describes the positions or placements of these devices relative to prior examinations, using phrases such as 'unchanged', 'no significant change', 'interval placement', indicating evaluations based on systemic review triggered by changes in device status.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6114937309215671,0.615,0.6419753086419753,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7307,latent_7307,5227,0.010454,0.015894538,3.973486,Distinction or consistency in radiological findings across current and prior imaging studies.,Highly activated examples consistently describe inter-study comparisons of radiological findings where changes or stabilities are noted over time or across different modalities. The focus is on evaluating temporal changes in patient conditions using comparisons between the current and prior images.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7308,latent_7308,10675,0.02135,0.019931214,5.5274744,Description of findings with all elements noted as normal status.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve direct observation of normal findings in chest radiographs, particularly those explicitly stating no significant or acute abnormalities such as 'heart size is normal', 'lungs are clear', 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax', etc. Contrarily, those with lower activation levels often involve complexities, potential abnormalities, or significant interventions indicated by more detailed findings.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5265434954150907,0.565,0.6511627906976745,0.28,100.0,100.0
+7309,latent_7309,4577,0.009154,0.014660447,5.00947,Explicit mention of 'PRIOR_REPORT' in radiology text.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on the inclusion of a structured prior report component. This involves stating 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'PRIOR_ [[RE]] PORT' explicitly in the text as part of a comparison against previous studies, frequently using this notation as a structural element in the report format.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4762186364788375,0.535,0.5209580838323353,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7310,latent_7310,71300,0.1426,0.08306002,4.451215,Stability or lack of interval change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with patterns of unchanged findings between current and prior imaging, such as stable pleural effusions, unchanged lung opacities, or stable cardiac silhouette, are associated with higher activations. High activation examples commonly describe the consistency or stability of pulmonary or cardiovascular findings over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5793269230769231,0.58,0.5869565217391305,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7311,latent_7311,26711,0.053422,0.030757902,4.841235,Analysis includes interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently include findings compared to prior imaging studies, specifically highlighting interval changes or stability over time. This reveals a pattern of evaluating current findings in light of historical data to ascertain progression or regression of conditions. Activation is connected to the emphasis on comparison rather than just incident findings.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4476190476190476,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7312,latent_7312,11605,0.02321,0.013615198,3.7835152,Focus on stability or changes in key features compared to prior images.,"The examples showing activations highlight descriptions related to changes or stability in situational positions or features (such as cardiac silhouettes or support devices), especially in comparison with prior studies. These descriptions are often needed in radiology to track progression or stability of key health indicators.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7313,latent_7313,5646,0.011292,0.012133388,3.55397,Comparative findings suggestive of pneumonia or other notable pathology.,"The examples with high activation typically involve findings related to potential pneumonia, subtle opacities, or comparison to previous imaging stating either no significant changes or identification of abnormal findings suggestive of a pathology like atelectasis, pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or pneumonia with cautionary notes to consider clinical correlation or repeat imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.546875,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7314,latent_7314,22625,0.04525,0.046597812,4.543996,Description of findings without prior comparison focus.,Examples with high activation consistently involve a focus on describing findings from given images without the requisite of comparing them to prior images. Emphasis is placed on new observations or synthesis from current images.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6328029375764994,0.64,0.6944444444444444,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7315,latent_7315,6231,0.012462,0.016734805,7.3986745,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on radiological descriptions that explicitly reference comparisons to prior imaging studies, often contrasting current with previous findings demonstrating continuity or change. The comparison frequently appears alongside phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'unchanged since', or includes dates of prior studies, showing a clear linguistic pattern devoted to temporal comparison.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4728682170542636,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7316,latent_7316,21492,0.042984,0.025537046,3.2879562,Detailed interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging findings.,"The examples indicate a pattern where reports provide detailed descriptions of interval or comparative changes in the imaging findings relative to prior studies. These detailed comparative assessments emphasize changes or stabilities in specific features such as effusions, opacities, leads, or devices, often providing a nuanced overview of any progression or stability over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7317,latent_7317,3936,0.007872,0.009810415,9.397506,Detailed comparison of current and prior images with structured report segments.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve prompts requesting findings based on a set of current images and prior images, or the cases explicitly mention detailed comparisons to prior reports. These examples also often include structured segments such as 'FINDINGS' and 'IMPRESSION', which are hallmark patterns of detailed radiological reports or analyses.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4330805178886079,0.445,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7318,latent_7318,5109,0.010218,0.0066343634,2.3737056,Directive to compare findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation consistently include the directive to analyze current imaging while referencing prior images, explicitly noting 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior'. The attention to comparing current and prior images appears to be a key linguistic feature.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7319,latent_7319,17056,0.034112,0.014187126,2.884011,"Comparison of interval changes in pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or atelectasis.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve radiological descriptions involving the presence of a pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or atelectasis, where a comparison with a prior frontal image is essential to note changes or stability over time. This indicates a focus on identifying interval changes in specific conditions requiring follow-up.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5797101449275363,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7320,latent_7320,4227,0.008454,0.008771211,4.4619617,Surgical or medical device artifacts and placements in radiological images.,"The presence of surgical artifacts like sternotomy wires, clips, and medical devices such as central catheters, pacemakers, or tubes are a distinct pattern. Their presence is contrasted or noted across studies to identify changes or ensure appropriate placement and stability.",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.5963302752293578,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7321,latent_7321,9979,0.019958,0.017350523,4.495178,"Clear lungs, normal cardiac and mediastinal contours in radiology reports.","The highly activated examples focus on the clear or normal lungs, heart, and mediastinal contours in radiological descriptions. These examples explain a pattern of unremarkable findings in crucial thoracic areas, often seen in comparative radiology interpretations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.59375,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7322,latent_7322,15682,0.031364,0.021807926,8.263607,Reference to or inclusion of a prior report.,"The examples with higher activations frequently reference the presence of a prior report or explicitly mention 'PRIOR_REPORT' in their description, even if the specific prior report or details are not provided. This suggests that the pattern involves direct inclusion or reference to prior reports when describing the findings.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3949654464211373,0.455,0.4529411764705882,0.8279569892473119,93.0,107.0
+7323,latent_7323,10391,0.020782,0.01613428,4.920792,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with clear lungs.","The pattern described involves radiologic reports that specifically identify the normal appearance and stable condition of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in the context of clear lungs. This constellation of stable and normal findings represents a common scenario devoid of acute cardiopulmonary complications.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6625620105260508,0.665,0.6987951807228916,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7324,latent_7324,3960,0.00792,0.007474802,4.502412,Direct comparison with prior images without relying on prior reports.,"The highly activated examples describe a pattern indicating the need to provide a description of findings specifically in comparison to prior imaging studies, with the descriptions not relying on an existing prior report. The focus is on directly comparing the current and prior images to evaluate changes, rather than interpreting against provided prior reports.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7325,latent_7325,15798,0.031596,0.016145295,4.8882785,Descriptions highlighting lung volumes or hyperinflation in radiology findings.,"Examples with activations near zero indicate no significant pattern. High activation examples typically involve explicit observations of lung hyperexpansion or hyperinflation, common with obstructive lung diseases like COPD, and specific findings like clear lungs with adequate aeration, often highlighting lung volumes or aeration as a focus rather than pathology description.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4540888743312589,0.5,0.5,0.21,100.0,100.0
+7326,latent_7326,31151,0.062302,0.026621113,2.3783107,Comparisons to prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"A hallmark feature in these examples is the direct comparison of findings to prior imaging results with explicit notations of changes or stability, frequently in the context of acute or interval changes. This includes phrases like 'compared to previous', 'as compared to prior', or descriptions of stability of known findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6334513318771811,0.635,0.6194690265486725,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7327,latent_7327,5160,0.01032,0.01259707,6.204862,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies focusing on changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the comparison aspects in radiology studies, particularly focusing on interval changes or stability of certain findings since prior imaging, such as opacities, effusions, and medical devices. These examples consistently highlight differences or similarities with prior exams, indicating that comparison to previous imaging is a key determinant for activation.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7328,latent_7328,31826,0.063652,0.031660162,3.8004444,Comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"The pattern observed in these examples is the description of radiological findings by comparing current imaging with prior studies. This is explicitly done by referring to changes or stability in specific features (e.g., 'unchanged', 'increased in size', 'improved') across the examples. This comparative approach is a common characteristic in medical radiology reports for tracking disease progression or stability.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7329,latent_7329,4101,0.008202,0.006766559,7.035893,Focus on interval change/stability comparison with prior studies.,"Examples show consistent findings or stability of clinical conditions over time as indicated by radiological assessments, focusing on comparison to previous imaging. Keywords like 'interval improvement', 'stable', and 'unchanged' are suggestive of the pattern.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7330,latent_7330,3256,0.006512,0.007084714,6.0186105,Request for comparison to prior images.,"The pattern observed in the samples with high activation is the explicit request for a comparison of current images with prior images, which is a common form of inquiry in radiology reports. This involves a command to evaluate changes or stability in radiological findings over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5146966854283928,0.515,0.5157894736842106,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7331,latent_7331,4372,0.008744,0.007444486,4.7477345,Comparison of current and prior radiographic findings.,"The high-activation examples consistently require an analysis of radiographic findings in comparison with previous images. This involves assessing changes or stability in pathologies, positions of medical devices, or other imaging characteristics across time, while many of the low-activation examples are standalone assessments without needing comparison.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7332,latent_7332,6463,0.012926,0.008044263,4.2030687,Report changes or stability based on current versus prior imaging.,"The pattern of these examples indicates the presence of changes or status updates based on previous imaging studies, explicitly using comparative language. The key request here is to identify or describe changes between the current and prior imaging, a common need in longitudinal patient monitoring in radiology reporting, frequently using past examinations for reference.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7333,latent_7333,48298,0.096596,0.06746413,6.104448,Emphasis on interval changes in devices or anatomical features compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently analyze and describe the changes in medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or specific anatomical changes over time, emphasizing the comparison and interval changes between previous and current images. This differs from lower activation examples, which either lack comparative imaging description or feature stable findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7334,latent_7334,5525,0.01105,0.00772736,5.678777,Reports comparing findings with prior images.,"These examples demonstrate reports where comparisons are made between prior studies, albeit with low activation levels when no changes are present. Reports with noted changes versus no change influence activation levels.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4612391499551033,0.505,0.5031847133757962,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7335,latent_7335,5625,0.01125,0.008105448,3.7155743,"Comparison of imaging findings, especially lines/tubes positions, to prior studies.","These examples focus on describing specific findings in comparison with previous radiographs, often highlighting unchanged or stable conditions such as tube positions, cardiomediastinal contours, or lack of new pathologies. Reports emphasize comparisons and include specific positional details or clinical implications, frequently discussing changes in placement or configuration that might necessitate intervention.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4836065573770491,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7336,latent_7336,7501,0.015002,0.012963541,5.9832435,Requests for comparison to prior images even when 'comparison: none' is stated.,"Higher activations occur when a current imaging study is compared to a prior one, even when the current report states 'comparison: none.' This often happens when the prompt specifically asks for descriptions 'in comparison to the prior frontal image,' indicating a task targeted towards examining changes or stabilities relative to past imaging studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.504950495049505,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7337,latent_7337,7332,0.014664,0.012407227,6.158037,Enlarged cardiac silhouette without vascular congestion or pleural effusion.,Examples with high activation levels consistently describe unexplained or disproportionate enlargement of the cardiac silhouette with both the absence of vascular congestion and pleural effusion. This dichotomy is notable as edema or effusion often corresponds with cardiomegaly in radiological assessments.,0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5604395604395604,0.6,0.75,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7338,latent_7338,12975,0.02595,0.016072346,5.862071,Worsening opacities or consolidations compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss findings of new or worsening opacities or consolidation compared to the prior image, which is often concerning for conditions like pneumonia or aspiration. It appears the model is detecting worsening lung pathology as the key pattern with higher activation.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4689028651292802,0.525,0.5714285714285714,0.2,100.0,100.0
+7339,latent_7339,10132,0.020264,0.01256035,5.6757045,Implicit comparison to prior images without explicit statements of 'no change'.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve comparisons of current imaging findings with prior images despite the absence of explicit comparison remarks like 'no change'. These examples assume a comparative framework without necessarily stating it explicitly, indicating that the pattern is centered around the implicit comparison, particularly when subtle changes are noted.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.5,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7340,latent_7340,4862,0.009724,0.010978435,6.494771,Consistent findings compared to prior studies.,The pattern exhibited across these examples include a direct comparison to a prior study with specific mention of similarity or changes in the current and previous imaging findings. This analytical approach in reporting emphasizes monitoring continuity and status changes.,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4937932437932438,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.41,100.0,99.0
+7341,latent_7341,47571,0.095142,0.052198254,6.420457,Description of stable or resolving findings compared to prior imaging.,"The identified pattern revolves around substantial change in radiological findings compared to prior studies. This includes instances where a previously noted anomaly, such as pneumonia or effusion, has resolved or remained unchanged as described in follow-up reports.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.4301075268817204,0.4819277108433735,83.0,117.0
+7342,latent_7342,10299,0.020598,0.014752301,4.8733034,Comparison to prior imaging and assessment of interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels not only provide a description of current findings but also clearly compare these findings with prior imaging, identifying changes or stability over time. This alignment with comparison and change assessment is a recurring pattern in the dataset.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4768253968253968,0.485,0.488,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7343,latent_7343,16182,0.032364,0.014385061,4.5216403,"Focus on pleural effusion, atelectasis, or opacities in descriptions.","Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to potential or suspected issues related to pleural effusion, atelectasis, or opacities, which are typical manifestations needing careful monitoring in radiology reports. Examples like 42 and 45 mention direct observations of opacities or effusions wondering about the etiology or specificity of those findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4193548387096774,0.6190476190476191,84.0,116.0
+7344,latent_7344,2841,0.005682,0.011245502,7.7510934,Explicit comparison of current and prior images or reports.,"The examples with high activation levels all include instructions to compare current radiological imaging with prior images or reports, explicitly utilizing the term 'compare' or 'comparison' prominently.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7345,latent_7345,4550,0.0091,0.009200425,5.1275334,Analyzing or generating findings with reference to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently demonstrate the pattern of explicit requests or prompts for description or analysis of image findings in the context of prior imaging. Terms such as 'prior frontal image' and explicit empty placeholders suggest the need for detailed comparative analysis or generation based on prior image data, which are likely requirements seen in these activations.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.36,0.4,0.4333333333333333,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7346,latent_7346,6893,0.013786,0.024146186,7.9944606,Prominence of prior image comparison prompts activation.,"Activation is higher in examples where text emphasizes comparison between current and prior images. Use of phrases like ""PRIOR_REPORT"" and ""comparison to the prior"" indicates detailed analysis is being prompted specifically for comparison, which is consistently present in higher activation samples.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4938271604938271,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7347,latent_7347,41900,0.0838,0.03473852,2.6507068,Emphasis on significant interval changes in lung or pleural findings.,"Examples with higher activation (e.g., 4-7) focus on significant interval changes, often related to pulmonary opacities or pleural effusions indicative of acute processes, with explicit comparison to prior findings. Samples with comprehensive CLEAR COMPARATIVE findings directly related to acute/important changes receive higher activation.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5294117647058824,0.27,100.0,100.0
+7348,latent_7348,5875,0.01175,0.008143232,4.853737,Comparison of current imaging to explicitly dated prior studies.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings in comparison to explicitly dated prior imaging studies, indicating an interest in changes over time, stability, or resolution, particularly when specific previous results are named or described.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4814814814814814,0.26,100.0,100.0
+7349,latent_7349,4060,0.00812,0.006172903,5.095268,Explicit interval changes in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples have high activation when they include specific findings described in relation to prior imaging while discussing changes in pathology or stability. This pattern emphasizes interpretation based on previous states, indicative of interval changes.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7350,latent_7350,3159,0.006318,0.010635373,4.815617,Descriptive findings without prior image comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve situations without explicit prior comparisons. They often include notable changes or findings in imaging studies, such as shifts in the mediastinal and cardiac silhouettes, opacities, or effusions, that are observational rather than comparative.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5457585892368502,0.5808080808080808,0.6666666666666666,0.3061224489795918,98.0,100.0
+7351,latent_7351,9547,0.019094,0.0136323515,9.3747425,Clear comparative imaging findings or resolution following prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly feature instances where the description explicitly mentions findings in context to a previous study, indicating either stability or resolution/comparison of specific pathologies like opacities, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion. This implies the pattern centers around follow-up or comparative evaluation reports that lead to clear imaging diagnosis or changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4041404598813374,0.415,0.2666666666666666,0.4117647058823529,68.0,132.0
+7352,latent_7352,26932,0.053864,0.026396371,5.3373866,Explicit assessment of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation include a direct comparison of current imaging with prior imaging, where changes are explicitly mentioned regarding specific findings such as tube placements or extent of opacities. Examples with zero activation don't involve explicit comparisons or assessments of interval changes with prior imaging.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5445544554455446,0.5913978494623656,93.0,107.0
+7353,latent_7353,10384,0.020768,0.01830668,5.6612053,Assessment of medical device positioning in relation to anatomical landmarks.,"These examples consistently involve the examination of multiple features or entities on the chest radiograph (e.g., tubes, catheters) in relation to either the carina or other standard anatomical landmarks. The explanations are heavily focused on precise positioning or changes in medical devices across successive time points on imaging.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5149775925780329,0.5326633165829145,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,99.0
+7354,latent_7354,5088,0.010176,0.012395365,4.555077,Comparison of current and prior radiographic images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve radiology interpretation tasks where the current and prior radiographic images need to be compared to evaluate changes or stability of findings. This pattern emerges from references to previous imaging explicitly mentioned in the tasks, highlighting the comparative nature of radiological interpretation exercises.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7355,latent_7355,30234,0.060468,0.029011216,1.970844,"Explicit comparison of cardiopulmonary features to prior images, noting stability or minor changes.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently exhibit findings related to cardiopulmonary elements such as heart size, mediastinal contours, or lung volumes as compared to previous images, with a focus on changes that are clearly defined or unchanged. Activation appears related to specific cardiopulmonary changes noted between current and prior images, such as stability or slight changes in heart or lung conditions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6049901247531189,0.605,0.6039603960396039,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7356,latent_7356,21430,0.04286,0.028827121,9.214336,Descriptions of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation emphasize stable or unchanged cardiopulmonary findings specifically when compared to prior imaging, indicating reports that confirm lack of significant interval change in conditions or structures. This includes stable cardiomegaly, unchanged pleural effusions, or no new significant opacities.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4429590017825312,0.5,0.2307692307692307,0.3103448275862069,58.0,142.0
+7357,latent_7357,4491,0.008982,0.0059740287,2.5670428,Temporal changes or stability in previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently refer to the stability or resolution of conditions when compared against previous imaging, indicating a focus on significant temporal changes or stability over time across analyses.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7358,latent_7358,3834,0.007668,0.0059532803,7.2912674,Characteristic pleural changes or stability over time in follow-up imaging.,"Examples with high activation contain references to changes or stability in pleural conditions (e.g., pneumothorax, effusions) as compared to prior films. These conditions are dynamically tracked in follow-up studies for understanding progression or improvement. Examples with low activation do not emphasize these dynamic pleural changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5570910973084886,0.5678391959798995,0.5942028985507246,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+7359,latent_7359,14985,0.02997,0.031154403,6.7852054,Findings and comparisons explicitly related to prior imaging studies.,"The examples contain consistent structural patterns featuring explicit references to previous imaging for comparison, often immediately after the introductory phrase 'Given the current frontal image' and repeated emphasis on changes or similarities in current findings compared to prior imaging. Despite varied indications and findings, the comparison with prior imaging remains central and is explicitly stated in each explanation.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4598147753885458,0.4874371859296482,0.4896551724137931,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+7360,latent_7360,55211,0.110422,0.06245439,9.251597,Comparison between current and previous images for changes.,"The lower activations suggest an absence of consistent pattern or the examples are partial reports. Examples with higher activations tend to involve a clear comparison or description of changes between a current image and a prior image, including reference to previous imaging results, which implies that the task description requires explicit change comparison between the images presented.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.525,0.875,24.0,26.0,0.4031946638581709,0.405,0.2333333333333333,0.8974358974358975,39.0,161.0
+7361,latent_7361,6626,0.013252,0.0107843345,6.0878835,Evaluating interval changes across multiple views in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of findings across both frontal and lateral views of the chest, and comparisons with prior images to evaluate for changes, particularly in the context of complex chest pathologies such as aortic changes, device positioning, or pleural conditions.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7362,latent_7362,8345,0.01669,0.013130107,6.889772,Comparison across multiple imaging views noting consistent or stable findings without significant abnormalities.,"Examples with higher activation focus on comparisons and descriptions across multiple imaging views while noting the presence of normal or expected configurations, but do not identify significant abnormalities. These compare current frontal images with current lateral images, implying a focus on consistency or expected findings across views.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5119047619047619,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7363,latent_7363,9316,0.018632,0.033038646,5.467238,Use of prior imaging for evaluation of interval changes.,"The examples consistently involve the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images to evaluate changes in the patient's condition, indicating a pattern of identifying interval changes or stability in imaging findings over time.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7364,latent_7364,2054,0.004108,0.008133078,6.3157277,Structured task for comparative image analysis using prior imaging data.,"The examples with high activation involve instructions for detailed radiology comparisons, often requiring description changes over time between images. The pattern emerges from structured tasks asking for comparative analysis, integrating historical data or prior images with current findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3725809958686671,0.4170854271356783,0.4444444444444444,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+7365,latent_7365,4822,0.009644,0.011472101,4.095955,Comparison with prior imaging showing minimal or no significant changes.,"The examples with high activation generally revolve around the comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, focusing particularly when there are minimal or no significant changes observed. This entails documentation of the consistency or stability of medical conditions over time through imaging, often indicated by terms like 'no significant interval change', 'unchanged', or 'stable'.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3814808077132982,0.405,0.3442622950819672,0.21,100.0,100.0
+7366,latent_7366,5962,0.011924,0.020446224,7.856034,Direct comparison with prior chest images highlighting changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include direct comparisons between current imaging studies and prior chest images, highlighting specific changes or stability in findings over time. This usage explicitly evaluates changes, employing phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph', indicating systematic comparison over time for diagnostic or treatment monitoring purposes.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.431578947368421,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7367,latent_7367,8057,0.016114,0.012699326,5.0347214,Descriptions of interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The more highly activated examples include specific interval changes in imaging findings from earlier studies, highlighting differences that are not just mentioned but rather explicitly stated as 'improved', 'unchanged', 'increased', or 'unchanged'. This focus on documenting and reporting interval changes, emphasizes patient progress and disease monitoring across imaging timepoints highlighting evolution in pathologies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.537396401859713,0.5376884422110553,0.5368421052631579,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+7368,latent_7368,6790,0.01358,0.010489894,4.3583913,Clear lungs or unremarkable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight findings where lungs appear 'clear' or unremarkable despite previous indications or current comparisons, emphasizing patterns where lungs show no acute abnormalities. This pattern often refers to radiology comparisons and suggestions that areas maintain clarity, suggesting no development of conditions like pneumonia.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6504854368932039,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7369,latent_7369,2096,0.004192,0.00923525,6.9072614,Comparison findings with prior but with 'N/A' prior report details.,"The cases with higher activations consistently involve comparing current and prior images with an emphasis on providing findings specific to the current image, noted as 'N/A' in prior comparisons. This suggests the pattern emphasizes reviewing findings explicitly when prior details are not available or intentionally unreported.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7370,latent_7370,5220,0.01044,0.0113845505,5.7556267,Time-based comparisons with prior imagery.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently use comparisons with prior imaging studies, and summaries of changes over time, focusing often on device placement, cardiovascular findings such as cardiomegaly, or opacities. They often feature patterns with established pathologies that require monitoring over time.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6111811685582178,0.63,0.5902777777777778,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7371,latent_7371,7078,0.014156,0.012483718,3.4784386,Detailed comparative assessment with previous imagery.,"The highly representative examples tend to mention comparisons with previous radiographic studies, and show a focus on changes relative to prior imagery. This is indicated by consistent referencing of prior reports combined with comparative language indicating stability or change in findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4878048780487805,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7372,latent_7372,43131,0.086262,0.05199029,5.6266375,Detailed comparative descriptions against prior findings.,"Highly representative examples include detailed descriptions of current radiological findings compared with prior images, often highlighting changes or stability. Reports use phrases like 'compared to the prior study', 'stable findings since prior', or 'interval change'. This type of language denotes the focus on comparative evaluation.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5238095238095238,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7373,latent_7373,5361,0.010722,0.023979435,5.7536097,"Comparison of patient's current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, noting stability or progression.","The pattern here indicates a comparison between the current imaging and various prior imaging studies. Specifically, highly activated examples describe a progression or lack of significant change in patient condition, often noting stability or minimal change over time in pathologies such as effusions, opacities, cardiac silhouette size, etc. This aligns with medical contexts where monitoring temporal changes in conditions is crucial for prognosis and treatment.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5304347826086957,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7374,latent_7374,2957,0.005914,0.006154972,4.8316274,Frequent comparisons between current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the interval changes or stability of patients' conditions by comparing current and prior imaging studies, especially focusing on variations in medical devices, lung volumes, and consolidations. This is reflective of evaluating progress, complications, or interventions over time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4757852077001013,0.4773869346733668,0.4774774774774775,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+7375,latent_7375,3237,0.006474,0.0066142413,5.9287763,Assessment of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,Highly activated examples often describe imaging reports where multiple simultaneous views (frontal and lateral) are assessed together with a prior frontal image for a comprehensive comparison. This pattern might imply complexity or thoroughness in the radiological report structure that leads to higher activation levels.,0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.550157444894287,0.575,0.5510204081632653,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7376,latent_7376,71817,0.143634,0.069158,3.7492826,Observations indicating procedural change or clinical improvement.,"These examples activate when the findings iterate status, change, or outcomes of procedures or treatments, such as catheter placements or resolution/improvement of conditions. The focus is on detection of procedural success and subsequent improvements as demonstrated by imaging.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.6323529411764706,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7377,latent_7377,58666,0.117332,0.08239064,6.1346574,"Analysis emphasizes comparison with previous studies, noting interval changes or stability.","These examples involve detailed findings based on comparing images, often noting changes from baseline states such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or terms like 'since the prior'. This suggests that the model primarily reacts to discussions about interval changes and comparisons over time. The examples with high activation levels present changes or confirmations of findings against previous images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5733854180051914,0.585,0.5639097744360902,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7378,latent_7378,34216,0.068432,0.058346923,4.2974153,Monitoring changes in medical device placements or pathologies over time.,"Reports are comparing current findings with prior imaging and notably indicate any changes or lack thereof over time. Patterns with higher activations are demonstrating changes in medical devices or pathological conditions. This context involves monitoring positions or placements of devices, changes in pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary alterations in comparison to prior imaging, often with specific detail on positions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7379,latent_7379,23798,0.047596,0.02415737,3.133625,Comparative assessment of radiological findings between current and prior images.,"The descriptions focus on the comparative assessment between the current and prior images or examinations, highlighting any changes in the condition or positioning of the features such as opacities, cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, pleural effusions, and other structures.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7380,latent_7380,25653,0.051306,0.023260744,3.6697822,Description of interval changes from prior imaging.,"Some examples describe a comparison between current and prior radiographs. These examples elaborate on changes or lack thereof in detailed features across different body structures from two sets of images, using specific comparative language or focusing on interval changes. This pattern typically signifies evaluating progress or stability of a condition.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4974747474747475,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.5,100.0,99.0
+7381,latent_7381,17142,0.034284,0.017891748,5.909848,Detailed comparison with prior images to identify interval changes.,"The consistent factor in high activation examples is the conjunction of current imaging with prior imaging studies for direct comparison and identification of changes. These examples emphasize the need for explicit analysis of interval changes from prior images, unlike examples merely providing current descriptions without detailed comparative analysis.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.4018691588785046,0.589041095890411,73.0,127.0
+7382,latent_7382,36625,0.07325,0.0457703,12.032575,Stable or improving pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations generally describe interval changes in lung-related findings such as effusions, opacities, or devices, indicating stability or resolution. This suggests the model activates more when finding stability or improvement in pulmonary findings than in acute or deteriorating conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.5,0.7368421052631579,19.0,31.0,0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.202020202020202,0.8,25.0,175.0
+7383,latent_7383,7587,0.015174,0.021275252,6.0649385,Comparative assessments with prior chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit mention of comparison with prior radiographs or reference to specific prior studies. Additionally, these higher activation examples often detail changes or stability in patient's condition or positioning of medical devices compared to past imaging, reflecting a consistent pattern of comparative assessment across different studies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7384,latent_7384,5650,0.0113,0.008812147,4.715555,Comparison of intubation and catheter positioning over time.,"Highly representative examples focus on findings related to chest radiographs where a comparison with prior imaging reveals new changes or stability of post-surgical or post-procedure devices (e.g., endotracheal tube, catheters, etc.), often related to acute care settings (e.g., intubation, line placements) in chest imaging.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7385,latent_7385,8657,0.017314,0.012906038,4.9581127,Comparison of current findings with previous imaging or prior reports.,"When high activation levels are observed, the radiology reports often include language that explicitly compares current radiological findings to previous imaging or reports, evaluating changes or stability since prior exams. This comparison is a critical component of radiology for tracking disease progression or treatment response, which is why these examples show higher activation levels.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7386,latent_7386,7712,0.015424,0.012036664,5.963225,"Comprehensive analysis of cardiac, mediastinal, hilar contours, and lung consolidations/effusions.","The examples that have a high activation level consistently present a complete analysis of chest images that mention the state of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, as well as the presence or absence of lung consolidations or pleural effusions. These reports provide a detailed summary of normalcy or abnormalities in these major radiological areas, indicating a comprehensive understanding of the chest X-ray's diagnostic scope.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.456,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7387,latent_7387,5907,0.011814,0.009644551,5.7539124,Emphasis on normal findings or unchanged status.,"These examples often use phrases that indicate a lack of acute findings or changes, specifically focusing on normality or absence of significant abnormalities. Terms like 'unchanged', 'normal limits', and 'no acute process' consistently appear, implying an assessment of stability or absence of notable pathology.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5702932877740674,0.585,0.5620437956204379,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7388,latent_7388,3300,0.0066,0.009009626,7.923932,Detailed pulmonary opacities and structural changes assessments.,"Examples with high activation levels involve detailed descriptions of pulmonary opacities, often in combination with potential membrane/structural changes like overlap or pleural effusions, along with comparison or assessment against prior images. Low activation examples are generally simple position or status updates on medical devices.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7229064039408868,0.73,0.6742424242424242,0.89,100.0,100.0
+7389,latent_7389,60057,0.120114,0.06772831,6.243105,Explicit comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels predominantly feature scenarios where prior imaging studies are explicitly referenced, specifying either direct comparison or stable findings from earlier examinations. The inclusion of specific historic comparison details and interpretive phrases like 'unchanged', 'as before', or the use of explicit dates reflects the pattern.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7390,latent_7390,3550,0.0071,0.010022759,5.139168,Reports explicitly mentioning image comparisons without detailing changes.,"The pattern indicates reports that specifically mention the presence of image comparisons or reference other images descriptively (e.g., 'in comparison with the prior study'), notably when assessing changes in patient condition or verifying changes between current and previous images, independent of actual changes found.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7391,latent_7391,45521,0.091042,0.048749052,5.147293,Inclusion of prior frontal image comparison in the analysis.,"Most examples involve requests to compare findings in a current frontal image to those in a prior image. Reports mentioning such comparisons often describe intervals or stable findings over time, changes, or lack of change in specific anatomical or pathological features, such as nodules or pneumothorax, often framed with standard evaluative language indicating continuity or deviation from the prior findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4652777777777778,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7392,latent_7392,15919,0.031838,0.020591171,5.7808533,Description involves comparison with prior images and stable or unchanged findings.,"Examples showing activation levels with a comparison seem to indicate a description of changes over time or stability in findings in relation to prior studies. Examples providing additional relevant details, such as healed fractures or unchanged abnormalities, seem aligned with this pattern.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4890389177071658,0.5,0.5072463768115942,0.35,100.0,98.0
+7393,latent_7393,2646,0.005292,0.0066048703,5.432557,Comparison against multiple prior imaging studies or imaging modalities.,Examples with high activation levels consistently feature comparisons between different imaging modalities or direct references to prior imaging studies. This highlights the effectiveness of evaluating current imaging against multiple previous instances to understand stability or progression of findings.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7394,latent_7394,4784,0.009568,0.011380512,7.0803823,Patterns or changes identified in current vs. prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or specific findings observed in latest imaging comparisons, especially focusing on new, resolved, or unchanged abnormalities between current and prior images. They emphasize assessment relative to prior state changes, highlighting important information for diagnosis or treatment decisions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.4477611940298507,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7395,latent_7395,32257,0.064514,0.044437356,6.275274,Unchanged findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The prominent pattern involves the use of terminologies describing changes or continuities between the current and prior imaging. Specifically, descriptions often highlight stable conditions or unchanged size of notable anatomical features (e.g., cardiac silhouette, lesions) between studies, even in the presence of new or unchanged medical equipment (ET tubes, pacemakers, etc.).",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5468117408906883,0.5477386934673367,0.5555555555555556,0.5,100.0,99.0
+7396,latent_7396,18859,0.037718,0.027784597,6.1282077,Review of paired frontal and lateral chest images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve frontal and lateral chest images described, highlighting findings on these paired views. This referral to paired images is indicative of a thorough examination pattern and comparison for a more comprehensive evaluation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7397,latent_7397,4232,0.008464,0.0076539335,6.167118,Descriptions or explanations based on comparison between current and prior images.,"The pattern emerges with examples that involve descriptions of the current radiology findings in direct comparison with prior images. The examples that show activation include phrases like ""as compared to prior"", ""in comparison with study of"", or ""since prior examination"", which indicates they are directly addressing changes noted between the current and previous examinations.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5263157894736842,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7398,latent_7398,9298,0.018596,0.0115815345,4.89373,Significant interval changes or new findings compared to prior images.,"High activation examples involved new clinically relevant findings in the current imaging study when compared to the prior images. Often, these examples include interval changes or follow-up statements that show significant progress or new issues, rendering them as important updates in comparison to earlier exams.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5517241379310345,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7399,latent_7399,3452,0.006904,0.009679346,5.6544914,Use of current imaging compared explicitly with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve the usage of current and prior imaging for explicit comparison, followed by descriptions indicating highlights or interval changes based on these comparisons. This pattern is prevalent in radiology reports which emphasize findings through comparison to prior images, especially when consecutive imaging sequences are present.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4800309768779732,0.53,0.5185185185185185,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7400,latent_7400,1765,0.00353,0.00258251,4.4251027,No relevant change in comparison to previous radiograph.,"Examples with high activation involve radiological findings that explicitly compare to previous images, and emphasize either the presence or net absence of 'relevant change'. The emphasis on 'no relevant change' suggests significance in cases where findings remain stable despite clinical query or condition.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3901549527746966,0.585,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7401,latent_7401,19685,0.03937,0.024802618,4.3966627,Emphasis on stable or unchanged cardiomegaly in reports with comparisons.,"The highly activated examples involve situations where cardiomegaly or cardiac silhouette abnormalities are emphasized in reports with comparison to prior imaging, often highlighting lack of change or stability over time, and correlated with vascular congestion or peripheral disease findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,100.0,100.0
+7402,latent_7402,5200,0.0104,0.013783912,5.5699015,Thorough comparison of current and prior imaging focusing on specific clinical findings or indications.,"Examples with high activation levels include instances of specific indications or findings where prior imaging is compared to address a detailed clinical question or observation. They often show focused clinical assessments, detailed comparisons, and comprehensive evaluations against prior studies, indicating a more thorough interpretation process. Lower activation examples tend to lack these detailed comparisons or focused evaluations.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3574051407588739,0.37,0.3194444444444444,0.23,100.0,100.0
+7403,latent_7403,4319,0.008638,0.011807744,5.5386076,Assessment of interval change or stability in cardiopulmonary findings.,"The pattern involves examining imaging studies for acute changes in areas such as heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, and lung findings, often correlating to worsening or improvement trends. Specific descriptors like 'unchanged', 'worsening', 'improved', and references to increased indistinctness or stability give insight into the acute changes monitored over time.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7404,latent_7404,3201,0.006402,0.010315527,7.649759,Detailed 'ASSISTANT' assessment of radiographic findings.,"Examples with high activation levels include detailed 'ASSISTANT' sections, which provide comprehensive assessments of the findings from the images, often detailing heart size, lung clarity, and other specific observations. These sections comprehensively describe radiographic findings segregated by assessment of cardiopulmonary status, osseous structures, and any devices present.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7405,latent_7405,6899,0.013798,0.010926293,7.372532,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting stability or progression of findings.,"The examples with high activation levels reference comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or stability in findings over time. This specific language pattern of referencing past examinations to evaluate stability or progression aligns with higher activation levels.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5208333333333334,0.5050505050505051,99.0,101.0
+7406,latent_7406,5298,0.010596,0.012249056,4.4977736,Frequent focus on stable or unchanged anatomical features.,"The pattern observed is the emphasis on specific findings when comparing current and previous imaging, such as stable cardiomediastinal silhouette, unchanged PICC line placement, or other unchanged key anatomical features. These provide clinicians assurance on particular stable health parameters even when prior detailed reports are absent.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4816649642492339,0.4874371859296482,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,99.0
+7407,latent_7407,97337,0.194674,0.122129515,9.922152,Detailed descriptions of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"While varying slightly in their structure and content, examples with higher activation consistently demonstrate specific or newly identified changes or descriptions comparing current images with prior ones. They involve details that have changed from the previous image to the current one, such as 'unchanged', 'interval development', or changes in tube positions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7408,latent_7408,19353,0.038706,0.023015708,5.575768,Comparison analysis for progression or resolution in medical imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include a description of findings in comparison to prior imaging, along with specific changes noted over time. Additionally, they feature specific direction for evaluating change, reflecting a diagnostic motive to identify progression or resolution of an abnormality. This evaluative language pattern signifies an intent to track changes of a particular medical condition.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7409,latent_7409,3712,0.007424,0.01061755,4.4999495,Standalone description focus without explicit prior image comparison.,"Examples with key findings where the radiology report does not explicitly demand comparison to a prior study or explicitly states in instruction that no comparison is available tend to have low activation. High activation often includes explicit instructions to describe findings without reference to prior images or indicates no previous image is available, focusing more on standalone descriptions of the current findings.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.603448275862069,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7410,latent_7410,5056,0.010112,0.005787099,7.535767,Explicit mention of stability or change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently describe comparison to prior imaging with specific mention of changes or stability in the findings, often using the format 'in comparison with prior' and noting 'little change' or 'stability'. This pattern reflects a structured approach to highlighting changes or stability compared to past studies, which is a key component in radiological follow-up assessments.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.489903745553463,0.507537688442211,0.3137254901960784,0.5333333333333333,60.0,139.0
+7411,latent_7411,71082,0.142164,0.09015549,5.529972,Changes in thoracic findings compared to prior images.,"The common pattern among examples with high activation is the presence of radiographic changes that have been compared to previous studies, highlighting alterations in pleural effusions, cardiac size, or pulmonary vascular congestion. This pattern suggests the model's activation is linked to the process of documenting progression or stability of thoracic findings over time.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5555555555555556,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7412,latent_7412,8025,0.01605,0.016795978,6.329923,Interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"High activation examples often involve references to previous imaging studies for direct comparisons, including changes over time or interval changes. Additionally, obscure or specific medical terms or situations may also increase activation.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7413,latent_7413,36437,0.072874,0.059823617,9.254763,Detection of interval changes in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern identified involves the description of interval changes in imaging findings compared to a prior radiograph, often indicating some degree of change rather than stability. Examples with higher activation frequently describe worsening, improvement, or resolution of specific findings over time, using explicit terms indicating some progression or alteration.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.3947368421052631,0.3529411764705882,85.0,115.0
+7414,latent_7414,5083,0.010166,0.015669467,6.53345,Reports noting low lung volumes and related findings.,"These examples are characterized by a technique-related finding where low lung volumes are noted, often resulting in accentuation of bronchovascular markings, atelectasis, or increased opacity. Low lung volumes are typically due to patient positioning or inspiration effort during the capture of the image.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6521739130434783,0.66,0.7285714285714285,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7415,latent_7415,18824,0.037648,0.017924644,3.3353777,"Description of anatomical tortuosity, especially aorta, as notable finding.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently use the phrase 'mildly tortuous' or 'tortuous' to describe anatomical structures, specifically the aorta, as a notable finding. This distinct pattern of reporting aortic tortuosity seems to be leading to high activation levels of the model.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3807673627974745,0.49,0.4375,0.07,100.0,100.0
+7416,latent_7416,45097,0.090194,0.04376708,2.9888582,Highlights interval changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples showing high activation levels emphasize a comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. They often highlight changes or stability in pathologies or devices between successive radiographic examinations. This includes specific mentions of differences like size changes of lesions, presence or placement of medical devices, and notable changes in lung or heart conditions.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6068255091609656,0.625,0.5874125874125874,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7417,latent_7417,5847,0.011694,0.008553117,2.7181144,Description or comparison against prior images with interactive analytical request.,"These examples involve evaluating findings using a prior image and often asking for a description or comparison related to specific pathologies or changes, indicated by the completion call for an assistant response in the prompt. This back-and-forth dialogue assessment, requiring descriptions, analysis, and comparison to prior images, is distinguishing.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.498663101604278,0.55,0.5304878048780488,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7418,latent_7418,5767,0.011534,0.01391634,4.6336117,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently refer to radiological findings or abnormalities that show minimal or stable changes upon comparison with prior imaging studies. This is indicated by terms like 'unchanged', 'similar to prior', or 'no significant changes', which highlight stability or consistency in findings over time.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4683544303797468,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7419,latent_7419,4690,0.00938,0.007418491,6.168261,Comparison of current and prior images focusing on medical device placement or status.,"Reports with higher activation levels frequently involve comparisons with prior views for changes or confirmation of devices/structures, particularly focusing on the position and status of medical devices or tubes. This comparison highlights the importance of cross-referencing to prior images for ensuring accurate assessments of equipment placement and consistency in findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.6323529411764706,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7420,latent_7420,9505,0.01901,0.029838596,6.780818,Notable changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation scores consistently provide detailed descriptions of changes between current and prior imaging findings, particularly using language that highlights specific observations like increases in opacity, positioning of lines/tubes, and changes in lung fields. This implies a pattern focusing on intervals or changes noted in serial imaging studies.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6294070512820513,0.63,0.6413043478260869,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7421,latent_7421,5521,0.011042,0.012941386,4.0631156,Direct description of current imaging findings without focus on change from prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the sequence of using the current imaging to provide findings or impressions without comparison to prior imaging. The presence of 'comparison' does not necessarily lead to a zero activation if the primary descriptive focus is not on change comparison but rather on describing current images directly. In contrast, examples focusing on comparing to prior findings directly, rather than describing the current state solely, have lower activation values.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7422,latent_7422,3272,0.006544,0.017371386,7.739794,Presence of multiple imaging views (frontal/lateral) and comparisons.,"The examples with high activation show a common pattern in radiological reporting, involving multiple views or images (frontal, lateral, and often prior images) with findings emphasized in context to these different permutations. The syntax describes iterative imaging perspectives and comparisons explicitly.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,0.5555555555555556,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4198391100212327,0.515,0.5082872928176796,0.92,100.0,100.0
+7423,latent_7423,6341,0.012682,0.013157794,7.752148,Generalized or missing specific comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"The pattern seen in examples with higher activations involves instances where multiple images or reports for comparison are provided, but specific conclusions about changes between current and prior images or specific findings are omitted or generalized, often left unfilled or represented with placeholders (e.g., underscores). This lack of detailed comparative analysis distinguishes them.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7424,latent_7424,2444,0.004888,0.0074650487,6.8495674,"Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, clear lungs.",The examples with the highest activations focus on reports that include normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours alongside absence of acute pathologies. These reports include a balance of comparisons to previous findings with predictors of no acute changes or abnormalities.,0.8572011423908609,0.86,0.78125,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7399739973997399,0.74,0.7352941176470589,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7425,latent_7425,10884,0.021768,0.010637428,5.009622,Description of intervals of change compared to prior images.,"Samples with higher activations frequently describe changes in the radiological findings in comparison to prior studies, such as interval placement or removal of medical devices, changes in fluid levels, or alterations in opacities. The emphasis is on temporal changes evidenced by directly comparing with previous images, which is explicitly noted in descriptions or impressions.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.596120745022479,0.6030150753768844,0.584,0.73,100.0,99.0
+7426,latent_7426,2760,0.00552,0.0087265065,5.146638,Frontal image evaluations focused on comparison with prior images without full interpretative context.,"Examples with high activation all emphasize initial image observation without an extensive prior image evaluation context, often accessing only frontal images alongside a request for comparison with prior fronts, usually without mentioning or providing analysis of lateral images when noted.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7427,latent_7427,22967,0.045934,0.028643264,4.4889617,Focus on interval changes or stability in lung findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often discuss the current and prior imaging findings and mention stability or changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, atelectasis, etc., suggesting they focus on interval changes or stability of pulmonary findings over time.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7428,latent_7428,2332,0.004664,0.0069890763,5.4885254,Requests for descriptions using current and prior images for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently ask for descriptions or assessments of findings based on current and prior imaging studies. The task involves comparing findings, even when no prior study is explicitly used in the response, indicating a focus on comprehensive report generation using available images.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3943064809206542,0.475,0.4855491329479768,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7429,latent_7429,10147,0.020294,0.024402667,10.29048,Assessment of stability or change by comparing current to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparative analyses of current versus prior imaging, which frequently includes mentions of stability or change in observed features, often utilizing terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'. These comparisons assess longitudinal changes in the patient's condition.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7430,latent_7430,3251,0.006502,0.011141914,8.595776,Focus on providing or requesting a description based on comparison to prior images.,"The strongly activated examples often involve scenarios where a description of findings is requested or provided in relation to prior imaging. Specifically, these examples include prompts that focus on instructions to produce such descriptive comparisons, not just the occurrence of prior comparisons but framing of findings based on stated criteria.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4275793939041752,0.5025125628140703,0.5029239766081871,0.86,100.0,99.0
+7431,latent_7431,7899,0.015798,0.017606886,4.281048,Detailed descriptions of changes relative to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels discuss findings explicitly in the context of specific prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability or changes over time, even when some samples state ""none"" under comparison. The activation focuses on detailed comparisons and describing findings versus previous evaluations, especially with phrases like 'as compared to prior,' 'interval change,' or noting stability/improvement in findings over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.4268292682926829,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7432,latent_7432,4726,0.009452,0.0120233195,3.886615,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging with focus on changes or stability.,"Highly activated samples consistently describe findings by comparing current images to prior scans, with an emphasis on changes or stability in pathological or anatomical features. Phrases like 'in comparison', 'stable', 'unchanged', and terms describing changes in pathology are prevalent.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.509090909090909,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7433,latent_7433,5661,0.011322,0.024484454,7.331553,Prominent images marked by double brackets [[<image>]] in descriptions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on images marked or referred to in a double bracket notation ""[[<image>]]"", which appears to be a distinctive marker used in the dataset for images being emphasized or newly introduced in the series presented for comparison.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.8846153846153846,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8795664391810518,0.88,0.8392857142857143,0.94,100.0,100.0
+7434,latent_7434,7812,0.015624,0.009647518,3.596483,Patterns of comparison and description of findings relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often pertain to reports mentioning 'comparison' with prior imaging, especially when changes are observed or noted. References to comparison with prior images, particularly those with stable findings or intervals with little to no change, and explicit mentions of previous imaging dates or comparisons between frontal and lateral views consistently trigger higher activations.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7435,latent_7435,26397,0.052794,0.032941133,7.226322,Low lung volumes or diminished aeration.,"These examples exhibit a pattern where the radiology reports discuss low lung volumes or diminished lung aeration, often contextualizing these findings in relation to other potential conditions like atelectasis or pleural effusion, but consistent across these examples is a reference to reduced lung volumes as a noteworthy observation.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4948778342177701,0.555,0.4468085106382978,0.25,84.0,116.0
+7436,latent_7436,8732,0.017464,0.010882516,6.4320226,Tracking progression of known malignancy or pulmonary nodes over time.,"The high activation examples focus on findings or conditions that are traced over time for changes and disease progression using comparison with prior imaging. This often involves conditions such as malignancy, which is critical to track over time for signs of worsening or metastasis.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5122549019607843,0.5778894472361809,0.6,0.2307692307692307,91.0,108.0
+7437,latent_7437,8410,0.01682,0.020281898,6.897305,Reports highlight changes since the prior exam were detected.,"The examples with high activation predominately showcase explicit descriptions of radiological comparisons using directional language or presence of specific changes such as 'interval worsening', 'compared with prior', or mentioning changes detected since a previous study. They often identify transformation in the condition, such as worsening edema or the emergence of a pneumothorax, over time as observable changes.",0.650733752620545,0.6530612244897959,0.7,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7438,latent_7438,4574,0.009148,0.009976798,5.1678023,Evaluation of images in conjunction with explicit mentions of missing portions in the prior report template.,"Higher activation levels are associated with explicit mentions of image evaluation in relation to a prior report, especially with placeholders indicating missing report details, denoting an incomplete radiology context or evaluation, which seems to be the pattern the model is focusing on.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7439,latent_7439,7790,0.01558,0.017859444,8.330136,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and previous imaging studies. This suggests a pattern focusing on evaluating changes or stability of findings between serial images, which can indicate the model's focus on longitudinal assessment of disease progression or resolution in the radiology reports.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4728682170542636,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7440,latent_7440,4956,0.009912,0.008299717,3.4581137,Requested comparison with no available prior imaging studies.,"The pattern describes scenarios where imaging studies are performed but no prior images are available for comparison. Despite the request for comparison, the reports indicate no baseline studies exist to use for comparison or evaluation of change, indicated by the frequent mention of 'none' or 'no prior'. This creates ambiguity when evaluating findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5146966854283928,0.515,0.5157894736842106,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7441,latent_7441,11029,0.022058,0.021210972,7.330515,Stable or unchanged findings in serial imaging comparisons.,"Higher activation levels are associated with cases where radiographic findings are persistently stable, do not show significant interval changes, or where new findings confirm a previous suspicion without change. This stability informs treatment or follow-up plans, often noted in chronic conditions or stable post-procedural findings.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.2222222222222222,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4107142857142857,0.23,100.0,100.0
+7442,latent_7442,17489,0.034978,0.026568795,7.5727944,Significant interval changes in radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activations refer to changes in imaging findings over time, specifically highlighting changes like increased opacifications, consolidations, or other substantial alterations in lung fields that suggest progression or improvement of pathologies. This pattern reflects a focus on tracking interval changes in imaging studies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5416666666666666,0.4020618556701031,97.0,103.0
+7443,latent_7443,4345,0.00869,0.009073064,3.9917502,Comparison involving current frontal and lateral images with prior imaging.,"Images which are compared with prior imaging studies and include comparisons of findings from both frontal and lateral images, strengthening the analysis regarding patient conditions.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7444,latent_7444,12140,0.02428,0.012492564,4.3429704,Stable or unchanged findings on current versus prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples describe both the current and prior images, even frequently denoting the lack of the prior report, focusing on comparison over interval findings, and describe minimal or no interval changes, often indicating a stable or unchanged condition over time. These reports often mention the consistency of findings compared to previous images and emphasize changes, when present, mainly for devices such as the positioning of tubes and lines.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4691358024691358,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7445,latent_7445,7170,0.01434,0.011139699,5.0065966,"Evaluation of images comparing current and prior studies, focusing on changes or new findings.","The highly activated examples consistently involve evaluating current imaging studies against prior ones, with detailed techniques and descriptions highlighting changes or confirmations of stability. They often contain specific comparison details like multiple previous comparisons, significant changes, or new findings correlated against past exams. The mention of prior findings being stable or unchanged is less relevant in higher activations, which rather highlight changes or new confirmations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4405452141186044,0.45,0.4603174603174603,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7446,latent_7446,3184,0.006368,0.01439179,7.6151237,Inconclusive studies due to incomplete imaging information.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios with missing or unclear imaging information which hinders comparison with prior exams and affects diagnostic certainty. The model highlights studies that lack complete information leading to inconclusive assessments, using gaps in comparison details, like missing image views, unspecified times, or incomplete imaging records.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.52667004048583,0.5276381909547738,0.5229357798165137,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+7447,latent_7447,18515,0.03703,0.01970773,3.9279509,Focus on stable positioning of medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently describe the details of inserted medical devices, such as pacemakers, tubes, or surgical hardware, which are described as stable, unchanged, or positionally noted.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5423728813559322,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7448,latent_7448,5198,0.010396,0.011971537,4.636461,"Emphasis on specific changes or stability against prior imaging, often involving devices or significant opacities.","The highly activated examples often refer to specific observations in chest radiographs evaluated against prior imaging, detailing changes such as resolution, stability, or worsening of conditions. They frequently describe the presence or adjustment of medical devices like tubes or catheters with respect to previous placements or findings, which require close comparative attention.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4320081549439347,0.4371859296482412,0.4491525423728814,0.53,100.0,99.0
+7449,latent_7449,5578,0.011156,0.007953541,3.4504626,Description of findings based on comparison with prior images.,"These examples consistently involve providing radiological findings based on comparisons with prior imaging. They focus on describing interval changes or the stability of identified features or abnormalities across different imaging moments, using terms such as 'compared to', 'unchanged from', or referencing prior studies.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7450,latent_7450,6629,0.013258,0.012788543,10.86885,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior chest images.,"Reports tend to have higher activation levels when the task involves a direct comparison between current and prior imaging of the chest area, referencing changes or stability in specific observations like cardiac silhouette size, pulmonary findings, or device placements across the images.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.45,0.7159090909090909,88.0,112.0
+7451,latent_7451,6501,0.013002,0.011961755,4.362727,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+7452,latent_7452,3588,0.007176,0.00947175,5.7032003,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior images without acute changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparative assessments with prior imaging studies while also focusing on the absence of acute processes. This includes clear lungs and stable cardiomediastinal structures despite comparisons to earlier images, emphasizing continuity and stability over time.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5098522167487685,0.5175879396984925,0.52,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+7453,latent_7453,4778,0.009556,0.008151511,8.140548,Emphasis on interval findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Higher activation samples refer to comparisons with prior imaging to assess interval changes and generally use terminology marking such comparisons, while lower activations focus on individual examinations or imaging without direct prior comparison, omitting language detailing changes over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.5981308411214953,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7454,latent_7454,17414,0.034828,0.016746096,2.9718015,Change in atelectasis or pleural effusion over time with reference to prior exams.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve findings that describe changes in atelectasis or pleural effusion over time, often with reference to previous exams to assess stability or improvement.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.6271186440677966,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7455,latent_7455,4435,0.00887,0.013207373,3.8149614,Comparison with previous radiological findings for interval changes.,"The key observations in the examples with higher activations are references to previous examinations and notable changes in comparison to them, specifically mentioning interval changes such as increased pleural effusion, changes in cardiac size, or consistent findings with prior reports. These comparisons form the basis of radiological assessments and help determine the stability of patient conditions.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7456,latent_7456,4014,0.008028,0.010798999,5.475239,Reference to stable or unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include a systematic analysis of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, often noted as unchanged or unremarkable, typically in reports comparing current to prior chest images. This repetition and focus likely indicate a common radiological practice and pattern recognized by the model.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7118228468869283,0.715,0.6776859504132231,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7457,latent_7457,23390,0.04678,0.03324103,4.3726606,Radiological identification of new/changing opacities or effusions.,"The pattern identified in examples with higher activation levels involves radiology descriptions that include findings of new or changing opacities or effusions. These findings suggest active or ongoing pathologic processes, which would capture the attention of clinicians seeking to identify changes in a patient's condition. This is relevant in contrast to static findings that don't indicate change.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5897435897435898,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7458,latent_7458,14739,0.029478,0.02259002,8.669721,Elevation of the hemidiaphragm on imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels all describe changes, especially elevations, in the hemidiaphragm, suggesting a common pattern related to diaphragmatic elevation which often correlates with volume changes in adjacent anatomical structures.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.8211587678455798,0.855,0.9333333333333332,0.6176470588235294,68.0,132.0
+7459,latent_7459,1721,0.003442,0.008624589,6.5104547,"Structured prompt with clear comparison request, often involving differential diagnosis.","Prompts with higher activation levels have clearly structured requests for comparison between current and prior images, often explicitly highlighting purpose or medical history involving differential diagnosis or status post significant intervention, using consistent structured input fields even if report details are unfilled or anonymized. Prompts not showing this structured comparison request or lacking expected structured format have lower activations.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3811440619951258,0.435,0.4591194968553459,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7460,latent_7460,6138,0.012276,0.011872657,4.5875864,Normal or unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours.,"These examples feature radiological descriptions that include explicit references to anatomical features, such as 'mediastinal silhouette', 'hilar contours', or 'cardiac silhouette'. The descriptions frequently emphasize normal or unchanged appearances of these structures, suggesting a focus on evaluating these aspects of the images.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6395755210326267,0.6432160804020101,0.6218487394957983,0.74,100.0,99.0
+7461,latent_7461,3656,0.007312,0.00852886,6.890175,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+7462,latent_7462,3936,0.007872,0.011140921,8.05582,Detailed focus on changes in lines/tubes in current vs prior images.,"Examples with high activation explicitly emphasize changes or stability of specific clinical features, e.g., lines, tubes, and opacities, with detailed comparisons to prior images.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5772332263368042,0.595,0.6610169491525424,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7463,latent_7463,4044,0.008088,0.012700815,7.8454013,Significant interval change between current and prior imaging.,"The high activation examples often show dynamic changes or updates, such as equipment adjustments, new findings, or significant temporal changes since a prior image, reflecting significant clinical shifts that prompt reevaluation.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3727623435375093,0.435,0.3243243243243243,0.12,100.0,100.0
+7464,latent_7464,20471,0.040942,0.02695115,3.5245037,Emphasis on description and placement of medical lines and tubes.,"The key pattern associated with higher activation levels involves descriptions of medical line and tube placements, changes in their position, recommendations for adjustments, and typically no acute findings beyond tube placements. These patterns often involve nasogastric tubes, endotracheal tubes, or intravenous lines, highlighting their significance, adjustments, and stable placement in a landscape of otherwise unchanged cardiopulmonary findings.",0.754180602006689,0.7551020408163265,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.6596825396825396,0.665,0.72,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7465,latent_7465,7991,0.015982,0.01286993,2.9256103,Description of radiology findings with current frontal and lateral images in comparison to prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve instructions for generating detailed findings and comparisons specifically between current and prior images, but focusing primarily on the descriptions of the technique and method involving multiple views (frontal and lateral) and comparison during the radiological assessment process.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5080645161290323,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7466,latent_7466,5622,0.011244,0.011431162,6.6327314,Comparison to prior imaging studies to assess interval changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels often reference direct comparisons to prior imaging studies to determine interval changes. The examples commonly use terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'as compared to prior', and include specific historical context or indications that imply a need to assess changes over time from prior studies.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4107426153962378,0.415,0.4273504273504273,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7467,latent_7467,4570,0.00914,0.01257696,5.822004,Utilization of 'PRIOR_REPORT' for direct comparison against prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve both a current and a prior image, enabling a comparison between the two, but most notably, these examples explicitly contain phrases like 'PRIOR_REPORT' or explicitly detailed comparative analysis, which indicates an ongoing monitoring or direct evaluation against prior studies.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7468,latent_7468,3327,0.006654,0.0070434483,5.2785883,Explicit comparison with prior imaging studies and interval changes.,"The key distinguishing factor for high activation levels is when analysis and comparison with prior imaging is explicitly included, demonstrating a pattern of evaluating progression or stability of conditions. This might involve discussing the presence or absence of changes, lines, tubes, or medical devices, and comparing opacity or fluid presence against previous studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7469,latent_7469,4112,0.008224,0.009682455,6.0360584,Comparison of image findings with emphasis on regional stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activation scores often involve comparison to previous imaging studies while mentioning specific details about the images, like normal heart size or stable chest findings. Descriptions often include the phrase 'provide a description of findings in comparison to the prior image', which suggests a pattern of focusing on the stability or changes in certain key regions like heart size, pleural effusion, or pulmonary edema across different images.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.5572519083969466,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7470,latent_7470,27227,0.054454,0.049824353,6.8494086,Presence of mildly or moderately enlarged heart size.,"Higher activation examples consistently mention a moderately or mildly enlarged heart or cardiac silhouette. This finding is notable, often prompting considerations of altered volume status or effects of medical devices that affect heart size in radiographic interpretations.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5471698113207547,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7471,latent_7471,15760,0.03152,0.030697307,6.421233,"Comparison of current and prior frontal images, with inclusion of lateral views.",The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing frontal and lateral images with a prior frontal image. This pattern likely corresponds to the model being trained on generating or evaluating reports that integrate multiple current and prior image types to provide comprehensive radiologic analysis.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4346973593746021,0.445,0.4566929133858268,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7472,latent_7472,3713,0.007426,0.007059603,3.0494287,Higher activation with detailed comparison to prior images.,"High activation is associated with the presence of both current and prior images, alongside comprehensive comparison findings that highlight changes or stability relative to past images.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7473,latent_7473,21311,0.042622,0.024016613,6.610238,Emphasis on evaluation of interval changes in imaging over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically include a comparison between a current image and a prior image, highlighting changes or stability in findings over time. This pattern is common in radiology reporting, emphasizing the importance of interval change assessment to determine progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.4899328859060403,0.8295454545454546,88.0,112.0
+7474,latent_7474,2928,0.005856,0.0069810613,3.5804715,Comparison using both current frontal and lateral images to the prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels contain specific instructions for comparing current and prior imaging, involving detailed analysis like noting unchanged findings or slight variations. They emphasize consistent evaluation across different views (frontal and lateral) and documented comparisons from timing. Prominent terms: 'stable', 'unchanged', and descriptions from both views, hinting multiple angles as significant.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5783132530120482,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7475,latent_7475,8406,0.016812,0.0118377395,4.089985,Assessment of ET or NG tube placement or position.,"The examples with high activation focus on radiological findings directly correlated with endotracheal (ET) or nasogastric (NG) tube placement or assessment of their positions, often in life-supporting scenarios involving intubation or post-surgical evaluations. Key terms like nasogastric or endotracheal tube manage placement or positioning in the patient's care.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3831228473019518,0.457286432160804,0.3548387096774194,0.1111111111111111,99.0,100.0
+7476,latent_7476,11214,0.022428,0.020152662,4.1587367,Explicit comparative evaluations with prior imaging.,The pattern involves identifying differences or consistencies in radiological findings by comparing with prior imaging. The examples with higher activation often express specific changes or stable findings over multiple imaging instances. These descriptions specify comparison dates or emphasize consistency or change over time.,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7477,latent_7477,20832,0.041664,0.02530122,5.70559,Interval changes or positions of medical tubes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of changes or interval developments in medical tubing or catheters, such as endotracheal tubes and nasogastric tubes, compared to prior images. The emphasis is on the interval change or positioning of medical devices, which aligns with the prompt to ‘Provide a description of the findings in comparison’ with prior.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6788438378161381,0.68,0.6607142857142857,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7478,latent_7478,3826,0.007652,0.019057859,6.128199,Request for primary image-based findings without earlier comparison details.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently prompt for descriptions based solely on given images, lacking comparisons or reference to previous reports. This shows a pattern where the request is for a fresh assessment from images rather than evaluating changes over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.6,0.27,100.0,100.0
+7479,latent_7479,34709,0.069418,0.035839666,5.4791365,Describing interval changes involving removal or presence of medical devices.,"Activations are high when there are interval changes noted that are clinically relevant, such as removal or presence of medical devices (catheters or stents) compared to prior reports. This suggests significant alterations in the patient's clinical management or condition.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5909090909090909,0.26,100.0,100.0
+7480,latent_7480,5125,0.01025,0.010093539,6.0658894,Significant cardiopulmonary findings or notable changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically include specific findings such as changes in cardiac silhouette, presence of pleural effusions, consolidation or indications of pneumonia, and comparisons with prior images indicating stable or changed conditions. This suggests the model is focusing on reports with notable cardiopulmonary findings or changes over time compared to prior images, distinct from those noting normal findings or with no comparison data.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4027735600769309,0.41,0.3846153846153846,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7481,latent_7481,23819,0.047638,0.024169186,5.0391536,Emphasis on identifying and quantifying changes in pneumothorax status.,"Examples with a high activation level are primarily focused on evaluating changes in imaging findings with respect to pneumothorax, particularly changes in size, presence, or resolution. Repeated notations of pneumothorax conditions and the assessment of interval changes (either in size or status) are integral in these samples, suggesting an emphasis on this specific condition.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6419270833333333,0.67,0.8863636363636364,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7482,latent_7482,4608,0.009216,0.009339657,3.5251179,Focus on cardiac silhouette size and related observations.,"The pattern observed is the expression of findings related to the cardiac silhouette size, often described as enlarged or normal, in context of low lung volumes or other descriptions that influence the interpretation of the heart's size. Most high activation examples contain descriptions of the cardiac silhouette or related features.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4404761904761904,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7483,latent_7483,4203,0.008406,0.011803058,4.3978252,"Comparison between current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","Examples with the patterns tend to include references to both frontal and lateral images as well as prior comparison, highlighting significant details from multiple angles. The consistent references to comprehensive imaging descriptions in conjunction with prior records focus on comparative evaluation.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4904458598726114,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7484,latent_7484,5084,0.010168,0.009703304,4.629263,Comparison made between current and prior imaging in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve a request for a comparison between current and prior imaging to assess stability or changes in radiological findings, despite the specific nature of findings or conditions being secondary details.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7485,latent_7485,3248,0.006496,0.0074405293,4.5417657,Descriptions of interval changes in medical devices or pathology on comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples involve processing and resolving comparisons between current and previous imaging reports, specifically focusing on interval changes detected over time such as alterations in size or position of medical devices and changes in pathological conditions indicated by terms like 'unchanged', 'intubation', and device positioning. These examples demonstrate differences in clinical assessments between the current and prior radiological findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4606741573033708,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7486,latent_7486,3310,0.00662,0.009298196,7.140089,Current imaging findings without reference to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of frontal and lateral imaging views without directly referencing older images. The pattern highlights findings based solely on the current images, and not on comparison with prior ones, using 'None' under the comparison section despite being asked.",0.84,0.84,0.84,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6915998887737304,0.695,0.7468354430379747,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7487,latent_7487,2024,0.004048,0.005232382,3.6610916,Comparative analysis with previous chest images for pathology evaluation.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently require a comparative analysis between current and previous chest images, mentioning explicit comparisons made to detect changes in pathologies or conditions. This pattern involves noting changes or stability in lung opacities, effusions, tube placements, or cardiomegaly against previous studies, which is a typical practice in radiological assessments.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4158730158730158,0.425,0.44,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7488,latent_7488,23256,0.046512,0.032123514,6.3167386,Change or consistency in monitoring and support device positions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently discuss a change or an intervention applied to monitoring and support devices, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and other catheters, while noting their positions have changed or remained consistent. This pattern reflects how procedural interventions or device placements are critical points for analysis.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6276167471819646,0.63,0.6547619047619048,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7489,latent_7489,4386,0.008772,0.011629755,5.4112005,Statements about stability or lack of significant change in medical imaging compared to prior images.,"Samples with higher activation levels focus on clear, concise comparisons between current and prior radiographs, emphasizing the absence or stability of significant changes such as effusions, opacities, or tube placements. This suggests the model responds strongly to the task of describing stability or unchanged conditions between imaging studies, often used to document findings requiring no immediate action.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4507042253521127,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7490,latent_7490,7997,0.015994,0.01358125,6.4662795,Evaluation of endotracheal tube (ETT) placement in imaging.,"The pattern is characterized by the mention of endotracheal tube (ETT) placement evaluation, which is specifically highlighted in examples with relatively high activation. These examples repeatedly reference 'ET tube' positioning, indicating a systematic pattern these samples illustrate in recordings or reports for cross-reference or confirmation purposes.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.364805278899818,0.485,0.3846153846153846,0.05,100.0,100.0
+7491,latent_7491,1841,0.003682,0.008666442,8.5502405,Inclusion of multiple image angles and prior image comparison.,"Highly activated examples consistently show examination reports where multiple image angles, such as frontal, lateral, and prior, are used for comparison, indicating that comprehensive analysis of films from different perspectives and over time explains their higher relevance to pattern recognition.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4948794093974633,0.545,0.5276073619631901,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7492,latent_7492,15087,0.030174,0.023628652,5.4780617,Descriptions of tubes or lines position in comparison to prior images.,"This pattern involves providing a comprehensive report of findings in comparison to previous imaging, yet focusing substantially on the presence and management of tubes and lines, possibly being positioned accurately or not, along with mentioning the various findings compared to prior images.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5490196078431373,0.28,100.0,100.0
+7493,latent_7493,7856,0.015712,0.018702894,4.3718653,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings explicitly compared to prior imaging, resulting in phrases like 'interval change', 'decreased density', and 'consistent with'. This language indicates a focus on analyzing changes over time between the current and previous reports, capturing diagnostic updates based on comparison.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5367408906882591,0.5376884422110553,0.5321100917431193,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+7494,latent_7494,15746,0.031492,0.019293582,5.957041,Detailed comparative descriptions of current and prior imaging findings.,"High activation levels correlate with examples where radiological reports explicitly compare current and previous imaging findings, noting changes or stability in specific pathologies or anatomical features. This contrasts with lower activation examples lacking detailed longitudinal observations.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7495,latent_7495,9782,0.019564,0.012524322,5.61948,Frequent mention of stability or change from prior imaging in detailed context.,"The examples with higher activation involve detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons to prior imaging, especially when such details are noted in conjunction with specific medical history or indications. Reports emphasizing stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior studies, often for monitoring progression or response to treatment, demonstrate the pattern more strongly.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.68324358568261,0.7,0.636986301369863,0.93,100.0,100.0
+7496,latent_7496,6933,0.013866,0.008244053,4.089164,Focus on changes in medical devices or surgical findings in radiology images.,"The pattern observed in examples with higher activation levels revolves around changes of known medical devices such as catheters, chest tubes, or stents or notable changes in anatomy due to surgeries or known conditions, such as pleural effusions or pneumothorax, seen in the radiological images. This indicates that the focus is on changes or stability of specific medical interventions or post-surgical findings, rather than normal or unremarkable appearances.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4457831325301205,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7497,latent_7497,115684,0.231368,0.13264823,3.9891834,References to changes or stability in interval imaging findings.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve changes or stability of findings on current imaging compared to prior imaging studies, especially involving pleural effusion, opacity changes, and cardiomegaly. There is frequent mention of previous image dates and assessments of changes, indicating that the focus is on analyzing interval changes and stability over time.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.5864661654135338,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7498,latent_7498,2958,0.005916,0.007050297,5.407374,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior imaging with focused clinical indications.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels have descriptions that involve comprehensive examinations using at least both a current and a prior set of images, and present detailed comparisons regarding changes or stability of radiological findings. They typically focus on specific clinical questions or changes related to ongoing medical concerns. This level of detail is consistent with the clinical approach of searching for or ruling out specified pathologies through comparative imaging.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3850186510736969,0.39,0.3658536585365853,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7499,latent_7499,11896,0.023792,0.014178766,3.6647594,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"Among the examples with high activation levels, reports consistently focus on analyzing changes compared to prior studies, which involves assessing alterations in conditions, device placements, or opacities linked to potential conditions (e.g., pneumonia), often detailing improvements or worsening of visible symptoms or conditions, thus demonstrating an emphasis on change and continuity.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7500,latent_7500,10329,0.020658,0.019521557,5.962677,Unchanged medical device position compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently compare findings to prior reports and describe details about lines, tubes, or medical devices, such as ""unchanged PICC line position"" or ""removal of specific equipment."" These elements are distinctive features examined over time or within specific contexts, highlighting their stable or changed states.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3846153846153846,0.46,0.3666666666666666,0.11,100.0,100.0
+7501,latent_7501,17499,0.034998,0.02325684,6.995553,Analysis prompt without available prior image comparison.,"The examples exhibiting the pattern all describe a 'given the current image' prompt without a prior comparison available, contrasting with examples having a prior image comparison or no prompt. This structure is distinct from other usual prompts of radiology reports, focusing on the immediate analysis of the current images only.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4974747474747475,0.4974874371859296,0.4807692307692308,0.5208333333333334,96.0,103.0
+7502,latent_7502,18690,0.03738,0.026191078,4.845537,Reports compare findings to unchanged conditions in prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation consistently include statements comparing current radiology findings with prior studies, emphasizing any unchanged condition or characteristics. This consistency suggests a focus on tracking stability or the lack of significant progression in various conditions, often in the context of post-treatment, device orientation, or chronic conditions.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6791979949874687,0.68,0.6636363636363637,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7503,latent_7503,4057,0.008114,0.008507292,4.763382,Focus on interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The higher activation examples consistently describe a detailed, comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or stability in findings. This pattern emphasizes the importance of detecting interval changes (e.g., resolution, stability, or development of findings), which is a core aspect of radiological interpretation and reporting.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7504,latent_7504,12286,0.024572,0.015900226,6.1117396,Complex interpretation of radiological changes compared to prior images.,"The given examples show varying levels of specificity and complexity of radiographic findings and interpretations. Activation levels highlight reports that combine detailed descriptions of the findings, comparison to prior images, and a focus on changes from previous studies, implying a sophisticated, narrative-driven interpretive style.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4171440056275751,0.42,0.4298245614035088,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7505,latent_7505,9989,0.019978,0.011331149,3.877537,"Comparison to prior imaging focused on equipment (lines, tubes).","The examples with high activations commonly include comparisons of the findings to prior images, specifically noting changes in medical equipment (lines, tubes, catheters) placement or removal. These are frequently mentioned in the context of patients undergoing monitoring or treatment, where the positioning of such equipment is crucial.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5107240008369951,0.5276381909547738,0.5483870967741935,0.34,100.0,99.0
+7506,latent_7506,3053,0.006106,0.008184148,5.586801,Descriptions of internal medical devices and their positioning.,"The pattern in the given examples with high activation include references to internal medical tools and devices such as endotracheal tubes, catheters, and other internal monitoring or assistive devices like Swann-Ganz catheters, and providing details about their placement or status in the body, regardless of the comparison to prior images. These are critical elements commonly discussed in relation to examining the internal condition and adjustments of such devices.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.4266666666666667,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7507,latent_7507,5178,0.010356,0.009865648,7.707147,Comparison involving interval change or stability in findings or device positioning.,"The examples with higher activation levels show descriptions of changes or stability in medical devices' placements, alterations of lung opacities, or other findings of interest, in comparison to prior imaging studies. This involves both qualitative and quantitative assessments of changes over time, acknowledging both stability and movement in medical conditions or devices as a focal point in interpretation.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4851485148514851,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7508,latent_7508,4065,0.00813,0.0063397055,4.306072,Prompts instructing review and comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"This pattern involves explicit instructions and prompts to provide descriptions of findings on current imaging in comparison to prior studies. Each instance is tied to an indication or history, and often involves reporting changes or stability over time, which aligns with common protocols in radiological assessments.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7509,latent_7509,24857,0.049714,0.03342265,5.560595,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies highlighting interval changes.,"This set of examples predominantly highlights the pattern where reports compare current imaging findings with prior studies. Activation levels are higher when evaluations between current and prior imaging are explicitly mentioned, showing a clear dependency on comparative analysis as a key pattern.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7510,latent_7510,3924,0.007848,0.011543968,6.0656095,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal/hilar contours in chest studies.,"The examples given most frequently describe findings related to the cardiomediastinal or hilar contours being normal, unchanged, or unremarkable despite changes or observations elsewhere in the study. This finding likely emphasizes identification of cardiovascular or related structures that are not contributing to observed or potential pathology in the chest area.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7272727272727273,0.73,0.6916666666666667,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7511,latent_7511,17936,0.035872,0.017911764,2.186613,Comparative analysis with prior frontal images accentuating changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed comparative analysis between current and prior frontal images, specifically indicating whether changes or stability are observed. The reports highlight similarities or differences, indicating a pattern centered around the stability and comparative analysis across time or procedures.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4728682170542636,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7512,latent_7512,19243,0.038486,0.01664858,2.6492457,Comparisons of current image findings to prior images or reports.,"The examples with higher activations often refer to radiological findings that provide a description or interpretation of current images in explicit comparison to prior images or reports. This is prominently featured in radiology practices where changes or stability over time is assessed relative to past examinations, often describing a change or stability in certain conditions over time.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4140625,0.46,0.4743589743589743,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7513,latent_7513,5782,0.011564,0.010867379,4.2438912,Comparisons highlighting device positioning and interval change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently point out changes in device placement or presence as compared to previous images (e.g., tubes, catheters, pumps) and the status of any lung volumes or consolidations, both of which require careful comparison to past radiographs. This indicates a pattern of emphasizing device positioning and interval changes which could be clinically significant for patient monitoring.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6238621831038893,0.625,0.6404494382022472,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7514,latent_7514,5811,0.011622,0.015202394,5.815239,Emphasis on interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels refer explicitly to evaluation through comparison with prior imaging, or through noting that observations or abnormalities are 'new' or 'unchanged'. This context-specific comparison language enhances the representation of the pattern, indicating a focus on interval change.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4081632653061224,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7515,latent_7515,3145,0.00629,0.014064262,6.1629643,Reports include interval change in comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently compare the current radiographic findings with prior imaging studies, often noting interval changes or lack thereof. These comparisons often include phrases that reflect a comparison to previous examinations and are used to determine interval change, resolution, or progression of the medical condition from prior assessments.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4328358208955223,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7516,latent_7516,4531,0.009062,0.008583039,4.084008,Description of acute changes compared to prior images.,"The excerpts that trigger higher activation levels frequently deal with acute radiological changes or notable findings in the current image compared to the prior image, such as improvement, resolution, or identification of significant alterations in the radiological findings.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7517,latent_7517,11664,0.023328,0.030942244,5.195096,Details of imaging findings needing comparison with prior images.,"This set of examples clearly highlights pattern of revisiting and comparing findings from a previous imaging study despite use of varied phrasing and contexts across different examples. This approach ensures that changes or stability of conditions are documented, which is a critical practice in healthcare decision making.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7518,latent_7518,5593,0.011186,0.010299248,3.0999603,Comparison indicating stable or unchanged status on consecutive images.,"The analysis of examples showing higher activation levels reveals consistent use of specific observations related to stability or change in findings over prior imaging. This comparison context indicates stable cardiomediastinal contours, unchanged opacities, or medical device positions over time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4385964912280701,0.25,100.0,100.0
+7519,latent_7519,2879,0.005758,0.00657721,4.852957,Comparison-focused radiology report generation task.,"The examples with high activations all include a task that involves directly comparing the current and prior radiological images. The assistant provides a brief comparative analysis of the images, indicating changes or lack thereof.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7520,latent_7520,3855,0.00771,0.0091858255,5.161924,Objective comparison with prior images for interval change.,"The examples with high activations involve a clear pattern of comparing current imaging with prior imaging to evaluate for interval changes. These examples often describe unchanged, improved, or worsened conditions noted from previous imaging. Phrasing includes 'As compared to the prior study', 'In comparison with the study of', and specific mentions of stable or changed medical findings over time.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.696969696969697,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6055226824457594,0.615,0.5877862595419847,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7521,latent_7521,12058,0.024116,0.021037035,4.1273766,Radiological comparison emphasizing interval changes or stability.,"The pattern is characterized by radiology reports that provide detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging, often noting specific intervals of stability or resolution in conditions like effusions or opacities. These reports highlight details of changes over time or stability, indicating continued monitoring or comparison is a focus of the study.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7522,latent_7522,5313,0.010626,0.009472776,4.5640755,Radiology reports provide findings in comparison to prior images to assess interval changes.,"Most of these examples contain radiological comparisons to older images, providing assessments like stability, no significant change, or interval worsening based on past images. This common radiological practice identifies interval changes and stability over time by referencing prior studies.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5536554542765723,0.585,0.5555555555555556,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7523,latent_7523,15288,0.030576,0.019643113,13.720797,Recommendations to adjust medical tube or catheter positioning.,"The pattern in the examples with higher activation levels involves recommendations about the positional adjustment of medical tubes or catheters. These reports specifically recommend advancing or withdrawing tubes, such as endotracheal and enteric tubes, for optimal positioning, which is highlighted in the findings or impression sections of the report.",0.8726655348047538,0.88,0.8,0.8888888888888888,18.0,32.0,0.762051282051282,0.855,0.4893617021276595,0.8214285714285714,28.0,172.0
+7524,latent_7524,10840,0.02168,0.012244573,3.412513,Use of both frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels most frequently mention a technique involving both frontal and lateral images, with a particular focus on providing a comparison to a prior image. This structure is typically used in radiological reports designed for follow-up assessments or for identifying interval changes.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7525,latent_7525,17098,0.034196,0.01765766,3.8831608,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings with nuanced interpretation.,"Examples with high activation levels all refer to providing a detailed description of findings based on comparisons with prior imaging studies and often include a nuanced comparison statement in the reports, leveraging existing data for diagnostic insight.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7526,latent_7526,3882,0.007764,0.010294834,4.9259257,Comparison to prior imaging shows interval changes in pleural effusion or atelectasis.,"High activation instances consistently involve radiological findings where multiple changes (e.g., pleural effusion, atelectasis, or other opacities) were compared against previous imaging studies, indicating a recurrent pattern of assessing interval changes. They describe changes or persistence of significant findings like effusions and atelectasis compared to the prior.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7527,latent_7527,13169,0.026338,0.022289604,5.8719826,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, with phrases indicating analysis performed in relation to previous studies, such as 'as compared to', 'unchanged from', 'interval resolution'. They also often prioritize certain unchanged findings or resolution of conditions over time.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7528,latent_7528,4366,0.008732,0.01011962,8.821119,Elevation or alteration of hemidiaphragm position in images.,"Examples with elevated activation levels consistently mention radiological findings of elevated or altered diaphragm positions. This is a recurrent observation in these radiology reports that are marked by higher activation scores, regardless of other conditions or findings noted in the reports.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7472598323662154,0.755,0.8923076923076924,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7529,latent_7529,5698,0.011396,0.009740206,4.486656,Comparison of frontal and lateral images against prior images.,"The dataset contains examples where findings in radiology studies are compared with prior images. The pattern specifically focuses on cases where both current frontal and lateral images are taken for comparison against prior frontal images, often with detailed evaluation of status with respect to previous findings or medical indications.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7530,latent_7530,11265,0.02253,0.011165269,3.599809,Comparison to prior images showing unchanged findings.,"Across examples, there is mention of medical imaging descriptions specifying stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior images. This pattern often appears when the diagnostic task involves comparing new imaging results to past imaging for any interval changes, using terms like 'no change', 'unchanged', or 'stable'.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4606194573827005,0.4824120603015075,0.4666666666666667,0.2828282828282828,99.0,100.0
+7531,latent_7531,31304,0.062608,0.042933144,4.16348,"Comparison of current imaging with prior studies, noting stability or changes.","Examples with high activation all involve comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, which emphasizes detecting changes or stability in conditions. Radiology reports often highlight stable findings or lack of significant changes when comparing to previous images, a pattern consistent with these examples.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7532,latent_7532,8867,0.017734,0.014237717,3.3010345,Comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on changes or stability.,"The examples describe findings in the context of comparing current imaging to prior imaging, often involving terms like 'prior', 'provided', 'compared', 'comparison', and referring to prior reports or previous states (e.g., 
+frontal image', 'lateral image', 'prior frontal image'). This demonstrates a pattern where detailed radiological assessment focuses on changes or consistency with prior imaging.
+",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4387755102040816,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7533,latent_7533,5375,0.01075,0.010289401,4.621599,Comparison to previous imaging showing interval change or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of findings compared to a prior image, focusing on interval changes or stability in the medical condition or in findings identified from prior imaging. The consistent element is the assessment of change over time in findings such as presence of medical devices, anatomical changes, effusion, opacities, or pathology identified from previous images.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7534,latent_7534,15545,0.03109,0.016182523,4.64982,Focus on interval change or device positioning comparison.,"The examples with higher activation describe a direct comparison of findings across different time points or examinations, emphasizing any changes or stability in pathologies or positions of medical devices. These comparisons often use specific language indicating interval changes, stability, or details of device positioning, which are crucial for monitoring patients.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7535,latent_7535,5153,0.010306,0.018726207,3.7690446,Focus on findings directly comparing current to prior images.,"Examples with activations closer to 9.0 frequently make references to findings based on comparing current images with prior images. Although many examples include a request for comparison to prior images, the highly activated examples particularly show immediate requests to compare the current single or multiple images distinctly against older ones described right after the frontal image instruction.",0.2694805194805195,0.28,0.3225806451612903,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4031946638581709,0.405,0.4144144144144144,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7536,latent_7536,5296,0.010592,0.01052539,6.371219,Explicit comparative analysis with prior imaging studies.,"Reports with high activations focus on comparing new and prior imaging to monitor changes or stability, explicitly mentioning 'comparison', 'prior', or specific changes ('new', 'resolved', 'unchanged'). Lower activations often provide findings without such detailed comparative analysis or are vague about prior studies.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3746091307066916,0.375,0.3809523809523809,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7537,latent_7537,6263,0.012526,0.012120993,4.490145,"Descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or minimal change.","The pattern seen here involves descriptions of radiology studies that explicitly reference findings in comparison to prior imaging, using specific language that indicates stability, change, or similarity. These examples often involve checking positions of devices or patient conditions post-procedure, where minor or no change is notable.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4503335417969564,0.4673366834170854,0.453125,0.29,100.0,99.0
+7538,latent_7538,32490,0.06498,0.038308643,5.890677,"Significant findings or changes in comparison to prior images, especially lateral views.","Prompts with higher activation levels describe scenarios where there is either a lateral view image mentioned with a significant finding or a notable change in the given frontal image in comparison to a prior study. These typically include newly identified, significant medical conditions such as opacities, pneumothorax, or emphysema that were absent or less severe before. The presence of new conditions or changes makes these reports more likely to have notable activations.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5980303487086724,0.6,0.6162790697674418,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7539,latent_7539,6471,0.012942,0.011257833,5.6731887,Comparative descriptions of radiology studies with prior imaging.,"The high activation level examples frequently contain comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often explicitly asking to 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This highlights the importance of comparing current studies with previous ones for evaluating changes, especially in patients with histories of multiple chronic issues.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4522746157041961,0.4673366834170854,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,99.0
+7540,latent_7540,5265,0.01053,0.010304811,7.918478,Explicit comparisons to prior radiological findings or reports.,The examples with higher activations consistently involved descriptions in which the current radiological findings are either compared directly to a prior report or involve changes noted since a prior examination. Lower activation examples either lack a clear comparative context or stated that no prior was available. The key pattern is the explicit comparison to prior radiological data.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4405452141186044,0.45,0.4603174603174603,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7541,latent_7541,6950,0.0139,0.009470578,7.877201,Comparative analysis with prior radiological images.,"Activation levels increase when the task focuses on producing a comparative analysis between current and past radiological images, indicated by descriptions explicitly asking for comparisons across different time points or imaging studies. The consistent mention of findings in ""comparison to the prior"" throughout inputs with non-zero activation levels highlights this pattern.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4444444444444444,0.7906976744186046,86.0,114.0
+7542,latent_7542,12143,0.024286,0.010808056,3.9068358,Emphasis on the comparison with prior imaging to indicate stability or change.,"The pattern seems to be the presence of comparison with previous studies to evaluate stability or change in findings, often indicated by phrases such as 'compared to prior','unchanged', or explicit date mentions. High activations are notable when such comparisons directly inform about the patient's current state, providing evidence of stability, improvement, or lack of acute changes.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7543,latent_7543,8404,0.016808,0.019299442,4.449715,Noting stable or unchanged conditions in comparison to previous imaging.,"The highlighted pattern showcases radiology findings that emphasize stability, regression, or minimal changes compared to prior imaging, indicating attentiveness to ongoing conditions and therapies. This is prevalent in reports where ongoing treatment or monitoring is crucial, thus consistent reference to any changes (or lack thereof) is vital.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5214045214045213,0.5226130653266332,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,99.0
+7544,latent_7544,3923,0.007846,0.0067319334,3.4992883,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations frequently include clear, direct comparisons between current and previous images, often providing explicit descriptions of stability or change. This aligns with the common radiology practice of evaluating the current state against past imaging to assess progress or detect abnormalities.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3781440380191612,0.385,0.4049586776859504,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7545,latent_7545,3556,0.007112,0.010804275,5.7692323,Subtle new or unchanged lung or pleural findings without major acute pathology.,"The examples with higher activation scores frequently describe new or unchanged minor findings related to the lungs or pleura, such as small effusions or opacities, that are subtly different from prior exams but do not indicate acute major conditions like pneumonia or other significant cardiopulmonary issues.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5952765183534414,0.605,0.5801526717557252,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7546,latent_7546,5770,0.01154,0.010910767,5.6330786,Presence or mention of a pacemaker or cardiac device.,"High activation levels are seen consistently in reports where there's reference to a PACEMAKER or cardiac device being present in the patient's chest, implying that the presence of a pacemaker or its description is linked to increased activation levels. These examples repeatedly mention pacemakers or cardiac devices with variations in their descriptions.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4111152005888848,0.52,0.6428571428571429,0.09,100.0,100.0
+7547,latent_7547,9641,0.019282,0.015346187,4.739898,Reporting stability or changes over time using prior comparisons.,"These examples involve radiology studies which describe changes or stability in findings over time, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'interval improvement'. Such reports are common in radiological evaluations when findings are presented in relation to prior studies for tracking progression or stability.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5304347826086957,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7548,latent_7548,8418,0.016836,0.022590233,6.2360168,Highlighting interval changes or comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"The highest activation levels are associated with reports that emphasize changes or evaluations based on comparison to previous radiographic images. These findings often include the assessment of medical devices, lines, techniques, or anatomical changes between the images.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7549,latent_7549,4306,0.008612,0.0081681935,4.375583,Emphasis on comparison with prior images and changes in devices or conditions.,"The identified pattern involves references to changes or stability observed in radiological features, specific procedures, or the introduction/removal of medical devices, while consistently noting comparison with prior imaging studies. These reports use specific language to detail findings related to device placement or procedural changes (e.g., tubes, catheters, effusions resolved) with a noted emphasis on previous imaging for comparative context.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7550,latent_7550,2741,0.005482,0.013013995,6.029287,Absence of prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels often lack available previous studies for comparison, indicating that the model activates strongly when tasked with providing findings in the absence of prior comparative data.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7551,latent_7551,56949,0.113898,0.053485706,2.823294,Evaluations concerning possible lung infections or consolidations.,"These examples involve evaluations for pneumonia or lung abnormalities, often mentioning lung volumes, consolidations, and atelectasis. They involve findings in cases of pneumonia or related complications, describing lung fields, tubes placement, and opacities related to pleural effusions or infections. The examples with activation levels explore the potential for pneumonia or lung processes impacting the lung appearance as compared to prior studies.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6133664733499034,0.615,0.6017699115044248,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7552,latent_7552,3078,0.006156,0.0058480864,3.617466,Mentions of atelectasis.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention atelectasis as a finding. Atelectasis is a common abnormality noted in chest radiographs, often associated with either volume loss or small areas of lung collapse, frequently appearing as streaky or patchy opacities. These descriptions often exclude or do not confirm infection as the cause.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6472663139329806,0.66,0.7580645161290323,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7553,latent_7553,19804,0.039608,0.024447516,6.9295063,Interval changes identified comparing current imaging to prior studies.,"The examples that show higher activation levels typically involve references to previous imaging, indicating a temporal comparison for detecting changes in conditions like effusions or atelectasis. This pattern implies looking for interval changes which is very frequent in follow-up examinations for chronic conditions or postoperative care.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.633811412877632,0.64,0.5930232558139535,0.5795454545454546,88.0,112.0
+7554,latent_7554,7352,0.014704,0.012489281,4.249899,Comparison of findings with prior imaging studies.,"The examples showing high activation levels focus on observing and describing radiological findings in comparison to prior images, often specifying changes or continuing stability. This comparison is essential for identifying pathological developments. The references to prior imaging studies and their context highlight the importance of historical data for assessing patient conditions.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3880048959608323,0.4,0.421875,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7555,latent_7555,4437,0.008874,0.011419671,6.159885,Stable findings through comparison with prior imaging.,"All highly activated reports include radiological findings that are described in relation to a prior exam, demonstrating the stability of certain features or unchanged conditions over time. This is a common pattern in comparative radiology reporting, emphasizing longitudinal analysis of patient data.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7556,latent_7556,4520,0.00904,0.011825383,4.0464997,Explicit task to compare current radiographic findings to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve prompts related to image comparison where descriptions are explicitly required in light of both current and prior images. These reports explicitly mention comparing current and prior imaging but identifying it in context of specific radiological findings evaluated over time (e.g., persistent conditions or stability of lesions).",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.420197345674087,0.455,0.4697986577181208,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7557,latent_7557,19318,0.038636,0.020534184,5.3016315,"Compared to prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activations reference explicit comparisons between current and prior radiological studies. This pattern is characterized by phrases like 'in comparison to', 'compared to', and detailed observations about changes or stability of specific findings in radiology reports. These reports demonstrate a focus on monitoring changes in medical imaging over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4579439252336448,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7558,latent_7558,6336,0.012672,0.018040165,5.623439,Descriptions of interval changes with medical device placement/removal.,"The examples with high activation levels describe changes in radiological findings compared to prior images, highlighting placement or removal of medical devices like chest tubes and catheters. The reports focus on interval changes and tend to note stable cardiac features amidst device-related updates.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.591002044989775,0.605,0.6666666666666666,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7559,latent_7559,3682,0.007364,0.010238924,4.397294,Explicit systematic comparison to a prior radiological report.,"Examples with higher activation discuss previous radiological reports, indicating a systematic description and comparison of findings with prior images or reports. This includes using phrases like 'PRIOR_REPORT', explicit findings compared to previous studies, or highlighting interval changes against documented past evaluations.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7560,latent_7560,64678,0.129356,0.07016616,4.559148,Comparison with prior imaging assessing stability or change is stated explicitly.,"Examples with higher activations focus on descriptions of comparisons of current findings with prior findings in imaging studies, often using specific terms like 'unchanged', 'compared to', 'consistent with', or detailed measurements that assess stability, progression, or change.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7561,latent_7561,4753,0.009506,0.015234597,4.7412724,High activation involves descriptions using multiple chest views (PA and Lateral) even without acute findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve situations where multiple views (frontal and lateral) of the chest are provided, even when the impression dictates no acute findings. This pattern contrasts with examples with low activation, which either lack multiple views or focus on single straightforward conditions such as specific comparisons or single-view analysis.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7562,latent_7562,2135,0.00427,0.005727739,9.206929,Low lung volumes or effusion with noted imaging comparison.,Examples exhibit high activation when there is the presence of low lung volumes or pulmonary effusion combined with a noted comparison or change in cardiomediastinal silhouette or pulmonary features compared to prior imaging.,0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4328358208955223,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7563,latent_7563,6331,0.012662,0.009375226,3.5958304,Explicit or absent comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves providing descriptions of radiology findings that either explicitly mention the comparison between current images and prior images or specify an inability to provide such comparisons due to lack of relevant previous imaging. Comparisons refer to 'prior study', 'previous exam', or explicit periods or dates.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.396011396011396,0.47,0.4823529411764706,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7564,latent_7564,5517,0.011034,0.011734815,9.162769,"Explicit task instructions or incomplete findings, lacking detailed comparative analysis.","Almost every example with activations close to zero includes explicit instructions or mentions of providing a description of findings based on specific images and comparison directives, without describing findings themselves. These are typically preliminaries or tasks, whereas instances with higher activations include detailed comparative findings or changes in the context of past and current imaging, indicating the distinction between tasks and actual findings descriptions.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3736884584342211,0.515,0.5076923076923077,0.99,100.0,100.0
+7565,latent_7565,4254,0.008508,0.007509133,5.241872,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+7566,latent_7566,7164,0.014328,0.020354332,5.5283422,Pulmonary vascular congestion and related findings.,"High activation examples consistently mention pulmonary vascular congestion as a notable finding, often alongside interstitial edema or pulmonary edema. This pattern suggests a focus on the vascular condition and implications like fluid overload or congestive heart failure.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.6491228070175439,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7567,latent_7567,76539,0.153078,0.10749592,3.778007,Detailed documentation of changes or stability in complex imaging findings.,"Examples exhibiting high activation typically have detailed descriptions of specific changes or stability in findings when comparing current imaging with prior studies, despite explicit or implicit directives for comparison in all examples. This pattern highlights reports where the changes are either complex, subtle, or hold clinical significance, warranting descriptive elaboration even without prior study access.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7568,latent_7568,2445,0.00489,0.0072938623,5.2986617,Fragmented or incomplete phrases in radiology descriptions.,"The examples with high activation levels suggest a pattern of reports that often include incomplete or fragmented phrases, underscoring a propensity toward unfinished sentences or instructions lacking clear closure. These appear as a mix of technical radiology terms with missing context or end of phrases, which aligns with fragmentary report documentation.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3503118503118503,0.5,0.5,0.98,100.0,100.0
+7569,latent_7569,3982,0.007964,0.008211264,4.231104,Mediastinal and hilar contours normal or unchanged.,"The examples with high activations consistently mention the mediastinal and hilar contours being within normal limits or unchanged, often in scenarios where there are other findings mentioned or the diagnostic context calls for confirmation of mediastinal stability. This signifies a focus on the regularity of specific thoracic contours as a key factor in the activation.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6645891216740507,0.665,0.6542056074766355,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7570,latent_7570,3873,0.007746,0.010652115,5.0164394,Detailed and specific evaluation of image findings despite limited context.,"Highly activated examples involve the analysis and identification of specific findings, procedures, or details within the radiological images, despite limited contextual information. These examples often represent complex image observations, highlighting the significance of thorough evaluation.",0.3398522381573229,0.3673469387755102,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4437236286919831,0.4673366834170854,0.475177304964539,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+7571,latent_7571,34060,0.06812,0.028878631,2.4599123,Explicit instruction and comparison to prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels include explicit instructions to compare current images with prior ones, often addressing changes or stability in clinical findings or devices rather than just describing a process. The pattern involves references to both the current and prior images explicitly, including instructions to ""provide a description"" or details of ""interval changes.""",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7572,latent_7572,7870,0.01574,0.011156779,5.7637153,Focus on current imaging findings without prior comparison.,High activation examples often lack reference to prior imaging studies for comparison and focus on findings pertaining to a single current image evaluation.,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5666666666666667,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7573,latent_7573,5039,0.010078,0.009226164,8.206908,Mentions of mild to moderate pulmonary edema or airspace opacities.,"The examples with higher activations focus on descriptions that specifically include the identification of mild to moderate pulmonary edema or airspace opacities. These suggest acute or chronic lung conditions which are of medical concern, likely prioritized in the model's training for being informative clinical findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5319148936170213,0.25,100.0,100.0
+7574,latent_7574,3531,0.007062,0.011654491,5.1556134,Image-based findings comparison with prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation levels all involve image data and request a description that involves a comparison with prior frontal images. The pattern involves providing descriptions that reference image-based comparisons, using the context of frontal and lateral chest views.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3944991789819376,0.41,0.4318181818181818,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7575,latent_7575,3816,0.007632,0.010958753,4.639161,"Detailed comparison of current and prior images, with context of frontal and lateral imaging.","The samples with higher activation levels often describe specific imaging findings in the context of prior reports involving the current frontal image, the lateral image, and prior images. The emphasis seems to be on detailed comparisons, changes, or confirmations against previous images.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7576,latent_7576,2906,0.005812,0.0075874035,5.5730405,Detailed prior report comparison with specific known changes or devices.,"Most examples with high activation involve a prior report description accompanied by specific information about known or identified changes since previous examinations. This may include discussions around device placements, known diseases, or specific conditions, often distinguished by distinctive medical conditions or complex status updates such as post-operative changes or chronic conditions under follow-up.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4907407407407407,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7577,latent_7577,5098,0.010196,0.009794568,5.317216,Mentions of cardiomegaly in radiology reports.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently describe the presence of cardiomegaly, whether it is 'mild', 'moderate', or 'stable'. This pattern indicates a notable association between the mention of cardiomegaly and increased activation.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6750483558994197,0.685,0.7846153846153846,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7578,latent_7578,3437,0.006874,0.009765102,5.898052,Mention of required prior image comparison with 'None' or 'N/A' for comparison.,"The high-activation examples specify that the radiology study requires a comparison between current and prior frontal images yet state 'COMPARISON: None' or indicate no relevant or available prior comparisons beyond descriptive mentions. This contradiction where prior images are expected but not identified or described directly seems to correlate with higher activation, likely flagging reports for further attention due to incomplete information.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.5925925925925926,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.58,0.58,0.58,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7579,latent_7579,4472,0.008944,0.007827295,5.0556293,"Comparison: None, despite prompt requiring prior image comparison","Highly activated examples all specify 'none' as comparison despite the prompt requiring a comparison to prior images, indicating that lack of previous images is a key factor contributing to high activation.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7580,latent_7580,12396,0.024792,0.028635234,6.3885107,Evaluation of medical device positioning on imaging.,"In these examples, certain medical devices, lines, or tubes (e.g., nasogastric tubes, chest tubes, vascular catheters) are described with regard to their position, placement, or changes in position compared to prior imaging. The presence and position of these devices are specifically noted as being stable, changed, or needing adjustment, which is a key focus of the reports.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6527050610820244,0.6532663316582915,0.6703296703296703,0.61,100.0,99.0
+7581,latent_7581,16253,0.032506,0.030791275,7.046555,Radiology findings described in terms of changes from previous images.,"The examples with higher activation discuss findings in terms of changes or lack thereof in comparison with prior radiographic images, often mentioning updates or the state of particular conditions. The prompt's structure involves comparisons with previous records, indicating therapeutic progress or stability.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5746446726838883,0.59,0.5652173913043478,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7582,latent_7582,3136,0.006272,0.012733328,7.0319705,Comparative analysis with prior imaging reports.,"These examples show radiology reports explicitly focused on providing findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, despite some examples having no changes or comparisons explicitly noted. The patterns in the activation often involve mention of prior report references or explicit comparative analysis.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7583,latent_7583,5047,0.010094,0.020419732,6.2747507,Utilization of explicit constraints on image set included.,"The heavily activated examples focus on constraints regarding the images themselves, primarily utilizing patterns or syntax that describe which images have been provided (e.g., 'given the current frontal image <image>, the current lateral image <image>'). The format lays out an explicit constraint indicating the type and sequence of imaging data being analyzed, without extensive narrative or interpretation. This seems to activate the model optimally.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5758269519223178,0.592964824120603,0.5683453237410072,0.79,100.0,99.0
+7584,latent_7584,8233,0.016466,0.010654415,3.355991,Comparison with prior studies or images to evaluate changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples involve the comparison of images, including evaluations of findings based on prior images or studies. These examples use comparative language to discuss stability, presence, or resolution of certain findings over time or examinations.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7585,latent_7585,3517,0.007034,0.008186321,5.4040246,Frequent interval changes in pneumothorax or pleural conditions post intervention.,"Samples with high activation show changes in the condition of pneumothoraces, changes or stability with chest tubes, or indicate postoperative or interval changes related to pleural or parenchymal findings, often with emphasis on pneumothorax or effusions, and therapeutic interventions like tube placement or removal. These samples describe specific interval changes post intervention or closely monitor known conditions.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6223303811271577,0.645,0.7843137254901961,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7586,latent_7586,2527,0.005054,0.009641215,5.6798496,High activation when images are compared to prior studies with detailed findings.,"The examples with high activation levels describe reports that involve comparing images (frontal and lateral) directly to previous studies, emphasizing interval changes. They typically contain structured report formats with specific findings and comparison to prior imaging for assessing stability or change.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4536082474226804,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7587,latent_7587,6521,0.013042,0.010340523,2.7973793,"Comparison of cardiac or pulmonary findings with prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples with significant activation levels consistently describe assessment or evaluation of imaging findings against previous studies, specifically annotating changes or lack thereof in pathologies like cardiomegaly, atelectasis, or devices. Mentions of unchanged findings compared to previous images result in increased activation.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7588,latent_7588,44331,0.088662,0.07282958,5.9183216,Analysis of multiple image views with explicit comparison to prior studies indicating stability or change.,"Examples with higher activations include explicit descriptions of multiple image views (frontal and lateral) and comparisons between current and prior images. Specifically, they reference past findings and note whether they have changed over time, often indicating stability or minor changes. This pattern involves tracking and reporting details over time with multiple image views.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7589,latent_7589,4211,0.008422,0.012072179,5.9854693,Findings based on current image view descriptions without explicit prior image comparison.,"Examples with high activations involve the identification of abnormalities or changes evaluated specifically through descriptions of a single or multiple current images, particularly in the frontal view, without a comparison to previous images noted in the findings. Examples with direct instructions to provide descriptions based on available current images tend to activate more strongly.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5844155844155844,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7590,latent_7590,3673,0.007346,0.010929357,4.9932165,Low lung volumes noted in chest radiography.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe scenarios with low lung volumes, while lower activation levels include various other findings without this consistent feature. The phrase 'low lung volumes' typically indicates decreased lung expansion and is a distinct pattern in these narratives.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6589499793303017,0.67,0.765625,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7591,latent_7591,5143,0.010286,0.007071916,3.6124856,Assessment of interval change or stability in imaging compared to prior.,"These examples represent findings in radiology studies where the current imaging was compared to prior imaging, as indicated by phrases such as 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior'. The focus is on interval changes or stability from previous studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7592,latent_7592,6126,0.012252,0.013835359,4.573185,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels typically include specific references to changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies, noting whether certain findings are stable, increased, or reduced. There is a significant focus on detailing interval changes, typically in relation to stable findings or noting any significant developments like the presence or expansion of effusions, pneumothorax, lesions, etc.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4388129123587553,0.445,0.4545454545454545,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7593,latent_7593,5020,0.01004,0.010767706,4.0551157,Comparison of findings to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently provide comparisons between the current imaging findings and prior imaging findings, indicating a significant focus on highlighting changes or lack thereof over time. This is typical for monitoring known conditions or evaluating treatment effects. The language includes direct references to comparison with previous scans, implying detailed analysis over time.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4024362215582624,0.415,0.4341085271317829,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7594,latent_7594,3728,0.007456,0.008734084,5.463569,Tasks involving comparison of current and prior images.,"Examples exhibit a pattern where imaging analysis tasks involve comparing multiple current images against prior images. Emphasis is placed on comparisons between the present and historical images, particularly using frontal and sometimes lateral views.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7595,latent_7595,4416,0.008832,0.010660017,4.9594393,Synthesis of findings through comparison with prior imaging and current images.,"The pattern observed in the samples with higher activation levels involves a synthesis of multiple images and comparison with prior studies to provide an assessment. This synthesis creates a comprehensive view aiding in assessing stability or changes in findings, regardless of how incomplete the statements are. References to 'comparison' seem common, signifying its role in these high activation scenarios.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7596,latent_7596,7644,0.015288,0.014890316,3.9182272,Comparison of current and prior chest images focusing on medical devices or cardiovascular status.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently reference both current and previous imaging of the chest, with detailed comparisons of specific changes or persistences in medical devices, alignment of medical tubes, or cardiovascular status. This pattern suggests a focus on assessing stability or changes in the patient's condition based on comparisons with prior images.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5145631067961165,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7597,latent_7597,3097,0.006194,0.0074965465,5.0167985,Describes interval changes by comparing with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate the presence of specific comparisons between current and prior imagery. These examples often discuss changes, stability, or progression in pathological findings, such as consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or placement of medical devices, highlighting a focus on interval changes or stasis in radiological findings.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4457831325301205,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7598,latent_7598,21574,0.043148,0.057268705,6.0807257,Involvement of multiple image views and comparison with prior images.,"The common point of focus is the presence of multiple views (frontal, lateral) of current and prior images being analyzed for comparison, often observed in comprehensive, multi-view chest examinations in radiology studies. Activation levels are high when multiple views and prior reports are involved, indicating close evaluation against prior results.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4740532959326788,0.55,0.5284090909090909,0.93,100.0,100.0
+7599,latent_7599,1527,0.003054,0.0035145513,9.014274,Absence of prior imaging for comparison in reports.,"The examples with high activation levels often indicate scenarios where there is a lack of a 'COMPARISON' entry, meaning that there is no prior study available for comparison. This is significant as these reports focus solely on current findings without a historical baseline for change. However, minor observations like 'slight changes' may still occur, but the overarching pattern remains the lack of prior imaging for reference.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7095352564102564,0.71,0.6944444444444444,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7600,latent_7600,6666,0.013332,0.010735174,3.2547116,Requirement to describe findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation indicate situations where there is an explicit directive to provide a description of current radiological findings in comparison with prior imaging, even though sometimes prior reports or explicit comparisons might not be available.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7601,latent_7601,6660,0.01332,0.015426486,6.3584275,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,These examples consistently mention explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies with observations of changes or interval developments in patient condition. This reference to previous examinations is a standard practice in radiology to track changes over time and relates to monitoring stability or progression of findings.,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4563106796116505,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7602,latent_7602,5492,0.010984,0.016228508,4.672253,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, highlighting changes or stability.","Regardless of technique or patient history, these examples focus on providing comparisons between current and prior imaging, a common practice to evaluate changes or stability of findings over time. Reports typically highlight changes like resolution or development of specific pathologies.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4242947610823258,0.425,0.4299065420560747,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7603,latent_7603,5783,0.011566,0.011723875,6.292753,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples typically evaluate cases where findings are stable compared to prior studies, indicating no significant change in the patient's condition. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable appearance', or 'no change' suggest a stability pattern.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7604,latent_7604,13019,0.026038,0.013663015,6.645861,Postoperative evaluations involving pacing devices or surgical modifications.,"Samples with moderate activation levels involve references to surgeries or procedures like median sternotomy, CABG, implantation of pacing devices, or valve replacements. This suggests a pattern where findings often include a focus on postoperative status and monitoring for possible complications following these procedures such as evaluating leads positioning, tubes, or silhouette stability.",0.650733752620545,0.6530612244897959,0.7,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.6789727126805778,0.715,0.6440677966101694,0.5135135135135135,74.0,126.0
+7605,latent_7605,18450,0.0369,0.020867154,5.2138205,Detailed comparison with prior images for change evaluation.,"The examples with higher activation levels often focus on direct language asking to evaluate for changes since the last comparison or provide a description relative to prior imaging. These reports consistently emphasize the specifics of comparing a current image with a previous one, using language like 'as compared to', 'unchanged from', 'improved', and the related descriptive content about findings and impressions. This emphasis on comparison as the central operation distinguishes these examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4795918367346938,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7606,latent_7606,2714,0.005428,0.007275939,5.228179,Textual comparison of current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation primarily focus on providing text interpretation of images that explicitly compare current findings with prior images, using phrases like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image', even when there are no findings or changes noted. This pattern of comparison is indicative of the required task.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3827806255884506,0.41,0.4366197183098591,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7607,latent_7607,20659,0.041318,0.019463664,4.903558,Comparisons with prior imaging emphasizing unchanged findings.,"The pattern involves detailed comparisons of findings with prior imaging, typically highlighting no significant changes or stable findings. Phrasing like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'compared to prior', or descriptions of specific unchanged medical device placements are common.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6482765551200884,0.65,0.6744186046511628,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7608,latent_7608,4248,0.008496,0.011436592,7.3461404,Reports of normal cardiomediastinal or hilar contours without acute pathology.,"Most highly activated examples reference or include a description of a normal cardiac silhouette or mediastinal/hilar contours, typically noting the absence of acute pathology such as pneumothorax or pleural effusion alongside specific normal radiological findings.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.664320248503219,0.665,0.6513761467889908,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7609,latent_7609,9158,0.018316,0.013515396,4.415473,Frequent comparison of current findings with prior imaging to assess changes over time.,"This set of examples predominantly features references to changes or stability in findings compared to previous studies. Common phrases like 'in comparison with', 'there is no significant interval change', or 'provides a description in comparison to prior' highlight the focus on assessing changes over time, which is a critical aspect of monitoring certain medical conditions in radiology.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.570999570999571,0.6,0.5657894736842105,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7610,latent_7610,7746,0.015492,0.0117679145,6.327064,"Description includes comparison with prior image findings, emphasizing interval changes.","The pattern strongly represented includes explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or the stability of findings. This is standard practice in radiology reports when assessing progression or resolution of a disease or condition, making the comparison-central reports activate strongly.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.496,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7611,latent_7611,7558,0.015116,0.009472367,6.0892744,Tracking interval changes in radiology findings relative to prior exams.,"Highly activated samples exhibit the initial observation of new or modified findings in comparison to prior imagery, emphasizing intervals of temporal monitoring or updates on development like ""No prior chest x-ray available for comparison,"" ""comparison made to,"" or ""similar to."" Samples without these aspects tend to have lower activation levels.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4887218045112781,0.49,0.4909090909090909,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7612,latent_7612,6822,0.013644,0.009359105,4.5053964,Comparison of current and prior imaging with focus on changes in lung or heart-related structures.,"These examples involve medical imaging findings, often involving abnormal observations, compared to previous studies, and particularly focus on cardiomediastinal silhouette, clarity of lung fields, and evidence of specific pathologies. Activations seem higher when details of change or stability in specific features like effusions, volumes, or known pathologies are explicitly provided.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.423728813559322,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7613,latent_7613,2349,0.004698,0.0062475246,6.286855,Volume loss in lungs assessed in comparison studies.,"These examples describe volume loss in the lungs when assessing changes in imaging studies. Volume loss can become apparent due to anatomical changes resulting from surgical interventions or pathological conditions, often requiring confirmation with prior imaging studies to assess interval changes or stability.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.52,0.26,100.0,100.0
+7614,latent_7614,22486,0.044972,0.02107797,4.8049483,Interval change noted or ruled out upon comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern we define here encompasses references to changes or absence of changes in specific findings when a prior study is available for comparison. The representative examples frequently note interval change in findings such as opacifications, effusions, or device placements.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5353535353535354,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7615,latent_7615,4343,0.008686,0.0074132406,2.964974,Findings comparison between current and prior images.,"These examples describe findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, a process common in radiology to evaluate changes or stable conditions over time. Distinguishing between current and prior frontal images or using explicit comparison statements like 'compared to previous radiograph', 'interval changes', or reports noting stability or change, form a pattern indicating consistency or lack of progression in pathology findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4330805178886079,0.445,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7616,latent_7616,4554,0.009108,0.009114809,4.799637,Emphasis on description of changes or stability based on prior imaging comparison.,High activations correspond to descriptions involving comparison of current imaging findings with prior images. This allows for assessment of changes or stability in clinical conditions.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7617,latent_7617,44889,0.089778,0.05434677,5.4164877,Describes changes or stability in comparison to previous imaging.,"The higher activation level examples show variability or changes in medical findings (e.g. resolution, progression, or change in size of a condition) between current and previous imaging studies. Phrases such as 'decreased from', 'unchanged in position', and 'since prior' indicate assessments over time, showing a comparison of medical conditions or abnormalities across different imaging studies.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5444067261387858,0.5628140703517588,0.5428571428571428,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+7618,latent_7618,3303,0.006606,0.0091992915,5.761707,Pulmonary abnormalities described in detail and compared.,"High activation levels in these examples correspond to mentions of specific abnormalities or changes in the pulmonary system, such as opacities, pneumothorax, or interstitial markings. The pattern reflects a focus on detailing pulmonary anomalies that require follow-up or further clinical correlation.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4216720779220779,0.43,0.4078947368421052,0.31,100.0,100.0
+7619,latent_7619,3222,0.006444,0.010422207,6.680776,Attention to changes or stability in abnormal findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve descriptions of changes or no changes in abnormal findings like consolidations, increased opacities, or masses within the lung fields or cardiac areas. These reports emphasize recurrent issues or improvements detected when comparing current and prior images, indicating attention to progression or stability of disease-related findings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4590358704719533,0.465,0.4556962025316455,0.36,100.0,100.0
+7620,latent_7620,38108,0.076216,0.039828047,5.766052,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess position or change of tubes/hardware.,"The pattern in the examples with high activation involves explicit instructions or queries to compare current imaging with prior ones to specifically assess the positioning of tubes or hardware (e.g., pacemakers, catheters, etc.), or changes in internal structures between imaging sessions. These reports often include recommended actions based on changes observed or stability noted.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7621,latent_7621,4336,0.008672,0.008111498,8.626939,Description of medical device placement and associated changes.,"The high activation samples explicitly mention changes or findings related to placement of lines, tubes, or medical devices within the body. This includes specificity about the position and condition of medical devices, with particular focus on radiographs depicting their placement and any associated changes noted since previous images.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6848030018761726,0.685,0.6947368421052632,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7622,latent_7622,9973,0.019946,0.012631914,7.8798347,Comparisons to prior imaging demonstrating unchanged or stable findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently contain references to comparisons with prior images or reports, especially noting changes or stability in findings. This includes phrases about unchanged or stable conditions as compared to previous studies, specifically addressing the analysis of changes over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.2682926829268293,0.3728813559322034,59.0,141.0
+7623,latent_7623,2066,0.004132,0.012417599,11.124371,Activation increases with reference to prior imaging changes.,"The pattern of activation appears to increase when there is a description of radiological findings in reference to changes compared to prior studies. This includes comments on stability or resolution of previous findings from prior images, using phrases like 'Compared with prior', 'appearance similar to prior', or 'changes since previous'.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4115174443043295,0.44,0.3928571428571428,0.22,100.0,100.0
+7624,latent_7624,4416,0.008832,0.011767637,7.531843,Comparison with prior imaging to assess change.,"The examples with high activation consistently refer to comparing current imaging findings with prior studies or explicitly state 'comparison' findings over time. This pattern is a key component in radiology to assess changes or stability in a patient's condition, and the examples often include phrases like 'as compared to prior', 'interval change', or an explicit mention of the comparison study, highlighting the temporal aspect of imaging diagnosis.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5632710994650071,0.6,0.5632911392405063,0.89,100.0,100.0
+7625,latent_7625,8133,0.016266,0.013715805,5.572359,Reports noting bibasilar atelectasis/opacities and comparing changes over time.,"These examples often describe conditions of the lungs like bibasilar atelectasis or opacities in a pattern observed after examining both current and prior radiology images. However, the defining pattern here is the focus on changes or absence of changes over time as seen by comparing with prior imaging, whether the specific finding is persistent, resolved, stable or worsened, which often includes atelectasis, effusions, or opacities.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6625620105260508,0.665,0.6987951807228916,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7626,latent_7626,6911,0.013822,0.01780989,5.854973,"Analysis of frontal and lateral chest images, considering prior comparisons.","The highly activated examples consistently involve the analysis of radiological findings in views that include both frontal and lateral images, with some attention given to prior imaging for comparison. This pattern represents typical comprehensive radiological analysis for thorough assessments.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4233378561736771,0.49,0.494047619047619,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7627,latent_7627,3774,0.007548,0.011670663,4.903958,Explicit directive to provide a description based on current images.,"Samples with higher activation typically lack specifications about prior imaging results elsewhere in the prompt, but crucially require an explicit description to be provided based on the current images. Including phrases like 'Provide a description' prominently marks the pattern of interest.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5352586010480747,0.5879396984924623,0.5508982035928144,0.9292929292929292,99.0,100.0
+7628,latent_7628,5125,0.01025,0.01040222,5.314444,Comparison to prior imaging is specified or implied.,"The analysis shows a consistent pattern where the descriptions involve comparing current imaging with previous studies, explicitly mentioning either a 'prior frontal image' or 'comparison to CT or radiograph from a specific date'. This demonstrates an emphasis on tracking changes or stability over time, which is an important aspect of radiology assessments.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4685662596110357,0.53,0.5178571428571429,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7629,latent_7629,7458,0.014916,0.025089813,8.675443,Comparison findings to prior imaging indicating stability or change.,"The pattern here includes descriptions of radiological findings with reference to previous imaging studies for comparison, indicating stability or change in current findings compared to prior ones. Examples mention comparisons to prior imaging or describe findings as unchanged, highlighting temporal comparison in radiological evaluations.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4495045540986888,0.45,0.4528301886792453,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7630,latent_7630,2966,0.005932,0.0074399533,5.5365114,No prior comparison in report required.,"High activation levels correlate with examples where the assistant instructions explicitly mention 'COMPARISON: None' or 'COMPARISON: None available' and require a description of findings without comparing to prior exams. This pattern indicates a focus on current image examination alone without reference to past studies, suggesting a key interest in isolated assessment.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5238095238095238,0.22,100.0,100.0
+7631,latent_7631,3636,0.007272,0.012806763,6.2158113,Explicit comparison to prior images showing stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels generally describe findings which explicitly state either stability or change compared to prior imaging studies, using terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'increased', 'decreased', or 'not changed'. This suggests that the comparison is critical in evaluating the imaging findings.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4476190476190476,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7632,latent_7632,5379,0.010758,0.013251383,5.7288756,"Emphasis on findings comparison with prior imaging, influencing perception of thoracic pathology stability or change.","The dataset shows a higher activation level when there is comparative analysis provided, either directly or indirectly, between current and prior imaging, especially focusing on specific pulmonary or thoracic pathologies. This demonstrates the pattern of emphasizing comparison levels.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5211267605633803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7633,latent_7633,496495,0.99299,5.0862107,19.322353,Provide findings in comparison to prior image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a directive to provide a comparison description between a current and a prior radiology image involving specific changes, stability, or stability of certain clinical findings. This directive is crucial for these comparisons, typically leading to a notable pattern observed in each report.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3982778296503786,0.42,0.4420289855072464,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7634,latent_7634,11371,0.022742,0.011954529,2.8384078,Detailed comparisons to prior imaging in findings.,"The examples with higher activations focus on providing a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings. They describe interval changes, stability, or lack of significant differences in specific abnormalities or features. The presence of comparison data and highlighting relative differences between images appears to be central to the high activation.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.537396401859713,0.5376884422110553,0.5333333333333333,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+7635,latent_7635,2359,0.004718,0.007188658,6.8464155,Use of both current frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently use both a frontal and lateral view in the current images for comparison against prior studies, emphasizing three-view examination. This provides a complete assessment by incorporating multiple perspectives, typical in radiology for nuanced diagnosis.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6471418489767113,0.65,0.6271186440677966,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7636,latent_7636,31562,0.063124,0.033926576,10.004424,Describe findings without detailed prior comparison data.,"These examples involve instructions for comparison against previous imaging studies, without specifying the comparison details in the inputs. The pattern is about describing findings by implicitly noting interval changes without giving explicit comparative data or outcome. This often indicates incomplete or absent comparative information.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.4074074074074074,0.5789473684210527,19.0,31.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.3090909090909091,0.5151515151515151,66.0,134.0
+7637,latent_7637,10835,0.02167,0.010151135,3.8909616,Frontal and/or lateral views with comparisons to prior images.,"All examples describe the use of frontal and/or lateral views in the radiological assessments, often combined with a comparison to prior radiographic images to describe findings. This pattern suggests a focus on recording and evaluating imaging consistency and any changes in the context of anterior-posterior views, which are common in evaluating respiratory and cardiopulmonary issues.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3953802353908016,0.485,0.4915254237288136,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7638,latent_7638,14629,0.029258,0.015951278,5.191178,Comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"These examples show frequent references to comparing current imaging findings with those from previous imaging, indicating a focus on assessing changes over time. Additionally, moderate activations are associated with examples where interpretative emphasis is placed on the detailed transliteration of findings between current and prior images, often with descriptions of changes or stability, reflecting a nuanced reading style typical of radiological assessments.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.433693796243597,0.4723618090452261,0.4802631578947368,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+7639,latent_7639,11245,0.02249,0.01285253,4.270777,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with comparisons to prior imaging studies, particularly where detailed radiological findings remain stable or unchanged, are indicative of high activation levels. This reflects a consistent pattern of identifying unchanged or stable pathological findings across time in medical imaging reports.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.5789473684210527,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5108755979596691,0.5326633165829145,0.5517241379310345,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+7640,latent_7640,4052,0.008104,0.015426721,8.93375,Emphasis on change in findings or positioning compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels are associated with reports that reference specific findings such as increased pleural effusion, edema, lines/tubes positioning, and comparison to prior images that note significant changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7641,latent_7641,3121,0.006242,0.006515393,6.124713,Detailed comparison to prior image focusing on changes or stability.,"The most significant activations involve reports comparing current and prior images where notable findings regarding changes, stability, or specific conditions are detailed. This reflects a pattern of thorough comparison and detailed descriptions especially relating to the findings from the prior imaging, aiding clinical decision-making by highlighting changes or stability over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4085213032581454,0.41,0.4,0.36,100.0,100.0
+7642,latent_7642,4400,0.0088,0.014349299,5.84186,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"Higher activation levels showcase examples where there is explicit mention of previous findings or changes compared with prior radiological images, focusing on stability or change in condition based on historical imaging. The reports emphasize comparison comments even when coding errors are present.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7643,latent_7643,3904,0.007808,0.007821644,7.0848455,Comparison of chest radiographs over time to assess changes.,"The high activation values in these examples consistently describe changes or status of chest conditions over time, enhanced by explicit reference to previous imaging comparisons. Such comparisons allow evaluation of stability, improvement, or progression, using terminologies indicating change over longitudinal imaging studies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7644,latent_7644,5441,0.010882,0.010052191,3.899684,Requests to compare current images with prior ones for interval changes.,"A pattern emerges in examples where prompts request specific comparisons between an existing set of images and prior images. These requests often include specific phrases related to comparing between images and prior reports, with clear instructions to analyze interval changes. This focused pattern indicates high relevance of comparing current vs prior images, regardless of details from the findings or impression sections.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7645,latent_7645,4590,0.00918,0.009578133,5.408914,Descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples are distinguished by an explicit focus on interval changes or comparisons made to prior imaging studies in the findings section, which is a common feature in radiological examinations assessing progression or stability of pathological conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7646,latent_7646,5158,0.010316,0.0089532975,4.3106413,Description of radiological findings in comparison to a previous image.,Examples with high activation levels are describing the process of providing detailed findings that note the similarities and changes in radiological images compared to previous or different images. This involves the synthesis of past and present radiological data and sometimes includes patient history and comparison to known reference states.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7647,latent_7647,12556,0.025112,0.016332598,4.2526026,Detailed comparison of image findings with prior focus on interval changes in tubes or anatomical structures.,"Samples with high activation levels are characterized by detailed analysis of previous and current imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes and comparison to past findings regarding placement, appearance, or configuration of tubes, catheters, and anatomical conditions. Common descriptions include phrases like 'interval placement', 'unchanged position', and changes in tube placement, often featured in radiology reports where device management is crucial.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.562416277012511,0.5628140703517588,0.5566037735849056,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+7648,latent_7648,5515,0.01103,0.010771847,4.867338,Improvements or stability in findings compared to previous imaging.,"These examples describe situations with findings that are stable or have improved from a prior study, reflecting significant patterns where radiological abnormalities are not worsening and may involve follow-up for confirming stability or improvement.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7649,latent_7649,6008,0.012016,0.009119404,4.0583982,Comparative descriptions of stability or changes in pathology since prior imaging.,"Examples that exhibited high activation levels contain explicit comparative language, detailing changes or stability in the imaging findings relative to previous studies. Notably, there is often new or stable pathology described, taking account of differences or consistencies since prior imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7650,latent_7650,10517,0.021034,0.020554591,5.7365847,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and absence of acute pulmonary abnormalities.,"In the examples, the heart size and contours, mediastinal structures, and absence of acute pathology are emphasized, while conditions such as pneumonia or pneumothorax are specifically ruled out in the findings. The presence of stable cardiac silhouette, mediastinal and hilar contours are consistently noted in these radiological assessments.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.6,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7651,latent_7651,4020,0.00804,0.007981112,6.6584797,Comparison with prior imaging assessing stability or change.,"These examples have a focus on providing comparative analysis of the current radiological findings in relation to prior imaging, indicating either stability or change in certain clinical aspects. Higher activation levels correspond with examples that heavily emphasize this comparative analysis.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4330805178886079,0.445,0.4573643410852713,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7652,latent_7652,5113,0.010226,0.012946705,6.7428894,Issues related to pacemaker or port device leads in radiological exams.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently note the presence, position, or note changes about pacemaker or port device leads, emphasizing radiological examinations that involve checks on cardiovascular devices or their placement.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3453661273730478,0.475,0.2727272727272727,0.03,100.0,100.0
+7653,latent_7653,15665,0.03133,0.02217895,5.790691,"Pleural effusion, atelectasis, or lung opacities mentioned in relation to prior changes.","These examples involve radiological studies that mention specific issues related to pleural effusion, atelectasis, or lung opacities, especially in relation to changes from prior images. Consistency in referencing these findings while comparing current and prior images seems to be a pattern in these activations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6185567010309279,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7654,latent_7654,5522,0.011044,0.011016347,4.8190336,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' inclusion related to report comparison.,"The pattern in this dataset is linked to reports including ""PRIOR_REPORT"" data with higher activation, particularly when historical changes or stability are assessed in comparison to prior imaging. Reports not mentioning 'PRIOR_REPORT' or those focused on immediate clinical assessments without historical context tend to have lower activation levels.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4724573671942093,0.57,0.5376344086021505,1.0,100.0,100.0
+7655,latent_7655,6240,0.01248,0.01050261,3.6023266,"Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, no acute pathology.","The high-activation examples typically report on radiology findings where normal heart size, normal mediastinal contours, and absence of new or acute abnormalities like effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax are noted, often following the comparison with a prior image or within the current imaging context.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6749268585431722,0.675,0.6804123711340206,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7656,latent_7656,3576,0.007152,0.009439439,4.232841,"Normal imaging findings: cardiac, lung, mediastinal, hilar contours unchanged.","Most instances with high activation levels involves clear or normal findings in the lungs, mediastinal, and hilar contours, often with references to unchanged cardiac silhouette.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.55,0.55,0.55,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7657,latent_7657,3757,0.007514,0.0084520355,4.1707997,Comparison with prior images or indication of changes over time.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently contain explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies or reference changes over time, such as improvements, worsening, or stability of conditions. This reflects a common radiological approach to diagnosis which uses previous images as a baseline for observing changes or verifying stability in a patient's condition.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4774193548387097,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7658,latent_7658,6771,0.013542,0.016551474,3.6328638,Radiological examination paired with prior comparison to emphasize stable findings.,"Examples with high activation levels include multiple references to comparing findings against prior exams, along with medical histories or indications detailing existing conditions or events like surgeries or implantations. The lower activation examples work differently, often focusing on new findings without complex past references.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5340909090909091,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7659,latent_7659,41998,0.083996,0.037773356,2.2847342,Comparisons to prior images revealing interval changes in medical findings.,"These examples all contain comparisons to prior images or studies in the findings or impressions. In some cases, findings explicitly state 'compared to prior' or similar language that indicates an evaluation of changes over time. Examples with high activation levels specifically focus on identifying changes in clinically significant findings or structures, such as pleural effusions, lung opacities, or medical device placements, compared to previous studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7660,latent_7660,5669,0.011338,0.009641321,5.6417894,Explicit reference to 'PRIOR_REPORT' in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention 'PRIOR_REPORT' in their descriptions, indicating a pattern where prior reports are explicitly referenced in relation to current findings. This use of 'PRIOR_REPORT' suggests these examples are concerned with the context of ongoing monitoring or follow-up in patient care.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5618661257606491,0.595,0.5612903225806452,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7661,latent_7661,10352,0.020704,0.021866383,3.8932917,Comparison to prior imaging findings over time.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently reference comparisons to prior imaging, including explicit descriptions of unchanged or changed findings compared to previous exams. This indicates the pattern is recognizing language associated with longitudinal evaluation of radiological findings over time.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7662,latent_7662,3303,0.006606,0.007241672,3.7535758,Detailed comparative findings with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently provide detailed comparative descriptions of current imaging findings with prior images, indicating specific changes or stability in the condition. This detailed comparison using imaging studies is a key distinguishing feature.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3869962817807255,0.39,0.3720930232558139,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7663,latent_7663,4759,0.009518,0.009950914,6.967218,"Comparison of images to prior, noting stability or changes in pathology or positioning.","These examples consistently refer to comparisons between the current image and prior images, with emphasis on monitoring stability or changes in pathological findings, often providing further context like equipment position or pathological stability across views.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7664,latent_7664,9343,0.018686,0.017630966,5.419106,Assistant-provided detailed description of findings based on provided images without complex historical context.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve scenarios that require an assistant to generate descriptive findings based on provided radiological images, often related to straightforward visual assessments in the absence of complex patient history or previous examination comparisons.",0.2525252525252525,0.26,0.2,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3794414973476128,0.38,0.3723404255319149,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7665,latent_7665,6049,0.012098,0.012421812,5.1777353,Stable or unchanged cardiopulmonary features compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples consistently involve a comparison between current radiological findings and prior studies, with an emphasis on stable, unchanged, or sequential changes in features such as cardiomediastinal contours, vascular congestion, and pleural effusion. Reports highlight the importance of tracking variations over time, even if subtle.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5505392716660322,0.5527638190954773,0.5581395348837209,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+7666,latent_7666,17848,0.035696,0.02101078,4.2959576,Determine changes or stability compared to prior image study.,"Radiology narrative structure often includes past comparisons to identify stability or changes. These examples consistently employ this practice, analyzing whether any notable changes have occurred between a current and prior study, sometimes describing stable findings using specific terms like 'unchanged', 'normal', or 'clear'.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.51,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7667,latent_7667,34353,0.068706,0.0329357,3.6657898,"Focus on lines, tubes, or devices in radiology findings.","Highly activated examples specifically reference the presence of lines, tubes, or medical devices (e.g., catheters, ET tubes) in the radiology findings, showing interest in evaluating placement or changes alongside other findings such as pneumothorax or pleural effusion. This pattern is evident in contexts where monitoring device positiing or adjustment is crucial to correct patient management.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5920525798897031,0.595,0.6144578313253012,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7668,latent_7668,71804,0.143608,0.073928624,6.093384,Reporting changes in medical devices or post-procedural findings.,"Multiple examples show mention of specific procedures, previous conditions, history of device placements, or changes in medical devices and their positioning. These labels indicate radiological findings related to known interventions, surgeries, or prior conditions and focus on evaluation post these actions/interventions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.4415584415584415,0.3736263736263736,91.0,109.0
+7669,latent_7669,5431,0.010862,0.020876084,5.346909,Direct comparison between current and prior images in instructions.,"Examples with high activations consistently contain specific instructions to compare the current radiological images to prior images. This pattern focuses on making direct comparisons between specific imaging studies, which is a common practice in monitoring for changes or stability in medical imaging.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4837840870833801,0.54,0.5240963855421686,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7670,latent_7670,3955,0.00791,0.009031558,5.4059124,Comparison to prior imaging regardless of findings.,"High activation levels correlate with comparisons made between current and prior imaging studies, regardless of changes or findings, which suggests an emphasis on consistency in reporting based on previous exams.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3995943204868154,0.445,0.4645161290322581,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7671,latent_7671,6494,0.012988,0.008752605,3.3227892,Comparison of current and prior radiographic views focusing on cardiopulmonary findings.,"These examples describe multiple radiographic views (frontal and lateral) with attention to comparing the current findings to prior imaging, especially highlighting changes or stability in findings such as cardiac silhouette, pleural effusions, and pulmonary opacities, even when prior exams are not explicitly detailed.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7672,latent_7672,7342,0.014684,0.011600357,4.506068,Detailed comparison between current and prior chest images.,"High activation examples all involve detailed comparisons between current and prior chest x-ray or radiograph images, with specific mentions of changes or stability in findings. This is distinct from low activation examples where no or fewer comparisons are discussed. This pattern likely highlights the importance of temporal comparison in ongoing patient management.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.52,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7673,latent_7673,9497,0.018994,0.019974107,5.0419283,Comparison of multiple views showing stability or subtle differences.,"The pattern is identified when there are multiple views (frontal and lateral) and a comparison with prior imaging, especially when subtle differences or the stable nature of certain findings like heart size or lung shadowing are noted. The high activation examples place emphasis on comparing details across views and time without significant changes, highlighting stability or minor changes rather than significant pathological findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5113288271183007,0.5125628140703518,0.509090909090909,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+7674,latent_7674,44500,0.089,0.036474563,4.467403,Reports highlight stability or unchanged status compared with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation typically include a stable or unchanged status when current imaging is compared with past studies, often emphasizing specific findings or pathologies that have not deteriorated or improved. This focus aligns with the common pattern in radiology reports of mentioning stability over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5913978494623656,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7675,latent_7675,7758,0.015516,0.010252047,3.4491343,Reports structured around specific instructions to compare current with prior images.,Examples with high activation consistently describe a certain instruction or template that provides directives for radiological assessment and comparison tasks. These exemplars often employ phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' and have commands or assistant intervention within a structured task-oriented framework that suggests an outlined process was followed or instructed to follow.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4931506849315068,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7676,latent_7676,28316,0.056632,0.03252183,3.9429367,Specific comparisons and evaluation of changes from prior imaging studies.,"There are strong activations when the description involves a comparison between current and previous imaging, further specifying findings in context of said comparison, and particularly emphasizing changes or stability over time — even when the exact details of the comparison are not available. Cases that clearly state 'no comparison' or do not specify changes typically have lower activation.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7677,latent_7677,78958,0.157916,0.14611831,8.432859,Focus on line/tube positioning or presence of effusions/pneumothoraces.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed assessment of lines or tubes positions on radiographs or the presence and characteristics of effusions or pneumothoraces. These elements appear to be emphasized, considering the need for precise localization and implications for patient management.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6216897856242118,0.64,0.5972222222222222,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7678,latent_7678,23199,0.046398,0.05495981,6.8466864,Frequent comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on stability or changes.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently include references to comparisons with previous imaging, tracking stability or changes in appearance, often mentioning cardiac, vascular, or structural aspects of the thorax. This pattern reflects the importance of monitoring changes over time in radiology.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4951456310679611,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7679,latent_7679,3077,0.006154,0.0062174215,5.3365664,Focus on describing radiological findings in comparison to a prior image.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels focus on instructions to compare current imaging studies to previous ones. The high activations showcase prompts that emphasize the comparison process, whether it's changes in findings or stability across images.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7680,latent_7680,8319,0.016638,0.010631977,6.428004,High activation associated with focus on patient history and current assessment.,"The pattern in the high activation examples indicates a focus on questions or assessments related to patient history, both prior and current, and involves alterations from established baselines in medical device placements or clinical conditions. This includes clear continuity of care and device adjustments or stability comparisons.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7681,latent_7681,73935,0.14787,0.09390324,2.9667032,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of findings that are compared to previous studies, highlighting changes or stability in conditions over time. The presence of explicit comparison phrases in the radiological report is a key feature.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7682,latent_7682,3732,0.007464,0.009575401,5.6112638,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging studies.,Highly representative samples tend to describe either changes in findings compared to previous imaging studies or explicitly specify when no significant changes are found. Other examples with low activation mention findings without comparative analysis or report 'no comparison available.' This indicates the pattern is about emphasizing changes or stability over time.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7683,latent_7683,4198,0.008396,0.00838872,4.5682006,"Stability or interval changes in repeat imaging, especially device positioning.","Activated examples highlight findings of stability or changes over time, emphasizing radiologists' focus on observable changes in anatomical or pathological entities. This can involve phrases describing comparison with previous images or highlight stability or resolution of findings, particularly how they relate to devices like pacemakers or procedural context.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6215848028456823,0.625,0.6050420168067226,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7684,latent_7684,6071,0.012142,0.014489369,5.629645,Radiological findings linked to specific clinical indications or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently provide descriptions or evaluations of radiological findings that are directly correlated with a clinical indication or question. These descriptions often make connections to prior conditions or devices, and detail changes or stability since prior imaging. These observations reflect a detailed comparative analysis in radiological reporting.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7685,latent_7685,12732,0.025464,0.012615855,2.9669282,Emphasis on device placement or interval change.,"The key pattern in these examples is the focus on identifying changes or the placement of medical devices such as tubes or catheters, seen in phrases like 'placement of nasogastric tube', 'catheter terminates', and 'Dobbhoff placement'. These reports emphasize the accuracy and adequacy of device placement in relation to previous exams or similar procedures, which is critical in patient care where devices are regularly used for treatment.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5784313725490197,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7686,latent_7686,7564,0.015128,0.02057242,4.145921,Explicit comparison of changes or stability in findings over time.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently highlight specific changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging, with an emphasis on evaluating certain conditions or devices over time. These reports often use direct language to compare historical and current images, emphasizing the differences or lack thereof in the findings, often with a clearly defined purpose for comparison stated in the indication.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.41486834537771,0.415,0.4174757281553398,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7687,latent_7687,4246,0.008492,0.00861504,4.0798116,References to technical details and comparison with prior images for stability or changes.,"The pattern is identified by references to technical aspects of the X-ray images such as their views (PA, AP, lateral) and frequent mentions of detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging studies, often specifying observations such as no substantial interval changes or stability of findings. Such patterns of technical and comparative language are typical in follow-up studies to assess progression or stability of a patient condition.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4206928513497856,0.5,0.5,0.87,100.0,100.0
+7688,latent_7688,18483,0.036966,0.025460612,4.7571244,Repetitive mention of 'unchanged' findings in comparison to previous images.,"The consistent pattern in the examples with higher activation levels is the description of the findings in relation to unchanged aspects as compared to prior studies. This emphasizes stability or lack of significant change from prior imaging, marked by repetitive mentions of 'unchanged' elements like opacities, effusions, or structural positions.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6689669221562986,0.675,0.7397260273972602,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7689,latent_7689,3544,0.007088,0.0063838633,9.337537,Descriptions of cardiopulmonary findings with comparison insights or specific diagnostic evaluations highlighted.,"The examples with activation mainly involve either descriptions of cardiopulmonary findings or problem resolution such as interval improvement, or evidencing of nuanced changes across comparative studies, specifically addressing conditions like effusions, pneumonia, or emphasized catheter placements. This pattern seems to highlight scenarios where specific diagnostic evaluations are requested or subtle image variations are noted over comparisons.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.421152732986025,0.475,0.484472049689441,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7690,latent_7690,22772,0.045544,0.024895867,6.467881,Focused on detailed tracking of changes and evolving findings from prior exams.,"High activations describe reports focusing on detailed observations and changes over time, particularly with newly emerging or evolving findings, using specific anatomical and positional descriptions to track known changes.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.3714285714285714,0.7761194029850746,67.0,133.0
+7691,latent_7691,7751,0.015502,0.010751984,5.3571777,Comparative imaging emphasizes stability or change in findings.,"These examples highlight instances where prior imaging is used to assess changes in conditions such as opacities, effusions, tube placements, or device position. Despite occasional lack of specification regarding comparisons, the evaluated pattern indicates the focus on changes or stability between studies, especially with respect to soft tissue anomalies or medical device positions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4388489208633093,0.7176470588235294,85.0,115.0
+7692,latent_7692,17661,0.035322,0.023463247,7.1544647,Emphasis on interval changes and reversible findings in images.,"Samples with higher activations describe changes in radiological findings between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing the reversible nature of certain findings or medical interventions and their effects, such as tube placements or resolution of effusions. The pattern emerging is that these reports include interval changes compared to previous studies leading to an assessment of improvement or worsening of conditions.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6341164453524004,0.6381909547738693,0.5401459854014599,0.891566265060241,83.0,116.0
+7693,latent_7693,5133,0.010266,0.0096844975,4.8336396,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"The examples exhibit a pattern where even when detailed findings are reported, there is a specific emphasis on evaluating or describing the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, often noting their stability or normalcy. This highlights the model's activation in response to references describing the heart and mediastinal regions as unchanged or within normal limits.",0.7624831309041835,0.7708333333333334,0.71875,0.92,25.0,23.0,0.6807743795695603,0.69,0.6417910447761194,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7694,latent_7694,4552,0.009104,0.01294298,4.0550947,Identification of interval changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently refer to changes, particularly interval changes, in the findings between current and prior imaging studies. They often involve re-evaluation of known abnormalities. The highest activations noted are focused on explicit assessments of alterations in imaging findings over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7695,latent_7695,1629,0.003258,0.0057897116,8.613426,Complete and coherent radiology report structure.,"Examples with activation typically involve detailed textual descriptions reflecting careful evaluation of anatomical details, radiological findings, and comparisons with prior studies but without procedural mistakes or truncated text (typos or brackets). These examples are often complete, direct, and lack typing artifacts, suggesting a coherent structure in the linguistic patterning of radiology reports.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4689028651292802,0.525,0.5714285714285714,0.2,100.0,100.0
+7696,latent_7696,5083,0.010166,0.0137432115,5.6389766,Comparison and analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"High activation levels are associated with reports that provide a detailed comparative analysis of the current and prior radiological images, focusing on identifying changes or stability in findings over time. These reports often contain specific statements instructing the comparison between images, such as descriptions of interval changes, stability, or improvements, and include both frontal and lateral views.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7697,latent_7697,2928,0.005856,0.005186788,4.0397367,Complex comparison involving clinical history or stability of medical devices.,"The cases with higher activations tend to feature requests for detailed comparisons between current and prior radiological findings, involving complex clinical settings such as surgical histories or implanted devices, which may require careful documentation of continuity and stability. These differ from simple task-driven comparisons prevalent in the low-activation cases, which lack such complexity.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7698,latent_7698,4939,0.009878,0.011738091,3.632947,Activation linked to 'PRIOR_REPORT: N/A' for comparisons.,"The key differentiator for activation in these examples is the presence of a prior report indicated as 'N/A', which suggests the automatic identification of prior comparisons is crucial to the task. Activation is higher when 'N/A' is present, indicating a lack of comparison text purely based on the structure 'PRIOR_REPORT: N/A', showing that the model activation is sensitive to the absence of comparative prior imaging studies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4210526315789473,0.24,100.0,100.0
+7699,latent_7699,2457,0.004914,0.0076483837,5.172309,Radiology findings described in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently involve providing a description of radiology findings by comparing current imaging to prior ones. The pattern focuses on analyzing changes or stability over time using available prior imaging as a reference point, even if explicit comparison information is unavailable due to missing priors.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4271932469098582,0.43,0.4385964912280701,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7700,latent_7700,193266,0.386532,0.32765284,6.0863667,Comparison of current and prior imaging focusing on changes or stability.,"The pattern in cases with higher activation levels is the presence of specific radiological comparisons made with prior imaging, specifically referencing interval changes or stability in findings, rather than just describing the findings. These reports focus on assessing changes over time, often identifying new developments or confirming stability, which is critical in monitoring the progress of disease or treatment outcomes.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7701,latent_7701,7969,0.015938,0.010974759,4.028652,Examination findings described via interval or stability changes against prior images.,"Examples displaying an activation include descriptions referring to findings over time, usually noting changes like progression or stability of specific conditions or findings when compared with prior images. Many mention terms like 'interval','since prior', 'unchanged', or describe changes in size or appearance compared to previous evaluations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4434782608695652,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7702,latent_7702,16344,0.032688,0.02264776,4.78017,Evaluation or repositioning of indwelling medical devices.,"Sets with higher activation levels consistently involve the assessment, monitoring, positioning, or repositioning of indwelling medical devices like tubes and catheters, often compared to prior positioning or appearance in imaging studies.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7628598097832942,0.765,0.7226890756302521,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7703,latent_7703,3306,0.006612,0.013024184,6.855706,Absence of acute cardiopulmonary findings in context of clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal contours, indicating absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities. These reports often confirm these normal findings after retrospective comparison with prior images or available clinical indications suggestive of acute changes, thus emphasizing the stability and absence of acute changes.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6897207486738064,0.69,0.7021276595744681,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7704,latent_7704,6701,0.013402,0.014958853,3.8151064,Descriptions involving comparison to prior reports or images.,"Higher activation levels correspond to examples that explicitly mention comparison with prior images or reports, emphasizing the comparison aspect as a critical part of the contextual understanding of the changes or stability in patient's conditions. This pattern indicates a focus on recognizing phrases that reference and contrast current findings with historical data.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4171685493047653,0.475,0.4846625766871165,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7705,latent_7705,2523,0.005046,0.009261918,6.057471,Reports lacking available previous imaging for comparison.,Example reports with high activations (>= 6.0) consistently lack explicit comparative data from prior imaging studies in the findings or indicate that no comparisons are available. This contrasts with reports that mention comparisons but have lower activations.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3983669961323592,0.405,0.379746835443038,0.3,100.0,100.0
+7706,latent_7706,7370,0.01474,0.010032649,5.585002,"Worsening or notable changes in findings against prior images, highlighting anomalies.","In the examples with high activation, there is a consistent presence of findings which are either new or worsened compared to the prior images, combined with significant anomalies such as effusions, pneumonia, or changes linked to hardware (e.g., tubes, catheters). Conversely, examples with zero activation typically indicate stability or normal findings across multiple comparisons.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7707,latent_7707,8799,0.017598,0.012690394,7.750405,Description of interval changes in tube or catheter placement.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe a detailed interval change, referencing the placement or modification of tubes and catheters, especially focused on ET tube, IJ line, or enteric tube, often in reference to patient management or intervention indications.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5053272450532724,0.61,0.3658536585365853,0.2238805970149253,67.0,133.0
+7708,latent_7708,12440,0.02488,0.015271925,5.905229,Stable pleural effusion or cardiomegaly alongside unchanged medical device positioning.,"These examples predominantly focus on changes in pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, and positioning of surgical or medical support devices compared to prior imaging. Reports often describe stability or changes in these findings and use terms indicating stability such as 'unchanged' or 'stable' multiple times during comparison.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7709,latent_7709,3931,0.007862,0.008355801,5.07185,Description involving interval changes or findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern consists of explicit evaluation, changes, or stability of conditions in radiographic findings when compared to prior images. The higher activation examples often describe interval changes, comparisons with prior imaging, or findings in relation to previous exams. Observations related to possible changes or stability in the medical condition are emphasized.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7710,latent_7710,8686,0.017372,0.012545585,5.1259913,"Explicit comparison to prior images, noting changes or stabilities.","In highly activated cases, reports include explicit comparison of current radiological findings with prior images, highlighting specific changes or stabilizations in conditions over time. This comparison evaluates for changes like consolidation resolution, effusion changes, opacities, or image artifacts, clearly distinguishing findings related to a specific historical context.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.55,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7711,latent_7711,30625,0.06125,0.030650118,5.381527,Descriptive comparison to prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a descriptive comparison of the current images to prior images, particularly noting changes in pathology or stability of identified issues. This pattern involves evaluating consistency or progression of findings over time using comparative language explicitly related to prior imagery.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6354166666666667,0.65,0.6071428571428571,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7712,latent_7712,3564,0.007128,0.0152557455,6.5969315,Comparison with prior frontal image is requested.,"The examples receiving high activation levels consistently feature prompts requiring the assistant to provide a description using given current images and a comparison with prior images, emphasizing explicit analysis relative to the previous images. This aligns with the model's task of evaluating changes over time, as indicated by many examples showing zero activation when the comparison was unavailable or not highlighted.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7713,latent_7713,4451,0.008902,0.011322947,4.621901,Interval imaging changes compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels feature descriptions confirming interval changes in medical imaging findings, specifically involving comparison to prior studies. Indicators of stable, improved, new, or resolved medical conditions based on previous images are common in high activation examples.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4516129032258064,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7714,latent_7714,2592,0.005184,0.007882711,6.1222577,Explicit instruction to compare findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently instruct the assistant to provide a comparison-based description explicitly, mentioning examination findings compared to previous imaging. This involves outlining changes noted in the current study versus past observations, which is indicative of clinical importance in radiology reports. Conversely, low activation examples negate explicit instructions to compare findings and may not emphasize 'interval change' which is less influential for determining activation levels.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.5681818181818182,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7715,latent_7715,13570,0.02714,0.017114935,6.0840554,Absence of prior images for comparison.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently indicate situations where no contemporary or prior images are available for comparison. This absence of comparative imagery creates a specific context for interpreting radiological findings without historical image reference.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7716,latent_7716,5173,0.010346,0.01280481,6.418065,Comparative description of findings with unavailable prior imaging references.,"The active arguments involve evaluating imaging findings by comparing current images to prior images, despite some being unavailable. Requests ask for descriptions based on this comparative analysis, indicating the intent to discern changes over time even in situations where direct comparisons aren't possible due to unavailable prior images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5818033455732354,0.59,0.5703125,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7717,latent_7717,15210,0.03042,0.050654013,5.4367642,Consistent observation of interval imaging changes and stability in radiological findings.,"These examples demonstrate a combination of detailed radiological findings in relation to changes over time, referencing comparisons with prior imaging where distinct interval changes are noted, and the persistent or stable nature of certain conditions is highlighted.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4951456310679611,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7718,latent_7718,8498,0.016996,0.012778543,5.693278,Comparison of frontal and lateral images with prior frontal images.,"The samples with high activation levels all involve the systematic provision of a frontal and lateral image, a request for comparison to prior images, and radiology reports specifying comparative findings. This suggests that the model activates strongly for tasks requesting detailed comparative analysis between current and prior radiographic findings, specifically when frontal and lateral views are used.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7719,latent_7719,14463,0.028926,0.032814708,4.2956147,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"These examples describe a pattern of comparing findings from a current image to those seen in prior images to identify stability, improvement, or new developments over time. This is evident in radiological analyses where new developments might reflect pathological changes or improvements requiring clinical attention.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7720,latent_7720,18529,0.037058,0.038735796,7.530788,Cardiac size observation with thoracic aorta change or calcification.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently describe images with evaluations about the heart size or position alongside a notable change or difference observed in the thoracic aorta, such as tortuosity or calcification. These specific details distinguish them from examples where changes are not significant.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.5142857142857142,0.18,100.0,100.0
+7721,latent_7721,5782,0.011564,0.010811143,3.993952,Evaluation of both frontal and lateral chest views in radiologic findings.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings in both 'frontal' and 'lateral' views of the chest in addition to the comparison with prior images. This suggests the pattern involves evaluating standard chest views comprehensively.,0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6068255091609656,0.625,0.5874125874125874,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7722,latent_7722,14995,0.02999,0.019316427,3.9696002,Describes mediastinal and hilar contours as stable when compared to prior exams.,"These examples often explore normal mediastinal, hilar, and cardiomediastinal contours without significant change, presence of pleural abnormalities, or absence of major pulmonary issues, with comparison to prior exams. Examples consistently describe findings surrounding mediastinal and hilar contours as stable, especially regarding concise comparison to past images, hinting stability without specific focal issues.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,100.0,100.0
+7723,latent_7723,5415,0.01083,0.012916568,5.5741434,Describes findings in relation to changes compared to prior images.,"The high activation examples emphasize findings that are stated in relation to changes or stable findings when compared with prior imaging studies. This pattern indicates radiographic evaluation specifically discussing changes over time, particularly stability or progression of findings when previous images are available. Comparison is a fundamental aspect of follow-up in radiology, especially for conditions requiring monitoring over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4601769911504424,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7724,latent_7724,5760,0.01152,0.011764944,4.2256546,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The activations indicate the model's interest in examples that describe specific findings or conditions in detail, frequently involving comparisons and the stability or change of observed conditions. High activations often involve notable changes or considerations of prior or baseline states, such as new consolidations or notable differences compared to prior imaging, important in tracking disease progression or assessing the efficacy of treatment, and ensuring correct interpretation of acute findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5353535353535354,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7725,latent_7725,13594,0.027188,0.014033007,2.7966628,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The examples that show higher activation levels involve descriptive findings related to the cardiomediastinal silhouette being normal, stable, or within normal limits. This phrase is often used in reports indicating no cardiopulmonary abnormality, which aligns with the pattern the model is identifying.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.634771732332708,0.635,0.6285714285714286,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7726,latent_7726,12428,0.024856,0.024830775,3.9478958,Emphasis on describing findings with reference to comparison imaging.,"The highest activated examples emphasize providing a description of findings relative to current imaging compared to prior studies, even though the comparison might be based on a general observation or no explicit changes. The phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' is consistently included in the high activation examples.",0.4731182795698925,0.5102040816326531,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.4514054054054054,0.4874371859296482,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,99.0
+7727,latent_7727,12766,0.025532,0.013778148,4.7603235,Subtle comparison findings with prior imaging showing stability.,"The patterns with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions that highlight comparisons with prior imaging and note stability or changes in chronic or subtle findings. These involve detailed comparisons to previous images showing subtle or no change compared to past studies, rather than acute or new findings.",0.4337568058076225,0.4583333333333333,0.4285714285714285,0.25,24.0,24.0,0.3529717778644817,0.371859296482412,0.303030303030303,0.202020202020202,99.0,100.0
+7728,latent_7728,1999,0.003998,0.0056230756,4.947493,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies to assess interval changes.,"The high activation examples focus on describing changes over time through comparisons with prior imaging, specifically noting stability, resolution, or progression of specific conditions or features across multiple past exams. The prominent use of phrases such as 'no change', 'as compared to previous', 'new', 'persistent', and dates of past studies in these examples indicates the pattern is highly attuned to such comparative analyses.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4983323685878883,0.545,0.5279503105590062,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7729,latent_7729,40146,0.080292,0.041951872,4.1164284,Monitoring interval change or stability in follow-up images.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently mention interval changes, stabilization, or monitoring over time, indicating that the pattern observed is related to the assessment or maintenance of conditions over sequential radiographic examinations.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6634026927784578,0.67,0.6328125,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7730,latent_7730,9976,0.019952,0.015228064,5.205553,Interpretation of current images without prior comparison emphasizing normal findings.,"Highly activated examples emphasize direct instructions for comparison, using images without prior comparisons available. They are tasks where the assistant is asked to assume findings with missing comparison radiographs, focusing on normal findings like clear lungs and cardiomediastinal contours.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5265434954150907,0.565,0.6511627906976745,0.28,100.0,100.0
+7731,latent_7731,5113,0.010226,0.008314832,7.066806,"Normal findings in chest images, especially heart, mediastinal, and lung clarity.","The examples with high activation describe normal findings across multiple chest images, using indicative phrases such as 'heart size is normal', 'mediastinal and hilar contours are normal', and 'lungs are clear'. The pattern is the reporting of unremarkable or normal findings with no significant abnormalities.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7660461804495982,0.77,0.7142857142857143,0.9,100.0,100.0
+7732,latent_7732,4264,0.008528,0.015269352,5.0820813,Documentation and analysis in the context of prior imaging comparisons and changes tracking.,"The high-activation examples frequently involve examination findings given the context of comparing images, highlighting changes observed between current and prior imaging, often using specific phrasing like 'compared to prior' or indicating examination of past events ('comparison' or 'previous'). The presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' and detailed indications suggests a focus on tracking or discussing changes over time/radiographic evaluations.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.50625,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7733,latent_7733,10451,0.020902,0.020585602,5.1022863,Evaluate radiology findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparison between current images and prior images as part of the prompt structure. The pattern centers around evaluating changes or stability in findings between provided images, thus noting any differences or confirming no change from previous conditions.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7734,latent_7734,12879,0.025758,0.015646704,6.1311593,Use of comparative findings with prior imaging to describe changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include comparisons with a prior radiology study to identify changes or stability over time. They use comparative language and mention intervals, changes in opacities, consolidations, and stability based on prior imaging, unlike the lower activation examples which do not highlight interval changes or comparisons.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5556190278354798,0.5678391959798995,0.5488721804511278,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+7735,latent_7735,4585,0.00917,0.010009867,4.977351,Reference to thoracic aortic tortuosity in image comparisons.,"A common feature in these samples is a description of the thoracic aorta as tortuous, often in the context of normal cardiac function or specific pulmonary findings. Tortuosity of the aorta is highlighted, regardless of other detailed cardiomediastinal or pulmonary observations.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4916115912557193,0.575,0.8947368421052632,0.17,100.0,100.0
+7736,latent_7736,4901,0.009802,0.010714265,3.2770615,Focus on procedural monitoring with portable or specialized imaging techniques.,The key characteristic in the high activation examples is the use of specific imaging techniques or devices like portable chest X-rays or comparisons made during procedures such as line placements and post-operative assessments. These examples emphasize monitoring interventions or specific procedural imagery rather than standard diagnostic findings.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5527186403010329,0.5527638190954773,0.5544554455445545,0.56,100.0,99.0
+7737,latent_7737,36788,0.073576,0.034074597,2.5330582,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images to identify interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently include a clear comparison of findings between the current and prior images, indicating changes or stability over time, often highlighting specific alterations such as effusions or opacities. This is evident from the focus on radiological comparisons and changes against baseline data.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7738,latent_7738,5074,0.010148,0.011792577,3.2076468,High activation linked to 'PRIOR_REPORT: N/A' indication.,"The samples with high activation levels contain references to ""N/A"" in the 'PRIOR_REPORT' section, suggesting there is no prior report available. This differs from examples with a low activation level that either do not contain this or have actual data in the 'PRIOR_REPORT'. The presence of ""N/A"" appears to correlate with a unique case where the comparison status is unclear or perhaps not needed.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5685958574807037,0.585,0.639344262295082,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7739,latent_7739,4136,0.008272,0.009386424,4.103539,Emphasis on interval changes or assessments between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve the task of comparing new images with prior images, especially emphasizing any changes or the assessment for interval changes in the patient's condition, including specific findings like the stability or variation in lesions, insertions, or opacities relative to previous examinations. This involves a comparison aspect which the model seems to highlight as important.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4621848739495798,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7740,latent_7740,5552,0.011104,0.013023997,5.72555,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The high activation levels are associated with examples that mention specific comparison of the current imaging study with past imaging or changes over time, often noting stability or changes in findings. This pattern suggests the activation is identifying the specific task of comparing imaging results over time to assess for changes, which is a common practice in radiological assessments.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7741,latent_7741,5217,0.010434,0.007750831,7.415806,Importance of technique description and comparison with prior images or reports.,"Most examples have references to previous images or reports for comparison, specifically mentioning 'comparison' or 'prior report', which influences the activation level. Use of 'technique' detailing frontal and lateral views suggests comprehensive examination and contributes to higher activation.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3627621364847642,0.45,0.4505494505494505,0.8913043478260869,92.0,108.0
+7742,latent_7742,9685,0.01937,0.010497475,3.2091894,Mandatory description of findings in comparison to prior radiographs.,"The highly activated examples generally involve a request or requirement to describe radiographic findings explicitly in comparison to previous images, despite the imperative insertion of 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' and 'COMPARISON: None or chest...' lines, indicating a comparative 'description will be output' pattern in some models of imaging reports.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7743,latent_7743,20601,0.041202,0.019430378,3.5958593,Detailed sequential comparison of multiple image views in reports.,"Examples with higher activation involve detailed comparison of sequential radiography with the most recent and/or prior images included. This pattern responds to exploratory requests for changes or stability through progressively detailed comparative analysis within the report body, capturing specific radiologic changes over multiple image views.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4867256637168141,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7744,latent_7744,5772,0.011544,0.012431901,10.058973,Comparison of current and prior images to assess interval changes.,"These examples describe comparative analysis explicitly between current radiological findings and prior images, assessing changes in pathological conditions or the positioning of medical devices over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5839368005266623,0.605,0.5724137931034483,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7745,latent_7745,5095,0.01019,0.011439231,6.0159254,Findings of atelectasis and possible pleural effusion in lung bases.,"These examples describe findings of atelectasis and possible pleural effusion, typically noted at the lung bases or chronic rib pathologies. This pattern of atelectasis is often associated with patients who have a history of chronic lung conditions, hospitalization or immobility, leading to collapsed or partially collapsed areas in the lungs.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4087229112716369,0.4522613065326633,0.391304347826087,0.1818181818181818,99.0,100.0
+7746,latent_7746,3083,0.006166,0.0066519855,4.6441865,Analysis of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples frequently reference changes or stability in the imaging findings when compared to prior studies. The descriptions consistently involve comparison to identify whether structures or abnormalities such as opacities, catheter positions, or pleural effusions have changed, suggesting a focus on comparing changes over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7747,latent_7747,11035,0.02207,0.013561374,3.879489,Descriptions of findings explicitly comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve a clear written directive to provide a description of radiology findings in comparison to a prior image, often for evaluation or change in a patient's condition or treatment. This suggests an emphasis on assessments that specifically include reviewing sequential or comparative data.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7748,latent_7748,4987,0.009974,0.011385713,3.5684803,Emphasis on describing findings in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated samples are marked by an emphasis on providing comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. The language explicitly instructs or requests descriptions of changes between successive images, indicating a focus on tracking interval changes.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3714644877435575,0.375,0.391304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7749,latent_7749,20692,0.041384,0.02440069,4.274206,Mention of interval changes based on comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels highlight mentions of changes in opacity or structures compared to a prior image, suggesting evaluations of progression, changes, or stability of a medical condition. The need for comparison against prior imaging is crucial in these cases to determine such changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3408542713567839,0.51,0.5151515151515151,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7750,latent_7750,34846,0.069692,0.032319818,3.2065544,Slight interval change in lung volumes or thoracic findings on comparison.,"The highly activated examples involve changes in lung volumes, consolidations, or other thoracic findings that are slightly altered from the prior comparison, such as lower lung volume loss or interval improvement. These subtle changes in the appearance of pathological findings are characteristic and noted in the reports as compared to prior studies.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5087710084033613,0.5276381909547738,0.5409836065573771,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+7751,latent_7751,3904,0.007808,0.009304129,5.1669154,"Comparison of current and prior imaging findings, highlighting stability or changes.","Examples that show higher activations typically describe the findings in a new radiology study in direct comparison to a previous imaging, mentioning stability, slight differences, or changes from prior findings. This indicates the pattern focuses on comparative analysis against prior images.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4661654135338345,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7752,latent_7752,4798,0.009596,0.012269712,4.050226,Relative stability or lack of significant change compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern is identified by references to findings that are either unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging, despite the presence of underlying thoracic abnormalities or specific pathology like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or other structures related findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6026538607354985,0.6030150753768844,0.6,0.63,100.0,99.0
+7753,latent_7753,26057,0.052114,0.034911174,10.381977,Comparison to prior imaging for interval changes.,"Examples with non-zero activations often involve providing a description or comparing findings between the current and prior images, focusing specifically on interval changes or continuities in the presence and progression of pathologies or interventions. This is a common task in interpreting imaging studies to monitor disease progression or response to treatment.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4348728463904379,0.435,0.2763157894736842,0.9333333333333332,45.0,155.0
+7754,latent_7754,18029,0.036058,0.027327826,4.584895,Comparison of current findings to previous exam results.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention comparison to previous exams and describe stability or changes in specific pathological findings. They frequently include previous examination results as part of the findings description to contextualize the current image analysis results, which seems to correlate with higher activation levels.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7755,latent_7755,40197,0.080394,0.033195984,1.6432412,Descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with moderate to high activation levels consistently discuss findings in relation to previous imaging studies, indicating a focus on evaluating interval changes or stability in imaging findings over time. This kind of comparison is crucial in monitoring disease progression, regression, or stability.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7756,latent_7756,25416,0.050832,0.029771382,4.416882,"Comparison of current and prior imaging studies with emphasis on interval changes, often after medical interventions.","The compared studies include adequate descriptions of findings before and after a particular medical intervention, highlighting any changes in patient status between different imaging times. This pattern involves noted changes or stability in findings, which often correlate with ongoing or resolved medical issues defined by the context of intervention.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7757,latent_7757,91801,0.183602,0.14620489,7.3949513,Change or stability of medical device positioning between radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels often focus on changes or lack of change in devices or tubes such as NG tubes, PAC catheter placements, or other interventional changes noted in radiology reports. This may indicate that the model recognizes increased activation when there is discourse about placement or interval change of medical device positioning.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6220651808133364,0.635,0.7142857142857143,0.45,100.0,100.0
+7758,latent_7758,3574,0.007148,0.009755214,4.6546335,Comparison of findings and device placement post-procedure on follow-up imaging.,"The highly activated examples feature detailed post-surgical or post-procedural findings or comparisons concerning apparatus placement and physical changes. These reports emphasize stable or changing status of implanted devices or anatomical features, suggesting a focus on follow-up imaging post-procedural intervention.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6075546116504854,0.6080402010050251,0.6195652173913043,0.57,100.0,99.0
+7759,latent_7759,7873,0.015746,0.012370299,7.730505,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the explicit description of findings in current images compared to prior ones, highlighting changes or stability over time. This pattern is key for assessing progress or development of conditions and involves direct comparison remarks.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7760,latent_7760,4417,0.008834,0.010695958,6.187249,Identification of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Most examples with higher activation involve a descriptive evaluation of images compared to prior imaging focusing on changes in findings, rather than simply listing current observations. This shows continuous pattern recognition and changes over time, which is a comprehensive approach commonly seen in radiological assessments.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3735835603880726,0.385,0.3424657534246575,0.25,100.0,100.0
+7761,latent_7761,10381,0.020762,0.01463999,8.100589,Comparison of interval change in pleural effusions or device position.,"These examples predominantly involve descriptions of interval changes in the findings compared to prior studies, recurrent comparison of pleural effusions, atelectasis, or presence of tubes and devices. This pattern emphasizes interval changes or lack thereof from recent clinical radiographs to the current state.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4924722336487042,0.5326633165829145,0.423728813559322,0.2976190476190476,84.0,115.0
+7762,latent_7762,4254,0.008508,0.011012576,7.5469165,"Description of findings based on limited comparison, using 'None' for additional prior comparisons.","The examples with high activations use the prompt to describe findings without involving any detailed previous report or history review, focusing on the comparison between current and one prior frontal image with additional lateral imaging when available. Situations where 'None' is specified for comparisons from additional prior imaging results also seem to consistently lead to high activations, suggesting that gaps or absences in further detailed comparative analysis contribute to the pattern.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6843608306821314,0.685,0.6697247706422018,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7763,latent_7763,3379,0.006758,0.013272286,6.657717,Structured input-output for image comparison tasks.,"The highly activated examples refer to instructions that specifically guide the input of multiple images or modalities and a direct comparison to prior images, pinpointing a procedural flow in radiographic evaluation. These often request interpreting radiologic studies for changes over time or stability in certain conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7764,latent_7764,7378,0.014756,0.010676503,7.544772,Detailed comparison of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Reports with higher activations detail comparisons between current and prior imaging where specific changes were noted. This echoes the pattern of evaluating imaging results over time to assess progression, resolution, or stability of observed conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7765,latent_7765,13158,0.026316,0.021413093,4.1570654,"Findings unchanged or stable compared to prior images, indicating no new pathology.","Examples with higher activation consistently describe imaging where there's no significant change or abnormal findings are absent in comparison to a prior study. They're reporting stable or unchanged findings between studies, emphasizing no acute cardiopulmonary process or abnormality.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7766,latent_7766,8960,0.01792,0.011712017,5.2959905,Describes interval changes in comparison with prior images.,"These examples involve comparison to prior radiological images and describe interval changes in various pulmonary conditions. It uses terms like 'unchanged since prior CT', 'compared with study of', and other references to past imaging, showing a linguistic pattern centered around assessments of interval change or stability in findings.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.475,0.38,100.0,100.0
+7767,latent_7767,2312,0.004624,0.007752778,4.4094067,Use of both frontal and lateral images for comprehensive comparison.,"Examples with higher activation involve radiological analyses using multiple image views, such as both frontal and lateral images. These descriptions require considering different perspectives and integrating information from multiple images for comprehensive assessment.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6353840711817366,0.665,0.6050955414012739,0.95,100.0,100.0
+7768,latent_7768,29989,0.059978,0.024165943,2.5413897,Comparative analysis of radiology findings with prior images or reports.,"Most examples have lower activation levels, except those explicitly mentioning interval changes or stable conditions compared to a prior report or image. This pattern indicates that comparative analysis of sequential studies is the focus pattern in this set, including recognizing stable or unchanged findings against a baseline image.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4842767295597484,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7769,latent_7769,6863,0.013726,0.009302518,4.176253,Tasks requiring report completion with prior image comparison.,"The high activation examples involve completing a report where a prior report or image is being provided for comparison. These are complex tasks as they require interpreting changes over time, indicating that the model performs strongly when required to analyze radiological changes across images/reports.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7770,latent_7770,4265,0.00853,0.008588835,4.915022,Instructed comparison between current and prior images.,"The consistent pattern in highly activated examples includes instructions for comparison between current and prior images, despite the prompt containing images labeled as ""current"" and ""prior"" with relevant radiological history or notes. Lower activation examples either explicitly mention no comparison or contain follow-up imaging requests without direct comparisons to prior images.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7771,latent_7771,3594,0.007188,0.009110286,5.266087,Comparison of current images with prior images to note changes.,"High activation examples consistently involve giving an assessment of current imaging findings relative to previous imaging, a task common in radiological settings to detect changes over time. These tasks require comparing current and past images to describe changes or stability in the visual information, thus matching the prompt.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3795137829315431,0.39,0.4126984126984127,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7772,latent_7772,7612,0.015224,0.009175192,4.904103,Comparison and description of tube or catheter placement in imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe the presence and comparison of specific tube placements or catheters (e.g., PICC line, endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube) in the current study compared to prior imaging studies, often noting any positional changes or stability.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.546875,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7773,latent_7773,3974,0.007948,0.01114291,6.1085987,Detailed comparison to prior imaging in terms of stability or changes in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include direct comparisons to either a prior imaging study or explicit details indicating changes over time, typically indicating interval changes or stability in findings, as is common in longitudinal patient assessments.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4480128462464873,0.45,0.4431818181818182,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7774,latent_7774,5219,0.010438,0.00751545,3.8061745,"Low lung volumes leading to bronchovascular crowding or opacities, no pleural effusion/pneumothorax.","Examples with higher activation levels describe low lung volumes leading to specific observations such as bronchovascular crowding or patchy opacities, often compared to previous imaging, further highlighted if ""pleural effusion"" or ""pneumothorax"" were not present.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5618661257606491,0.595,0.7111111111111111,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7775,latent_7775,6661,0.013322,0.013690313,3.6027036,Complex lung pathology comparisons with previous imaging.,"The activation levels are high for examples discussing detailed radiologic characteristics and changes noted across comparative imaging assessments, often involving complex interpretations of pulmonary conditions like atelectasis, pleural effusion, or other lung pathologies, and explicit reference to prior studies using dates or clinical context, which is commonly used to track progression or stability of conditions.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7776,latent_7776,4692,0.009384,0.007889765,5.358689,Stable or unchanged findings over multiple imaging studies.,"The pattern indicates that the activation is high when there is a description of changes or stability in findings across multiple imaging studies, often involving devices or known conditions rather than acute or resolving issues. This is evident from examining iterations such as with prior imaging, stable findings, or the placement and status of devices in the body related to known issues or chronic states, rather than acute issues or findings related to new medical events.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3982048143614851,0.41,0.375,0.27,100.0,100.0
+7777,latent_7777,5209,0.010418,0.013614285,6.399517,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging for interval changes.,"These examples all involve direct or indirect comparison with previous imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability in the findings. Reports highlight comparisons with previous examinations, indicating a focus on identifying interval changes or stability.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4377820760799484,0.455,0.4666666666666667,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7778,latent_7778,7878,0.015756,0.010135369,4.1216106,Focus on procedural follow-ups and device status in comparison.,"All examples refer to previous imaging studies and describe findings related to lung conditions, cardiac devices, or volume status, but activations are higher when appropriate placement of tubes or devices and stability concerns following interventions (e.g., surgery, tube insertion) are emphasized, suggesting emphasis on procedural follow-up and device status affects activation.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.6666666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6997297567811029,0.7,0.6886792452830188,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7779,latent_7779,4321,0.008642,0.010957279,4.0848107,Acute or critical findings emphasized over stable findings.,"The pattern indicates a focus on acute findings or pathologies, which reflects more urgency or importance in the current medical context, seen in higher activation examples. These may include pneumonia, edema, or device complications. In contrast, lower activation examples primarily report stable or elective findings.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4032118055555556,0.45,0.3863636363636363,0.17,100.0,100.0
+7780,latent_7780,3753,0.007506,0.018744811,5.5829163,Detailed changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples consistently involve comparing current and previous radiological images, often revealing changes like persistent or new pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or unchanged structures such as cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes. These reports highlight the focus on tracking specific radiological features or interventions over time using explicit comparison, which is essential for evaluating progression or stability of conditions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+7781,latent_7781,4887,0.009774,0.0098027615,7.1517735,Evaluation of device placements and comparison to prior imaging.,"High activations appear in cases where imaging findings are evaluated concerning the positioning of medical devices such as chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, or lines, and the findings are stable or show little change compared to earlier images. It involves interpreting the position and effect of devices on imaging findings before and after medical interventions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.5277777777777778,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7782,latent_7782,4570,0.00914,0.013025537,6.8737044,Comparisons between current and prior chest images in radiology reports.,"Examples demonstrate radiology reports that frequently involve comparisons between current and prior images, emphasizing changes or stability in conditions. Examples frequently use terms indicating temporal assessment, like 'interval', 'compared with prior', 'no significant change', or specific dates, suggesting a pattern focused on monitoring progression or stability of medical conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7783,latent_7783,3085,0.00617,0.0052551143,3.9739752,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings or newer imaging relative to prior.,"Examples with high activation levels explicitly involve descriptions that compare findings to prior imaging reports, often specifying the date or relating changes to prior observations. This temporal comparison is the key aspect of these examples.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7784,latent_7784,25234,0.050468,0.026009748,4.968488,Presence of comparison with prior imaging studies for assessment.,"The consistent factor among high-activation examples is the inclusion of a prior imaging study for comparative analysis. These reports routinely provide changes or stability since the previous exam, marked by terms like 'compared to', 'since prior', or referencing prior dates, indicating a comparative focus which is characteristic in radiological assessments.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7785,latent_7785,3691,0.007382,0.011515135,4.844897,"Request for comparative description with prior images, even if none available.","These examples are focused on providing descriptions or interpretations of radiology findings in relation to prior images, despite some having no direct comparison. The prompt consistently asks for a description compared to a prior image, which suits radiology tasks that involve tracking changes over time even if the actual comparison is absent.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4904458598726114,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7786,latent_7786,5000,0.01,0.007476344,3.2475846,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples focus on cases where image assessment is in direct comparison to previous or prior radiography, particularly new developments or changes in medical devices, opacities, nodules, effusions, or aeration compared to past imaging. These descriptions use terms like 'new', 'worsening', or 'resolved' which indicate interval changes and specifics tied to prior images.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.575,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7787,latent_7787,6631,0.013262,0.008680864,4.911666,Presence of comparative analysis with prior images in the report.,"Higher activation levels are associated with reports that request descriptions to be made in comparison with prior imaging studies, whereas lower activation levels are associated with reports lacking the use of comparative language. Phrases like 'compared to', 'in comparison to', or referencing prior imaging explicitly indicate the pattern.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4154048716260697,0.445,0.4620689655172413,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7788,latent_7788,2995,0.00599,0.006515745,4.031011,"Comparison of current radiology images with prior studies, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels frequently discuss descriptions and comparisons of current radiological findings with specific focus on observed changes or stabilities relative to previous imaging. This is consistent with a pattern of analyzing disease progression or stability over time which is pivotal for patient management and diagnosis in radiology, particularly when using words like 'unchanged', 'compared to', 'significant change', 'stable', etc.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.4871794871794871,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7789,latent_7789,3167,0.006334,0.009292073,5.6135626,Comparison in tube placement and stability between current and previous images.,"Based on the activation levels, the examples predominantly refer to findings related to the correct placement and stability of various medical tubes (NG, ET, feeding, etc.) compared to previous imaging studies.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7790,latent_7790,4486,0.008972,0.0069430955,5.2257814,Assessment related to medical device placement or pathology change compared to prior imaging.,Examples with high activation involve radiological interpretations that include positions or changes related to medical devices or specific pathologies along with a detailed comparison to prior imaging. Many examples highlighted have findings related to medical devices like tubes or lines and changes in pathology compared to previous assessments.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5284552845528455,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7791,latent_7791,11470,0.02294,0.012062159,4.247472,Detection of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that activate likely discuss interval changes in imaging, specifically mentioning alterations between the current study and previous images. These examples often use language such as 'interval development', 'since prior', or 'change'. This focus on changes over time between different examinations likely contributes to high activation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5714285714285714,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7792,latent_7792,9674,0.019348,0.015246647,4.706709,Emphasis on evaluating images against previous studies for changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve text that specifies comparing current imaging findings to previous ones to assess changes over time. This includes changes in size, location, or presence of specific features like effusions, opacities, or the positions of medical devices. These comparative analyses are central to the function of the described task, such as determining stability or progression of medical conditions.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7793,latent_7793,3265,0.00653,0.0072100125,7.1481566,Changes indicative of pleural effusions or atelectasis on radiological images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in chest images where there are notable indications of pleural effusion and atelectasis, often with alterations in inspiratory volumes or prominence in costophrenic angles. These cases highlight changes in pleural fluid levels or compression of lung tissue that are key to understanding the described pattern.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6673051718923279,0.67,0.7073170731707317,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7794,latent_7794,11974,0.023948,0.015693577,4.8853426,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in pathology on chest imaging.,"Highly activated examples often involve chest imaging where findings are made in relation to an existing or noted pathology, notably changes or stability over time in conditions such as pneumonia, effusion, or edema. There is a consistent mention of the interval change, stability, or comparative evaluation against prior studies, indicating attention to progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7795,latent_7795,18247,0.036494,0.02281873,5.7636585,Findings are described in relation to prior imaging.,"The activated examples all revolve around the description of findings in the current study as compared to previous imaging studies, often using explicit language such as 'compared to prior', 'as compared', and 'is unchanged from'. These indicate observations on the stability or change in findings over time, which is a staple task in radiological assessments for tracking progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3811440619951258,0.435,0.4591194968553459,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7796,latent_7796,7255,0.01451,0.011422115,4.1209836,Identifying interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes in findings based on previous radiological images. The pattern suggests attention to detecting changes or stability in medical conditions through comparison, indicating the importance of longitudinal assessment in radiographs.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6673051718923279,0.67,0.6440677966101694,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7797,latent_7797,4881,0.009762,0.009685953,5.557826,Presence of pulmonary edema and vascular congestion.,"These examples prominently feature the description or assessment of pulmonary edema, often accompanied by references to pleural effusion, vascular congestion, and cardiomegaly. The pattern includes using specific phrases to describe the state and extent of edema, as part of cardiovascular or respiratory evaluations.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.752166730207142,0.7537688442211056,0.8072289156626506,0.67,100.0,99.0
+7798,latent_7798,7454,0.014908,0.011785279,4.4149156,Comparison of current findings to prior images for stability or change.,Examples with activation levels close to zero are typically using a consistent technique of comparing current radiological findings with prior images to evaluate stability or change over time. This comparison aspect is a key trigger for the observed activation pattern.,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7799,latent_7799,2512,0.005024,0.0068415347,7.1630573,Use of PA and lateral views for chest imaging.,"The pattern in these examples is the use of PA (posteroanterior) and lateral views for chest imaging. These examples commonly specify PA and lateral views in their description, suggesting a complete assessment of the thorax. This is distinct from instances where other techniques or fewer view angles are mentioned.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6220651808133364,0.635,0.5985401459854015,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7800,latent_7800,4304,0.008608,0.007793788,5.3519053,Bilateral pleural effusions or related pulmonary condition.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings of bilateral pleural effusions and related pulmonary conditions such as edema, cardiomegaly, or atelectasis. These conditions are notable when evaluating chest radiographs, often indicating fluid-related pathologies which are clinically significant.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.9523809523809524,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7801,latent_7801,4024,0.008048,0.010646751,8.918266,Focus on device placement changes compared to prior.,"The examples with high activation levels involve actual or potential changes related to procedural devices (like feeding tubes or endotracheal tubes) in radiographic comparisons, indicating a focus on procedural follow-up through imaging.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.6071428571428571,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7802,latent_7802,5995,0.01199,0.010271942,4.301227,Comparison findings described between current and prior imaging.,Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on comparison descriptions between a current imaging study and a prior one. Both the existence of such a comparison and the mention of changes or stability of specific findings are highlighted in high activation examples. They are prompt in providing intervals and frequently focus on findings regarding changes or stability of medical tubes or devices and specific pathologies like pulmonary edema or effusion between two time points.,0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7803,latent_7803,8511,0.017022,0.022505118,4.766302,Comparison identifying stable or new findings relative to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize analysis based on comparison of current findings to prior studies, especially noting changes over time, for example identifying new or stable conditions in relation to previous exams. This is a key task often performed in radiology to assess progression of a disease or the efficacy of treatment options.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4444444444444444,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7804,latent_7804,3797,0.007594,0.008444514,4.0141835,"Emphasis on imaging comparisons with prior studies, noting changes or stability.","The examples primarily focus on creating comparisons between current images and prior studies, emphasizing how radiological findings have changed or remained stable over time. They frequently reference unchanged features, equipment stability, or specific anatomical changes, using terms like 'compared to prior' or 'as compared to previous'.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7805,latent_7805,11230,0.02246,0.013274291,4.399371,"Comparison of chest findings focused on infection signs, e.g., pneumonia.","Examples with high activation levels consistently contain mentions of fever or infectious conditions with associated pulmonary symptoms, such as cough or dyspnea, implying evaluation for pneumonia or other pulmonary infections. The repeated focus on comparing findings for signs of infection or pneumonia correlates with higher activation levels.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+7806,latent_7806,5121,0.010242,0.0065530716,2.4884548,Evaluations include both frontal and lateral chest images as a set.,"The higher activation levels are associated with reports where both frontal and lateral chest images are provided as a set for evaluation, often in conjunction with comparison to prior images. Typically, these evaluations include phrases indicating both frontal and lateral aspects and assessments in relation to prior data or images. The presence of these dual views seems to be the pattern linked to higher activations.",0.6854942233632862,0.6938775510204082,0.65625,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7807,latent_7807,12676,0.025352,0.015291602,4.3729258,Unchanging and stable cardiomediastinal features across comparisons.,"Across the higher-activation examples, findings noted on both the current and prior images are relatively unchanged, and descriptions consistently maintain the normalcy of cardiac and mediastinal contours, as well as the absence of acute pathology. This stability and lack of change in critical features often indicate monitoring or non-alarm findings, resulting in higher activations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.63996399639964,0.64,0.6372549019607843,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7808,latent_7808,2243,0.004486,0.0064337286,5.891667,Observations involving monitoring device placement or change.,"These examples describe the presence of multiple monitoring or support devices (like tracheostomy tubes, enteric tubes, right IJ venous catheters, PICC lines) and assessments of their placements relative to prior studies. The reports highlight changes or stability in these devices' positioning, often using detailed measurements from anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7809,latent_7809,39439,0.078878,0.046415918,5.719446,Implicit comparison to prior imaging observations.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current findings to prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability in the context of previous exams, even when the prior report is unavailable or partial details are obscured by underscores. This repetition of comparison with past imaging highlights the focus on evaluating changes over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5063291139240507,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7810,latent_7810,14747,0.029494,0.01957226,4.722238,Interpretation of changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe changes or comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, referencing significant observations such as progression, resolution, or unchanged status of certain radiological findings. This indicates that the pattern of interest focuses on interpreting differences or stability of conditions over time as revealed by successive imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5364906832298137,0.5477386934673367,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,99.0
+7811,latent_7811,27812,0.055624,0.031157391,3.6951516,Focus on interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The pattern here is where subtle changes in imaging findings are being compared to previous studies, with a focus on any interval developments or stability of conditions observed between the original and follow-up images. This indicates the model activates more when asked to assess subtle or minimal changes from prior imaging, rather than providing a static assessment.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7812,latent_7812,2672,0.005344,0.007822997,3.7806325,Radiographic comparisons with prior images.,"Examples are representative of cases discussing radiographic findings with comparisons to prior imaging. This involves recognizing changes or stability over multiple images, often in complex clinical scenarios.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5509093322713394,0.5728643216080402,0.5486111111111112,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+7813,latent_7813,3473,0.006946,0.011681397,6.5190487,Focus on comparing current and prior images to describe findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently required a description of findings specifically comparing current and prior imaging. The repeated mention of reviewing 'frontal', 'lateral', and 'prior' images underscores a pattern of focusing on changes or stability over time, which is key in radiology follow-ups.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7814,latent_7814,25914,0.051828,0.0339808,6.3083262,Comparison of findings to previous images with reported changes.,"High activation levels occur in examples that explicitly use comparison with previous images or scans, often with descriptive changes in conditions or placement of medical devices. References to previous reports, imaging histories, and comparisons over time are notable.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7815,latent_7815,5198,0.010396,0.010316388,7.4797883,Requests for description of findings given multiple recent and prior images.,"The examples with high activation mention both current and prior frontal and lateral images, indicating a pattern tied to consistent image comparison requests. This correlates with frequent requests to compare multiple images in recent times, even without specific findings or comparisons noted in accompanying older data.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4134897360703812,0.505,0.5027932960893855,0.9,100.0,100.0
+7816,latent_7816,3683,0.007366,0.008067005,5.461015,"Stable cardiac and mediastinal contours, lack of acute lung or pleural pathology.","Examples with higher activations focus on the presence of low or normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes accompanied by a lack of acute focal abnormalities in lungs, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, often utilizing descriptive terms about normalcy or stability from prior imaging studies.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6199741582427605,0.625,0.6016260162601627,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7817,latent_7817,3989,0.007978,0.014212512,7.2397685,Comparison includes both current lateral and prior frontal images.,"The pattern of descriptions with higher activations involves comparing recently acquired images with prior frontal and current lateral views. These thorough comparisons typically yield activation as they potentially highlight discrepancies or confirm findings not just in frontal views but also with added lateral perspective, thus capturing more detailed clinical changes through systematic comparison.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4754098360655737,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7818,latent_7818,2515,0.00503,0.0068994854,5.2810698,Monitoring medical device placement or acute-phase changes.,"The pattern involves evaluating or monitoring changes or position, typically of medical devices, structures like tubes, or conditions in the context of acute-phase illness, often with indications relating directly to recent acute medical procedures, trauma, or interventions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3883477679833466,0.405,0.3582089552238806,0.24,100.0,100.0
+7819,latent_7819,15628,0.031256,0.022406168,4.090977,Detailed comparison to prior images with specific findings.,"The examples with high activation levels feature detailed descriptions of specific findings observed in the images, comparing them explicitly with any changes or stability to the prior exams, often within the context of a clinical history. This detailed comparison to previous imaging is a key element in those cases with elevated activation levels.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5238095238095238,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7820,latent_7820,3691,0.007382,0.006050179,3.7532694,Comparison with prior imaging to ascertain changes or stability.,The highly activated examples all mention the task of providing a description of radiographic findings in relation to a prior image that is part of the current input. The typical pattern involves establishing a CHANGE or STABILITY from a previous study with explicit phrasing to 'compare to prior'. This pattern reflects diagnostic continuity in radiological assessments.,0.2452060383516932,0.26,0.3125,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3926510780443365,0.4,0.4180327868852459,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7821,latent_7821,17526,0.035052,0.05423206,6.4884033,Focus on procedural changes or device placements over time.,"Data points with higher activation levels frequently reference findings concerning changes over time or status of previously mentioned issues, such as tube placements or post-operative conditions, focusing on devices or procedures rather than purely diagnosing lung conditions.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+7822,latent_7822,14102,0.028204,0.021397203,6.300443,Progression or improvement of pulmonary fluid or opacities compared to previous imaging.,"The pattern involves identifying changes since the prior radiograph, particularly increases in fluid or opacities indicating conditions like pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or other acute lung changes. There is emphasis on worsening or improvement of these conditions as identified in comparisons with previous studies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7823,latent_7823,3184,0.006368,0.00674569,4.1708364,Stability or normal findings in cardiomediastinal and hilar structures upon comparison.,"The pattern here is characterized by detailed descriptions of current radiographic findings compared with prior imaging findings, noting stability, change, or normalcy in cardiomediastinal and hilar structures, and reporting on other specific conditions. Additionally, the use of normal findings or lack of acute changes in conjunction with comparison emphasizes non-concerning outcomes.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4807692307692308,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7824,latent_7824,24791,0.049582,0.027389685,5.273491,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions of unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, often indicating stable conditions without notable changes from prior imaging. This pattern suggests a focus on stability of mediastinal and cardiac appearances despite other possibly variable findings or conditions.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4528301886792453,0.24,100.0,100.0
+7825,latent_7825,2504,0.005008,0.006103057,5.38395,Use of both current frontal and lateral images with prior images for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss findings across both current and prior frontal and lateral images. This pattern seems to involve comprehensive analysis of multiple views, emphasizing a more detailed evaluation compared to single images or single view comparisons.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6342593752348505,0.635,0.6238532110091743,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7826,latent_7826,9284,0.018568,0.012792256,5.7958436,Abnormal findings related to medical interventions or device placements.,"Examples with significant activation describe abnormal findings in the patient related to post-surgery outcomes, medical interventions, or device placements, suggesting complexity or complications regardless of other normal considerations like cardiomediastinal silhouette. This contrasts with examples of direct comparison without significant change.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7827,latent_7827,3768,0.007536,0.008258923,7.8998027,Reporting interval changes or stability in findings over time with prior film comparison.,"Examples with higher activations focus on specific changes observed between current and prior imaging studies. These often mention interval changes or assessments, using comparison-focused language such as 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change', or 'again noted'. Lower activations describe findings without substantial changes or comparisons.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6189887756152817,0.63,0.5970149253731343,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7828,latent_7828,27020,0.05404,0.028868789,2.99844,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"Most examples describe comparisons with prior imaging studies to detect changes. High activations are associated with stable findings or minimal changes over time, indicating a focus on identifying unchanged conditions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4626865671641791,0.31,100.0,100.0
+7829,latent_7829,3300,0.0066,0.006309254,7.829082,Evaluate current images against prior ones for specific patient concerns or changes.,"The high activation examples mostly outline cases where findings are compared against prior images although further prior report details may be absent. Typically, these are cases with specific patient indications that suggest acute or ongoing investigation. The texts focus not only on presence of prior images but imply changes and features that guide specific concerns about acute observations, contrasting stability versus change.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7830,latent_7830,15355,0.03071,0.017035604,3.5846975,"Comparison of current imaging with prior studies, noting intervals of change or stability.","The examples with higher activation focus on situations where a current study is being compared directly to a previous imaging study. This involves providing findings relative to noted intervals of change or stability from prior images, usually showcasing terms related to ""unchanged"", ""stable"", or ""interval"" as indicative of this pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4149853746343658,0.415,0.4158415841584158,0.42,100.0,100.0
+7831,latent_7831,7443,0.014886,0.010774191,3.5908394,Comparison using frontal and lateral views in radiology studies.,"The pattern consistent across highly activated examples is the presence of ""frontal and lateral images"" for comparison, which indicates a more comprehensive diagnostic procedure, possibly indicating complex conditions requiring multiple imaging views in radiology.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7832,latent_7832,5314,0.010628,0.015366782,5.6663404,Requirement of comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations all emphasize providing a description of current findings in explicit 'comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating that the task requires elaboration based on comparative analysis of new versus previous imaging data.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7833,latent_7833,4504,0.009008,0.012064834,7.0783668,Interval change identification or assessment in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples all involve a mention of a direct comparison with prior imaging alongside specific observed changes, questions, or the context within provided imaging descriptions, frequently with specific follow-up actions or recommendations. The pattern suggests a strong focus on assessing interval change, which is a key diagnostic tool in radiology.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.424985624640616,0.425,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7834,latent_7834,24274,0.048548,0.03420153,4.6871157,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in PA and lateral views.,"These examples universally discuss the appearance of PA and lateral chest view radiographs, indicating that the pattern is related to standard frontal and lateral assessments used in radiological studies. Many reports specify clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal contours, highlighting typical findings or lack of pathological change.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.532750713853076,0.595,0.8518518518518519,0.23,100.0,100.0
+7835,latent_7835,5992,0.011984,0.012039101,5.426855,Reports describe clear findings and lack of acute pathological processes.,"Examples with high activations consistently feature phrases indicating clear findings without major anomalies, such as no focal consolidations, pleural effusions, or acute processes. These examples often emphasize that the findings are unremarkable or stable following previous examinations, particularly in cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar regions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4006698395910453,0.405,0.3855421686746988,0.32,100.0,100.0
+7836,latent_7836,11399,0.022798,0.015660822,6.302922,Comparison with prior imaging highlights changes or stability over time.,"Examples with higher activations mention the comparison with prior imaging, indicating the ability of the model to assess changes or stabilities over time. Terms like 'unchanged', 'as compared to previous', or detailed reflections on prior studies are highlighted in these examples.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4232553474259635,0.425,0.4324324324324324,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7837,latent_7837,126961,0.253922,0.20461833,7.3894744,Comparative assessment of imaging findings over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings that are compared against previous imaging studies. The activation pattern suggests that the model is responsive to the presence of descriptive changes in pathology over time, tracked through comparative imaging reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5429001640181765,0.575,0.5490196078431373,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7838,latent_7838,6325,0.01265,0.009864162,3.7701647,Detailed interval changes in pathology between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe complex changes in pathology between current and prior imaging, focusing specifically on improvements or new findings such as resolution of effusions, new opacities, or changes in catheter positioning. These are critical for ongoing patient management, especially in cases with multifaceted clinical presentations requiring detailed longitudinal tracking.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3470907350281885,0.3737373737373737,0.2833333333333333,0.173469387755102,98.0,100.0
+7839,latent_7839,10144,0.020288,0.018028945,9.7445,Substantial emphasis on comparisons with prior images to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include comparisons to prior images, indicating assessments of stability, changes, or improvements in findings relative to past examinations. This pattern is a common practice in radiology reporting to track patient progress and evaluate treatment effects or disease progression.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7840,latent_7840,5768,0.011536,0.010882194,3.4934778,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+7841,latent_7841,10867,0.021734,0.013479037,4.354032,Comparison of current and prior chest radiograph findings.,"The pattern identified in the activations is the explicit comparison of current chest radiograph findings to those from prior images or studies. This style of report is commonplace in radiology when tracking changes in a patient's condition over time and is usually indicated by terms that denote comparison with prior images. In the current dataset, the activation is lower due to the systemic nature of this task format rather than specific findings.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7842,latent_7842,6591,0.013182,0.021010647,4.0308647,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+7843,latent_7843,3264,0.006528,0.00823369,6.4209447,Presence or absence of comparison with prior imaging affects activation.,"Compare prompts with prior images usually exists in radiology reports to highlight changes over time. These examples showcase descriptions of radiology findings compared against current and prior images, focusing on the stability or changes in existing conditions, like cardiomediastinal silhouette, pleural effusions, etc. Activation is 9.0 when comparison is explicitly absent in the information provided.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7844,latent_7844,2747,0.005494,0.0076264506,4.997844,Explicit comparison of lung changes or device placements with prior images.,"The examples with high activation involve medical reports that discuss changes between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on specific features like atelectasis, effusions, or consolidations, often in the context of either evaluation of the lungs or associated device placements. These indications are compared explicitly between current and previous imaging assessments, indicating the model's emphasis on identifying stability or progression of certain pathologies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4997325631151048,0.5276381909547738,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,99.0
+7845,latent_7845,4717,0.009434,0.01262523,6.702739,Discussion of Dobbhoff or similar tube placement and its change over time.,These examples often include discussions related to the placement and positioning of medical tubes (such as a Dobbhoff tube) and their changes relative to prior imaging. The frequent measurements and observations concerning their location or insertion correlate with higher activation levels when mentioning Dobbhoff or similar medical tube terminology and any status change.,0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,100.0,100.0
+7846,latent_7846,6081,0.012162,0.01722761,5.2612963,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging results.,"The pattern is observed in cases where a direct comparison with a prior imaging study is explicitly requested and available. The assistant generates findings based on comparisons where prior imaging data is considered, typically indicated by terms like 'compared to the previous radiograph'.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7847,latent_7847,12735,0.02547,0.01978561,5.3890724,Interval change or significant new findings relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations show descriptions of changes in chest imaging findings compared to previous studies, indicating interval changes such as increased opacities suggesting pulmonary edema or effusions. Reports often include phrases like 'increased compared to prior' or 'worsening since _', highlighting new developments.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4522746157041961,0.4673366834170854,0.4545454545454545,0.3,100.0,99.0
+7848,latent_7848,3311,0.006622,0.013156316,6.547854,Comparison of radiological findings with prior images.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings with an emphasis on making comparisons with prior images, despite sometimes explicitly stating the absence of a prior image. This pattern reflects the task's focus on identifying differences in ongoing monitoring or evaluation of a medical condition through comparison with past studies, which is a common recurrent theme in radiological assessments.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3512511584800741,0.37,0.4029850746268656,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7849,latent_7849,4051,0.008102,0.008827922,4.6403193,Presence of retrocardiac opacity in chest images.,"The consistent pattern across the examples with high activation involves the presence of 'retrocadiac opacity'. These examples include descriptions of an opacity behind the heart, which is a particular detail in radiological examinations that can suggest various conditions and requires attention for proper diagnosis.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4835267743125514,0.545,0.6451612903225806,0.2,100.0,100.0
+7850,latent_7850,39140,0.07828,0.035763547,4.994911,Changes or stability in medical device positioning noted across imaging studies.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero consistently include changes in medical device positioning, such as tubes or lines, between compared radiographic images. This pattern identifies reports that describe clear changes or stability in tube positioning in comparison with previous imaging, which is essential for tracking clinical interventions.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7089522280208751,0.71,0.6875,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7851,latent_7851,13192,0.026384,0.022959806,6.3026996,Mentions of positioning or changes of medical devices in comparison findings.,"Examples with higher activation (values of 3.0 or more) often mention positioning or changes related to medical devices such as tubes or lines in comparison to previous imaging studies. This suggests sensitivity to the descriptions of interventions or alterations in internal support systems. The presence, placement, or modification of these devices is a recurring theme.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6262626262626263,0.63,0.6625,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7852,latent_7852,4955,0.00991,0.00793287,4.738558,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with no significant pulmonary findings.,"The highly activated examples are those with descriptions of a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, stable lung appearances, and absence of significant findings like pleural effusion or pneumothorax, particularly in scenarios where there is no prior for comparison or where the comparison reveals no significant change.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6477455716586151,0.65,0.6785714285714286,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7853,latent_7853,3041,0.006082,0.014269822,7.579545,Frequent use of comparison between current and prior images.,"The positively activated examples provide detailed comparisons between current and prior frontal and/or lateral chest images, explicitly mentioning how findings compare to past radiographs. The presence of a prior comparison creates context but is not enough for high activation, unless coupled with comparative descriptions indicating changes or stability, as indicated by details in the 'Provide a description...' requests, focusing on how each study shows change or stability.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4115174443043295,0.44,0.4583333333333333,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7854,latent_7854,3370,0.00674,0.01060752,4.7673044,Current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include 'prior frontal image' along with both 'current frontal image' and 'current lateral image'. These instances emphasize comparative analysis across different types of x-ray views, hinting that the pattern is the inclusion of both current and prior imagery for comprehensive assessments.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7855,latent_7855,14690,0.02938,0.017192211,8.914964,Normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes amidst other findings or technical contexts.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the presence of normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes while other changes or findings are noted in lung conditions or device placements. Reports focus on interpreting cardiomediastinal stability amidst other diagnostic or technical contexts.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4678005990586221,0.4974874371859296,0.2765957446808511,0.4482758620689655,58.0,141.0
+7856,latent_7856,2823,0.005646,0.013272533,11.266588,Persistent cardiomegaly relative to previous studies or stable over time.,"Samples with high activation levels frequently mention cardiomegaly as either 'moderate' or 'severe', and discuss its stability or comparison to prior exams. These examples involve descriptions of persistent cardiomegaly alongside other observations but focus primarily on the heart size which is a significant radiological finding.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.8888888888888888,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6915998887737304,0.695,0.7468354430379747,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7857,latent_7857,29152,0.058304,0.033609893,6.4030004,Emphasis on stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or device positions.,"These examples involve describing changes over time; however, they focus on identifying stability or slight changes in cardiomediastinal silhouette or device positions rather than respiratory pathology. Descriptions such as 'unchanged position', 'minimal change', and stable appearance are frequently noted.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.4942528735632184,0.4725274725274725,91.0,109.0
+7858,latent_7858,43346,0.086692,0.049751047,5.525231,Analysis of current imaging relative to specific findings on prior studies.,"The cases with higher activation typically describe findings through comparison with prior imaging and emphasize changes or stability in specific pathologies, such as nodules or lines, often indicating concern or interest in potential changes indicative of pathology, treatment assessment, or complications.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7859,latent_7859,7169,0.014338,0.0137662785,3.613395,Requests for or inclusion of lateral image projections in radiology comparisons.,"The examples with high activation consistently ask for or imply examination of posterior or lateral views, including lateral projections in radiological studies. This suggests an interest in comprehensive imaging involving different perspectives in the chest X-rays, likely to better evaluate complex structures or conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7860,latent_7860,29331,0.058662,0.025101824,2.983066,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,The pattern observed is that activation levels are higher when the task involves not just describing findings from images but specifically comparing a current image to a prior image to note changes. These instances often mention stability or change by explicitly referencing a prior study. Examples with lower activation typically describe current findings without comparison or explicitly state that no comparison was made.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7861,latent_7861,27566,0.055132,0.021771736,2.3067055,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging indicating stability or change.,"In this pattern, high activation samples refer to detailed descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging. This involves noting intervals, naming specific anatomical changes, and whether findings are unchanged, worsened, or improved. These descriptions include terms like 'compared to previous', 'no significant change', 'stable', etc. They often relate specific changes since the prior imaging.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.5702479338842975,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7862,latent_7862,16295,0.03259,0.016659439,3.5130126,Comparison to prior image shows stability or minimal change.,"These examples indicate that the pattern is best represented by instances where there is a direct comparison to a prior image, noting changes or stability in certain conditions, especially focusing on changes or stability related to support devices, cardiomediastinal structures, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax, without significant new findings unless they concern these areas.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7863,latent_7863,26868,0.053736,0.050584517,6.073688,Normal heart and hilar contours with clear lungs.,"Representative samples describe normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours across different radiological views and techniques. They emphasize clear lungs with no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6807743795695603,0.69,0.7878787878787878,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7864,latent_7864,2910,0.00582,0.008401637,5.293232,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging.,"Examples with the highest activation consistently include explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. This pattern indicates that making direct comparisons, involving terms like 'change', 'unchanged', 'since prior', using past dates, is central to achieving high activation.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.456,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7865,latent_7865,7972,0.015944,0.017385937,6.126819,Reference to prior imaging comparisons with specific dates.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to previous imaging comparisons, implying that the mention of 'comparison' with dated prior images is integral to the identified pattern.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.2222222222222222,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4389901823281907,0.52,0.5833333333333334,0.14,100.0,100.0
+7866,latent_7866,2518,0.005036,0.01041034,6.67007,"Unchanged, deteriorating, or inconclusive findings in comparison to prior images.","Comparing the activation levels, the zero activations appear in descriptions where changes over time or improvements are noted, while high activations appear in comparisons pointing to unchanged findings, worsening conditions, or ambiguous or multiple possible conditions without conclusion or improvement. This suggests that the pattern regards the absence of improvements or presence of ambiguous/worsening conditions when compared to prior imaging.",0.2359932088285229,0.28,0.0769230769230769,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.2757911392405063,0.3065326633165829,0.1694915254237288,0.101010101010101,99.0,100.0
+7867,latent_7867,40178,0.080356,0.04952262,5.870393,Detailed imaging comparison with prior images and description of changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include both the current and prior images, using these to make detailed comparisons and describe changes in device positioning or pathological findings. This includes noting the stability or advancement of lines or tubes and changes in pathologies such as effusions or opacities relative to the previous study. These reports often provide specific changes in medical devices' position or detailed imaging findings compared to prior studies, which aligns with the prompt to describe findings in comparison to prior images.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+7868,latent_7868,17182,0.034364,0.01808232,5.4974775,Contextual changes or stability in interpreted images and findings.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference changes in the patient's condition or findings in comparison to previous images or reports. The examples with lower activation levels primarily describe new findings or unchanged conditions without reference to life-threatening progression of conditions or interventions that significantly impact clinical management.,0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.5031055900621118,0.8709677419354839,93.0,107.0
+7869,latent_7869,233727,0.467454,0.46522543,6.0495696,Comparison of current and prior imaging focusing on changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically discuss findings in a frontal image compared to a prior frontal image, and mention specific changes or consistencies observed in follow-up examinations, focusing on changes in opacities, effusions, or other pathological findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6086911749562351,0.62,0.5895522388059702,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7870,latent_7870,5603,0.011206,0.011531597,4.5712924,Detailed comparison with prior reports or indication of prior evaluations.,"The provided examples with higher activation levels frequently emphasize the presence of a 'prior report', 'PRIOR_REPORT', or 'history' section that indicates a detailed comparison is made with previous findings, which seems to be the pattern activating the response. These examples often contain specific assessments or nuanced observations linked directly to preceding reports.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+7871,latent_7871,3851,0.007702,0.007581724,5.129902,Comparison-based description of findings between current and prior images.,The consistent phrases and instructions regarding the requirement to provide findings based on frontal and any prior images point to a likely pattern of interest around the comparisons between current and prior imaging studies.,0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4443192911316362,0.445,0.4485981308411215,0.48,100.0,100.0
+7872,latent_7872,8062,0.016124,0.014048865,5.108468,Normal and stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in imaging reports.,"These examples often reference the normality and unchanged appearance of thoracic structures like the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in chest imaging reports. The consistent use of phrases like 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal' in primarily non-acute settings indicates a typical pattern for stable cases or routine follow-ups.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6524892347208582,0.655,0.6324786324786325,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7873,latent_7873,6656,0.013312,0.011482454,3.855213,Directive to compare and describe findings from current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a directive to provide a description comparing the current and prior images, suggesting this is a significant pattern in these cases. The presence of such a directive may promote the focus of the analysis on changes over time, crucial for identifying relevant medical changes.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4640605296343001,0.49,0.4930555555555556,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7874,latent_7874,5116,0.010232,0.01363862,5.8286905,Interval worsening of existing chest pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern here involves radiological interpretation and comparison with prior images where interval changes, particularly worsening of existing conditions such as opacities, pulmonary edema, or effusion, are noted. This often suggests a progression of disease or need for further evaluation.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4679481678537716,0.535,0.6206896551724138,0.18,100.0,100.0
+7875,latent_7875,17476,0.034952,0.02803385,6.284941,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging with descriptions of stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels share commonalities of describing changes, or lack thereof, in specific medical findings over time in comparison to prior images. This often includes phrases like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', 'similar location', 'consistent with', or 'improved'. High activations are noted when explicit comparisons are made with prior imaging.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.625,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,100.0,100.0
+7876,latent_7876,38334,0.076668,0.03624537,4.7063694,Findings explicitly noted as unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern that stands out in the provided examples with higher activation levels is the mention of stable findings or the overall lack of significant change when comparing current and previous imaging examinations. This is reflected in descriptors like 'unchanged', 'little interval change', or 'no significant interval change', which are consistently found in high activation examples.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,100.0,100.0
+7877,latent_7877,6511,0.013022,0.013268951,5.300138,Reports indicating stability or lack of significant interval change.,"The examples with high activation involve cases where there is less concern for acute changes and more focus on stable findings or chronic conditions, noted mostly through unchanged comparison with prior images, without new significant findings. The identified pattern includes the use of specific language denoting stability or lack of significant interval change compared to prior examinations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7878,latent_7878,15527,0.031054,0.018046577,5.238457,Presence of a comparison task prompt without explicit comparison findings.,"This pattern occurs when radiology studies do not mention comparison to a prior study even though a prompt for comparison with a prior image is included, suggesting that the absence of comparison or changes noted aligns with the pattern of the prompt unrelated to findings change.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4249131944444444,0.47,0.4807692307692308,0.75,100.0,100.0
+7879,latent_7879,8448,0.016896,0.015095274,8.360118,Emphasis on technical aspects or limitations related to patient positioning.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve language associated with detailed technical aspects of the imagery, such as patient positioning (e.g., positioning affecting visualization, ""low lung volumes,"" ""patient rotated""). These findings typically note limitations or variability introduced by such factors, which are often highlighted in comparison discussions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6355906468266019,0.64,0.6794871794871795,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7880,latent_7880,11164,0.022328,0.016044343,5.7480044,Requests for comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with high activation feature medical image analysis requests that explicitly ask for comparison with prior images, often to assess stability or changes. This is characterized by phrases like ""Provide a description of the findings...in comparison to the prior"" or similar.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7881,latent_7881,6873,0.013746,0.014290991,5.685281,Detailing interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples demonstrating a pattern of images described with reference to comparison against prior images in radiological assessments, contain detailed examination of interval changes detected versus previous imaging studies. This reflects typical linguistic patterns in radiology where changes from prior studies are noted to track progression or stability of findings.",0.5916666666666667,0.5918367346938775,0.6,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5125,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7882,latent_7882,10983,0.021966,0.013091906,6.109342,Comparison with prior imaging reported in radiology findings.,"The samples which exhibit the pattern refer to comparisons with prior imaging explicitly using the term ""comparison"" and often describe stability or changes in findings relative to previous images. Common observations include unchanged conditions or slight variations noted against prior reports, indicating reliance on sequential imaging for assessment.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.4935064935064935,0.7755102040816326,98.0,102.0
+7883,latent_7883,15638,0.031276,0.016371952,6.0179152,Detailed specific changes from prior imaging emphasized.,"The examples with higher activations involve explicit, detailed descriptions comparing the current imaging to a prior one, emphasizing changes in findings such as an increase/decrease in effusion or opacification, but less focus on long descriptive narratives of unchanged findings. These patterns highlight significant changes corresponding to the patient's condition over time, which is a crucial aspect in radiologic interpretations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5,0.5053763440860215,93.0,107.0
+7884,latent_7884,3962,0.007924,0.0079447115,4.666411,Detailed comparison with prior images identifying clinical changes.,"Examples with high activation refer to detailed comparisons of current radiological findings against prior images, often identifying changes that suggest significant clinical implications, such as altered positions of medical devices, newly noted or increased opacities, or relevant structural changes. These findings are typically documented in relation to specific prior imaging, crucial for monitoring progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7885,latent_7885,9730,0.01946,0.010668127,2.9538553,Lung abnormalities with changes over time compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on detailed interpretations of lung abnormalities, particularly consolidation, opacity, or pneumothorax, and reference prior imaging for comparison to detect changes. The pattern indicates a focus on evaluating changes over time, specifically looking for acute developments in the lung parenchyma or pleural space which could signify new or resolving conditions, infections, or other pathologies.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.503917378917379,0.507537688442211,0.5060240963855421,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+7886,latent_7886,4614,0.009228,0.0064651696,4.109574,Comparison of current chest images with prior ones noting stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe comparative chest X-ray imaging where changes or stability are noted between current and prior images, specifically related to findings such as heart size, pulmonary opacities, or aortic tortuosity. High activation correlates with reports that analyze and synthesize changes over time between images, using comparative language, which is sophisticated radiological reasoning.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7887,latent_7887,10696,0.021392,0.013516864,4.6992154,Mild pulmonary vascular changes or improvement without acute major findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight interpretations of mild pulmonary vascular changes, such as subtle changes in the pulmonary vasculature or improvement/decrease in effusion, without major acute findings. Mild changes or improvements often necessitate careful assessment and are discussed in detail, which may align with the pattern that is of interest.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3839144728326991,0.405,0.3492063492063492,0.22,100.0,100.0
+7888,latent_7888,6830,0.01366,0.01479037,6.33747,Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours; clear lungs without consolidation or effusion.,"Highly activated examples consistently feature clear lungs without consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or cardiomegaly, while noting normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, often termed as 'unremarkable'. This represents a pattern of stating normal findings in clinical radiology.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6080795899909557,0.61,0.627906976744186,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7889,latent_7889,15592,0.031184,0.021233875,6.00427,Evaluation of tube placement/position in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or assessments of medical tubes/tubes placement, such as Dobbhoff or nasogastric tubes, confirmed through comparison with prior imaging. This suggests the pattern involves close attention to tube position, changes, or placement verification in imaging reports.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8090644156366193,0.81,0.7719298245614035,0.88,100.0,100.0
+7890,latent_7890,3859,0.007718,0.010552952,5.031539,Comparative analysis of radiographic changes across time in lung or pleural conditions.,"High activation levels correspond to cases where there is a description to compare current and prior radiographic findings, especially noting changes (or lack thereof) in lung opacities, consolidation, pleural effusion, or specific conditions like emphysema or pneumothorax.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.453781512605042,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7891,latent_7891,4693,0.009386,0.0072261817,3.3708324,Explicit prior imaging comparison or report reference.,"The pattern identified involves the presence of a prior report or prior imaging comparison along with contrastive structures. The explanations of the changes or lack thereof between the current and previous images are commonly given in radiology reports, as part of assessing stability or progression of medical conditions. These examples frequently contain explicit prior comparisons, making them more relevant to this pattern.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+7892,latent_7892,5312,0.010624,0.015655054,4.5353365,Presence of frontal and lateral chest images for comparison.,"The examples that have high activations involve scenarios with descriptions of both frontal and lateral chest images being compared. These comparisons often involve observing changes or lack thereof between the two views, with both types of images being available and reviewed as part of the assessment.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7893,latent_7893,10419,0.020838,0.015475916,7.034274,Hyperinflated lungs indicative of COPD.,"The pattern observed is the presence of hyperinflated lungs, often linked with COPD, indicated by descriptors like 'hyperinflated', 'flattened diaphragms', or 'hyperexpansion'. This finding can be related to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, reflecting underlying pulmonary hyperinflation.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.694708276797829,0.73,0.8125,0.4642857142857143,84.0,116.0
+7894,latent_7894,3211,0.006422,0.006695432,5.059169,Monitoring of findings over time compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples involve findings that change over time or are stable with respect to previous studies, often in contexts where a diagnosis or condition is being monitored over multiple imaging sessions. Such descriptions facilitate understanding the progression or resolution of clinical conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4479166666666667,0.47,0.4785714285714286,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7895,latent_7895,35275,0.07055,0.03881381,5.866587,Comparison of current radiographic findings with prior studies to assess changes.,"The data consistently highlight the use of a direct comparison between a current radiographic image and prior imaging studies, particularly focusing on changes or stability in specific medical findings or devices. Variations in descriptive changes, device placements, or stability are consistently linked to the level of activation.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7896,latent_7896,54215,0.10843,0.073585846,4.3030095,Frontal and lateral chest views provided for comparison with prior frontal image.,"The examples that describe the findings consistently point out that they include a directive for providing a description of radiological findings using a current image, both frontal and lateral views, in comparison to a prior frontal image. This observation suggests the task format itself with a comparison and the presence of both types of views contributes to the activation.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7897,latent_7897,36794,0.073588,0.049612623,10.260965,Current image analysis without reference to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation tend to lack prior comparison even when multiple images are presented, requiring potentially more detailed descriptions based on the current images only.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4458710636572509,0.59,0.2222222222222222,0.1290322580645161,62.0,138.0
+7898,latent_7898,13405,0.02681,0.018150076,5.719637,References to atelectasis or changes in lung conditions on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples that relate to some form of atelectasis, bronchiectasis, or specific lung findings tend to show higher activation levels. The pattern suggests the model is responsive when findings describe or compare certain lung conditions that are seen as serial changes or are described as unchanged from prior studies, particularly if linked to known conditions like bronchiectasis.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4782608695652174,0.22,100.0,100.0
+7899,latent_7899,4280,0.00856,0.012565267,7.9580355,Descriptions focused on interval change in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention the term 'comparison' relating to prior imaging studies, indicating that the primary pattern involves evaluating the interval change between films. This reflects a clinical need to assess stability, progression, or resolution of findings over time, contrasting current and prior images.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5879917184265011,0.5979899497487438,0.5725190839694656,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+7900,latent_7900,4584,0.009168,0.016769245,4.186565,Assessment of interval changes by comparison with prior images.,"Examples describe scenarios where radiographic findings explicitly change, remain unchanged, or detail the patient’s history, often evaluated by comparing the current images to prior ones or discussing specific aspects like the stability of medical devices, consolidation, or lung opacities. The pattern involves assessment in the context of changes or stabilities identified through comparison.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7901,latent_7901,4284,0.008568,0.009089005,6.048085,Explicit comparison with prior imaging studies in context.,Examples with high activation predominantly involve instructed contexts indicating a 'comparison with prior images' or the presence of indicated prior imaging studies without explicit indication in findings. The crucial pattern here is the explicit mention of comparison process with prior images.,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7902,latent_7902,3454,0.006908,0.006360587,5.069655,Stable or slightly changed imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Highly activated examples contain comparative analysis or changes noted between current and prior imaging, specifically focusing on changes that highlight clinical stability, improvement, or minor variations without significant new pathologies. This pattern often uses phrases indicating stability or improvement compared to prior imaging findings.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7903,latent_7903,6607,0.013214,0.009823362,6.094277,Unchanged or stable position of lines/devices in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern here involves radiology studies that confirm placement of lines or devices and mention their unchanged or stable position in comparison to previous images. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'similar in position', or verification of catheter tips in expected locations are used.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.56,0.28,100.0,100.0
+7904,latent_7904,26646,0.053292,0.0352623,7.546013,"Assessment for interval stability, changes, or comparison with prior imaging.","Highly representative samples indicate findings that note the similarity or stability in certain pathological or anatomical features over time between current and prior studies or imaging. This is commonly described in radiology reports where changes from previous studies are evaluated and noted, particularly when minimal or no change has occurred.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.422077922077922,0.8333333333333334,78.0,122.0
+7905,latent_7905,4751,0.009502,0.012618869,3.7938998,High activation when both current frontal and lateral images are compared to prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation consistently have situations where a current image is shown as a frontal and lateral view, and a comparison is being made to a prior image, also often specifically a frontal view. This likely reflects a protocol in radiology emphasizing comparative assessments across different angles.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5346534653465347,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7906,latent_7906,8273,0.016546,0.010543281,3.547922,"Descriptive radiology comparison to prior imaging, regardless of prior report availability.","The consistently activated examples provide descriptions of radiology findings comparing current images to previous studies, even when no comparison studies are explicitly available. This pattern suggests an emphasis on evaluating or noting changes or stasis over time between different imaging exams, irrespective of availability of previous reports.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+7907,latent_7907,4881,0.009762,0.011361471,8.032566,Radiological comparison with prior images for stability or change assessment.,"The representative samples highlight a consistent pattern of radiological studies compared to prior imaging to evaluate stability or change in specific findings, particularly identifying new developments or stability in pathological features, which is a common practice in longitudinal patient care to monitor disease progression or improvement.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5691374770605601,0.595,0.5637583892617449,0.84,100.0,100.0
+7908,latent_7908,3201,0.006402,0.0075316997,6.5891614,Prompts explicitly requesting comparison to prior images.,"The examples exhibit activation patterns associated with the use of directive language or instructions inherent in completing the requested task—'provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images'. These prompts specifically ask for an assessment based on the current and previous images, a directive that may generate higher activation levels from the model.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7909,latent_7909,22028,0.044056,0.023604667,3.7919612,"Emphasis on normal cardiac, hilar, and mediastinal contours in comparison to prior images.","The pattern here centers on the presence of a comparison with a prior image and the description of findings primarily within the cardiac, hilar, and mediastinal contours. These are often paired with indications of normality or stability, emphasizing unchanged or normal anatomical contours visualized in chest radiographs over time.",0.6312709030100334,0.6326530612244898,0.6363636363636364,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.6043956043956044,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7910,latent_7910,8495,0.01699,0.01680181,4.745638,Focus on changes in pulmonary opacities or fluid collections over time.,"The examples with high activation frequently describe changes in pulmonary opacities or effusions, specifically comparing current to previous findings. They often highlight interval improvements, developments, or stabilities in conditions such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, and pneumonia, alongside device placements. The pattern emphasizes change intricacies over time or after interventions, distinguishing them from those without significant reported changes.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7911,latent_7911,18088,0.036176,0.01603673,2.9982245,Positioning and placement of chest tubes and lines on X-ray.,"These examples consistently describe positioning and appropriate placement of various chest tubes and lines (e.g., endotracheal tube, NG tube, central venous catheter) on chest radiographs. They frequently mention the specific distance from anatomical landmarks like the carina or the superior vena cava to ensure correct placement, highlighting proper management of these medical devices.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.6172839506172839,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7912,latent_7912,3237,0.006474,0.009025012,4.0323153,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples show references to explicit comparison between current and prior imaging, which is a typical approach in radiology to assess changes over time. Examples with lower activation don't necessarily mention such comparisons or detail in conclusions based on them.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7913,latent_7913,13618,0.027236,0.013189607,2.9540217,Impressions include comparison with prior images highlighting changes or continuity.,"Activations are higher when findings or impressions are compared with previous images, especially when changes or lack thereof are observed (e.g., stability, interval change, improvement, or worsening). Reports containing detailed analyses about how current findings differ or align with prior reports or imaging demonstrate this pattern.",0.5,0.5102040816326531,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7914,latent_7914,7423,0.014846,0.010349917,3.1773512,Emphasis on stability or changes in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the description of findings 'in comparison to prior frontal images', often mentioning 'changes', 'unchanged', or 'again seen', showcasing attention to consistency or change in follow-up or prior evaluations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4497799119647859,0.45,0.4519230769230769,0.47,100.0,100.0
+7915,latent_7915,28831,0.057662,0.030553127,6.391473,"Interval changes in lines, tubes, or abnormal findings in comparison with prior studies.","In these examples, there is a focus on identifying changes or stability between prior and current imaging studies with reference to specific lines, tubes, fractures or abnormalities, often noting interval changes like worsening or improvement. The pattern focuses on interval changes, particularly regarding lines, tubes, or stability of findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5483741469289443,0.55,0.4375,0.6447368421052632,76.0,124.0
+7916,latent_7916,17920,0.03584,0.022426086,4.786493,Reports with indeterminate or absent comparison information.,"These examples often lack comparison, indicated directly by 'None available' or indirectly by the presence of comparisons without specifying prior examinations. They mention the interpretation of findings without effectively using previous images as reference to discern interval changes, leading to mid-level activation since the task is specified yet partially fulfilled.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4255514705882353,0.5,0.5,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7917,latent_7917,4314,0.008628,0.009295774,7.8311367,Focus on comparing current images to prior ones.,"These examples focus on providing a description of findings in the current radiology study in relation to prior imaging, emphasizing a comparison to previous studies without necessarily reporting new pathological findings or changes in condition. This pattern refers explicitly to a prior image and ensures the inclusion of comparisons as a key aspect of the report.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4661654135338345,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7918,latent_7918,6350,0.0127,0.007517603,5.192886,"Chronic pulmonary disease characteristics such as hyperexpansion, consistent with known COPD.","This pattern involves the presence of significant chronic pulmonary disease indicators, mainly COPD features, as seen in radiological imaging with findings like hyperexpansion and flattening of diaphragms, which are consistent with known diagnoses of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease present in these samples.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6203107034947459,0.645,0.7959183673469388,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7919,latent_7919,4276,0.008552,0.0123695135,4.967306,Use of both current frontal and lateral images with prior imaging for comparison.,"Samples with high activation predominantly involve radiological examinations that provide both current and prior imaging for comparison, often including at least two views such as frontal and lateral images, and make comparisons to previous exam results. This reference to multiple images for deeper analysis, especially when using phrases like 'PA and lateral', appears to be a significant determinant.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5643564356435643,0.57,100.0,100.0
+7920,latent_7920,15717,0.031434,0.020400876,6.213963,Persistent or unchanged cardiac enlargement or a tortuous aorta.,"Most examples with high activation show descriptions of changes in imaging related to cardiac or vascular features, such as an enlarged heart or a calcified and tortuous aorta, which are clinical significant findings.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6797117405665098,0.68,0.6914893617021277,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7921,latent_7921,6679,0.013358,0.010490993,4.032484,Remark on stable findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight the characteristic pattern of reporting stable conditions or findings compared to prior examinations. The stable findings are often related to devices, lesions, or anatomical features across successive imaging studies.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3943383805134957,0.425,0.3636363636363636,0.2,100.0,100.0
+7922,latent_7922,18288,0.036576,0.02485521,5.3115854,Analysis and comparison with prior imaging for changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or stability between current and prior images, providing detailed comparisons of findings. This pattern indicates a focus on longitudinal comparisons in imaging studies, assessing for changes over time such as improvement, worsening, or stability of certain conditions.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7923,latent_7923,3568,0.007136,0.011665292,6.141302,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest images to prior studies for nuanced changes.,"The highly activated examples indicate that the pattern involves reports with both frontal and lateral radiographic views being compared to prior imaging, without explicitly listing indications or findings unrelated to the comparison. These comparisons focus on subtle findings like mild changes in cardiomegaly or lung fields, where radiologists need to make nuanced observations from multiple angles.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4448750968968017,0.445,0.4432989690721649,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7924,latent_7924,13529,0.027058,0.022869913,10.458316,Descriptions focusing on interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples show activation patterns matching phrases that describe changes or assessments of the appearance of medical findings compared to previous imaging or scans, with indicators specifying examination details or history relevant to the change. These examples relate to the comparative evaluation of current and prior imaging studies to determine stability or change in medical conditions.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4996241283666433,0.5125628140703518,0.3398058252427184,0.546875,64.0,135.0
+7925,latent_7925,4623,0.009246,0.011734793,4.3344493,Brief prompts with minimal specific findings or impression details for image comparison.,High activation examples generally lack detailed findings or impressions beyond the basic prompt to compare current images with prior images and often include placeholders that need completion. This suggests that high activation is seen in cases with minimal assistance needed beyond general comparison.,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+7926,latent_7926,6836,0.013672,0.008330109,3.7591617,Detailed comparison between current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation consistently incorporate specific imaging techniques, conditions, and direct comparison between current and prior images, employing comprehensive language to describe findings and differentiations from earlier reports. This pattern reflects a detailed comparative analysis of medical images, aligning with practices in radiological assessments to describe changes over time for specific medical evaluations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,100.0
+7927,latent_7927,15921,0.031842,0.016292242,7.545248,Detailed analysis of imaging findings with explicit comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, utilizing references to previous examinations and highlighting interval changes or stability. These examples show a detailed analysis of changes over time, which is a common pattern in radiological follow-ups.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4107426153962378,0.415,0.2796610169491525,0.5076923076923077,65.0,135.0
+7928,latent_7928,10144,0.020288,0.01184627,3.9146674,Stable or unchanged positioning of medical devices in anatomical locations.,"This list of examples exhibits consistent phrasing referring to anatomical placements, particularly of medical devices or tubes. Examples with higher activation levels describe stability, positioning or removal of such items, like catheter tips or tubes, which often utilize terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and specific anatomical locations, from one imaging study to the next.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.6212121212121212,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7929,latent_7929,2537,0.005074,0.0051443004,7.569622,Detailed analysis of medical procedures and devices in comparison reports.,"The examples with higher activation all contain nuanced and often complex procedural descriptions involving medical devices or changes in patient condition that demand detailed analysis and often involve a comparison with prior examination findings. These descriptions tend to be comprehensive, integrating several elements into the clinical context, noted through use of specific medical terminology relating to interventions such as catheter placements or post-surgical evaluations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5978260869565217,0.55,100.0,100.0
+7930,latent_7930,4064,0.008128,0.012448127,4.7277384,Imaging comparison indicates stable or unchanged findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve examinations being evaluated against prior imaging studies, where changes in the condition are stated as unchanged, stable, or without significant interval change. This references follow-up or comparison with previous images to assess the current clinical situation.",0.4405919661733615,0.4489795918367347,0.4210526315789473,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.3989201840474481,0.435,0.3725490196078431,0.19,100.0,100.0
+7931,latent_7931,20025,0.04005,0.032662623,8.358534,Explicit instruction to compare current image with prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include instructions to compare current imaging findings with previous imaging. This pattern involves explicit directives for comparison, usually preceded by phrases like 'Given the current... and the prior... Provide a description...' followed by a description of the comparative analysis.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+7932,latent_7932,8383,0.016766,0.013615061,4.7936516,Comparison of current imaging results with past imaging or annotated past reports.,"The samples with high activation levels all involve situations where the current imaging is explicitly compared with prior images despite being given single frontal images or no previous images at all. This indicates that despite variations in the presence of previous images, the important factor is discussing a change or non-change over time based on prior reports or instructions to compare with prior data implicitly, which might be inherently noted by the system.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7933,latent_7933,3478,0.006956,0.008638858,4.592577,Identifiable changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve changes in a patient's condition compared to previous imaging, with explicit alterations noted (e.g., increase in effusion, removal of a catheter). These examples highlight identifiable changes over time, not just stability or absence of change.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3376981217927652,0.345,0.3037974683544304,0.24,100.0,100.0
+7934,latent_7934,5133,0.010266,0.013988197,3.7288146,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+7935,latent_7935,38798,0.077596,0.05657329,3.8138332,Reports with clear interval changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"This set of examples indicates that notable activations occur when both current and prior radiographic images are compared, with clear documentation of findings showing interval changes or stability over time. Descriptions include terms like 'unchanged,' 'no new,' 'stable,' and 'persistent,' signifying maintenance of prior conditions or resolution of previous findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5213675213675214,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7936,latent_7936,2975,0.00595,0.007815176,5.033307,Detailed analysis of findings across current and prior images.,"The most representative examples all involve instructions or explicit directives that require descriptions of radiological findings based on current and prior images, with strong emphasis on providing evaluations or comparisons of those findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3849846246156154,0.385,0.3861386138613861,0.39,100.0,100.0
+7937,latent_7937,14846,0.029692,0.013476245,3.0334458,Frequent mention of unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples show instances where radiology descriptions emphasize stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging. Also, there's often mention of specific findings like catheters or medical devices that remain unchanged, indicating the significance of stability in serial imaging interpretations. The presence of unchanged findings is documented frequently across high activation examples, especially when specific devices or previously noted conditions are consistently mentioned as 'again noted' or 'unchanged.'",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+7938,latent_7938,24966,0.049932,0.04476413,5.1229477,Detailed comparison of cardiopulmonary findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently pertain to detailed comparisons of current and previous imaging, specifically emphasizing changes or stability in cardiopulmonary structures, such as heart size or aortic features. This reflects a focus on radiographic assessments of status over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4579439252336448,0.49,100.0,100.0
+7939,latent_7939,25943,0.051886,0.025272157,3.6429553,Subtle interval changes in lung and pleural conditions.,"The pattern involves descriptions of pulmonary or cardiac conditions, specifically referencing changes, resolution, or stability in findings, frequently related to signs of pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, or conditions like pneumothorax. References to specific changes over time or in comparison to prior images are crucial. Hemidiaphragm elevation, bibasilar atelectasis, and the state of pleural effusions are often involved, indicating a focus on subtle changes in lung and pleural conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5138888888888888,0.37,100.0,100.0
+7940,latent_7940,4092,0.008184,0.008807046,4.5568967,Structured findings and comparison using frontal and lateral chest images.,"These examples exhibit the radiology report format of providing a structured evaluation of imaging findings, often comparing to prior images when available. Activation levels are high where the report explicitly specifies the use of both frontal and lateral views of chest imaging as well as mentions ""comparison” and “findings"" sections. Reports without explicit ""comparison"" context tend to have lower activation levels even if format matches. Specifically, usage of 'PA' (Posteroanterior) and 'lateral' combined with structured report reflects this particular pattern.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4429590017825312,0.5,0.5,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7941,latent_7941,7175,0.01435,0.011715361,4.0433125,Comparison with previous images to assess interval changes.,"The commonality here is the interpretation of sequential radiology images by comparing them explicitly to prior images, capturing changes over time, which is a standard practice in radiological analysis.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+7942,latent_7942,5474,0.010948,0.008974037,7.8188825,Specific measurement of endotracheal tube distance above the carina.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature precise measurements of the endotracheal tube's position relative to the carina, indicating a specific radiological practice of documenting this key detail about tube placement for evaluating appropriate or inappropriate positioning.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7821350762527233,0.79,0.967741935483871,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7943,latent_7943,2822,0.005644,0.012281579,5.853604,Comparison with prior images and detailed narratives of findings.,"The examples with high activation levels involve detailed narratives where current imaging is compared with prior imaging, and specific findings are reviewed methodically with historical context and clinical implications.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7944,latent_7944,7145,0.01429,0.0096223885,5.940488,Integration of findings and diagnostics based on image comparison.,"Examples with higher activation often mention diagnostic summaries or recommendations in response to image analysis, indicating a focus on integrating clinical findings with reference to prior images for comparison, suggesting this is the pattern the model highlights.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4891237127261971,0.525,0.5163398692810458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7945,latent_7945,20256,0.040512,0.038018133,6.5847564,Interval changes from baseline in comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern involves cases where radiological descriptions state notable findings such as changes from baseline or previous studies, potentially indicating a progression or resolution of conditions. This is evident in language indicating interval changes or using terms like 'dramatic improvement', 'severe cardiomegaly', 'interval increase', and comparisons to prior images, while examples without any change or findings have lower activation.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+7946,latent_7946,6240,0.01248,0.020227006,5.284528,Explicit comparison of current and prior images in multi-view studies.,"The pattern entails reports describing imaging findings with specific mention of a comparison with prior images. Multi-view reporting or description in studies with more than one anatomical plane, e.g., 'frontal image' and 'lateral image', is also highly activated. The consistent mention of comparisons with prior images and elements like 'CURRENT/PRIOR report' are seen in high-activation examples.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3760064412238325,0.38,0.396551724137931,0.46,100.0,100.0
+7947,latent_7947,4535,0.00907,0.009502204,5.563189,Use of frontal and lateral chest views with historical comparison.,"These examples contain frequent use of both frontal and lateral views in the description and comparison with prior imaging studies. This usage indicates thorough radiological examination for detecting changes over time, especially in cardiopulmonary evaluations.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4676131322094055,0.505,0.5032679738562091,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7948,latent_7948,41215,0.08243,0.034451466,2.2079086,Emphasis on unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"This collection of examples reflects the presence of phrases indicating findings unchanged from prior imaging studies, even when other findings might also be mentioned, such as pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, devices like lines or tubes, etc. This is a frequent observation in clinical reports stating stability or lack of progression in certain contexts.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.5375,0.43,100.0,100.0
+7949,latent_7949,4532,0.009064,0.008719446,4.7326674,Comparison with prior imaging and description of findings.,"Each of these examples involves a direct comparison between current imaging and prior studies, often highlighting changes or consistencies over time. This pattern is frequently found in radiological assessments to monitor disease progression or check for interval changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7950,latent_7950,3461,0.006922,0.008098918,4.966919,Insufficient historical comparison in radiology reports.,Both representative and variant examples focus on comparison across a certain modality (frontal and lateral views) or absence of enough historical data to compare with the current findings often in context of follow-up exams. High activation indicates focus on comparative observation when sufficient past studies are available but not provided instantly in the prompt.,0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4472222222222222,0.5175879396984925,0.5087719298245614,0.8787878787878788,99.0,100.0
+7951,latent_7951,14317,0.028634,0.026478786,8.67081,"Focus on tube positioning (ET, NG, Dobbhoff) in relation to anatomical landmarks.","Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions where endotracheal (ET) or other tubes are explicitly mentioned in relation to anatomical landmarks, indicating a focus on correct positioning of tubes such as NG tube, Dobbhoff tube, or others, often noted as either out of place or satisfactorily positioned.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,100.0,100.0
+7952,latent_7952,4595,0.00919,0.0067243674,6.562329,Comparison findings or changes from previous imaging studies.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports comparing findings with prior imaging studies and noting changes or stability. The absence of comparison or indication of change tends to relate with lower activation.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+7953,latent_7953,3039,0.006078,0.005771046,7.2856207,Accentuated cardiac structures due to low lung volumes or tortuous aorta.,"Examples with high activation levels typically mention low lung volumes accentuating the heart or bronchovascular structures along with thoracic aorta tortuosity, suggesting an association with findings where anatomical or positional variations in chest radiography are emphasized.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5576923076923077,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7954,latent_7954,23908,0.047816,0.028053775,4.654516,Emphasis on low lung volumes affecting imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels identify themes of comparison with prior imaging to assess changes over time often indicating interval stability, improvement, or worsening of a condition. This theme is accompanied by the frequent detection of low lung volumes, which may affect visibility or accentuate other findings.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,100.0,100.0
+7955,latent_7955,4889,0.009778,0.009218043,4.5567884,Evaluation of line and tube positions compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves updating or stability of findings related to catheters, lines, and tubes positions as compared to prior imaging. This is a common reassessment focus in radiological follow-ups, particularly for critically ill patients or those with central lines or other devices.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+7956,latent_7956,11102,0.022204,0.012918145,3.3174822,Detailed comparison with prior images showing significant clinical or imaging changes.,"The examples with high activation levels often include a clear comparison between current and prior images in a defined imaging sequence, usually indicating a significant clinical change or detailed analysis. They may also involve multiple views (frontal and lateral) or specific findings related to complex or acute pathologies. This suggests complexity or richness in data or findings described, which is why they are highly activated.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.2,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.4032118055555556,0.45,0.3863636363636363,0.17,100.0,100.0
+7957,latent_7957,32879,0.065758,0.06633693,4.9971304,Reports constructed without comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve creating a report based on description of findings when there is a lack of obvious comparison data, necessitating a synthesis or update of information solely from the current imaging results. This pattern includes explaining findings where ""None"" or ""No prior"" denotes explicit absence of available previous context, prompting emphasis on current observations.",0.4888888888888889,0.5306122448979592,0.5454545454545454,0.25,24.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5576923076923077,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7958,latent_7958,4659,0.009318,0.008951892,5.078081,Focus on interval changes when comparing current to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently involve direct comparisons between current and prior radiological imaging, primarily focusing on identifying any interval change or stability of findings. They frequently specify measurements or visual changes like 'stable', 'resolved', or 'slightly improved', indicating that the consideration of change over time is part of the pattern being detected.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5309734513274337,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7959,latent_7959,6567,0.013134,0.021118509,5.8375044,Comparison using both current frontal and lateral images with a prior frontal image.,"The samples with higher activation levels specify using both current frontal and lateral images along with prior frontal images in the data, indicating a comparison process that utilizes a more comprehensive set of imaging views.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7960,latent_7960,28507,0.057014,0.028242925,5.3213134,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include descriptions of findings which are unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging studies. This stability is emphasized across various examples, with unchanged findings being cited as significant and noteworthy compared to potential recent changes in existing radiological conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.4861111111111111,0.3723404255319149,94.0,106.0
+7961,latent_7961,5836,0.011672,0.01573074,6.1411276,Findings comparability between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a combination of current and prior imaging studies where findings are compared across images, showing stability or minor change over time, particularly with the presence of external devices like pleural effusions or pulmonary opacities and other consistent findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+7962,latent_7962,7940,0.01588,0.03313051,6.6512456,Descriptive comparisons indicating interval changes in findings or device placements.,"The highest activation levels are associated with reports that involve direct comparisons of sequential changes in medical findings over time, often including device placement like tubes and lines or changes in fluid levels, such as pleural effusions. Such comparative descriptions offer dynamic clinical insight, thereby aligning with a pattern that focuses on detecting temporal changes in patient status through consecutive imaging.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5734035549703753,0.595,0.5655172413793104,0.82,100.0,100.0
+7963,latent_7963,5151,0.010302,0.011465638,5.440977,Comparative description of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels specifically request examining current imaging findings in comparison to a prior frontal image, focusing on describing any changes or stability since prior observations. These examples often lack or note the presence of prior comparative data, emphasizing radiological changes over image sets with clear instruction to compare and document findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7964,latent_7964,8560,0.01712,0.024604803,5.621887,Stability or unchanged conditions in comparison with prior studies.,"These examples primarily describe pathological findings or changes seen in radiographic images in comparison to prior studies, focusing specifically on findings where conditions are unchanged or stable over time. This recurrence of stability in comparison with earlier results seems to be the key pattern sought by the task when noting higher activation levels.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4375617541992855,0.445,0.4285714285714285,0.33,100.0,100.0
+7965,latent_7965,4188,0.008376,0.009600187,6.4921627,Interval changes indicating improvement or placement of medical devices compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe specific anatomical changes or interventions (such as surgical repairs, placements of tubes, or resolution of pathologies) compared to prior imaging studies. These comparisons are crucial in assessing the progress or changes in a patient's condition over time.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4603174603174603,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7966,latent_7966,5590,0.01118,0.011664812,5.4645624,Comparative findings with prior images in radiology reports.,"The pattern identified in these examples consistently includes descriptions of current radiological findings in comparison with prior images, often noting changes or stability in conditions. The presence of multiple detailed and explicit comparative statements is an indicator of the pattern.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+7967,latent_7967,3872,0.007744,0.00872796,6.3817344,Normal or stable cardiac or mediastinal contours in current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activations often include descriptions of radiological findings in relation to previous imaging studies and consistently comment on the normalcy or stability of the heart and mediastinal contours. Lower activation examples lack references to such stability or appear in contexts where either changes or other significant findings (e.g., no prior comparison) are described.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6558356108917907,0.66,0.6311475409836066,0.77,100.0,100.0
+7968,latent_7968,6580,0.01316,0.021215368,5.165407,"Presence of ""prior report"" or ""prior image"" reference tags.","The pattern among the examples with high activation levels is the consistent mention of ""prior report"" or ""prior image"" being explicitly identified in the prompt. This consistent reference structure likely triggers a specific context or memory pattern in the model beyond just using the word ""comparison”, aligning with the higher activation levels.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4091067083767813,0.49,0.4942528735632184,0.86,100.0,100.0
+7969,latent_7969,30639,0.061278,0.037177186,3.8339503,Reports describing notable interval changes in condition.,"These examples often ask for findings to be described in relation to prior images, but are mixed in terms of the presence of notable findings in comparison with previous images. However, a pattern appears where examples with noted changes (progressive findings such as increased opacities or pneumothorax resolution) tend to have higher activations, suggesting a focus on interval change, particularly advancements or resolution in radiological findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6550324675324675,0.66,0.7105263157894737,0.54,100.0,100.0
+7970,latent_7970,6138,0.012276,0.016457526,8.371507,Focus on changes or stability in findings compared to prior studies.,"The activation levels indicate a focus on descriptions in radiological reports where comparison is made with prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability in findings. The model is trained to identify these specific comparative patterns across studies.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4089075068746627,0.425,0.4436090225563909,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7971,latent_7971,5022,0.010044,0.013718914,5.363105,Description of current findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the interpretation of current radiological images with respect to prior images. This pattern focuses specifically on reports that clearly state comparison observations between current and previous imaging, often using language indicating stability, changes, or differences between sequential imaging studies.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7972,latent_7972,10058,0.020116,0.023923535,5.2553062,Direct image comparisons using given current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently specify direct image comparisons, usually with a 'Given the current frontal image ... and the prior frontal image' preamble, indicating detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images. This pattern suggests that the model activates highly when tasked to analyze and compare multiple images in a series.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7973,latent_7973,2838,0.005676,0.0037998802,4.439569,Request to provide findings from current frontal and lateral images in comparison to prior frontal image.,"The observations with high activation levels show certain combinational requests to compare findings from both current, frontal, and lateral chest images against prior frontal images within given indications. Interestingly, some high activation examples do not provide clear prior comparison dates but instructions are present to contextually provide findings based on the visualized current images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7974,latent_7974,3187,0.006374,0.0058237533,4.357909,Directives to explicitly describe findings compared to a prior image are prominent.,"The examples with higher activation levels include the directive to explicitly provide a comparison with a prior image within the assistant's requested action. These instructions indicate a focus on evaluating changes or differences, which is crucial in radiological assessments, especially when dealing with recurrent symptoms or known issues.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+7975,latent_7975,2568,0.005136,0.0072620385,6.5277042,Detailed findings followed by comparison and emphasis on significant changes or critical findings.,"Highly activated examples feature findings descriptors followed by comparative analysis from previous imaging and conclude with a definitive assessment about a primary finding or device, often indicated within a context of serious clinical indications, like pneumonia or cardiac conditions 'requiring follow up' or 'evaluation right now'. The consistency of such descriptor-comparison-assessment closure within highly activated examples reflects its relevance.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5263157894736842,0.5,100.0,100.0
+7976,latent_7976,46383,0.092766,0.08089461,4.914659,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings showing stability or change.,"The highly activated examples involve cases needing comparison between current and prior imaging findings, explicitly indicating unchanged or improved conditions over time. These contain terms describing evaluation over time like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improving', 'interval change', or mention multiple prior studies for comparison of conditions like atelectasis, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+7977,latent_7977,20226,0.040452,0.018460566,4.5965853,Explicit description of lung changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation explicitly describe changes in the lung parenchyma, including consolidation, atelectasis, opacity, or similar terms, and a comparison with prior images is mentioned, often showing improvement, no change, or a worsening condition. These details highlight findings specifically related to lung changes over time.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5576884219034148,0.5577889447236181,0.5567010309278351,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+7978,latent_7978,10466,0.020932,0.013109645,3.9335535,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"In these examples, high activation occurs when there is a request or task to provide a description of current radiological findings in comparison to previous imaging studies. This often involves analyzing changes over time, which is a key task in monitoring disease progression or treatment response.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+7979,latent_7979,10170,0.02034,0.012618525,4.8619294,Focus on positioning and description of medical devices or tubes.,"Examples with higher activation involve descriptions of medical devices or tubes (e.g., tracheostomy, central venous line) positioned within the body and mentions of their stability or change in position, which indicates clinical observations of interest regarding recent medical interventions or post-operative status in patients. This focus on device placement is central to the task identifying new or unchanged status.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.65996599659966,0.66,0.6632653061224489,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7980,latent_7980,32491,0.064982,0.051961955,5.6060843,Comparison of current and prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently focus on the detailed description of findings by referencing prior imaging studies. These examples demonstrate interval changes or stability of findings, often emphasizing configuration changes in chest structures over time. The key pattern is the methodical comparison of images to assess alterations or stabilities.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,100.0,100.0
+7981,latent_7981,20155,0.04031,0.020174233,3.5847893,Comparison indicates worsening potential lung pathology like pneumonia or atelectasis.,"Examples with higher activation refer to evaluations where findings on images are compared to previous and demonstrate either acute change or significant ongoing abnormality, specifically consolidations or focal opacifications suggestive of pneumonia, atelectasis etc.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.6829268292682927,0.28,100.0,100.0
+7982,latent_7982,4487,0.008974,0.00844193,4.1416426,Descriptions of stability or changes between current and previous imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently contain detailed descriptions of changes or lack thereof between current and prior imaging, often specifying interval changes or stability in conditions like pleural effusions, pneumonia, and other cardiopulmonary processes.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+7983,latent_7983,4046,0.008092,0.010013886,4.368144,Incomplete or placeholder text in report sections.,"The examples with high activation levels contain descriptions with missing or incomplete information in sections like indications or findings. The presence of literal placeholders like '_' or marked fragments e.g., '[[status]]' indicates incomplete template structure which strongly aligns with the desired pattern.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3658265502925697,0.515,0.5076142131979695,1.0,100.0,100.0
+7984,latent_7984,5780,0.01156,0.01388284,4.1488442,"Comparison to prior image studies, excluding noted comparison history.","The examples showing high activation levels comprise instructions that request a comparison between current and prior image studies without reference to prior comparisons already mentioned in the initial input. The presence of language explicitly indicating 'comparison to prior' or 'comparison: none', combined with a detailed description of current findings, seems to increase activation.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4303733089207608,0.44,0.4189189189189189,0.31,100.0,100.0
+7985,latent_7985,15643,0.031286,0.015381247,5.057133,"Explicit comparison to prior imaging, noting change or stability of findings.","Examples with low activation either lack prior imaging for comparison or state 'comparison not available' despite no mention of prior images. High activation examples frequently provide explicit directional changes or stability of findings compared to prior imaging, even when it's speculative.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7986,latent_7986,9237,0.018474,0.020218326,5.661232,Presence of both frontal and lateral chest images in the evaluation.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve radiographic evaluations that include both frontal and lateral views of the chest, suggesting a pattern where the presence of both views contributes significantly to the model's activation. In contrast, examples with only frontal views generally have lower activation levels.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4565079365079365,0.465,0.472,0.59,100.0,100.0
+7987,latent_7987,2740,0.00548,0.008322381,5.807695,Cardiomediastinal and hilar contours within normal limits.,"Higher activation samples uniformly mention cardio-mediastinal and hilar contours as 'within normal limits', describing the heart and adjacent structures as unremarkable in comparison to other findings, which is a recurring pattern in the dataset.",0.8357963875205254,0.84,0.7575757575757576,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6649246080368083,0.665,0.6701030927835051,0.65,100.0,100.0
+7988,latent_7988,10306,0.020612,0.02538563,5.3097787,Prompts requesting descriptions of current images in comparison to prior images show high activation.,"High activation levels consistently occur in examples where the task explicitly asks for a description of the radiology findings in comparison to the prior frontal image, or similar diagnostic tasks implying comparison, whereas examples with no explicit mention of this task have low activation.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4437632704327282,0.535,0.5193370165745856,0.94,100.0,100.0
+7989,latent_7989,4649,0.009298,0.0062171584,3.940467,Unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette amidst detailed findings.,"Highly activated samples often provide descriptions involving unremarkable or normal cardiomediastinal contours while discussing other specific pathologies, using descriptive language for comparative analysis with previous images. This description pattern is consistent with detailed evaluations where the heart and mediastinal contours are stable despite other lung or anatomical findings, promoting stability and unchanged status of cardiomediastinal features across studied comparisons.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4228657524451594,0.435,0.4084507042253521,0.29,100.0,100.0
+7990,latent_7990,4791,0.009582,0.01671421,5.5384893,Radiological findings described with reference to interval changes.,"These examples contain descriptions of radiological findings compared to previous imaging studies and generally emphasize aspects of interval change, whether improvement or worsening. They often include details about specific anatomical structures or pathological findings that changed over the interval or remained stable, such as pulmonary opacities or device placement.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+7991,latent_7991,3875,0.00775,0.0077072135,5.678409,In-depth analysis using current and prior images for comparison.,"Radiology reports in high-activation examples frequently incorporate both current and prior images into their analysis and explicitly mention comparisons with prior reports, using detailed descriptions and interpretations that may affect clinical decisions, implying a more advanced analysis process than mere observation.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+7992,latent_7992,17456,0.034912,0.021881694,7.843369,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples describe changes observed in the comparison of a current imaging study with previous ones, specifically noting progression or regression of findings, such as worsening pleural effusions or unchanged masses. These reports emphasize the importance of longitudinal analysis in imaging for clinical decision-making.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.3404255319148936,0.676056338028169,71.0,129.0
+7993,latent_7993,20789,0.041578,0.017085653,3.7954571,"Explicit and detailed comparison to prior imaging findings, noting changes or stability.","The higher activation examples often involve detailed comparisons to prior imaging findings, specifically noting changes or stability with explicit comparisons made, including imaging dates. These examples highlight the presence of new findings or affirm that findings remain unchanged compared to prior studies, with continued reference to prior imaging and its results.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+7994,latent_7994,2210,0.00442,0.007118017,8.741757,"Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and lungs without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","The examples show consistent patterns in the text regarding findings on the chest radiograph. Specifically, examples with high activation levels often describe the heart and mediastinal silhouette as normal, and lungs without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax even when other aspects like silhouette enlargement or artifacts are present. This normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung description reflect a repetitive template used in the outputs, despite changes in the other comparison findings.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7395833333333333,0.74,0.7608695652173914,0.7,100.0,100.0
+7995,latent_7995,33055,0.06611,0.038935613,6.097931,Assessment of interval change in medical device positioning or pulmonary findings.,"These examples primarily describe changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging, focusing heavily on positioning and changes of medical devices (e.g., tubes, lines, catheters), and interval changes in pulmonary conditions, often with repeated descriptions and comparisons drawing attention to interval change.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6413628212791392,0.655,0.6115107913669064,0.85,100.0,100.0
+7996,latent_7996,6251,0.012502,0.016021857,5.4360037,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior radiographic images.,"These examples emphasize the comparison with prior studies and typically involve cases with specific indications or findings that need to be evaluated for change over time, such as stability or interval change. The use of 'prior frontal image' and explicit comparison indicates a focus on longitudinal assessment.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,100.0,100.0
+7997,latent_7997,4298,0.008596,0.010156524,5.034524,Presence of tortuous thoracic aorta.,Examples with high activation levels consistently detail the presence of a tortuous thoracic aorta as a distinctive radiographic finding. This finding is noteworthy because it is less commonly highlighted in standard radiological assessments unless there is an implication or association with pathological conditions.,0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4710902752734703,0.56,0.8333333333333334,0.15,100.0,100.0
+7998,latent_7998,5386,0.010772,0.012479074,8.559001,Comparison of current and prior imaging finding changes.,"Examples with the highest activations describe a radiological evaluation process focusing on changes or stability of findings over time, frequently including descriptors like 'increased', 'unchanged', or 'resolved'. These examples focus on prior and current comparisons, highlighting the stability or changes rather than new findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,100.0
+7999,latent_7999,5229,0.010458,0.009362593,4.999812,Positions or stability of medical devices in imaging.,"Examples showing high activation levels consistently reference medical devices, like endotracheal tubes or central lines, specifically mentioning their position or stability in relation to anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina, SVC). This pattern highlights reports focusing on accurate device placement and interval evaluation of such placements in imaging studies.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.6206896551724138,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8000,latent_8000,12074,0.024148,0.020252734,4.053217,Task to describe radiology findings in comparison to a prior image.,"The pattern here specifically highlights cases where descriptions are given for radiology findings with explicit comparisons to prior images, ensuring that the assistant is tasked to describe changes seen or to affirm stability or differences in findings.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8001,latent_8001,14235,0.02847,0.022101847,4.5939145,Low lung volumes or diaphragmatic flattening.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions of low lung volumes or flattening of the diaphragms, often accompanied by terms like ""crowding of bronchovascular markings"" or ""lung volumes are low"". This appears in contexts of chronic pulmonary disease or atelectasis, indicating a pattern of interest for the model.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5135135135135135,0.19,100.0,100.0
+8002,latent_8002,13220,0.02644,0.027456816,5.074255,Analysis requires description of current and prior images for comparison.,"The highly activated examples consistently ask for a description of findings in the context of both current and prior images. They explicitly include both current observations and alignments or changes against previous imaging, matching the pattern of comparative evaluation in radiology.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8003,latent_8003,1822,0.003644,0.0066474807,6.584791,Comparison to prior imaging revealing stable findings.,"Highly activated examples feature references to comparisons with prior imaging studies and specific findings like normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes or other stable features, indicating a pattern of reporting consistency or non-progression, often highlighting unchanged findings as indicators of no new pathology.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4222222222222222,0.19,100.0,100.0
+8004,latent_8004,6312,0.012624,0.016278995,3.4738734,Clear comparative analysis with current and prior reports using both frontal and lateral images.,"The examples with higher activation levels usually provide clear conclusions by comparing current and prior images, without missing information such as a 'Prior Report'. This technique is emphasized in reports that require detailed comparison and utilize 'PA and lateral' views to identify changes.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4895833333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8005,latent_8005,20723,0.041446,0.043668613,5.8503914,"Comparisons indicating stability or change in pleural effusion, atelectasis, and cardiomegaly.","Each example involves a comparison with previous imaging, often highlighting stability or change in lung and pleural findings, particularly emphasizing pleural effusions, atelectasis, and cardiomegaly. These consistent themes in follow-up and evaluation of radiographic changes align with the pattern of referencing and describing changes over time in serial imaging.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6449911247781195,0.645,0.6464646464646465,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8006,latent_8006,2883,0.005766,0.010324227,4.9593205,Evaluation of respiratory symptoms in comparison with prior images.,"Examples that describe findings in comparison to previous exams and include an indication or history focusing on respiratory symptoms like dyspnea, cough, or pneumonia evaluation have high activation levels. The pattern indicates reports emphasizing respiratory symptoms while considering stability or changes in pathology across multiple exams.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4557791537667698,0.4673366834170854,0.4728682170542636,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+8007,latent_8007,34180,0.06836,0.030774858,4.455753,Specific findings of change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Reports with higher activation levels specifically indicate findings of change or the absence of significant change when compared to prior radiological studies. These examples often explicitly mention comparisons like 'compared to prior', 'stable impression', or describe changes or stability in specific findings such as effusions, opacities, or device positioning.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6246350223508437,0.6331658291457286,0.6046511627906976,0.78,100.0,99.0
+8008,latent_8008,10039,0.020078,0.023576407,7.5796595,Assessment of lung and pleural conditions via comparison.,"The examples consistently highlight the evaluation for changes in lung or pleural conditions, such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or pneumonia, often in the context of a comparison to prior imaging. This indicates a focus on tracking and assessing the status or progression of lung-related pathologies over time.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8009,latent_8009,5826,0.011652,0.009871731,4.76789,Comparison with previous images identifying new findings or changes.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve the use of image comparisons, particularly focusing on identifying and describing new or suspicious findings compared to prior imaging. These cases often require specific attention to changes over time or new presentations, which is a typical pattern in radiological assessments where progression or regression of abnormal findings is evaluated.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,100.0,100.0
+8010,latent_8010,4212,0.008424,0.009287929,4.1397777,Detailed comparisons between current and prior images to assess for changes.,"The examples consistently involve thorough comparisons with prior imaging and emphasize noting interval changes or lack thereof. Textual requests are frequently aligned with identifying subtle changes or stability across consecutive images, specifically in relation to medical devices, pathologies, and lung findings such as effusions or opacities.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8011,latent_8011,4736,0.009472,0.009623684,6.148957,Comprehensive description of radiological findings related to prior images.,The examples with higher activations consistently provide detailed observations and comparisons of current and prior radiological findings. The prompt consistently asks for descriptions of findings in relation to previous observations even when specific comparisons are explicitly absent. This suggests a pattern where comprehensive descriptions of radiological findings without omitting or assuming details is valued.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4274277317524258,0.435,0.4471544715447154,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8012,latent_8012,44904,0.089808,0.058589637,6.538114,Stable or improved radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,Most examples show radiological comparisons which highlight outcomes like decreased opacities or stability in conditions where the findings demonstrate improvement or non-progression in certain abnormalities. This stabilization or improvement pattern is a common feature in these radiological reports.,0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5721744471744472,0.5778894472361809,0.6052631578947368,0.46,100.0,99.0
+8013,latent_8013,5134,0.010268,0.008368626,4.907489,Comparison of device positions or lung volumes changes between current and prior imaging.,"Many examples have a consistent pattern that compares findings from current and prior studies, especially focusing on changes in lung volumes or in the position of tubes or medical devices. They often involve medical interventions where a device's presence or position has changed since a previous study, such as extubation or removal of tubes, which is explicitly noted as a change.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8014,latent_8014,36508,0.073016,0.04585462,7.44451,Observational notes on the position or condition of procedural medical devices in comparison with previous radiographs.,"The examples detail changes, or the absence thereof, in procedural medical devices such as tubes or catheters as compared to prior studies. Monitoring and support devices are often central in the language of these examples, emphasizing their unchanged position or corrected placement.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7448405253283302,0.745,0.7264150943396226,0.7777777777777778,99.0,101.0
+8015,latent_8015,25950,0.0519,0.032925077,4.51147,Emphasis on unchanged stability of previous pathological findings.,Highly activated examples frequently describe the presence of previous findings or pathologies that remain unchanged or stable over time. This emphasizes stability in the observed findings rather than noting new or acute changes.,0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5357142857142857,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8016,latent_8016,2854,0.005708,0.0069085495,5.4537754,Noting interval changes in radiographic findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed involves descriptions of radiological findings as compared to prior radiological examinations. The emphasis is on reaching conclusions based on intervals or changes between current and previous images, which is reflected in the examples with higher activation levels.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4805194805194805,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8017,latent_8017,7125,0.01425,0.013940994,4.464354,Comparison of current chest images with prior imaging for stability or change.,"In these examples, the pattern is the presence of detailed descriptions addressing both current and previous imaging. The reports often describe findings such as unchanged features, stability of findings over time, or comparison tethered to previous imaging studies, specifically focusing on chest-related topics with normal or unchanged impressions where available images are specified.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8018,latent_8018,17466,0.034932,0.017238207,5.0773106,Clear identification of changes or findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe clear identification or changes in findings between the current and prior images. These changes can include details about device placement, changes in opacities, lesions, or specific disease indicators. Lower activation levels often indicate a lack of changes when compared to prior studies or do not specify the differences in diagnostic implications from previous images.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8019,latent_8019,28435,0.05687,0.04471961,5.192257,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation consistently refer to a specific finding on imaging and indicate stability or lack of change compared to prior studies. Common phrases like 'unchanged' or 'stable' from prior exams are used to describe findings, which is typical in radiology reports monitoring ongoing conditions over multiple imaging sessions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8020,latent_8020,16991,0.033982,0.0151519645,3.589274,"Comparison focusing on cardiac silhouette, aorta findings, and changes in opacities.","Samples with higher activation describe findings that relate to structures and conditions often detailed in chest radiographs, such as cardiomediastinal contours, pleural effusion, and pneumothorax, but specifically highlight the status of the cardiac silhouette or aorta, whether enlarged, tortuous, or stable, along with any opacities, edema, or effusion.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5779816513761468,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8021,latent_8021,37955,0.07591,0.04542592,3.7715428,Stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples generally reflect unchanged or stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging. Typically, radiological reports may state the lack of significant change, growth, or development of new pathologies, which is a common assessment in follow-up examinations.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5063291139240507,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8022,latent_8022,7260,0.01452,0.010198755,3.3838668,Detection of 'interstitial abnormalities' in lung imaging.,"The pattern that aligns with the higher activation examples focuses on detecting and describing 'interstitial abnormalities' within lung imaging, specifically terms like 'interstitial opacities' or 'interstitial edema'. This pattern is clearly represented in textual descriptions of lung changes, often related to edema or fibrosis, which is prevalent even when comparison is made to prior images.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6396986570586308,0.67,0.9047619047619048,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8023,latent_8023,4865,0.00973,0.01502253,4.7422156,Explicit focus on interval changes in imaging findings.,"These examples emphasize direct comparisons between current and prior imaging to note changes, using explicit temporal markers or descriptions of change ('improved', 'new', 'unchanged'), especially for assessing treatment progress or detection of acute events.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.634771732332708,0.635,0.6285714285714286,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8024,latent_8024,15475,0.03095,0.013806324,3.6079073,Evaluation of tube or line placement between current and prior images.,"While many examples contain explicit references to prior reports, such comparisons are standard in radiology reports. However, these examples exhibit a pattern where the current and prior images include descriptions of tubes or lines (medical devices), their placement, and changes in their position, which is often highlighted when evaluating stability or issues in radiological studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5510204081632653,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8025,latent_8025,3505,0.00701,0.009377771,6.976952,Comparison with prior images for evaluating bilateral findings or acute changes.,"The examples that demonstrate higher activation levels predominantly involve clear comparative analysis between current and prior images, examining bilateral lung findings, cardiomediastinal contours, and ruling out acute changes. The focus is on confirming improvements, stability, or worsening of conditions, especially when acute processes or changes are evaluated or ruled out.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3897559023609444,0.39,0.3942307692307692,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8026,latent_8026,4907,0.009814,0.00854321,3.640785,Description of normal cardiopulmonary contours and clear lungs.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions of typical radiographic findings, especially highlighting normal features such as clear lungs, normal mediastinal and hilar contours, and absence of effusion or pneumothorax. These descriptions mirror typical phrases used in cases without acute abnormalities, helping indicate stable or benign findings.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6997297567811029,0.7,0.7127659574468085,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8027,latent_8027,3969,0.007938,0.0131169455,6.756936,Presence of 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]]' in the text.,"Examples with high activation often include the use of 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]]', which seems to indicate an emphasis on generating or referencing a prior report, possibly to juxtapose findings or contextualize current imaging analysis. This distinct representation or token distinguishes highly activated examples.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6053333333333333,0.63,0.5866666666666667,0.88,100.0,100.0
+8028,latent_8028,26305,0.05261,0.022683913,1.9890133,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels note changes or comparisons with a prior study when evaluating specific conditions or prior findings in the imaging, indicating a pattern of assessing progression or stability of abnormal findings. This includes terms like 'interval', 'stable', 'unchanged', or variations of these expressions, often linked to clinical decision-making.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6247847652334815,0.635,0.6015037593984962,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8029,latent_8029,3400,0.0068,0.0107165435,6.620735,Comparison observations with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern here is a comparison with prior imaging studies and observed interval changes. This includes specific references to previous exams, conditions, and any changes or stability noted, which is a critical aspect in radiological assessments.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8030,latent_8030,4416,0.008832,0.009579329,9.321876,Analysis involving multiple views and comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions and comparisons based on multiple views of imaging, including both frontal and lateral images, with an emphasis on reported changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies. This suggests the pattern relates to complex image analysis scenarios where both orientations are available and comparative information is significant.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5062282572101897,0.56,0.536144578313253,0.89,100.0,100.0
+8031,latent_8031,7392,0.014784,0.011785836,4.268023,Comparison of current to prior imaging focusing on interval changes.,"These examples frequently involve discussions of serial comparisons or interval changes in imaging findings, particularly with respect to pulmonary findings and pathologies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5309734513274337,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8032,latent_8032,6473,0.012946,0.014569985,5.1414576,Changes relative to previous imaging observations.,"The identified pattern involves reports describing findings where radiological assessments compare the current image to a prior image, particularly highlighting changes or stability over time. This involves comparisons to assess changes in specific features such as lung volumes, cardiomediastinal contours, or presence of opacities, using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'new since', etc.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4142824960576706,0.415,0.4205607476635514,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8033,latent_8033,15500,0.031,0.01985391,13.735388,Emphasis on interval changes from previous chest radiographs.,"This pattern indicates reports where specific findings in chest radiographs are compared to previous studies, with an emphasis on any interval change, such as in pulmonary edema or device placement, often indicating a follow-up evaluation rather than detecting new conditions. This timeline-based comparison is key in radiology.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.3939393939393939,0.6190476190476191,21.0,29.0,0.4175824175824176,0.47,0.1545454545454545,0.5666666666666667,30.0,170.0
+8034,latent_8034,3956,0.007912,0.013132427,4.9710617,Description requires comparison with previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on performing comparative analysis between current and previous radiological images. The task emphasized is to identify interval changes or stability in findings over time, highlighting differences like improvements, stability, or progression of conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4198980597561318,0.485,0.4910179640718562,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8035,latent_8035,11856,0.023712,0.017903373,5.419156,Mentions of atelectasis in the radiology report findings.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently mention atelectasis, which is a common lung condition characterized by partial collapse or incomplete inflation of the lung. This is explicitly mentioned, indicating its prominence in the findings of the given examples.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.612919737919738,0.6180904522613065,0.6578947368421053,0.5,100.0,99.0
+8036,latent_8036,4075,0.00815,0.009203832,4.7347946,Requests for description in comparison to prior image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve requests to provide descriptions of radiology findings, specifically asking for findings to be described in comparison to a prior image. The explicit request for comparative analysis highlights a key interaction with prior images, distinguishing these highly activated examples from those with lower activation.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8037,latent_8037,7414,0.014828,0.00961963,3.7572932,Comparison with previous radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability in observed medical conditions. This highlights the importance of comparative analysis over other possible explanations.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4725620020199753,0.53,0.5180722891566265,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8038,latent_8038,19512,0.039024,0.02301688,5.4717693,Reports emphasize comparison to prior studies.,"These examples explicitly reference prior studies or reports, establishing a pattern where the text seeks to provide a comparative description against previous examinations. This pattern is crucial in radiology to track changes or stability in patient conditions over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8039,latent_8039,4876,0.009752,0.010150809,5.8167543,Preambled structured comparison in complex medical conditions.,"Examples with high activation include a pre-existing preamble structure in the reports that guide very specific comparison use, particularly with previously documented, often complex medical conditions that necessitate a methodical approach for radiological comparison.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4138366809174263,0.455,0.4705882352941176,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8040,latent_8040,17940,0.03588,0.020883795,6.084256,Detection of interstitial pulmonary edema or vascular congestion signs.,"The examples with higher activations consistently mention the detection of interstitial pulmonary edema or similar vascular congestion, often identified through signs like Kerley B lines, increased interstitial markings, or pulmonary vascular congestion on radiographic studies. This pattern points to an emphasis on evaluating radiographs for indications of subtle signs of heart failure or fluid overload.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6767676767676768,0.68,0.725,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8041,latent_8041,20673,0.041346,0.03473766,4.6989,Emphasis on comparison. Specific interval changes or stabilities.,"The pattern indicates that examples with higher activations frequently include observations about specific changes in radiological findings over time, particularly related to new, improved, or unchanged conditions when compared to prior studies. This is consistent with clinical vigilance in tracking disease progression or treatment effects through imaging.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8042,latent_8042,10589,0.021178,0.011843178,6.618406,Multiple images for comparative analysis in radiology reports.,"The examples feature multiple image tags and compare current image findings with prior images. The presence of older image references indicates a pattern of comparison, contrasting with examples where only the current image is discussed.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3512511584800741,0.37,0.3253012048192771,0.7941176470588235,68.0,132.0
+8043,latent_8043,3438,0.006876,0.009261023,6.2250175,Task requires descriptive comparison with prior images or reports.,"Examples with high activation levels involve explicit instructions to compare current images to prior reports, even when specific comparison results are not initially provided. This task-oriented language likely emphasizes interpretation variation and perception, common in clinical settings requiring sequential image comparisons.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8044,latent_8044,5641,0.011282,0.008083961,5.3255067,"Comparison with immediate prior imaging, assessing changes.",The examples frequently reference comparing the results of the current radiology examination to prior imaging studies without necessarily having many prior indications available. The focus is on how the radiology report describes the status of findings in terms of stability or change compared to previous images.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3697478991596639,0.37,0.3645833333333333,0.35,100.0,100.0
+8045,latent_8045,3868,0.007736,0.0070398995,8.938223,Emphasis on unchanged status of pathologies compared to prior studies.,"The examples receiving higher activation levels provide detailed descriptions of radiological findings that emphasize the relative or minimal changes from previous studies, while explicitly noting stability or lack of new pathologies, such as unchanged pleural effusions or atelectasis. The reports also often explicitly mention multiple prior studies or specific intervals to highlight the consistent role of comparison in evaluation.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8046,latent_8046,6937,0.013874,0.015413469,4.398941,Comparison with prior images involving both frontal and lateral views.,"The examples show that both ""comparison"" and ""prior image"" phrases are crucial for understanding the activation pattern, suggesting a focus on finding differences between current images and previous images. Additionally, the presence of both views (frontal and lateral) alongside a request to compare these with prior imaging seems to be important for generating detailed descriptions.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6249906247656192,0.625,0.6237623762376238,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8047,latent_8047,4818,0.009636,0.011946168,5.730384,Reports structured to describe findings from current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels require descriptions based on a series of given images, namely a current frontal image, current lateral image, and a prior frontal image. This task structure likely distinguishes these examples with higher activation levels.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4568578419510096,0.495,0.4967320261437908,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8048,latent_8048,4439,0.008878,0.01382002,6.012841,Emphasis on changes or stability between current and prior images.,The examples mostly describing comparison with prior imaging and indicate specific changes or stability in findings over time are given higher activations. This suggests the pattern favors not just any comparison but those with explicit material comparison data or modifications noted. This distinguishes it from examples where the comparison is mentioned but with no significant emphasis on change or stability over time.,0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8049,latent_8049,5643,0.011286,0.010541659,4.921139,Reports include both frontal and lateral chest views.,"The pattern observed is consistent mention of both frontal and lateral chest radiographs or views. These examples highlight reports that include both frontal and lateral imaging techniques, providing a comprehensive view of the chest, which suggests a thorough examination in comparison to previous studies.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,100.0,100.0
+8050,latent_8050,15693,0.031386,0.016884862,2.7384903,Explicitly stated 'None' or 'N/A' for comparison with prior images.,"In these examples, a common phrase structure is used to prompt a comparison with prior images, but the specific differences or comparisons are often explicitly stated as 'none' or 'N/A'. This lack of specified comparison constrains the assistant's role to general observation of findings without detailed historical comparison.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4385964912280701,0.25,100.0,100.0
+8051,latent_8051,4491,0.008982,0.012449489,6.4435315,Description of stable findings across comparative imaging studies.,"Most examples show comparison with previous studies or observations of stable pathological findings across exams, regardless of whether the findings relate to tubes, lesions, or overall lung conditions. Stability against a baseline is often noted in these reports, indicating a pattern of monitoring existing conditions rather than diagnosing new ones.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4507042253521127,0.32,100.0,100.0
+8052,latent_8052,4017,0.008034,0.009265752,4.8552585,Detailed comparison with prior imaging focusing on progression or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve deeper analysis or multiple comparative elements across previous imaging, such as tracking changes over time, while all explicitly reference prior imaging for comparison but are not directly describing simple findings as the lower activation examples do.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.376832188626615,0.4020100502512563,0.3389830508474576,0.2,100.0,99.0
+8053,latent_8053,8420,0.01684,0.01125602,6.1605206,Stable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes.,"The highly activated examples tend to focus on the stability or consistency of the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes in the presence of various factors. The reports often mention the lack of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging, specifically noting 'The cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes are stable.' This reflects patterns commonly highlighted in follow-up imaging where consistency over time suggests a lack of acute conditions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6245400615754299,0.625,0.616822429906542,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8054,latent_8054,3826,0.007652,0.010371356,7.3325815,Comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently request specific findings compared to prior images, reflecting a typical radiologic practice of evaluating changes over time to assess disease progression or stability. The format includes references to prior studies, dates, and detailed image descriptions for comparison.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8055,latent_8055,20142,0.040284,0.02582448,3.1216624,Comparison to prior imaging studies with stable findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve chest imaging that is compared to prior studies, often focusing on findings that have either not changed or show improvement, such as stable disease, unchanged cardiomediastinal contours, or the resolution of prior abnormalities. The presence of comparison with prior imaging and stability of findings seem central to the pattern.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8056,latent_8056,39223,0.078446,0.03697771,3.9393632,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples frequently note whether conditions or findings are unchanged compared to prior studies. This pattern emphasizes stability in radiological findings, often indicating no progression or improvement in a condition, such as unchanged tube position, catheter placement, or opacities.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5362715298885512,0.5376884422110553,0.5393258426966292,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+8057,latent_8057,2994,0.005988,0.0075444896,5.455735,Recognizing changes in medical device positions or cardiothoracic structures upon image comparison.,"Samples related to finding changes in medical devices or cardiothoracic contours upon comparison with previous imaging. Common elements include consistency or changes in device positions, pleural or pulmonary status, and no new acute issues. High activations focus on specific comparisons causing change recognition, especially in devices or sternal hardware, revealing a pattern of device or structure change detection.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5544554455445545,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8058,latent_8058,4906,0.009812,0.010158999,4.554334,"Descriptive assessment beyond basic findings, indicating additional monitoring or conditions.","This pattern involves comprehensive radiological descriptions that account for components beyond routine observations, providing details on structures like ports, devices, scoliosis, or streaky lucencies, often indicative of additional conditions like pneumomediastinum or monitoring status post-procedures.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3723481710225703,0.375,0.3563218390804598,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8059,latent_8059,3716,0.007432,0.0075679985,6.995576,Focus on describing current findings without prior comparison reference.,"Examples with high activation typically ask for a description of findings in current and prior radiological images without having any prior comparison available. These tasks emphasize the identification of findings purely from current observations, lacking explicit prior studies to guide comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5344827586206896,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8060,latent_8060,5199,0.010398,0.0121109765,6.5365458,Comparison of radiology findings with prior images shows significant changes or stability.,"The high activation examples involve detailed descriptions of radiology findings as compared to previous imaging studies, which is a common reporting pattern to track changes or stability over time. This implies that the pattern being identified involves significant findings in contrast to previous images.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5063291139240507,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8061,latent_8061,6102,0.012204,0.012930941,7.467857,Comparison to prior imaging showing unchanged findings.,"Higher activation levels correspond to examples which commonly mention a comparison to an earlier radiograph with mostly unchanged findings. Patterns of stability or minimal change since previous exams are frequently addressed, indicating stable conditions or minimal progression of existing pathologies.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.4406779661016949,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8062,latent_8062,2945,0.00589,0.009277109,5.9114037,Use of 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]]' indicating structured report continuation.,"The highly activated examples contain structured report sections indicating a continuation from a prior report, usually signified by arrangements like 'PRIOR_RE [[PORT]]', indicating missed information or sections needing extraction from a continued report. This structured format is key to the observed activation pattern.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6113880206133311,0.655,0.592814371257485,0.99,100.0,100.0
+8063,latent_8063,6439,0.012878,0.009500533,4.58949,Emphasis on changes or stability in medical devices between studies.,"The identified pattern involves reporting changes or stability in medical devices, anatomical changes, or pathologies based on current versus prior imaging studies. Reports frequently mention 'removal' or 'placement' of medical tubes or devices, demonstrating a common linguistic pattern signifying a focus on procedural changes or stability over time.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8064,latent_8064,8802,0.017604,0.01401599,3.2951999,Focus on describing current image findings without prior comparison.,The highly activated examples consistently feature comprehension of visual data and explicitly provide observations regarding the current image without any reliance on prior imaging. They focus on describing the current findings without comparative narrative or omission of previous imaging details.,0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6874684948079444,0.69,0.7317073170731707,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8065,latent_8065,18686,0.037372,0.018448904,4.1756983,Thoracic aortic tortuosity or elongation in imaging findings.,"The examples showing higher activation tend to have references to the presence of thoracic aortic tortuosity or elongation, whether explicitly mentioned or implied in findings or impressions. These examples are consistent with conditions that would highlight unusual configurations or assessments of the descending or ascending thoracic aorta.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4324942791762013,0.535,0.7333333333333333,0.11,100.0,100.0
+8066,latent_8066,5248,0.010496,0.018167337,6.9493423,Comparison of interval changes or stability in lung abnormalities.,"Reports with high activation frequently feature narratives that describe interval changes or stability in lung abnormalities, particularly regarding pulmonary opacities (e.g., atelectasis, pneumonia, pleural effusion) in comparison to previous examinations. These reports focus significantly on the dynamic assessment of pulmonary findings over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4794520547945205,0.35,100.0,100.0
+8067,latent_8067,22231,0.044462,0.028623939,5.3778634,Stability or change in medical imaging findings compared to prior scans.,"Examples frequently exhibit comparison of current and prior imaging, with resulting reports identifying stability or changes in findings. This historical comparison in the report is consistently highlighted, indicating the pattern is related to the use of comparative analysis over time rather than immediate static findings.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4818181818181818,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8068,latent_8068,87370,0.17474,0.087534755,3.5369618,Comparison of medical device positioning to prior images.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern have an emphasis on evaluating or describing changes in medical devices and anatomical changes by comparing them to previous radiographic images. This involves observing stability or alterations in the positioning and condition of devices like catheters, tubes, PICC lines, and others, relative to prior imaging.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.59375,0.61,0.6833333333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8069,latent_8069,60638,0.121276,0.06569365,4.170212,Stable or changed findings relative to a prior imaging study.,"The data includes radiology examination findings highly focused on instances where abnormalities are stable relative to prior imaging studies, or findings have changed. Comparisons are drawn using phrases such as 'unchanged', 'compared to...', 'improved', 'persistent', reflecting an analysis or discussion about changes or stability between the current exam and a previous one.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8070,latent_8070,10827,0.021654,0.01896732,7.113779,Comparison of current images to prior images for interval changes.,"Reports with higher activation levels frequently mention the presence of comparisons between current and prior images to assess changes in pathology, particularly to note interval changes in condition. This comparison reveals understanding of interval changes, which is a critical aspect of any follow-up imaging study.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8071,latent_8071,4487,0.008974,0.0142889805,5.358212,Reports involving findings of pulmonary edema or related changes.,"The highly representative examples consistently describe and reference findings related to pulmonary conditions, specifically mentioning pulmonary edema as a recurrent theme. These instances involve changes or references to changes in the pulmonary structures, fluid levels, or pulmonary conditions that directly involve fluid or structural anomalies in the lungs.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.8888888888888888,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.640608875128999,0.6482412060301508,0.7142857142857143,0.5,100.0,99.0
+8072,latent_8072,32319,0.064638,0.027878212,2.7187135,Explicit comparisons to previous imaging for stability or change in conditions or devices.,"The examples in this set with higher activation levels all describe radiological findings that compare current images to prior ones, emphasizing the stability or change of specific medical conditions or device placements. The pattern involves specific mention of changes or stability in device placements or pathologies compared to earlier imaging studies.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5626666666666666,0.59,0.56,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8073,latent_8073,35851,0.071702,0.038472574,7.662374,Changes in medical device placement/status from prior images.,"Activations are higher for examples that describe changes in the placement or status of medical devices like tubes or catheters, often in comparison with previous images if available. This points to a radiological pattern focused on evaluating the positioning or changes in medical devices, as well as any complications arising from them.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6721709567751335,0.73,0.4246575342465753,0.7209302325581395,43.0,157.0
+8074,latent_8074,23056,0.046112,0.029491588,3.6764038,Multiple image views with reference to prior comparison showing stable or minor changes.,"The pattern seems to involve both the presence of multiple types of images, i.e. both frontal and lateral views of the chest, and comparisons to prior imaging reports. However, various examples show stable findings or minor changes, and higher activations happen often when there is a more distinct improvement or change compared with prior imaging, particularly when examples involve both a current and a comparison element.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4263285024154589,0.43,0.4396551724137931,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8075,latent_8075,5782,0.011564,0.010487907,4.445773,Tasks require comparison with prior frontal image findings.,"The examples consistently reference providing descriptions of findings in the current images compared to prior frontal images, focusing on requesting a direct comparison.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,0.5681818181818182,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4763814616755793,0.53,0.5182926829268293,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8076,latent_8076,12079,0.024158,0.013259068,4.2345476,Low lung volumes reported in chest imaging.,"The pattern in highly activated examples involves references to low lung volumes. Specifically, the reports describe low lung volumes as a notable finding which often influences the interpretation of other chest findings, like highlighting cardiac size or altering appearance.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5024458420684835,0.555,0.6571428571428571,0.23,100.0,100.0
+8077,latent_8077,12551,0.025102,0.013833283,4.1839423,Emphasis on interval changes in radiology comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on describing interval changes between current and previous imaging studies, often noting specific changes or stability in findings such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or device positions. The emphasis is on comparative analysis.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.684044233807267,0.685,0.6666666666666666,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8078,latent_8078,7990,0.01598,0.015623596,5.612406,Use of multiple imaging views and comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with activations above 4.0 focus on a combination of reporting multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) and direct references to prior studies for comparison, evaluating changes over time.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4091067083767813,0.49,0.4942528735632184,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8079,latent_8079,20737,0.041474,0.015589899,2.1442568,Unchanged cardiac silhouette amidst other changes over time.,"These examples consistently describe radiological findings in comparison to prior studies, but with specific emphasis on unchanged cardiac silhouette or cardiomediastinal contours, even when other changes or medical interventions are noted. This pattern arises in reports focusing on cardiovascular stability amidst other changes.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4153846153846154,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8080,latent_8080,19903,0.039806,0.021942142,4.2235713,No acute changes or pathologies compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern indicated by these examples is the absence of acute changes or pathologies in radiographic findings compared to prior exams. The reports often describe stability or lack of new acute issues despite potentially chronic findings being present, as observed through phrases like 'no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax', 'no acute osseous abnormalities', and 'stable cardiomediastinal silhouette'. This is reflected in the reports' overall impressions indicating no acute pathologies.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6185567010309279,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8081,latent_8081,28093,0.056186,0.03138715,6.6819377,Descriptions include explicit comparison to prior studies or stability assessment.,"Examples with the higher activation levels frequently incorporate a comparison element explicitly referring to prior images or reports, identifying changes or stability over time. These entries explicitly call out the radiological examination's purpose related to prior results, signify expiration of findings, or describe clinical undertone by noting consistent or improved conditions.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4206896551724138,0.7530864197530864,81.0,119.0
+8082,latent_8082,7413,0.014826,0.018610066,6.0284553,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior images noting stability.,"This set of examples often includes reference to multiple imaging views (current frontal and lateral views), alongside previous images. The pattern emphasizes a comprehensive evaluation involving comparison with prior frontal imaging, often noting the absence of acute changes, which indicates stability or unchanged conditions.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4629629629629629,0.25,100.0,100.0
+8083,latent_8083,16850,0.0337,0.020358004,4.3001533,Normal cardiac silhouette and clear lungs without effusion or pneumothorax.,"The pattern identified involves reports of clear lungs, absence of effusion or pneumothorax, and normal cardiac silhouettes. High activation samples consistently mention these observations, indicating a focus on reporting stable, unremarkable findings in lung and cardiac evaluations.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7580401250126021,0.76,0.7203389830508474,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8084,latent_8084,56792,0.113584,0.14000799,4.8066254,Comparison with prior studies to assess stability or changes in findings.,"The examples are focusing on findings described in current imaging in relation to prior studies, highlighting changes or stability. They include assessments of conditions based on stability, changes, or intervals mentioned from previous reports, especially related to cardiothoracic features, lung conditions, and other notable comparisons.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8085,latent_8085,3821,0.007642,0.006742805,3.8311439,Normal cardiac mediastinal and hilar contours compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation focus on details about the cardiac mediastinal and hilar contours being normal or unchanged, in conjunction with a comparative analysis of the prior imaging.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.2,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.46,0.23,100.0,100.0
+8086,latent_8086,5086,0.010172,0.005026852,3.7560844,Comparison with previous radiological findings.,"High activations correlate with descriptions that explicitly identify or compare with previous radiological findings, such as stable, unchanged, or interval improvement/worsening. These reports often have words like 'unchanged', 'previously', 'no new', or specific comparison dates, emphasizing the continuity or change in patient's condition over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4900662251655629,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8087,latent_8087,3556,0.007112,0.009303201,7.2749915,Comparative analysis with specific prior imaging or reports.,"The provided examples consistently refer to comparisons between current images and specific prior images or reports. The presence of descriptive comparative analysis between repeated imaging studies helps in tracking changes over time, which is central to these examples' high activation. Terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged since', and 'compared with prior imaging' often appear in these contexts, emphasizing both stability and change of findings over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3329228243021346,0.35,0.3863636363636363,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8088,latent_8088,17149,0.034298,0.029588137,5.6509027,Observations of interval changes on sequential imaging.,"High activation levels occur in reports that involve detailed descriptions of changes in radiological findings over time, often noting specific changes (e.g., worsening or improvement of opacities, intervals of device placement or removal) with explicit comparisons to prior imaging.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8089,latent_8089,8689,0.017378,0.016088204,2.9489093,Comparison to prior imaging to assess changes in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels are predominantly requests for comparison to prior imaging or notes about changes in current images relative to past ones. These examples often include detailed instructions on image analysis, emphasizing changes, differences, or stability in findings.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4233343630933992,0.44,0.4552238805970149,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8090,latent_8090,6828,0.013656,0.009518111,6.085169,Observations from comparing current and prior frontal images regarding changes in findings.,"The highly activated examples involve cases where comparisons between current and prior frontal images are explicitly analyzed to determine changes in conditions. This often involves describing the stability or changes in findings such as heart size, pleural effusion, or airspace opacity. The comparison plays a critical role in determining the findings.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.474671669793621,0.475,0.4761904761904761,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8091,latent_8091,21650,0.0433,0.025044657,3.5027585,Clear lungs and cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"The comparison element is present in all examples, but the ones with activation involve the lung fields being mostly clear of consolidation, fibrosis, or significant opacities. These examples focus on the absence of certain conditions rather than prominently identifying conditions, with languages such as 'no focal consolidation', 'lungs are clear', 'unchanged', and 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette'.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5195982094115078,0.56,0.6428571428571429,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8092,latent_8092,2817,0.005634,0.0076534143,4.3530817,Comparison of current and prior chest images with mediastinal or pleural changes.,"The pattern here is specifically related to the comparison of current imaging to prior images, with findings on these comparisons often highlighting stability or changes in pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or mediastinal contours, combined with conditions often seen in post-operative or critical care settings.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5146966854283928,0.515,0.5142857142857142,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8093,latent_8093,24852,0.049704,0.032977168,5.2992983,"Findings explicitly compared to prior imaging, indicating interval changes or stability.","Radiology reports with higher activation consistently involve detailed descriptions of the findings using language indicative of 'comparison' between current and prior imaging studies, particularly when specific differences are noted or unchanged findings are emphasized. Examples stress individual changes, intervals, or stability of features between studies, often with explicit mention of prior reports or direct result comparisons.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8094,latent_8094,4891,0.009782,0.009667038,8.009051,Stable or unchanged features compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels exhibit a focus on comparing findings to prior imaging studies, specifically highlighting unchanged or stable features. Reports consistently mention stable size or unchanged condition of particular features (e.g., cardiac silhouette, pleural effusion, lung opacities) upon comparison with past studies.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4441768097373478,0.4522613065326633,0.4342105263157895,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+8095,latent_8095,5614,0.011228,0.007398099,3.4396887,Stable cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours across multiple image views.,"These examples represent use of multiple image views (frontal and lateral) compared to prior images to evaluate interval changes, incorporating imaging findings with a stable or normal cardiac silhouette, hilar or mediastinal contours, and emphasis on any lack of acute or significant change. This pattern captures a stable condition across multiple imaging perspectives and histories.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.4347826086956521,0.2,100.0,100.0
+8096,latent_8096,3707,0.007414,0.007838278,4.8233232,Evaluation of findings in comparison to prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly focus on cases where findings are described in comparison to prior frontal images. This use of comparison with previous images is critical in radiology reports to ascertain changes or stability in patient condition, such as evaluating for pneumothorax, effusion, consolidation, or specific pathologies.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3883477679833466,0.405,0.4285714285714285,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8097,latent_8097,13704,0.027408,0.025026876,4.5934577,Explicit comparisons of findings with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Scenarios with high activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons between current and previous images, often indicating changes or stability in specific clinical findings. The verbatim use of phrases like ""As compared to the previous radiograph"" to emphasize changes, either minor or noteworthy, helps distinguish these patterns from those that lack such comparative details.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6093337556752191,0.63,0.589041095890411,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8098,latent_8098,6049,0.012098,0.009271999,5.465183,Lack of available comparison images despite indicating a need for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels often lack an available previous study or indicate non-specific or incomplete information, particularly regarding comparison to prior imaging. This pattern emphasizes situations where comparison details are inadequately provided or are entirely missing, despite indicating a prior study should be referenced.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8099,latent_8099,3463,0.006926,0.008372785,5.96062,Comparison of findings with previous images to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve cases where radiologic findings are compared to previous images or reports, specifically noting and describing changes or lack thereof between the current and prior examinations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4245117262101805,0.435,0.4488188976377952,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8100,latent_8100,5411,0.010822,0.009572514,4.8926682,Evaluation of changes in medical devices and pathological states compared to prior.,"Many examples describe a comparison of current radiographic images to prior studies, with specific mention of changes or stability in medical devices like tubes and catheters (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube) or comment on stable pathological findings. This pattern is common in radiological reports involving evaluations for any changes in medical device positioning or pathological states within the chest.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8101,latent_8101,27893,0.055786,0.030957423,4.2750597,Normal cardiac silhouette despite other imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve a normal cardiac silhouette or heart size within the context of evaluating other potential pathologies in the imaging study. This pattern highlights the emphasis on confirming cardiac normalcy amidst evaluating other conditions, often seen in radiological reports that analyze multiple aspects of the thoracic cavity.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5719070282793182,0.575,0.5903614457831325,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8102,latent_8102,9794,0.019588,0.011773067,4.5520544,Change in findings or condition between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels mention the reassessment or new findings suggesting a change in the clinical condition, such as repositioning of tubes, development or progression of opacities, or changes in pleural effusion opinions between current and prior imaging, indicating an emphasis on identifying changes or potential clinical concerns.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+8103,latent_8103,20875,0.04175,0.02453349,4.6240606,Comparison to prior imaging with no new findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve the presence of prior imaging for comparison and explicitly request a description of the findings, yet they report that no new or acute changes have occurred in the findings described.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.589583605273463,0.6030150753768844,0.6666666666666666,0.42,100.0,99.0
+8104,latent_8104,19353,0.038706,0.022053184,6.131739,"Reassessment of medical supports (e.g., ET tube, PICC line) with stability or minimal change.","Higher activations correspond to descriptions indicating medical devices or support hardware, specifically tracheostomy tubes, PICCs, or other lines that have been reassessed for changes while emphasizing stability or few changes compared to previous imaging.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8105,latent_8105,3518,0.007036,0.007774689,5.3063064,"Radiology findings in comparison to prior studies, focusing on device positions or interventions.","These examples typically contain references to comparison with prior imaging studies and often focus on changes related to interventions or device placements, such as tube or catheter positioning, which are typical concerns in interval assessments. The repeated pattern includes descriptions of stable versus changed findings, particularly around interventions.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4925373134328358,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8106,latent_8106,3891,0.007782,0.008404966,6.0913157,Reports indicating significant interval changes or stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"All examples with higher activation levels indicate significant interval changes or stable findings of previously noted conditions when assessing patients over time using imaging comparisons. Notably, phrases indicate stability ('unchanged') or interval development ('development of a new opacity').",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8107,latent_8107,6596,0.013192,0.011159813,6.930905,Comparison of current and prior imaging showing interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature descriptions comparing current radiological findings with prior examinations, specifically where changes or stabilities in conditions like effusions, fractures, alterations in opacities, lines, or tubes are noted.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8108,latent_8108,32646,0.065292,0.030100148,4.714913,Describing interval changes or stability compared to previous images.,"These examples indicate descriptions of interval change or stability in radiological findings when compared to prior imaging. This commonly involves statements like 'an interval increase', 'stable', 'unchanged', and comparisons to previous studies.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6713769306605324,0.675,0.6446280991735537,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8109,latent_8109,20150,0.0403,0.02620324,7.2129717,"Presence of atelectasis, pulmonary vascular congestion, or pleural effusion.","The examples that score higher activations tend to describe findings that reflect either atelectasis, pulmonary vascular congestion, or pleural effusion, often in conjunction with comparisons to prior imaging. This suggests emphasis on pathologies related to lung parenchyma and vascular markings, typically indicative of chronic pulmonary or cardiovascular conditions.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6937059074590144,0.695,0.6129032258064516,0.8539325842696629,89.0,111.0
+8110,latent_8110,41910,0.08382,0.052754488,5.631228,"Focus on stable, unchanged, or improvement in findings compared to prior imaging.","The examples with activations typically mention imaging findings in the context of some stability or regression when compared to prior studies. Common elements include terminology such as 'appears unchanged', 'stable', 'improved', and 'decreased', and the context usually suggests evaluating stability rather than acute changes.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5673038025889967,0.5678391959798995,0.5760869565217391,0.53,100.0,99.0
+8111,latent_8111,5802,0.011604,0.010797957,3.6756585,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours on comparison.,"The pattern observed in these examples involves the description of normal or stable findings in the cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours across different chest radiograph views when compared to prior images. Despite various clinical indications, the reports emphasize unremarkable or stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes, indicating a focus on confirming the lack of acute thoracic or cardiopulmonary pathology.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.6027397260273972,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8112,latent_8112,15155,0.03031,0.025879601,4.9249125,Radiology reports focusing on longitudinal stability or minimal changes over time.,"This pattern involves radiology reports where specific comparisons are made between the current imaging findings and previous studies, often emphasizing either stability or change over time, rather than just identifying or describing new findings. These reports often lack new acute changes or noted interval changes, indicating stable or improving conditions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8113,latent_8113,3965,0.00793,0.012732659,5.191705,Opacities with interval change.,"Many examples focus on changes observed in consecutive imaging related to opacities, often suggesting atelectasis, infection, edema, or aspiration. The presence and modification of opacities between current and prior evaluations are central to these patterns.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.6379310344827587,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8114,latent_8114,3665,0.00733,0.008413002,5.8498983,"Descriptions of radiology findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on interval changes or stability.","These samples with higher activation levels focus on comparing findings with previous radiographs, specifically noting any changes or the absence of change over time. Common phrasing like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' indicates a direct comparison and assessment of interval changes, which is highlighted in the given activations.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6408946498919812,0.6432160804020101,0.6260869565217392,0.72,100.0,99.0
+8115,latent_8115,4769,0.009538,0.0073430683,6.6716766,Detailed evaluation of medical device placement and changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention specific measurements and positions of medical devices or changes to them across images, such as tubes, catheters, or devices. This indicates the pattern's focus on detailed evaluation and comparison of device placement and related anatomical changes.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.6363636363636364,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8116,latent_8116,6168,0.012336,0.008745067,5.766179,Endotracheal and line placement changes compared with prior imaging.,"Examples consistently indicate comparisons between current and prior imaging, often specifying the position of the endotracheal tube or other medical devices such as enteric or PICC lines, marking changes or stability in positions over time. This indicates a high activation when procedural elements or hardware placement have notable alterations or stable observations compared to previous radiographs.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.6530612244897959,0.32,100.0,100.0
+8117,latent_8117,103502,0.207004,0.12681116,5.604005,Procedural or device changes compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with reports that provide descriptions of procedural or device changes when explicitly compared to prior images. These examples emphasize findings like Dobbhoff or thoracostomy tube positioning, adjustments, or unchanged states since prior imaging, focusing on evaluations for placements or alterations.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7049926248156204,0.705,0.7029702970297029,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8118,latent_8118,2705,0.00541,0.0038632923,4.700276,Use of both frontal and lateral image views for comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently utilize both frontal and lateral images when making comparisons to prior studies, highlighting the significance of combining different imaging angles for comprehensive evaluation. This approach allows for precise detection of interval changes in pulmonary and cardiac structures.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.550561797752809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8119,latent_8119,5866,0.011732,0.011563594,4.273534,Image comparison or change evaluation instructions in radiology reports.,"Examples consistently involve interpreting current and prior imaging studies, focusing on evaluating changes over time, especially when descriptions or instructions on how to compare the current findings with prior images are explicitly given. This pattern hinges on radiological evaluation processes that involve direct image comparisons over time, utilizing specific instructions to assess changes.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8120,latent_8120,46471,0.092942,0.060692172,7.831179,Comparison to prior images focusing on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe comparisons attempting to capture the interval change or stability of findings by directly relating newer images to older ones, implying use of past and present reference points to assess progress, improvement, or lack of change in radiological findings. References to specific changes or stability from prior reports or imaging highlight this pattern.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8121,latent_8121,26140,0.05228,0.041100137,3.8298295,Comparison of current and previous imaging findings with interval changes noted.,"Examples with higher activation levels exhibit comparisons with prior images, changes in findings between exams, and complex data such as heart size or lung conditions. This pattern of imaging comparison, indication of interval findings, and adjustments or emphases in reported results are consistent in more representative instances.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6625620105260508,0.665,0.6410256410256411,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8122,latent_8122,3103,0.006206,0.007801171,4.8010964,Comparison of current radiographs with prior ones.,"Examples that involve the comparison of current and prior radiographs without reference to evident changes in the current image tend to have higher activation. When there is a prior report but no described changes in the new image relative to the prior one, activations are often low.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4246260069044879,0.45,0.4647887323943662,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8123,latent_8123,23005,0.04601,0.021301653,2.8300188,Detailed comparisons to prior imaging focusing on changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed findings and comparisons made to a prior imaging study. These descriptions often mention changes to conditions, placements, or visible elements over time, indicating a pattern of temporal comparison and progression tracking in imaging reports.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.64349376114082,0.645,0.6283185840707964,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8124,latent_8124,5441,0.010882,0.013404577,3.5368373,Significant interval changes between current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include instructions to provide a comparison between current and prior images or describe interval changes. This involves noting significant shifts in findings such as effusions or other opacities based on comparisons with prior radiological images, indicating a focus on temporal change.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5227272727272727,0.23,100.0,100.0
+8125,latent_8125,5184,0.010368,0.006660148,5.043096,Detailed comparison to prior imaging or technical methodology in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation often describe changes relative to prior imaging and significant pathologies utilizing specific examination techniques. Notably, these examples commonly comment on the aorta's tortuosity or specific deformities, often relating to technical considerations of image acquisition and relevant findings like atelectasis or effusions, reinforcing the specific pattern of comparisons and detailed technical description.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8126,latent_8126,1956,0.003912,0.0072555225,9.795385,Emphasis on tube positioning and changes in comparison to previous images.,High activation levels correspond to findings where tube placements and changes are compared to previous images. The frequent mention of the position of endotracheal tubes relative to the carina and any positional changes between studies suggest a focus on tube positioning adjustments as a key observation in these instances.,0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6429918290383407,0.645,0.6705882352941176,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8127,latent_8127,3263,0.006526,0.007138975,4.757983,"Discussion of placement, removal, or adjustment of thoracic devices or catheters.","Highly activated examples frequently discuss interval changes in thoracic devices or catheters, particularly ""tube"" or ""catheter"" placement, removal, or adjustment in serial imaging. Examples focus on chest hardware, including endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, or central lines. This is contrasted with examples with lower activation levels that do not emphasize such changes.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4095587648607676,0.445,0.392156862745098,0.2,100.0,100.0
+8128,latent_8128,18376,0.036752,0.025623837,5.9124312,Absence or incompleteness of prior report comparison details.,"Examples with high activations often lack complete prior comparison information or have missing previous report details. This appears to reflect the assistant's prompt structure where the presence of adequate prior information leads to more complete and consistent pattern recognition, hence lower activation. Conversely, cases where prior comparison or detailed prior reportage is absent or less clear exhibit higher activations.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3325632139648312,0.48,0.4896907216494845,0.95,100.0,100.0
+8129,latent_8129,3691,0.007382,0.010287709,7.6992903,Interval changes in lung pathology compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on interval changes in pulmonary findings such as effusion, pneumothorax, or parenchymal opacities. They describe specific changes in lung volume, opacity, effusion, or other lung pathology compared to prior examinations, which is a common pattern in radiology reports evaluating the progression or resolution of chest pathologies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.6285714285714286,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8130,latent_8130,3439,0.006878,0.00722638,5.8956337,"Evaluation of medical ports, tubes, or catheters.","This pattern consistently features descriptions of medical ports, tubes, and catheters, mentioning positions and stability or changes since prior imaging. The text highlights evaluation of these devices, often referencing unchanged positions or adjustments.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.66996699669967,0.67,0.6666666666666666,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8131,latent_8131,38747,0.077494,0.050614517,6.4063916,"Mentions of emphysema, COPD, or pleural effusions.","Samples scoring higher activations tend to refer to emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD), or pleural effusions. These conditions involve specific lung volume and pleural characteristics that are often remarked upon in radiological assessments and are mentioned more frequently in reports with moderate activations.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8132,latent_8132,33301,0.066602,0.028589092,2.8933806,Interval changes in lung opacities or effusions compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activations contain descriptions of imaging findings indicating changes in the lung opacities or pleural effusion in relation to prior images. This pattern emphasizes the use of phrases describing alterations from previous imaging, highlighting changes or stability in pathologies rather than acute manifestations or procedural placements.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5615262980532442,0.5728643216080402,0.6119402985074627,0.41,100.0,99.0
+8133,latent_8133,5131,0.010262,0.0074783405,5.41161,Comparison with prior imaging described or implied.,"The patterns identified in this task represent imaging studies in radiological reports that compare current imaging findings with prior views, regardless of whether these prior findings are explicitly detailed or not. Many high-activation examples use language indicating a comparison with previous studies, suggesting evaluation of interval changes or stability of findings.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4048716260697828,0.435,0.4551724137931034,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8134,latent_8134,13618,0.027236,0.01318588,3.8153632,Stable findings in current imaging compared to prior study.,"These examples focus on the comparison of current and prior imaging, with specific attention to the unchanged or minimally changed state of findings. The activation is high when descriptions emphasize stability or lack of significant interval change in findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5951007186962243,0.6,0.6282051282051282,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8135,latent_8135,7634,0.015268,0.012401563,4.9750857,Concise and clear presentation of radiological findings.,"The text highlighted by higher activation levels tends to provide plain results of imaging evaluation, focusing on stating findings with brevity and clarity. High activation samples have little or no intermediate elaboration between the task description and findings, leaning towards concise declarations such as 'The heart size is normal. The mediastinal and hilar contours are normal.'",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.6438356164383562,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8136,latent_8136,4218,0.008436,0.017629856,7.5584702,Reports mention support devices and assess their position.,"Samples with higher activations consistently involve portable or AP chest views with associated lines, tubes, or devices mentioned prominently in findings, and these samples utilize the pattern of referring to and assessing the position of these support devices.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.620253164556962,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8137,latent_8137,6846,0.013692,0.00799343,8.76773,Stability or change in tubes and line positions across images.,"The sentences with higher activations focus on changes or stability in imaging findings, specifically noting the position and changes of tubes or central lines, or comparing with a previous study to note any significant interval change including unchanged findings in monitoring devices.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5736840203764587,0.705,0.2777777777777778,0.4285714285714285,35.0,165.0
+8138,latent_8138,5877,0.011754,0.0108726565,3.9814754,Language describing changes relative to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activation involves language describing changes or stability of findings compared to previous imaging studies. The reports with high activation explicitly mention the current status of certain features relative to past exams, often citing stability, improvement, or worsening of findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.575,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8139,latent_8139,5974,0.011948,0.0136304,4.8976364,"Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung clarity, assessed comparatively.","Highly activated examples consistently emphasize the normalcy of the cardiac silhouette and lung clarity, using standard radiological phrases while assessing for acute cardiopulmonary processes or infectious changes. Additionally, these examples ensure a comparative assessment using imaging. Low activation examples involve more detailed abnormal findings or complex histories, diverging from this pattern.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,100.0,100.0
+8140,latent_8140,16198,0.032396,0.017618861,3.7537565,Comparison to prior imaging noted in reports.,"The pattern involves the presence of comparison elements between current and prior imaging studies, as indicated by phrases like 'comparison with prior', 'as compared to previous', and noting interval changes. These descriptions highlight findings in relation to previous imaging, emphasizing stability or changes over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5195982094115078,0.56,0.5379746835443038,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8141,latent_8141,9195,0.01839,0.011984721,4.477141,Description of interval changes or stability upon comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature direct comparison between current and prior images focusing on descriptions of interval changes or stability in thoracic and pulmonary findings. These comparisons may mention specific timeframe intervals, indicating changes in conditions such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, pneumothorax, among others.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4248705958840739,0.425,0.422680412371134,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8142,latent_8142,7964,0.015928,0.011990146,5.821122,Discussion of tube placement or repositioning.,"Samples with high activation levels frequently describe observations that include tubes (such as feeding tubes, chest tubes, Dobbhoff tubes) and their placement. This involves evaluating whether the placement is proper or if adjustments are needed, often following procedures or surgeries. These descriptions about tube positioning are distinctively emphasized in high-activation examples.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.6379310344827587,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8143,latent_8143,37428,0.074856,0.060314365,6.168222,Documenting interval changes by comparing current to prior radiologic images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention 'comparison to prior' images while identifying interval changes from one examination to the next. This is a common aspect of follow-up radiologic study documentation, emphasizing changes over time, including interval increase/decrease in findings.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5395729141859174,0.565,0.54421768707483,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8144,latent_8144,39306,0.078612,0.036171082,3.1861134,Emphasis on stability of findings across current and prior imaging studies.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently include radiological interpretations that highlight changes between current and prior imaging studies, particularly stability or improvement in imaging findings. This pattern suggests interpretative focus or prioritization of stability comparisons across examinations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5684464070654356,0.57,0.5795454545454546,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8145,latent_8145,3622,0.007244,0.010703564,6.3663807,Comparisons between current and prior imaging findings are emphasized.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include findings compared between the current and prior images. This often includes changes, adjustments, or consistency in structures or pathologies discussed, indicating that descriptions involving comparisons of historical medical imaging are triggering activation.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4089075068746627,0.425,0.4436090225563909,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8146,latent_8146,3899,0.007798,0.0063073207,4.710831,Instructions to compare current to prior images.,"Activated examples frequently feature instructions to provide a comparison of findings from the current and prior radiology images. The pattern emphasizes an explicit task of comparison between current images and past images, often lacking specific clinical details or a direct comparison worded instruction when activation is low.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5075757575757576,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8147,latent_8147,45303,0.090606,0.04776869,2.5336926,Stable or unchanged abnormalities over serial imaging.,"Higher activation is associated with findings describing specific stability or persistence of known abnormalities like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or pulmonary nodules across multiple imaging studies rather than acute changes or new findings.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8148,latent_8148,5142,0.010284,0.005928851,4.1270494,Comparison of current and prior radiographic images for stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve analysis of current and prior radiographic images. The evaluation focuses on identifying changes and intervals between the current and prior exams using comparative terms like 'not significantly changed', 'than on previous exam', 'unchanged', and dates to ascertain stability or progression of findings. This discourse reflects a core component of comparative radiologic interpretations.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8149,latent_8149,21534,0.043068,0.022944804,3.647798,Detailed comparisons of current chest imaging findings to prior images.,"Examples show findings on chest radiographs that are directly assessed in comparison to prior images, with detailed descriptions of stability or changes. This includes commentary on cardiomediastinal silhouettes, effusions, opacities, and hardware, indicating that the pattern involves detailed comparative evaluations in radiology reports.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8150,latent_8150,34978,0.069956,0.045351706,4.8376217,Analysis of interval changes in radiological findings over time.,"Examples with high activation mention specific comparator studies or detail changes over time, indicating that tracking interval changes is the focus. High activations often involve a description of findings at two or more time points across multiple imaging modalities.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.5864661654135338,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8151,latent_8151,5769,0.011538,0.013331117,5.1486454,Short-term interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include findings that compare the current imaging with prior studies, specifically using expressions that indicate changes or stability over a short interval of time. These references often focus on changes or lack thereof in the cardiac silhouette, pleural effusions, or lung fields.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3637110016420361,0.38,0.3235294117647059,0.22,100.0,100.0
+8152,latent_8152,10558,0.021116,0.009860695,3.6482408,Comparison to prior imaging with focus on medical devices or interventions.,"The pattern involves a focus on describing findings in comparison to prior imaging studies and often includes specific radiological interventions or the presence/removal/alteration of medical devices (like tubes or stents). High activations occur in examples detailing the continuation, change, or stability of these factors over time.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5274725274725275,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8153,latent_8153,5805,0.01161,0.010528887,6.7820044,"Formal radiological comparison language using 'seen', 'not seen', 'unchanged'.","The highly activated examples focus on the description of findings in radiology using prepositions like 'seen', 'not seen', 'unchanged', or 'normal', and consistent language patterns. The descriptions typically confirm the absence or status of specific findings across multiple comparative views (e.g., frontal and lateral) without introducing major new abnormalities.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.575,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8154,latent_8154,4613,0.009226,0.023968456,7.5464725,References to comparison with prior imaging studies and unchanged findings.,"These samples are generated for comparison and evaluation against previous imaging and contain references such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from previous', 'prior study', and dates specific to past imaging. This indicates that the pattern is focused on evaluating changes or stability against earlier images.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.532258064516129,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8155,latent_8155,3149,0.006298,0.012128614,7.9161067,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette with no acute findings without significant comparison.,"Most examples with high activation involve descriptions concerning the lungs, heart size, and cardiac silhouettes without comparison imagery. Common terms include ""normal"", ""mild"" enlargement, or ""unremarkable"" features, indicating stable, non-pathological findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5920075321686369,0.61,0.6896551724137931,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8156,latent_8156,24233,0.048466,0.027838072,4.7725263,Comparison of current radiological findings with previous images.,"These examples consistently emphasize the need to compare current radiological findings with prior imaging studies. Even without explicit comparison data in the report, the task focuses on analyzing potential changes between current and previous images. This comparison-based analysis is the common thread in the higher activation examples.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.5212121212121212,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8157,latent_8157,2053,0.004106,0.00589574,5.9414577,Altered mental status as indication or part of the narrative in reports.,"The pattern consistently present in reports with high activation involves the mention of altered mental status or related neurological symptoms, often as the indication for the imaging study or within the extended narrative of the report. Such cases seem to trigger higher activation, which may imply a relationship between these symptoms and specific diagnostic focus in reports.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.539894512400404,0.59,0.7647058823529411,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8158,latent_8158,5679,0.011358,0.01615492,4.75271,Inclusion of detailed comparative assessments with prior imaging studies highlighting stable findings or positional changes.,"The examples with high activation predominantly contain comparisons of radiological findings between current and prior imaging. Moreover, these reports also highlight stable findings over time or any noted deterioration. Descriptions of positional changes or alterations in clinical radiological artifacts (e.g., tubes or consolidations) compared to previous studies are key features that elicit high activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+8159,latent_8159,3378,0.006756,0.0065615997,4.328663,Focus on interval changes or stability in radiographic findings.,"These examples focus on comparing current and prior radiographic findings to identify interval changes or stability of observed conditions. The reports commonly use phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'no relevant change,' indicating the presence of a comparative analysis approach within the reports.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8160,latent_8160,6691,0.013382,0.00866573,3.6746829,Comparison with prior frontal image alongside current lateral and frontal images.,"Examples with activation include multiple images for comparison and specifically reference findings from prior frontal images as compared to current frontal and lateral images. This indicates assessments based on changes observed between multiple images, enhancing the accuracy and richness of the analysis.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8161,latent_8161,7567,0.015134,0.019717298,6.2276797,Focus on interval changes or stability when comparing to prior images.,"Highly representative samples consistently mention the comparison with prior images, explicitly refer to specific changes or interval changes, and highlight findings that remain stable or unchanged over time. These elements indicate an emphasis on tracking changes over multiple observations, relevant in radiological assessments for evaluating progression or stability of conditions.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4745330203123405,0.4747474747474747,0.4711538461538461,0.5,98.0,100.0
+8162,latent_8162,9037,0.018074,0.012024456,6.5599146,Prompt requests findings comparison but states no prior images available.,"The pattern is that instructions indicate to provide findings in comparison to prior imaging, yet no prior comparisons are available according to the report. This inconsistency can indicate an issue with the report format or instructions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5555555555555556,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8163,latent_8163,6187,0.012374,0.017394956,5.2935386,Reference to previous reports showing interval changes or stable findings.,"Examples often refer to findings on images being compared for changes or stability, indicating a pattern of referencing previous reports, particularly those associated with acute or chronic conditions. This pattern shows how a current finding is evaluated in the context of previous changes.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4635084522724972,0.47,0.4754098360655737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8164,latent_8164,4488,0.008976,0.010532466,3.650979,Descriptive reporting without clear prior report assistance.,"The examples with high activations include scenarios where findings must be described or interpreted without direct assistance from a prior report, albeit sometimes with a comparison mentioned. AI is detecting a scenario when an explicit onus is placed on the assistant to generate observation-based descriptions or interpretations, specifically when comparison points are absent or unclear.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4704361710216184,0.4723618090452261,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,99.0
+8165,latent_8165,21480,0.04296,0.019940674,2.3863144,Fragmented or incomplete report descriptions with hidden text snippets.,"The examples with higher activation often describe the presence of prior or additional findings like hidden word snippets or fragmented text, suggesting a complex reporting pattern which is incomplete, whereas the lower activation ones generally describe complete and clear findings or are related to only normal or unchanged conditions without reporting irregularities.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3427579365079365,0.47,0.4840425531914893,0.91,100.0,100.0
+8166,latent_8166,4530,0.00906,0.006752636,5.2829256,Findings related to the placement or change of medical tubes.,"The pattern identified here is using explicit comparison to prior studies when making radiological assessments about the stability or change in findings, particularly in the context of medical devices like endotracheal, nasogastric, or chest tubes, which are mentioned frequently in many of these descriptions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5454545454545454,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8167,latent_8167,55200,0.1104,0.073370144,5.0720463,Clear lungs with stable or normal cardiac silhouette.,"In these examples, there is a recurring focus on the clarity of lung fields, and the absence of significant abnormalities like pleural effusion or pneumothorax, in conjunction with stable or normal cardiac findings. The examples highlight reports where no new or acute findings are noted, which is typical in radiological follow-ups where stability and absence of change are important.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6578099838969405,0.66,0.6904761904761905,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8168,latent_8168,9372,0.018744,0.013282946,4.999231,Comparative analysis using current frontal and lateral views against prior images.,The model's activations are higher for cases that emphasize using current frontal and lateral views compared explicitly with prior images to identify changes or consistencies in patient pathology. This approach inherently helps track disease progression or recovery in radiological assessments.,0.5875055383252105,0.6122448979591837,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8169,latent_8169,31550,0.0631,0.039202698,8.202521,Assistant provides detailed descriptions and analysis on comparison.,"Highly activated examples mention detailed descriptions of radiographic changes or interventions (such as the presence of tubes, new opacities, or changes in fluid levels) visible in current images against prior imaging. The assistant typically provides descriptions of placements, changes in condition based on comparison, and status of accessories in such comparisons, indicating specific technical assessment or procedural follow-up present in the assistant responses.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.4234234234234234,0.5802469135802469,81.0,119.0
+8170,latent_8170,4071,0.008142,0.011041315,4.3054357,"Structured format with elements: given images, prior report, comparison.","Examples with high activation levels frequently use a structured format with specific elements: mention of frontal and lateral images, a prior report, indication, and comparison. These examples are well-structured and contain multiple components that allow for a thorough evaluation in radiology reports.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4086339444115908,0.475,0.4850299401197604,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8171,latent_8171,8818,0.017636,0.010636682,3.053298,Findings compared over time to note changes in conditions.,"The examples highlight a pattern where descriptions focus on the findings in a new study are compared directly to prior radiological findings, specifically looking for changes in conditions like cardiomegaly or pleural effusion. Common terms include 'interval placement', 'unchanged', 'increased', and 'stable since', which indicate comparisons over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8172,latent_8172,5693,0.011386,0.007144211,5.5310683,Hyperinflated lungs noted in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature the mention of hyperinflated lungs, which is associated with conditions such as COPD. These reports often note hyperinflation or increased lung volumes as a key finding, drawing attention to the respiratory pathology related to this state.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.465760077707625,0.56,0.875,0.14,100.0,100.0
+8173,latent_8173,11543,0.023086,0.013325963,3.828813,Stable findings between current and prior images with emphasis on unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung clarity.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging, emphasizing unchanged or stable findings over time, particularly regarding the cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung fields. The pattern is likely in recognizing phrasing that denotes constancy or absence of new developments in specific landmarks, which is crucial in evaluating the progression of negative findings or stability in radiology.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.578125,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8174,latent_8174,21212,0.042424,0.032417558,5.3142996,Comparison with prior images for interval change evaluation.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions that involve comparison with past imaging findings, indicating a focus on interval change evaluation. The examples often provide specific details on whether the current findings are stable, worsened, or improved compared to previous exams.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8175,latent_8175,10318,0.020636,0.01625358,4.603443,Presence of acute evaluations or assessments in radiology exams.,"The examples with higher activations consistently use phrases indicating the evaluation of an acute condition or process. These include specific historical contexts or indicators such as 'assess pneumonia', 'evaluate acute process', 'r/o acute pathology', or the presence of findings that warrant immediate attention.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5983935742971888,0.61,0.582089552238806,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8176,latent_8176,38854,0.077708,0.033072285,2.5438702,Comparison in findings between current and prior imaging.,"These examples generally show radiology reports comparing the current and prior images, with a tendency to focus on pulmonary findings. Despite detailed examination of potential acute abnormalities, such as changes in pleural effusion or pneumonias, consistent radiologic findings are often unchanged between scans. Thus, the activation of these articles is not as high, as they only partially show focus on assessing differences and similarities over images, core to many clinical imaging tasks.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8177,latent_8177,8782,0.017564,0.014690679,8.333701,"Broad and detailed assessment of current images, emphasizing evaluation for pneumothorax or pneumonia, using frontal and lateral images.","Highly activated examples often include pneumothorax, pneumonia evaluation, are expansive and contain a comprehensive review combining frontal and lateral radiograph images, along with comparisons to prior imaging, provided that there is no prior comparison available, rather assessing the current image against same-day or existing findings. Main pattern is found in elaborate evaluations using multiple imaging techniques and significant terminology.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.5923076923076923,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8178,latent_8178,21388,0.042776,0.024703147,7.0459766,Focus on comparison to prior images evaluating stability or interval changes.,"The presence of phrases that explicitly compare findings to prior images, often indicating specific tools like catheters, presence of tubes, pneumothorax, or other recurring findings, matches examples with higher activation. This pattern is characteristic of radiology reports where ongoing issues or interventions are being monitored over time, necessitating direct comparison to previous states or prior exams.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.54,0.54,0.4,0.8307692307692308,65.0,135.0
+8179,latent_8179,19137,0.038274,0.024659578,4.79936,Ambiguous or indeterminate findings in radiology reports.,"The pattern involves vague or indeterminate findings, such as ""streaky opacities,"" ""atelectasis,"" or findings that ""could represent"" various conditions without definitive conclusions. The examples often mention these ambiguous findings as likely being residual changes, potential early disease, or artifacts.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5527638190954773,0.5527638190954773,0.5555555555555556,0.55,100.0,99.0
+8180,latent_8180,81682,0.163364,0.10048144,6.1124597,Emphasis on unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"The highest activation levels are associated with examples that describe correlations with prior imaging findings and emphasize unchanged or stable appearances of pathology compared to earlier studies. These examples frequently include comments on ""no significant interval change,"" ""unchanged,"" or descriptions of stability in specific conditions, such as effusions or opacities, reflecting the focus on stability or lack of change as a condition of interest.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8181,latent_8181,5601,0.011202,0.008719229,3.666864,Examples lack clear comparison and often complex imaging descriptions.,"Examples with high activation often include descriptions of both current and prior imaging views, particularly where detailed comparison information is missing, vague, or incomplete. This wave of complexity creates ambiguity that may confuse automated assessment tools, leading to higher activation scores. Examples frequently also mention multiple imaging techniques and views, such as frontal, lateral, and descriptions to indicate comparisons.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8182,latent_8182,3710,0.00742,0.01144119,9.317666,Comprehensive Evaluation with Multiple Image Comparisons and Stable Chest Contours.,"The pattern in high activation examples involves detailed descriptions of radiological studies with multiple image comparisons (frontal and lateral views), typically assessing the cardiopulmonary status and includes observations of the overall chest contours being within normal limits or stable. This pattern indicates comprehensive evaluation beyond a single view, considering the status of multiple anatomical structures.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8183,latent_8183,7495,0.01499,0.007831834,3.007901,Stable cardiac silhouette with detailed pulmonary assessments.,"Highly activated examples contain discussions of abnormalities in pulmonary vasculature or dilation, as well as mentions of cardiac dimensions mostly remaining within normal limits or stable. The reports lack significant acute cardiopulmonary processes and instead focus on stable, unchanged, or chronic findings, typically in the context of previous imaging comparisons.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.4375,0.35,100.0,100.0
+8184,latent_8184,3105,0.00621,0.0058942134,6.6063666,Stability or changes in medical devices or opacities compared to previous images.,"These examples with high activation levels describe findings related to changes or stability in the state of medical devices, surgical placements, or opacities in the lungs from one imaging study to the next. This tends to include wording around “status post” medical procedures, or specific focus on comparison of known medical conditions or devices to prior radiographs, showing a concern for interval changes (new or stable).",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6017549261083743,0.6080402010050251,0.5887096774193549,0.73,100.0,99.0
+8185,latent_8185,12319,0.024638,0.016231902,7.24804,Emphasis on stability or improvement in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations describe specific changes or improvements compared to previous images, indicating No acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities. Phrases like 'improved aeration', 'stable', or 'resolved' commonly appear, suggesting a focus on identifying when the condition of the findings on images is described as stable or improved, indicating no current acute issue.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4142857142857143,0.29,100.0,100.0
+8186,latent_8186,40921,0.081842,0.05177258,5.9442825,Variability or interval change in pleural effusions.,"Example activations correlate with findings that include assessment of pleural effusions showing variability or interval change, reflecting emphasis on pleural fluid dynamics in comparison to prior radiographic studies.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5954955687454264,0.6231155778894473,0.75,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+8187,latent_8187,5975,0.01195,0.02288109,6.365049,Comparison of medical device placement or intervention across imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss various medical interventions or tools involved with the patient, such as catheters, endotracheal tubes, or surgical implants. This suggests the pattern relates to an active comparison of medical device positions or effects over time across radiographic examinations, typically indicating clinical follow-up or monitoring.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.6197183098591549,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8188,latent_8188,10929,0.021858,0.015285978,5.24692,Focus on unchanged findings or resolution in comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss specific changes in radiological findings when comparing current images to previous ones, such as stable findings or improvements in certain areas. These reports focus on changes or the lack thereof over time, using terms like 'unchanged', 'resolution', or 'stable', and explicitly mention the comparison process which seems to be a key feature for higher activations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.574468085106383,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8189,latent_8189,3498,0.006996,0.008584057,5.012024,Evaluation of medical tube or line placement and changes between images.,"The high-activation examples tend to involve analyzing and describing the placement or changes in position of medical tubes or lines (e.g., nasal gastric tube, endotracheal tube) compared to previous images. This includes evaluating correct insertion, position, or advancements of tubes in the body, which require specific attention to comparisons between current and past imaging.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6290726817042607,0.63,0.6444444444444445,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8190,latent_8190,24053,0.048106,0.023764586,4.977179,Mentions of low lung volumes in findings.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently mention low lung volumes in the findings or impressions sections of the radiology reports, often leading to secondary observations like bronchovascular crowding or atelectasis. This recurring observation indicates that the activation pattern is likely triggered by references to low lung volumes rather than other elements such as technique or comparison.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5729166666666666,0.59,0.65,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8191,latent_8191,12355,0.02471,0.014031213,5.936742,Low lung volumes and their impact on imaging interpretation.,"These examples consistently report low lung volumes and their consequences (e.g., obscuration or misleading appearance), highlighting how reduced lung expansion can impact the visual assessment of other anatomical structures on chest X-rays.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.498663101604278,0.55,0.5476190476190477,0.2446808510638297,94.0,106.0
+8192,latent_8192,8473,0.016946,0.0062286337,2.5946043,Emphasis on interval change or comparison with prior findings in imaging reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on the adjusted interpretation of findings in comparison to prior images, especially when changes or differences in clinical significance are noted, even if subtle.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8193,latent_8193,954,0.001908,0.0016144882,4.781107,"Comparison of current images to prior for interval change, with stable findings indicated.","These examples frequently reference the findings from a set of current images compared to previous images. The focus is on detecting and describing gradual changes (or stability) in lung and heart conditions, tube placements, or other thoracic structures. Often, stable findings, unchanged tube placements, or consistent pathologies signify the pattern of interest.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3505592406538813,0.415,0.2702702702702703,0.1,100.0,100.0
+8194,latent_8194,940,0.00188,0.0015720803,3.4558303,Explicit direct comparison specifying changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activations often emphasize a direct change in findings compared to prior imaging, particularly noting worsening or improvement in specific conditions, or confirmation of device placement. This comparison is sometimes explicit within the 'IMPRESSION' section, reflecting evaluations about changes in pathologies like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pneumonia.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4016341923318667,0.405,0.388235294117647,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8195,latent_8195,1364,0.002728,0.0017961619,2.6457012,Findings interpreted relative to prior images.,"These examples show frequent emphasis on the interpretation of findings in comparison to prior images. This pattern is identified by elements specifying changes, stability, or progression of specific aspects like anatomical structures or devices through explicit mentions, earlier dates or previous exams.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5348445314198739,0.5678391959798995,0.5424836601307189,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+8196,latent_8196,1573,0.003146,0.0019573157,2.8939042,Comparison with prior imaging showing stable findings.,"The pattern with high activation levels involves explicit use of comparison with prior radiographs to identify changes or stability in the findings, but not every example with ""comparison"" reference was activated. It seems the presence of 'comparison' alongside unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size often relates to stable findings from previous reports, which drives down activation when no acute or significant changes are indicated, despite noting the comparison.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8197,latent_8197,12110,0.02422,0.009118134,1.94767,Emphasis on changes or stability in cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"Comparisons to prior images and changes or stabilities in findings related to cardiopulmonary features, such as pleural effusions, heart size, pulmonary vasculature, and vascular congestion, are prominent in samples with higher activation levels, emphasizing the focus on interval changes in these elements.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8198,latent_8198,1428,0.002856,0.001814032,3.245838,Comparing current imaging findings to prior images to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a comparison of current imaging findings against prior images and descriptions, especially when specific intervals or changes are identified or ruled out. The pattern places emphasis on identifying specific changes or stabilities over time in imaging studies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8199,latent_8199,12330,0.02466,0.012052395,2.888446,Descriptive comparison to prior imaging for assessing stability or change.,"The high-activation examples consistently reference findings in the current radiological image in comparison to prior images, both identifying stability or changes. This is a frequent approach in radiology to assess the progression or resolution of previously identified issues by contrasting them with earlier studies to determine clinical significance.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.4583333333333333,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8200,latent_8200,986,0.001972,0.0015466867,4.303616,"Focus on interval change in atelectasis, effusions, or device placement.","Examples with a high activation level typically describe follow-up imaging studies assessing interval change, focusing on changes in features such as atelectasis, effusions, and device placement. These reports often note improvements, stability, or worsening in these features compared to prior imaging, indicating the importance of these interval changes in distinguishing studies with the pattern.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5424320109945291,0.5628140703517588,0.6140350877192983,0.35,100.0,99.0
+8201,latent_8201,7523,0.015046,0.0057637477,1.9309314,Emphasis on stability or resolution in comparison to previous imaging findings.,"The pattern recognized in the examples with higher activation involves noticing and comparing changes in previous conditions or interventions noted in prior imaging studies and identifying that elements like lines, tubes, or opacities have not changed significantly or have resolved/stabilized. The focus is on descriptions that detail stability or lack of significant change from prior assessments.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6153846153846154,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8202,latent_8202,1196,0.002392,0.0018913728,4.1808395,References to interval improvement or resolution of findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples depict reports where changes or stability in condition over time are noted by comparison between current and prior radiological images. Most notably, a consistent focus is on the resolution or improvement of prior abnormalities, utilizing specific comparison language to document changes.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6884496539748206,0.695,0.7746478873239436,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8203,latent_8203,1775,0.00355,0.0020994055,2.5654175,Detailed assessment and comparison of medical device positions.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on technical descriptions involving medical devices such as endotracheal tubes (ETT), PICC lines, and comparisons of these devices' positions with prior images. They often mention their placement accuracy, any necessary adjustments, and corresponding measurements. Moreover, they emphasize specific clinical details surrounding interventions or device evaluations.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5957446808510638,0.28,100.0,100.0
+8204,latent_8204,1301,0.002602,0.0020841488,4.292116,Reports making detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies for changes.,"These examples focus on reports which make detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies, especially when evaluating changes in pathologies over time, such as stability or change in radiographic findings, often including specific signs of improvement or worsening conditions.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6093337556752191,0.63,0.589041095890411,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8205,latent_8205,998,0.001996,0.0014688906,2.564756,Presence of pacemakers or cardiac devices in X-ray findings.,"High activation examples consistently involve the presence of a pacemaker or other cardiac devices, often mentioning their position as stable or unchanged. The repeated references to pacemakers likely indicate a focus on device positioning and cardiac-related features in these reports.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6178622120318812,0.65,0.8571428571428571,0.36,100.0,100.0
+8206,latent_8206,593,0.001186,0.0014679471,3.686626,Detailed patient history and/or comparison with prior imaging.,"Prompts with higher activation levels consistently provide indications and detailed patient histories, or they describe comparison with prior radiological images. They reflect comprehensive, contextual clinical scenarios for analysis.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4267498267498267,0.4659090909090909,0.4383561643835616,0.8421052631578947,76.0,100.0
+8207,latent_8207,2168,0.004336,0.001992144,3.4356081,Description and positioning of tubes or medical devices in radiology findings.,"These examples include detailed descriptions of medical devices like tubes or catheters placed within the body, such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, or central venous catheters, specifying their position, need for adjustment, or unchanged status when compared to prior imaging. These mentions often arise in reports regarding device placement or adjustment.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4677419354838709,0.29,100.0,100.0
+8208,latent_8208,1178,0.002356,0.0017007719,3.8612576,Observed changes in placement or removal of medical tubes or lines.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe changes specifically in tubes or lines placement as seen in the radiography exams, like removal or repositioning of tubes (e.g., chest tube, venous sheath, nasogastric tube). In contrast, less activated examples tend not to focus on these specific changes.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.7857142857142857,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7740453415681253,0.775,0.7433628318584071,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8209,latent_8209,1015,0.00203,0.0018746464,4.5727334,Analysis of interval changes in imaging findings compared to previous exams.,"The relevant examples with high activation contain a description of differences or comparisons between current and previous radiographic images, highlighting changes or stability in findings. The emphasis is on specific changes or trends over time based on previous imaging studies as compared to current findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4287014333021562,0.435,0.4462809917355372,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8210,latent_8210,842,0.001684,0.0017863584,3.2905266,"Normal or unchanged heart size, mediastinal or hilar contours.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions of heart size and mediastinal or hilar contours being within normal limits or stable, even with other abnormalities present or considered.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5858562029828838,0.605,0.5734265734265734,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8211,latent_8211,9788,0.019576,0.0073287333,2.158204,Presence or position comparison of medical devices in imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently mention technical medical devices, either existing or newly inserted, such as pacemakers, endotracheal tubes, or chest drains, and compare their positioning with prior studies or note changes in their position, often in relation to the patient's clinical scenario.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8212,latent_8212,2414,0.004828,0.0024339186,4.336265,Comparison of lung volumes and aeration between current and prior images.,"These examples consistently note differences in lung volumes or indications of changes in lung aeration when comparing current and prior imaging. They specifically mention low lung volumes, changes in effusions, or related pulmonary findings as the primary comparative feature.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8213,latent_8213,5210,0.01042,0.005467869,2.497048,Direct comparison of sequential images to track changes.,Examples with high activation levels consistently discuss findings in the current image in direct comparison to prior images and include a detailed review of changes (or lack thereof) since the prior study. This pattern of reporting is used to track progress or stability of conditions over time.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8214,latent_8214,3032,0.006064,0.0029046945,2.9628804,Evaluation of changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes in findings from a previous imaging study to the current one. This pattern highlights a focus on identifying interval changes, development of new findings, or stability following a previous report.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8215,latent_8215,7185,0.01437,0.005468102,3.458686,Detailed comparison of image findings to assess changes over time.,"The highly activated examples consistently show detailed comparative descriptions in their findings section that specify changes or stability in medical imagery findings over time, particularly with attention to tubes, effusions, or known pathological entities like opacities or devices. These comparisons frequently cite detailed imaging adjustments and interpretations on positions of medical devices or size changes in opacities or effusions, reflecting careful monitoring over time.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.623428467739845,0.6331658291457286,0.5984848484848485,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+8216,latent_8216,844,0.001688,0.001341375,3.2645025,References to implanted devices or catheters in imaging reports.,"Examples which describe the presence and positioning of implanted devices or catheters, such as Port-A-Caths or pacemakers, consistently show higher activation levels, suggesting the model pattern focuses on device references when comparing images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8217,latent_8217,2916,0.005832,0.0030829955,2.701796,High detail in findings and comparison to previous imaging.,The highest activation levels are associated with detailed descriptions of chest radiographs involving multiple angles (frontal and lateral) and/or explicit comparisons with prior imaging. Comparisons and multi-angle evaluations are essential parts of monitoring changes in radiology studies over time.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4768253968253968,0.485,0.488,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8218,latent_8218,1152,0.002304,0.0017172013,4.28061,Comparison of radiologic findings with prior studies to assess changes.,"The pattern is the comparison of current and prior radiological findings, focusing on how abnormalities have changed or remained stable over time. This includes both explicit language about comparing findings to past images and discussions on changes detected in new versus prior images.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8219,latent_8219,1140,0.00228,0.0019733834,4.3178153,Description of radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These examples focus on descriptions where the findings and changes are explicitly compared to previous imaging studies. This is evident in the repeated phrase templates such as 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' and phrases involving 'unchanged', 'similar to', 'compared to', or 'interval change'.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4071596868587064,0.415,0.4308943089430894,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8220,latent_8220,5537,0.011074,0.0045363004,2.8363843,Non-acute changes or stability in interval imaging comparisons.,"Examples with activation levels greater than 2.0 primarily contain references to imaging studies comparing interval changes, assessments of non-acute differences, or stability over previous examinations. This pattern emphasizes evaluating changes or consistency in radiological findings across different time points.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8221,latent_8221,10332,0.020664,0.0075908722,1.7186261,Detailed comparison with prior radiological imaging for interval change.,"The included examples with higher activation reference detailed evaluations of changes in radiological imaging using terms like ""compared to,"" ""interval change,"" ""similar to prior,"" and dates of prior examinations. This indicates a focus on descriptions that rely on comparing current findings to previous images to assess for changes, stability, or resolution of findings.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8222,latent_8222,6805,0.01361,0.0049912394,1.7657247,Change or evaluation in position of monitoring/support devices compared to prior study.,"Examples with higher activation consistently mention changes or evaluations related to monitoring/support devices (like tubes or catheters) between current and prior studies, particularly when a notable change or an observation related to device positioning is mentioned. This suggests the model focuses on the presence and changes in such medical devices in radiographical comparisons.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8223,latent_8223,1778,0.003556,0.0020856964,3.4027832,Reports emphasizing comparisons with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The samples with higher activation levels prominently feature direct comparisons with prior imaging studies and indicate either unchanged, improved, or worsened conditions based on these comparisons. This pattern aligns with radiology reports that assess progression or stability of findings over time by referencing previous exams.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8224,latent_8224,11602,0.023204,0.008517152,1.4098532,Interval changes or comparisons in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation scores consistently describe interval changes or comparisons of findings against previous imaging studies. They detail changes such as size, appearance, or positioning of various anatomical or pathological features, suggesting that the model is focusing on radiological interpretations involving temporal changes in medical imaging.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8225,latent_8225,1004,0.002008,0.0017836147,3.7329397,Stability or unchanged findings since prior imaging comparison.,"Across the examples, a common pattern is the description of findings that are 'unchanged' since a previous exam. This includes stable appearances of various structures such as heart, lung nodules, atelectasis, or masses, often after a description of a comparison to prior studies. This is consistent because when radiology reports indicate no interval change or stability, it suggests monitoring without progression of concerning pathology.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5405405405405406,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8226,latent_8226,972,0.001944,0.0017101417,3.6193624,Precise assessment of tube placement with specific measurement references.,Examples with high activation levels often include detailed descriptions of medical tube placement with specific mention of how much they should be adjusted or their current precise position relative to anatomical landmarks. This reflects the model's recognition of precision in the context of intervention or placement evaluation in medical diagnostics.,0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6875,0.7,0.8333333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8227,latent_8227,1219,0.002438,0.0020106784,3.784042,Evaluation of tube positions in chest radiographs.,"These examples predominantly focus on the evaluation and positioning of tubes, such as endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, within the body, referencing their precise positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or stomach. This is a common radiological practice in critical care settings to ensure appropriately placed medical devices, as demonstrated by descriptions of tube positions in several examples.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8411844565690719,0.845,0.7633587786259542,1.0,100.0,100.0
+8228,latent_8228,6864,0.013728,0.0052844104,2.151919,Emphasis on interpretation through comparison with prior imaging for detailed evaluation of changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where a detailed comparison is made between current and prior linguistic patterns, particularly with clear narratives that enhance data interpretation. Additionally, these examples often involve specific radiological changes noted over time, which necessitate a deeper understanding of detailed comparisons for effectively interpreting patient progress or changes.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8229,latent_8229,1791,0.003582,0.0020322045,3.6288683,Comparison to prior imaging emphasized in analysis.,Samples with high activation levels specifically ask for findings in the current images to be described in comparison with previous images. This emphasis on comparison aligns with the nature of radiology reports where progression or stability of findings is critical.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3868916419649869,0.395,0.4146341463414634,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8230,latent_8230,1102,0.002204,0.0017602182,3.767831,Stable imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently note specific findings in relation to prior imaging studies, especially in the context of stable conditions or interval changes like resolution of edema or comparison note absence of new pathology. They focus on stability or expected changes rather than new findings.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5394736842105263,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8231,latent_8231,1679,0.003358,0.0017332723,3.432808,Comparison with prior imaging findings using explicit report references.,"Examples with high activation consistently contain references to a prior radiology report or an earlier study being explicitly compared with current findings. This includes phrases like 'as compared to the prior study,' 'unchanged from prior,' or 'compared to the previous radiograph.' Examples without such clear references have lower activations.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8232,latent_8232,1877,0.003754,0.002234446,2.8412015,Observations of stability or absence of acute findings.,"High activation levels correspond to examples where the radiology report suggests no change from prior observations or notes the absence of urgent findings such as consolidation or acute cardiopulmonary processes, often seen in routine follow-ups or stable conditions.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8233,latent_8233,2874,0.005748,0.0035666963,5.374663,Description of interval changes compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature comparisons of current imaging findings against previous studies, specifically noting interval changes in conditions. They often describe new findings or stability in noted abnormalities over time, which prompts follow-ups or reassessments.",0.4071756362119316,0.4081632653061224,0.4074074074074074,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8234,latent_8234,764,0.001528,0.0012987371,4.6302543,No available prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe cases where there are no prior imaging studies available for comparison. The pattern reflects situations where radiology reports note the absence of prior images, requiring independent evaluation of current findings without historical reference.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.699807272260054,0.702020202020202,0.6666666666666666,0.7959183673469388,98.0,100.0
+8235,latent_8235,4452,0.008904,0.0037830193,3.7550654,Specific temporal changes or condition alterations in imaging.,"Samples with activation levels deviating from zero contain more specific temporal comparisons between current and prior images, often involving changes in positioning or conditions, while low activation samples have no significant findings or minimal changes. Specific attributes like changes in tube/catheter positioning, significant lung or pleural changes, or introduction/removal of devices increase activation levels.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4924646417806631,0.5025125628140703,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,99.0
+8236,latent_8236,937,0.001874,0.0015879244,7.506774,Low lung volumes or inspiratory effect considerations in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels showcase either changes or stability in lung volumes, particularly noting low lung volumes or associated effects like crowding of vascular markings, often related to poor inspiratory effort. This pattern frequently considers how inspiration affects radiological interpretation.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5254081819849569,0.542713567839196,0.5737704918032787,0.35,100.0,99.0
+8237,latent_8237,1667,0.003334,0.0020287319,2.3164358,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiological findings with analysis of changes.,"Examples with high activation levels discuss detailed comparisons to prior images, not just stating the comparison but analyzing changes in specific anatomical features across multiple dimensions (e.g., mediastinal contours, pleural effusions), often using technical terms like 'atelectasis', 'opacification', showing changes or stability over time. Examples with lower activation levels either do not compare current findings to prior images, lack specific details on the change, or mention comparison only briefly.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8238,latent_8238,1983,0.003966,0.0017847654,2.6950412,Detailed comparison of findings to prior images and device positions.,"Examples with high activation levels include specific indications and histories related to the usage or position of medical devices (like catheters or tubes), or changes noted in radiological findings compared to prior images. These examples particularly mention positions relative to anatomical landmarks (e.g., heart, carina) indicating detailed analysis of reported findings.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3984962406015037,0.4,0.4090909090909091,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8239,latent_8239,2289,0.004578,0.0027628501,2.7637663,Descriptions detailing specific comparisons with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions where findings are explicitly compared to previous imaging results, showing stability or change over time. Complexity in these reports, such as reviewing changes in atelectasis, volume losses, or tube placements is notable. Non-activated examples lack these comparative details or demonstrate no significant interval change.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.5578231292517006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8240,latent_8240,1235,0.00247,0.0021150229,3.9753785,Focus on findings in direct comparison with prior imaging reports.,"High-activation examples consistently include descriptions requested based on the presence of prior reports or direct mandates to compare them against previous images. The most activated examples explicitly focus on comparisons made with prior images or scans, often describing changes in conditions like catheter positioning, pneumothorax, or fluid collections.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8241,latent_8241,3050,0.0061,0.0025127486,2.2526028,Comparison of current findings to prior images and description of interval changes.,The examples with higher activation levels focus on the task of comparing current radiologic findings with prior images and providing descriptions or assessments based on changes observed across sequential imaging studies. This suggests a pattern related to analyzing interval changes between current and prior images.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.5981308411214953,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8242,latent_8242,1479,0.002958,0.0023458134,3.8787055,Reports emphasizing unchanged findings or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss the stability or absence of significant changes in findings when current images are compared with prior images. These reports frequently highlight the absence of acute issues or only minor, non-significant changes noted upon review, suggesting stability in the findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.562769906811122,0.5628140703517588,0.5670103092783505,0.55,100.0,99.0
+8243,latent_8243,3776,0.007552,0.003143284,2.0704024,Comparative description between current multiple images and a defined prior image.,Samples with higher activation consistently involve a description of findings for one or more current images while explicitly making a comparison to a specified prior image already identified in the context. This pattern involves using multiple imaging frames rather than contrasting with an unspecified prior.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8244,latent_8244,1194,0.002388,0.0017314968,3.9585686,Radiological findings compared to prior imaging; indicating changes or stability.,"The examples with significant activations all contain descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies. This comparison, especially noting changes or stability of findings against previous images, is a fundamental pattern in radiology that informs diagnostic decisions, hence the high activation.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.5581395348837209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8245,latent_8245,1232,0.002464,0.0018160264,3.0908506,Interval change or stability of findings between imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation all involve situations where there is a significant note of interval change or lack of change in specific findings between imaging studies, with a focus on specific pathological or anatomical details. This pattern is common in monitoring disease progression or stability.",0.517757809157039,0.5306122448979592,0.5151515151515151,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5774076002082249,0.5858585858585859,0.5625,0.7346938775510204,98.0,100.0
+8246,latent_8246,840,0.00168,0.0013236977,4.0159645,Focus on interval changes or findings compared to prior images.,"These examples focus on descriptions of specific changes or intervals in findings when comparing current and prior chest images. The activation pattern indicates perceived changes in findings, such as interval changes in medical devices, conditions of pathology, or other significant alterations between the current and prior images.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8247,latent_8247,2808,0.005616,0.0023230773,1.7197444,"Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging, focusing on changes.","There are multiple examples where findings are compared between current and prior images, emphasizing changes or lack of changes in tube placements (such as OG, ETT, PICC), lung consolidation, and other measurable observations over time as specifically noted, showing an activation pattern responding to detailed comparative reporting between imaging studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5773195876288659,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8248,latent_8248,1749,0.003498,0.0021006148,4.1483264,Comparison and interpretation of findings relative to prior imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activation values include explicit references to the findings in the radiology study, mainly in relation to prior images or reports. ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"" is consistently stated across samples with moderate to high activation, emphasizing the comparison aspect in the radiological assessment.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8249,latent_8249,1165,0.00233,0.001557194,3.3454058,Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings indicating changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples demonstrate detailed comparison with prior radiological studies, displaying changes or stability in findings over time. This is a typical pattern in radiology reports, highlighting the continuous monitoring and evaluation of a patient's condition through imaging.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.426031746031746,0.435,0.4133333333333333,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8250,latent_8250,1025,0.00205,0.0016400127,4.171928,Mention of mildly enlarged heart size or upper limits of normal.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of the heart size as 'mildly enlarged' or at 'upper limits of normal', usually within a context of comparison to previous imaging. These findings indicate that minor or borderline changes in cardiac silhouette are the focus of the model's pattern recognition, differing from examples where heart size is stated as normal without emphasis on change.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6136646291445054,0.635,0.7547169811320755,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8251,latent_8251,826,0.001652,0.0012743842,3.7652586,Comparison to prior imaging with stable cardiomediastinal and bony findings.,"The highly activated examples involve cases where there is a comparison to prior imaging with notable changes, descriptions of bony structures, or trajectories of catheters and tubes, despite a lack of acuteness in the lung fields. These examples often describe mediastinal contours in detail and focus on structural stability in the face of potential changes.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5263157894736842,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8252,latent_8252,2102,0.004204,0.0019209567,3.1329243,"Changes or findings in mediastinal, cardiac, or pulmonary vascular structures.","The highly activated examples all involve findings or changes in the mediastinal, cardiac, or pulmonary vasculature structures, such as mediastinal contours, interstitial lung markings, or central pulmonary vessels. The pattern may relate to changes in these radiographic features or chronic processes involving these areas.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8253,latent_8253,1215,0.00243,0.0015586896,3.3140144,Assessment of interval changes from prior imaging.,"The examples frequently describe a comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes, either explicitly mentioning 'comparison to prior imaging' or stating specific changes in findings compared to past images. The pattern includes 'as compared to previous radiograph' or similar phrases indicating comparison and change.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4409609428118153,0.445,0.452991452991453,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8254,latent_8254,1526,0.003052,0.0018127802,5.2045803,Reports focus on interval changes or stability from prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels provide descriptions of radiological findings that focus on changes, improvements, stability, or need for further evaluation based on comparison with previous imaging. This suggests that the pattern focuses on acknowledging or discussing changes or continuities in radiological findings over time as per prior reports.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8255,latent_8255,3008,0.006016,0.0026945584,2.7257903,Descriptions involving limited or no prior image comparisons.,"Examples with high activations involve cases where comparison can be made between multiple types of images (frontal, lateral, prior) but often no explicit prior comparison is provided, suggesting reliance on descriptions without direct comparison data.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8256,latent_8256,907,0.001814,0.0015758052,3.6496534,References to bilateral pleural effusions with noted changes over time.,"Instances with high activation levels consistently involve references to multiple pleural effusions, often with changes over time, in chest radiographs. This indicates the pattern likely focuses on tracking pleural effusion observations and their interval changes, regardless of accompanying pathologies or stability of other anatomical structures.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.465760077707625,0.56,0.875,0.14,100.0,100.0
+8257,latent_8257,1051,0.002102,0.0015404766,3.0550323,Comparisons to prior imaging with detailed interval changes.,"These examples exhibit a pattern of radiology findings being compared to prior studies, often involving interval changes or the lack thereof. The descriptions involve various anatomical or pathological changes noted in relation to previous imaging, a common practice in radiology for monitoring progression or stability of conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4365194765439657,0.4422110552763819,0.430379746835443,0.34,100.0,99.0
+8258,latent_8258,9617,0.019234,0.007217435,2.225079,Radiological findings described with respect to comparison to previous imaging.,"The activated examples consistently involve a comparison to a prior image, often noting stability or changes in a condition, such as a prior set of radiographs being referenced explicitly. They frequently detail findings in light of previous reports, resonating with examples that show structural stability or enlargement, subtle interval changes or stability. The non-activated examples, on the other hand, either have no previous comparison or focus on acute findings without historical context.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.542308515190415,0.5678391959798995,0.54421768707483,0.8080808080808081,99.0,100.0
+8259,latent_8259,735,0.00147,0.0012757983,3.3958144,Normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes.,"Reports emphasizing normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes as well as normal pulmonary vascularity while assessing structures that could potentially indicate pulmonary complications, such as pneumonia, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax. The description pattern highlights normality in certain key regions while evaluating lung and chest conditions.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6610814022578728,0.6630434782608695,0.627906976744186,0.6428571428571429,84.0,100.0
+8260,latent_8260,639,0.001278,0.0012900046,3.6423767,Findings describe tortuous or enlarged aorta.,"The high activation examples frequently reference a tortuous or enlarged aorta, indicating that tortuosity or elongation of the aorta might be a typical feature that triggers higher activation levels, especially when other changes are stable or normal. In radiological examination, identifying such vascular features is vital.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5160623409669212,0.6201117318435754,0.8235294117647058,0.1772151898734177,79.0,100.0
+8261,latent_8261,7523,0.015046,0.0056937784,2.1358213,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Reports with comparison studies show high activation when they mention findings unchanged from prior imaging. Example 47 demonstrates stable conditions like a pneumothorax, supporting that stability is a key factor activating this pattern. Consistently unchanged lines, tubes, or pulmonary findings prompt higher activation.",0.6016260162601625,0.6122448979591837,0.6875,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.4968648867313916,0.4974874371859296,0.4946236559139785,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+8262,latent_8262,866,0.001732,0.0017113402,3.0418904,No comparison to prior imaging in the report.,"Highly activated examples show absence or lack of comparison with prior imaging, indicating that recent findings are described independently in instances where no prior imaging is available or considered in the report. This absence of comparison is typical when there is either a lack of access to previous studies or the finding itself is new and doesn't require historical context.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5723328015065519,0.5786802030456852,0.5921052631578947,0.4639175257731959,97.0,100.0
+8263,latent_8263,570,0.00114,0.0011369295,5.5548897,Left-sided chest abnormalities or symptoms.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve patients with left-sided chest problems or conditions, often relating to pain or injury to the ribs or surrounding area. This contrast with the examples reporting findings that are less specific or don't focus on a particular side, which have low activation levels.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5620281690140845,0.591715976331361,0.5,0.4057971014492754,69.0,100.0
+8264,latent_8264,1530,0.00306,0.0028010623,6.193464,Examination findings explicitly compared to prior radiographs.,"The highly activated examples involve radiology studies with explicit comparisons to prior images, analyzing positional changes or intervals since prior assessments. This includes changes in pulmonary or other anatomical features when compared to prior images, often with structured language around such comparisons.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5963408560719248,0.615,0.5804195804195804,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8265,latent_8265,6603,0.013206,0.0049920273,1.8814806,Inferences about imaging stability or change despite insufficient prior information.,The examples with higher activation levels include scenarios where comparative descriptions are made despite having no prior reports or insufficient prior information. This involves making inferences about stability or change based on the prior frontal image even in the absence of a complete history or prior information.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5542168674698795,0.46,100.0,100.0
+8266,latent_8266,9667,0.019334,0.0070787054,1.3015162,Explicit descriptions of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, highlighting any changes or stability in findings. These comparisons are critical in evaluating disease progression or stability, and this consistent element differentiates them from examples with new findings with no prior imaging context or simply reporting new placements without prior reference.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5662650602409639,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8267,latent_8267,7999,0.015998,0.0057792612,1.6562079,Detailed radiographic findings compared explicitly to prior images.,"Examples with moderate activation levels describe detailed radiographic findings with specific comparisons to prior images, indicating attention to slight changes, stability, or new findings over time. These demonstrate a pattern where the comparison to previous images helps clarify progression or stability of conditions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8268,latent_8268,1216,0.002432,0.0018525313,3.9142785,Low lung volumes leading to atelectasis and bronchovascular crowding.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight descriptions of low lung volumes often associated with atelectasis, which leads to bronchovascular crowding and basal opacities. These descriptions are part of routine comparisons in radiological studies to evaluate the condition of the lungs and bronchi in relation to previous studies.",0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8947869435607105,0.895,0.8623853211009175,0.94,100.0,100.0
+8269,latent_8269,1543,0.003086,0.001675123,3.0698187,Emphasis on comparison with prior studies in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activations frequently involve providing comparisons or evaluating radiological findings against a prior study or report. Specifically, they make use of prior radiographic comparisons, updates on changes from prior studies, or commentary on the stability/improvement of earlier noted conditions.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8270,latent_8270,1067,0.002134,0.0016252346,3.3059218,Comparison to prior images to assess stability or change.,"These examples compare current radiological images with previous studies, specifically noting either stability or change in findings. This commonality appears in reports that highlight the presence of consistent conditions over time or any new developments when viewed alongside past examinations. Descriptive phrases like 'as compared to', 'similar to', or 'unchanged' in findings suggest ongoing observation of certain conditions or status.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8271,latent_8271,747,0.001494,0.0014828389,4.7282257,Use of 'although' for uncertain or differential diagnoses.,"The examples typically describe findings with uncertain significance using the word ""although"" to indicate a possibility of different interpretations of the observed abnormalities. This suggests a pattern of cautious language where radiologists indicate potential differential diagnoses or acknowledge the limitations of the imaging study in providing a definitive diagnosis.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,1.0,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7717647058823529,0.7835051546391752,0.9642857142857144,0.574468085106383,94.0,100.0
+8272,latent_8272,1245,0.00249,0.0016102346,3.594532,Description of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe stable versus altered findings in prior versus current imaging. These reports usually address interval changes, which indicates progress or resolution of conditions over time. This pattern is critical in assessing dynamic changes in the patient's condition over time based on past and present imaging.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5422974851510174,0.542713567839196,0.5428571428571428,0.57,100.0,99.0
+8273,latent_8273,677,0.001354,0.0012555288,3.2623637,Detailed comparative analysis to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern centers on providing comparative analysis, where reports explicitly describe findings in the current images compared with prior images, using terms like 'compared to', 'compared with', or 'as compared to'. These examples delve into detailed comparison descriptions, emphasizing changes or stability between imaging studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4258585858585859,0.4367816091954023,0.3421052631578947,0.3513513513513513,74.0,100.0
+8274,latent_8274,800,0.0016,0.0013394287,4.8108397,Detailed comparison of current and prior lung or pleural changes.,"The examples with high activation levels present findings that relate current imaging to prior studies. They commonly emphasize changes in lung opacities, signs of effusion, or the presence of pleural or atelectasis areas when compared over time or with current imaging. This thematic emphasis on detailed comparison often involves using consistent language indicating progress or stability of findings such as pleural changes or lung opacities.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.592964824120603,0.592964824120603,0.59,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+8275,latent_8275,812,0.001624,0.0015349629,5.3569107,Reports indicating interval change in cardiomegaly or devices on imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels contain language related to interval changes highlighted through comparison with prior imaging. These changes often refer to the position of tubes, cardiomegaly, or opacities, as well as monitoring devices and similar alterations.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.3333333333333333,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3668023518769787,0.44,0.3125,0.1,100.0,100.0
+8276,latent_8276,10768,0.021536,0.00784089,1.7420231,Lung volumes assessment and related conditions.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve the recognition or measurement of lung volumes or identification of afflictions causing low lung volumes. Such instances are consistently analyzed in reference to prior imaging data, suggesting a specialization in conditions and findings related to lung volumes.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5217391304347826,0.36,100.0,100.0
+8277,latent_8277,834,0.001668,0.0013034873,3.7388248,Emphasis on comparison to prior reports or examinations.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a prior report or examination findings in direct comparison to a given imaging study, focusing on changes or stability in conditions over time. These entries emphasize temporal comparisons rather than just findings in a single isolated study.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8278,latent_8278,2466,0.004932,0.0020942627,2.1399937,Description of interval changes in serial imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently mention interval change between serial imaging studies, especially related to changes in device positions, lung conditions, or opacities. This reflects the radiological practice of monitoring changes over time, highlighting findings that exhibit temporal consistency or change.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5670103092783505,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8279,latent_8279,3788,0.007576,0.0047494634,4.320333,Radiological findings described as unchanged or stable compared to previous imaging.,"The patterns with high activation levels often include imaging findings that are unchanged, consistent, or stable, especially in comparison to prior studies. The reports often use terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or directly state comparison results indicating stability. These phrases are indicative of no acute change or worsening of findings, suggestive of non-urgent follow-up characteristics in radiological review.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.4406779661016949,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8280,latent_8280,1655,0.00331,0.0018286513,3.3132226,Comprehensive technical setup descriptions and indications evaluated with a prior frontal image.,"Samples with higher activation levels frequently mention specific changes or evaluations based on prior comparisons, such as techniques used, indications, history, or setup, rather than outcomes in terms of findings. They often discuss the setup in depth, reflecting illustration details like type of image given, indications, and examination style which seem to improve activation levels.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4269949066213922,0.46,0.4729729729729729,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8281,latent_8281,3468,0.006936,0.0026467103,2.1099014,Detailed description of radiology technique and findings compared to prior images.,"The inclusion of specific techniques like 'PA and lateral views' and comprehensive descriptions of findings in comparison to previous images highlights a detailed radiological assessment strategy. High activations likely represent instances where such detailed comparisons are more elaborately carried out, emphasizing radiographic changes or confirmations associated with significant based evaluation.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8282,latent_8282,2277,0.004554,0.0023594417,4.4287186,Lung findings correlating with low inspiratory volumes.,"The pattern corresponds to radiology descriptions for lung findings associated with suboptimal inspiratory volumes or limitations during imaging, which can influence interpretation due to reduced visibility or altered presentation of pulmonary structures. ",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8283,latent_8283,2960,0.00592,0.003372183,7.163872,Significant changes or mentions of cardiac silhouette size/position.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of significant cardiac silhouette enlargement or notable changes in cardiac positioning, often indicating cardiomegaly or other cardio-related abnormalities. These reports typically include terms such as 'cardiac silhouette' and discuss variations in heart size or contour. The pattern seems to focus on changes or significant mentions of the cardiac silhouette in the presence of other radiological findings.",0.5775862068965517,0.5918367346938775,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.567255679769203,0.64,0.4107142857142857,0.3709677419354839,62.0,138.0
+8284,latent_8284,1183,0.002366,0.0019024096,4.0308456,Explicit comparison to prior imaging focusing on interval changes.,"The highly activated examples involve instances where an explicit comparison with prior imaging was noted, particularly for evaluation of any interval change in findings. The pattern reflects the focus on monitoring for changes over time, typical in follow-up examinations where certain patient conditions warrant continual assessment.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4683544303797468,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8285,latent_8285,10549,0.021098,0.008107642,2.5236542,Emphasis on comparing current and prior images to assess changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include specific references to current and prior images indicating a focus on assessing changes or stability. These examples emphasize comparative findings to discern medical conditions or device placements across different time points, hence the key pattern is the emphasis on comparative analysis.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8286,latent_8286,9868,0.019736,0.0075672157,1.6057737,Explicit comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention findings in the current radiological examination compared explicitly to the prior images, detecting changes or stability in specific pathologies. This highlights the importance of comparison in reports, which may affect clinical management or indicate progression.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8287,latent_8287,795,0.00159,0.0014327911,3.7490556,Comparison of retrocardiac opacity between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention retrocardiac opacities and their characterization, often relating to atelectasis or other potential pleural conditions. This suggests a focus on the evaluation and comparison of retrocardiac findings between the current and previous images, contrasting with examples that focus on other aspects without noting retrocardiac areas specifically.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.483110950835437,0.57,0.8888888888888888,0.16,100.0,100.0
+8288,latent_8288,12635,0.02527,0.0094711445,2.5475752,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples describe radiological findings with a current image in direct comparison to a prior one, often involving interval changes, stability, or improvements, reflecting a focus on change over time in the patient's condition. However, examples with no clear or significant interval changes tend to have lower activation.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.5474452554744526,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8289,latent_8289,606,0.001212,0.0011791561,3.4483087,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize descriptions of multiple views using comparative language to note changes or stability between current and prior radiographs. The instructions to compare current and prior images are directly provided or implied using specific language such as 'compare to previous', use of 'interval changes', and imperative phrasing requesting detailed comparison.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4488458434221146,0.4488636363636363,0.396039603960396,0.5263157894736842,76.0,100.0
+8290,latent_8290,1156,0.002312,0.0017720198,3.3777046,Stability or minor change in cardiomegaly compared to prior imaging.,"Each sample with a low activation level includes references to comparisons with prior exams, which is a common structure in radiology reports where findings are described in relation to previous imaging to identify changes. However, the consistent feature in examples with low activation is repetitive or unchanged mention of cardiomegaly or minor adjustments in existing findings, suggesting focus on stability rather than change.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6329352608422376,0.635,0.6588235294117647,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8291,latent_8291,1041,0.002082,0.0014967101,2.8881075,Comparison-focused descriptions highlighting changes over time.,"Most active examples focus on observations involving comparisons with prior images where notable findings entail changes in positioning, removal or appearance of tubes and lines, or evolution of existing conditions like opacities, effusions, or cardiomegaly. These reports often emphasize significant changes in the radiological findings over time, particularly changes related to medical devices or significant pathological changes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8292,latent_8292,1425,0.00285,0.0019827532,2.4134977,Comparisons show stabilization or resolution rather than new findings or deterioration.,"These examples often describe multiple views of chest x-rays, including frontal and lateral perspectives, alongside comparisons to prior images. However, activation is 0 unless there is specific comparison related to deterioration or new serious findings like consolidation or pneumothorax, which were not present in original comparisons.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5276262626262627,0.5276381909547738,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,99.0
+8293,latent_8293,838,0.001676,0.0012787686,4.7162404,Presence of mild pulmonary edema or vascular congestion.,"The examples with high activation contain descriptions of mild pulmonary edema or vascular congestion, often accompanied by increased interstitial markings. These phrases are indicative of subtle fluid accumulation or blood flow changes in the lungs, which can be mild and not immediately apparent in patients with conditions like pulmonary hypertension or initial stages of heart failure.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7645231593977806,0.765,0.7912087912087912,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8294,latent_8294,5473,0.010946,0.0043126955,2.446269,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images.,"The samples with higher activation levels mention a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior images, a common requirement in radiology reporting to assess changes over time. Phrases such as 'as compared to previous', 'no relevant change', or descriptions in the context of prior imaging (e.g., 'progression', 'stable') indicate this pattern.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8295,latent_8295,8446,0.016892,0.0061857714,2.0000792,Instructions emphasize evaluation based exclusively on current frontal image.,"Examples with high activation contain directive phrases for conducting the study with the current frontal image exclusively, suggesting the model focuses on findings based solely on recently captured frontal images without additional comparative context like lateral imaging or prior reports. When frontal images are specified independently, it may imply emphasis on acute findings or immediate evaluation.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4293346284604177,0.53,0.6875,0.11,100.0,100.0
+8296,latent_8296,1498,0.002996,0.0020956697,3.2162783,Descriptions focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"These examples consistently involve providing a description of radiographic findings while directly comparing them to previous images. In addition, specific changes or stability in conditions are analyzed to inform about potential progressions or regressions in health conditions. This language and format is indicative of careful monitoring of pathologies over time.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5925209542230818,0.605,0.5777777777777777,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8297,latent_8297,1238,0.002476,0.0015757973,4.384546,"Comparison between current and prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples describe findings from current images while comparing them to prior ones, often emphasizing stability of certain features or absence of significant changes. This recurring pattern highlights radiological evaluations over time to track changes or stability in the patient's condition.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4438738445351837,0.445,0.4495412844036697,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8298,latent_8298,2421,0.004842,0.003362528,2.6226664,Comparison with prior imaging and analysis of interval changes.,"The model shows high activation for examples that involve a direct comparison in radiology reports between a current image and one or more prior images, particularly highlighting changes, stability, or intervals between the findings in these images. The presence of phrases such as 'compared with', 'unchanged', or 'stable' indicates a comparative analysis, which significantly contributes to activation.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4677419354838709,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8299,latent_8299,777,0.001554,0.0014159442,3.4389071,Assessment of interval changes by comparing current and prior imaging.,"The examples frequently mention a direct comparison between current and prior imaging, indicating a focus on evaluating interval changes in the radiological findings. Reports often assess the heart size, silhouette, aortic contour, and lung fields for changes, which is a standard practice in monitoring patients for progression or improvement.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4206919648607569,0.4321608040201005,0.4453125,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+8300,latent_8300,3423,0.006846,0.0030170183,3.8778758,Comparison with prior images to assess stability or changes.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently describe imaging reports where findings are explicitly compared to prior images for detecting or confirming changes or stability in medical conditions. Examples focus on noting changes over time or recognizing stability in a condition by using phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'no change', 'since prior', or 'compared to study from'.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8301,latent_8301,825,0.00165,0.0019918461,6.3871937,Explicit comparison of current findings to prior images.,The highly activated examples involve radiology studies where findings or conditions are explicitly compared to a prior image. This contrasts with other examples which lack such comparative analysis or comparison references. The recurring phrase 'compared to previous radiograph' is a linguistic indicator of this pattern.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6067315304272325,0.615,0.5891472868217055,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8302,latent_8302,1106,0.002212,0.001811016,3.1651344,Findings described in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation describe specific findings and their changes over time compared to prior imaging, a pattern often used in radiology reports for monitoring progression or stability of health conditions.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8303,latent_8303,1342,0.002684,0.0016456894,2.8481326,Focus on interval change or stability compared to previous images.,"The pattern involves radiological findings described in reference to prior or current images with an emphasis on determining interval change or stability. This often involves comparisons of observed features to check for improvements, deterioration, or unchanged states over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4245283018867924,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8304,latent_8304,3838,0.007676,0.0032869966,2.8254013,Stable cardiopulmonary findings in comparison to previous imaging indicating benign process.,"Patterns showing high activation levels involve specific mentions of acute changes or descriptions indicating no increase of acute cardiopulmonary processes, with considerations of stable findings in the presence of comparison images from prior examinations. The presence of unchanged findings often indicates benignity, reducing the likelihood of concern for an acute process, thus leading to higher activation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8305,latent_8305,4277,0.008554,0.0044019325,4.199121,Interval evaluation with consistent or resolved prior conditions.,"The pattern observed involves reports that include observations of interval changes compared to a prior examination. Instances reporting unchanged conditions or removal of medical apparatus, apart from consistent anatomical observations across comparisons, achieve higher activations. The stable presence or resolution of previously noted conditions marks a significant factor, reflecting the emphasis on interval evaluation in clinical imaging follow-ups.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5402298850574713,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8306,latent_8306,13223,0.026446,0.009682012,1.8133094,Adjustments or positions of medical tubes/devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples describe findings or adjustments related to various medical tubes or devices such as feeding tubes, enteric tubes, or PICC lines in relation to previous radiographic images. The examples with high activation levels often note positions of tubes and devices and their unchanged or adjusted positions from prior studies, signifying their significance in report analysis.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5915492957746479,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8307,latent_8307,1214,0.002428,0.0018108338,2.8552003,Comparison of current and prior images with noted findings.,"The activation pattern is observed when there is explicit mention of a 'comparison' component typically involving a 'prior image' or 'previous study', often featured with specific findings noted against those previous studies to track changes over time, indicative of the model being attuned to changes over time in radiological imagery.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5718891038039975,0.585,0.562962962962963,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8308,latent_8308,716,0.001432,0.0013154885,3.0004606,"Comparison of current radiological images with prior, noting changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed instructions to describe findings in current radiological images in direct comparison to prior images. They include explicit comparison details such as 'minimal increase', 'unchanged', or specific changes noted over time, which suggests the model is focusing on patterns related to temporal analysis of radiological findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5164473684210527,0.5408163265306123,0.5208333333333334,0.78125,96.0,100.0
+8309,latent_8309,346,0.000692,0.0012312721,3.9201288,Mildly enlarged heart and tortuous aorta.,"Examples exhibit mentions of mildly enlarged heart size and tortuosity (often alongside calcification/unfolded) of the aorta, which is a combination often described in chest radiographs. This specific observation is frequently noted in patients with chronic vascular or cardiac conditions.",0.6177777777777778,0.627906976744186,0.5555555555555556,0.5555555555555556,18.0,25.0,0.6963213882450823,0.7602739726027398,0.6666666666666666,0.4782608695652174,46.0,100.0
+8310,latent_8310,1399,0.002798,0.001870239,2.4293056,Presence or repositioning of NG or endotracheal tubes in serial imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the presence of a nasogastric (NG) tube, endotracheal tube, or other similar medical devices being placed or changed between compared images. This reflects a specific focus on assessing and describing changes in tube position as seen in follow-up imaging.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.444464243288192,0.5276381909547738,0.6086956521739131,0.1414141414141414,99.0,100.0
+8311,latent_8311,1418,0.002836,0.0019201533,3.0320883,Comparative analysis of current vs. prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference imaging findings in context of observed stability or changes when compared to prior imaging studies or reports. Furthermore, these high activation samples often evaluate for specific changes in pathology such as pneumonia or nodules, focusing on the details of these findings in relation to previous reports to indicate presence or absence of changes. This is an explicit linguistic pattern of comparing current and past medical imaging, which stands out as a key feature of these high activation results.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5561378646487873,0.585,0.5562913907284768,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8312,latent_8312,3319,0.006638,0.0030371954,3.07258,Identification of new or changed findings from prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detection of new or changed findings (opacities, fluid, significant changes in pathologies) compared to prior studies. This applies irrespective of the type of change or magnitude but focuses on identifying alterations in the state of pathologies recorded within the images.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.5789473684210527,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.537396401859713,0.5376884422110553,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,99.0
+8313,latent_8313,5540,0.01108,0.0046377466,2.0617938,Comparison and assessment of changes in radiological findings across images.,"The examples with higher activations often include interpretative descriptions of radiological findings, comparing the current image to prior images, noting changes or stability, particularly in relation to specific pathologies or conditions. They often contain details about lung volumes, specific features like pleural effusion, or devices in situ, indicating a focus on detailed comparison and change assessment across images.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8314,latent_8314,1224,0.002448,0.0017978145,3.257563,Comparison of findings using provided prior and current images.,"Highly activated examples mention the provision of both current and prior frontal images, along with the requirement to provide a detailed description of findings in comparison to the prior image. These examples emphasize the need for direct visual comparison and analysis.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8315,latent_8315,722,0.001444,0.0011798566,4.9811897,Instructional descriptions for comparing imaging findings at different times or conditions.,"Examples 7, 11, and a few others that have non-zero activation levels describe detailed technical findings and comparisons or changes between prior and current imaging based on specific findings. These cases often present by first indicating the background details via an imperative format that instructs on what to compare with PRIOR_REPORT or COMPARISON segments, which differentiates them from other examples with lower activation",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.407051282051282,0.4486486486486487,0.4429530201342282,0.7764705882352941,85.0,100.0
+8316,latent_8316,1213,0.002426,0.0017612366,5.2703795,Linear opacities or atelectasis indicative of scarring or chronic conditions.,"These examples frequently mention chest imaging findings related to atelectasis and scarring, particularly in the context of informing about underlying chronic conditions. The pattern is seen through references to linear opacities, atelectasis, and descriptions that note scarring or chronicity.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8317,latent_8317,1313,0.002626,0.0017957899,2.9634795,Providing findings descriptions with a format requesting comparisons but without comparison details.,"These examples often include a directive for the model to provide a description of the findings in comparison with prior imaging, even when no explicit comparison information is available. The pattern likely involves understanding the format or structure with which such descriptions are requested or given, especially when involving the 'frontal image' clause without direct comparison details.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4034772182254196,0.4974874371859296,0.4972067039106145,0.898989898989899,99.0,100.0
+8318,latent_8318,848,0.001696,0.0015283298,4.6944585,Reports state 'none' or lack comparison to prior exams.,"The pattern among higher-activation examples indicates that the reports often lack a comparison with a prior exam or explicitly state 'none' for comparison. This suggests that the pattern recognition is sensitive to the presence or absence of comparative prior exams, possibly highlighting reports where the comparison data is noted as ""none.""",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8319,latent_8319,1214,0.002428,0.0019940392,4.4936414,"Instructions include explicit analysis comparing current images with prior findings, evaluating change.","The particularly high activation samples share a pattern where a frontal image and potentially a lateral image are analyzed and directly compared with a prior frontal image used to aid the current examination. High activation cases have clear links to prior imaging and present findings relative to those previous scans, specifically assessing any changes or absence of significant changes.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.3214285714285714,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4251575630252101,0.4472361809045226,0.460431654676259,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+8320,latent_8320,738,0.001476,0.0013899963,3.2463565,"Technical evaluation of inserted medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes).","The pattern of highly activated examples involves instances where specific, notable clinical interventions or devices (such as tubes or lines) have been introduced, manipulated, or evaluated within the patients. The reports highlight radiological findings assessing these interventions or devices.",0.5493311036789297,0.5510204081632653,0.5454545454545454,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5380615697818372,0.5492227979274611,0.5428571428571428,0.4086021505376344,93.0,100.0
+8321,latent_8321,3879,0.007758,0.0034301102,2.8900435,No prior imaging comparison for significant current findings.,"Examples with activations show abnormalities or changes in lung, cardiac, or thoracic structures due to conditions such as cardiomegaly or pulmonary nodules, often with no prior imaging comparisons available. Absence of comparisons on previous abnormalities shows the model's heightened response to current changes or findings considered significant without readily referencing prior examples.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8322,latent_8322,1162,0.002324,0.0018726564,3.8577166,Requests for comparison even when prior images are unavailable or unspecified.,"The examples with high activation levels all request comparisons to prior imaging studies despite the presence of 'comparison: none' or not providing specific prior comparisons within the prompt itself, which indicates that the model focuses on the inherent expectation of comparison within the instruction rather than the specific data provided.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5937831063796801,0.6030150753768844,0.5813953488372093,0.75,100.0,99.0
+8323,latent_8323,1169,0.002338,0.0015074455,3.2640626,"Specificity in clinical context, post-intervention or procedural details.","The highly activated examples consistently include specific details about the equipment, procedures, and context affecting the patient's chest condition, such as post-surgical status, ongoing treatment, or procedural complications (e.g., thoracotomy, chest tube insertion/removal, etc.). This specificity in clinical context, particularly post-intervention or procedural assessment, is contrasted with more generic or non-intervention-related imaging descriptions in lower activation examples.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5270529935275081,0.5276381909547738,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,99.0
+8324,latent_8324,1091,0.002182,0.0019823792,3.4954178,Descriptions of stable mild cardiopulmonary changes.,"The pattern involves descriptions of mild pulmonary and cardiovascular changes, such as mild cardiomegaly, mild pulmonary edema, mild interstitial edema, or mild vascular congestion, often as opposed to larger or acute issues like significant edema or heart failure. This pattern highlights stable mild abnormalities frequently noted in radiology reports.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6930946291560103,0.7,0.6538461538461539,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8325,latent_8325,7313,0.014626,0.005507682,2.4764905,Changes in medical device/tube positioning and cardiac silhouette due to procedure/positioning.,"The examples with higher activation levels show changes in the position or condition of tubes, medical devices, or cardiac silhouette due to differences in patient positioning or prior surgical or medical interventions. These descriptions often highlight changes described in the context of previous images and involve terms like 'accenuated', 'position', or 'unchanged'.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5303030303030303,0.35,100.0,100.0
+8326,latent_8326,646,0.001292,0.0014889073,3.4999645,Evaluation focused on status post medical procedure or intervention.,"These examples focus on evaluating changes or assessing the current state post medical procedures or conditions, such as post-operative evaluations or follow-ups on specific interventions (e.g., stenting, intubation). The contrast with prior imaging highlights alterations or stability following these statuses, often used in radiology to ascertain effectiveness or complications of medical interventions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.551812450748621,0.5542857142857143,0.4883720930232558,0.5526315789473685,76.0,99.0
+8327,latent_8327,1101,0.002202,0.0018151964,3.7233658,Persistent mild cardiomegaly or heart enlargement.,"Radiology findings consistently describe a mildly enlarged heart across these examples. This suggests a focus on persistent cardiomegaly or mild cardiac enlargement as the key pattern, as they distinguish example activations from zero.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5861629881154499,0.61,0.7115384615384616,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8328,latent_8328,4009,0.008018,0.0031028283,1.7973218,Comparison highlighting changes in specific pathologies or anatomical positioning over time.,"Examples with high activations consistently describe the comparison of new radiologic findings against a prior study, specifically examining changes in abnormalities like effusions, opacities, or anatomical positioning over time. This pattern includes detailed contrast of pathological changes or stability between current and previous radiologic assessments.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8329,latent_8329,3541,0.007082,0.0031601335,2.5693343,Observations of interval change in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels present radiological conclusions phrased in terms of interval change when comparing images from different times. Expressions like 'interval change', 'unremarkable', and 'stable', indicate the degree to which findings remain consistent or alter over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8330,latent_8330,587,0.001174,0.0012403455,4.654212,Providing findings without effective historical comparison.,"Many of the high activation examples emphasize descriptions requiring direct comparison to a prior image while often stating 'COMPARISON: None' or having no actual comparison available. These examples utilize available views or data without effective historical comparison, indicating an absence or limitation in historical data reference.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5558536929812173,0.5647058823529412,0.4838709677419355,0.8571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+8331,latent_8331,655,0.00131,0.0013674009,3.5108335,Comparison between current and prior imaging with emphasis on stability or change.,"Examples with activation levels indicate attention to providing descriptions of findings for multiple images, including both frontal and lateral views. The prompts typically request an explicit contrast between the current and previous images, often using terms like 'same' and 'new' to emphasize changes or stability, and repeated findings such as pleural effusions and opacities compared to prior imaging.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4741311732427489,0.4742857142857143,0.4123711340206185,0.5333333333333333,75.0,100.0
+8332,latent_8332,3086,0.006172,0.0026546412,1.9856354,"Comparison of current and prior imaging studies, noting changes.","Prompts that refer to both current and prior imaging studies, specifically making comparisons and identifying changes or using terms related to reviewal of previous images, exhibit increased activation. This indicates the model is focused on maintaining consistency across multiple imaging instances and changes over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8333,latent_8333,5936,0.011872,0.004660165,2.5782864,Use of qualitative terms describing interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is that the examples with higher activation levels include descriptions that convey changes, stability, or comparisons to prior imaging using specific qualitative terms. These terms can include ‘unchanged’, ‘improved’, ‘increased’ or ‘stable’ which denote interval change or stability in the findings between images.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5263157894736842,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8334,latent_8334,1604,0.003208,0.0025354126,4.3157506,"Descriptions include pleural effusion, atelectasis, consolidation, often showing interval change.","The examples exhibiting higher activation levels demonstrate descriptions of radiological findings that point towards atelectasis, pleural effusion, pneumonic or consolidation processes, and often mention more transient changes like improvements or worsening which likely require further clinical assessment or follow-up. These examples also often point out significant changes or updates in the patient's condition from prior imaging, making them noticeable.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7190939503051661,0.725,0.6744186046511628,0.87,100.0,100.0
+8335,latent_8335,1447,0.002894,0.0021898209,4.2658343,Emphasis on lateral chest images in conjunction with frontal views.,"The examples with higher activations tend to emphasize the use of lateral chest images in conjunction with frontal views, often noting findings specific to the lateral view such as pulmonary opacities or atelectasis more visible in this orientation. The inclusion of lateral imaging for comprehensive comparison with prior studies seems crucial for increased activation.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.418546365914787,0.42,0.4272727272727272,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8336,latent_8336,1219,0.002438,0.0015547259,5.0204773,Use of comparison with prior imaging results in findings.,"These examples specifically address the procedure of comparing current imaging findings with prior imaging results. The high activation levels are observed in reports that explicitly mention the comparison process, often with noted differences or absence of change, particularly those using phrases such as 'compared to the previous radiograph'. These phrases mark the relevance of change or stability in findings, crucial in radiology.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4661654135338345,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8337,latent_8337,1176,0.002352,0.001682207,3.9121153,Focus on comparison to prior imaging and detailed findings vs just indication.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activations indicates a tendency for the model to respond when there is a comparison with prior imaging studies, inclusion of both frontal and lateral views, and descriptions of image findings rather than just the indication or technique.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.45368492224476,0.495,0.4967741935483871,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8338,latent_8338,603,0.001206,0.0012741084,4.1329074,Assessment and position details of endotracheal and other tubes or lines.,"These example sentences focus on details of monitoring and support devices, specifically on endotracheal tube placement and other lines or tubes in chest radiography. Descriptions point to their positioning relative to anatomical landmarks such as the carina, and often suggest adjustments if needed. This is a common pattern in reports assessing the placement of medical devices.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6815148656674702,0.6918604651162791,0.6376811594202898,0.6111111111111112,72.0,100.0
+8339,latent_8339,646,0.001292,0.0010966974,5.1269784,Presence of prior imaging for detailed comparison increases activation.,"Examples that indicate no comparison image or limited information available for comparing current with prior, show lower activation levels. Lack of historical reference prevents comprehensive analysis and results in inconsistent report complexity.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4467505307519249,0.4611111111111111,0.4341085271317829,0.7,80.0,100.0
+8340,latent_8340,7441,0.014882,0.005656278,2.680604,Notable interval changes or comparisons in radiological findings.,"Most examples with higher activation levels feature a distinct pattern of descriptive language when assessing changes or comparisons in findings within a radiology report. This pattern corresponds to the assignment of conditions, placement of medical instruments, or clinical evaluation criteria over time, indicating medical status shift or stability.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6024688774976462,0.62,0.5845070422535211,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8341,latent_8341,2392,0.004784,0.0023194216,3.541562,Detailed radiological findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,The pattern in the examples with higher activation levels seems to focus on providing detailed descriptions of findings and explicit comparison to prior imaging studies.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4695652173913043,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8342,latent_8342,1614,0.003228,0.001994308,3.145863,Hyperinflated lungs or findings suggestive of COPD/emphysema.,"These examples consistently indicate findings suggestive of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or emphysema, characterized by hyperinflation of the lungs, flattening of the diaphragms, and sometimes mentioning increased lung lucency or presence of bronchiectasis.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5673485035187164,0.605,0.7560975609756098,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8343,latent_8343,1474,0.002948,0.0017377549,3.377821,Comparison of findings indicating improvement or stability over time.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of findings compared to prior frontal images for the pattern of improvement or stability, often with medical indications like pneumonia, consolidation resolution, or benign findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4461538461538462,0.29,100.0,100.0
+8344,latent_8344,753,0.001506,0.0013645863,3.7441385,"Stable position of tubes, catheters, and surgical hardware on comparison with prior image.","The pattern indicates a focus on describing the current findings in comparison to a prior image, specifically highlighting any changes or stability in features such as surgical hardware positioning, pleural effusion, and lung conditions. This can be an essential step in a radiology report providing context for patient management.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5893179668014106,0.6073298429319371,0.6333333333333333,0.4175824175824176,91.0,100.0
+8345,latent_8345,8583,0.017166,0.0065236627,1.8324776,Reports indicating unchanged findings compared to past imaging.,"Examples with activation close to zero have a pattern of describing findings with decreased significance from prior studies. These reports describe findings that are stable or otherwise unaltered when compared to previous imaging. This may include descriptions of unchanged pneumothorax, effusion, catheters, or stable cardiomediastinal contours, which collectively suggest a lack of notable change warranting low activation.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5904507100226384,0.5979899497487438,0.6388888888888888,0.46,100.0,99.0
+8346,latent_8346,1242,0.002484,0.0017303406,3.6636481,"Adjustments of medical tubes are recommended, specifying distance for repositioning.","These examples consistently refer to the need for repositioning or adjustment of tubes, particularly nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, often specifying the distance the tube should be moved. This reflects a common radiology practice where precise positioning is crucial for optimal function or diagnostic interpretation.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.615,0.96,0.24,100.0,100.0
+8347,latent_8347,2269,0.004538,0.0025970612,3.6422784,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in comparison to previous images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention stable or unchanged findings between comparative chest images, highlighting the attention to detailed continuity in patient status over time. This pattern is common in reports where longitudinal stability of features is emphasized.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4814814814814814,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8348,latent_8348,1463,0.002926,0.0019919684,2.5459495,Imaging findings stable when compared to prior.,"The model exhibits higher activation levels when findings confirm the current imaging matches the prior imaging in the absence of significant changes, often with terms like 'unchanged', 'same', or 'normal'. This indicates consistent stability over time in identified conditions or structures.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.4347826086956521,0.2,100.0,100.0
+8349,latent_8349,2503,0.005006,0.0024712011,2.9132233,High activation with significant findings in multiple imaging views.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings related to significant changes or abnormalities in the comparison of current and prior imaging, but notably include multiple imaging views such as frontal and lateral, which may aid in detecting these changes. This pattern may indicate a focus on detailed assessment from multiple perspectives contrasting past and present imagery.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.5803571428571429,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8350,latent_8350,5590,0.01118,0.004408348,2.1135852,Explicit description of change or stability in pathology compared to prior images.,"Higher activations are associated with examples where specific radiological findings are directly compared or indicated as changed (e.g., 'interval change', 'appears unchanged', 'new', 'persistent') in relation to prior imaging. These comparisons focus on changes in pathology or patient status, suggesting the reason for variation in activations is the explicit description of change or stability over time in pathology.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5304347826086957,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8351,latent_8351,1442,0.002884,0.0020571498,2.8114262,Comparison reveals significant findings or changes affecting patient management.,"Examples with high activation levels involve reference to both prior imaging and detailed descriptions of radiological findings, particularly involving instruments or anatomical changes. The comparison is not just to note differences, but to actively direct or suggest changes or continuation of care.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4523809523809524,0.19,100.0,100.0
+8352,latent_8352,3797,0.007594,0.0031786552,2.0665898,Intervals or stability tracking of devices and intrathoracic findings.,"These examples not only reference comparison to prior studies but also focus on specific intervals or stability of findings, specifically related to intrathoracic structures such as chest tubes, pacemaker wires, or specific pathologies. Examples with high activation involve precise tracking of devices or specific pathologies over time.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8353,latent_8353,812,0.001624,0.0012988284,3.2369637,Comparison between current and prior radiographic images.,"The examples clearly emphasize the presence of multiple images, namely current and prior radiographs, and involve providing descriptions or interpretations in comparison to these references. This pattern highlights the importance of multiple image perspectives in assessing changes or stability across different imaging sessions.",0.2610837438423645,0.28,0.3333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8354,latent_8354,1553,0.003106,0.0020810594,3.3053253,Comparison of current findings against previous in the context of complex medical history or surgeries.,"The pattern of significant activations is noted when there is an analysis of findings compared to previous studies, specifically focusing on anatomy or potential changes due to conditions like previous surgeries or known pathologies (e.g., lobectomy, CABG). These reports often describe anatomical changes or confirm stability, indicative of a pattern recognition correlating with complex clinical history or diagnosis.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8355,latent_8355,4552,0.009104,0.0036796657,2.5185392,Comparisons with prior imaging studies requested for analysis.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently include a directive to provide descriptions of radiological findings with explicit comparisons to prior studies. This pattern is evident in the phrasing that often involves direct instructions to utilize the comparison in descriptive analysis.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8356,latent_8356,3317,0.006634,0.003230534,1.9713731,Multiple views compared with prior imaging studies.,"Most examples are characterized by radiological comparisons involving multiple views (both frontal and lateral images) for assessing changes since prior studies. The presence of multiple views and comparisons frequently leads to higher activation levels, showing a pattern of comprehensive evaluation.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8357,latent_8357,6427,0.012854,0.0069594732,5.64531,Stable findings or unchanged status compared to prior imaging.,The data indicates a pattern where reports detailing unchanged or stable findings when compared to prior imaging studies tend to have higher activation levels. This suggests that the reference to stability or lack of change in comparison to previous images is a key element in the pattern identified by the higher activation values.,0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.367816091954023,0.4507042253521127,71.0,129.0
+8358,latent_8358,514,0.001028,0.0011977792,5.2921224,Describing findings by comparing current to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing a comparative description based on current and prior images, indicating a focus on synthesizing information from multiple images to note changes or stability over time. The examples use phrases directly comparing findings to previous images.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3765652951699463,0.3780487804878049,0.324074074074074,0.546875,64.0,100.0
+8359,latent_8359,3469,0.006938,0.0027254226,2.1692684,Explicit focus on comparing current with prior images without detailed findings descriptions.,"These examples effectively use ""comparison"" to prior images despite variable inclusion of image descriptions and findings. The focus is on instructing the assistant to specifically provide comparisons with prior images without going into detailed image findings, implying a validation strategy.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4766355140186916,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8360,latent_8360,886,0.001772,0.001679441,3.5941985,Use of both frontal and lateral images in radiology comparisons.,"Examples with significant activation levels appear to involve the use of both frontal and lateral images for evaluating changes or stability in findings, especially when comparisons with previous images or reports are included. This suggests that the dual view approach is noticeably impacting the analysis of radiological changes.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.5158730158730159,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8361,latent_8361,1449,0.002898,0.002281336,3.5353339,Focus on stability of findings compared to previous images.,"These examples emphasize the stability or minor changes in certain pathological findings when compared to prior imaging, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'minimally changed', or 'stability of findings'. This pattern highlights the focus on assessing trends over time in radiological interpretations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5576884219034148,0.5577889447236181,0.5567010309278351,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+8362,latent_8362,8789,0.017578,0.0066727777,1.6086063,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"In these examples, the focus is on providing detailed descriptions of the findings observed in current radiological studies in comparison to prior images. Activation levels increase when there is a comparison or change noted from previous imaging, particularly in regards to cardiopulmonary findings, indwelling devices positioning, or other emergent changes. Such comparisons are typical in follow-up radiological interpretations.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5170825122810913,0.565,0.5398773006134969,0.88,100.0,100.0
+8363,latent_8363,2422,0.004844,0.0024202059,2.5807183,Comparison with prior imaging indicates finding stability or resolution.,"Examples with high activation levels describe explicit comparisons with prior imaging that ascertain stability, resolution, or changes in findings, often indicating clinical stability or lack of progression requiring no change in immediate management.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4743589743589743,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8364,latent_8364,6401,0.012802,0.004832944,2.2667718,Evaluation of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with activation levels suggest a pattern where the report includes an assessment of changes or stability in the findings compared to prior imaging, indicating evaluation of interval changes, which is a common practice in radiology to monitor progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8365,latent_8365,9560,0.01912,0.006921569,1.2247047,Comparison of medical device placement or change with prior study.,"The activated examples consistently describe either the placement or change in position of medical devices like tubes and catheters, which are critical findings often requiring careful monitoring. Additionally, they note the stability or interval change from a prior study. This involves comparing current and past device positions or states, indicating temporary or anatomical changes relevant for clinical consideration.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5970149253731343,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8366,latent_8366,1629,0.003258,0.0020252063,5.994478,Evaluation of findings related to tube or line placements across images.,"Examples with higher activations frequently discuss positioning or placing various tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric) along with airway or chest findings in the report, compared with prior images. These reports focus on descriptions of changes in relation to anatomy or medical devices, indicating the analysis of some process or state related to tube and line placements, as well as pathological conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5588235294117647,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8367,latent_8367,8563,0.017126,0.006359994,2.3408759,Identification of interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly representative examples report findings that have undergone an interval change compared to prior imaging, leading to new pathological findings. These examples use descriptive language to discuss whether new findings have emerged or existing findings have changed in the context of new images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5408163265306123,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8368,latent_8368,671,0.001342,0.0012882351,4.990928,"Frequent use of imaging comparison, often under incomplete or assumed conditions.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve reference to prior imaging for comparison in assessing changes, despite some instances of missing or assumed comparison details. This requires continual evaluation and contextual comparisons, potentially generating notable insights in radiological reporting even when specifics about prior images are limited.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5063545150501672,0.5444444444444444,0.4933333333333333,0.925,80.0,100.0
+8369,latent_8369,717,0.001434,0.0015015163,3.7651882,Descriptions without comparison to prior images or with missing comparison information.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the assistant providing descriptions of current frontal and lateral chest images either without comparison to a previous image or with explicitly missing prior comparison information. The pattern suggests that these instances lack comparison data, which increases activation.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5559083097894154,0.5906735751295337,0.5454545454545454,0.9032258064516128,93.0,100.0
+8370,latent_8370,5324,0.010648,0.0041318336,3.2718031,Interval change or stability of specific features in serial imaging.,"Examples with relatively higher activations involve descriptions of radiological findings where intervals changes are specifically related to positions or appearances of medical devices, cardiomediastinal curves, or lung opacities. Descriptions include unchanged intervals across the examples with activations above 1.0.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6080795899909557,0.61,0.5964912280701754,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8371,latent_8371,1095,0.00219,0.0016202106,3.2035317,Reports featuring tortuous or calcified aorta findings.,"Each example with a higher activation level discusses findings of a tortuous or calcified aorta frequently accompanied by references to cardiac size, regardless of whether cardiomegaly is present. This pattern is common in radiology where there is a focus on aorta morphology and its calcification, often using terms like 'tortuous','calcified','enlarged knob', or 'atherosclerotic,' to describe these findings.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.9523809523809524,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7701677775224086,0.775,0.8873239436619719,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8372,latent_8372,1113,0.002226,0.0013994087,3.0784206,Comprehensive multi-modality comparison of imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples involve comparisons across multiple types of imaging modalities, such as CT, MRI, or combining prior studies with current ones, for a comprehensive evaluation. This extensive comparison process typically indicates a more complex or thorough assessment of changes for diagnosing or ruling out specific conditions, corresponding to higher complexity in interpretation.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8373,latent_8373,8694,0.017388,0.008178786,5.184107,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
+8374,latent_8374,1419,0.002838,0.0019814584,3.2325919,Presence or positioning of invasive medical devices or tubes.,"The pattern across the examples with high activation levels is the presence or status of invasive medical devices or tubes such as PICC lines, central venous catheters, pleural catheters, or endotracheal tubes. The descriptions often mention the exact positioning or changes in these devices relative to prior imaging, indicating their importance in monitoring patient progress or condition.",0.6122448979591837,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8375,latent_8375,2076,0.004152,0.0025499146,2.767508,Comparison to prior images noting changes or consistency.,"Examples with high activation focus on comparing current and prior radiological images to describe findings, particularly noting changes or constancies in pathological structures like nodules, consolidations, or cardiomediastinal features.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3884711779448622,0.39,0.4,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8376,latent_8376,588,0.001176,0.0008718623,3.6652982,"Detailed imaging comparison between various views and prior studies, assessing consistency and device placements.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comprehensive comparisons between different imaging views, such as frontal, lateral, and particularly prior imaging, with a focus on detailed feature assessments, such as placement of devices or internal consistency between findings.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5348219032429559,0.5428571428571428,0.4796747967479675,0.7866666666666666,75.0,100.0
+8377,latent_8377,1327,0.002654,0.002082627,3.803886,Multi-view comparison with noted abnormalities across frontal and lateral perspectives.,"Highly activated examples generally involve comparisons between current and prior imaging, with findings noted across multiple perspectives (frontal and lateral views, but primarily PA and lateral views) which may include the description or suspected presence of abnormalities or indications for further investigation.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3815708101422387,0.425,0.3404255319148936,0.16,100.0,100.0
+8378,latent_8378,640,0.00128,0.0011132224,4.704009,Stability or change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"This set of radiology report examples consistently includes explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, either mentioning that specific changes or stabilities have been noted compared to earlier images. This comparative aspect is critical in radiology for tracking the progress or stability of medical conditions over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.45645752097365,0.4565217391304347,0.4215686274509804,0.5119047619047619,84.0,100.0
+8379,latent_8379,6886,0.013772,0.0050488943,2.7023773,Evaluation of medical devices or tubes in imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve the manipulation or evaluation of medical devices (such as tubes or catheters) within or around parts of the body, often with changes or evaluation against previous placements in imaging. This indicates the model is triggered by instances of medical device adjustment or evaluation compared to past images.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8380,latent_8380,3078,0.006156,0.00292284,2.9540794,Comparative analysis with previous or current imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve an explicit comparison to either prior or current imaging studies, except examples focusing on descriptions without thorough comparative analysis. This pattern indicates that a specific type of comparative analysis is a trigger for higher activation.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8381,latent_8381,7327,0.014654,0.005409838,1.7396595,Comparative analysis with prior imaging study is essential.,Examples with high activation levels frequently refer to or require comparison with a prior radiological study. This suggests that providing any comparative analysis with previous imaging is a salient pattern in these examples.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,100.0,100.0
+8382,latent_8382,1063,0.002126,0.0017355527,3.9891825,"Evaluation of interval changes, particularly in traumatic scenarios.","These examples frequently mention a prior frontal image and the use of comparisons to prior studies, indicating a focus on evaluating interval changes specifically in trauma scenarios. The high activations suggest the pattern involves analysis of interval changes potentially due to trauma, as seen in examples mentioning new pulmonary findings, orthopedic hardware, or device locations in trauma context.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4927536231884058,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8383,latent_8383,2279,0.004558,0.0023484484,3.1317832,Comparison of multiple current and prior images with stable findings highlighted.,"Examples with higher activation involve comparison of multiple images (current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal views) with references to both cardiac and pulmonary features being normal or unchanged, often incorporating a clear comparison segment.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8384,latent_8384,3095,0.00619,0.0034583737,3.732205,Mild or moderate cardiomegaly descriptions in chest imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently highlight descriptions of either 'mild' or 'moderate' cardiomegaly, often with additional references to heart configuration, size, or dilation, but notably avoid terms like 'normal'. These descriptions indicate a significant focus or pattern of interest on the varying degrees of heart enlargement, while low activation examples either describe normal heart sizes or focus on non-cardiomegaly findings.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7307936507936508,0.735,0.8133333333333334,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8385,latent_8385,892,0.001784,0.0013345414,2.5791311,Routine chest radiograph findings with unremarkable comparisons.,"Highly activated examples focus on observations from current chest radiographs with descriptions related to cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, lung status, and lack of consolidation or effusions. Many of these reports include a frontal and lateral view, and provide an overall routine or unremarkable observation, often comparing to prior images to denote consistency or stability across time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4996241283666433,0.5125628140703518,0.5147058823529411,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+8386,latent_8386,556,0.001112,0.0012675481,4.1750607,Description based on current images without prior comparisons.,The examples that show higher activation levels are those that do not perform comparisons with prior images. The model activates higher when instructed to generate findings without pre-existent comparison details. This suggests the pattern focuses on newly describing images without relying on prior comparisons.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.634327251149681,0.6588235294117647,0.6071428571428571,0.4857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+8387,latent_8387,11932,0.023864,0.008774662,2.0525503,Direct comparison of current and prior imaging results highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a direct comparison between current and prior imaging results, with specific changes or stabilities in findings noted. The examples also often account for the changes by mentioning previous conditions, procedures, or devices.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8388,latent_8388,3852,0.007704,0.0031303596,3.0181227,Focus on anatomical distortion or positioning effects.,"Highly activated examples are focused on identifying anatomical curiosities related to patient positioning or anatomical anomalies that could impact lung or cardiac function, like rib fractures, sternotomy variations, or atypical placements and contours.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5006969612489546,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+8389,latent_8389,8267,0.016534,0.0068209716,1.5598936,Clear specification of unchanged findings or stabilized pathology over time.,"Examples demonstrating higher activation often describe clear, specific findings or changes in the imaging, such as stability or changes in masses, opacities, or structures over time. This pattern aligns with reports that detail relevant findings clearly, often emphasizing changes or stability compared to prior imaging, a key element in radiology for monitoring disease progression or treatment effects.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8390,latent_8390,806,0.001612,0.0013473872,4.1434546,"Comparison with images is emphasized, especially lack thereof.","The pattern of providing a description of current radiological findings in comparison to a prior image is highly emphasized in the examples with higher activation levels. This approach is common in radiology to detect changes over time, often using explicit mentions of prior images, which aligns with the instructions given in many of these examples.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4856798227159247,0.5077720207253886,0.4928571428571429,0.7419354838709677,93.0,100.0
+8391,latent_8391,1295,0.00259,0.0018833098,3.7841008,References to specific comparison images or techniques in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation frequently involve imaging reports that reference various comparison images, such as CT or prior radiographs, emphasizing descriptions of findings in the context of comparison. The presence of specific comparison techniques or images appears to be a feature of these higher activation level examples.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,0.5319148936170213,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4281609195402298,0.5276381909547738,0.5164835164835165,0.94,100.0,99.0
+8392,latent_8392,1196,0.002392,0.0019280288,4.0868816,Emphasis on consistent findings between current and prior images.,"Analysis of the activation levels reveals a clear pattern centered around the presence of descriptions that emphasize minimal or no change when comparing with previous studies. This emphasis on stability is frequently reinforced with the repetition of the term 'constant' or similar, indicating that the reports stress consistent findings between current and prior images.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8393,latent_8393,1106,0.002212,0.0016357059,3.9921849,Radiology comparisons emphasize changes or stability versus prior imaging.,"The examples demonstrating high activation levels contain references to providing comparative descriptions of current and prior imaging findings. They are tasked with suggesting changes, improvements, or stability in the context of previously identified abnormalities or clinical questions using phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior'. This process is integral to radiology interpretation, where evolution and resolution of conditions are tracked over time.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8394,latent_8394,1205,0.00241,0.0017951276,3.4998744,Description of temporal changes and stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently reference changes over time, making comparisons to prior studies as a part of a medical assessment, particularly noting any conserved aspects like stability or progression in lung and cardiovascular states. The pattern involves temporal comparisons with previous imaging, using the sequence of findings as a method to identify clinical meaning or stability.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8395,latent_8395,1979,0.003958,0.0025734128,4.9869814,Low lung volumes affecting radiologic interpretation.,"These examples frequently mention low lung volumes as a contributing factor to the difficulty in evaluating cardiopulmonary details. Reports often highlight how these low lung volumes impact the appearance of surrounding structures, such as exaggerating the cardiomediastinal silhouette or contributing to atelectasis, without indicating an acute process.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8395989974937343,0.84,0.8090909090909091,0.89,100.0,100.0
+8396,latent_8396,966,0.001932,0.0015688762,2.9828794,"Chest radiographs showing clear lungs, normal heart and mediastinal contours.","Examples with high activation levels involve detailed analysis of images with lungs, heart, and mediastinal details, highlighting no acute findings like pleural effusion or consolidation. These reports focus on identifying possible pneumonia or other infections but do not identify any acute intrathoracic issues. The high activation examples consistently show lung and heart structures are clear.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.6153846153846154,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8397,latent_8397,902,0.001804,0.0015170869,3.8433158,"Comparisons to previous images highlighting changes in effusions, edema, or pneumothorax.","The examples exhibiting high activation frequently reference current and prior images for comparison, especially focusing on changes regarding pleural effusions, edema, pneumo, or effusions. They consistently use a format of presenting findings followed by comparisons to previous results, which underlines the importance of identifying changes over time.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3688757655293088,0.4170854271356783,0.3111111111111111,0.1414141414141414,99.0,100.0
+8398,latent_8398,1053,0.002106,0.0018668049,3.5887911,Comparison of chest findings with prior images showing stability or specific changes.,"The pattern involves descriptions of chest radiographs that highlight stability or changes compared to previous images. These reports frequently include language that indicates stability, clearing, unchanged states, or specific changes compared to prior imaging, which is a key component when assessing ongoing conditions like lymphoma or previous findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8399,latent_8399,5025,0.01005,0.0038208223,2.4853785,Detailed comparison to prior imaging focusing on stability or changes.,"The common element among high activation examples is a focus on notating specific changes or stability in findings compared to prior studies, which are likely key points of interest in evaluating follow-ups for specific medical indications or progressions.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8400,latent_8400,374,0.000748,0.0009540878,3.7215226,Detailed chest radiograph analysis with emphasis on comparison to prior images and temporal changes.,"These examples describe detailed chest radiological findings with an emphasis on changes over time and specific comparisons to previous studies. They often mention subtle or slight changes, stability, or previous degeneration trends. They also note unchanged findings explicitly, highlighting stability or temporal progression of conditions.",0.4545454545454546,0.4583333333333333,0.4482758620689655,0.5652173913043478,23.0,25.0,0.3146517996870109,0.3146853146853147,0.2277227722772277,0.5348837209302325,43.0,100.0
+8401,latent_8401,1568,0.003136,0.0018041756,2.6805117,Emphasis on interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The radiological reports emphasize findings in relation to prior examinations, either noting stability, changes, or lack of changes over time or after interventions. Reports frequently mention the state of previously identified conditions or hardware positions, using terms such as 'compared to prior', 'no significant change', or 'progressed since', indicating a focus on comparative analysis.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4546591619762351,0.455,0.4526315789473684,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8402,latent_8402,1025,0.00205,0.0015937906,3.6902573,Descriptions of interval changes in radiologic findings.,"The examples showing high activation describe changes in medical imaging findings over time using explicit comparison with prior images. Specifically, they note alterations in lung or heart conditions, device placements, or opacities against previous imaging, focusing on updates such as changes in pulmonary edema, effusion resolution, or stable findings over time.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4831460674157303,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8403,latent_8403,792,0.001584,0.001455618,3.2654629,Assessment of medical device placement against prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to medical device placement, particularly lines, tubes, or wires, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, and others. These reports focus on evaluating the position of these devices and assessing changes or complications related to their placement as compared to prior images. This pattern is indicative of reports prioritizing the assessment of medical device positioning over other findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5003170577045022,0.5126903553299492,0.5072463768115942,0.3608247422680412,97.0,100.0
+8404,latent_8404,996,0.001992,0.0014158521,3.5252268,"Chest radiographic findings compared to prior studies, noting changes or stability.","The pattern is characterized by the evaluation of radiological findings in comparisons to prior studies, often aiming to identify changes or stability in medical conditions. Many examples mark differences or lack thereof (i.e., stability) over time within the lung fields.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8405,latent_8405,755,0.00151,0.0012461804,3.6177778,Comparison of current frontal image with prior frontal image.,"The examples demonstrate the presence of a current frontal image accompanied by a prior frontal image, with an instruction to provide a description comparing the two. This results in a consistent activation pattern where reports are structured to compare findings from images taken at different times, highlighting any changes, similar to reviewing longitudinal data in patient studies.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.537823553327009,0.5561224489795918,0.5323741007194245,0.7708333333333334,96.0,100.0
+8406,latent_8406,2397,0.004794,0.0022197878,3.3960512,Unchanged or stable findings in radiographic comparisons.,"Higher activation levels consistently occur in examples describing observations where previously noted abnormalities remain unchanged. This indicates an interest in stability or lack of progression in particular findings over time, suggesting the model's focus is on longitudinal stability rather than acute changes.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5444139194139195,0.5477386934673367,0.5542168674698795,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+8407,latent_8407,1032,0.002064,0.0014411925,3.2672117,Detailed comparison and evaluation of interval changes with prior imaging.,"These examples describe the findings of a current radiological image in direct comparison to those in prior images, indicating changes or stability over time. High activations often explicitly state 'comparison to prior imaging' and assess interval changes in medical conditions or device placements. This pattern is fundamental in radiological evaluations for tracking disease progression or checking procedural efficacy.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4811320754716981,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8408,latent_8408,3334,0.006668,0.0038081093,3.1292663,Focus on stable findings or minimal changes compared to prior images.,"Higher activation samples consistently require descriptions of changes relative to prior imaging, focusing on stability or changes of specific findings or abnormalities. This includes phrases like 'stable appearance', 'no significant interval change', and references to unchanged findings compared to prior images.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8409,latent_8409,1798,0.003596,0.0021527782,3.6924531,Interval changes or stability of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern shows that high activation samples feature comparisons that identify interval changes, such as changes in fluid levels or tubes and lines, that potentially indicate ongoing or new pathological processes. Terms like 'interval change,' 'unchanged,' 'persistent,' or 'removal' are commonly used.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5498538569068496,0.5527638190954773,0.5431034482758621,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+8410,latent_8410,12097,0.024194,0.008641968,1.154109,Comparison of current radiological findings to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the radiological examination findings in the context of comparing current radiographic images to prior images. The details of change, stability, or progression of findings are explicitly emphasized, especially in situations where a prior image is referenced directly.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5164835164835164,0.56,0.5375,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8411,latent_8411,9757,0.019514,0.0073442846,2.2165554,Detailed and structured comparison with prior imaging reports.,The highly activated examples involve a clear and structured comparison between current and prior imaging. Less activated examples lack prior report details or a direct comparison with previous images. This structured comparison includes phrases that illustrate specific changes or stability of findings over time.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8412,latent_8412,7589,0.015178,0.0058519486,2.0997672,Emphasis on comparison with prior chest imaging studies.,"The examples are focused on the task of descriptions and comparisons with prior imaging studies. It shows a particular interest in the existence or absence of comparative statements regarding previous images, which indicates a pattern of assessing interval changes observed in diagnostic imaging.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8413,latent_8413,3166,0.006332,0.0026848705,2.310841,Change in position of medical devices or tubes since prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention changes in the appearance or placement of medical devices or tubing between assessments. These occurrences suggest that the model is focusing on the mention of medical device or tube adjustments, such as tracheostomy cannula, central lines, catheters, endotracheal tubes, etc., indicating meaningful changes from previous assessments or studies, which is significant in radiology for tracking patient management and intervention.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5093580308167259,0.555,0.6410256410256411,0.25,100.0,100.0
+8414,latent_8414,1745,0.00349,0.0022095693,2.4296014,Significant interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Prompts with higher activations involve direct and substantial changes noted when comparing current and prior imaging, such as new findings or significant changes in conditions like consolidation or fluid levels. Instances with stable conditions or descriptions without notable changes activate less, suggesting that the model focuses on variability and significant clinical change as indicative of the pattern.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4160702043054984,0.4623115577889447,0.4090909090909091,0.1818181818181818,99.0,100.0
+8415,latent_8415,1196,0.002392,0.0014945039,2.6047077,Explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern in this data set is related to the presence of information comparing current radiology imaging findings to prior studies. The examples with activation higher than zero contain explicit descriptions of current versus previous imaging findings. Specifically, clear comparative statements are made regarding stability, changes, or interval evaluations of particular findings.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.4491525423728814,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8416,latent_8416,763,0.001526,0.0011505632,3.1670103,Cardiomediastinal contour is stable or at upper limits of normal.,"The high activation examples consistently reported findings in the cardiomediastinal region, specifically detailing characteristics like the heart size being at 'upper limits of normal', 'mild cardiomegaly', or 'normal contours', often accompanied by comparisons to previous studies. These elements suggest a pattern that highlights stability or minor changes in cardiomediastinal features when compared to prior imaging.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.494521859376662,0.5151515151515151,0.5166666666666667,0.3163265306122449,98.0,100.0
+8417,latent_8417,1678,0.003356,0.0019598233,2.7807603,Descriptions focus on changes relative to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed involves documenting radiological findings in relation to prior imaging studies, highlighting interval changes or stability. These examples often describe changes in findings or note stability concerning previous diseases or interventions, using explicit comparison with earlier studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4672131147540984,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8418,latent_8418,10972,0.021944,0.0082367,2.178074,Focus on comparison of medical device or line positions between studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe observations of previous imaging comparisons with findings related to tubes, lines, or devices, particularly focusing on their position and potential changes between studies. This context surrounds specialized monitoring conditions often present in intensive care or post-operative settings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.6296296296296297,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8419,latent_8419,733,0.001466,0.001569019,2.990323,Detailed comparisons noting cardiomediastinal contours and pleural findings.,"Highly activated examples have descriptions focusing on the cardiomediastinal contours, pleural effusion, and bilateral pulmonary opacities, often with references to changes from previous exams or descriptions of devices like pacemakers and catheters indicating treatments or status post procedures.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5229959166129379,0.5233160621761658,0.5047619047619047,0.5698924731182796,93.0,100.0
+8420,latent_8420,1346,0.002692,0.0018317824,2.8678432,Explicit requests to compare findings with prior images.,"Highly activated samples all have explicit or clear requests to compare current radiological findings with prior images or studies. This focus on comparison to prior records is a critical aspect in radiology to track changes, stability, or progression of observed conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4433160309937561,0.445,0.4382022471910112,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8421,latent_8421,2763,0.005526,0.0037541206,4.6764035,Contrast with prior imaging studies to determine changes in findings.,"These examples contain references to previous imaging studies, which are common in radiology reports to assess stability or changes in findings over time. This pattern uses phrases like 'compared to' or explicit dates of prior exams to establish this comparative context.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8422,latent_8422,577,0.001154,0.0013509976,3.2477522,Description and assessment of heart size and mediastinal contours.,"The examples that show higher activation levels refer to findings that describe the size or appearance of the heart and its implication on cardiopulmonary health. This suggests a pattern in which the description of the heart size (normal, borderline, or altered) is highly significant for the model's activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5318696648619923,0.5344827586206896,0.4597701149425287,0.5405405405405406,74.0,100.0
+8423,latent_8423,750,0.0015,0.0014539307,4.91128,Comparison of pleural effusion changes with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels all feature descriptions of pleural effusions or pleural changes with accompanying language indicating comparison to prior images in terms of effusion size or presence. This is a common pattern in these reports, focusing on stability or changes in pleural effusions and their implications.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6516717325227963,0.6701570680628273,0.75,0.4615384615384615,91.0,100.0
+8424,latent_8424,1592,0.003184,0.0023065445,5.001086,Reports emphasizing stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations are about accurately assessing changes or stabilities in findings via comparisons with prior imaging, indicating a specific focus on identifying changes or consistency over time. Examples with lower activations often lack this comparison emphasis or have no notable change mentioned.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8425,latent_8425,4106,0.008212,0.0033477584,3.186876,"Comparison of current and prior images, focusing on interval change.",The common theme is providing descriptions of the findings that specifically highlight interval changes by comparing the current radiograph with a prior one. This involves reporting the stability or change in specific clinical features or radiographic markers.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8426,latent_8426,969,0.001938,0.0015591914,3.7350411,"Findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The pattern involves radiological studies that provide descriptions of findings by comparing them against prior imaging studies, specifically noting intervals and stability or changes, and often providing clinical indications for the study.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8427,latent_8427,5436,0.010872,0.0041823327,1.8728639,Incorporation of both frontal and lateral chest radiographs for multi-view assessments.,"These examples highlight patterns where frontal and lateral images are assessed together, often in the case of complex or evolving findings requiring multiple viewpoints, such as assessments of post-surgical changes, intervals changes, or more complex conditions within the thoracic cavity.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.43,0.4363636363636363,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8428,latent_8428,383,0.000766,0.00076804694,5.3938074,"Comparison of current image findings with prior studies, mentioning stability or changes.","Examples with high activation levels prominently feature the comparison or correlation of current imaging findings with prior images. This is often accompanied by the identification of stability, changes, or additions in the medical devices depicted in images. This pattern is central to evaluating medical interventions, device placements, or the progression/stability of conditions.",0.3804181540030596,0.4,0.2941176470588235,0.25,20.0,25.0,0.5036039711682306,0.5133333333333333,0.3544303797468354,0.56,50.0,100.0
+8429,latent_8429,950,0.0019,0.0016714609,3.174095,Detailed lung conditions and anatomical changes or comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly describe changes or observations in specific lung conditions, structures, or devices, with a focus on details such as anatomical changes, exact placements, or specific comparison details (e.g., change in size, opacification levels), demonstrating the model's attention to precise diagnostic descriptions.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.5328947368421053,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8430,latent_8430,4907,0.009814,0.0041456153,3.0700772,Stable findings with interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently compare findings in a specified radiological exam to previous studies using explicit indications that changes have occurred since prior imaging, but without significant new or acute pathologies. The instances often highlight stable conditions or small variations that may not be clinically urgent, implying a close monitoring over time. Phrases such as 'unchanged', 'decreased', 'interval improvement', and 'compared to prior' are prevalent.",0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5735294117647058,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8431,latent_8431,760,0.00152,0.001185853,4.4469414,Request for findings based on image comparison with template prompts.,"Highly activated examples commonly involve a request to provide radiological study findings based on images and to compare these findings with prior imaging studies. Additionally, these examples often utilize templates with placeholders and partial sentences to prompt specific input by the assistant.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4396483033383707,0.4797979797979798,0.4836601307189542,0.7551020408163265,98.0,100.0
+8432,latent_8432,9548,0.019096,0.009401789,4.815408,Uncertainty or recommendations for further evaluation in imaging findings.,"Examples with activation scores greater than 0 often involve the mention or observation of low lung volumes, which can affect the appearance of other structures, previously unknown findings or evaluations, or discussions of potential repositioning or follow-up actions based on the imaging results. These reports usually note changes, suggest recommendations, or highlight uncertainties in positioning or interpretation.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6051587301587301,0.6080402010050251,0.6265060240963856,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+8433,latent_8433,1712,0.003424,0.0029148173,2.8096457,Comparison with prior or current radiological findings highlighting changes.,"Reports with high activation levels refer to findings noted in comparison with either current or prior imaging studies of the chest. Specific anatomical or pathological changes are identified and their variations from previous images are emphasized, such as changes in pulmonary opacities, cardiomediastinal contours, or position of medical devices.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8434,latent_8434,4870,0.00974,0.0037183077,2.0877075,Finding descriptions compared to a prior with no given report.,"Examples with higher activation levels request a description of findings on both current and prior images without providing any specific imaging findings to the AI ('PRIOR_REPORT: N/A' or simply directive to provide comparison). This instruction-focused contrast indicates that when AI is directly tasked to compare imaging findings without further context, it shows a specific activation pattern.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8435,latent_8435,638,0.001276,0.0012296463,3.516806,Occurrence of draft or template placeholders in report.,"High activation is associated with reports containing terminology indicative of draft or unfinished text, such as sporadic incomplete placeholders or brackets '[[]]' which suggest prompt templates rather than final findings.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3015873015873015,0.4318181818181818,0.4318181818181818,1.0,76.0,100.0
+8436,latent_8436,1221,0.002442,0.0017294257,3.7043703,Comparison with focus on medical device placement.,"The examples with higher activation involve descriptions involving comparison between a current and a prior image, with a focus on the presence or stability of medical devices (e.g., catheters, PICC lines, tubes). The pattern likely emphasizes the identifying, tracking, or verification of medical devices' placement or their related changes over time.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6645891216740507,0.665,0.6774193548387096,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8437,latent_8437,2189,0.004378,0.0030742288,3.3781612,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging are emphasized.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference findings in comparison to prior reports and describe findings as stable, unchanged, or slightly altered compared to previous exams. This implies the pattern focuses on evaluations of stability or change over time relative to prior images.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5447154471544715,0.545,0.5473684210526316,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8438,latent_8438,939,0.001878,0.0016289563,3.5319088,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding.,Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions that note 'low lung volumes' leading to 'bronchovascular crowding' or related changes. This pattern recurs in several reports and appears to correlate with higher indication of model activation.,0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5471698113207547,0.595,0.7714285714285715,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8439,latent_8439,8476,0.016952,0.006345391,1.5954039,Reports focusing on unchanged or stable findings compared to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on unchanged findings or stability over time, often with reference to prior imaging to note stability. They frequently include descriptions of stable cardiomediastinal contours, heart size, and lung fields. The reports emphasize consistency over time, disregarding instances where changes or dynamic findings are present.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.569620253164557,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8440,latent_8440,4118,0.008236,0.0040083127,2.6813295,Interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels include phrases pointing to interval changes, such as new appearances, stable findings compared to prior exams, or worsening conditions. Such comparisons are crucial in evaluating the significance of current findings against previous states, highlighting stability or progression.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8441,latent_8441,1201,0.002402,0.0015662524,3.7727935,Use of previous image comparison for change assessment in findings.,"Instances with references to previous imaging for comparison tend to have higher activations. Such comparisons emphasize continual monitoring or change over time of specific features or devices, aligning with clinical practice patterns emphasizing longitudinal assessment.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8442,latent_8442,639,0.001278,0.0010739968,5.1737614,"Assessment of interval changes in pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pulmonary opacifications.","These examples involve comparisons of the current image findings to prior studies, but particularly focus on changes or stability in pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pulmonary opacifications, often indicating interval improvements or persistence of conditions seen in previous studies.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.444905905256327,0.4835164835164835,0.3846153846153846,0.2439024390243902,82.0,100.0
+8443,latent_8443,1295,0.00259,0.0018625163,3.8514,Improvement or stability in aeration or device position compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples discuss changes in respiratory conditions, aeration, or device positions by comparing them to prior imaging, especially highlighting improvements or lack of changes. This indicates the focus is on dynamic assessment of treatment response or stabilization over time.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,0.6944444444444444,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7457023700539112,0.75,0.6984126984126984,0.88,100.0,100.0
+8444,latent_8444,3092,0.006184,0.0028269605,2.5478637,Descriptions highlight changes found compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels focus on providing descriptions of findings in radiology studies specifically in relation to prior imaging, highlighting intervals of change or stability. These examples frequently contain specific language explaining the changes compared to prior films, which underscores the pattern.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8445,latent_8445,1911,0.003822,0.0019950042,3.1925673,Comparative analysis of changes with previous imaging studies.,"These examples regularly involve comparing findings on current imaging with prior imaging studies, often noting changes or stability over time. Emphasis is placed on observing and documenting changes, detecting any worsening, improvement, or stability, which reflects a pattern of comparative analysis in radiology reports.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8446,latent_8446,1091,0.002182,0.0016442124,2.772335,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples reflect stable findings when compared to previous imaging, often mentioning terms like 'unchanged from', 'stable', 're-demonstrated', or 'no significant change', indicating a consistent finding over time without significant progression or regression.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.2727272727272727,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4262295081967213,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8447,latent_8447,667,0.001334,0.0011321895,3.347724,"Radiological findings indicate normal cardiac, pulmonary, and mediastinal contours.","Many examples discuss the radiological findings of normal cardiac silhouette size, clear lungs, normal mediastinal and hilar contours, and lack of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, reflecting a normal examination. The consistency of 'normal' findings despite diverse given indications indicates a pattern towards identifying variations from normal rather than specific abnormalities.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6656339644291451,0.6702127659574468,0.6666666666666666,0.5909090909090909,88.0,100.0
+8448,latent_8448,10200,0.0204,0.007561227,1.9605788,References to comparison with prior imaging studies and interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels all involve the presence of comparison with previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability over time. This linguistic pattern is common in radiology reports to assess the progression or resolution of medical conditions using phrases like 'compared with', 'interval change', or specific dates of the prior imaging.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8449,latent_8449,1127,0.002254,0.0017343004,2.9713924,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies with focus on changes.,"Activation levels are high in examples where there is a detailed process of comparing current imaging with prior studies to identify changes or lack thereof, particularly in terms of cardiac and pulmonary details. The explanations often document stability or specific changes over time, involving multiple comparable studies.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4736842105263157,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8450,latent_8450,941,0.001882,0.0016857999,4.0098586,Description of interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"This set of examples revolves around the specific process of evaluating radiological images in comparison to prior ones, focusing particularly on changes or stabilities in findings such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, lung opacities, or cardiomegaly. Reports often mention intervals of time or details about the history related to comparisons such as prior examinations or symptoms, which reinforces this pattern.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4895833333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8451,latent_8451,4758,0.009516,0.0043638893,3.3346188,Assessment of device/tube placement relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation focus on evaluating medical device placements such as tubes and catheters, or surgical changes like pneumonectomy in comparison to prior radiographs. They often involve detailed descriptions of the positions and necessary adjustments of these devices.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6503762255833396,0.655,0.7012987012987013,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8452,latent_8452,8222,0.016444,0.0060912054,1.9002012,Presence of comparative analysis with prior radiological findings.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to findings in comparison to a previous study or indicate interval changes in a patient's condition based on these comparisons. This suggests the model is activating based on the presence of comparative statements that imply monitoring of disease progression or stability.,0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4542297196725378,0.505,0.5031055900621118,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8453,latent_8453,1366,0.002732,0.0017572435,3.768372,Comparative analysis with emphasis on stable or unchanged findings.,"These examples predominantly describe the findings of current imaging while referencing prior studies for comparison. They often use terms like 'unchanged', 'similar from previous', 'compared to prior', indicating a comparison-based style of report writing. This consistency indicates a pattern of recurring comparative evaluations derived from radiology report formats.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4936123805567096,0.507537688442211,0.5151515151515151,0.34,100.0,99.0
+8454,latent_8454,7800,0.0156,0.005849687,1.551687,"Comparison of notable prior abnormalities or devices, focusing on changes or stability.","Most high-activation examples discuss the comparison and interval progression of notable or significant findings like consolidations, effusions, pneumothorax, cardiovascular abnormalities, or specific mentions of devices or procedures. There is also an emphasis on changes in the structure of interest like the mediastinum, lung pattern (e.g., tortuosity, consolidation).",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6292863762743282,0.64,0.6044776119402985,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8455,latent_8455,937,0.001874,0.0015215313,4.536528,Focus on placement or changes in indwelling devices.,"Examples with positive activation levels consistently mention placement or changes in indwelling medical devices such as tubes or catheters, often referring to 'Dobbhoff', 'NGT', or 'pacemaker' placement or adjustments. This reflects common clinical practices where device positioning is assessed in relation to prior images.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8456,latent_8456,705,0.00141,0.001143132,4.39417,Detection of free air in radiological evaluations.,Examples with higher activation levels contain references to free air in the abdomen or pleura as seen on chest radiographs. Free air is a critical finding usually indicating perforation and requires attention in both radiology reports and clinical assessment.,0.7688104245481295,0.78,1.0,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.586013986013986,0.654054054054054,0.92,0.2705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+8457,latent_8457,1192,0.002384,0.0017570691,2.6407113,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels describe changes or findings by explicitly comparing current radiological images with prior images. An emphasis on temporal changes or stability in certain features or placements of medical devices is consistently highlighted, indicating a comparison-focused diagnostic pattern.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8458,latent_8458,1837,0.003674,0.0020530326,2.6552157,Detailed placement and comparison of tubes or catheters.,"Reports showing notable activation levels often involve explicit comparison of current imaging results with prior studies and include the presence of various tubes, lines, or catheters in the imaging field. Highlighting the consistency or changes in the position of these implements often requires detailed attention to such comparisons.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6298519407763106,0.63,0.6354166666666666,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8459,latent_8459,946,0.001892,0.0014349554,5.6351438,"Descriptions focus on comparison with prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability.","The given examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate the model's ability to recognize and generate findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. This involves explicitly noting any changes or stability of findings relative to previous images, such as stable or changed conditions since the prior imaging, which is a thematic practice in radiology reporting.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5112781954887218,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8460,latent_8460,1099,0.002198,0.0017699747,3.8517842,Focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the comparison between the current and prior imaging studies, particularly when specific mentions are made to assess interval change indicating focus on changes between examinations. This pattern of language indicates the importance of longitudinal assessment in the findings.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8461,latent_8461,771,0.001542,0.0014485432,4.22843,Interval changes in pulmonary findings compared to prior images.,"Sample examples contain comparisons to previous images and focus on identifying interval changes in the radiologic findings, especially regarding pulmonary opacities, effusions, and pleural thickening. Other common aspects include repeated evaluations for specific conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion, which are updated in comparison to previous reports or images.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4945670437997087,0.5104166666666666,0.4848484848484848,0.3478260869565217,92.0,100.0
+8462,latent_8462,1235,0.00247,0.0015595141,2.8071432,"Findings described in comparison to baseline or prior imaging, often focusing on stability or specific changes in findings.","These examples are highly descriptive of radiological findings and often reference previous comparison studies. The presence of stable conditions, improvements, or specific conditions like tube placement in relation to radiopaque material are noted.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8463,latent_8463,1259,0.002518,0.001850482,2.4194784,Detailed interval change/comparison description including multiple views.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on providing specific descriptions of radiological findings based on given images, including references to prior reports, but particularly indicate providing detailed observations of interval changes or comparisons over time across different views (frontal and lateral) in the context of complex medical histories or questions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4448671130046663,0.4472361809045226,0.4513274336283185,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+8464,latent_8464,4214,0.008428,0.0059067695,3.5222356,"Detailed evaluation of cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours for stability or normalcy.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently include detailed evaluations of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours and note their normalcy or any changes. These are detailed descriptions of standard anatomical points checked for abnormalities during chest imaging, often highlighted for stability or absence of change from prior studies.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,0.6756756756756757,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6789203014883949,0.705,0.6305732484076433,0.99,100.0,100.0
+8465,latent_8465,732,0.001464,0.0014382072,3.2352638,Use of both frontal and lateral views with specific clinical indications in comparisons.,"This pattern shows evaluations based on comparison with prior images, reflecting an interest in noticing changes over time. Reports with higher activations consistently evaluate the current state using both frontal and lateral views of the chest and provide specific clinical indications like presence of cardiac or respiratory issues, pneumonia assessments, hospital interventions, or device placements. This results in high activation due to detailed, clinical comparisons made possible by the full spectrum of available views.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5392156862745099,0.5425531914893617,0.5086206896551724,0.6704545454545454,88.0,100.0
+8466,latent_8466,806,0.001612,0.0013663479,2.7148986,Description of findings by comparing to prior frontal image.,These examples generally involve providing descriptions of findings by comparing the current imaging against a prior frontal image without the presence of initial historical detail or preamptive comparison. The cue 'Provide a description of the findings' and viewing 'in comparison to the prior frontal image' is emphasized without additional context suggestive of expected or emergent pathology.,0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.412987012987013,0.4292929292929293,0.4436090225563909,0.6020408163265306,98.0,100.0
+8467,latent_8467,687,0.001374,0.0013643153,3.1678414,Detailed interval change evaluation related to prior images.,"Examples demonstrating significant activations consistently include a discussion predicting or evaluating for interval changes compared to prior images. Lower activation examples lack these predictive or evaluative comparisons, indicating the presence of a description in the historical context as key to higher activation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.479319536374255,0.4808743169398907,0.4333333333333333,0.4698795180722891,83.0,100.0
+8468,latent_8468,690,0.00138,0.0012171763,4.4125676,Assessment of interval changes in radiology images.,"The pattern observed is the usage of radiology images and previous reports to determine interval changes. These examples list radiological findings and often involve assessing various structures or devices in relation to their position in prior images, emphasizing descriptions of changes over time using previous reports for comparison.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5119050997531004,0.5185185185185185,0.4918032786885246,0.6741573033707865,89.0,100.0
+8469,latent_8469,8659,0.017318,0.006258621,1.6303571,Evaluating interval changes and stability in medical imaging reports.,"Instances with higher activation include comparisons of current with prior images, particularly highlighting stability or improvement in conditions related to medical devices, fluid collections, or opacities indicating infection or other pathologies. The texts exhibit systematic evaluation of interval changes in radiological findings, which may include equipment positions or resolution of medical issues.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8470,latent_8470,12326,0.024652,0.008918799,1.1856076,Description of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples focus on comparisons between current and prior images, specifically identifying changes in findings or stability over time, emphasizing these variations or consistencies in clinical status, device placement, or anatomical structures.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8471,latent_8471,652,0.001304,0.0012617514,2.6140249,Comparative analysis of current and prior images in the report.,"The common pattern observed is the focus on analyzing and describing the current images in relation to the prior frontal image, emphasizing the comparative aspect of imaging studies even when only one image is initially considered.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4204585537918871,0.4301075268817204,0.4193548387096774,0.6046511627906976,86.0,100.0
+8472,latent_8472,523,0.001046,0.0010157891,6.70439,Analysis involving both current frontal and lateral chest images compared to prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples consistently describe comparisons between current and prior imaging and often involve frontal and lateral chest X-ray views. The presence of both current and prior images, specifically mentioning the inclusion of lateral views, correlates with higher activation levels.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5268090671316478,0.5329341317365269,0.4320987654320987,0.5223880597014925,67.0,100.0
+8473,latent_8473,857,0.001714,0.0015269346,3.9817796,Evaluating stability or changes by comparing current images to prior ones.,"Descriptions consistently involve evaluating findings from current X-ray images in comparison to prior X-ray images and providing interpretations based on those comparisons, specifically emphasizing unchanged conditions or stability over time.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3642211709343946,0.365,0.3738317757009345,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8474,latent_8474,886,0.001772,0.0013550913,3.881677,Interval change compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a direct comparison of current images to prior images, with emphasis on identifying and describing any 'interval change'. This includes references to moderate resolution or unchanged findings from a prior examination. This suggests the pattern involves evaluating and noting changes between current and previous imaging studies, particularly where there is room for significant change or stability in findings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5368421052631579,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8475,latent_8475,12059,0.024118,0.008699536,1.1604236,Direct image comparison with prior study.,"The high activation levels correspond to prompts with explicit instructions to compare the current images with older images. This is likely a trained task of the model, where past and current states are directly compared to evaluate changes, maintaining continuity in assessing medical conditions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4900173611111111,0.53,0.5192307692307693,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8476,latent_8476,1219,0.002438,0.0016961034,3.375186,Assessing interval changes by comparing to prior radiographic images.,"The pattern indicates a comparison of current radiology images to prior studies, specifically those that discuss changes or stability in clinical findings over time. This is determined by repeated references to past images, emphasizing ongoing assessment of conditions through serial imaging.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.40625,0.43,0.45,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8477,latent_8477,1112,0.002224,0.0016195859,3.1141992,Detail changes in specific pre-existing conditions over time.,"The highly activated examples often specify a detailed change over time regarding specific conditions, typically of complex or stable nature, requiring narratives focused on nuanced changes. This is reflected in detailed comparative analyses of specific findings or devices and their positions, absent of new critical incident focus.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4443192911316362,0.445,0.4408602150537634,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8478,latent_8478,3685,0.00737,0.0033258435,4.123195,Descriptions focusing on interval changes from prior imaging.,"Examples show radiological findings described in comparison to prior studies, with emphasis on interval changes, both significant and non-significant. Descriptions of alterations or lack thereof are integral to these reports, with language highlighting changes like 'improved', 'stable', or 'removed' devices.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.594059405940594,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8479,latent_8479,1254,0.002508,0.0016627087,3.9968781,Description of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The pattern primarily highlights observations regarding differences from previous images when a comparison is available, particularly noting areas of progression or resolution such as 'slightly more dense', 'more confluent', 'no relevant change', or 'smaller than prior', which are linguistic markers indicating changes over time. These are key components in assessing follow-up radiological changes in serial studies.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6236395076797885,0.63,0.6031746031746031,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8480,latent_8480,870,0.00174,0.001463386,3.0205345,Comparison focuses on frontal image changes from prior.,"The examples with high activation levels involve cases where there is an explicit comparison made to prior frontal images, despite instances where there is only a current frontal image without additional views. This indicates a pattern where high activation samples prioritize the comparison to prior frontal images over lateral or other views, focusing on the differences observed between the two evaluations.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8481,latent_8481,2601,0.005202,0.0027641908,3.2298486,"Detailed image comparison to prior images, noting stability or change.","Examples with high activation levels tend to contain detailed descriptions of findings in the current images comparing them to prior images, often confirming stability or change. This pattern indicates that the model is focusing on the detailed imagery comparisons and changes over time which are crucial for tracking patient progress in radiological assessments.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.54,0.54,0.54,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8482,latent_8482,1557,0.003114,0.002181384,3.8214254,Interval assessment of medical device placement or repositioning.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of intervals in treatment or monitoring devices, reflecting changes in their positioning or status. This concerns placement or repositioning of tubes, catheters, pacemakers, and similar devices, often with specifics on their anatomical location, compared against previous imaging. Such practices are fundamental to ensure correct and safe placement, necessitating careful monitoring and documentation of any alterations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5730337078651685,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8483,latent_8483,568,0.001136,0.0011785617,3.260305,Directives to alter placement of support devices in radiology results.,"High activation levels are associated with findings in radiological studies that incorporate explicit directives to advance or retract support devices, like nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, due to suboptimal current placements.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4637593377750858,0.6144578313253012,0.5833333333333334,0.106060606060606,66.0,100.0
+8484,latent_8484,14531,0.029062,0.010444577,1.395633,Comparative findings focus with detailed differential interpretations.,The activated examples focus on providing a detailed comparative analysis of current imaging findings with prior images. They often do this by highlighting changes or stability in medical conditions as well as indicating a more thorough differential when interpreting data. Less activated examples lack a similar comparative emphasis or detail in differential diagnosis when focusing on specific changes or rulings.,0.6122448979591837,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6290726817042607,0.63,0.6444444444444445,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8485,latent_8485,10110,0.02022,0.010432847,4.372292,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions that include a detailed comparison between current and previous imaging studies. This is a common pattern in radiology reports to identify changes over time.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4591346153846154,0.46,0.4629629629629629,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8486,latent_8486,8723,0.017446,0.006484241,1.6011721,Comparison of positioning or stability of medical devices in sequential images.,"These examples consistently involve assessing and reporting changes or stability in medical devices or equipment placement, particularly lines or tubes, when comparing the current to prior images. Phrases indicate reference to prior studies to verify placement of hospital equipment, such as 'NG tube', 'ET tube', 'PICC line', or similar.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8487,latent_8487,1217,0.002434,0.0017560051,4.1102295,"Assessment for pulmonary edema, pneumonia, or consolidation.","The descriptions in the examples with higher activation levels focus on evaluating for specific pathologies like pulmonary edema, pneumonia, or consolidation, often including findings relevant to these conditions such as interstitial edema, hilar engorgement, or vascular congestion.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6401446654611211,0.6532663316582915,0.6131386861313869,0.84,100.0,99.0
+8488,latent_8488,1315,0.00263,0.0022151235,4.8721943,Reports emphasize stability or comparison with prior images.,"The examples with significant activations show descriptions of radiological studies in direct comparison to a prior study, often emphasizing stability or slight changes in findings across time or to note changes in devices or lesions compared to past data. There's a pattern of emphasis on stability or unchanged status from previous comparisons.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8489,latent_8489,827,0.001654,0.0014631627,3.9817293,"Description of interval changes, especially in medical device positioning or fluid collections.","These examples include detailed descriptions of changes over time in medical line placements or fluid collections, such as pneumothoraces or pleural effusions, referencing prior imaging studies. This specificity and focus on interval changes or adjustments are highly represented in the samples with higher activations.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8490,latent_8490,1032,0.002064,0.0016510175,2.9956386,Assessment of interval change between current and prior imaging studies.,"These examples involve reports where imaging findings from different time points are compared, with attention to changes in radiographic opacities, device placements, and pleural effusions. This type of comparison is crucial in assessing progression or stability of conditions, typical in follow-up imaging.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8491,latent_8491,4206,0.008412,0.0031798198,1.9573705,Report descriptions focus on changes or stability between current and prior images.,"The examples with an activation level greater than zero consistently involve comparative analysis between a current and prior imaging report, focusing on detecting changes or stability in the findings, often using explicit mentions of 'comparison', 'compared to prior', and documenting status over time, such as 'unchanged' or 'increased'.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4545098551102989,0.4723618090452261,0.4779411764705882,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+8492,latent_8492,968,0.001936,0.0017757778,2.8979592,Radiological findings are described relative to prior images.,"Highlighted examples report findings by comparing current images with prior ones, indicating interval change or stability of the findings over time. Common phrases include 'in comparison with prior', 'stable since prior', or 'increased since prior', which helps determine changes in condition or treatment efficacy.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5733333333333334,0.6,0.5666666666666667,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8493,latent_8493,1999,0.003998,0.002283515,4.1564364,Comparison to prior imaging with mention of subtle changes or stable findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently feature detailed comparison findings that reveal subtle changes in lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, or other radiographic features linked with prior exams. This pattern holds regardless of other elements of the radiology report context.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5339805825242718,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8494,latent_8494,4563,0.009126,0.003757469,2.892298,"Comparison of current image findings with previous images, often finding no new significant changes.","The examples with higher activation focus on comparing the findings of current and prior radiographs, discussing and evaluating the interval changes. This often involves an assessment where there is little or no change, suggesting stability or benignness. This is evident from the recurring phrase 'unchanged' about previous imaging findings and 'stable' appearances. Also, they sometimes note minor procedural changes or adjustments.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4743589743589743,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8495,latent_8495,1810,0.00362,0.0017765898,3.2010286,Focus on interval changes or differences compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation include references to specific comparison with prior chest images to assess changes or abnormalities over time. This pattern involves using terms that denote diagnostic evaluation in relation to previous exams, especially focusing on significant findings rather than stating similarity alone.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4508196721311475,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8496,latent_8496,6357,0.012714,0.004836637,2.2946513,Reports focus on change or stability compared to previous images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include comparisons with prior images, generally noting changes or stability in specific radiological findings across examinations. This pattern accentuates the relevance of comparative analysis over standalone imaging in these radiological reports.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5713265063110264,0.595,0.564625850340136,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8497,latent_8497,3504,0.007008,0.0030209085,2.0232599,Analysis without prior reports available.,"The highly activated examples consistently use both current and previous images for comparative analysis, but they are distinctive for lacking information about the 'PRIOR_REPORT' or are marked as 'N/A'. When the prior report is not provided or unavailable, the descriptions focus more extensively on current findings and impressions without detailed historical context.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8498,latent_8498,11339,0.022678,0.008350552,1.3646268,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings indicating changes.,"The representative samples consistently demonstrate a detailed comparison between the current imaging findings and prior imaging studies. This pattern shows observations are made relative to a baseline or previous state, often noting changes over time.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5402298850574713,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8499,latent_8499,14435,0.02887,0.010505709,1.2596787,Emphasis on findings by comparing current and prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples have detailed commentary that highlights new or unchanged findings via comparison with a prior study, frequently intertwined with direct observations from the current radiograph, reflecting the significance of comparison methodology in radiology.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8500,latent_8500,816,0.001632,0.0014703599,6.634429,Significant findings or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Most examples that demonstrate high activation involve specific abnormal findings or changes compared to prior radiographs, emphasizing significant progression or findings that are clinically relevant.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3706666666666667,0.41,0.32,0.16,100.0,100.0
+8501,latent_8501,11436,0.022872,0.008275986,1.623097,Detailed lung or mediastinal findings compared with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples often include varied findings specific to lung abnormalities, or unusual mediastinal contours, often with demonstrable changes over time or surgical observations clearly documented. Key details for features such as pleural effusion, mediastinal shift, atelectasis, and specific medical interventions like stents or catheters are described, often comparing to past examinations.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8502,latent_8502,9013,0.018026,0.007529274,2.4443576,Clear lungs despite potential indications for abnormal findings.,"The examples with the highest activation levels describe findings where the lungs are specifically noted to be clear without any abnormalities such as consolidation, effusion, or edema, often despite certain indications or patient history suggesting potential lung pathology. This pattern emphasizes the normal appearance of the lungs in radiological findings when there are expectations of issues.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6049111049986247,0.605,0.6082474226804123,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8503,latent_8503,898,0.001796,0.0015420242,2.7492871,Utilization of absence of findings in cardiomediastinal silhouette and presence of normalcy.,"The samples showing high activation levels consistently provide descriptions where no significant findings are highlighted, and the cardiomediastinal silhouette normal or unchanged is a key point mentioned. These findings typically imply that the report is confirming the absence of acute or major issues after evaluation and direct comparison to previous studies, when mentioned.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6379624014554275,0.6381909547738693,0.6346153846153846,0.66,100.0,99.0
+8504,latent_8504,4076,0.008152,0.0031181085,1.396488,Focus on stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve specific mentions of comparison between current and prior imaging, especially highlighting stable findings or no significant interval change, as seen in phrases like 'no significant interval change', 'unchanged', or 'again seen'. This recurrent emphasis on stability compared to previous images likely requires identifying minimal differences to verify consistency across studies, which is a key feature the model activates on.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5030071355759429,0.507537688442211,0.5061728395061729,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+8505,latent_8505,4056,0.008112,0.0035341212,3.3361797,Changes in medical device positions between imaging studies.,"The examples commonly note changes in diagnostic tubes or catheters between previous and current imaging, suggesting focus on intervals of changes in medical device positions or presence. Observations often detail device placement in the chest, like endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or swan-ganz catheters, where changes are highlighted over substantive pathologic findings.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5062282572101897,0.56,0.6764705882352942,0.23,100.0,100.0
+8506,latent_8506,4192,0.008384,0.0030961074,2.0617926,Multi-view comparison or analysis in reports with imagery.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly involve imagery evaluation in comparison to prior studies or different angles (e.g., frontal and lateral views), emphasizing consistent analysis across multiple views. These reports are characterized by thorough, multi-view or progressive analysis, often directing attention to potential changes or stable findings against prior images.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4198391100212327,0.515,0.5082872928176796,0.92,100.0,100.0
+8507,latent_8507,12633,0.025266,0.009257516,1.618322,"Frequent reference to atelectasis, pneumothorax, or changes in opacities.","The presence of the term 'atelectasis', 'pneumothorax', and specific descriptions about lung opacity changes in the context of acute or recent findings often corresponds with model activation. Frequent mentions in reports with the comparisons indicate attention to changes that suggest newly retained or resolved findings, such as effusion or pleural changes, which are critical for treatment considerations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5523809523809524,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8508,latent_8508,8178,0.016356,0.0061996,2.9504783,Model doesn't strongly activate with general clinical background without specific temporal changes.,"The low activation levels correlated with prominent references to patients' general clinical background and indication context in observing findings, without strong emphasis on detailed comparison to prior imaging or significant changes over time. This suggests that the model doesn't activate strongly without a focus on specific changes over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4696969696969697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8509,latent_8509,1087,0.002174,0.0015295058,3.4202597,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,Reports with high activation levels consistently compare current findings with prior images to evaluate changes in the patient's condition over time. These comparisons emphasize modifications in the clinical presentation or stability of existing findings against previous studies.,0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4596774193548387,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8510,latent_8510,935,0.00187,0.0015103491,3.4689415,Comparison with prior imaging studies using specific dates.,"The examples highlight the use of dated comparisons, indicating the examination results are being evaluated against previous studies. This pattern allows for tracking changes or stability in medical conditions over time. Highly activated examples often refer to specific radiological features or consistency with past report findings, such as cardiac and aortic characteristics.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4336222431991761,0.505,0.5172413793103449,0.15,100.0,100.0
+8511,latent_8511,932,0.001864,0.001681692,2.6288188,Direct comparison to prior images indicating changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly ask the assistant to compare current images directly with prior images, emphasizing changes or stability (or minimal change) in findings from the previous imaging. This appears to encapsulate the model's focus in these scenarios.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4836065573770491,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8512,latent_8512,786,0.001572,0.0013317509,2.5832553,"Detailed findings comparing current to prior image, especially noting interventions or intrathoracic changes.","Examples with high activation involve detailed descriptions of findings when comparing current and prior images, specifically noting changes or lack thereof, particularly with regard to interventions, tubes, or intrathoracic processes.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.505089157881036,0.5051020408163265,0.495049504950495,0.5208333333333334,96.0,100.0
+8513,latent_8513,3284,0.006568,0.0026840845,2.4313662,Focus on comparison and changes in radiology findings.,Samples with higher activation levels emphasize descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images. This pattern is indicative of the importance placed on identifying changes or stabilities in diagnostic imaging over time.,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8514,latent_8514,10649,0.021298,0.0077866204,1.5298655,Short descriptions comparing current findings to prior images.,"These examples consistently use language to compare current image findings with one or more prior images, indicating changes or stability over time. The discussions often focus on not just the presence of elements but their change in position or extent compared to earlier records.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8515,latent_8515,6588,0.013176,0.0049176,2.669792,Comparison focuses with no significant changes or weak findings.,"The lower activation scores correlate with comparisons being made with prior images, but the results often indicate either no significant change or lack of evidence for acute or notable new processes, suggesting a comparison focus without significant change. This is different from examples with high activations in prior rounds that had explicit changes such as stability or clearly resolved findings. The higher score in example 15 indicates pattern complexity or context we may not fully explain, but overall the pattern is clear.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5169491525423728,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8516,latent_8516,708,0.001416,0.0014601308,3.21646,Comparisons indicate stable findings or unchanged conditions.,"Higher activation levels are present when reports involve detailed comparisons between current and previous imaging, even without explicit prior report information. Such reports describe stable or unchanged conditions, size, or location of medical devices, or overall lack of acute findings. Conversely, reports with no prior comparisons or lacking stability assessments show lower activation, indicating more significant findings or acute changes aren't the focus of high activation patterns.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4914928889276677,0.5053191489361702,0.463768115942029,0.3636363636363636,88.0,100.0
+8517,latent_8517,1186,0.002372,0.0017645642,4.457484,"Comparison across frontal, lateral, and prior images.","The pattern appears to emphasize multiple views, including both frontal and lateral imaging as well as prior comparisons. Cases with a mid to high activation level consistently describe findings from both current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5298013245033113,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8518,latent_8518,1153,0.002306,0.0016247078,3.0537298,Comparison-focused descriptions in radiology studies.,"These examples feature comparisons of current imaging findings with prior imaging to assess for changes over time, especially focusing on monitoring and stability or changes in medical devices such as leads or catheters.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8519,latent_8519,742,0.001484,0.0012912622,3.9945261,Use of both current frontal and lateral images compared to prior images in the evaluation.,These examples with high activation levels include comparisons to prior imaging studies using the current frontal and lateral images. This pattern of utilizing multiple views and prior reports appears to strongly correlate with higher activation levels.,0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5152962892586661,0.515625,0.4947368421052631,0.5108695652173914,92.0,100.0
+8520,latent_8520,2636,0.005272,0.002502155,3.1038353,Comparison of current images with previous ones to assess changes in radiological findings.,"These examples include a mixture of current and prior imaging references with a focus on observing changes in the radiological findings from one study to another, especially in relation to specific conditions like pulmonary edema, atelectasis, or device positions. The common factor is the evaluation of findings compared to previous states within the imaging context.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4403970013726111,0.47,0.4794520547945205,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8521,latent_8521,1005,0.00201,0.0017674984,2.6708815,Explicit statement of no available prior comparison study.,"These examples use available comparison studies or images explicitly, especially when none are available. Many examples reference comparison but indicate 'None', highlighting an inconsistency in the structure by listing a comparison and then stating none exists. This pattern is noted consistently in some high activation examples.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8522,latent_8522,2249,0.004498,0.0022192933,3.7592988,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on providing a comparative analysis between current and prior imaging findings. This often includes noting stability, improvement, or progression in certain pathologies or anatomical features, which is critical in tracking the patient's condition over time.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8523,latent_8523,624,0.001248,0.001319138,4.0992107,"Recognition and mention of rib fractures, either new or healed.","Examples with high activation focus on imagery describing observations related to or involving rib fractures. The reports frequently use terms like 'rib fracture', 'rib deformities', and 'healed rib fractures', indicating a notable pattern related to the presence or history of rib fractures.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,1.0,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7724137931034483,0.7954545454545454,0.9545454545454546,0.5526315789473685,76.0,100.0
+8524,latent_8524,7858,0.015716,0.0057743657,1.633404,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting interval changes.,Examples with higher activation levels predominantly show findings that mention comparisons to a prior image or report and significant interval changes or stability assessed. This indicates the pattern is primarily focused on highlight predictions or observations about how the current image compares with prior imaging data to evaluate for changes in the medical findings.,0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8525,latent_8525,2187,0.004374,0.0022670417,2.4591072,"Comparison with prior imaging, detailed technique descriptions, and absent indications.","Activation levels are highest in samples where both current and prior comparison images are provided, and technniques are described but not indications. Indications are often omitted or marked as N/A, suggesting the pattern focuses on image data and techniques rather than clinical indications.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4468414647638013,0.5,0.5,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8526,latent_8526,619,0.001238,0.0011196653,4.124759,"Comparisons between current and prior images, even with 'N/A' in some fields.","Highly activated examples predominantly involve scenarios where a thorough comparison between current and prior images is stated or implied, despite certain scenarios having the note 'N/A' for comparison availability. The pattern indicates managing scenarios where prior imaging is compared when provided or assumed, emphasizing careful evaluation of image changes.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3980044345898004,0.4033149171270718,0.3846153846153846,0.5555555555555556,81.0,100.0
+8527,latent_8527,2750,0.0055,0.0024166552,2.1208062,"Improvement, interval change in atelectasis or effusion, or device positioning in imaging.","Many high activation examples include the presence of atelectasis or pleural effusion, along with technical evaluations like endotracheal tube positioning, suggesting that improvement, change, or notable position of medical devices correlates with the pattern.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8528,latent_8528,2448,0.004896,0.0022317704,2.2492833,High focus on comparative assessment of current and prior images.,"Higher activation levels are associated with reports providing clear, comparative radiological findings from both current and prior images, indicating a focus on comparative analysis as a distinctive feature. Lower activations exhibit a lack of this emphasis, where comparative details might be mentioned but not central to the report.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.442866801893171,0.485,0.4903225806451612,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8529,latent_8529,786,0.001572,0.0016266218,4.740173,Suggestions for adjustments to medical tubing or device positioning.,"Examples with high activation levels are characterized by situations where endotracheal, nasogastric, or PICC lines are not optimally placed and suggestions for adjustments are provided. This pattern involves detecting positional inadequacies in medical tubing/devices and recommendations on how to correct them.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5080056510477985,0.5778894472361809,0.8,0.202020202020202,99.0,100.0
+8530,latent_8530,4508,0.009016,0.0048481547,3.7801898,"Detailed comparisons of chest imaging with prior studies, emphasizing tube placement and interval changes.","The examples with higher activation levels all demonstrate focused attention on interpreting chest radiographs with comparisons to prior imaging studies. These involve evaluating changes or stability in identified pathologies, especially those involving tubes or other monitoring devices (like chest tubes or NG tubes), and assessing these elements in context via pre-existing images.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6542999574137629,0.655,0.6422018348623854,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8531,latent_8531,1688,0.003376,0.0020999513,3.2145023,Focus on comparing current and previous imaging results.,"The highly activated examples consistently request a detailed comparison of current and prior images. They feature prompts to explicitly provide descriptions of changes between the current and past imaging, which helps the model focus on differences or unchanged findings over time as part of the diagnostic process.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+8532,latent_8532,2675,0.00535,0.0024763253,2.0606313,Interval change or stability noted compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern often involves reports of changes or developments in conditions as compared to previous imaging. Descriptions of ""interval"" developments such as ""interval intubation"" or ""interval improvement,"" accompanied by references to previous imaging reports are typical of serial evaluations, examining changes over time in imaging contexts.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5045045045045045,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8533,latent_8533,1273,0.002546,0.0015863426,3.6441212,Comparison of PICC line positioning with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the comparison between current radiographic findings and a prior report, often using the term 'PICC line' and its status, placement, or changes as a focus of the report. These comparisons usually refer to specific catheter types or their implications.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6567996567996568,0.68,0.875,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8534,latent_8534,1034,0.002068,0.001803208,2.7429051,Emphasis on comparison with prior radiographic images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the comparison between the current radiographic images and those from previous studies, often using language that describes specific findings like 'unchanged', 'stable appearance', or noting any changes observed. This pattern highlights the importance of continuity and tracking changes over time, which is a common practice in evaluating patient progress.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3732718894009216,0.405,0.4344827586206896,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8535,latent_8535,2532,0.005064,0.0024598262,2.6963348,Changes in pleural effusions or catheter placements in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern described in higher activation examples involves changes or assessments in chest imaging related to pleural effusion, catheter placements, or other interventions, often compared descriptively to previous imaging results. These examples highlight specific attention to anatomical changes and inserted medical devices as consistent observations across the data.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5306122448979592,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8536,latent_8536,881,0.001762,0.0018863882,3.3110301,Stable radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to include references to 'comparison' or phrases like 'as compared to' indicating that the findings in current images are being evaluated against prior images. This pattern of language is frequently employed in radiology to note stability or change over time, which is also indicated by 'stable', 'unchanged', or similar terms.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4288045695634435,0.44,0.4166666666666667,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8537,latent_8537,12439,0.024878,0.009071389,1.321817,Stable or improved findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe interval improvement or stability in findings compared to prior studies. This involves language indicating changes such as 'no significant interval change', 'stable', or 'persistent but improved'. This is a key pattern in radiological follow-up reports where examinations compare present conditions to earlier imaging results.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5923059412702026,0.592964824120603,0.6043956043956044,0.55,100.0,99.0
+8538,latent_8538,8055,0.01611,0.006023304,2.3352842,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples emphasize findings that are stable or unchanged when imaging studies are compared with prior exams. This pattern typically highlights cases where there is lack of progression or change in observed abnormalities, often suggesting stable or resolved conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.562539283469516,0.565,0.5764705882352941,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8539,latent_8539,716,0.001432,0.0012217829,4.303061,Chest imaging findings related to line or tube placement and positioning.,"Examples with high activation levels contain specific mentions of line or tube placements in the chest radiographs, such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, PICC lines, and recommendations regarding their positioning. These involve detailed radiological observation and analysis specific to radiologist reports.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.659080216419666,0.6684491978609626,0.6811594202898551,0.5402298850574713,87.0,100.0
+8540,latent_8540,10593,0.021186,0.0077435584,2.0991874,Comparison of current radiological findings to prior images highlighting interval changes or stability.,"These examples describe findings in chest radiographs or CT scans with explicit references and comparisons to prior images to identify changes or consistent aspects over time. Phrases like 'compared to previous,' 'unchanged positions,' and 'from previous study' indicate retrospective analysis within radiology reports, focusing on interval changes or stability in clinical findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8541,latent_8541,962,0.001924,0.0016978444,3.0444324,Interval radiological changes noted compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently exhibit descriptions of interval changes in radiological findings, indicating shifts from previous baseline states. These reports use terms like 'interval placement', 'unchanged', 'has improved', and 'decreased' in reference to previous studies, highlighting notable alterations or constancy in clinical observations.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6645891216740507,0.665,0.6542056074766355,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8542,latent_8542,5765,0.01153,0.0046124295,2.2786129,Focus on medical device position changes in radiology comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve specific mentions of changes to medical devices' positions or conditions visible in the radiographs. This focus on medical device positioning is often fundamental in monitoring patient conditions, particularly in acute care settings. These reports include terms such as 'removed', 'unchanged', 'terminates' relating to devices like catheters, PICC lines, and Dobbhoff tubes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5777777777777777,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8543,latent_8543,6590,0.01318,0.0052096243,2.37077,Comparison of medical devices and conditions to prior images.,"The pattern here is comparing imaging findings from current radiographs or scans to prior ones, typically noting stability or change in medical devices such as tubes, lines, catheters, and heart devices like pacemakers, alongside changes in conditions like atelectasis or pleural effusion presence.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8544,latent_8544,2092,0.004184,0.002365977,3.1257315,Emphasis on changes compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels all mention comparison with prior images, focussing on any interval changes, stability, or findings that compare the current state with previous radiographs. It appears that reports focusing on changes between sequential images, rather than just standalone interpretations, generate higher activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8545,latent_8545,530,0.00106,0.00093404285,4.0891533,Comparison of findings to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation involve a common pattern where an analysis is requested which integrates and compares findings directly from both current and prior imaging studies or requests a comparison that actually cannot be performed due to lack of prior studies, using explicit phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'comparison', and 'prior frontal image'. This reflects the model's ability to engage with temporal or follow-up details in radiology reporting.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4071856287425149,0.4071856287425149,0.34,0.5074626865671642,67.0,100.0
+8546,latent_8546,1016,0.002032,0.0016443309,5.0635915,Detailed comparison between current and prior chest images.,"Highly activated examples explicitly reference the findings in current images and compare them to previous images to document changes or stability, indicating differential findings compared to the prior study. Descriptions include nuanced observations about changes in conditions between radiographs.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8547,latent_8547,937,0.001874,0.0014853338,3.8933365,"Radiology reports confirm the absence of acute findings like focal consolidation, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion, and describe unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes.","Highly activated examples detail findings that confirm the absence of acute abnormalities like focal consolidation, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion, and describe unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, frequently using terms like 'clear', 'unremarkable', or 'normal'. This linguistic pattern indicates standard evaluations in radiology reports where no acute pathology is detected.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7046381817726715,0.705,0.6915887850467289,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8548,latent_8548,878,0.001756,0.0016832467,3.8207788,Clinical indication and device placement details with comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include a specific indication or clinical question coupled with details of a comparison to prior imaging, including references to specific placement or adjustment of medical devices. Indication details, comparison with previous results, and tube or line positioning are a common theme in these entries.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4409609428118153,0.445,0.452991452991453,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8549,latent_8549,10567,0.021134,0.007812707,2.1918437,Interpretation of radiological findings in the context of clinical history or prior imaging.,"The high activation examples describe changes or observations in current imaging that are interpreted in the context of the patient's clinical history or findings on prior studies. The reasoning involves correlating current radiological findings with known clinical conditions or indications, such as presence of catheters, history of pleural effusions, pneumonia, or other known conditions that could impact interpretation of images.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4503181029496819,0.5151515151515151,0.5120481927710844,0.85,100.0,98.0
+8550,latent_8550,4637,0.009274,0.004434184,3.2435203,"Frequent references to tube and catheter placements, especially dialysis or central lines, with comparisons to previous studies.","The examples with higher activation levels describe observations related to dialysis catheters, endotracheal tubes, and central venous catheters, especially with references to their placement or position. These findings often pertain to changes in position over the observation period, which suggests that this type of information regarding specific line placements and comparisons to previous images is the driving force behind the model's activation.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5892672858617132,0.5979899497487438,0.6338028169014085,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+8551,latent_8551,1521,0.003042,0.001999368,2.5689757,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,These examples focus on the presence or absence of comparison with prior or other imaging studies. Examples with higher activation include tasks where there is an explicit request to provide a description of findings in reference to a prior or previous image. These reports involve dynamic evaluations and adjustments based on findings seen over multiple examinations.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8552,latent_8552,827,0.001654,0.0013430465,3.8105557,Changes in medical device positions or condition status between compared images.,"Samples with activations close to 5.0 involve changes in medical devices or tube positions between imaging studies, or highlighting notable changes in medical conditions (such as fluid collections or pneumonia) over time. These elements mandate a comparison for context of change and are central to case monitoring, hence their high activation levels.",0.510212950890917,0.5306122448979592,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.3995943204868154,0.445,0.3777777777777777,0.17,100.0,100.0
+8553,latent_8553,889,0.001778,0.0015300929,5.903975,High activation when asked to compare with no prior study available.,"Examples with high activation levels depend on the absence of a prior study for comparison, yet the task is to describe the findings in comparison to a prior image. This contradiction is key in the context provided, where tasks involve making comparisons but the presence of 'None' leads to higher activations.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.634771732332708,0.635,0.6285714285714286,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8554,latent_8554,1618,0.003236,0.0020139052,5.6895466,Mention of cardiomegaly or enlarged heart silhouette.,"Responses with high activation levels frequently mention cardiomegaly or an enlarged heart silhouette, suggesting that the model is particularly activated by mentions of heart size changes or related findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.6714285714285714,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8555,latent_8555,5446,0.010892,0.0041252584,2.4063518,Visual comparison between current and prior imaging findings focusing on stability or change over time.,"High-activation examples demonstrate scenarios with both current and prior images, highlighting specific changes or stability of findings over time, often involving significant circumstances like malignant processes, cardiomegaly, or post-surgical observations. These examples focus on comparative analysis between present and previous studies to notice interval changes post intervention or progression of disease, reflecting the model's focus on comparative imagery requiring attention between sequential studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8556,latent_8556,377,0.000754,0.0010913089,3.6130502,Presence of a detailed PRIOR_REPORT with comparison to previous studies.,"In all examples with high activation levels, the reports include a detailed PRIOR_REPORT indicating a prior imaging study with which the current study is being compared. A specific history or preamble section is present, and detailed findings are given in the context of a comparison being made, often outlining historical context or significant prior comparisons in the imaging studies.",0.5619047619047619,0.5652173913043478,0.5172413793103449,0.7142857142857143,21.0,25.0,0.4642349814415983,0.4662162162162162,0.3577981651376147,0.8125,48.0,100.0
+8557,latent_8557,2074,0.004148,0.0020986444,4.916918,Stability in radiological findings over time.,"Highly activated examples frequently note interval change or stability, particularly with the explicit mention of lack of significant interval change, using standard comparative terminology such as 'no significant interval change' or 'unchanged'. These are common phrasing that highlights stability in findings over time as opposed to changes seen from previous radiological studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5931237920862578,0.6,0.6351351351351351,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8558,latent_8558,1568,0.003136,0.0021481742,3.9526503,Reports with 'Comparison: None' indicating no prior exam comparison.,"A commonality in these examples is the absence of comparison to previous exams, specifically noted as 'Comparison: None'. This suggests the pattern involves cases where a radiologist describes findings based on a single examination without previous exams to compare against, often resulting in generic or broad findings due to lack of context from past data.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4915742552728854,0.5276381909547738,0.5652173913043478,0.26,100.0,99.0
+8559,latent_8559,1164,0.002328,0.001770451,4.419411,Descriptions of stable or interval changes in cardiological findings or structural anomalies.,"These examples feature radiological descriptions referencing either stable findings or interval changes in relation to known conditions or prior imaging, usually involving heart size (cardiomegaly) or structural abnormalities. Activation is higher in cases describing a change such as stability or interval improvement.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.53,0.53,0.53,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8560,latent_8560,940,0.00188,0.0016552774,3.147116,Emphasis on comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"These examples commonly request the provision of a comparison or description of findings between current and prior imaging studies. The assistants' tasks include comparing images to detect changes or stability, crucial for evaluating treatment response or disease progression.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8561,latent_8561,755,0.00151,0.0016075011,5.177186,Assessment involving PA and lateral chest image views.,These examples all involve the identification or comparison of imaging findings that involve the assessment of multiple views—specifically PA (posteroanterior) and lateral views—of the chest. This pattern is commonly used to investigate complex pulmonary or thoracic conditions that require multiple perspectives for comprehensive analysis.,0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5769230769230769,0.5959595959595959,0.5673758865248227,0.8080808080808081,99.0,99.0
+8562,latent_8562,16201,0.032402,0.011385933,1.6021476,Findings that are compared to prior imaging with noted changes in pathology.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss findings in direct relation to prior imaging, particularly noting comparisons or changes such as improvement or worsening of visual features. Descriptive terms that compare past and current findings, especially in context of pathological changes, appear frequently in high activation examples.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5818033455732354,0.59,0.625,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8563,latent_8563,8644,0.017288,0.006499437,1.9246007,Comparison of current image findings with prior studies.,"The pattern identified involves providing an analysis of the current imaging findings in direct comparison to previous studies. This involves specific language patterns indicating comparison, such as 'compared to the previous radiograph/projected over/improvement/unchanged'. The analysis focuses on changes or stability over time, which are key aspects of assessing radiological progress or stability in imaging studies.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5904146386871991,0.615,0.5771812080536913,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8564,latent_8564,896,0.001792,0.0014487673,6.816626,"Focus on tube and line positioning, especially relative to the carina.","The examples consistently describe the positioning of various medical tubes and lines, such as endotracheal tubes and intra-aortic balloon pumps, often with measurements from anatomical landmarks like the carina. It highlights the importance of tube placement relative to these landmarks in clinical evaluation, as reflected in the stable high activation examples.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.9411764705882352,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6329689619404771,0.655,0.803921568627451,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8565,latent_8565,4858,0.009716,0.0040475447,2.4674642,Reported absence of prior imaging comparison.,"Examples with specifically articulated descriptions of 'comparison: none' or similar indicate a lack of prior imaging for comparison, which seems to correlate with activation levels reflecting a preference for assessments identified as standalone without the previous image baseline.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8566,latent_8566,769,0.001538,0.0015020523,2.9316547,Provide comparison when no prior imaging exists or specified.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the need for comparisons with prior images but specify that no prior images exist or provide no comparison at all, which is a common scenario where doctors seek to rule out new developments when no baseline is available.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5958440721649485,0.5958549222797928,0.5757575757575758,0.6129032258064516,93.0,100.0
+8567,latent_8567,1985,0.00397,0.0020141955,3.1563246,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves providing detailed descriptions of current imaging findings, explicitly comparing them to prior imaging studies. The examples with high activation levels consistently include direct comparison to previous imaging to describe changes or stability in findings, which is common in radiological evaluations for monitoring progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8568,latent_8568,6151,0.012302,0.0047602532,2.1513722,Descriptions include multiple findings compared to prior images over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve radiological examinations that explicitly describe comparative analysis with previous radiographic findings, incorporating terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or specifying direct comparisons over time within the impressions.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8569,latent_8569,583,0.001166,0.0012771852,6.3854694,Clarity of lungs without significant findings on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings where there is an absence of significant findings such as focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. This pattern specifically highlights clarity of the lungs and the absence of acute pathology on comparison with previous imaging, often noting no substantial changes or only benign findings when compared with previous images.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6438673451482716,0.6569767441860465,0.5970149253731343,0.5555555555555556,72.0,100.0
+8570,latent_8570,2400,0.0048,0.002095613,3.1423953,"High activation associated with presence or assessment of effusion, pneumonia, or consolidation.","The majority of cases where the activation is highest involve descriptions that include pleural effusion, pneumonia, or consolidation, often with context of change or progress. Cases where activation is lower often describe steadier states without these conditions or the resolution of such conditions.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8571,latent_8571,1525,0.00305,0.0022524877,3.7722383,Emphasis on comparison of current and prior imaging findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include a detailed description of alterations or stable findings from prior images, specifically focusing on comparative analysis. These examples explicitly specify changes in clinical conditions noted over time using previous and current imaging comparisons, helping radiologists track the progression or stability of a condition.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8572,latent_8572,2659,0.005318,0.003308817,4.1158414,Comparison of current chest image findings with prior image focused on changes or stability.,"The activated examples involve description and comparison of findings in the current chest image with a prior image, emphasizing differences or confirmatory observations related to key medical indications like pneumonia or pneumothorax. These comparisons help highlight changes, stability, or resolution of conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5245901639344263,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8573,latent_8573,2674,0.005348,0.0026961954,5.8295517,Emphasis on change or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activating examples consistently include descriptive changes between current and prior imaging, highlighting either stability or change over time, indicating the pattern primarily relates to descriptions about alterations from prior imaging, emphasizing temporal comparison in observations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4067708738367421,0.4221105527638191,0.2280701754385964,0.490566037735849,53.0,146.0
+8574,latent_8574,3841,0.007682,0.003942226,5.3372464,Descriptions of changes relative to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss changes or comparisons relative to previous imaging studies. Specifically, these instances describing variations, developments, or stability of observed findings across different examinations, which is a common pattern in radiological assessments to evaluate progression or resolution of certain conditions.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5034965034965035,0.7272727272727273,99.0,101.0
+8575,latent_8575,1028,0.002056,0.0016491923,2.8310025,Reports describing findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to a prior study, with a focus on interval changes or stability in conditions identified previously. This means the presence of comparative observation related to prior images is a significant trigger for activation.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8576,latent_8576,4099,0.008198,0.003503448,1.9229808,Stability or improvement noted compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to finding stability or improvement compared to prior imaging. This involves noting the absence of significant changes or reductions in specific findings such as effusions or opacities, indicating a stable or improved clinical status.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8577,latent_8577,1241,0.002482,0.0016054385,2.8645055,"Focus on comparing findings with prior images, noting changes.","The examples consistently mention findings based on a current radiological comparison with prior images, particularly noting if changes are present or not. The activation level is high in examples that focus on both explicit mention of comparison and specific attention to findings or placement of tubes/devices changing from previous instances.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8578,latent_8578,749,0.001498,0.0015350707,3.2818758,Enlarged cardiac silhouette noted in assessments.,"Many examples highlight cardiac silhouette enlargement as a prominent finding, often indicating potential underlying cardiopulmonary issues or being a consideration in patient assessments. This finding is frequently mentioned even when other pulmonary or mediastinal structures are unremarkable, providing important context to the report findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5609756097560976,0.23,100.0,100.0
+8579,latent_8579,969,0.001938,0.0015700964,3.2803912,"Symptoms indicating potential acute processes, notably lightheadedness.","The examples with high activation levels frequently mention symptoms or indications such as lightheadedness, which are associated with queries for acute or significant findings in radiology examinations. These specimens are often concerned with immediate or symptomatic evaluations, contrasting stable or non-specific findings.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4986560357585092,0.585,1.0,0.17,100.0,100.0
+8580,latent_8580,6876,0.013752,0.0053107655,2.2038167,Significant interval change in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit changes in findings or interventions when compared to prior examination reports. These often describe medical devices, reduction or new appearance of pulmonary opacities, or resolution of fluid collections, highlighting dynamic alterations in the patient's condition over time, often requiring further scrutiny or action.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.6072912339011217,0.6180904522613065,0.6716417910447762,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+8581,latent_8581,495,0.00099,0.0011230541,2.5892956,"Changes in lung opacity or nodules, suggestive of infection or pneumonia.","Examples with high activation describe changes in lung opacity, either resolution, new opacity suggestive of pneumonia, or changes in existing nodules, often in right or left upper lobes, like pneumonia, nodule formation, or other consolidations. These focus on noting changes overtime or confirming new significant findings relevant to acute conditions.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5965346534653465,0.6196319018404908,0.5081967213114754,0.492063492063492,63.0,100.0
+8582,latent_8582,762,0.001524,0.0014271971,4.6460285,Reports on tube placement and adjustment recommendations.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels primarily focus on the presence and positioning of tubes within the body, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and PICC lines. These examples often provide specific measurements or recommendations for adjustment to ensure optimal placement, which is a common task in radiology reports when evaluating such medical devices.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,0.78125,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8659651360544218,0.865979381443299,0.8333333333333334,0.9042553191489362,94.0,100.0
+8583,latent_8583,7783,0.015566,0.005893078,2.351242,Detailed interval changes or stability assessment in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels contain explicit descriptions of changes or stable findings between current and prior imaging, emphasizing the evaluation of interval changes or stability over time. This involves noting specific areas of improvement, lack of new developments, or consistent patterns with previous reports, reflecting a practice of monitoring progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5631067961165048,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8584,latent_8584,6597,0.013194,0.005076902,2.040381,Decisive interpretations based on critical findings or conditions.,"This pattern captures cases where specific findings or clinical indications lead to a definitive or high-confidence result that indicates a condition. The high activations indicate when there's a move from possible conditions or routine assessments to more decisive interpretations, likely due to significant findings requiring expert diagnostic or descriptive attention.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+8585,latent_8585,545,0.00109,0.0011744082,4.800562,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on pulmonary venous pressure changes.,"Examples with high activation levels include a detailed comparison with prior imaging studies and observations of changes in the pulmonary venous pressure, often linked to conditions like heart failure or pulmonary edema. This information is frequently analyzed in clinical settings to assess cardiopulmonary conditions.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5496212121212121,0.6463414634146342,0.625,0.234375,64.0,100.0
+8586,latent_8586,1153,0.002306,0.0017567237,3.8693314,Importance of comparing current imaging findings with prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where current imaging findings are compared to prior images, especially when noting the absence of prior imaging for comparison. This highlights the emphasis on evaluating findings with available historical imaging data.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3648570928458903,0.365,0.3689320388349514,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8587,latent_8587,1390,0.00278,0.0020204966,3.9516015,Comparison of findings against prior images to detect changes.,"The pattern in these examples involves the examination of current images against prior images or reports to detect changes or stability in findings. The presence of intervals, specific techniques, and findings overlaid or described with respect to a past comparison point are consistent cues.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4538461538461538,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8588,latent_8588,1543,0.003086,0.0020512105,2.2739596,Comparison highlights changes or interval placements of medical devices.,"Examples with high activation levels involve imaging interpretations that provide a comparison to prior studies, often highlighting changes or interval placements regarding devices and tubes such as pacemakers, catheters, or surgical tubes. These comparative assessments often emphasize the detection of interim medical interventions and changes, reflecting an ongoing medical management approach.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8589,latent_8589,2399,0.004798,0.0022127377,3.2058468,Comparison to prior images to assess interval changes.,"The context involves a direct comparison with prior images to evaluate for changes, often in critically ill patients or those under active treatment. High activation levels occur when changes and comparisons are explicitly noted or requested in images, likely due to ongoing clinical decisions based on these comparisons.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8590,latent_8590,1056,0.002112,0.0016820771,3.558082,Changes or stability in pleural effusions compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe changes or stability of pleural effusions in comparison to prior studies. Pleural effusion references are common and vary in size, presence, or interval change between radiographs, often considering factors like lung opacity and associated conditions.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8591,latent_8591,5431,0.010862,0.004701519,5.3866587,Descriptions of interval changes or stability based on prior imaging.,"Example 4 focuses on providing a detailed and clear description of radiological findings based on comparison with prior images, noting specific changes and stable findings. This pattern is typical for detailed diagnostic comparison reports in radiology.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.3451327433628318,0.5909090909090909,66.0,134.0
+8592,latent_8592,1755,0.00351,0.0021657164,3.8322263,Emphasis on interval changes in imaging findings.,"Cases with higher activation levels frequently mention findings that have changed or worsened in comparison to previous imaging, focusing on disease progression or new symptoms, whereas other examples describe stability or lack of significant change, which corresponds to lower activation. This reflects the model's interest in notable changes indicative of disease activity or progression.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6073542600896862,0.6130653266331658,0.5934959349593496,0.73,100.0,99.0
+8593,latent_8593,846,0.001692,0.0015886187,3.6015832,Mention of hiatal hernia in chest image findings.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently mention hiatal hernia as part of the findings. This is a common structural anomaly in chest imaging that can be noted in a variety of medical evaluations, often unrelated to the primary indication for imaging.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,1.0,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5709259418175577,0.625,0.9310344827586208,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8594,latent_8594,3875,0.00775,0.0030573623,2.096964,Multiple cross-comparisons of images and reports in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in context to multiple comparisons, such as repeated references to previous imaging modalities or multiple dates. This pattern suggests the model focuses on cross-comparison of multiple images when identifying this activation feature.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8595,latent_8595,1960,0.00392,0.0025280754,4.0545373,Focused on comparing changes in chest imaging over time.,"Contextual elements like being given both current and prior imaging, and frequent mentions of 'comparison' indicate that findings are framed around change or stability relative to prior studies. This pattern reflects a focus on documenting and describing changes over time as opposed to only describing static findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8596,latent_8596,373,0.000746,0.0009916966,7.174204,Focus on placement of support or monitoring devices in chest imaging.,"High activation levels are observed for examples that specifically mention external support or monitoring devices, often with detailed descriptions of significant or unchanged positions, such as catheters, endotracheal tubes, or other surgical interventions. These devices are key focus areas in certain medical contexts, such as post-operative monitoring or critical care settings.",0.7229024943310658,0.723404255319149,0.6956521739130435,0.7272727272727273,22.0,25.0,0.5262118885720553,0.5833333333333334,0.34,0.3863636363636363,44.0,100.0
+8597,latent_8597,3146,0.006292,0.0030485957,2.18709,Changes or stability in medical findings compared to prior imaging.,Many examples have modified or new medical findings in the current radiograph compared to the prior. Descriptions often note unchanged or increased findings from past exams. Activation is higher when findings indicate notable differences or stability in comparative assessments.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4444444444444444,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8598,latent_8598,3198,0.006396,0.0026466958,3.5597057,Description includes changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons between current and prior images to describe findings, suggesting that the focus is on providing new, unchanged, or resolved findings based on sequential imaging studies. This pattern signals emphasis on monitoring or assessing changes over time by comparing with previous results.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8599,latent_8599,6681,0.013362,0.0052400166,3.1225266,Reporting changes over time via comparison to prior images.,"The observed samples show a focus on reporting changes management clinicians might need to monitor over time, through comparative analysis of sequential imaging studies. This framework is common in contexts where imaging captures dynamic changes, such as evolving or resolving pathologies, in the course of medical intervention or monitoring.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8600,latent_8600,623,0.001246,0.0013065689,4.134921,"Comparison of current and prior images, focusing on device positioning.","These examples involve radiological reports emphasizing the comparison between current and prior images, focusing on changes or stability in positioning of medical devices or anatomical structures like tubes and lines. The level of activation reflects whether comparisons highlight changes or stable assessments in such device placement.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5334821428571428,0.5681818181818182,0.5,0.3421052631578947,76.0,100.0
+8601,latent_8601,1616,0.003232,0.0017123049,3.3489368,"Comparison to prior imaging findings, especially noting stability or changes.","The higher activation levels in the examples are frequently associated with descriptions that relate both current and prior imaging, often emphasizing comparison and changes over time.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5087710084033613,0.5276381909547738,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,99.0
+8602,latent_8602,2298,0.004596,0.0029097188,3.0374575,Radiological analysis emphasizing prior image comparison.,"Instances that highlight prior comparison, both in the task and the resulting report, show higher activation. This pattern identifies a core requirement for providing comparative radiological analysis based on current versus previous or baseline images.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4259381171823568,0.455,0.4689655172413793,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8603,latent_8603,5002,0.010004,0.004136349,2.3320863,Emphasis on interval changes compared to previous images.,Higher activation samples consistently highlight the specific requirement to comment on interval changes based on sequential comparisons between images. This focus on identifying and documenting how current imaging results relate to previous findings appears to be a critical component associated with higher activation.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8604,latent_8604,1293,0.002586,0.0017626921,3.5702212,Dynamic radiological changes compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of changes, persistences, and lack thereof in specific radiological findings when current imaging is compared to prior studies. They particularly focus on dynamic reports, like cardiomegaly, vascular congestion changes, or effusions as they evolve over time, compared to baseline stability mentioned in low activation examples. This suggests that activation is increased by detailed comparative analysis findings relevant to changes over time.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6265469669304118,0.628140703517588,0.6160714285714286,0.69,100.0,99.0
+8605,latent_8605,2460,0.00492,0.0024920944,2.1103213,Requests for comparative findings between current and prior images in radiology reports.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions requiring comparison between current and past imaging studies, as indicated by various contextual cues in the text for radiology evaluation purposes. Examples emphasize sentence structure and context for comparison, rather than findings themselves.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8606,latent_8606,5668,0.011336,0.0046876776,2.294948,Radiological assessments with nonacute findings.,"These examples involve the inclusion of current and prior imaging comparison, a technique or preamble, findings, and impression, often with a focus on nonacute findings that do not suggest significant acute changes. The pattern highlights routine radiological assessments where differences in technique and patient position are noted, and often findings do not indicate acute pathology.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5189873417721519,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8607,latent_8607,8971,0.017942,0.0067184847,1.6108612,"Focus on recognizing changes from prior images, particularly device/tube positioning or opacities.","Examples with higher activations focus on changes identified through comparison with prior images, highlighting how previous conditions have altered, especially concerning normal or abnormal positioning or opacities related to inserted devices, tubes, or physiologic changes. These patterns are particularly evident when at least some change or no new significant abnormality is noted, but demonstrate the critical role of prior image comparison in interpreting current images.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8608,latent_8608,1085,0.00217,0.001365703,3.8757737,Comparison with prior imaging for assessing stability or change.,"These examples focus on comparing current radiological findings with previous studies to assess stability or change. Comparisons include assessment of lung opacity, cardiac silhouette, and presence of devices, which are mentioned in terms of change or stability over time.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4461025516926138,0.485,0.4901960784313725,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8609,latent_8609,12227,0.024454,0.008786765,1.3021183,Evaluation and description of lung volumes in imagery findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently include descriptions of expanded lung volumes, normally inflated lungs, or specific analysis of lung volumes. This focuses on structural aspects of the lungs relevant in multiple imaging contexts and conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5818181818181818,0.32,100.0,100.0
+8610,latent_8610,1249,0.002498,0.0017247358,2.674675,Instructions for generating description based on image comparisons.,"The examples with high activation often involve instructions or tasks for the AI to generate a report or findings based on images and prior comparisons. The samples specifically highlight tasks where the assistant is asked to process and describe given images in comparison to prior ones and generate outputs, indicating a focus on direct task performance rather than passive observation.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8611,latent_8611,947,0.001894,0.0015646734,2.7235234,Task requires description of current image compared to prior image.,"Prompts with higher activation often involve a request to provide a description of findings in the current image in comparison to a prior one, which is explicitly stated in the task. The examples with lower activation either do not mention or do not compare to a prior image in the task instruction.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4682539682539682,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8612,latent_8612,1291,0.002582,0.0019678122,3.3858714,Device position reporting and comparison to prior studies.,"In nearly all high-activation examples, there is mention of the position of medical devices like tubings or catheters and comparison to previous studies to note interval changes. These observations are key in follow-up radiological assessments where device placement or changes due to interventions are evaluated.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6208195353775374,0.625,0.6582278481012658,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8613,latent_8613,6504,0.013008,0.004818173,1.6587659,Detailed comparison with prior images concerning interval changes or stability.,"Examples with activation levels close to zero often lack meaningful comparison details, even when prior images are mentioned. High activation examples consistently use specific comparative findings like interval change or detailed descriptions of changes from prior images, signifying thorough comparative analysis.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5638634046890928,0.5678391959798995,0.5546218487394958,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+8614,latent_8614,674,0.001348,0.0013828493,4.327784,Reports of opacities or consolidations in the lingula.,"The examples with high activation levels report changes or findings involving lingula opacities, often described in terms of atelectasis, scarring, or consolidation, and compare these to prior imaging. These mentions are a common feature in radiology reports and relate to possible pneumonia or structural changes in the lung.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,1.0,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4768316139185172,0.6136363636363636,0.9,0.1184210526315789,76.0,100.0
+8615,latent_8615,801,0.001602,0.0016346645,3.3332462,Use of comparison to characterize persistent or unique findings.,"The highly activated examples usually detail findings based on the comparison between current and prior images, emphasizing the presence of less common imaging patterns such as deformities or unusual conditions (e.g., prominent nipple shadows, retrocardiac density changes, etc.) rather than the standard absence of acute pathology. These examples specifically mention past radiological findings or acknowledge historical imaging data as part of their descriptions which marks significant documentation in reports.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4307232728285359,0.4321608040201005,0.4403669724770642,0.48,100.0,99.0
+8616,latent_8616,10053,0.020106,0.007325362,1.9424359,Low lung volumes or poor inspiration noted in chest imaging.,"The pattern has emerged with higher activations when reports indicate low lung volumes or poor inspiration, often associated with supine positioning, which can obscure certain radiographic findings such as pneumothoraces.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3912285215999085,0.4623115577889447,0.3870967741935484,0.12,100.0,99.0
+8617,latent_8617,2436,0.004872,0.0029729821,4.320509,Higher activation for descriptions comparing current to prior radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation values involve interpretation of images in comparison with prior studies. These comparisons include statements detailing changes, or their absence, in medical observations or technical findings against previous assessments. Examples with direct comparison to prior studies show higher activation, while those lacking comparison have lower activation.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4776902887139107,0.5175879396984925,0.5096774193548387,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+8618,latent_8618,840,0.00168,0.0014253733,2.9815583,Stable findings with explicit comparison to prior radiographs.,"The pattern appears to focus on radiology reports that make direct, specific comparisons to a prior image and highlight no significant changes or explicit stability of certain findings, sustaining or observing for minor differences explicitly noted in context to prior studies. This is a common language structure in follow-up imaging studies where stability in findings is noted as clinically relevant.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.6047529706066291,0.605,0.6105263157894737,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8619,latent_8619,2806,0.005612,0.002697998,2.3680918,Use of prior imaging for stability or change in ongoing conditions.,"These examples closely align with higher activation when imaging findings include comparisons to prior studies, where the previous reports are utilized to remark either continued stability or changes in specific conditions, such as device positioning or chronic abnormalities.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+8620,latent_8620,1398,0.002796,0.0021886101,3.2434037,"Atelectasis, consolidation, or pleural changes noted in comparison to prior imaging.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe lung or combined lung and pleural changes such as atelectasis, consolidation, or pleural effusions in comparison with prior imaging studies. Reports with these findings typically indicate worsening or improvement, suggesting active monitoring of these pulmonary conditions is relevant to the observed activation.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6706442704770592,0.675,0.6422764227642277,0.79,100.0,100.0
+8621,latent_8621,2369,0.004738,0.0023565216,2.2927792,Detailed comparison to prior imaging studies with stability or changes noted.,"The samples with high activation levels focus on describing comparative findings between current images and prior studies, noting any changes or lack thereof with detailed interpretation of stability and alterations in disease or physical structure. Higher activation occurs when radiological findings are reviewed in context with past imaging, even though findings may be unremarkable.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4742268041237113,0.46,100.0,100.0
+8622,latent_8622,863,0.001726,0.0015402003,3.7039835,"Stable cardiac silhouette and calcified, mildly tortuous aorta in reports.","Highly activated examples emphasize specific descriptions regarding aortic condition, including ‘mildly tortuous’, ‘calcified’ aorta, and other characteristics such as 'stable' or 'unchanged' cardiac silhouette within radiology results, which seem to trigger these patterns significantly more.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5235356937484597,0.565,0.6585365853658537,0.27,100.0,100.0
+8623,latent_8623,8380,0.01676,0.006439229,1.7208748,Presence of comparisons with prior imaging and noting stable findings.,Examples with a strong activation level highlight the presence of comparison with prior imaging while also noting stable or unchanged conditions in the current imaging findings. This suggests that the pattern involves not just having a comparison but finding stability or no change between the current and prior images.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5394736842105263,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8624,latent_8624,722,0.001444,0.0014886415,3.895126,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding.,"These examples consistently mention descriptions of lung volumes being low, which lead to the crowding of bronchovascular markings. This specific pattern of findings is highlighted across multiple examples.",0.9599358974358976,0.96,0.925925925925926,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8810498012625672,0.8810810810810811,0.8247422680412371,0.9411764705882352,85.0,100.0
+8625,latent_8625,1079,0.002158,0.0017623182,3.1265216,Detailed comparative description of changes between current and prior imaging.,"The pattern observed in highly activated examples is the presence of detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging studies, with explicit documentation of changes or stability in specific medical or radiological findings, such as device placements or pathology status. This indicates a focus on detailed examination of changes over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5212765957446809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8626,latent_8626,972,0.001944,0.0017141721,2.9938684,"Unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in chest imaging.","The pattern appears to focus on the normal or unremarkable appearance of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in chest images when the lung fields or surrounding areas exhibit other abnormalities, whether suspected or confirmed. These examples note retained devices, effusions, or unchanged previous findings without a corresponding change in the cardiac and adjacent structures.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8627,latent_8627,1720,0.00344,0.0023260475,3.1417882,Comparison of current and prior images for stability or change in findings.,"Activations are high when there are direct comparisons of current radiological images to prior studies, specifically evaluating changes or stability. The reports explicitly instruct to compare current and prior imaging to determine any differences or lack thereof in specific pathologies like cardiomegaly, consolidation, or effusion. This systematic comparison is often structured with an assistant providing an analysis of current versus prior images, focusing on stable or changed findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8628,latent_8628,499,0.000998,0.0012295637,4.67367,Right middle lobe opacification suggests pneumonia or atelectasis.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to findings of lung opacification or consolidation localized to the right middle lobe, often associated with atelectasis or pneumonia. This pattern is characteristic in radiology reports for identifying pneumonia or other similar conditions, particularly when described as unilateral and localized to a specific lung region.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.9166666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8018823157228725,0.8203592814371258,0.8775510204081632,0.6417910447761194,67.0,100.0
+8629,latent_8629,10791,0.021582,0.007875375,1.3147634,Comparison of current to prior imaging shows changes or stability.,"This dataset contains examples with comparisons between current imaging and prior studies. It describes changes in findings relative to previous scans, often mentioning stability, increase, or decrease in certain conditions or features. This pattern is identified by explicit mention of assessments compared to earlier reports or scans.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5600208089478476,0.5728643216080402,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,99.0
+8630,latent_8630,5542,0.011084,0.004154508,2.0514,Requests for findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Prompts exhibiting higher activation often involve a request for a description of current radiological findings explicitly compared to prior imaging studies. These examples emphasize the act of comparison, seen in phrases like 'description of the findings in comparison to the prior image,' reflecting a pattern where interpretation requires direct correlation with historical data.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8631,latent_8631,5540,0.01108,0.0041975654,2.0401146,Focus on interval change or stability of findings from prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels consistently include a component of interval change or stability in findings when compared to previous studies. They emphasize the description or assessment of stability and change over time, which is critical in radiological evaluations.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8632,latent_8632,960,0.00192,0.0015305175,5.145347,Pleural or pulmonary change (improvement or new findings).,"The examples with higher activation levels describe some form of pleural or pulmonary change manifesting as either improvement or new findings upon radiological examination. This can include improvement in effusions, pleural drain placements showing effectiveness, or progress of prior findings such as opacities or nodules. These reports often highlight dynamics and changes in diseases that affect the lungs and their associated structures.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5977011494252874,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8633,latent_8633,420,0.00084,0.000990498,4.9582233,"Focus on detailed comparison with prior imaging, explicitly instructed.","The examples with high activation involve use of the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', underscoring the role of detailed comparative analysis between current and past images, often structured this way in reports to highlight evaluation processes.",0.4166666666666667,0.4166666666666667,0.4,0.4347826086956521,23.0,25.0,0.3728152044798914,0.3766233766233766,0.3125,0.6481481481481481,54.0,100.0
+8634,latent_8634,2946,0.005892,0.0028740712,3.7043653,Complex radiological findings with interval changes in comparison to previous studies or involving medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels show complex radiological findings with definite interval changes, descriptions of medical devices or interventions, and a comparison with prior studies, highlighting significant changes or monitoring for potential complications.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8635,latent_8635,2968,0.005936,0.0026554964,2.3421571,Reports evaluating interval change or positioning from prior images.,"Examples with activations tend to describe findings in relation to prior images, particularly when noting 'interval change', positioning or adjustments of medical devices (e.g., tubes), or stable findings compared to previous studies. Reports often evaluate for changes in positioning or extent of conditions, implying more active monitoring or intervention compared to merely comparing anatomical or structural norms.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8636,latent_8636,7982,0.015964,0.006002435,2.700511,Detailed comparison and description of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels incorporate detailed comparisons between current images and prior images, identifying interval changes and providing descriptions of the findings. These comparisons often result in descriptions of change in clinical conditions or stability over time, reflecting a pattern of complex interpretation of radiological findings over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8637,latent_8637,1526,0.003052,0.0016662452,3.327623,Radiology findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with low activations lack explicit documentation of comparison to previous imaging. Meanwhile, high-activation examples indicate a comparison being made between current and prior images, especially through explicit reference to changes or stability over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4353472614342179,0.475,0.4836601307189542,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8638,latent_8638,642,0.001284,0.0015141272,3.2974672,Detailed and structured comparison with prior imaging showing stable cardiomediastinal contours.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involved detailed comparison with prior imaging studies, using structured formats indicating comparison and indicating notable lack of changes or specific patterns in cardiopulmonary or mediastinal contours. Low activation lacks detailed comparisons or focuses on conditions likely causing change.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.25,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.5034013605442177,0.5828571428571429,0.5517241379310345,0.2105263157894736,76.0,99.0
+8639,latent_8639,2224,0.004448,0.0021994456,3.5817287,Comparisons highlighting specific clinical changes or evaluations against prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently request comparisons between current images and prior imaging, involving specific clinical evaluations or changes rather than merely noting positional stability of observed phenomena. Requests for more detailed clinical evaluations or recognitions of specific changes appear to show this pattern.",0.4405919661733615,0.4489795918367347,0.4516129032258064,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8640,latent_8640,1692,0.003384,0.0025631892,2.8515737,Comparative analysis of findings with prior imaging in radiology reports.,"These examples emphasize the use of comparative language to describe findings in radiological studies. The reports frequently specify changes or stability in relation to prior images, often using comparative phrases and direct comparisons between images, with a consistent focus on evaluating differences over time.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8641,latent_8641,9362,0.018724,0.006932556,2.0077415,Stable findings across successive imaging examinations.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include explicit references to stable or unchanged findings over time compared to prior radiographic imaging, often implying ongoing monitoring of a condition without progression.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.52,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8642,latent_8642,1007,0.002014,0.0014145448,3.416048,Evaluation of change or stability across imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions or findings related to images, typically specifying comparisons that are necessary between current and prior images to outline any changes or consistencies in the patient's condition. There is an implicit emphasis on evaluating new findings against historical ones, although these comparisons are not immediately apparent nor outlined with the precision seen in examples with lower activations, possibly indicating missing details or assumptions about report context.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3831339802903784,0.385,0.3963963963963964,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8643,latent_8643,5989,0.011978,0.0046646665,2.1363442,Emphasis on absence or presence of prior imaging for comparison.,"Although many examples mention various clinical and radiological factors, examples with the highest activation levels either explicitly indicate providing a comparison to prior imaging or note the absence of prior images for comparison. This highlights a pattern of interest focused on the lack or presence of prior imaging for comparative purposes.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.452991452991453,0.52,0.5117647058823529,0.87,100.0,100.0
+8644,latent_8644,807,0.001614,0.0013257653,3.969284,Comparative analysis highlighting changes or stability in findings from prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels commonly involve thorough comparison to prior imaging, particularly noting stability or change in findings such as opacities, effusions, or mediastinal contours, often suggesting careful evaluation for ongoing pathology versus stability.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8645,latent_8645,3179,0.006358,0.0028222722,2.9628916,Comparison between current and prior imaging reports across body systems.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve reconciling current findings with prior reports across various body systems or imaging techniques. The higher activation samples contain comparative assessments highlighting changes or stability in medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathologies, providing a contextual view of patient health relative to previous examinations.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8646,latent_8646,5768,0.011536,0.004474695,2.0892234,Significant changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples typically compare current imaging findings with prior images, but examples with high activation levels focus on cases that involve significant changes between current and prior images or notable developments requiring close attention or follow-up, such as tube/line placements, new opacifications, changes in previously noted anomalies, or adjustments to medical devices.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5970149253731343,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8647,latent_8647,2086,0.004172,0.002454315,3.4362993,Stable radiological findings with no interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings where there are no significant interval changes in imaging results, implying stability over time. This pattern is depicted in examples where radiological findings are unchanged from prior reports or imaging.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5614035087719298,0.57,0.5972222222222222,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8648,latent_8648,1851,0.003702,0.002282839,3.3620913,Observations of interval change between current and prior images.,"The pattern identified in the examples with high activation levels is the documentation of changes in imaging studies. Descriptions often include terms indicating alterations such as 'increased', 'mild interval decrease', 'now more prominent', or similar comparative observations of progression, regression, or stability of findings between prior and current imagery. This differs from reports without noted changes, which generally have a lower activation score.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.575,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8649,latent_8649,1947,0.003894,0.0020653154,3.9645932,Cardiac evaluation limited by effusions or lung pathology.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels focus on reports where the evaluation of change (particularly worsening) concerns the cardiac silhouette, pleural effusion, or signs of cardiac-related processes which could be occluded or not clearly differentiated due to existing conditions, like pleural effusions.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,100.0,100.0
+8650,latent_8650,3298,0.006596,0.00376819,2.6742096,Changes or stability between current and prior chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, where specific changes or stability in the abnormalities are noted. The pattern includes descriptions of changes over time, such as persistence or resolution of pulmonary or cardiac issues, and frequently notes the status of medical devices like tubes or catheters.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5534606797320765,0.595,0.5590062111801242,0.9,100.0,100.0
+8651,latent_8651,1399,0.002798,0.0019521788,2.1496239,Assessment of enteric tube positioning relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe findings related to enteric or nasogastric tube placement, often mentioning the tube's position relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or gastroesophageal junction. This pattern focuses on the details and assessments of tube placement in radiological procedures.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.630450849963045,0.65,0.7777777777777778,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8652,latent_8652,2939,0.005878,0.0024325186,2.0023978,"Detailed description of changes or comparisons with prior images, especially with significant findings.","Higher activation is associated with prompts where specific changes or direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies are explicitly detailed, especially when there are notable pathologies, intervals or adjustments in medical devices/tubes that are significant in the clinical context. These comparisons highlight the evolution or stability of findings, aiding in diagnostic or monitoring assessments.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8653,latent_8653,7164,0.014328,0.005402844,2.6130733,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with a pattern of describing findings in terms of interval changes or stability compared to previous imaging received higher activation levels. This includes using comparative language to describe stability or specific changes noted over time. Dates and prior reports are often referenced, highlighting the importance of changes over time rather than specific pathologies.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8654,latent_8654,976,0.001952,0.0016256289,2.5953202,Require explicit comparison of findings to prior images.,"The pattern observed in the examples with higher activations is the requirement for explicit instructions to provide a comparison between current and prior images. These higher activation examples consistently mention that a description should be provided that contrasts the findings with prior imaging studies, as opposed to merely reporting current findings.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8655,latent_8655,5989,0.011978,0.004599474,2.051378,Placement or repositioning of medical devices or tubes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation all involve descriptions of medical devices, tubes, drains, or catheter placements and their positioning or repositioning, especially with respect to earlier radiographic studies. This is apparent from the emphasis on comparisons or changes in placement statuses like endotracheal tubes, catheters, and other medical apparatus in the radiological findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5997816991086047,0.615,0.6885245901639344,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8656,latent_8656,12765,0.02553,0.009168625,1.6519921,Updates on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently reference comparison with prior imaging studies and describe specific changes or stability in the findings over time. This suggests a pattern of providing updates on patient conditions by observing interval changes against baseline or prior states, even when minor. Activation levels reflect the relative consistency of this behavior or presence of new notable findings absent previous comparison.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8657,latent_8657,7837,0.015674,0.0057810084,1.8164549,Evaluation of medical device placement and related changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention evaluation or comparison of medical support devices such as endotracheal tubes and catheters, particularly with comments on their placement in relation to anatomical landmarks. These examinations focus on confirming the proper position or identifying changes in those devices and any associated complications such as pneumothorax or pleural effusions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4878048780487805,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8658,latent_8658,457,0.000914,0.0009338323,3.7419407,Emphasis on comparisons and evaluations of interval changes in imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on describing the findings of the chest images in a comparative manner to previous studies, emphasizing specific stable or changed conditions observed over the intervals, particularly concerning fluid accumulation and effusions. This pattern is common in radiology for continuous monitoring of existing conditions to decide on follow-up care.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.349212447176335,0.3571428571428571,0.3076923076923077,0.6666666666666666,54.0,100.0
+8659,latent_8659,1792,0.003584,0.002098852,2.6610327,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior imaging.,"The pattern emerges from reports making comparisons to prior imaging, emphasizing unchanged findings or stability in imaging between time points. These examples focus on changes or stability between images and refer specifically to prior studies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4186046511627906,0.43,0.4453125,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8660,latent_8660,4179,0.008358,0.0035521328,3.3088052,Radiological descriptions emphasizing interval changes over multiple imaging sessions.,"Examples selected for higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in relation to changes observed over multiple imaging sessions. This focus on 'interval change', where earlier images indicate progression (increasing or resolution of findings) of conditions, correlates with higher activation.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8661,latent_8661,4844,0.009688,0.0036218753,1.5969162,Detailed identification of specific pathologies in radiographic imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples focus on identifying specific pathologies and confirming their presence through radiological findings, often with detailed descriptions of the observations in the images provided. In contrast, the less activated examples often refer to technical aspects or minor findings without significant implications, which are typical in standard radiological reports but do not emphasize pathological evidence.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8662,latent_8662,5368,0.010736,0.0041889856,2.166249,"Comparison with prior image, but lacks a specific prior report.","The selected examples consistently describe the act of comparing a current radiological image with a prior one, yet they frequently lack a specific prior report for direct comparison. This absence of a specific comparison is likely due to the fact that the assistants are frequently directed to describe findings compared to some prior image (which might be implicit or assumed), which results in a higher activation level.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8663,latent_8663,842,0.001684,0.0014885282,4.420548,Assessment or discussion of pneumonia in findings.,"The explanation identifies that high activation levels are associated with radiological findings specifically related to the assessment or presence of pneumonia. These examples frequently contain phrases or terms like 'assess for pneumonia', 'no pneumonia', or similar language explicitly focused on evaluating or reporting on pneumonia.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.475,0.19,100.0,100.0
+8664,latent_8664,695,0.00139,0.0014142729,3.8703465,Comparison of findings to prior images focusing on interval changes.,"Reports with high activation compare findings to prior images. The reports emphasize new or interval changes, demonstrating changes over time. These comparisons often assess changes post-procedure, incorporating both current and prior imaging findings to determine progression.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4534050179211469,0.453551912568306,0.4123711340206185,0.4819277108433735,83.0,100.0
+8665,latent_8665,1037,0.002074,0.0020259507,4.362918,Change or comparison in position of tubes or catheters.,"High activations occur with descriptions that involve changes or comparisons in positioning of tubes or catheters between the current and prior imaging studies. Radiology reports commonly state whether tubes have been repositioned, remain unchanged, or outline positional differences compared to prior images.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5737704918032787,0.35,100.0,100.0
+8666,latent_8666,12607,0.025214,0.009243532,1.6103038,Explicit comparison of interval changes with prior imaging studies.,"These examples consistently involve explicit comparison of findings with prior imaging studies, with a focus on assessing interval changes such as stable or worsening conditions, using descriptive phrases suggesting direct comparison of images over time.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.575,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8667,latent_8667,1069,0.002138,0.0019172549,4.7484484,Detailed comparisons indicating changes or stability in findings from prior imaging.,"In these particular examples, higher activation levels are linked with very specific comparisons made between changes over consecutive studies, particularly with detailed descriptions of either unchanged pathology or new developments from previous examinations, emphasizing the stability or change of notable findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8668,latent_8668,1071,0.002142,0.0016406456,5.806317,"Signs of infection or significant change (e.g., opacities) in comparison to prior imaging.","Analysis showed a higher activation level in examples that described medical imaging findings indicating signs of infection or significant changes, such as pulmonary opacities, consolidation, or pneumonia. These updates were noted often in comparison to prior imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,100.0,100.0
+8669,latent_8669,923,0.001846,0.001460755,3.8533845,Repositioned or adjusted medical devices in imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings related to medical devices, tubes, or catheters that require or have undergone repositioning, retraction, or adjustment based on prior imaging comparisons. This likely indicates a focus on procedural monitoring and adjustments, a regular concern in radiology reports.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.5641025641025641,0.22,100.0,100.0
+8670,latent_8670,1697,0.003394,0.0022235669,2.6906068,Radiological comparison emphasizing changes or stability over time.,"These examples describe findings in the radiology study, comparing them to previous images. Higher activations relate specifically to changes or stability noted over time, indicating a focus on evaluation of changes, stability, or progression in the findings between the current and prior images. This pattern reflects a comparison-focused approach in radiological interpretation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4027735600769309,0.41,0.4262295081967213,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8671,latent_8671,1370,0.00274,0.001905188,2.1794622,Direct comparative description of radiological findings to prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently address the instruction to describe findings by comparing them directly and explicitly to prior images. This involves a comprehensive approach to changes in findings over time, with recurrent directives for such comparative description, likely indicating the importance of an evaluative approach across temporal imaging within the model's tasks.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8672,latent_8672,3535,0.00707,0.0028472904,2.3061414,Comparative assessment of chest imaging including both frontal and lateral views.,"Analysis of the examples shows that the pattern involves providing a description or assessment of both frontal and lateral chest imaging views, or comparisons with prior images, with explicit comparisons being more representative as seen in examples with higher activation. Absence of lateral view or only current images reduces activation level.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4338535534457276,0.435,0.4403669724770642,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8673,latent_8673,793,0.001586,0.0014410637,4.473837,Focus on evaluating changes by comparing with previous images or reports.,"Highly activated examples feature references to previous studies or images, often using terms like 'comparison', 'prior', or noting specific previous dates along with descriptions of images given for contextual analysis. These characterstic terms signify efforts to evaluate the current findings by directly contrasting them with prior data.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3745244469494152,0.4041450777202072,0.4225352112676056,0.6451612903225806,93.0,100.0
+8674,latent_8674,2302,0.004604,0.0025093392,2.6679068,Compact analysis of observed changes with explicit yet succinct findings in reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings that describe very specific changes or conditions observed in the current imaging study, often in reference to prior studies, without providing an extensive comparative narrative or mundane details. The noted radiology findings focus on succinct descriptions of relevant clinical observation or changes.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8675,latent_8675,868,0.001736,0.0014639203,3.0796967,Findings compared to prior images highlight changes needing further evaluation or confirmation.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention both a description of current imaging findings and a comparison to prior images, often showing changes or stability in conditions. However, unlike examples mentioning simple comparison language, these emphasize follow-up actions or significant findings necessitating further evaluation or potential clinical consequence.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.6504060900781627,0.6532663316582915,0.6829268292682927,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+8676,latent_8676,978,0.001956,0.0014256653,2.804867,Comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations commonly reference or infer the presence of prior imaging results for direct comparison, allowing explicit or implicit analysis of interval changes. This is a frequent pattern when discussing findings in radiology, emphasizing changes or stability over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4228657524451594,0.435,0.4496124031007752,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8677,latent_8677,567,0.001134,0.0012202116,3.9651415,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where both the current frontal and lateral images are compared against prior frontal images. The presence of a lateral view compared to a prior frontal image appears to play a significant role in these activation patterns.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4375547381327728,0.4378698224852071,0.3645833333333333,0.5072463768115942,69.0,100.0
+8678,latent_8678,939,0.001878,0.0014596488,5.076792,Presence of atelectasis or opacities considered likely atelectasis.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe opacities suspected to be atelectasis. Atelectasis is a repeated finding across highly activated reports, often accompanied by mentions of unchanged or persistent features when compared to prior studies. Terms repeatedly used include 'likely atelectasis' or 'compatible with atelectasis'.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.689875950380152,0.69,0.6826923076923077,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8679,latent_8679,983,0.001966,0.0016717751,3.4542055,Descriptions of compressive atelectasis in the radiological findings.,"The highly activated examples describe a specific pulmonary finding: compressive atelectasis, often noted as an opacity at lung bases associated with pleural effusion or other causes. These examples use detailed descriptions and factual comparisons indicating changes or stability, consistently pointing out compressive atelectasis as a significant part of the radiological findings.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666667,0.51,0.55,0.11,100.0,100.0
+8680,latent_8680,6283,0.012566,0.005155,3.7339914,Emphasis on unchanged or stable findings compared to previous reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on describing stable or unchanged findings compared to a prior baseline or imaging report, often emphasizing consistency or lack of change over time in the presence of ongoing investigations.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5061728395061729,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8681,latent_8681,1242,0.002484,0.0016745849,2.746857,"Details on catheter/tube placement or change, especially Dobbhoff.","The high activation examples consistently reference changes or placement details specific to catheter and tube placements, with a particular emphasis on Dobbhoff and other tube positioning within the body. This includes descriptions of catheter tips, placements, and positions relative to anatomical landmarks or previous imaging.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4985754985754985,0.56,0.7,0.21,100.0,100.0
+8682,latent_8682,801,0.001602,0.0016760299,3.1267462,"Detailed comparative evaluation against prior images, noting changes or stability.","Samples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed comparisons between current and prior images, particularly noting changes or stability over time concerning pulmonary or cardiac findings. The usage of comparative language such as 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', 'stable appearance', or 'no interval change' is prevalent.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5424528301886793,0.5463917525773195,0.5254237288135594,0.6595744680851063,94.0,100.0
+8683,latent_8683,1790,0.00358,0.002371128,4.9422917,Radiographic interpretation without prior imaging comparison.,Examples with available high activation levels describe scenarios where radiographic interpretations are made without comparison to prior imaging. This indicates a focus on documenting observations in the current image without historical data for reference.,0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.81998199819982,0.82,0.826530612244898,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8684,latent_8684,2942,0.005884,0.0027604776,2.7040994,Comparison of current imaging to prior reports with noted differences or assessments.,The examples focus on comparing current imaging findings to previous reports. Activation levels are linked to whether there are differences or notable comparisons made between these current and prior images. The presence of changes or observations related to previous radiographs aligns with higher activations.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.496,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8685,latent_8685,2015,0.00403,0.002694126,3.3240526,Comparison of current images with prior ones for changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve providing a description of findings based on current images and their comparison to prior images, explicitly indicating changes or stability. This entails analyzing differences over time based on available previous imaging distinctly outlined in each report, focusing on interval changes or lack thereof.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3982778296503786,0.42,0.4420289855072464,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8686,latent_8686,6571,0.013142,0.0051274565,2.4315536,"Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, noting changes.","The pattern primarily involves comparing current imaging findings with prior images, paying close attention to changes over time. Examples with higher activation levels focus on identifying improvements or deteriorations such as changes in opacities, placement of tubes, or cardiomediastinal silhouette stability in comparison to previous images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8687,latent_8687,920,0.00184,0.0016032318,3.0977278,Radiology reports with explicit comparisons or changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples that exhibit significant activation levels typically involve descriptions containing both current imaging findings and explicit prior imaging comparisons or references. These descriptions explicitly delineate differences or similarities in findings over time, which is a pattern recurrent in follow-up studies to monitor change.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3814808077132982,0.405,0.4316546762589928,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8688,latent_8688,4217,0.008434,0.0036165998,2.4844546,Changes in lung opacities or pneumothorax from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation involve detecting significant changes in lung volumes, opacities, pneumothorax, or pleural effusions in comparison to prior images, indicating acute changes or complications, such as increased or resolved pneumothorax or opacities possibly indicating infection.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5757575757575758,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8689,latent_8689,1439,0.002878,0.0013204474,4.3743553,Presence of both current lateral and prior frontal chest images.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference both a frontal and lateral image of the chest, along with a prior frontal image for comparison. The absence of these specific conditions correlates with low or zero activation levels, indicating that the pattern of requiring both perspectives in combination with past images is vital for high activation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5104166666666666,0.49,100.0,100.0
+8690,latent_8690,1283,0.002566,0.0013520253,2.6606555,Direct comparisons to prior images emphasizing stability or changes.,"The common element among high activation levels is descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images, especially emphasizing any changes or the lack thereof. This is prevalent with complete comparative statements evaluating stability, interval changes, or the continued presence of previously identified features or devices.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4601769911504424,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8691,latent_8691,1047,0.002094,0.001664493,3.0207207,Comparisons showing significant cardiopulmonary changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with significant activation levels refer to either the presence of acute or chronic cardiopulmonary abnormalities and specific findings such as consolidation or severe underlying conditions. However, most importantly, they involve a process of comparison between the current imaging and prior exams, suggesting changes, stability, or the identification of significant pulmonary or cardiac issues.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3811440619951258,0.435,0.3414634146341463,0.14,100.0,100.0
+8692,latent_8692,748,0.001496,0.001124223,5.0322175,Presence of both current frontal and lateral chest radiograph views.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve both frontal and lateral views of chest radiographs, whereas examples with lower activation are either unclear about the additional views or only involve frontal images. The lateral view seems to add critical depth or additional information to the radiology analysis.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5163318916337198,0.5255102040816326,0.5118110236220472,0.6770833333333334,96.0,100.0
+8693,latent_8693,889,0.001778,0.0014549483,3.6317308,Direct comparison with prior images and stability or change in findings.,"The pattern is based on providing explicit comparison with prior imaging in the radiology reports. This is highlighted by the frequent use of comparative phrases or the indication of unchanged or stable findings relative to older images, which are critical in identifying the presence and significance of trends or stability in clinical conditions.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4887218045112781,0.49,0.4909090909090909,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8694,latent_8694,5483,0.010966,0.00440353,2.0909746,Radiological finding comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is the emphasis on comparing radiological findings with prior imaging studies, which is a standard practice in radiology for tracking changes over time in pathological conditions and assessing device placements, fluid levels, or anatomical features.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8695,latent_8695,3842,0.007684,0.0029791985,3.2573595,"Detailed descriptive comparison with prior images, focusing on tubes, lines, or opacities.","The examples consistently involve comparing changes in findings over time, typically involving tubes, catheters, or opacities. Some changes are noted with potential implications for patient management, such as repositioning of tubes or monitoring disease progression. References to prior images denote a temporal comparison element.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5851063829787234,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8696,latent_8696,2642,0.005284,0.0022685807,2.058908,Detailed comparison to prior imaging focusing on changes or stability.,"These examples are focused on providing descriptions of current radiological findings and explicitly noting comparisons to prior imaging. High activation examples specifically emphasize changes or stability of certain features when compared to earlier images, such as the presence of opacities, positioning of medical devices, or structural stability.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.625,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5047619047619047,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8697,latent_8697,1063,0.002126,0.001577716,3.6254458,Unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes with no indication or comparison noted.,"Higher activation levels consistently occur in examples where the CARDIAC AND MEDIASTINAL SILHOUETTES are described as 'unremarkable' or 'normal', and there is NO INDICATION or COMPARISON provided for contextual clinical evaluation, along with frontal and lateral imaging. This pattern suggests normality or lack of significant cardiomediastinal pathology.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6829439434496738,0.695,0.819672131147541,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8698,latent_8698,867,0.001734,0.0015319369,3.2312026,Detailed finding descriptions with specific analysis of image comparisons.,Most examples with high activation involve providing a description of the radiologic findings that includes analysis or comparison with the prior frontal image while providing an impression where applicable. This pattern emerges distinctively when specific notes and detailed comparison are explicitly stated.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4027735600769309,0.41,0.4262295081967213,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8699,latent_8699,809,0.001618,0.001206864,2.6787038,Reports including 'as compared to previous radiograph' indicating interval change.,"The pattern across these examples is the inclusion of a comparison phrase related to interval changes. Examples with high activation predominantly feature comparisons with prior studies where there is noted improvement, unchanged state, or specific change in a condition being tracked, using phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'compared to previous examination.'",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5403856175091193,0.5408163265306123,0.5319148936170213,0.5208333333333334,96.0,100.0
+8700,latent_8700,817,0.001634,0.0017056406,4.6441107,Instruction to compare current findings with prior frontal image.,"The pattern observed is the explicit instruction to compare findings with prior imaging studies, specifically the previous frontal image. Entries include representative statements suggesting critical evaluation against past imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8701,latent_8701,5419,0.010838,0.004544266,1.9730018,"Emphasis on comparison with prior study findings, highlighting interval changes.","Examples with a high activation level consistently highlight comparisons to prior studies, referring to specifics like interval changes, resolution, or persistence of findings. This pattern involves assessing current findings in the radiology images against historical data, emphasizing changes or the lack thereof, and aligning with the consistent reporting style seen in comparative analyses of radiographic studies.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5907928388746804,0.6,0.5769230769230769,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8702,latent_8702,541,0.001082,0.0011529067,4.3894706,Low lung volumes.,"This set of examples consistently mentions 'low lung volumes', which is a radiological observation often indicating limited expansion of the lungs, possibly due to shallow breathing, restriction, or atelectasis. This pattern is notable across examples regardless of other findings.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7075410892684499,0.7333333333333333,0.7058823529411765,0.5538461538461539,65.0,100.0
+8703,latent_8703,866,0.001732,0.0018233551,3.674519,Radiology assessments focus on interval changes compared to prior reports.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve radiology reports providing findings and conclusions based on new imaging relative to a previous study. These examples emphasize continuity in evaluating changes or stability over time, often with follow-up recommendations or implications of stability or change in clinical management.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8704,latent_8704,2296,0.004592,0.002690446,5.979991,"Current findings described in comparison to prior images, noting any changes or follow-up on previous findings.","Activated examples consistently describe the findings in the current radiology study with specific reference to a prior image. The activation is higher when the description includes distinct changes or follow-up on previously noted findings, often using comparative language to assess changes over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8705,latent_8705,1523,0.003046,0.0021079099,4.672192,Attention to low or unchanged lung volumes in radiology evaluation.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the evaluation of lung volumes, either low or unchanged, in the context of chest radiographs. This pattern is marked by explicit mention of 'low lung volumes' or 'unchanged lung volumes', emphasizing an assessment element that distinguishes the finding from other radiological descriptions.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4749042417364165,0.5326633165829145,0.5882352941176471,0.202020202020202,99.0,100.0
+8706,latent_8706,553,0.001106,0.0011445804,5.282326,Evaluation for interval change or status post medical intervention.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve evaluation of thoracic changes necessitating direct comparison to prior imaging reports. These show detailed findings following acute medical interventions, significant changes, or new clinical suspicions that prompt immediate evaluation for changes, such as after procedures like intubation, or when symptoms fluctuate.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4428262436914203,0.4523809523809524,0.4016393442622951,0.7205882352941176,68.0,100.0
+8707,latent_8707,1714,0.003428,0.0020512748,3.099829,"Radiology report compares current images to prior, noting specific changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve studies that rely on multiple imaging views, often comparing findings from PA and lateral views and emphasizing descriptions in direct comparison with prior frames, focusing on changes in opacities, catheter positions, and other static vs. dynamic findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5754716981132075,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8708,latent_8708,2403,0.004806,0.0024220292,2.5310407,Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly/heart silhouette compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples feature descriptions of unchanged or stable cardiomediastinal or cardiac silhouettes as compared to prior imaging, often with additional commentary on unchanged associated lung or pleural conditions. This pattern aligns with a common trend in radiology reporting to note stability or lack of significant interval change in these structures, indicative of non-progression of heart-related conditions over multiple exams.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5671641791044776,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8709,latent_8709,1529,0.003058,0.0018082093,4.8429465,Detailed medical follow-up actions based on findings.,"The examples with high activation levels involve detailed analysis and indication of subsequent medical or procedural decisions based on the assessment. Specifically, the presence of direct references to findings that may directly imply further medical understanding or assessment, often involving technical specificity (e.g., pneumothorax evaluation changes).",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3672800847865883,0.5025125628140703,0.5714285714285714,0.04,100.0,99.0
+8710,latent_8710,3477,0.006954,0.003129878,2.192382,Imaging findings stable compared to prior examinations.,"The examples with high activation levels include descriptions of imaging findings that are stable or unchanged from prior exams, usually with explicit comparisons indicating ""no relevant change"" or ""remained stable."" This indicates that the pattern involves identifying whether there are no significant changes compared to previous studies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8711,latent_8711,821,0.001642,0.0012531901,5.530012,Presence of interval changes or notable findings in comparison with prior images.,"Samples with activation levels greater than zero often involve abnormal findings or notable changes when comparing current and prior imaging studies. These abnormal findings or changes are explicitly described, like new or increased pleural effusions, changes in opacities, or evidence of stabilization or removal of certain medical devices.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4482758620689655,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8712,latent_8712,765,0.00153,0.0012778136,3.5862365,Evaluation of medical device placements.,"These examples all refer to the presence of specific medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) and their positions, orientations, or placements compared with prior radiographic evaluations. This often indicates a focus on evaluating medical device placement in the radiology studies which leads to higher activations.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5342472907690299,0.5357142857142857,0.5280898876404494,0.4895833333333333,96.0,100.0
+8713,latent_8713,3404,0.006808,0.0033295162,4.0289097,Comparison to prior imaging studies with emphasis on stability or change.,"Patterns exhibiting higher activation levels often included descriptions of comparison to prior imaging, whether explicit or implicit, combined with a focus on stability or changes in findings over time. This language appeared in both the description of findings and the rationale for continued monitoring as seen in medical follow-ups.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8714,latent_8714,728,0.001456,0.0013441825,3.073268,Use of comparative phrasing to describe changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels include consistent references to comparative phrases such as 'compared to' or 'in comparison to', indicating a focus on evaluating changes or stability of findings over time.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5199755684499847,0.5210526315789473,0.4954128440366973,0.6,90.0,100.0
+8715,latent_8715,841,0.001682,0.001383736,4.4844856,Description of findings without available prior comparison studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe imaging findings in the context of insufficient or unavailable prior comparison studies. This pattern reflects focus on the absence of previous imaging data to compare current observations against, often indicating that findings are entirely diagnostic and standalone.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7694613079228464,0.775,0.7099236641221374,0.93,100.0,100.0
+8716,latent_8716,879,0.001758,0.0016917083,3.7679744,Use of comparative imaging analysis to assess changes.,"The pattern identified is the use of comparative imaging analysis, which involves referencing previous and current imaging to interpret status or changes. This includes findings that are described in relation to earlier images to assess for stability or progression.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.5448275862068965,0.79,100.0,100.0
+8717,latent_8717,809,0.001618,0.0015027202,6.178492,Coiled or misplaced tubes in imaging reports.,"The high activation examples involve descriptions of NG tubes or other tubes being coiled or misplaced, a specific error pattern observed in image-based assessments of tube placements. Phrases like 'coiled in the esophagus' or 'coiled within' highlight this pattern of misplacement or incorrect positioning, which is a common clinical issue that needs addressing when tubes are inserted.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.9166666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5096766750310058,0.575,0.7777777777777778,0.21,100.0,100.0
+8718,latent_8718,762,0.001524,0.0015695656,3.7860436,Comparison with prior imaging showing resolution or stable findings.,"The activation levels are high when the current imaging comparison shows either resolution, change, or no significant change in findings from the previous imaging study. Reports that mention a defined alteration or explicitly unchanged pathology compared to a prior image exhibit high activation levels.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5978535353535352,0.6020408163265306,0.620253164556962,0.5051546391752577,97.0,99.0
+8719,latent_8719,2141,0.004282,0.0022970776,2.6378245,Low lung volumes causing bronchovascular crowding or enlarged cardiac silhouette.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels frequently describe low lung volumes, leading to a crowding or accentuation of bronchovascular structures and enlarged cardiac silhouette visible on chest imaging. This finding is often reported when there is reduced lung inflation, which can be due to patient positioning or respiratory conditions causing lung volume reduction.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.7297373478539397,0.7336683417085427,0.8133333333333334,0.61,100.0,99.0
+8720,latent_8720,8915,0.01783,0.006522763,2.2045293,Instructions involving comparison between current and prior images.,"The given examples describe the ability to compare current radiographs or medical images to prior studies. Specific references to previous images are made, highlighting changes or stability in patient conditions. This pattern includes descriptors of stability, changes, and comparisons, illuminating inter-study analysis feature common in longitudinal radiology findings.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4900173611111111,0.53,0.5192307692307693,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8721,latent_8721,732,0.001464,0.0012316805,4.688354,Descriptions explicitly comparing current and prior image findings.,"The activations are higher for cases that provide an explicit description of the findings in the radiology study, specifically in relation to a prior image, emphasizing the comparison aspect. This pattern of comparing current findings with prior images in radiology reports is a typical practice for monitoring progression, stability, or resolution of the noted conditions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4256307339449541,0.4391534391534391,0.4341085271317829,0.6292134831460674,89.0,100.0
+8722,latent_8722,2706,0.005412,0.0028575824,2.5858326,Comparison with prior images and detailed change or stability description.,"The examples with higher activations typically describe findings in the current radiology images in relation to prior images. This often includes explicit descriptions of comparisons, stability, or changes over time. Examples that solely describe current findings without a clear comparison to prior images tend to have lower activation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3834315318976026,0.3869346733668342,0.369047619047619,0.31,100.0,99.0
+8723,latent_8723,6570,0.01314,0.006849575,3.0968254,Focus on stability or change in pulmonary conditions through comparative language.,"These examples articulate changes in certain conditions using comparative language, often related to pulmonary features such as pleural effusions or pulmonary edema. There is a focus on dynamic change over time as seen in comparative studies, with terms emphasizing stability or interval changes like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'decreased', or 'improved'.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.518796992481203,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8724,latent_8724,410,0.00082,0.0008714626,4.281109,Blunting of costophrenic angles or small pleural effusions.,"The examples with high activations display a consistent pattern of describing blunting or obscuring of the costophrenic angles (CP angle) and pleural effusions, typically subtle signs in chest radiographs often reflective of underlying effusions or external anatomical influences.",0.8762626262626263,0.8775510204081632,0.8,1.0,24.0,25.0,0.8498498498498499,0.86,0.7377049180327869,0.9,50.0,100.0
+8725,latent_8725,612,0.001224,0.0011619189,2.7573037,Comparison shows no significant interval change from prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples compare current imaging results to previous ones and suggest stability of conditions or devices, indicating no significant change from prior examinations. This kind of comparison underscores the importance of evaluating stability in serial imaging, where ""unchanged"" and ""stable"" findings are crucial.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5113767281105991,0.5517241379310345,0.46,0.3108108108108108,74.0,100.0
+8726,latent_8726,1322,0.002644,0.001767919,4.590006,Using direct images (current and prior) for detailed comparative evaluation.,"Samples with high activation levels involve generating descriptions based on visual data (current frontal and lateral images) and comparing these new findings directly against prior imaging (frontal image). This task emphasizes the change evaluation from previous states, especially when devices or anatomical positions need monitoring or confirmation, demonstrating a pattern of utilizing direct visual comparison in radiology assessments.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.416383701188455,0.45,0.4662162162162162,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8727,latent_8727,2545,0.00509,0.0028390684,3.1639762,Pattern of volume loss in lungs with associated pleural effusion on comparison.,"The most highly activated examples frequently discuss changes in lung volume or pulmonary opacities along with assessments of pleural effusion or retrocardiac opacification. This pattern mentions and contextualizes changes observed over sequential imaging, focusing on volume loss and associated pleural effusion as key findings in the radiological assessment.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5668333377897805,0.595,0.6938775510204082,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8728,latent_8728,11183,0.022366,0.008569092,1.4180008,Use of prior images for comparison and interval change assessment.,"The pattern focuses on the use of prior imaging or reports as a reference to describe current findings. In the activated examples, a specific comparison is made with past imaging, emphasizing interval changes, such as improvements or new developments. This consistent comparison motif coupled with descriptions of improvements or changes in conditions is a key characteristic.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8729,latent_8729,940,0.00188,0.0014112993,4.0900083,Explicit reference to interval changes compared to prior images in radiology reports.,"The pattern demonstrated in examples with higher activation levels involves explicit language indicating changes or comparisons with previous studies. Example 37, the one with activation level 9.0 (highest possible rating), references multiple prior chest radiographs and compares findings to these, which aligns with the pattern found in these kinds of examples. In contrast, examples with lower activations lack such explicit comparative references or changes.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4767394822006472,0.4773869346733668,0.4731182795698925,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+8730,latent_8730,890,0.00178,0.0015555393,2.8126886,"No significant acute findings—lungs clear, no pleural effusion or pneumothorax.","These examples show a pattern where the findings conclude with 'lungs are clear' or 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax' without indicating any significant or acute pathology, emphasizing the absence of urgent findings despite detailed imagery. This phrase is recurrently associated with high activations, indicating a typical non-eventful radiological evaluation.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6196576919227305,0.62,0.6276595744680851,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8731,latent_8731,1981,0.003962,0.0024091552,3.935791,Comparison of current and prior images shows significant change or stability in findings.,"The examples with high activation involve an availability of prior imaging for comparison and a notable change in findings between the current and prior images. This shows a focus on identifying and highlighting changes or stability in imaging findings, especially where prior images exist for comparative analysis.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4623655913978494,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8732,latent_8732,3733,0.007466,0.0032649385,2.038823,Comparison of current images to prior radiological exams.,"These examples mostly focus on findings in current images compared explicitly to prior images, which is common in evaluating medical imaging for changes over time. The presence of prior radiological examination serves as a key feature for observed activations.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8733,latent_8733,9888,0.019776,0.0071751345,1.419014,Low lung volumes or interstitial changes in context of equipment placement.,"The pattern involves radiology reports focusing on lung findings, particularly low lung volumes or increased interstitial markings, suggesting conditions like atelectasis or interstitial edema, often in conjunction with findings related to equipment placement or stability like tubes or catheters, with comparisons to prior imaging to identify changes in these lung conditions.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.55,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8734,latent_8734,1014,0.002028,0.0017735218,2.6459196,Device placement compared to prior imaging.,"The patterns relate to a focus on the findings from current and prior images primarily incorporated with the comparison of device placements, such as nasogastric or endotracheal tubes and catheters, and their stability or change in position relative to previous images, reflecting their importance in ongoing patient management.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8735,latent_8735,949,0.001898,0.0016949575,4.6134143,"Clear lungs, no pleural effusion or pneumothorax, unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes.","These examples frequently describe clear lungs without focal consolidation, no pleural effusion or pneumothorax, and normal or unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes. Such phrases repeat across highly activated examples, indicating this pattern of noting absent findings creates higher activations in this context.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.853056674520534,0.855,0.7886178861788617,0.97,100.0,100.0
+8736,latent_8736,631,0.001262,0.0012686483,2.741017,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies emphasizing interval changes or stability.,"Higher activation levels are associated with cases that involve a description and evaluation based on direct comparison to multiple prior imaging, especially when evaluating changes or stability over time. This pattern is indicative of a refined analysis using historical data which points to stability, change, or treatment effectiveness.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5529470529470529,0.553072625698324,0.4948453608247423,0.6075949367088608,79.0,100.0
+8737,latent_8737,1741,0.003482,0.0021213826,2.794025,Comparison of current and prior radiographic images.,The activation is high when explicit references to current and prior comparison images are made in the context of changes or stability in radiological findings. The pattern emphasizes changes in images due to medical conditions or interventions.,0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3866477942911064,0.415,0.4405594405594406,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8738,latent_8738,6594,0.013188,0.004950645,1.6681753,Comparative analysis of current vs prior radiology images.,The highly activated examples consistently reference findings in the current radiology images compared to prior images. This suggests that referencing and describing changes or stability between current and previous imaging is a key factor in producing the pattern with high activation levels.,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8739,latent_8739,798,0.001596,0.0016508528,4.31627,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies to assess changes.,"The examples that show higher activation contain explicit instructions to compare findings of the current images with prior ones, even when some prior information might not be available or specified. This pattern indicates a focus on identifying changes over time in imaging studies, which is a common clinical need.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4725136612021858,0.5025380710659898,0.4965986394557823,0.7525773195876289,97.0,100.0
+8740,latent_8740,1978,0.003956,0.0027666043,5.496526,Findings described in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently note findings compared to prior radiological studies, using phrases like 'compared to the previous radiograph', 'from prior study', or 'as compared to prior'. This suggests the pattern relates to the use of comparative analysis within radiology reports.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5901197281846619,0.62,0.577922077922078,0.89,100.0,100.0
+8741,latent_8741,1045,0.00209,0.0012315908,2.6500175,Comparative findings in radiology images over time or with specific changes.,"The pattern involves providing descriptions based on frontal and lateral radiology images in comparison to prior imaging studies where available. Descriptions often include analysis of changes or consistencies in specific findings over time, such as opacities or masses noted in previous reports. This is evidenced by higher activation levels in examples with changes in condition or detailed comparison findings.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4246260069044879,0.45,0.4647887323943662,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8742,latent_8742,1000,0.002,0.0015554423,2.9914782,Analysis of interval changes or stability in findings across imaging studies.,"These examples typically include both current and prior radiological images, and the descriptions focus on changes or stability of pathological findings over time. The reports often include analysis of interval changes, common in radiological evaluations of patients over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.4424778761061947,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8743,latent_8743,867,0.001734,0.0013488241,3.9894054,Inclusion of explicit comparisons with previous imaging.,"High-activation examples consistently include direct reference to historical imaging comparisons, with specific descriptors like 'compared to', 'unchanged since', or dates mentioned, while low-activation examples generally lack such specifics or detail non-comparison-related findings.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4761904761904761,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8744,latent_8744,2760,0.00552,0.002899606,2.1735327,Instructions for imaging comparison and change evaluation.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior state using given imaging data as part of the analysis task. The prompts request the model to provide findings or impressions that specifically require referencing past and current images to identify changes, trends, or stability over time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4461025516926138,0.485,0.4901960784313725,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8745,latent_8745,7719,0.015438,0.0057063517,1.2764971,Comparison made with prior image studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include comparison with prior imaging data despite various changes in radiographic technique, indication, and assistant comments. This indicates that the pattern is related to evaluating current images against prior studies.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8746,latent_8746,1273,0.002546,0.0016841993,3.128733,Radiological evaluation for tube or catheter positioning in comparison to prior images.,Examples with higher activations involve imaging indications and findings focused on evaluating tube or catheter placements including descriptions of positions relative to anatomical landmarks and any changes or retained positions compared to prior images. This is a common pattern in radiological evaluation for confirming correct medical device placement.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.576271186440678,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8747,latent_8747,790,0.00158,0.0013652068,3.3524163,Detailed comparison of current vs. prior image with minor changes noted.,"The key feature of examples with high activations is the presence of a detailed description comparing current and prior images, emphasizing subtle or minor changes, including recommendations for additional diagnostic steps when no major differences are noted. Elements include terms like 'no significant interval change', 'minimal interval change', or recommendations for further imaging.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4336319637524456,0.45,0.4242424242424242,0.28,100.0,100.0
+8748,latent_8748,2925,0.00585,0.004032501,5.344324,Unchanged intrathoracic device position from prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings related to intrathoracic devices, typically tubes or catheters, such as pacemakers, feeding tubes, or endotracheal tubes. The pattern focuses on whether the positions of these devices are unchanged compared to prior imaging, using phrases like 'unchanged in position' or 'same appearance'.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.15,100.0,100.0
+8749,latent_8749,563,0.001126,0.0012917159,4.09583,Assessment of interval changes or stability via comparison to prior images.,"High activation examples involve specific descriptions of changes or stability noted through comparison with prior imaging studies. This aspect leverages the use of comparative imaging to assess progression or stability of findings, a key aspect of radiological diagnosis.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4588607594936709,0.4619883040935672,0.4070796460176991,0.647887323943662,71.0,100.0
+8750,latent_8750,2728,0.005456,0.0025946444,2.3883111,Explicit requirement or finding description related to interval changes between images.,"Despite varied contexts and findings, the common linguistic feature among highly activated samples is the explicit action to compare with prior images, either specifying interval changes or direct instructions for comparison, indicated by lines such as 'comparison with prior' and specific evaluations for changes such as intervals or alterations, even when no change is noted.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4678899082568807,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8751,latent_8751,2311,0.004622,0.0023281132,2.2740679,Description of findings based on prior frontal image comparison.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve requests for a description of findings in radiology studies with comparisons explicitly mentioned to prior frontal images. This comparison appears focused on finding interval changes, especially related to conditions like pneumonia or other significant lung pathologies.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8752,latent_8752,763,0.001526,0.0011838312,2.9313548,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions comparing current imaging findings to prior studies. This comparison pattern explicitly mentions stability, changes, or similarities with previous radiographs, demonstrating attention to longitudinal changes over time, an important aspect in radiological assessments.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4839147780324251,0.5052083333333334,0.4892086330935252,0.7391304347826086,92.0,100.0
+8753,latent_8753,967,0.001934,0.0013586993,4.008607,Report analysis based on specific finding changes or stabilities compared to previous studies.,"Highly activated examples involve explicit radiological findings such as the resolution, removal, or persistence of specific pulmonary, cardiac, or catheter-related conditions compared to prior imaging, indicating awareness of interval changes or stability of noted abnormalities.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.4491525423728814,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8754,latent_8754,6269,0.012538,0.004921491,3.0302763,"Comparison of findings between current and prior images, noting stability or change.","The highly activated examples refer to a consistent finding or change in the observations between the current and previous radiological images. They've compared findings notably between different images, often noting stability or change of specific clinical interest findings such as lesions, device positions, or pulmonary conditions.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8755,latent_8755,4425,0.00885,0.003714704,2.5114183,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve comparisons of current and prior imaging findings. These findings explicitly use terminologies such as ""comparison to prior,"" ""unchanged,"" ""as compared to,"" or specific dates, indicating a focus on stability or change over time in radiological findings.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.459121548162644,0.4974874371859296,0.4967320261437908,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+8756,latent_8756,9605,0.01921,0.007146843,2.1299326,Requests for comparison with prior images in providing radiology study findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels request an assistant description that explicitly involves comparison of current images with prior images or radiological findings, suggesting a need for assessment of change or stability over time. The inclusion of phrases like 'comparison to prior' is indicative of this pattern.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8757,latent_8757,420,0.00084,0.0011531482,4.0999327,Central line or catheter placement described with specific position (e.g. 'mid SVC').,"Activation levels are high when a procedure involves evaluation or placement of a central line or similar device, often described with the tip placement reaching the 'mid' SVC or similar vessel descriptor. The presence of lines and catheters with specific locational descriptions is a recurrent pattern.",0.9180602006688964,0.9183673469387756,0.8571428571428571,1.0,24.0,25.0,0.9173508483853312,0.9271523178807948,0.9166666666666666,0.8627450980392157,51.0,100.0
+8758,latent_8758,1612,0.003224,0.0023259209,4.26844,"Presence or removal of tubes/devices and related findings (e.g., pneumothorax) in medical imaging.","The examples with higher activations involve descriptions relating to the presence, positioning, or removal of chest tubes, ET tubes, or other similar monitoring/support devices, specifically in the context of evaluating pneumothorax or effusion changes. These are relevant findings in post-procedural or critically monitored patients.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7256089668918744,0.735,0.6715328467153284,0.92,100.0,100.0
+8759,latent_8759,3138,0.006276,0.0030837262,2.8258927,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The samples with higher activation concern scenarios with stable or unchanged findings in radiological studies, often indicated by repeated statements about 'stable' conditions over comparisons with previous imaging. This pattern is consistent across the samples that show notable activation levels and describes findings that are consistent or unchanged over time.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5121951219512195,0.42,100.0,100.0
+8760,latent_8760,569,0.001138,0.0011362273,3.1453495,Emphasis on stability or change in findings via comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve description of changes or comparisons to previous images, even when findings are mostly stable or unchanged. This suggests the pattern relates to emphasizing comparison of the current findings to prior imaging studies.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4496902728946927,0.4508670520231214,0.3981481481481481,0.589041095890411,73.0,100.0
+8761,latent_8761,1534,0.003068,0.0018973436,3.9086494,Post-surgical changes like median sternotomy or CABG on chest imaging.,"Several examples describe findings in the context of status post open heart surgery such as median sternotomy, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and presence of devices like a pacemaker or ICD. These surgical and post-operative features are commonly compared against prior images to assess for changes or stability of cardiopulmonary structures.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.728005021445758,0.74,0.913793103448276,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8762,latent_8762,4136,0.008272,0.0035996658,2.3280509,Monitoring stability or changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples feature a consistent pattern of detailed comparison with a prior image, focusing on changes, or lack thereof, between current and past imaging. Mention of specific devices or interventions alongside their positional descriptions are common, indicating a focus on monitoring stability or changes related to treatment or diagnosis over time.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8763,latent_8763,882,0.001764,0.0017509384,3.3719037,Multiple views and comparison with prior studies concerning lung pathology.,"Examples with higher activation mostly include findings from multiple views and comparisons to previous studies, emphasizing the presence or absence of pathology like consolidation, effusion, or other lung-related conditions. Lower activation examples tend to focus on positioning, device-related findings, or have less emphasis on result comparison.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8764,latent_8764,1525,0.00305,0.001534604,2.092303,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"Examples with higher activation are all related to making direct comparisons between current and prior imaging to identify changes or stability of observable conditions, typically involving reference to prior imaging findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8765,latent_8765,4889,0.009778,0.003609489,2.786292,Activation higher with direct visual comparisons between current and prior images indicating diagnostic progress or stability.,"Activations are higher when there's emphasis on comparisons or changes based on an INDICATION, but lower when no direct comparisons or changes are explicitly noted. This pattern is derived from how each example references findings in existing images with prior examinations, suggesting the focus is on consistent or unchanged states unless otherwise noted.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8766,latent_8766,806,0.001612,0.001156703,3.130722,Comparative descriptions between current and previous imaging studies with specific findings noted.,"Highly activated examples describe findings using comparisons to prior imaging examinations, emphasizing progression, stability, or changes over time. Details of findings such as atelectasis, opacities, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary congestion are highlighted specifically through comparative descriptions, indicating a focus on evaluating stability or changes of conditions over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4016341923318667,0.405,0.388235294117647,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8767,latent_8767,5978,0.011956,0.0046520894,2.9990275,"Emphasis on pulmonary edema, cardiac silhouette changes, or vascular congestion.","The examples with higher activation levels mention potential or confirmed conditions related to pulmonary edema, pulmonary congestion, or changes in cardiac silhouette. These reports frequently focus on acute assessments for pulmonary or cardiac changes rather than stable findings. This could be indicative of the model tracking mentions of active conditions or changes needing attention.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,100.0,100.0
+8768,latent_8768,865,0.00173,0.0015038183,3.6471744,Structured comparative analysis with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed and explicit comparison between current and prior radiological images. They include a structured analysis of changes or stability in findings over time, often with reference to previous imaging dates and comparison of images to evaluate for changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8769,latent_8769,952,0.001904,0.0017370199,3.7949905,Explicit mention of changes or stability over time in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation demonstrate a pattern of explicitly identifying changes or stability over time in imaging findings, often seen in follow-up studies to track disease progression or treatment response.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.44,0.4423076923076923,0.46,100.0,100.0
+8770,latent_8770,1070,0.00214,0.0019051897,3.0421312,Comparison with prior frontal image findings.,"The descriptions consistently involve providing a comparison of the current findings with the prior images, a typical radiological report pattern, particularly when observing the stability, changes, or minor variations over time. This pattern is especially pronounced when terms like ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" ""compared to prior,"" or explicit dates of previous images are mentioned.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8771,latent_8771,1317,0.002634,0.0019304825,3.9515374,Focus on unchanged findings and normal contours compared to prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize the comparative analysis of current imaging with prior studies, focusing on stable, unchanged, or non-acute findings like normal cardiomediastinal contours, absence of focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. This pattern is typical in radiology where comparison statements are central for monitoring changes or stability.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8772,latent_8772,965,0.00193,0.001485432,3.910339,Comparisons with previously stable findings or resolved conditions in prior imaging.,"Examples that show higher activation levels indicate findings compared to prior imaging studies, usually focusing on specific changes such as stability or resolution of conditions, or absence of new abnormalities. This involves patterns of stability or change concerning medical conditions, which is typical in updated radiological reports.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.4347826086956521,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8773,latent_8773,901,0.001802,0.001459056,4.310021,Pleural effusion detection or evaluation in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the presence of pleural effusions, whether small or moderate, and often coupled with other pathologies such as cardiomegaly or edema. This suggests that the pattern is related to the detection or evaluation of pleural effusions in imaging.",0.8083441981747066,0.8163265306122449,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,24.0,0.7803117480908045,0.79,0.704225352112676,1.0,100.0,100.0
+8774,latent_8774,6820,0.01364,0.0053280955,1.9876056,Requests for brief or summary descriptions of findings.,"Examples with higher activation values tend to provide or specify requests for brief summaries or descriptions of the image findings, often with structured or incomplete sentences, and placeholders like lines and underscores that indicate missing or redacted information. These examples focus more on providing direct assessments or conclusions rather than detailed, full-formatted radiology reports.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4497799119647859,0.45,0.4519230769230769,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8775,latent_8775,1527,0.003054,0.0018361337,3.6150846,Comparative analysis with prior imaging focuses on identified interval changes.,"A higher activation level is observed when there is a specific comparison provided to prior imaging, either explicitly stating changes (e.g., development or stability) in the findings seen on previous images. This pattern distinguishes reports that focus on observed changes in the patient's condition over time, crucial for long-term patient assessments.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8776,latent_8776,16481,0.032962,0.012250733,1.554398,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the comparison of the current imaging study with previous imaging studies. Sentences reflect monitoring of changes or stability in conditions between the current and prior images.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4213342067911344,0.47,0.4810126582278481,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8777,latent_8777,6960,0.01392,0.0050643305,1.5015868,Focused examination of interval changes in radiology reports.,"The common factor in the activation levels for these examples is detailed and direct comparisons between a current radiological exam and previous exams, specifically describing changes or stability in specific findings such as opacities, pleural effusions, or cardiac silhouette dimensions. This comparison component is a central aspect of the reports marked by moderate activation levels.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5212428337428338,0.5276381909547738,0.5203252032520326,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+8778,latent_8778,1267,0.002534,0.001925367,3.830494,Comparing current to prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels demonstrate radiology reports providing comparison to prior imaging reports. This indicates that the pattern involves generating comparative descriptions of the findings in current imaging studies versus prior images to assess for stability, changes, or progression of findings. Comparisons are central to these discussions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8779,latent_8779,976,0.001952,0.0014434829,2.7469563,Requests for image comparison with specific focus on changes from prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include a specific instruction to provide a description 'in comparison to the prior frontal image' or similar language. Additionally, there might be comparative analysis or indications of change that require factoring in previous images, which aligns with requests for reports using comparison to prior examinations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8780,latent_8780,818,0.001636,0.0016120849,3.3105073,Low lung volumes causing bronchovascular crowding.,"The highly activated samples consistently involve low lung volumes resulting in bronchovascular crowding, regardless of the presence of other findings such as pleural effusions or atelectasis. The occurrence of low lung volumes is a recurring element in these reports, leading to increased activation levels.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7237851662404092,0.73,0.8285714285714286,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8781,latent_8781,913,0.001826,0.0016994185,3.6736226,Focus on post-operative changes or device placements in comparison with previous studies.,"Samples with high activations consistently include detailed descriptions of post-operative changes, comparisons with prior imaging, or guidance on line placements and device status, indicating an affinity for cases involving procedural follow-ups or reconfirmation of previous diagnostic conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4594594594594595,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8782,latent_8782,2148,0.004296,0.002170065,2.8149493,Focus on changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The high activation level examples consistently involve radiological comparisons to prior images where specific changes, improvements, or stability in findings are explicitly noted. This indicates a primary focus on stability or changes in patient conditions over time.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4646430520543673,0.485,0.4892086330935252,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8783,latent_8783,1511,0.003022,0.0021996147,3.0289743,"Interval changes from prior imaging, such as worsening or improvements in lung conditions and devices.","Examples often elaborate on radiological findings indicating changes from previous imaging studies, such as interval worsening or improvement. Reports emphasize alterations in lung pathologies, pleural effusions, or placements of tubes like tracheostomy or ET tubes, comparing them to previous examinations to assess any interval changes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4756097560975609,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8784,latent_8784,658,0.001316,0.0012461749,3.6603816,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette is stated.,The higher activation scores are associated with reports where a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette is observed and clearly stated. The reports with lower activations either lack an explicit mention of the normalcy of these structures or describe abnormal findings related to them.,0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5992531641386604,0.6298342541436464,0.64,0.3950617283950617,81.0,100.0
+8785,latent_8785,1029,0.002058,0.0018137094,3.8777902,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation describe scenarios where findings in current radiology images are compared to prior ones, similar to previous patterns. The emphasis is on changes or stability noted between the current and prior observations, often detailing changes in medical equipment or patient status.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3671542691150534,0.39,0.4202898550724637,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8786,latent_8786,11619,0.023238,0.008683834,1.9996082,Significant changes in opacities or tube positions from prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve scenarios where there are significant changes in pulmonary opacities or tube positions compared to prior images. These changes may indicate a worsening or complication of a condition such as pneumonia, atelectasis, or tube malplacement requiring intervention.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6058004876066639,0.6080402010050251,0.6235294117647059,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+8787,latent_8787,1180,0.00236,0.0017213736,3.3581965,Comparison of current imaging to prior images for evaluating changes.,"These examples consistently refer to a comparison of current radiographic imagery to prior images. This pattern emphasizes the importance of evaluating changes over time, using expressions like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'improved', and 'stable'. These comparisons help assess progression or resolution of findings in radiology.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.584,0.61,0.5733333333333334,0.86,100.0,100.0
+8788,latent_8788,2616,0.005232,0.0025603455,3.2781985,Emphasis on stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve requests for detailed comparisons with previous imaging to detect subtle or interval changes, focusing on descriptions of stable findings or specific changes as compared to previous images. Phrases detailing what is stable or unchanged are prominent.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4696969696969697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8789,latent_8789,901,0.001802,0.001493815,4.011511,"Evaluation of findings compared to prior images, focusing on changes or stability.","Examples primarily emphasize descriptions of findings in comparison with prior images, especially focusing on interval change or stability, often referencing changes in opacity, effusion, consolidation, or other pathologies. The consistent theme is the evaluation of differences or similarities with past imaging studies.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8790,latent_8790,628,0.001256,0.0012500071,4.0257125,Comparison and analysis of current images with prior ones.,"Examples with higher activation involve detailed descriptions where new findings are compared to prior imaging studies, not just mentioned but actively described contextually or specifically noted for changes. This often includes detailed analysis or confirmation of placement of medical devices, identifying stability or changes in medical conditions over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3912229060743912,0.4057142857142857,0.3858267716535433,0.6533333333333333,75.0,100.0
+8791,latent_8791,5324,0.010648,0.0058422335,2.8117216,Presence of cardiomegaly in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of cardiomegaly in the chest images. These examples often state the heart size as enlarged along with other findings, but the primary pattern linked to increased activation appears to revolve around this cardiac enlargement condition.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7688674505074866,0.77,0.813953488372093,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8792,latent_8792,1879,0.003758,0.0020728232,3.8232155,Documented changes or progression in opacities or pleural conditions between images.,"Highly activated examples refer to changes and progression, specifically in opacities or pulmonary conditions. This pattern highlights clearer alteration in radiographic findings over time, which may correlate with clinical significance or change.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5066983122362869,0.5276381909547738,0.5517241379310345,0.32,100.0,99.0
+8793,latent_8793,1190,0.00238,0.001667688,3.8358445,Detailed evaluation or positioning of thoracic medical devices compared to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples describe chest imaging findings compared to prior studies, focusing on detailed changes or stability in medical devices like pigtail catheters, ports, pacers, or other thoracic interventions or indicators in urgent contexts, frequently using terms like ""positioning,"" ""unchanged,"" or ""placement evaluation."" These examples reflect the importance of monitoring procedural outcomes over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8794,latent_8794,779,0.001558,0.0015901824,3.5041358,Presence of detailed 'prior report' information in the input prompt.,"The highly activated examples consistently refer to a 'prior report' or 'prior report' details while specifying either clinical indications or specific examination findings. This indicates that the presence of a detailed 'prior report' in addition to current imaging information contributes to high model activation, as it aligns with structured radiological analysis involving past and present data.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4289175391537596,0.505,0.5028901734104047,0.87,100.0,100.0
+8795,latent_8795,12643,0.025286,0.00917904,1.873535,Presence of prior reports and image comparison for ongoing evaluation.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels contain descriptions involving comparisons to previous imaging that demonstrate findings such as stability or slight changes often related to evaluation for specific indications or interventions. The presence of comparisons with prior images serves as an anchor to evaluate progression or stability of conditions, and these findings are reflected in the structured format of the report.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4643874643874644,0.53,0.5176470588235295,0.88,100.0,100.0
+8796,latent_8796,4202,0.008404,0.0043390333,4.291283,Detailed evaluation of interval changes relative to prior chest imaging.,"The pattern involves evaluating chest imaging findings relative to prior studies often mentioning terms like 'changed', 'interval', or 'compared to prior'. These descriptions typically focus on the stability or progression of conditions such as cardiomegaly, pulmonary opacities, or pleural effusion, with comparisons highlighting changes or stability across different observations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4138129712668153,0.415,0.4065934065934066,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8797,latent_8797,972,0.001944,0.0015332585,2.9318576,Descriptions involving interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve providing descriptions of radiology findings in comparison to prior images, indicating interval changes or stability. This comparison often involves specific historical data, such as medical history or prior study results, which facilitate assessing changes over time.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.4722222222222222,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8798,latent_8798,8816,0.017632,0.006680123,2.0022361,Comparison to prior imaging studies for assessment of interval change.,"The highly activating examples consistently make comparisons to previous imaging studies, thus evaluating the stability, improvement, or changes in certain radiographic findings or anatomical structures. This pattern reflects a common approach in radiology where interval change or stability is assessed and documented.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.5704225352112676,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8799,latent_8799,517,0.001034,0.0010565325,4.437513,Radiological findings are documented without prior comparison imaging available.,"Instances without prior imaging for comparison consistently show high activation, suggesting the model may be recognizing a pattern where a comparison context is missing, potentially highlighting the evaluation of findings without a comparative baseline.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6142706584956478,0.6234567901234568,0.5066666666666667,0.6129032258064516,62.0,100.0
+8800,latent_8800,2041,0.004082,0.002717893,3.0723512,Request for interval changes or comparison with prior images.,"Examples showing higher activation levels consistently include requests to compare current radiological imaging with prior studies, utilizing specific comparison phrases marked clearly in the context, such as 'comparison to', 'in comparison with prior', or requesting interval changes assessment. This ensures a focus on identifying any changes or progression in the medical condition.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8801,latent_8801,1020,0.00204,0.0016099606,2.5755653,Assessment involves both current frontal and lateral chest images.,"These examples demonstrate reference to multiple views of chest imaging (specifically frontal and lateral views) in conjunction with assessments compared to a prior image, which is a common approach to comprehensive radiological analysis.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5263157894736842,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8802,latent_8802,684,0.001368,0.0014110338,2.8177383,Description of findings compared to prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"These examples focus on interpreting current imaging studies by explicitly contrasting them with prior images to determine changes, often with medical devices or conditions like pacers, tubes, and cardiac silhouette. The emphasis is on evaluating stability or alteration in the patient's condition.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5367832167832167,0.5597826086956522,0.5106382978723404,0.8571428571428571,84.0,100.0
+8803,latent_8803,1001,0.002002,0.0015680008,4.081357,No prior comparison images and stable mediastinal contours.,"The samples with high activation levels often share the characteristic of having ""None"" in the comparison section, indicating no prior images available for comparison, combined with descriptive stability remarks about mediastinal and hilar contours. This suggests focus on assessment without comparative reference when no previous images are provided.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.6181818181818182,0.34,100.0,100.0
+8804,latent_8804,588,0.001176,0.00103763,3.797025,Emphasis on interval changes or lack thereof compared to prior imaging.,"The dataset shows that examples with specific interval changes highlighted, especially the stability or change in conditions compared to prior imaging, have higher activation scores. The pattern recognizes explicit mentions of whether significant radiological changes (or lack thereof) occur between old and new studies, often directly shown by phrases like 'compared to prior'.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5149805776051343,0.5202312138728323,0.4576271186440678,0.7397260273972602,73.0,100.0
+8805,latent_8805,5549,0.011098,0.0042236825,1.9142144,Comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern is represented by reports that describe findings in current imaging studies in direct comparison to prior studies, consistently using phrases like 'in comparison to', 'compared to', and specific findings such as changes in consolidation, nodules or opacities. This comparison is essential to highlight stability or change over time, characteristic of follow-up studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.5454545454545454,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8806,latent_8806,1609,0.003218,0.002568718,4.513759,Reports detailing implanted device positions and termination locations.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around radiology reports that describe implanted medical devices, such as Port-A-Caths, PICCs, or central lines, specifically mentioning them and their positions, like terminating at the SVC or cavoatrial junction. This focus on indwelling devices and their anatomical locations is often pivotal in clinical discussions about imaging findings.",0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8573914823914823,0.8592964824120602,0.7886178861788617,0.9797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+8807,latent_8807,2420,0.00484,0.0025553603,3.687335,Presence and evaluation of chest tubes or external medical devices post-intervention.,"Examples with higher activation discuss the presence or change in chest tubes or external medical devices, often following procedures like thoracentesis or post-surgical evaluations, indicating an interest in post-intervention changes or complications involving medical devices.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.65,0.65,0.65,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8808,latent_8808,627,0.001254,0.0012611998,3.7040694,High activation for image comparisons with structured input and detailed artifact progression.,"The examples that have high activation levels involve a structured format for input that explicitly references comparisons to prior imaging, with detailed notations about image details and the progression of certain medical artifacts (like catheters or medical devices). This structured input format with flagged areas for comparison aids in producing highly representative output, likely due to model reinforcement on matched structured pre-training data.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5249039692701665,0.5469613259668509,0.4964028776978417,0.8518518518518519,81.0,100.0
+8809,latent_8809,858,0.001716,0.0016254284,3.61858,Finding stability or lack of change despite comparison.,"These examples show a pattern where imaging is described as lacking substantial change despite comparison with previous studies. Common phrases include 'unchanged' and 'no significant change', which imply stability in findings across time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8810,latent_8810,789,0.001578,0.0015945488,3.5031273,Focus on detection or comparison of small pleural effusions.,"The examples with high activation levels typically describe identifying or re-evaluating pleural effusions, often using phrases like ""trace"", ""small"", or related blunting of costophrenic angles. Radiology reports use these terms to detail changes or stability of pleural effusions, which are a common focus in comparative analysis of radiographs.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,100.0,100.0
+8811,latent_8811,687,0.001374,0.0012879748,3.49495,Reports indicating entirely normal findings across cardiopulmonary structures.,"Examples with high activation focus on descriptions that denote normal findings across multiple structures such as heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, pulmonary vasculature, and lungs, with no pathologies like effusion or pneumothorax. The consistent mention of unremarkable and standard conditions indicates the pattern this model finds most representative.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5101168424052437,0.5759162303664922,0.6666666666666666,0.2197802197802197,91.0,100.0
+8812,latent_8812,1323,0.002646,0.0018213446,3.9969645,Reports emphasize change in pleural effusion or lung pathology over time.,"Examples with higher activations consistently discuss changes in pleural effusion, lung opacity, pneumonia, or related findings over time as assessed through consecutive radiological examinations. These findings often require comparison to assess interval changes, emphasizing temporal changes in these specific conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5606060606060606,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8813,latent_8813,11245,0.02249,0.008064132,1.2076584,Detailed comparative findings from current and prior chest imaging.,"Examples with significant activation levels focus on detailed evaluation and changes identified through comparison between current and prior radiographs, including device positioning, pleural effusions, pneumothoraces, and vascular congestion. The pattern involves the specificity of findings that attest to clinical decision-making based on changes from previous imaging.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5461627162075593,0.5527638190954773,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,99.0
+8814,latent_8814,2873,0.005746,0.002618048,2.1250858,Detailed comparison with prior imaging for change tracking.,"Examples with higher activations involve detailed comparison with a prior imaging study, including changes in medical devices (like chest tubes), signs of disease progression or resolution, and updates in clinical status. This pattern indicates the importance of tracking changes over time in a patient's condition by comparing current and prior radiological images.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8815,latent_8815,604,0.001208,0.0014343059,4.3234334,Presence of atelectasis or findings suggesting lung collapse.,"Observations with explicit descriptions of 'atelectasis' or signs implying collapse or incomplete expansion of the lung, like 'bibasilar atelectasis' or 'linear opacities', frequently exhibit high activation levels compared to those without such terms or pulmonary findings.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8101880929556048,0.8103448275862069,0.6952380952380952,0.9864864864864864,74.0,100.0
+8816,latent_8816,1530,0.00306,0.0026111186,3.143074,Detailed comparison of cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung findings to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels focus heavily on providing clear and detailed findings about the cardiomediastinal silhouette and lung condition in comparison to previous radiographic images. This involves a detailed analysis using current and prior images to ascertain any changes, particularly emphasizing stability or absence of acute findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4016341923318667,0.405,0.388235294117647,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8817,latent_8817,511,0.001022,0.001161513,3.4077969,Explicit prompts for comparison with prior frontal image.,"These examples make explicit mention of the assistant being prompted to compare current findings with those from prior images, often accompanied by explicit dates or a narrative structure that specifies historical observations. This prompts a detailed temporal comparison, which is a key focus in these high-activation examples.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3775027302511831,0.4135802469135802,0.381294964028777,0.8548387096774194,62.0,100.0
+8818,latent_8818,1313,0.002626,0.0020270944,2.810893,Requests for comparison with prior image but state 'comparison: none' or 'N/A'.,"The high activation examples consistently request a description of both a current image and a previous image but note 'comparison: none' or 'N/A', suggesting anticipated comparisons without available prior data. The pattern reveals a focus on expected comparisons without prior imaging context, emphasizing connection instructions without actual comparative analysis.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,100.0,100.0
+8819,latent_8819,1275,0.00255,0.0016015433,3.9893775,Device position and repositioning in radiographic comparison.,"A notable pattern in examples with high activation is the emphasis on descriptions of devices or tubes' positions and their re-positioning or adjustments. This includes pacemakers, PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, Swan-Ganz catheters, and intra-aortic balloon pumps, often in comparison with prior imaging. It reflects the importance of documenting and assessing medical devices in radiological examination.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+8820,latent_8820,11359,0.022718,0.008183609,1.3581644,Comparison of sequential images focused on interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing a comparison of changes over time using current and prior radiographs. They often have explicit indications or directives to evaluate for interval changes or stability concerning a specific condition, focusing on the differences or similarities between sequential images.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8821,latent_8821,2966,0.005932,0.0024283763,2.7685492,Stable findings as compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves a stable or unchanged status as compared to a previous exam. The examples often describe findings in comparison to earlier studies, highlighting phrases like 'no relevant change', 'is unchanged', or 'stable'. The consistent element across examples with higher activations seems to be the examination of stability to prior imaging.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.514041514041514,0.5175879396984925,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,99.0
+8822,latent_8822,12682,0.025364,0.009375305,1.6841135,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in the presence of interval changes.,"Differences between current and prior imaging studies are emphasized, particularly in identifying stability, changes, or improvements in existing conditions. Activations are found when there are comparisons showing variabilities in pathological findings in the context of stable cardiomediastinal structures or persistent pathology not related to acute change.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,100.0,100.0
+8823,latent_8823,1375,0.00275,0.0021439844,4.7545743,Comprehensive analysis of current lateral and frontal images compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a detailed description of all provided image views (lateral and frontal images) in comparison to prior images. The explanation emphasizes comprehensive examination and correlation between current and past radiographic findings, often entailing complex conditions or multiple pathologies assessed from various angles.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5175438596491229,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8824,latent_8824,2609,0.005218,0.0025429926,2.6968193,Comparison with prior imaging and focus on anatomical configurations.,"Samples with high activation in this dataset involve situations that describe findings compared with prior imaging to evaluate changes but additionally focus on describing or identifying specific anatomical configurations or abnormalities, which often involve intricate analysis beyond simple comparisons.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8825,latent_8825,3512,0.007024,0.0032494916,4.6459413,Focus on increased or changing lung opacities across images.,"Examples with high activation involve cases that focus on the findings of increased or changing lung opacities, possibly related to infection or volume changes. These examples often discuss specific changes in lung images over time, described by terms like 'redistribution', 'progression', or 'worsening'.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.5054945054945055,0.55,0.625,0.25,100.0,100.0
+8826,latent_8826,1530,0.00306,0.0021087895,2.9306154,Anticipation of comparison to prior imaging or use of prior studies.,"These examples show consistent use of radiology reports that describe changes or findings using prior imaging studies as reference points, even if the comparative studies are not available. The phrasing suggests anticipation of comparison, such as noting unchanged findings or interval changes, which is typical in radiological assessments.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5011688494578228,0.5527638190954773,0.5304878048780488,0.8787878787878788,99.0,100.0
+8827,latent_8827,4755,0.00951,0.00383395,2.8143883,Comparison to prior imaging for changes in findings or progression.,"The pattern shows a focus on descriptions related to changes in radiographic findings over time, particularly comparing current and prior images for indications of changes in details such as size, position, or presence of structures (e.g., cardiac silhouette, pleural effusion, new opacities, and so on). While some examples are focused more on immediate concerns rather than long-term follow-up, activations show more relevance to examples comparing specific changes to prior images.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8828,latent_8828,735,0.00147,0.001615555,3.654841,Lack of detailed comparative analysis despite presence of comparison prompt.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports mentioning current findings being compared to a prior image, but notably lack detailed comparison discussions; instead, these examples focus on describing current findings without distinct historical comparisons or changes.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.4782608695652174,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3998428908091123,0.4973821989528796,0.4858757062146893,0.945054945054945,91.0,100.0
+8829,latent_8829,1497,0.002994,0.0019874002,2.6778214,High activation with or without prior report references.,"The examples with high activation predominantly lack prior report comparisons, are mostly standalone observations focused on the current image findings, and include instructions to describe findings compared to prior images. Yet the primary trigger for high activation seems to be the absence of external prior reports explicitly being cited for comparison even if comparison is mentioned or noted.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4008602150537634,0.4371859296482412,0.4594594594594595,0.68,100.0,99.0
+8830,latent_8830,388,0.000776,0.00084270496,5.771025,Unchanged pacemaker/catheter positions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often detail the presence and positioning of interventional devices such as pacemakers or catheters and their stability or changes over time. Emphasis is placed on comparison to prior imaging studies, noting unchanged device positions, which suggests a focus on follow-up evaluations of medical devices.",0.4913419913419913,0.574468085106383,0.6666666666666666,0.1818181818181818,22.0,25.0,0.546633644007039,0.6824324324324325,0.5263157894736842,0.2083333333333333,48.0,100.0
+8831,latent_8831,1062,0.002124,0.0013763604,3.010868,Providing detailed comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples exhibiting higher activation specifically focus on providing a direct and distinct comparison between current and prior imaging findings. These comparisons often highlight changes or stability in the observations related to specific medical conditions or treatments, which could explain the nuanced interpretation required, thus resulting in higher activation levels for text processing.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8832,latent_8832,1565,0.00313,0.0023460183,8.034495,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently contain references to comparison with prior imaging, indicating a focus on detecting changes over time between exams. This pattern suggests that the activation is tied to reports emphasizing change or stability from one examination to the next, often linked to 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant interval change', and clear comparisons to past imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.5472972972972973,0.81,100.0,100.0
+8833,latent_8833,6412,0.012824,0.0048508556,2.6305876,Comparison to prior images with evaluation of interval change in findings.,"The high activation examples consistently provide interpretations of current chest imaging compared directly to prior imaging results. This involves direct analysis and description of any changes or lack thereof in findings over time, relative to previous images.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8834,latent_8834,1148,0.002296,0.0016578144,2.4325433,Description of PA and lateral chest radiograph with prior imaging comparison.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions of radiological findings with prior imaging comparisons and direct reference to a chest radiograph technique as PA and lateral views. These are typical for comprehensive examinations providing both frontal and lateral insights, facilitating better analysis when comparing with past studies.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8835,latent_8835,1142,0.002284,0.0019160237,3.3813856,Unchanged cardiomediastinal or mediastinal silhouettes in imaging comparisons.,"The pattern involves descriptions using current and prior imaging to identify stability or change, but with a focus on either unchanged cardiomediastinal features or normal mediastinal silhouettes. These are consistent with reviews that often emphasize findings that have remained stable or unchanged in comparison.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3581863024094099,0.4020100502512563,0.2978723404255319,0.14,100.0,99.0
+8836,latent_8836,378,0.000756,0.0010112678,3.442615,Presence of prior report and imaging comparison format: 'Given the current...',The examples with high activation levels consistently include a format where the text begins with 'Given the current' followed by references to imaging comparisons (frontal or lateral images) and prior reports. A clear comparison to prior imaging studies is a common feature in these high activation examples.,0.4404761904761904,0.5319148936170213,0.5,1.0,22.0,25.0,0.3121266427718041,0.3605442176870748,0.3309352517985611,0.9787234042553192,47.0,100.0
+8837,latent_8837,3739,0.007478,0.0033871466,4.532879,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly representative instances describe radiology reports where comparisons to previous imaging studies are included, often highlighting interval changes or stability of findings over time. Reports often specify previous conditions or interventions as well, and use language that emphasizes comparison to prior exams, making these reports attentive to context and historical changes in the patient's condition.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8838,latent_8838,900,0.0018,0.0016707593,3.8246498,Identification of subtle findings in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiological assessments where subtle findings, often requiring careful comparison to previous imaging or thorough evaluation, are identified despite otherwise normal or stable appearances in other areas. Elements such as new opacities, stable mediastinal contours, minor effusions, or specific focal anomalies are emphasized in these reports, suggesting that such subtle or specific findings are central to the pattern.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4823597747304088,0.4824120603015075,0.4803921568627451,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+8839,latent_8839,1048,0.002096,0.0017599057,3.160141,Identification of interval changes from prior imaging studies.,"Reviewing extensive examples, the samples with higher activations focus on comparing images to prior studies and identifying interval changes. Examples highlight changes like pneumothorax development or changes in opacities, emphasizing identified differences over time, which are critical observations in radiological assessments.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5876288659793815,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8840,latent_8840,821,0.001642,0.0015623638,3.0194726,Detailed evaluation of intervals in medical devices or chest conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently feature technical descriptions of chest imaging findings, particularly involving detailed assessments of placement or changes in medical support devices (like chest tubes or catheters), cardiopulmonary status updates, and potential complications or progress of lung and heart conditions. Often these descriptions indicate interval changes from previous images, technical evaluations of medical equipment, or diagnostic evaluations of complex chest conditions, incorporating comparisons with past data or findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4097639055622248,0.41,0.40625,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8841,latent_8841,1479,0.002958,0.0018069954,4.5292335,"Presence of incomplete or non-standard markers (e.g., '[[]]', '<>') within the report text.","The examples with activations display non-standard phrases or partially structured sentences marked with incomplete annotations, brackets or display elements indicating placeholders, such as '[[]]', '<>', mainly focusing on missing comparisons or incomplete reporting convention rather than complete descriptions. These incomplete sections might represent reports mid-edit or instruction text not properly populated which suggests interim or transitional states within text processing.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3311036789297659,0.495,0.4974874371859296,0.99,100.0,100.0
+8842,latent_8842,983,0.001966,0.00150005,3.7641344,Changes in opacity or pleural findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples all discuss increased opacities or changes in lung opacities, suspected atelectasis, pleural effusions, or pulmonary vascular congestion while typically referencing prior imaging for comparison to ascertain changes in findings, including terms like 'new', 'unchanged', or 'increased.'",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8843,latent_8843,2168,0.004336,0.0021385427,2.6319234,Detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern characterizes reports that use descriptors indicating a systematic comparison of current imaging findings with previous ones. Such comparisons help in assessing stability or changes in pathological conditions. These reports provide contextual information by referencing prior or baseline images to outline changes over time, often to emphasize stability or subtle changes.",0.4691666666666666,0.4693877551020408,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5648148148148148,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8844,latent_8844,927,0.001854,0.0015385945,3.7066984,Descriptive comparison of current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation refer to reports generated based on current and prior images, combining verbal prompts with radiological findings to assess changes over time. These examples employ comparison as a central method of evaluation even if 'comparison' is explicitly noted as 'None'. There is a strong contextual focus on utilizing past imaging data to inform current assessments in a detailed and descriptive manner, typical in follow-up examinations.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.39,0.39,0.39,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8845,latent_8845,4190,0.00838,0.003128978,2.255699,Focus on comparison to prior images for evaluating changes over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on describing findings in relation to changes over time using comparisons to prior imaging studies. The repetition of phrases like 'in comparison with', 'compared to prior exam', and the explicit reference to previous studies indicate this pattern emphasizes historical comparison in radiological assessment.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+8846,latent_8846,854,0.001708,0.0015567072,3.4519129,Comparison findings related to pneumothorax or mediastinal shifts.,"The pattern involves the comparison of findings in a chest radiograph to a prior study, with specific emphasis on changes or stability of observed conditions, notably related to pneumothorax, mediastinal shifts, or cardiac silhouette positioning.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5713265063110264,0.595,0.6792452830188679,0.36,100.0,100.0
+8847,latent_8847,1201,0.002402,0.0016647697,4.752152,Stable cardiac or mediastinal findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples provided primarily exhibit radiology findings where there are incidental or stable features, particularly regarding the heart, aorta, or mediastinal contours, combined with the comparison to previous imaging studies. This stable appearance of cardiac and mediastinal structures, often seen as incidental findings not associated with acute changes, forms the pattern.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5187795842766001,0.5276381909547738,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,99.0
+8848,latent_8848,1128,0.002256,0.0014347942,3.2793133,PICC line or catheter placement and positioning.,"The pattern is based on the presence and stability of supportive devices like tubes and catheters, as well as anatomical terms like PICC line tips and Port-A-Cath placements, which are often reported to ensure their proper positioning and changes during follow-up on the same day or over periods. These examples consistently mention such devices, followed by comments on their localization, displacement, or repositioning, consistent with the radiological review.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4679481678537716,0.535,0.6206896551724138,0.18,100.0,100.0
+8849,latent_8849,9372,0.018744,0.006858096,2.3311617,"Evaluation of findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","Many examples focus on specific radiological findings that are compared to prior imaging studies. The findings often address stability or change in conditions such as opacities, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax without evidence of acute deterioration or new pathology, indicating follow-up and monitoring are structured around radiological stability or change due to interventions or progressions required.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8850,latent_8850,6367,0.012734,0.005146566,4.800932,Detailed comparative analysis identifying interval changes on imaging studies.,"Examples with non-zero activation values include detailed changes or observations in relation to previous imaging studies, focusing on interval changes or new developments. The pattern highlights comprehensive comparative analysis of imaging findings, especially for identifying changes indicative of progression, stability, or resolution of conditions over time.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5121951219512195,0.7,90.0,110.0
+8851,latent_8851,1532,0.003064,0.0017586269,3.4190688,"Presence of pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the description of pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis, often characterized as mild, moderate, or unchanged. These findings outline conditions affecting the lung space and fluid retention, which reflects ongoing or stable pulmonary and pleural processes.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8852,latent_8852,16968,0.033936,0.012533638,1.2019086,Evaluating changes in findings between current and prior images.,"While most examples specify a comparison with previous studies, the key distinction for higher activation is explicit changes in abnormal findings or stable abnormalities noted between current and prior images. This comparison aspect is common in radiology to track progress or stability of a condition.",0.5006645990252547,0.5306122448979592,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5039370078740157,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8853,latent_8853,1360,0.00272,0.0018628164,4.334567,Evaluation for pneumonia by comparing current images to prior frontal/lateral images.,"These examples highlight a pattern of evaluating for pneumonia. This is evident from the 'indication' or 'history' section specifying an assessment for pneumonia, combined with a comparison of current images to prior frontal or lateral images. The frequent mention of 'evaluate for pneumonia' further indicates this search intention.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.51995199519952,0.52,0.5196078431372549,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8854,latent_8854,8507,0.017014,0.0064125108,2.0324361,Emphasizing stability or change over time through radiographic comparison.,"Highly representative examples consistently reference the comparison of current findings with previous radiographic studies and evaluations. This marks a pattern where language is focused on identifying stability, change, or improvement over time in follow-up examinations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4728756092392456,0.4974874371859296,0.4965034965034965,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+8855,latent_8855,1335,0.00267,0.0019101136,3.9805188,Comparison with prior imaging studies for finding stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently show explicit reference to comparison with prior imaging studies, reflecting a pattern where findings are analyzed in relation to past exams or noted to be unchanged or stable, which gives context to the current findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5365853658536586,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8856,latent_8856,1739,0.003478,0.001552221,2.5327206,Significant comparison in imaging results with prior studies indicating notable changes or stability.,"The pattern indicates that the activation levels are higher for descriptions that contain significant changes or notable findings when comparing current images with prior ones. These reports often use wording indicating comparison, such as 'compared to prior', 'interval changes', 'unchanged', or explicitly state improvements or worsening.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8857,latent_8857,1462,0.002924,0.001869204,4.4505706,Assessment of stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on providing a radiological description that emphasizes changes compared to previous images or reports. A hallmark of these descriptions is assessing stability or change in specific features such as lung opacities, heart size, pleural effusions, etc., relative to the comparison images.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8858,latent_8858,1700,0.0034,0.0020225174,3.935411,Findings in the context of past medical intervention or scarring.,"The representative examples often describe findings in the context of conditions related to specific anatomical disturbances or scarring, while also making reference to past medical interventions like radiation or surgical changes. This reflects patterns seen in radiological studies where changes are attributed to known factors.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.4683544303797468,0.37,100.0,100.0
+8859,latent_8859,853,0.001706,0.0010699984,2.9662957,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in findings.,"The examples show findings that highlight the cardiomediastinal silhouette and mediastinal/hilar contours being within normal limits. Despite various techniques and types of comparison (or lack thereof), the presence of normal cardiac structure remains predominant in the activations.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.684044233807267,0.685,0.6666666666666666,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8860,latent_8860,927,0.001854,0.0014389697,2.5066364,Interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on changes between the current images and prior results, indicating the importance of variability and interval changes in radiological assessments. The pattern involves detecting incremental alterations, new placements, or stability in findings compared to earlier imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8861,latent_8861,736,0.001472,0.0014505899,5.490802,Focus on comparison with previous imaging findings.,"Reports with higher activation consistently involve the task of comparing the current imaging to prior images. These examples emphasize finding changes over time, such as stability, improvement, or progression of findings between sequential studies, which the model appears tuned to recognize as a key pattern.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4587888982338099,0.4747474747474747,0.4776119402985074,0.6530612244897959,98.0,100.0
+8862,latent_8862,758,0.001516,0.0014148285,2.9115539,Reports indicating 'no relevant change' compared to prior imaging.,The examples with high activation levels demonstrate a pattern where the reports note 'no relevant change' in the findings when compared to prior imaging. This suggests that the model is responding strongly to phrases indicating stability or lack of significant change over time in the imaging findings.,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5423461796539955,0.5608465608465608,0.5483870967741935,0.3820224719101123,89.0,100.0
+8863,latent_8863,13897,0.027794,0.010117359,1.5252451,"Require explicit comparison with prior images, even if comparison details are inadequate.","Examples with higher activation involve explicit directives to compare current findings with previous images, using the terms 'comparison' or 'prior report', although the actual comparison may not be explicitly detailed in the assistant's description. This requirement for comparative analysis likely leads to increased activation.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4782956646521511,0.5226130653266332,0.5126582278481012,0.8181818181818182,99.0,100.0
+8864,latent_8864,684,0.001368,0.001342192,4.186314,Reports indicating 'clear' lungs or absence of thoracic abnormalities.,"Samples with high activation levels include explicit language indicating a 'clear' finding for lung conditions. This term is frequently used in radiology reports to signify an absence of abnormalities such as effusions, infiltrates, or pneumothorax, and appears in varying contexts within the reports.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7772455089820359,0.7795698924731183,0.6890756302521008,0.9534883720930232,86.0,100.0
+8865,latent_8865,2350,0.0047,0.002547394,3.068395,Comparison of medical device placement with prior imaging.,"These examples consistently emphasize positioning and monitoring of medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes, vascular sheaths, and catheters in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern is critical in the evaluation of device placement relative to anatomical landmarks or previous positions.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4936708860759494,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8866,latent_8866,9860,0.01972,0.0073631867,1.2982513,"Interval change in comparison to prior imaging studies, indicating progression.","The examples with higher activation all involve comparison to prior studies and describe changes, often indicating interval worsening or improvement in findings. This suggests the model identifies instances where there is a notable change in the clinical presentation as an important pattern.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5402298850574713,0.575,0.6666666666666666,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8867,latent_8867,594,0.001188,0.0011631516,3.4963136,Assumed need for comparison despite lack of a prior report.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently do not provide an existing prior report but instead request or assume comparison with prior imaging studies. This creates an implicit demand to critically evaluate if the current findings represent a change, often requiring subjective judgment.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.480503144654088,0.4858757062146893,0.4146341463414634,0.4415584415584415,77.0,100.0
+8868,latent_8868,1524,0.003048,0.0018437068,2.6542342,Reports noting immediate clinical interventions or device placements.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include specific mention of new interventions or changes resulting from an immediate clinical decision, such as the placement or adjustment of tubes, like a nasogastric or endotracheal tube, and comparison to prior near-term imaging studies, often involving phrase like 'interval change'. Examples with lower activation levels convey stable findings or lack comparable, actionable data changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8869,latent_8869,1886,0.003772,0.002448135,3.8385334,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The representative examples include both references to prior images for comparison and descriptions of interval changes, such as diminished effusions, resolved opacities, or newly identified effusions. These elements indicate a pattern focused on the evaluation of interval changes and clinical correlation with past images.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+8870,latent_8870,10645,0.02129,0.0076926686,1.8394351,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging, noting change or stability.","The highly activated examples often describe the findings in the current imaging study in comparison to prior studies, especially when there are specific changes (or lack thereof) noted, such as the presence, change, or placement of medical devices, or stability of certain observed conditions (e.g., effusions, pneumothorax). The language around details of modifications between imaging studies is crucial in these activated reports.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6491228070175439,0.65,0.6363636363636364,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8871,latent_8871,17599,0.035198,0.012844696,1.1685537,Descriptions involve comparing current images to prior images.,"The pattern prevalent in these examples involves providing detailed descriptions of current findings specifically in comparison with the prior frontal radiographic images. Such descriptions often assess changes using past data as a reference point, and frequently involve comparison remarks about stability or change, which fits the task of radiology assessments after clinical interventions or over time to check for progress or regression.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.477124183006536,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8872,latent_8872,8966,0.017932,0.006688633,1.8000319,Comparison showing interval change or sustained pathology across imaging types (frontal & lateral views).,"Examples showing activation levels indicate a pattern of comparison across different perspectives or imaging techniques (like frontal and lateral views), risking inaccuracies due to differing anatomical projections, yet especially change detection from prior stable conditions is recorded. Activation level correlates with definite interval changes in pathology or entity status.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8873,latent_8873,6081,0.012162,0.004654528,3.2072318,Changes in tube positions or device insertions compared to prior images.,"These examples with higher activation levels involve radiological comparisons that show changes, especially removal or insertion of tubes and their positions relative to previous images. Descriptions involve assessments of interval change or device placements, highlighting alterations compared to prior imaging.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,100.0,100.0
+8874,latent_8874,1089,0.002178,0.0019734597,5.2719784,Comparison to prior images and evaluation of changes or consistency in pathology.,"Examples with activations closer to the pattern mention comparisons to previous images, either directly or imply regression or persistence of prior findings. This often includes comparison of lung or heart conditions or monitoring changes such as pneumothorax resolution or persistent symptoms. Lower activation samples lack comparison or persistence of prior stated conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8875,latent_8875,2964,0.005928,0.0031419138,3.6274037,Identification of significant or subtle interval changes in imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with the mention of significant or subtle changes in imaging findings when compared to prior studies. This involves noting interval improvements, worsening, or the need for further evaluation due to subtle findings, which are critical for diagnosis or patient management, thus attracting higher model activation.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+8876,latent_8876,4921,0.009842,0.004744456,6.9326153,Description of radiographic changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation focus on providing a description of the current radiographic findings while explicitly comparing them to prior images, emphasizing differences or stability. The comparison allows for evaluation of changes over time, an integral part of radiological assessment.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.2296296296296296,0.6739130434782609,46.0,154.0
+8877,latent_8877,7143,0.014286,0.005487125,2.6525948,Interpretations involving changes in comparison to prior images.,"Activation levels are higher when examples involve clear comparisons between radiology findings on current and prior images, indicating changes or stability in patient condition. This suggests the model activates more for cases involving interpretations of possible alterations or stabilities across temporal image comparisons.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.5547445255474452,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8878,latent_8878,1828,0.003656,0.0030030305,3.9726205,Interval changes in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"These examples consistently describe comparisons between current and prior images, focusing specifically on interval changes either following medical interventions or chronic conditions. Common language includes 'as compared to the previous', 'no relevant change', and noting any medical devices or anatomical changes reported in continuity from past images.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+8879,latent_8879,1069,0.002138,0.0015483593,2.833034,Comparison of findings with prior imaging.,"Most representative samples involve a comparison between current imaging findings and details from prior imaging studies. This illustrates a typical linguistic pattern in radiology reporting where changes in findings are highlighted in relation to previous examinations using phrases like 'comparison', 'unchanged', and 'interval change'.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+8880,latent_8880,1077,0.002154,0.0018508781,3.5555363,Comparison to prior imaging for specific change in condition of interest.,"Higher activations occur when there is a comparison with prior imaging for specific changes or deterioration in conditions of interest, such as pulmonary edema, edema, pneumothorax, and other changes potentially indicating acute or progression of disease. It suggests an interest in assessing the progression or resolution of findings relative to previous imaging.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8881,latent_8881,5049,0.010098,0.0039860844,2.4938405,Detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging using specified orientations.,"Examples with an activation level indicate the sides and orientations of the imaging provided (e.g., 'current frontal image', 'lateral image') for analysis alongside a previous (prior) image, indicating specific comparisons or changes being evaluated. The prompt emphasizes providing detailed, comparative descriptions in cases where both current and prior images are explicitly mentioned and compared, often involving detailed historical or clinical context, resulting in higher activation levels.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+8882,latent_8882,5674,0.011348,0.00427042,2.2145333,Focus on comparative evaluation based on prior images.,"Examples with increased activation often include linguistic references to require providing comparative descriptions or evaluations based on old observations, such as evaluating interval changes or confirming stability, indicating whether specific observed radiological features have changed over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8883,latent_8883,12709,0.025418,0.009372206,1.4277269,Stable lung and support device findings when compared to previous images.,"The high activation levels are in reports that include descriptions of change or stability in findings when compared to past radiographs, focusing notably on the observation of persistent or improved lung conditions like clear lungs and lack of acute issues, often in conjunction with noting support devices or tubes. The language used tends to affirm stability, unchanged findings, or offers interval changes compared to previous exams, emphasizing the continuity or resolution of patient condition or tube positions.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.6323529411764706,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8884,latent_8884,1174,0.002348,0.0016776747,2.6598835,Comparison of current imaging findings with previous studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions that provide a comparison with previous imaging studies, focusing on changes or stability over time. This shows the model is activated when descriptions involve a comparative aspect between current and prior states, frequently indicating progress or stability of findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5037938708207095,0.5326633165829145,0.5202702702702703,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+8885,latent_8885,8112,0.016224,0.006013956,1.6238111,Comparison of interval changes in medical devices.,"This set focuses on reports that compare findings with previous imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes in medical devices like catheters, tubes, and central lines. Several examples use comparative language to highlight placements or changes, such as 'unchanged position', 'removed', 'new placement' (i.e., nasogastric, PICC lines).",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5945945945945946,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8886,latent_8886,1072,0.002144,0.00167017,3.5266857,Detailed comparison of current and prior imagery with observations on medical condition changes.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on detailed evaluations comparing current and prior images, highlighting changes or stability in medical conditions. These examples often provide chronological data and specific observations about changes in conditions over time. They explicitly compare current findings with those from previous radiographs, identifying new or stable pathologies and mentioning specific medical devices or anatomical changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.4320987654320987,0.35,100.0,100.0
+8887,latent_8887,1286,0.002572,0.0019650946,3.627354,"Assessment and description of medical device positioning (e.g., tubes).","Examples with higher activation focus on the description and evaluation of support devices like tubes or catheters in chest images, noting their position and any changes. This specific pattern is essential for monitoring device placement or migration.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5725958516656191,0.575,0.5882352941176471,0.5,100.0,100.0
+8888,latent_8888,586,0.001172,0.0011129759,3.090096,Descriptive statements on support and monitoring device placement.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions of support and monitoring devices, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and nasogastric tubes, focusing on their placement and status. This suggests the activation pattern is related to documenting these devices in radiology reports compared to previous imaging or assumed normal placement details.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4436632885830747,0.4912280701754385,0.3469387755102041,0.2361111111111111,72.0,99.0
+8889,latent_8889,926,0.001852,0.0015772658,3.7704315,Comparison indicating unchanged cardiac silhouette on imaging.,"The key pattern is focused on the comparison between current and previous imaging studies, highlighting unchanged features of the cardiac silhouette and other anatomical structures as part of radiological evaluations. Frontal and lateral images are often used, with phrases like 'as compared to previous' indicating consistency over time.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5931237920862578,0.6,0.6351351351351351,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8890,latent_8890,3997,0.007994,0.0043245624,3.0986133,Focus on positioning and status of medical devices or lines in imaging.,"The samples with higher activation focus on chest radiographs or CT comparisons where there is notable discussion on positioning and status of inserted devices or lines such as pacemakers, tubes, and catheters. Descriptions often note unchanged positions or changes in devices between imaging. This could indicate the model is prioritizing examples highlighting medical devices and apparatuses.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.6043956043956044,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8891,latent_8891,1231,0.002462,0.0018539451,3.8666563,No prior comparison available for imaging study.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently contain reports indicating there are no previous studies available for comparison, emphasizing the assessment of normalcy or abnormalities in the current images without a retrospective viewpoint. The phrase ""none available"" or similar means of indicating the lack of prior comparative studies is key in these examples.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8892,latent_8892,1133,0.002266,0.0016835179,3.6225982,"Comparison of current and prior imaging for stability or change, focusing on medical devices or specific pathologies.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention comparisons of current findings to prior imaging, specifically focusing on any changes or stability in medical devices, pathologies, or anatomical structures as opposed to simply finding comparisons. This pattern reinforces the importance of monitoring stability or changes in patient conditions over time particularly with medical devices or specific pathologies described.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4806594144854138,0.4924623115577889,0.4923076923076923,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+8893,latent_8893,1487,0.002974,0.001652139,4.9052563,Comparative analysis to prior images with emphasis on stability or changes.,"Higher activations are associated with sequences that compare the current study to prior imaging, indicating radiological stability or change in conditions. The detailed comparison of findings between the current and prior images, often noted with unchanged areas and progression details, aligns with strong activations. Lower activations lack in-depth comparative details or mention notable changes, instead focusing on new findings or initial assessments.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8894,latent_8894,4079,0.008158,0.0036300006,3.2916815,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples that clearly reference or imply a comparison between current and previous imaging findings. The focus is on detecting interval change and stability of findings over time, often using keywords like 'compared to prior', 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'. These phrases indicate a direct comparison of current imaging results with past data.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8895,latent_8895,819,0.001638,0.0014894676,3.3804684,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette description in radiology reports.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activation levels is the mention of a 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette' or equivalent descriptions in reports of chest radiographs. This description often follows when no acute or new abnormalities are noted, and suggests a common informational structure in these reports when the heart and surrounding structures appear normal.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6147592245153221,0.615,0.6210526315789474,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8896,latent_8896,719,0.001438,0.0012453813,5.079693,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and unchanged state compared to priors.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently include descriptions of a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or contours. These reports often detail comparisons to prior studies and emphasize an unchanged state, particularly noting the absence of acute changes despite incidental findings or ongoing chronic processes.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5030609695152424,0.5351351351351351,0.490566037735849,0.3058823529411765,85.0,100.0
+8897,latent_8897,2461,0.004922,0.0018623602,2.2074738,Reports highlight interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels often include discussion of interval changes or stability in radiological findings when compared with prior images. This pattern focuses on changes between current and previous imaging, highlighting alterations or stability in conditions over time, often used for evaluating treatment effectiveness or disease progression.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5454545454545454,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8898,latent_8898,688,0.001376,0.0015942182,4.0542483,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral images in the evaluation.,"Highly activated examples frequently describe findings from both frontal and lateral images, indicating that comprehensive evaluations involving multiple views contribute to activation. This pattern is seen in examples where lateral images offer additional context for assessing changes or findings.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6210611365472664,0.6455026455026455,0.5743243243243243,0.9550561797752808,89.0,100.0
+8899,latent_8899,834,0.001668,0.0012959759,3.629228,Description relies on interval comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples consistently involve an interval comparison with previous imaging, emphasizing stability or change in findings over time. They often use phrases indicating a description based on 'comparison,' 'prior study,' or by referring to findings as unchanged or changed since the previous imaging.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8900,latent_8900,2070,0.00414,0.0024433576,3.555265,Detailed descriptions of abnormal findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations all mention specific descriptions of findings in radiology studies, particularly focusing on detailed observations of abnormalities or changing conditions such as masses, opacities, effusions, or structural changes. This suggests that the model activates more strongly when detailed findings are the focus in reference to previous imaging, particularly in the context of disease surveillance or progression assessment.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6788438378161381,0.68,0.6607142857142857,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8901,latent_8901,2589,0.005178,0.0024498974,2.770164,Radiological assessment comparing current findings to prior imaging.,"The examples exhibit a consistent pattern of describing radiological findings in relation to prior studies, using terms like 'compared to previous', 'as compared to the prior study', or indicating stability or change. These reports emphasize serial or interval comparison in assessing disease status or the effect of treatment.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+8902,latent_8902,758,0.001516,0.001317596,3.5483267,Comparison of tube placement or medical devices with prior imaging.,The examples with high activation consistently involve references to the presence and positioning of a Dobbhoff tube or other medical tubes and devices in context with prior imaging. This includes assessing tube placement or changes in relation to past studies. Radiology reports frequently compare current findings with previous images to assess changes in medical devices like Dobbhoff tubes.,0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7211753433407857,0.7216494845360825,0.717391304347826,0.7021276595744681,94.0,100.0
+8903,latent_8903,625,0.00125,0.0014301499,3.7414334,Emphysematous changes in the lungs.,"Examples with high activation levels all involve emphysematous changes, characterized by hyperinflation, flattening of the diaphragm, or upper lobe lucency, regardless of the primary condition being assessed.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7016069585729028,0.7386363636363636,0.8947368421052632,0.4473684210526316,76.0,100.0
+8904,latent_8904,4334,0.008668,0.0032442822,1.9868228,Observation of pleural effusions and related findings.,"The pattern is the frequent observation of pleural effusions, often described as bilateral, and related findings like atelectasis, edema, or the use of medical interventions such as chest tubes, thoracentesis, or pleural catheters. It's a common finding in radiology related to fluid overload or lung conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.6041666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+8905,latent_8905,729,0.001458,0.0011132022,3.6195228,Explicit comparison to prior images and assistant description request.,"The examples with high activation discuss findings in current imaging in the context of comparison with prior images, specifically focusing on any notable changes or lack thereof between the images. They explicitly use or imply language about comparison with a 'prior frontal image,' and request the assistant to describe findings compared to prior images, which is a specific instruction pattern in radiology review tasks.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4259259259259259,0.4408602150537634,0.4307692307692308,0.6511627906976745,86.0,100.0
+8906,latent_8906,906,0.001812,0.0016980579,5.4648957,Comparison with prior imaging for changes or stability in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels involve comparing current and prior images to assess stability, change, or resolution related to findings across various conditions, often involving medical devices like pacemakers or tubes, or changes in lung or cardiomediastinal structures. The task frequently involves determining slight differences or confirming stability as it pertains to chronic or post-operative conditions.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8907,latent_8907,6080,0.01216,0.0046109,2.3082407,Comparison between current and prior images for findings.,"The representative examples involve the use of images for comparisons. The prompt structure suggests comparison with the current and prior images to analyze changes or stability in findings. The consistent use of 'prior frontal image', 'current frontal image', 'comparison', and 'prior report' indicates a pattern of image comparison, which correlates with higher activations.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5274725274725275,0.57,0.54375,0.87,100.0,100.0
+8908,latent_8908,6309,0.012618,0.0048502637,1.9898617,Absence of prior image comparison.,"This pattern shows a consistent absence of comparison data either in the structure of the input or in the descriptions provided. The lower activation scores correspond to those examples lacking available past images for comparison, which is noted by phrases like 'No comparison available' or 'COMPARISON: None.'",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+8909,latent_8909,781,0.001562,0.0015928329,3.1884744,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with clear lungs and pleura.,"Highly activated samples consistently report findings where the lungs or pleural space are clear of pathologies such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, and the cardiomediastinal silhouette is described as normal or unremarkable. This reaffirms the absence of acute or severe issues in most radiological assessments, often in evaluations for acute processes.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6919504643962848,0.6984924623115578,0.7746478873239436,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+8910,latent_8910,2370,0.00474,0.00212043,2.244374,Comparison indicating change or stability from prior imaging.,Examples with high activation levels consistently include observations such as 'analysis is performed in direct comparison with the prior study' and changes in findings relative to a previous examination. References to changes in findings compared to prior imaging suggest the pattern is tied to identifying differences or stability over time across studies.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8911,latent_8911,1876,0.003752,0.0020939382,2.7342074,Instructions to compare current and prior images for interval change.,"The examples with higher activations have consistent language instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images, emphasizing changes or intervals. The explicit mention of comparison in the directive signals the model to examine changes over time, which aligns with diagnostic practices concerned with tracking disease or condition progress.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.468671679197995,0.47,0.4727272727272727,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8912,latent_8912,2738,0.005476,0.0025782678,3.8164592,Evaluations of endotracheal and similar tube placements.,"These examples show a focus on endotracheal tube placement or evaluation often associated with post-intubation assessments, alongside instances of reporting other medical devices like chest tubes or nasogastric tubes, without significant changes in pulmonary findings. High activation is seen with descriptions of the tube position and the patient's circumstances related to respiratory interventions.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.396011396011396,0.47,0.4,0.12,100.0,100.0
+8913,latent_8913,636,0.001272,0.0010937848,4.5807843,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies. These descriptions detail either improvements or persistent presence of pathologies such as effusions, pneumothoraces, or opacities, indicating a focus on evaluating changes over time in radiological findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6462585034013606,0.6483516483516484,0.5789473684210527,0.8048780487804879,82.0,100.0
+8914,latent_8914,1233,0.002466,0.0017974703,3.0981135,"Interval change or persistence in pulmonary effusion, consolidation, or atelectasis compared to prior images.","Examples with high activation levels consistently show changes in pulmonary effusion, consolidation, or atelectasis compared with prior imaging. These changes reflect dynamic processes possibly indicative of evolving conditions, which are often subject to careful monitoring in medical practice.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.74997499749975,0.75,0.7551020408163265,0.74,100.0,100.0
+8915,latent_8915,2951,0.005902,0.0030880333,3.4745014,Changes in position or presence of intervention/support devices in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve reporting on changes in the position or presence of tubes, catheters, or other supportive devices between the current and prior radiographic images. This pattern reflects a focus on intervention or support devices which are critical to patient care and require regular monitoring on radiographs.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8916,latent_8916,1028,0.002056,0.0016261913,3.8142316,Endotracheal tube placement and lung status evaluation on comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently discuss endotracheal tube position or intubation in the context of no worsening or improvement in terms of effusion, congestion, or pneumonia, and compare these to prior studies. This pattern represents the reports' focus on the proper placement or status of the airway management devices, ensuring no acute respiratory failure or cardiopulmonary complication during the reassessment.",0.4289044289044289,0.4897959183673469,0.4444444444444444,0.1666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4074074074074074,0.48,0.4333333333333333,0.13,100.0,100.0
+8917,latent_8917,1055,0.00211,0.0016051821,4.1534324,Focus on interval change in pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe new, resolved, or improved pulmonary findings such as opacities, effusions, or consolidations when comparing current images to prior images, indicating interval changes. This emphasizes a focus on notable changes in the patient's condition over time.",0.4452830188679245,0.4489795918367347,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5256410256410257,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8918,latent_8918,692,0.001384,0.0012883968,3.5505648,Repositioning or assessment of tubes/catheters in imaging.,"The highly activated examples contain elements related to the repositioning or assessment of various tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, or chest tubes) and catheters in medical imaging, distinct from examples focused solely on disease states or other findings. This pattern illustrates the importance of documenting changes or evaluations concerning medical equipment placement.",0.7306553911205074,0.7346938775510204,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.6364189086487309,0.6467391304347826,0.6376811594202898,0.5238095238095238,84.0,100.0
+8919,latent_8919,1548,0.003096,0.0023517117,3.2866118,Stable findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,"The neural network activation is high when there is explicit comparison between current and prior images and when findings are consistent between examinations, indicating stability of known anomalies or resolution of previously identified conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.6212121212121212,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8920,latent_8920,3505,0.00701,0.0031323098,2.576626,Descriptions of instrumentation or artificial structures and their assessment.,"The pattern here revolves around the focus on findings related to artificial structures or instrumentation within the thoracic cavity, such as central lines, endotracheal tubes, or chest tubes, and their placement or changes since previous imaging. The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention these elements.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8921,latent_8921,858,0.001716,0.0015338027,3.4973104,Description of interval changes or stability based on prior imaging.,"These examples explicitly involve the evaluation of interval changes in the comparison of imaging findings. The examples describe changes in pathological findings over time or stability, often mentioning the positioning of lines or tubes, without introducing new clinical indicators or conditions. The emphasis is on documenting changes or stability based on prior imaging.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.5288461538461539,0.55,100.0,100.0
+8922,latent_8922,879,0.001758,0.0015992014,3.1336637,Detailed comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or changes.,"The examples indicate high levels of activations for descriptions that often include a comparison to previous imaging, along with identifying progression or stability in findings. Such narrative structures in radiology often involve examining changes or constancy over time, specific pathologies, and detailing imaging observations concerning these pathologies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,100.0,100.0
+8923,latent_8923,670,0.00134,0.0015344375,4.5189333,Comparison focused on prior frontal images without referencing prior lateral images.,"The highly activated examples consistently show comparison of current radiologic findings with prior images, specifically when a prior frontal image is available for reference, but where prior lateral images are not included or available for comparison. This sets a pattern where the comparison focuses on the frontal images.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5185459701588734,0.5388888888888889,0.4890510948905109,0.8375,80.0,100.0
+8924,latent_8924,884,0.001768,0.0014664093,2.7037313,Focus on evaluation and positioning of medical lines or tubes in imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the presence of lines, tubes, or catheters, such as enteric, feeding, or endotracheal tubes, evaluated for their positioning or changes. Phrasing often includes mentions of advancement, termination, or unchanged status, reflecting careful monitoring of these medical devices in imaging.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8925,latent_8925,1176,0.002352,0.0017903337,3.197772,Emphasis on longitudinal comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve imaging reports that specifically describe changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging. They assess potential improvements, deteriorations, or consistent states over time, using phrases like 'compared to previous' or 'unchanged since prior.' This specificity in comparison highlights the importance of longitudinal assessment in these examples.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8926,latent_8926,3248,0.006496,0.0030709698,3.1109307,Comparison with earlier imaging to assess interval changes.,"The pattern involves describing radiological findings by comparing them with those from previous or multiple recent studies to evaluate interval changes. These descriptions often highlight stability or changes in medical devices, opacities, or mediastinal/cardiac contours while indicating any developments or lack thereof since the last reviewed image.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.565,0.5419354838709678,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8927,latent_8927,1190,0.00238,0.0021582826,3.699041,Detailed comparative analysis with previous imaging.,"The examples consistently describe comparative analysis of current imaging with prior images, often identifying stability or changes in various findings such as organ sizes, opacities, effusions, etc. This pattern highlights the importance of longitudinal comparison in radiology reports to assess the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4770642201834862,0.52,100.0,100.0
+8928,latent_8928,1493,0.002986,0.001970515,2.8934352,Lack of detailed comparison in assistant responses.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically lack substantial previous comparison data or have only vague references, resulting in brief assistant responses. This succinctness likely leads to the observed activation pattern.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.43416447944007,0.4773869346733668,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,99.0
+8929,latent_8929,1107,0.002214,0.0022809138,3.7628667,Explicit comparison to the prior image in findings description.,"Examples with high activation levels explicitly specify the need to provide findings in comparison with a prior image, demonstrating the pattern of referencing prior imaging for comparison even when the comparison reports no changes.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4042553191489361,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8930,latent_8930,396,0.000792,0.00096055504,4.3210163,Stable findings with no new or acute pathology on comparison.,"These examples highlight a pattern where there is no significant change or acute findings identified, often with the technician's comparison indicating stability or lack of new pathology. Activation is high for these scenarios when updates show no significant clinical action required or new abnormality found during comparison with prior imaging.",0.5528031290743155,0.5714285714285714,0.6,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4474222585924713,0.4931506849315068,0.2586206896551724,0.3260869565217391,46.0,100.0
+8931,latent_8931,848,0.001696,0.0014658963,4.3717895,No relevant change compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently mention comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, focusing on stating whether there is a 'relevant change' or not. This indicates that the pattern involves assessing stability or changes in the findings compared to prior radiographs.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4899378251490928,0.4924623115577889,0.4941176470588235,0.42,100.0,99.0
+8932,latent_8932,4480,0.00896,0.0033450313,1.9173671,Comparison involving changes in position or status of medical devices across images.,"Most examples involve comparison with prior images, focusing on changes or stability of medical devices, such as catheters and lines, indicating that references to such medical devices in relation to prior exams are key features.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5025130917607432,0.5226130653266332,0.5333333333333333,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+8933,latent_8933,1054,0.002108,0.0018015685,2.864359,Comparative analysis of current and prior images for radiological findings.,"The examples with highest activations mention the sequence of images to be analyzed, including both current and prior images, and generally involve assessing or comparing specific radiological findings across these images. Activation is higher when the task is to describe findings in relation to a prior image, often requiring interpretation of interval changes.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4212484497726333,0.44,0.4558823529411764,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8934,latent_8934,2929,0.005858,0.0029955888,3.9385588,Observations related to change or stability on follow-up.,"The pattern primarily focused on is the presence of a specific change or stability in medical devices, lesions, or opacities, as identified through comparison with prior imaging. The core feature is the comparison with previous findings, whether noting changes or confirming stability, which is evident in the examples with activations greater than zero.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.586606035551881,0.6,0.5735294117647058,0.78,100.0,100.0
+8935,latent_8935,4170,0.00834,0.0038409173,4.325169,Medical device identification and positioning in imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples primarily involve descriptions of medical devices, such as catheters or surgical implants, being identified and positioned within the body cavities in imaging studies. The pattern likely highlights relevant findings related to placement and implications of such devices across serial image comparisons.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+8936,latent_8936,545,0.00109,0.0010024143,4.959073,Findings described in relation to comparative studies or previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation describe assessment or findings in relation to previous radiographic comparisons or changes over time, such as evaluating improvement or worsening of conditions like atelectasis or pleural effusion. The presence of terms like 'comparison', 'unchanged', and explicit references to previous images or findings is a clear indicator.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3647959183673469,0.3855421686746988,0.3615384615384615,0.7121212121212122,66.0,100.0
+8937,latent_8937,232,0.000464,0.0007261402,6.096972,Reports affirming normal anatomical findings and absence of abnormalities.,"Despite numerous prompts mentioning prior comparisons, the highly activated samples contain detailed and comprehensive standard findings with no abnormalities like pneumothorax or pleural effusion. These detailed reports with explicit negations of pathology and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette are consistent across the highly activated examples, reflecting a pattern of detailed review affirming normalcy.",0.7616724738675958,0.7631578947368421,0.5909090909090909,1.0,13.0,25.0,0.6721407624633431,0.6976744186046512,0.421875,0.9310344827586208,29.0,100.0
+8938,latent_8938,757,0.001514,0.0014636404,4.8924336,Description of findings post-intervention or medical procedure.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe conditions or findings that are present or evolving due to medical interventions, such as after a surgical procedure or placement/removal of support devices like catheters or tubes. These examples often involve terms indicating changes after a specific event, such as 'after', indicating post-procedural contexts.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5506864988558352,0.5508021390374331,0.5154639175257731,0.5747126436781609,87.0,100.0
+8939,latent_8939,774,0.001548,0.0016515831,3.7690654,Comparison of current and prior chest radiographs for evaluating acute conditions.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently describe current findings using frontal and lateral views, with or without prior images for comparison, and often in context of an evaluation for acute processes or resolution of recent issues. This pattern highlights a focus on evaluating changes in condition or confirming findings through comparison to previous imaging.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4341837654146178,0.4393939393939394,0.4453781512605042,0.5408163265306123,98.0,100.0
+8940,latent_8940,933,0.001866,0.0014252879,4.0057616,Low lung volumes or suboptimal inspiratory effort in chest images.,"The highly activated examples frequently mention 'low lung volumes' or 'suboptimal inspiratory effort,' which are terms indicating a reduced amount of air in the lungs during imaging, likely affecting the appearance of other chest structures. This would be a notable radiological pattern affecting the interpretation of findings.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5118999487884424,0.542713567839196,0.5918367346938775,0.29,100.0,99.0
+8941,latent_8941,1109,0.002218,0.0017735678,2.983506,Use of comparison with prior images to describe findings.,"Examples with high activation describe the comparison of the current radiological findings against previous imaging studies, indicating any new, unchanged, or resolved anomalies. This pattern of reporting aligns with the clinical relevance of monitoring changes or stability in patient conditions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8942,latent_8942,7244,0.014488,0.005331638,1.6499487,Emphasis on comparison with prior images to identify changes.,"Analysis of these examples reveals that those with higher activation levels often emphasize the comparison of current imaging findings against prior images, highlighting any stable or interval changes. This common approach in radiology ensures consistent monitoring of patient conditions over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+8943,latent_8943,545,0.00109,0.0011396653,2.9864497,Comparison to unspecified prior images for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation involve a direct comparison to a prior image to assess for changes, despite any missing prior report or incomplete previous information. This suggests that the pattern of high activation is associated with the task of evaluating current imaging in the context of historical imaging for an interval change, even if details on the prior aren't fully available in the prompt.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4576537128261266,0.467065868263473,0.358974358974359,0.417910447761194,67.0,100.0
+8944,latent_8944,3077,0.006154,0.0026816498,2.0270207,Unchanged mild cardiomegaly in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern in highly activated examples is the presence of cardiomegaly or a mildly enlarged heart, which is frequently documented in radiology reports; however, it is noted as unchanged from prior studies, indicating no acute findings or further enlargement since the last comparison.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.04,100.0,100.0
+8945,latent_8945,541,0.001082,0.0010701505,4.5546985,Focus on medical device and lead positions in thoracic imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels contain detailed commentary on the positions of medical devices and leads, such as pacemakers, catheters, and endotracheal tubes, indicating a potential pattern centered around tracking medical device placement and any positional changes.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.69236471460341,0.6987951807228916,0.6052631578947368,0.696969696969697,66.0,100.0
+8946,latent_8946,945,0.00189,0.0015929424,3.315866,"Focus on comparison of current and prior images, highlighting changes in devices or structures.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparison between current and prior radiological images, specifically noting changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical structures from previous studies. The pattern emphasizes evaluating differences or stability over time, often involving monitoring devices like catheters or tubes.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8947,latent_8947,2390,0.00478,0.002461399,2.4635026,Altered mental status prompting imaging comparison.,These examples often involve patients with altered mental status and often show radiological findings such as interval changes or the need for close monitoring through comparisons with prior studies. This implies a connection between computed changes observed on imaging and the clinical state of altered mental condition. Timeliness in reporting and vigilance in detecting incremental changes seem relevant here.,0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4141407912182788,0.525,0.6923076923076923,0.09,100.0,100.0
+8948,latent_8948,1382,0.002764,0.0020249942,3.434559,Interval change or worsening findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently highlight findings that are described as an 'interval change' or 'interval worsening' compared to prior imaging. This indicates a pattern of focusing on changes or progressions in the imaging findings over time, suggesting an underlying pathology or clinical concern demanding attention.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7283070388349515,0.7286432160804021,0.75,0.69,100.0,99.0
+8949,latent_8949,1004,0.002008,0.0018007313,3.5489004,Requests for findings in absence of comparative images.,"The examples with high activation levels specifically describe instances where prior patient imaging is not available, but the request or context demands a comparison with those nonexistent prior studies. Despite the lack of prior images for direct comparison, the reports still attempt to contextualize findings against this backdrop.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.42,0.3823529411764705,0.26,100.0,100.0
+8950,latent_8950,11391,0.022782,0.008506335,2.2455103,Explicit description of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve the comparison with a prior set of images where differences or changes are explicitly stated as ""improved,"" ""unchanged,"" or resolving specific conditions like consolidations, nodules, or effusions. These are commonly actionable or significant findings in radiology.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6545768566493955,0.655,0.6666666666666666,0.62,100.0,100.0
+8951,latent_8951,6515,0.01303,0.0048810267,1.8422922,Focused on stability or changes in anatomical findings between prior and current images.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions where the images are compared for interval changes, especially focusing on stable findings versus changes in the condition of specific anatomical structures or medical devices. Phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'stable', or identifying new findings are characteristic of this pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+8952,latent_8952,1009,0.002018,0.0018117758,4.789082,Explicit reference to altered or stable findings compared to prior images.,"The correlation is evident with the explicit mention of changes or stability in findings when viewed in conjunction with prior images. High activation levels occur when there's a direct reference to findings that are 'stable', 'unchanged', 'similar', 'improved', or documented as 'better' in the current image compared to the prior.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6647324306898775,0.675,0.6296296296296297,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8953,latent_8953,1103,0.002206,0.0015692912,3.1445312,Documentation of interval changes between radiographic images.,"Examples that show significant activation are primarily characterized by the documentation of interval changes in medical images, such as worsening or improvement, indicating a relevant change in the patient's condition. These focus on the comparative analysis over time, highlighting progress or regression of findings explicitly while stating the interval between observations.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4480128462464873,0.45,0.4553571428571428,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8954,latent_8954,1377,0.002754,0.001534996,4.3899126,Low lung volumes resulting in bronchovascular crowding.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of low lung volumes and associated bronchovascular crowding, where the density of blood vessels and bronchi appear increased due to lung volume reduction. This pattern is described using phrases such as 'low lung volumes result in bronchovascular crowding'.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5551215277777778,0.59,0.7045454545454546,0.31,100.0,100.0
+8955,latent_8955,951,0.001902,0.0016883548,3.5000825,Normal heart size or cardiac silhouette in findings.,"Highly activated examples involve findings of normal heart size or unchanged cardiac silhouette, as described in the radiological comparison typically using expressions such as 'heart size is normal' or 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal'. This pattern highlights the importance of confirming heart health in radiological studies.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5625,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8956,latent_8956,1621,0.003242,0.0021400421,4.761042,Emphasis on stability of medical devices across imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe medical devices (such as pacemakers or tubes) positioned in stable locations, referencing unchanged positioning or comparing device orientation between current and prior studies. This pattern indicates a focus on device stability over time as a key factor.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5729166666666666,0.59,0.65,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8957,latent_8957,12894,0.025788,0.009335224,1.2034732,Explicit change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The activation levels indicate a pattern where reports are considered representative if they make explicit comparisons of current and prior imaging findings, usually noting changes or stability over time, involving phrases like 'interval change', 'unchanged', or specific descriptions concerning devices and conditions positioned based on past studies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+8958,latent_8958,2153,0.004306,0.0028037727,3.3761556,Radiological comparison of current images to prior ones.,"The pattern consists of the need for an assessment of radiological findings in relation to previous images, specifically comparing the current images to prior ones. The reports frequently mention the task of comparing findings, with phrases ""Provide a description of the findings... in comparison to prior..."" This process is evident in multiple examples where past imaging is juxtaposed with new results to determine changes or stability.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8959,latent_8959,1084,0.002168,0.0016574238,3.5767703,Comparison of findings between current and prior images showing stability or changes.,"These examples focus on comparing the current imaging findings with prior ones to identify changes or persistent conditions. Specifically, they often highlight stability or changes over time like increased/decreased effusions, persistent opacifications, or unchanged positions of tubes, using differential language to suggest possible implications like atelectasis or pneumonia. Unchanged or slightly changed findings have moderate activations, while clearer changes or significant findings related to context (e.g., patient history) have higher activations.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+8960,latent_8960,1294,0.002588,0.0017999746,2.939618,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,The analysis indicates that examples with higher activation levels consistently feature explicit comparisons of current imaging findings to those of prior studies or exams. This linguistic pattern of highlighting changes or stability in findings helps identify the pattern being represented.,0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6136646291445054,0.635,0.5918367346938775,0.87,100.0,100.0
+8961,latent_8961,7215,0.01443,0.005335145,2.314516,Reports highlighting interval change with detailed comparison to prior images.,"Examples with activation levels of 2.0 or higher often discuss findings in their current study by specifically comparing the changes observed against prior images, providing detailed commentary that is absent in images with lower activation levels. This comparative narrative pattern is indicative of the model's pattern.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+8962,latent_8962,1270,0.00254,0.0016527702,3.9298563,Detailed descriptions of interval change compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings in current imaging as compared to prior imaging, focusing specifically on interval or unchanged abnormalities. These often require detailed comparison of specific areas to assess stability or change in known issues, which include conditions like previously seen effusions, pulmonary edema, or other chronic or acute changes in anatomy.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5131578947368421,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8963,latent_8963,650,0.0013,0.001453771,3.9642334,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples involve descriptions and evaluations of medical imaging studies where the main items of interest are either changes or stability in conditions over time. The emphasis is on comparison with prior imaging to assess any interval changes, highlighting stability or alterations in findings such as effusion, masses, or other abnormalities.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5470297029702971,0.5519125683060109,0.5042016806722689,0.7228915662650602,83.0,100.0
+8964,latent_8964,7264,0.014528,0.005488584,1.9739647,Detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging findings emphasizing changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on a detailed comparison with prior imaging, specifically noting changes or stability in pathologies or anatomical features since the prior studies. This emphasis on longitudinal assessment is indicative of the pattern being studied.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,100.0
+8965,latent_8965,1545,0.00309,0.0018644698,4.1206036,Medical device placement or changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes or stable findings in various medical devices or other clinical interventions (e.g., PICC lines, endotracheal tubes) based on comparison with previous imaging. They commonly use terms like 'changed', 'removed', 'unchanged', and specify changes related to medical equipment placement, in contrast with examples that do not emphasize those changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5194805194805194,0.4,100.0,100.0
+8966,latent_8966,609,0.001218,0.0010431131,3.9756184,"Mentions of intact lines, wires, or devices from prior reports.","The examples with high activation levels all reference the ""intactness"" of surgical lines, wires, or devices—such as sternotomy wires, pacemaker leads, or catheter positions—which implies a key characteristic of unchanged structural integrity post-surgery or treatment, a common pattern for stable post-operative radiological assessments.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.580250667207189,0.5942857142857143,0.5294117647058824,0.48,75.0,100.0
+8967,latent_8967,1039,0.002078,0.0016369863,3.926535,Describing comparison to prior images despite stating 'comparison: none' or 'N/A'.,"The strongest activated examples describe a comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, even though some explicitly list 'comparison' as not available or 'N/A'. This contradiction suggests an actual comparison process is inherent, focused on detecting changes or continuity over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4148936170212766,0.39,100.0,100.0
+8968,latent_8968,815,0.00163,0.0012942096,3.8674326,Use of comparison with prior images to describe findings.,"These examples contain comparisons with prior radiographic images, highlighting changes or stability in findings over time. This pattern is typical for monitoring the progression or stability of conditions and devices, often using terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged', or references to previous imaging dates.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8969,latent_8969,4489,0.008978,0.0034321232,1.2973782,Interval changes or stability noted in prior-to-current imaging comparisons.,"Examples that are highly activated include reference to specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, particularly describing interval changes or stability in lung findings, device placement, or cardiac features.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.5803571428571429,0.65,100.0,100.0
+8970,latent_8970,2929,0.005858,0.0027130293,2.963696,Focus on stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples prioritize findings that exhibit stable or unchanged features when compared to previous imaging studies, emphasizing descriptions using terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'similar', or 'improved'. This reflects a radiological focus on assessing changes over time to rule out progression or identify resolution of conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+8971,latent_8971,839,0.001678,0.0015558981,3.4014065,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with no acute abnormality.","The pattern here is in the use of specific technical and annotation details describing the images, focusing on the mediastinal, hilar, and cardiac contours while affirming no acute abnormalities or normal findings. This prominence with clarity and a normal status is documented as noteworthy in these activation examples.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5602272727272728,0.5656565656565656,0.5769230769230769,0.4591836734693877,98.0,100.0
+8972,latent_8972,893,0.001786,0.001655396,3.1832497,Descriptions of tube or line positions in thoracic imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently discuss the placement and positioning of tubes or lines like nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, referencing specific locations such as the carina or gastroesophageal junction. This pattern is detailed in examples with explicit descriptions of tube positions relative to anatomical landmarks.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.569620253164557,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8973,latent_8973,2982,0.005964,0.0029761314,3.1886778,Comparative evaluation of changes in lung fields over time.,"The pattern seen here involves discrepancies in interpretations between the current frontal image and prior frontal images. Distinctively, changes in pulmonary structures like effusions, tube positions, and consolidation or expansion of lung sections are deemed worthy of comparison, suggesting a focus on changes over time to assess disease progression or resolution.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6050032916392363,0.625,0.5862068965517241,0.85,100.0,100.0
+8974,latent_8974,4420,0.00884,0.003712996,1.698425,Images compared to prior studies indicating interval stability or minor changes.,"The pattern often includes the explicit use of prior comparisons, indicating stability or minor changes compared to the previous imaging, which is a typical radiology practice to note changes over time in comparison to earlier images.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5487804878048781,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8975,latent_8975,960,0.00192,0.0015869314,2.8835397,"Reports mention no pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary vascular congestion.","The pattern in these examples revolves around comments on the presence or absence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, and/or pulmonary congestion in relation to the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours. High activation often includes recurrent checks for these specific conditions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5487804878048781,0.45,100.0,100.0
+8976,latent_8976,1755,0.00351,0.0019605623,3.4989746,Documentation of change or stability through explicit comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation involve reports where findings are compared with prior imaging and documented, often with an explicit indication of change or stability over time. Key phrases like 'compared to', 'when compared to prior study', 'comparison is made to prior', denote this pattern, which explicitly mentions the comparison to previous studies, highlighting stability or changes in findings.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+8977,latent_8977,742,0.001484,0.0015255515,3.8547332,Significant interval change in lung findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve findings on chest radiographs, typically lung-related, that are newly observed or show significant interval change in comparison to prior images. This pattern is prominent in radiology where documentation of changes over time in findings, especially concerning lungs, carries importance for diagnosis and treatment plans.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.2857142857142857,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3974156851834678,0.4766839378238341,0.3666666666666666,0.1182795698924731,93.0,100.0
+8978,latent_8978,1059,0.002118,0.0019848899,3.3008761,Mention of degenerative changes in the thoracic spine.,"The examples with high activations consistently involve descriptions of the thoracic spine, particularly mentioning the presence of 'degenerative changes.' These references are directly linked to higher activation levels, indicating the model is possibly identifying this specific finding as a key pattern.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7631551848419318,0.77,0.9090909090909092,0.6,100.0,100.0
+8979,latent_8979,604,0.001208,0.0013005347,4.8752675,Request for comparison to prior imaging when there is no comparison available.,"The highly activated examples all request a description of findings in comparison to a prior frontal image, but there is no prior comparison available. This suggests the pattern is focused on such a request in the absence of a prior study.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6514819833906669,0.6529411764705882,0.5617977528089888,0.7142857142857143,70.0,100.0
+8980,latent_8980,3494,0.006988,0.0029453442,2.0552213,Focus on assessing positioning and changes of support devices or tubes in imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels indicate a pattern where reports focus on analyzing and ensuring the correct placement of support devices or tubes in the body, like endotracheal tubes, Dobbhoff tubes, or PICC lines. This specific detail is prominently mentioned and checked against prior imaging, demonstrating a pattern of medical imaging concerned with monitoring support device positioning or changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4761904761904761,0.3,100.0,100.0
+8981,latent_8981,792,0.001584,0.00112561,2.803938,Assessment of medical device placement or change in radiographs.,"Examples with high activation frequently include the evaluation of changes in medical devices and tubes (such as catheters, PICCs, or endotracheal tubes) on radiographs, often in relation to positions or changes over time. This pattern is significant because accurate assessment and documentation of such medical devices are critical in clinical contexts.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5924773828965446,0.6030150753768844,0.6470588235294118,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+8982,latent_8982,2153,0.004306,0.0026716392,3.2332363,Comparison with prior images revealing abnormal changes or detailing stable pathologies/devices.,"Examples with high activation levels involve detailed descriptions of abnormal pathologies or devices in the thoracic region that show changes or detailed characterizations when comparing with prior imaging. They often describe alterations in opacities, effusions, atelectasis, or conditions that require careful evaluation over time, sometimes noting stability, worsening, or improvement.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8983,latent_8983,685,0.00137,0.0012825957,4.6518593,Limited evaluation in radiology due to technical or patient factors.,"Many examples show reports that describe limitations in evaluation due to factors like underpenetration, body habitus, patient rotation, low lung volumes, or artifacts, affecting the assessment of exam findings. This is a common pattern in radiology reports where technical limitations or patient-related factors prompt cautious interpretation of images.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6538011695906433,0.654054054054054,0.6,0.7411764705882353,85.0,100.0
+8984,latent_8984,10323,0.020646,0.0075733084,2.0683985,Current imaging limitation affecting comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically mention a limitation in current imaging quality due to factors like patient positioning or technical constraints, such as low lung volume or obscured views by external structures, which limit the diagnostic capability compared to prior imaging studies.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5684210526315789,0.54,100.0,100.0
+8985,latent_8985,4274,0.008548,0.00342946,2.607946,Comparative analysis with prior imaging detail.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include detailed language comparing current imaging findings to prior studies, indicating changes or stability over time, with clear evidence of comparative analysis, such as ""compared to prior"" or ""unchanged since prior"" followed by detailed descriptions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+8986,latent_8986,1446,0.002892,0.0017578045,5.8878393,Assessment of tube and line placements in chest radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions and assessments of various tubes such as Dobbhoff, NG tubes, PICC lines, and cardiac catheter placement, often detailing their position, potential need for repositioning, or related complications. The pattern likely highlights a focus on where medical devices are appropriately or inappropriately placed in chest radiographs, suggesting a special interest or training focus of the model.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7246627118219819,0.725,0.7102803738317757,0.76,100.0,100.0
+8987,latent_8987,987,0.001974,0.0016362919,3.9348614,Comparison highlighting stability or resolution of specific findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on changes or stability of specific findings compared to prior studies, especially when there is stability or improvement of notable features such as prior opacities, consolidation, atelectasis, or cardiomegaly. These examples often highlight clinical stability or improvement over time in specific areas while referencing changes from the previous radiograph.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4831460674157303,0.43,100.0,100.0
+8988,latent_8988,765,0.00153,0.0015232514,4.422472,Comparisons or references to prior imaging in findings.,"The pattern across these examples is the routine comparison to prior imaging. Instances often mention the presence of prior reports or make direct comparisons to previous images, indicating an examination of stability or change over time in radiological findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4160427807486631,0.4256410256410256,0.432,0.5684210526315789,95.0,100.0
+8989,latent_8989,958,0.001916,0.0016299501,2.8176672,Stable or minimally changed findings from previous imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently describe stable findings or minimal changes over time in follow-up descriptions. Despite positing some mild instability or minor changes, the overall impression remains largely unchanged from prior studies, which is a key theme detected in these instances.",0.2171818546768366,0.22,0.1818181818181818,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4634146341463415,0.38,100.0,100.0
+8990,latent_8990,8854,0.017708,0.006625019,2.0353115,Focus on detailed findings with comparisons to previous imagery.,"Examples with higher activations consistently have phrasing that involves detailed descriptions of findings based on both the current and prior imaging. This involves intricately comparing the findings to previous images with a focus on continuity or changes in findings, which might reflect a pattern of case-based reasoning used by radiologists in follow-up studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.508679986898133,0.55,0.5316455696202531,0.84,100.0,100.0
+8991,latent_8991,7861,0.015722,0.0058950805,2.483604,Highlighting interval change or significant finding in comparison reports.,"Despite the examples containing varied conditions, those with a 0 activation level do not show a significant change or interval improvement. Those examples with higher activation mention findings that may suggest an interval improvement, significant change or new finding.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5588972431077694,0.56,0.5666666666666667,0.51,100.0,100.0
+8992,latent_8992,917,0.001834,0.001544849,2.9075837,Detailed analysis of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently highlight a comparison to prior imaging studies with emphasis on observed changes or stability in conditions. This indicates that the pattern involves detailed analysis in relation to previous imaging, identifying changes or lack thereof in pathological findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5956928078017065,0.5979899497487438,0.611764705882353,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+8993,latent_8993,8461,0.016922,0.006269748,1.6155952,Comparative analysis with prior imaging to assess interval changes or stability.,"The pattern among highly activated examples is that they involve the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, specifically for interval changes, stability, or improvement in conditions, often noting whether there is change or none in the presence of known clinical histories or ongoing conditions.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+8994,latent_8994,1117,0.002234,0.0019686425,3.801055,Stable findings compared to prior thoracic imaging.,"The examples with high activations emphasized the comparison of current thoracic imaging findings to previous ones, specifically noting stability or unchanged conditions such as heart size, hilar, and mediastinal contours or prior surgical changes. This pattern involves consistent findings without significant change from previous imaging.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5638297872340425,0.53,100.0,100.0
+8995,latent_8995,1326,0.002652,0.0019357145,2.9547803,Evaluation emphasizes comparison to prior imaging and changes in features.,"In almost all instances of higher activation, there is an explicit and available feature of comparison to an 'earlier', 'previous', or 'prior' study or reference to changes noted in specific clinical elements based on prior imaging. Higher activation is linked to the presence of quali-quantitative statements based on past and current evaluations, emphasizing interval changes.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+8996,latent_8996,1131,0.002262,0.0017228649,3.1956978,Findings with explicit comparative analysis to prior imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activations consistently provide findings with explicit references to prior imaging, emphasizing comparison and interval changes from previous reports. This pattern, often marked by phrases like 'in comparison to', 'since prior', and 'compared to the previous', indicates a focus on evaluating current medical imaging relative to past studies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+8997,latent_8997,492,0.000984,0.001195284,3.3141139,Emphasis on comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize providing a detailed description of radiological findings explicitly in comparison to prior images, suggesting called-for interval changes or stability of findings, even if subtle. This is crucial in understanding progression or resolution of conditions in a patient across studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4593016686127538,0.4727272727272727,0.4126984126984127,0.8,65.0,100.0
+8998,latent_8998,2851,0.005702,0.0027310518,3.7846062,Foregrounding specific findings or features with guided analysis for assistant.,"Higher activation examples focus on specific clinical findings in foreground, with guidance provided to assistant for detailed analysis and highlight. They emphasize clear articulation of observations for critical features in the imagery with additional commentary, usually comparing values, stability, or change in findings. Information often supplemented or emphasized by supplementary context from comparison or continuity needs in aid of decision-making.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,100.0
+8999,latent_8999,7175,0.01435,0.0052657593,1.874033,Presence of both current and prior images for comparative analysis.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the presence of both current and prior images, suggesting a focus on comparative analysis between studies. This pattern is indicative of cases that require thorough comparison due to potential changes or stability in clinical findings.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5054945054945055,0.55,0.53125,0.85,100.0,100.0
+9000,latent_9000,1205,0.00241,0.0019030296,3.2141342,Comparison with prior images highlighting unchanged or stable findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the specific task of comparing current images to prior ones with specified techniques, but are particularly focused on describing findings that are minor, unchanged, or subtle, indicating stability or resolution of previously reported issues or expected observation in serial imaging.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3596358921436321,0.395,0.3018867924528302,0.16,100.0,100.0
+9001,latent_9001,9053,0.018106,0.006699859,1.4917789,Expression of stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Increased activation is evident when the finding involves comparisons with a prior imaging where the current state is stable or unchanged from the previous one. This indicates sensitivity towards stability or consistency across medical assessments, with particular attention to unchanged or stable findings being a common theme in detailed imaging follow-ups.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5054270643132481,0.507537688442211,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,99.0
+9002,latent_9002,5615,0.01123,0.005704723,3.1445441,Describes placement or adjustment necessity of medical tubes or catheters.,"The examples with higher activation include evaluations and positions of various catheters or tubes (like PICC, NG tube, Dobbhoff tube) seen in radiology images, providing detailed information about their placement and any needed adjustments, which are critical clinical findings.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8547057792028858,0.855,0.8256880733944955,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9003,latent_9003,6321,0.012642,0.0046808105,2.2844014,Description of unchanged findings compared to previous study.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe a finding of at least one parameter remaining unchanged from a previous study or not showing acute change despite the description of other potential issues or monitoring for developments. This theme of stability in findings is presented as noteworthy in reports.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9004,latent_9004,1144,0.002288,0.001682553,2.3813853,Stable or unchanged findings from prior imaging studies.,"These examples often reference unchanged or stable findings from previous studies, indicating a consistent state or lack of significant interval change. This emphasizes the evaluation of current imaging concerning its previous counterparts, typically using terms like 'remains', 'stable', 'unchanged', or similar phrases linked to past findings.",0.4889445139758031,0.4897959183673469,0.4782608695652174,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5522807017543859,0.5606060606060606,0.5915492957746479,0.42,100.0,98.0
+9005,latent_9005,1519,0.003038,0.0022810223,4.4048786,"Unchanged findings from prior imaging, often in cardiopulmonary context.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptive findings that are marked as unchanged when compared to previous imaging. This indicates a focus on reports that describe intervals with no new changes, often pointing out factors like cardiomegaly or pleural effusions as remaining constant.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6231060606060606,0.628140703517588,0.6065573770491803,0.74,100.0,99.0
+9006,latent_9006,1107,0.002214,0.0016316428,2.2838702,Comparisons of current and prior imaging findings with emphasis on medical device or pathology changes.,"These examples are characterized by detailed descriptions of findings from current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes in medical devices or pathologies of interest compared to prior studies. Such investigations assess continuity or changes in clinical status, making them distinct in radiology as they focus on 'comparative evaluation' rather than standalone findings.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4534883720930232,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9007,latent_9007,1790,0.00358,0.002348456,4.0078135,High activation when comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions where current observations in images are directly compared to findings or conditions at earlier points in a patient's history. Precise intervals or states are often used to communicate the progress or stability of a condition, making use of terms like 'interval change,' 'unchanged,' or 'compared to prior.' This pattern is common in tracking the development or resolution of medical conditions over time via imaging.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9008,latent_9008,716,0.001432,0.0011919969,3.7647288,Finding descriptions that emphasize comparison to a prior image.,"Examples that specifically indicate the ""PROVIDE A DESCRIPTION OF THE FINDINGS IN THE RADIOLOGY STUDY IN COMPARISON TO THE PRIOR FRONTAL IMAGE"" prompt are typically accompanied by observed changes or descriptions related explicitly to the prior image, emphasizing the comparison aspect as crucial in the observed patterns.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3828257308642661,0.3842105263157894,0.3761467889908257,0.4555555555555555,90.0,100.0
+9009,latent_9009,653,0.001306,0.0011263131,4.459847,Reports involving Dobbhoff catheter placement or repositioning.,"All high-activation examples consistently mention the repositioning or placement confirmation of a Dobbhoff tube, detailing observations related to the tube's position relative to the patient's anatomy. This suggests a focus on issues related to enteral feeding catheter management in these reports.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.9166666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5133698518969365,0.6256983240223464,1.0,0.1625,80.0,99.0
+9010,latent_9010,4126,0.008252,0.0033731365,3.4644358,Focus on medical device positioning and verification in radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve detecting tubes or support devices in certain positions relative to anatomical landmarks such as the carina or stomach. This pattern emerges specifically when the placements are verified or unchanged over time, suggesting monitoring effectiveness of device positioning in radiographs.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6181288312732389,0.62,0.6395348837209303,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9011,latent_9011,770,0.00154,0.0015045824,3.4426887,Identification of rounded opacities or masses in lung or chest imaging.,"The high activation examples frequently mention or identify rounded opacities or masses in the lung or chest region, such as densities or calcified nodules. These findings are distinct visual features commonly noted in radiological assessments, often requiring further examination or follow-up.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.655858318550615,0.6855670103092784,0.8837209302325582,0.4042553191489361,94.0,100.0
+9012,latent_9012,1076,0.002152,0.0016280587,3.3637168,Dynamic changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently mention some form of change, typically an interval development, worsening, or improvement in specific findings between the current and prior imaging studies. This suggests that the model highly activates on identifying dynamic changes in radiological comparisons, as opposed to static findings or stability.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6373758267575781,0.645,0.6124031007751938,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9013,latent_9013,1605,0.00321,0.0019720385,3.4358304,Descriptions of findings focused on clinically significant changes or questions.,"The examples with higher activation involve scenarios where imaging findings are described in relation to specific questions or conditions indicated. These often involve detailed assessments for potential pathology or complications, such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or pneumomediastinum, with direct reference to areas of clinical concern. Moreover, they stress comparisons to prior radiographs or CT scans, even without explicit earlier imaging, which helps guide intervals of change and adjustments.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5186750515568908,0.5226130653266332,0.5169491525423728,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+9014,latent_9014,1219,0.002438,0.0015748783,4.851444,Significant interval changes in chest imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels refer to interval changes, particularly those involving changes in opacities or fluid levels suggesting either a progressive or regressive disease state. This pattern is typical in radiology reports where sequential images are analyzed for changes to understand disease progression or response to treatment.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4642857142857143,0.26,100.0,100.0
+9015,latent_9015,8324,0.016648,0.0060694152,1.5988836,Detailed comparison to previous images describing changes or stability.,"Examples with activations typically include detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic images. This indicates a pattern where previous findings are explicitly referenced and used to describe changes, improvements, or stability in the condition being examined. The presence of comparison dates or prior examinations is common among high activation examples.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9016,latent_9016,981,0.001962,0.00179469,3.9370208,Communicating changes by comparing current with prior images.,"This dataset consists of examples where the radiology examination involves direct comparisons to prior images, highlighting changes or stability. These comparisons often aim to identify progression or resolution of medical conditions, using descriptors like 'compared to prior' in the radiological findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9017,latent_9017,966,0.001932,0.0017698528,4.3027964,Descriptions emphasize changes relative to prior images.,"Examples with high activation indicate descriptions involving comparison to previous images, specifically assessing changes, stability, or improvement of findings over time, utilizing terminologies such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from', 'improvement of', and continuity of findings.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9018,latent_9018,1498,0.002996,0.002043448,3.7188087,Low lung volumes accentuating bronchovascular markings.,"Examples with high activation levels describe low lung volumes leading to accentuated bronchovascular markings, which is a notable radiographic finding often associated with conditions like interstitial lung disease or crowding due to low lung volumes.",0.9198717948717948,0.92,0.8888888888888888,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8648344221671547,0.865,0.8924731182795699,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9019,latent_9019,1523,0.003046,0.0015303772,3.2983046,Unchanged position of support devices compared to prior imaging.,"The examples show a pattern of reference to unchanged conditions of inserted medical devices compared to previous imaging. Terms like 'unchanged position', 'stable', or 'remain in unchanged position' are used to express stability or lack of movement of items such as chest tubes, catheters, and pleural tubes.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6138996138996139,0.64,0.7916666666666666,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9020,latent_9020,1449,0.002898,0.0018168523,5.265961,Stable findings with unchanged comparisons in imaging.,"Examples with higher activations contain comparisons indicating stability or unchanged appearance in radiological findings. This pattern appears in reports where findings are compared over time, emphasizing consistency and lack of new or worsening conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4471084585305618,0.457286432160804,0.4383561643835616,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+9021,latent_9021,1297,0.002594,0.0017137097,4.700887,Stable findings or minor changes in serial comparisons of imaging studies.,"In these examples, the fixation on comparison with prior studies, but particularly the identification of unchanged aspects (e.g., 'comparison made to prior radiograph', 'unchanged findings'), reveals the model activation pattern related to assessing stability or minor changes over time in repeated imaging studies, typically when the condition is chronic or management is ongoing.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9022,latent_9022,4566,0.009132,0.0050983564,3.4172578,Unchanged findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples consistently describe the lack of observed interval change from previous imaging studies, using phrases like 'unchanged' or 'stable'. This suggests a focus on identifying stability or lack of progression in findings compared to prior images.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.6797117405665098,0.68,0.6914893617021277,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9023,latent_9023,1258,0.002516,0.00197942,3.146464,Focus on comparing current imaging findings with previous ones.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing the current imaging findings to previous ones. These reports often identify slight changes or lack of change, highlighting interval changes or stability, while explicitly stating the comparison details, often with references to unchanged conditions or slight improvements.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9024,latent_9024,4264,0.008528,0.0033524267,1.7301638,Omission of explicit comparison to prior imaging studies in radiology description.,"Examples with high activation levels typically lack explicit or clear comparison to prior studies in their COMPARE section or description. These reports either state 'none', 'N/A', or omit clear prior comparison details entirely, resulting in descriptions based solely on current imaging, consistent with the provided confusion or lack of differentiation from prior imaging.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4199419941994199,0.42,0.4183673469387755,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9025,latent_9025,946,0.001892,0.0015960005,3.1948094,No comparison is made with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations describe radiological studies without making use of explicit or implied comparisons to previous images; they focus purely on current imaging findings, whether an initial or follow-up exam. This distinguishes these reports from others that involve such comparisons, which account for differences in activation.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6694711538461539,0.67,0.6847826086956522,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9026,latent_9026,359,0.000718,0.0012550972,5.79403,Direct instruction to compare current image to prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct instructions to compare current imaging findings to prior images, specifically when a direct comparison to a past image is specified. The activation seems to increase when direct instruction, marked by phrases like 'provide a description...in comparison to the prior frontal image,' is followed with explicit notes or focused comparisons to prior radiology findings.",0.5432624113475177,0.5434782608695652,0.5,0.5714285714285714,21.0,25.0,0.4286732874968169,0.4436619718309859,0.2597402597402597,0.4761904761904761,42.0,100.0
+9027,latent_9027,1408,0.002816,0.0020458156,4.812954,Changes in positioning of medical devices or tubes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activations describe changes related to medical devices or tubes within the body, focusing on their positioning and interval changes. These examples detail the placement, possible complications, or stability of devices like catheters, tubes, and pacemakers after comparing with prior images, emphasizing the medical significance of such changes.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5777777777777777,0.26,100.0,100.0
+9028,latent_9028,1356,0.002712,0.001749779,3.0170703,Changes in medical device placement compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation levels are associated with examples where changes in medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, are noted compared to prior imaging studies. Specifically, tube placement, removal, or movement, and associated radiological findings are repeatedly highlighted in these examples.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.441513246519982,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.18,100.0,99.0
+9029,latent_9029,535,0.00107,0.0010328908,5.9171915,"Comparison to prior imaging, often in operative context.","The pattern shows examples where radiology findings are described in comparison with previous imaging studies, often involving operative context or preoperative evaluations. Radiology reports frequently describe stability or changes compared to prior studies, especially in preoperative or post-operative contexts where specific structures are monitored for changes.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.378961346588666,0.3869047619047619,0.3529411764705882,0.6176470588235294,68.0,100.0
+9030,latent_9030,462,0.000924,0.001062167,3.8952024,Normal findings with a focus on clearing the lungs and normal heart size.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe normal radiological findings using phrases like 'Heart size is normal', 'Lungs are clear', and similar phrases that emphasize an absence of abnormalities. This is a specific pattern in radiology reports focusing on stating the normality of observed structures.",0.7847985347985348,0.7872340425531915,0.8421052631578947,0.6956521739130435,23.0,24.0,0.6358764186633039,0.6606060606060606,0.5789473684210527,0.5076923076923077,65.0,100.0
+9031,latent_9031,603,0.001206,0.001113281,3.6242924,High activation when no prior images are available for comparison.,"Activation levels are high when there are no comparisons made with previous images, as indicated by phrases like 'None available' or 'COMPARISON: None'. These descriptions solely focus on the current findings without reference to historical images.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7249758220502902,0.7252747252747253,0.6509433962264151,0.8414634146341463,82.0,100.0
+9032,latent_9032,610,0.00122,0.0013487261,5.4825034,Finding of no acute cardiopulmonary abnormality despite clinical concerns.,"The highly activated examples consistently demonstrate findings where no acute cardiopulmonary process is identified despite patient symptoms or indications. Reports emphasize the absence of abnormalities like effusions, pneumothorax, consolidation, or pneumonia despite clinical concerns, indicating a pattern of normal findings contrary to expected pathology.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5681818181818181,0.5789473684210527,0.4931506849315068,0.5070422535211268,71.0,100.0
+9033,latent_9033,8491,0.016982,0.0062986095,2.0445478,Stable or unchanged findings in comparative reports.,"Highly activated examples consistently feature references to detailed comparative analysis of radiological findings concerning specific changes or lack thereof over time, often indicating stable appearances of pathologies, as seen in wording like 'unchanged', 'similar', or 'stable'. This reflects a common pattern in radiology reports assessing the progression or stability of medical conditions.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9034,latent_9034,3693,0.007386,0.003381978,3.0861356,"Reports emphasize changes compared to prior studies, highlighting consistent or new findings.","The examples with high activation levels involve explicit comparisons to prior images where specific changes in findings are highlighted, such as the increase of pleural effusion or the presence of new opacities. These reports focus on identifying both the persistence or modification of pathologies over time, emphasizing consistency or progression of findings.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9035,latent_9035,1231,0.002462,0.0018947124,3.9725626,Descriptions of interval changes in fluid-related thoracic findings.,"These examples frequently describe the examination of current and prior imaging of chest-related conditions, focusing on pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, pneumonia, and other alterations observable in thoracic imaging. High activation levels correspond to clear interval changes, such as increases or decreases in pleural effusion or parenchymal opacities, emphasizing documented alterations over time.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.6530612244897959,0.32,100.0,100.0
+9036,latent_9036,895,0.00179,0.0015456717,3.5168273,Multiple chest radiograph views with prior image comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels highlight the presence of multiple perspectives (frontal and lateral) along with explicit mention of prior images for comparison. This pattern suggests that the model is sensitive to detailed multi-view and historical comparison-specific prompts, reflecting complex diagnostic contexts and thorough assessments.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4192799070847851,0.45,0.4657534246575342,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9037,latent_9037,1368,0.002736,0.0017917746,2.4961333,Rendering radiological comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples consistently frame descriptions of radiological findings when drawing comparisons to prior imaging. They focus on identifying stability or change regarding focal opacities, consolidations, or anatomical structures, which can account for progression, regression, or stable disease processes.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3627386438446346,0.395,0.4275862068965517,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9038,latent_9038,1013,0.002026,0.0014882002,3.5765357,"Detailed description of findings in relation to prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently include comprehensive descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, particularly noting changes or stability in observed anomalies. These descriptions articulate technical factors impacting interpretation and suggest potential underlying causes. Examples with low activation levels lack detailed analysis or comparison.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4973732067084259,0.4974874371859296,0.4951456310679611,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+9039,latent_9039,5812,0.011624,0.004585687,2.7599394,Comparison of changes or stability in imaging findings against prior studies.,"Activation levels are elevated when current and prior imaging studies are compared to assess changes or stability of existing conditions. This includes language that explicitly denotes stable conditions, unchanged findings, or notable changes when reviewed against earlier imaging.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9040,latent_9040,1507,0.003014,0.0020010548,3.7133708,Emphasis on comparison with prior images to assess interval changes.,The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve explicit instructions or requests for comparing current images to prior radiological exams. This is a common feature in medical imaging where clinicians assess changes over time. The pattern detected likely involves emphasizing description changes that must be compared against previous images.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9041,latent_9041,9788,0.019576,0.007245607,1.9359196,No discernible pattern linking examples to observed activations.,These examples do not contain significant linguistic elements or thematic consistencies that correlate with higher activation levels in previous examples. There is a mix of findings and contexts without a clear pattern connecting them to observed activation.,0.3382352941176471,0.5111111111111111,0.0,0.0,22.0,23.0,0.3630049853876569,0.4921465968586387,0.5714285714285714,0.0408163265306122,98.0,93.0
+9042,latent_9042,1049,0.002098,0.0016397315,3.353466,"Comparison with prior imaging findings, noting changes or stability over time.","Examples with high activation levels often reference prior imaging studies to highlight changes or stability over time. These examples focus on comparisons from the current images to prior ones to note progression, stability, or improvement in patient conditions. The repetitive comparing across cases and specific language indicating improvement or unchanged status in condition seems to increase activation.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9043,latent_9043,2278,0.004556,0.0029091232,5.617525,Findings described in terms of changes compared to prior imaging.,"Most cases with high activation levels explicitly include findings that have changed (or resolved) since previous imaging studies, as indicated by textual descriptions of changes and explicit comparisons to prior exams. This pattern of describing change, especially resolution of prior findings, aligns with high activations.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9044,latent_9044,539,0.001078,0.0012966444,4.007985,Interval changes in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes between radiographs over time, explicitly noting interval changes like 'worsening' or 'improvement' in lung opacities, edema, or other pathological findings. This focus on temporal changes aligns with radiology reports assessing disease progression or improvement, using terms like 'interval worsening' or 'interval improvement'.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6695029108822212,0.6707317073170732,0.5617977528089888,0.7692307692307693,65.0,99.0
+9045,latent_9045,649,0.001298,0.0014873234,3.702101,Detailed descriptions with comparisons to prior chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe the process of comparing current radiological images to prior images specifically relating to chest X-rays. The focus is on features that identify interval changes or stability between imaging studies, which is supported by the phrases prompting a comparison with previous studies or images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4134831460674157,0.4137931034482758,0.3653846153846153,0.5135135135135135,74.0,100.0
+9046,latent_9046,9949,0.019898,0.007608855,2.1708052,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on changes.","These examples frequently ask for or contain comparisons to prior studies or imaging to describe changes, stability, or progression of findings, though some examples do not contain an explicit comparison. This pattern of referencing prior imaging studies is consistent across examples rated positively for activation.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9047,latent_9047,4359,0.008718,0.0035209758,2.8395886,Descriptions of interval change or comparison to prior imaging.,"Activation is higher in instances that explicitly describe changes or comparisons with respect to previous imaging studies. The references to prior imaging often appear as 'interval change', 'in comparison with prior', or similar language describing differences between current and previous findings, indicating a focus on monitoring changes over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9048,latent_9048,839,0.001678,0.0012693778,3.5169144,Comparison to prior imaging indicating stability or change in findings.,"The pattern in examples with higher activation involves a comparison of the current imaging findings to a prior examination, particularly noting stability or change in known conditions like effusions, opacities, catheters, or atelectasis, often with recommendations for action based on these comparisons.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4601769911504424,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9049,latent_9049,1133,0.002266,0.0016733364,3.992557,Comparisons to prior images with mention of changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples typically include explicit comparisons to prior images and often involve descriptions of new or unchanged findings in the presence of prior examination data, particularly when using specific language of comparison such as 'compared to', 'unchanged', or 'new findings'. This contrasts with low-activation examples where such comparisons are absent or noted as unavailable.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9050,latent_9050,776,0.001552,0.0013339138,5.2850676,Detailed comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"Examining the examples with high activation values, there's an emphasis on findings compared to prior studies. The prompts describe specific changes or stability in findings across imaging studies. This focus on comparison of findings to prior images appears characteristic of the pattern the model is recognizing, where such detail may signal changes relevant to clinical management and diagnosis.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9051,latent_9051,1592,0.003184,0.0019814584,3.490658,Subtle radiologic findings indicating non-acute conditions.,"The examples highlight descriptive terms indicating subtle findings which suggest non-acute conditions, such as 'subtle opacity', 'bibasilar atelectatic changes', and 'mild prominence'. These descriptions often indicate non-immediate alerts or findings that are noteworthy but not urgent, which align with low activation levels. Additionally, these terms reflect how radiologists often describe mild findings that might require monitoring or follow-up.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5834991343892922,0.592964824120603,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,99.0
+9052,latent_9052,11772,0.023544,0.008728322,1.7526038,"Analysis and description of findings using both frontal and lateral chest images, referencing prior comparisons.","Higher activation is associated with the presence of comparisons between multiple imaging views, particularly frontal and lateral chest images, while maintaining coherence between narrative descriptions and prior reports.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4766355140186916,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9053,latent_9053,1543,0.003086,0.0019649277,2.836117,Comparison with prior images showing stability and no significant changes.,"Examples with low activation levels are detailed descriptions of chest images comparing current findings with previous images, often mentioning stability or comparisons. High activation level examples involve reviewing image findings specifically with respect to normal findings in the chest structures, indicating no significant changes or improvements from past imaging studies.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9054,latent_9054,1355,0.00271,0.002125057,4.021412,Structured medical report format with image analysis.,"There is a frequent usage of specific medical terminology or structured language when referring to images and comparisons, typical in telegraphic or templated medical reporting. This includes specific reference patterns for describing findings and comparisons using standardized formats, signaling this type of interaction with medical records.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,100.0,100.0
+9055,latent_9055,8325,0.01665,0.00638355,2.3341799,"Comparisons to prior studies, noting changes or stability of non-standard features.","Despite some variation, the common denominator among the examples with activation is the presence of certain details such as the findings of internal medical devices or changes in size/location of structures between current and previous radiographic images, highlighting the occurrences of invasive procedures, stability or changes related to medical interventions. This type of comparison to a prior study is essential for evaluating progress or complications following interventions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9056,latent_9056,8914,0.017828,0.006483324,2.7019548,Significance or changes noted in comparison with previous imaging.,Examples with higher activation include a recognizable pattern of changes in medical imaging better representing comprehensive comparisons or relate to a sequence of follow-up studies assessing progression or stability of findings.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.5871559633027523,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9057,latent_9057,6097,0.012194,0.0045398623,1.8931683,Reports noting improvement or stability of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels indicate that when reports specify improvements or changes in conditions like ventilation, decreased pleural effusion, reduced or stable opacities compared to prior images, they represent the pattern. Examples with low activation typically don't describe such changes or improvements, or lack historical comparison completely.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5732151623989045,0.5829145728643216,0.6142857142857143,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+9058,latent_9058,1640,0.00328,0.0017012624,4.1228237,Stable or normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with clear lungs.,"These examples describe radiological findings in chest images, especially focusing on cardiomediastinal silhouette stability or unremarkable aspects, and clear lungs, frequently noting comparisons to prior imaging. The pattern suggests normal or stable cardiomediastinal and pulmonary conditions regardless of other findings.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5927089880578253,0.595,0.611764705882353,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9059,latent_9059,2570,0.00514,0.0027353081,2.5571935,Comparative analysis of radiographic images noting changes since prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation scores consistently involved clear comparisons to prior imaging studies, particularly those that highlighted changes (or stability) in specific features such as opacities, pleural effusions, or other identified anomalies. These comparisons typically involve phrases indicating changes since prior studies, showing a focus on assessing continuity or change over time as captured in imaging data.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9060,latent_9060,759,0.001518,0.0012304207,3.6509318,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern revolves around descriptions involving comparisons with previous radiographic findings, emphasizing interval changes or stability in the medical imaging of specific conditions (such as pleural effusion, pulmonary nodules, or other thoracic abnormalities).",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4986399738874986,0.5,0.4818181818181818,0.5760869565217391,92.0,100.0
+9061,latent_9061,897,0.001794,0.001579371,3.723721,"Stability, subtle differences, or unchanged findings compared to prior images.","Examples with higher activations focus on providing a detailed description of findings by explicitly comparing the current imaging results with prior ones, often without significant change or with specific subtle changes noted, indicating no acute process. Such reports typically mention findings that are stable, unchanged, or minimally altered from previous images.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9062,latent_9062,1671,0.003342,0.0020617368,3.8976812,Interval changes involving placement or removal of items.,"The pattern identified involves radiographic findings described in the context of interval changes, such as placement, removal, or remodeling of medical devices or conditions. These samples feature language indicating temporal changes in the state or position between exams, with descriptions like 'interval removal', 'placement', or changes in size or density of structures.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.6,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9063,latent_9063,1202,0.002404,0.0018006071,2.5722542,Assessments of cardiac silhouette size or stability in chest images.,"Examples with higher activation tend to specifically involve a description or comment on the size or state of the cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours, using descriptors such as 'normal', 'stable', or 'enlarged'. This indicates that the pattern involves examining the heart and mediastinal area on chest imaging, possibly suggesting attention to patients with cardiac concerns.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9064,latent_9064,2063,0.004126,0.0019448258,3.7321556,"Higher activation with pneumonia-related assessment, fever, and no comparison available.","The pattern suggests that when radiology reports have findings described as pneumonia or related issues like cough, fever, or pleural effusion without direct comparison (or stating no comparison is available), they show higher activation. These indications seem to focus on acute assessment without prior comparison and primarily concern pulmonary matters requiring immediate attention.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5353468304015931,0.58,0.7105263157894737,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9065,latent_9065,710,0.00142,0.0013506042,6.194082,Mention and description of nasogastric or enteric tube placement.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently highlight the mention of ""nasogastric"" or ""enteric"" tube placement and their positioning details. There is a consistent description of these medical devices, their paths, and termination points, indicating this detail is part of the pattern recognized by the model.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5551469336329894,0.6141304347826086,0.696969696969697,0.2738095238095238,84.0,100.0
+9066,latent_9066,1092,0.002184,0.0017141704,3.8375075,"Comparison with prior images is central to evaluating stability or change in pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pulmonary edema.","The pattern primarily focuses on descriptions involving comparisons between current images and prior reports, combined with specific findings or changes like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pulmonary edema. These examples frequently reference techniques and images like frontal or lateral views.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9067,latent_9067,2247,0.004494,0.0029887368,4.1886473,Requests for comparison with limited or absent prior imaging.,"The pattern is identified by reports requesting a description of findings that compared images to prior studies, with a lack of available prior images or where comments highlight the absence of prior comparisons.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9068,latent_9068,1228,0.002456,0.0017551832,3.7493804,High clinical relevance in the indications for imaging.,"This set of examples emphasizes the presence of specific clinical indications or reasons for imaging that involve evaluating internal pathologies, often post-procedure or following a notable medical event, such as post-operative status or known cancer. This adds urgency or criticality in interpreting the radiological findings in relation to prior imaging, especially focusing on interval changes or evaluation for new complications.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3865384615384615,0.4141414141414141,0.4366197183098591,0.6326530612244898,98.0,100.0
+9069,latent_9069,2183,0.004366,0.0021559629,3.2473557,Assessment of thoracic vascular and structural changes using multi-view radiology studies.,"Examples with activations greater than 3.0 highlight anatomical changes or stability observed in multiple views of thoracic radiology studies, including frontal and lateral images, with detailed comparison to previous imaging. Cases with tortuosity or changes in the aorta, heart size, or pleural collections frequently appear in these examples, indicating a focus on extensive thoracic vascular or structural evaluation.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.5144927536231884,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9070,latent_9070,869,0.001738,0.0015240897,6.0308623,Discussion of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss interval changes or developments in findings, such as new opacities or effusions, since prior imaging. Lower activation examples tend to lack discussions of interval changes or describe unchanged conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5116279069767442,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9071,latent_9071,1545,0.00309,0.002087242,4.5530252,Pulmonary vascular congestion or indistinct vessels suggesting edema.,"Elevated activation levels correspond with examples that highlight pulmonary vascular congestion or edema with indistinctness of pulmonary vessels, often indicating fluid overload or elevated venous pressures, and cardiomegaly. This pattern focuses on subtle radiological signs of cardiopulmonary compromise while excluding examples that lack these features.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.875,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7192982456140351,0.72,0.7444444444444445,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9072,latent_9072,930,0.00186,0.0015321644,3.9892995,Detailed descriptions of medical device placement and positioning.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe findings related to the positioning and presence of tubes or catheters and their locations relative to anatomical landmarks. These descriptions often include measurements or precise placements such as 'cm above carina' or 'projecting over', which reflect a focus on the technical accuracy of medical devices rather than disease processes alone.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5797101449275363,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9073,latent_9073,8883,0.017766,0.0067304475,1.8194214,Focus on stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention specific changes or comparisons between current and previous imaging, indicating stable or unchanged findings over time. This pattern emphasizes the importance of longitudinal analysis in radiological studies to assess patient progress or stability of observed conditions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5632183908045977,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9074,latent_9074,586,0.001172,0.0011133568,2.5656652,Comparative analysis with prior images or studies.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the comparison of current imaging findings with previous studies or images, specifically noting differences or similarities across them. Mentions of 'comparison' and 'as compared to' are common, highlighting a focus on changes over time rather than isolated findings.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.372072072072072,0.3780487804878049,0.3362068965517241,0.609375,64.0,100.0
+9075,latent_9075,8849,0.017698,0.006470209,1.6444223,Emphasis on comparison between different views and prior frontal images.,"Examples with high activation frequently emphasize the comparison between different views of the current study, specifically the frontal and lateral chest radiographs, as well as between these current images and prior frontal images. This pattern reflects a detailed approach in evaluating changes across different perspectives and over time, focusing on assessing any changes in clinical context.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+9076,latent_9076,601,0.001202,0.0011918282,4.304404,Increased activation with detailed interval changes or new findings described.,"Activated examples consistently reference new or changed findings when comparing with previous images. This involves noting intervals of change, resolution, stability, or detection of new findings that are consequential for diagnosis or further treatment.",0.4225589225589226,0.4285714285714285,0.4,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4884539566319347,0.5144508670520231,0.4166666666666667,0.3378378378378378,74.0,99.0
+9077,latent_9077,1629,0.003258,0.002386697,4.458671,Evaluation of interval change after clinical intervention or event.,"Examples with high activations describe interval changes or lack of significant change in the context of evaluation after interventions, like tube placements or clinical events. This often involves monitoring specific alterations, stabilization, or reduction of pathologies previously identified, showcasing the importance of the comparison and noted stability.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9078,latent_9078,515,0.00103,0.0011616786,3.4227319,Comparisons made without additional guidance or new significant findings.,"The examples with high activation levels involve providing descriptions of current radiological findings in comparison with prior frontal images where no additional comparison is available or necessary. Moreover, reports that focus on a comprehensive examination of the current images against previous ones while noting unremarkable findings or absence of acute changes also tend to have higher activations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4807429130009775,0.48125,0.3904761904761905,0.6833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+9079,latent_9079,6031,0.012062,0.0044973465,1.7515343,Indication of stable findings or unchanged conditions compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature wording indicating that a present condition or finding in the image is unchanged compared to a prior image. Language describing stability over time, such as 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'as before', implies a lack of significant progression or regression, making stable findings a key part of the pattern.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9080,latent_9080,10118,0.020236,0.00793556,1.9996426,"Emphasis on comparison of current imaging with prior studies, including multiple views.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve multi-view comparison (frontal and lateral images) or detailed analysis against prior studies, emphasizing changes in the radiological findings over time. These descriptions often involve tubes positioning, lung opacities, and heart size, but primarily the comparison aspect is crucial.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9081,latent_9081,1403,0.002806,0.0016986524,3.5003917,Heart enlargement or cardiomegaly noted in comparison to prior image.,"These examples with high activation levels tend to describe cases where heart enlargement or significant change is noted in comparison to prior images. These notations, specifically of increased heart size or prominent cardiomegaly, are significant and noted as important changes when evaluating radiological findings.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.25,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.4540811834111121,0.535,0.6521739130434783,0.15,100.0,100.0
+9082,latent_9082,795,0.00159,0.0016469082,8.473704,Explicit comparative analysis of current with prior chest images.,"The examples that receive higher activation describe clear comparative analysis of multiple chest images over time. They often specify whether conditions have changed or remained stable compared to prior images, using terms like 'in comparison to prior','unchanged', or 'since prior'. The highest activation levels are seen when the descriptions are detailed and relate to changes or stability in medical conditions or device placements.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4330160204318551,0.4393939393939394,0.4153846153846154,0.6067415730337079,89.0,109.0
+9083,latent_9083,801,0.001602,0.0013948317,5.270821,Detailed image comparison indicating stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a detailed comparison to a prior image, indicating stability or change in specific features, such as a disease condition, device placement, or anatomical detail. This comparison often includes a note about unchanged conditions or detailed recounts of findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4444444444444444,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9084,latent_9084,743,0.001486,0.0014932334,2.3915062,Comparison of current frontal/lateral images with prior images.,"Images or examinations involving current frontal and lateral views compared to prior images with either explicit or inferred language about changes or stability, indicating a pattern of analyzing and discussing changes based on multiple image inputs to evaluate conditions.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5077138849929874,0.5185185185185185,0.4921875,0.7078651685393258,89.0,100.0
+9085,latent_9085,1818,0.003636,0.0018218983,3.3495963,Changes in placement/adoption of medical devices between current and prior images.,"Examples where the activation level is higher predominantly feature descriptions of changes in medical interventions, such as the placement or adjustment of tubes, lines, and surgical devices, between current and prior imaging. The key pattern is the comparison of device placements and adjustments over time, which reflects changes in patient management or condition.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5370370370370371,0.29,100.0,100.0
+9086,latent_9086,866,0.001732,0.0014848044,3.1807992,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral views in radiological analysis.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve the radiological analysis and description based on multiple views of current images often with reference or comparison to prior imaging, but notably, they include prior or current frontal and lateral views explicitly. These examples conduct analysis based on multiple angles of the present observation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9087,latent_9087,350,0.0007,0.0010268125,4.5864477,Presence of stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior images.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently reference the presence of stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images, with a focus on details like heart and mediastinal contours being normal or unremarkable. These descriptions span various conditions but maintain a stable comparative descriptor between current and previous imagery.",0.8035121025154248,0.8043478260869565,0.7727272727272727,0.8095238095238095,21.0,25.0,0.5729949874686717,0.5886524822695035,0.3835616438356164,0.6829268292682927,41.0,100.0
+9088,latent_9088,3485,0.00697,0.0029378547,2.0911698,Explicit comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"High activation samples consistently emphasize making comparisons to prior imaging, which is a common and important process in radiological practice to identify changes over time. Lower activation examples often lack such comparison or explicitly state no comparison is made, focusing purely on current observations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9089,latent_9089,1067,0.002134,0.0015608367,3.9595258,Combination of radiographic findings and detailed patient medical history.,"These examples include both an analysis of radiographic findings and additional context about the patient's medical history or indications for the imaging, such as symptoms or surgical history. The presence of this context, indicated by phrases like 'history of', 'status post', and specific medical conditions, strongly correlates with higher activation.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9090,latent_9090,1321,0.002642,0.001319294,2.6191654,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on descriptions or comparisons referring to interval changes, stability, or lack of changes. They emphasize whether findings have changed or remained stable compared to prior imaging, utilizing phrases like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change'.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9091,latent_9091,657,0.001314,0.0014062707,5.5132236,Mention of 'crackles' in the clinical history or indications.,"The high activation levels for examples are linked to the explicit mention of 'crackles' in the clinical history or indications section of the reports, indicating a potential pattern associated with respiratory pathologies like pneumonia or cardiac conditions exacerbated by respiratory issues.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5470745470745471,0.6514285714285715,0.9375,0.2,75.0,100.0
+9092,latent_9092,1071,0.002142,0.0014967993,4.2610073,Mention of low lung volumes or hyperinflation consistent with emphysema or COPD.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference either low lung volumes or hyperinflated lungs in the findings section, linked to the presence of underlying conditions such as emphysema or COPD.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5416666666666666,0.26,100.0,100.0
+9093,latent_9093,840,0.00168,0.0014943883,2.846938,High activation occurs when the task involves comparing current images to prior ones or referencing previous exams.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently discuss comparing current imaging with prior studies or reference previous studies explicitly, indicating the model is focusing on patterns of comparative analysis in imaging. The presence or the absence of a comparison is a critical trigger for the model's activation.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3949654464211373,0.455,0.4723926380368098,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9094,latent_9094,2673,0.005346,0.0026793438,3.5962167,Reports highlighting stable findings over time when compared to prior images.,"The pattern being detected here correlates with descriptions of radiologic findings being unchanged or stable when compared to prior imaging studies. The activation levels are higher when reports highlight changes over time, particularly when findings remain consistent despite interval changes or in subsequent evaluations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.6,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9095,latent_9095,1518,0.003036,0.0017786113,2.7471519,Description of interval changes compared to prior images.,"These examples focus on radiological studies that specifically incorporate comparisons of current imaging with prior images. This pattern emphasizes inferred interval changes or stability described using either explicit comparisons or dates ('compared to previous radiograph', 'since_', 'previously noted_'). Such comparisons are integral to determining the progression or stability of findings in radiological analyses.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5104166666666666,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9096,latent_9096,1351,0.002702,0.0018799129,5.608483,Direct instructions to compare with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image,' where a request for comparison is explicitly directed alongside providing context or indication.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9097,latent_9097,842,0.001684,0.0013619065,3.3270802,Cardiac enlargement and aortic tortuosity or calcification.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions of cardiac enlargement, often with accompanying notes on the calcification and tortuosity of the aorta. This indicates a focus on detecting certain cardiovascular abnormalities, particularly those related to changes in heart size and aortic characteristics, as a defining pattern for high activation levels in these examples.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6956168831168831,0.7,0.7631578947368421,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9098,latent_9098,6124,0.012248,0.0062020076,6.358005,Unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples show a consistent pattern where there is either no significant change from prior imaging or explicit mention of unchanged findings. This pattern includes phrases like 'no significant change', 'unchanged', and 'stable' descriptions in comparison to previous studies, indicating stability or lack of progression.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5729166666666666,0.59,0.40625,0.609375,64.0,136.0
+9099,latent_9099,1448,0.002896,0.0016588955,2.9346547,Radiology reports describing findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve imaging studies with a radiology report that describes findings in comparison to prior examinations, such as mentioning of unchanged appearances or specific evaluation against prior images. This indicates that the activation is related to comparative analysis in radiology.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3655705996131528,0.385,0.4148148148148148,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9100,latent_9100,9910,0.01982,0.007294867,1.5824727,Report emphasis on interval change between imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation scores reflect contrasting findings between current and prior images, particularly changes such as improvement or worsening of identified issues like nodules, effusions, or other anomalies highlighted by comparison to former imaging studies. Reports focus on interval changes and their clinical implications.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5927089880578253,0.595,0.5826086956521739,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9101,latent_9101,862,0.001724,0.0014076114,3.1654644,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"The highly activated examples point to a pattern where the current imaging findings (including changes or stability in conditions and anatomical structures) are explicitly described by comparing them against prior imaging studies. Terms like 'in comparison to', 'unchanged from', or 'as compared to previous' are frequently used.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9102,latent_9102,866,0.001732,0.0016051203,3.0875769,Comparison to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels often have language indicating comparisons to previous images. This includes phrases like 'compared with prior radiographs', 'no significant interval change', 'compared with radiograph dated', or explicit dates or historical imaging references. These are key indicators of comparisons in radiology reports.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9103,latent_9103,1867,0.003734,0.0024602585,3.2926552,Reports detailing interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently include clinical comparisons between current and prior imaging. This pattern emerges as reports explicitly describe changes (or the lack thereof) in medical conditions based on comparison points, which is a key aspect in follow-up imaging.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.639865340953574,0.655,0.6099290780141844,0.86,100.0,100.0
+9104,latent_9104,538,0.001076,0.0011773949,5.025678,Comparison with prior imaging introduced significant changes or clinical findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe changes detected through comparison with prior imaging, which involve a notable change in patient status, typically focusing on device positioning changes or development of key findings, like edema or infection developments not previously present. These findings emphasize changes over time related to clinical interventions or new developments.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4722318040703691,0.5235294117647059,0.3829787234042553,0.2571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+9105,latent_9105,1111,0.002222,0.0019006556,5.030285,Comparison with prior images showing stability or unchanged conditions.,"The highly activated examples consistently refer to the comparison of current radiological findings with prior images. They identify unchanged conditions, stability of structures, or resolution of any previous abnormalities, which is a key indicator in radiology reports for assessing treatment progress or disease stability. This linguistic pattern involves noting similarities or improvements since the last study.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9106,latent_9106,1062,0.002124,0.0015346056,3.6016574,Comparison with prior imaging findings is explicitly included.,The data samples with high activation levels consistently integrate adjacent or previous images into their descriptive analysis. Such comparisons form an integral part of observational studies where changes in current imaging are evaluated against past ones to deduce findings.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9107,latent_9107,2036,0.004072,0.0025128382,5.740967,"Comparisons focus on positional or condition changes of invasive devices (tubes, lines, catheters).","High activation levels are observed in examples where despite significant diagnostic details about pathology such as pleural effusion, atelectasis, pneumothorax, or tumor, the focus includes comparisons on positions or conditions of tubes, lines, or catheters in successive studies, prevalent clinical features that need meticulous comparison over time in complex patients.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.6153846153846154,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9108,latent_9108,1590,0.00318,0.0016370838,4.081216,Hyperexpansion and flattened diaphragms suggestive of COPD/emphysema on imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe the presence of hyperexpansion of lung volumes and flattening of the diaphragms, which are indicative of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or emphysema, along with references to comparison with prior imaging. This recurring set of findings suggests that the pattern of interest is related to identifying these specific pulmonary conditions in patients using imaging technology.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,100.0,100.0
+9109,latent_9109,2946,0.005892,0.0027472023,3.9803677,Abnormal aortic features in imaging reports.,"These examples feature descriptions of medical imaging studies with data regarding the aorta, such as its tortuosity, size, or remarks on calcification. This is a specific pattern used in radiology to assess cardiovascular conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.369047619047619,0.47,0.35,0.07,100.0,100.0
+9110,latent_9110,15206,0.030412,0.011365359,2.9079614,Noting interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging in radiology reports.,"The pattern focuses on highlighting the comparisons with prior imaging to denote changes in the findings. Factors such as interval changes, stability of conditions, or the presence or absence of alterations regarding certain health conditions or procedural outcomes appear to help activate this model the most.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.5871559633027523,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9111,latent_9111,2933,0.005866,0.003672592,4.365885,Detection of lung opacities or abnormalities in imaging.,"The examples highlight the detection of lung conditions causing opacities, effusions, or abnormalities (e.g., atelectasis or pneumonia) in chest radiographs or other imaging types. The descriptions focus on identifying changes in lung pathology, such as opacification, consolidation, or effusion, indicating these are the patterns of interest.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4597701149425287,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9112,latent_9112,1162,0.002324,0.0017303466,3.013583,Changes or stability in cardiomediastinal contours or devices across comparative studies.,"The examples with high activation involve references to comparison with previous studies, especially focusing on cardiomediastinal contours, heart size, and lung opacities in a sequence of images. Common disclosures include stability, changes in device placement, opacities, and indwelling devices across comparisons.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9113,latent_9113,2662,0.005324,0.0030299332,4.0657144,Discussion of positioning or changes in medical tubes or lines.,"The examples with higher activations consistently relate to the presence or positioning of endotracheal tubes, orogastric tubes, and other similar medical instruments visible in radiographic imaging. These examples often make explicit comparisons about the position of these tubes relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina. The repeated emphasis on positioning and comparison over time is a specific pattern in radiology findings for patients with tubes in place.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5846153846153846,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9114,latent_9114,608,0.001216,0.0012460385,4.853105,"Description of tubes, catheters, or lines in radiographic images.","These examples focus on the presence and position of various tubes, catheters, lines, or other artificial medical devices as seen in radiographic images. Reports concentrate on the stability, placement, and implications of these devices in relation to previous imaging studies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7139463055357567,0.7151162790697675,0.6292134831460674,0.7777777777777778,72.0,100.0
+9115,latent_9115,1189,0.002378,0.0017907012,2.3391392,"Radiological image comparison focusing on dynamic changes in pleural effusions, lung, and cardiac findings.","Examples with higher activations detail specific patterns in comparing current and prior radiological images. These patterns include checking for changes related to pleural effusions, pulmonary aspects, cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung volumes, and an emphasis on providing comprehensive visual comparative descriptions, often involving complex observations in the presence of intermittent or fluctuating conditions.",0.28,0.28,0.28,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.4210526315789473,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9116,latent_9116,796,0.001592,0.0015431582,2.8942294,Comparative analysis and stability or change of previous findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels all tend to focus on descriptions that compare current imaging with past findings, particularly emphasizing stability, changes, or reinforcement of previous assessments. While some examples that mention technical observations like tube placements or vessels have variable activation, the core pattern seems to remain around providing comparative imaging assessments.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9117,latent_9117,5668,0.011336,0.00429918,1.9750913,Comparison of current radiographic findings with prior images.,"Examples with positive activation levels consistently describe the comparison between current and prior radiographic images, focusing on changes or stability in pathological findings. The pattern emphasizes the importance of sequential imaging studies for monitoring disease progression.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9118,latent_9118,1050,0.0021,0.0016127736,2.960991,Explicit or implicit requests for longitudinal comparison of images.,"Activated examples tend to request specific comparisons between the current radiology findings to those from previous images, particularly emphasizing stability or change over time, despite often explicitly stating 'comparison: none', suggesting an error or override metaphor.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3596358921436321,0.395,0.4285714285714285,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9119,latent_9119,6982,0.013964,0.005221564,1.9642915,References to prior imaging in comparison.,"The higher activation levels are linked to examples where references to prior imaging studies are mentioned or emphasized, regardless of the specific medical condition, suggesting a pattern in how the findings are communicated.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.5283018867924528,0.84,100.0,100.0
+9120,latent_9120,1286,0.002572,0.0017679218,3.7707129,Explicit and detailed comparison to prior radiology studies.,"Examples with high activation levels explicitly emphasize a detailed comparison between current and prior radiological studies, often highlighting changes or stabilities in specific anatomical or pathological observations. This frequent mention of comparisons and evaluation of changes between studies is the distinguishing pattern.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9121,latent_9121,12200,0.0244,0.008949585,1.7772009,Requests for descriptions in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include requests for a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior images, indicating an emphasis on noting changes over time between current and previous imaging studies.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4726763065138353,0.525,0.5153374233128835,0.84,100.0,100.0
+9122,latent_9122,9029,0.018058,0.0074667493,2.4400399,Temporal change analysis in comparison to prior images.,The activation levels are higher when the reports explicitly ask for comparison between current and prior images or mention specific changes over time. This focuses on temporal change analysis in radiological examinations.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.525765534913517,0.5326633165829145,0.5284552845528455,0.65,100.0,99.0
+9123,latent_9123,2086,0.004172,0.0026498348,5.4629035,Focus on endotracheal or other tube placement and positioning.,"Examples with high activation involve analysis that includes tubes or devices in the chest image, specifically intubation or tube placement, whereas examples with anatomically clear descriptions, diagnoses, or lack of detailed tube analysis have lower activation rates. Thus, the focus is on tube placement rather than anatomical details.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4608246545021141,0.525,0.5806451612903226,0.18,100.0,100.0
+9124,latent_9124,682,0.001364,0.001216962,3.199391,High activation with prior imaging comparison reported.,"Activation is associated with prompts that include comparison to prior imaging. These examples detail findings based on prior examinations, emphasizing their role in evaluating the current status.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3995337995337995,0.4293478260869565,0.425531914893617,0.7142857142857143,84.0,100.0
+9125,latent_9125,1448,0.002896,0.0024731823,4.8116746,Detection of interval change compared to prior imaging study.,"These examples revolve around radiological comparisons focusing on identifying interval changes between current and prior imaging. This compares the presence or absence of changes in pathological findings, device placements, or patient's anatomical structures, highlighting the use of past imaging for ongoing assessment.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.5733333333333334,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9126,latent_9126,2535,0.00507,0.0028230562,2.925988,Stable or unchanged findings over multiple imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe stable imaging findings over multiple studies, often using words like 'unchanged', 'constant', 'resolved', or 'improved'. The focus is on documented changes (or lack thereof) in the context of previous reports, indicating no substantial interval change, rather than identifying new findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4875,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9127,latent_9127,9236,0.018472,0.006784594,1.7784718,Direct evaluation of interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to cases where both current and prior image comparisons are inherent to the task and findings directly imply interval changes or stability. These activated examples often involve a direct assessment of interval changes in clinical context, with a focus on stability or progression of medical devices or abnormalities across multiple imaging studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9128,latent_9128,2049,0.004098,0.003189095,3.519906,Pleural effusion and/or pulmonary edema presence or increase.,"Examples exhibit a pattern where radiographic findings demonstrate pleural effusions and/or pulmonary edema, often accompanied by patchy lung opacities or atelectasis. These examples consistently convey changes in lung markings, vascular congestion, or fluid accumulation as key indicators of possible pulmonary or cardiopulmonary concern.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5652173913043478,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9129,latent_9129,1451,0.002902,0.0019618638,3.0340433,Unchanged or previously noted dormant lesions on imaging.,"Highly activated examples tend to describe findings about unchanged old lesions or abnormalities, such as healed fractures or persistent rib deformities. These findings may indicate prior conditions or stable diseases rather than acute processes. The references to past conditions being unchanged imply prioritization in description patterns.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.503917378917379,0.507537688442211,0.5060240963855421,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+9130,latent_9130,1767,0.003534,0.0019328123,3.943287,Evaluation centered around respiratory issues such as wheezing or hypoxia.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on assessing respiratory conditions such as wheezing, hypoxia, and potential infiltrates, where clarity in lung findings and comparisons against prior images are noted for changes like 'compared to prior' or absence/presence based assessments. This suggests emphasis placed on arrival or development of respiratory problems, screening with detailed description for explicit symptoms or indications.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5909090909090909,0.26,100.0,100.0
+9131,latent_9131,1114,0.002228,0.0017274119,2.9931097,Portable/semi-erect chest imaging with tube/catheter placement changes.,"Highly activated examples focus on specific changes or confirmation regarding tubes, catheters, or implants between current and prior imaging studies, and include portable or semi-erect imaging techniques, often with assessments that are limited by these techniques.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4838709677419355,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9132,latent_9132,7024,0.014048,0.00520052,1.7026978,Presence of comparative analysis with prior imaging investigations.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly refer to comparing current images against prior radiographic studies, often with observations of stability or change in pathology. This comparison step indicates a pattern of continued monitoring, which is crucial in evaluating chronic or persistent conditions over time by tracking changes.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9133,latent_9133,890,0.00178,0.001267724,3.874356,Comparisons focus on positioning of medical devices/tubes.,"There is a pattern where comparisons to prior imaging studies are made specifically for evaluating the positioning or presence of medical devices or tubes. This includes references to PICC lines, pacemakers, or central venous catheters, and their stable, unchanged, or adjusted positions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9134,latent_9134,2241,0.004482,0.0026048333,3.191568,Mention of hyperinflated lungs or flattening of diaphragms.,"These reports show increased activation levels when there is mention of 'hyperinflated lungs' or associated signs like 'flattening of the diaphragms'. This finding is indicative of underlying processes like COPD, which alters the radiographic appearance of the lungs.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6816638370118846,0.7,0.8846153846153846,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9135,latent_9135,774,0.001548,0.0015590952,6.3902082,Normal or mildly enlarged heart described as stable or top normal.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels all describe scenarios where the cardiac size is normal or mildly enlarged while emphasizing stability or top normal limits instead of actual enlargement when discussing findings. Low lung volumes, cardiomegaly, or cardiac silhouette size are used to convey the heart's status as normal or within expected limits in elaboration.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6209704178258761,0.6212121212121212,0.6210526315789474,0.6020408163265306,98.0,100.0
+9136,latent_9136,1572,0.003144,0.002353322,4.0822973,Emphasis on interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"These examples demonstrate a pattern where reports compare current findings with prior imaging, emphasizing changes such as interval decreases or increases in findings like effusions, opacities, etc. The key is the detailed description of changes over time in imaging studies.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6910719802286067,0.7,0.6492537313432836,0.87,100.0,100.0
+9137,latent_9137,624,0.001248,0.0010276947,4.7814484,Comparison and analysis of chest images over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference a direct comparison between current and prior chest images, highlighting changes or stability in findings. This comparison typically focuses on aspects like cardiac silhouette, pulmonary structures, and other anatomical or pathological features documented in both past and present images.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4525740025740026,0.4806629834254143,0.4539007092198581,0.7901234567901234,81.0,100.0
+9138,latent_9138,877,0.001754,0.0015566008,3.0384283,Change in lung infiltrates or opacities over time.,"Radiology samples with high activation often describe the presence or resolution of infiltrates or opacities in the lung fields, particularly those that change over time requiring a comparison to prior imaging to ascertain 'improvement' or 'worsening'. This change detection is critical in evaluating pathologies like pneumonia or atelectasis.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5675675675675675,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9139,latent_9139,1855,0.00371,0.0021784888,2.8804495,Comparison with prior imaging to note changes.,"The pattern identified in these samples is the comparison of findings with prior imaging, particularly noting any changes or the stability of findings. Reports frequently mention if conditions are 'unchanged', 'increased', or 'decreased' relative to a previous radiograph, often explicitly referring to a 'prior' image or report.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9140,latent_9140,1142,0.002284,0.0014195369,3.5661201,Presence and evaluation of pacemaker device positions.,"This pattern involves the presence and assessment of pacemaker devices or similar cardiac implants, often mentioning their placement and stability over time. These findings show consistent references to pacemaker lead positions, stability, and lack of significant changes in these devices across the reports.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,1.0,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6620845799304601,0.6834170854271356,0.8775510204081632,0.43,100.0,99.0
+9141,latent_9141,5882,0.011764,0.004550657,2.4620168,Description of findings in relation to prior imaging studies.,"The observed pattern arises when image examples refer to the comparison with historical imaging to evaluate changes over time, mentioning details such as improved or worsened conditions, placement changes of tubes or devices, or stability of previously observed conditions. Such instances are often accompanied by historical references from prior examinations for direct comparison.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9142,latent_9142,771,0.001542,0.0013984514,3.6688197,Acute cardiopulmonary process mentioned.,"Examples with high activation levels are characterized by mentions of acute cardiopulmonary processes, which signify the presence or evaluation for new emergency conditions involving the heart or lungs, distinct from chronic or unchanged findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4441157487091222,0.4564102564102564,0.4225352112676056,0.3157894736842105,95.0,100.0
+9143,latent_9143,884,0.001768,0.0015518146,4.135668,Indication of urgent evaluation for acute processes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference an evaluation of an ""acute"" process or specify urgent conditions in their indications, even when no acute findings are present. This pattern indicates heightened model responsiveness to prompts seeking evaluation for acute or urgent medical processes, regardless of actual findings.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7044014128610436,0.705,0.7252747252747253,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9144,latent_9144,798,0.001596,0.0015101703,2.3998332,Findings based solely on current images without comparison references.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide descriptions based on current imaging data without prior reference comparisons. These examples focus on clear statements of radiographic findings such as size and shape of cardiac and mediastinal contours, presence or absence of effusions, consolidations, nodules, or other acute findings, while lacking comparison to prior reports or images.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5758269519223178,0.592964824120603,0.65,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+9145,latent_9145,655,0.00131,0.0012273715,4.157875,Comparison highlighting pulmonary changes like consolidation/atelectasis.,"Reports showing comparison with prior images and highlighting changes in lung opacities, particularly for consolidation or atelectasis, exhibit the pattern. Key focus is on evaluating changes primarily related to pulmonary findings in sequential chest imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5997843831818882,0.6120218579234973,0.5882352941176471,0.4819277108433735,83.0,100.0
+9146,latent_9146,8040,0.01608,0.0058092442,1.5190923,Language instructing to compare current and prior images' findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently contain language indicating the presence of phrases instructing to provide descriptions of the findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on the language of comparison rather than the content of findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9147,latent_9147,448,0.000896,0.0011418139,3.8398633,Comparative analysis between current and prior images explicitly requested.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve directive instructions to provide a report comparing current and previous images. This comparison is explicitly stated as the task, often with a follow-up prompt to provide a detailed description of findings, not just general observations, highlighting that the model responds strongly when tasking involves specific analytical comparison between current and prior images.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5161538461538462,0.5163398692810458,0.3980582524271844,0.7735849056603774,53.0,100.0
+9148,latent_9148,842,0.001684,0.0012758403,5.258651,Changes in specific radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation are ones that elaborate on prior examinations, explicitly pointing out the comparison of specific features with earlier findings. Most examples with high activation involve contrast with prior imaging to determine changes in specific findings, such as nodules, pleural effusions, or other abnormal opacities.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9149,latent_9149,1323,0.002646,0.0016353714,3.0132275,Explicit mention of comparisons between current and prior images.,"Higher activations commonly reflect examples where descriptions explicitly mention comparisons between current and prior imaging. The explicit mention of comparisons, especially using language elements like 'comparison', 'as compared to', 'previous radiograph', is a distinct pattern.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.5472972972972973,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9150,latent_9150,1054,0.002108,0.0015030833,5.626609,Findings exaggerated by imaging technique or patient anatomy.,"The examples with high activation levels often emphasize the influence of technique or anatomic factors (like low lung volumes or AP projection) on imaging appearance, particularly when suggesting explanation for findings like apparent cardiomegaly or exaggerated vascular markings.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8173701298701299,0.82,0.7580645161290323,0.94,100.0,100.0
+9151,latent_9151,2087,0.004174,0.0025232371,4.439803,Evaluation of external medical device placement or change.,"The examples with high activation suggest a pattern of detecting changes in external medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, between imaging studies. This includes noticing new placements, movements, or confirming positions in relation to previous images—key operational details in many hospital settings.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6649916247906198,0.665,0.6633663366336634,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9152,latent_9152,726,0.001452,0.0013335175,3.099001,Analysis of radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently include descriptive analysis of comparisons between current and previous radiological images. This includes evaluations of changes or stability in findings over time, often highlighting specific intervals or resolutions related to prior studies.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4329501915708812,0.4336734693877551,0.4299065420560747,0.4791666666666667,96.0,100.0
+9153,latent_9153,1945,0.00389,0.0025190392,3.0035455,Placement or stability of medical tubes and lines on imaging.,"The examples frequently reference the placement of medical tubes, lines, and associated devices, indicating a common focus in these radiological studies. This reflects that the activation likely rises in cases where such placement or stability is described, with terms like 'position unchanged', 'placement of', or 'ending at' being prominent.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8044083352140223,0.805,0.7747747747747747,0.86,100.0,100.0
+9154,latent_9154,6119,0.012238,0.0047376575,2.3938947,Radiological comparison to prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The examples consistently describe findings in the context of comparison with previous imaging studies to assess changes over time, which is indicative of radiological monitoring of patients. This pattern involves assessing stability, interval changes, or new findings by explicitly comparing them to prior images.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9155,latent_9155,862,0.001724,0.0013052098,3.5044732,Focused on changes over time between current and prior imaging studies.,"The high-activation examples consistently involve reports that describe changes over time in imaging findings between current and previous or prior studies. These examples explicitly use terms such as ""compared to prior"" and highlight differences or consistencies identified, indicating the focus is on temporal change or stability in findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4661654135338345,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9156,latent_9156,5382,0.010764,0.0041670226,1.8640397,Comparative imaging studies noting stability or mild changes in response to interventions.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention comparisons with prior imaging and evaluate specific changes such as slight improvements or stability in conditions like pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or effusions, particularly following interventions like thoracentesis or tube placements. These examples often note stability or minimal change in conditions or positions indicative of post-procedural assessment or follow-up on known concerns.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.6206896551724138,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9157,latent_9157,1233,0.002466,0.0024280564,5.6654053,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in sequential imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on describing radiographic comparisons to identify interval changes or stability in a patient's condition over sequential imaging studies. This involves noting changes or the lack thereof in specific pathologies or procedures (e.g., pneumothorax size, tube placements) compared to previous examinations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5555555555555556,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9158,latent_9158,935,0.00187,0.0016262087,3.7661176,Description of findings compared to prior images indicating stability or change.,"The activation levels suggest that the model is primarily responding to comparisons made with prior images, especially when those comparisons lead to a conclusion about stability or changes in the condition (e.g., improvement, stability, persistent findings).",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3447619047619047,0.355,0.3066666666666666,0.23,100.0,100.0
+9159,latent_9159,911,0.001822,0.0015951953,3.2627897,Cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe new, persisting, or unchanged findings in the context of a prior radiographic assessment, specifically focusing on cardiopulmonary conditions such as heart failure, atelectasis, and changes in pleural effusion or pulmonary edema. When previous imaging is compared, the descriptions emphasize these conditions or their progression.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9160,latent_9160,1324,0.002648,0.002199873,3.766563,Radiological comparison of current and prior imaging for changes.,"The examples that show high activation involve radiological comparison between current and prior imaging studies, particularly emphasizing the need for comparative analysis to identify changes or stability in the patient's condition. The prompt specifies using clear images for current and previous examinations, for comparison in the context of investigation, follow-ups, or continued evaluation. This pattern aligns with processes that determine clinical outcomes based on visual changes over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4006698395910453,0.405,0.4188034188034188,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9161,latent_9161,805,0.00161,0.0012290956,5.6216044,Normal findings in radiographic examination despite specific indications.,Examples with high activation levels commonly include a straightforward description of normal findings despite the presence of specific symptoms or indications. They often conclude with a sentence describing a normal or unremarkable radiographic examination.,0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6747967479674797,0.675,0.6842105263157895,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9162,latent_9162,6971,0.013942,0.0052837776,1.465811,Presence or change of lung opacities indicating pneumonia.,"High activation levels are associated with findings of pneumonia or opacities in the lungs, either new or worsening, identified through direct comparisons with prior radiographs. These examples involve the detection or monitoring of pulmonary opacities, suggestive of infections or inflammatory processes, with a focus on their interval changes or persistence over comparative studies.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.55,0.22,100.0,100.0
+9163,latent_9163,3745,0.00749,0.0032095208,2.1633434,Comparison indicating stability or change of findings against prior imaging.,"The pattern recognized in these examples is a comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, resulting in a description of stability or change of conditions. Specific findings such as aortic tortuosity or device placement are closely compared against prior examinations, focusing on continuity or interval change, and frequently resulting in descriptors like 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'persistent'.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9164,latent_9164,5912,0.011824,0.00468086,1.7171289,Comparison to prior images with noted interval changes or stability.,"Activation levels are higher when the description contains comparison between the current and prior imaging studies, likely as this indicates interval changes, stability or resolution of previous findings, which is crucial for assessing ongoing or resolved pathologies.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5833333333333334,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9165,latent_9165,1160,0.00232,0.0017104186,4.1538258,Description of persistent findings on sequential radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe persistent abnormalities despite interval or previous imaging changes, indicating a focus on unchanging findings that are evaluated over multiple studies, such as stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes or persistent opacities.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9166,latent_9166,1199,0.002398,0.0017148103,2.9608629,"Comparison to prior imaging for interstitial, vascular, or cardiac changes.","Examples with high activation levels often describe cardiac silhouette or interstitial marking changes based on comparison to prior imaging, which are specific to changes in cardio-pulmonary status or conditions like edema or fibrosis, reflecting the model's focus on detecting subtle or significant changes over time.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.5581395348837209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9167,latent_9167,3314,0.006628,0.0029489524,2.68937,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"Most examples refer explicitly to comparisons with prior imaging, while simultaneously pointing out changes in specific findings or noting stability when no change has occurred. This key pattern of comparing current and prior findings, with specific mentions of stability or change, characterizes this set of high activation examples.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4618223177050423,0.4623115577889447,0.4574468085106383,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+9168,latent_9168,677,0.001354,0.0010720128,4.184189,Activation linked to notable or unchanged findings on comparison with clinical indication.,"Examples with high activation levels describe notable findings for specific clinical questions, such as post-surgical changes, emphysema, cardiopulmonary conditions, improved or unchanged pathologies over time, and absence of acute findings when such are suspected given prior history or context. This indicates that the activation pattern is triggered when reports address specific clinical indications or follow-up evaluations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4424242424242424,0.4456521739130434,0.4247787610619469,0.5647058823529412,85.0,99.0
+9169,latent_9169,7062,0.014124,0.005264936,3.0930662,No clear pattern identified for these image comparisons.,"None of the examples show significant activation, indicating the model does not perceive a clear pattern in comparing <image> references with prior reports.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4267714747864581,0.495,0.4838709677419355,0.15,100.0,100.0
+9170,latent_9170,1046,0.002092,0.0017439208,3.5057194,Comparison with prior and current imaging prompts high activation.,"Models show higher activation when tasked with comparing imaging findings between current and prior frontal and lateral chest images, but with no prior comparison available, causing forced reliance on descriptors, indications and techniques to offer interpretations.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3502949660853972,0.375,0.4100719424460431,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9171,latent_9171,846,0.001692,0.0014140407,3.4474437,Prompts requesting detailed comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on radiological studies where a direct description of findings is requested in comparison to prior imaging. This pattern is evident in sample prompts where the assistant is asked to describe findings in the radialogy study compared to previous images, indicating changes or stability.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9172,latent_9172,2820,0.00564,0.0025001592,2.4757109,Focus on interval imaging changes or stability.,"The examples show descriptions of findings in radiology images comparing current to prior images, often mentioning terms like 'unchanged', 'resolved', or 'stable'. The emphasis is on interval changes in imaging findings, whether it's stabilization, resolution, or persistence of previously noted conditions between current and prior images.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9173,latent_9173,531,0.001062,0.0011352855,5.1461945,Comparison of current and prior images indicating cardiac or pulmonary changes.,"These examples show that high activation levels are associated with detailed analysis of image comparisons for pathologies, particularly when assessing differences in the heart, pulmonary congestion, or pleural effusions. Activation is highest when there is an indication of change in medical condition or critical finding.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3678911564625851,0.3726708074534161,0.2674418604651162,0.3770491803278688,61.0,100.0
+9174,latent_9174,9853,0.019706,0.007363016,2.0419736,Focus on the positioning and assessment of medical devices in chest radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings that directly relate to the positioning or assessment of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or lines, often describing their position relative to anatomical landmarks or other devices. This focus on device positioning is a key aspect of the pattern identified.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9175,latent_9175,1007,0.002014,0.0016325888,3.517236,Cardiac and mediastinal silhouette affected by projection or positioning.,"These examples all involve the description of chest radiographs, specifically examining the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours changes potentially due to positioning and technical factors or low lung volumes, which affect the perceived size and prominence in radiological images. The pattern includes terms like 'accentuated', 'exaggerated', and 'likely due to'.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7444825772188681,0.745,0.7692307692307693,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9176,latent_9176,9192,0.018384,0.0070120334,1.9837041,Unchanged findings compared to prior images suggest stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically describe findings that remain unchanged over time, indicating stability. These examples focus on observations that show no significant change from previous scans, highlighting a pattern of stability often synonymous with non-emergent or chronic conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.46875,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9177,latent_9177,7755,0.01551,0.005798544,1.997918,Detailed interval changes or stability in findings with current and prior image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations involve instructions concerning description of findings from images that include both current and prior imaging comparisons, and emphasize reporting detailed interval changes or stability of findings over time. These reports assess changes in clinical context, such as improvement or worsening of conditions, particularly detailed in complex cases or key diagnostic assessments.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4811320754716981,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9178,latent_9178,1197,0.002394,0.0015532469,3.4584575,Current findings compared to prior images for changes.,"Examples consistently reference the comparison of current radiological findings with previous studies or images. These comparisons often note stability, changes, or no significant interval changes in the findings, indicating that the pattern emphasizes the temporal assessment of images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9179,latent_9179,863,0.001726,0.001412556,3.4189358,Detailed interval change comparisons in radiological findings.,"High activation levels are associated with detailed descriptions of radiological findings, particularly focusing on changes over time or interval changes compared to previous studies. These entries mention specific comparisons to prior images, discussing intervals and specific changes in findings such as opacities, effusions, and device placement, which indicate ongoing or resolved conditions, thus they are prominent in these detailed comparisons.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5876794016575702,0.5879396984924623,0.580952380952381,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+9180,latent_9180,5791,0.011582,0.0044309474,1.5968612,Detailed verbal comparison with prior imaging findings is favored.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe detailed comparison of current images with prior ones, particularly highlighting changes such as ""no significant interval change"" or adjustments in positions of medical devices (e.g., pacemakers, tubes). This suggests a pattern where detailed verbalization of changes in findings across imaging studies is preferred.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5727272727272728,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9181,latent_9181,1364,0.002728,0.001682226,3.8582911,Focus on interval changes between current and prior images.,"High activation examples request descriptions comparing a current set of images to a prior set, focusing on interval changes or stability, particularly when there is specific wording related to 'comparison to prior' or 'as compared to previous study'. Such descriptions appear vital in these examples.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4563106796116505,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9182,latent_9182,6030,0.01206,0.0047318256,2.0845666,Interval removal of a medical device compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on the interval removal of a medical device like a PICC line or chest tube, as compared to previous imaging studies. These findings are linguistically emphasized in radiology reports due to their clinical relevance and the need to confirm their removal and any potential complications post-procedure.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4261725710488961,0.525,0.6470588235294118,0.11,100.0,100.0
+9183,latent_9183,768,0.001536,0.0015028472,3.4860973,No prior image comparison available or explicitly stated as not made.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve the absence of prior image comparisons or clearly stating no comparison was made, focusing completely on the current diagnostic evaluation based on available views. This is essential when the normalcy or baseline is being firmly established without relying on historical comparison.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5701032059727712,0.5706806282722513,0.5420560747663551,0.6373626373626373,91.0,100.0
+9184,latent_9184,6317,0.012634,0.005201008,1.9689044,Comparison to prior images in radiology studies.,"The pattern involves samples where there are references to comparisons between current and previous images. Examples with higher activation levels use explicit comparison to prior images within their analysis, often detailing changes or the lack of changes observed between current and past imaging, using specific dates or observations made previously.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9185,latent_9185,1636,0.003272,0.0023304243,4.7887387,Presence of non-empty 'PRIOR_REPORT' in the radiology report.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference a 'PRIOR_REPORT' field which suggests a structured radiological workflow that includes comparison with previous studies. This differs from examples with zero activation where the workflow pattern is not followed, and the 'PRIOR_REPORT' field is absent or marked 'N/A'.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9186,latent_9186,11915,0.02383,0.008565881,1.5259941,Comparison of thoracic findings over time between radiological exams.,"The higher activation levels are associated with detailed descriptions of radiological findings compared to earlier studies, implying recognition of patterns like changes or stability of certain findings over time. These comparisons, especially stability or change over time in the thoracic region findings, trigger higher model responses.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9187,latent_9187,9565,0.01913,0.0070014065,1.6635276,Activation correlates with description of relative change from prior imaging.,"The activation is higher for examples where radiological findings are provided explicitly in terms of changes—whether for better or worse—relative to prior images. This includes specific notes of stability, improvement, or progression in disease or condition. Reports lacking such comparisons or changes scored lower.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6245941558441559,0.63,0.6048387096774194,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9188,latent_9188,1775,0.00355,0.0023104504,4.4654894,Mild pulmonary vascular congestion without overt pulmonary edema.,"The data indicates high activation levels for samples describing mild pulmonary vascular congestion without overt pulmonary edema. This condition involves changes in vascular markings or mild engorgement, often without significant accompanying symptoms such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax, likely representing a subtle but recognized pattern by the model.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7647058823529411,0.77,0.8857142857142857,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9189,latent_9189,2745,0.00549,0.0030667365,5.093191,Emphasis on detailed comparisons between current and prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels mention comparisons between images, especially focusing on potential interval changes, such as differences in medical devices, lung opacities, or effusions. The phrasing often includes 'compared to the prior frontal image' or similar variants.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4385964912280702,0.44,0.4454545454545454,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9190,latent_9190,1610,0.00322,0.0018402716,2.5847783,Evaluation including both frontal and lateral chest views compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation mention the evaluation of frontal and lateral views of the chest in correlation with prior frontal images, often indicating comparison with older studies or detailing changes over time without necessarily stating 'no prior'. The pattern corresponds to detailed comparison across different views and timeframes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9191,latent_9191,715,0.00143,0.0013665035,3.945264,Radiological comparison with prior studies detailing changes or stability.,"The pattern here is detailed radiological comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, explicitly focusing on changes or stability in specific findings like lung or mediastinal appearances, positions of lines, or devices. Terminology revolves around terms such as 'unchanged', 'new', 'decreased', 'increased', and specific anatomical changes.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4394863563402889,0.4432989690721649,0.4396551724137931,0.5425531914893617,94.0,100.0
+9192,latent_9192,3786,0.007572,0.003320134,3.1230543,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight a pattern where the findings are discussed in the context of a comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability. This involves explicit mention of changes since the comparison, whether in terms of resolution, improvement, or the inferential stability of pathologies.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4931227712684666,0.5226130653266332,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,99.0
+9193,latent_9193,1024,0.002048,0.00166271,2.9590163,Emphasis on evaluating interval changes or stability in repeated imaging.,"These samples feature radiological findings being compared to previous imaging and commenting on the stability or changes in condition or instrumentation (e.g., lines, tubes). The comparisons often concern small changes or no interval changes, commonly seen in follow-ups or monitoring conditions. They typically involve medical terminology evaluating conditions like atelectasis, effusions, or catheter placements.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9194,latent_9194,686,0.001372,0.0012145779,4.628521,Evaluation of interval change by comparing current and prior images.,"These examples all focus on identifying changes or evaluating findings against prior radiographs. This indicates a pattern of emphasis on interval changes or stability, which is prevalent in radiology when assessing treatment effects, intervention results, or progression of conditions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3951732673267327,0.4033149171270718,0.3884297520661157,0.5802469135802469,81.0,100.0
+9195,latent_9195,2675,0.00535,0.003978977,2.5028703,Descriptions of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with positive activation levels reference a change in comparison to previous imaging studies, highlighting an interval change or update is described as opposed to cases simply stating similarity or unchanged conditions.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6750483558994197,0.685,0.6370370370370371,0.86,100.0,100.0
+9196,latent_9196,12137,0.024274,0.008985181,1.7632223,Emphasis on low lung volumes in imaging interpretation.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve low lung volumes either mentioned as a finding or influencing other interpretations, such as exaggerating cardiac size or altering other thoracic observations. This suggests that the model highly activates on reports indicating low lung volumes due to its potential diagnostic significance.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5121951219512195,0.21,100.0,100.0
+9197,latent_9197,1312,0.002624,0.0017624655,4.020304,Reports emphasizing interval changes or stability in pathology based on image comparisons.,"The highly activated examples all detail specific imaging comparisons that note changes in pathology or intervention status such as the increase or decrease in effusion, resolution of opacities, or changes in placement of devices. These descriptions often involve evaluations for interval change, stability, or specific development in findings compared to previous imaging results.",0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9198,latent_9198,1001,0.002002,0.0015288835,3.7307055,Comparison of medical instrument placement with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels reference a change or stability in the placement or status of medical instruments or lines (like nasogastric tubes), compared with prior imaging. This pattern is focused on specific alterations or continuities involving medical devices, whereas examples with lower activation levels do not emphasize such comparisons or have no prior comparisons to reference.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4927536231884058,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9199,latent_9199,1170,0.00234,0.0014028267,2.2199597,Comparisons highlighting changes from prior images yield higher activation.,The provided examples consistently mention phrases related to the comparison with prior radiographs and notable changes or lack thereof from previous studies. It seems the activation has increased when explicit comparison is documented about the change in observations or findings in the present with respect to the prior images.,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.5590551181102362,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9200,latent_9200,888,0.001776,0.0013717967,3.2957485,Description of findings in interval comparison to prior imaging.,"Most samples with high activations describe changes in radiological findings compared to prior imaging, emphasizing 'comparison' and 'interval change'. These samples frequently mention minor alterations or stability compared to previous images, which is a key focus in radiology to assess progress or stability of conditions.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4299429942994299,0.43,0.4285714285714285,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9201,latent_9201,12840,0.02568,0.0091660675,1.4322333,Integration of both frontal and lateral views with referenced prior imaging for interval assessment.,"The examples with higher activations utilize both current frontal and lateral views, along with reference to prior images, as part of the report. This combination suggests the model emphasizes comprehensive multi-view assessments and comparisons for detecting interval changes in pathology.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4623655913978494,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9202,latent_9202,892,0.001784,0.0017247602,3.6555853,Emphasis on describing changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare current imaging with prior imaging, particularly with specific focus on direct descriptions or instructions for comparison of specific findings between current and previous images. This emphasis on comparison, noting changes or stability in findings, is key in the pattern.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3924415611162599,0.41,0.4328358208955223,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9203,latent_9203,443,0.000886,0.0010075859,4.170964,"Emphasis on cardiac silhouette size, especially enlargement or stability.","Examples with high activation levels have a consistent pattern of mentioning the size or change in size of the cardiac silhouette, often described as 'enlargement' or 'mad enlargement', in comparison to previous imaging. This suggests a focus on cardiomegaly or heart size changes as a key feature in these examples.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7401073105298457,0.7419354838709677,0.5862068965517241,0.9272727272727272,55.0,100.0
+9204,latent_9204,3069,0.006138,0.0030274135,4.4595804,Explicit changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern focuses on comparison with prior imaging, specifically identifying instances that describe changes from previous studies. Example instances reflecting changes have higher activation levels, such as improvement or progression. Whereas those without explicit mention of changes, or consistent stability across findings have lower activation.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4426229508196721,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9205,latent_9205,4502,0.009004,0.003954992,1.8762734,Comparison with prior imaging findings and changes in opacities.,"Examples with higher activation levels demonstrate descriptions of both current and prior images with distinct identifications of previous findings, particularly related to changes in lung opacities or absence thereof, combined with instructions to describe or compare findings. Act of comparison with prior imaging significantly impacts activation level.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.4375,0.35,100.0,100.0
+9206,latent_9206,2176,0.004352,0.002196246,3.0270424,Multiple image views and prior image comparison in complex clinical contexts.,"The examples with high activation frequently involve examination descriptions that include multiple image views (both frontal and lateral), comparisons with prior images, and often complex clinical narratives indicating the need for detailed longitudinal assessment across time. This pattern may be particularly relevant in contexts where chronic conditions or post-operative statuses are evaluated over multiple points in time, necessitating a thorough comparison with a comprehensive view of multiple potentially involved areas (implying multiple views).",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3748415983779674,0.445,0.467065868263473,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9207,latent_9207,7849,0.015698,0.0061258944,2.3761563,Emphasis on reported interval changes in medical device position within radiological studies.,"The samples with low activation values appear to focus on NG tube placement and position assessment, often neglecting to offer any broader comprehensive assessment of radiological pattern variability. In contrast, those with higher activation place notable emphasis on detailed outcome comparisons of medical devices and their positional changes over time through the recorded intervals, showcasing the significant attention the model places on such context.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4874827518233786,0.545,0.6363636363636364,0.21,100.0,100.0
+9208,latent_9208,646,0.001292,0.0013657107,3.2435176,Focus on changes or stability in imaging compared to previous studies.,The examples with high activation levels emphasize changes in radiological findings or their stability compared to previous imaging studies. This focus on changes or consistency over time is typical for assessing ongoing medical conditions and treatment responses.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4350102145045965,0.4350282485875706,0.3861386138613861,0.5064935064935064,77.0,100.0
+9209,latent_9209,2954,0.005908,0.002484419,2.2687678,Changes or additions in medical device appearances compared to prior images.,"The pattern focuses on the additional medical devices that have been observed in the latest image as compared to prior images, especially involving complications or evaluations regarding placement and appearance of these devices. When a change in medical device status is noted between comparisons, it seems to consistently trigger high activation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5961538461538461,0.31,100.0,100.0
+9210,latent_9210,2609,0.005218,0.0022504972,3.9536026,Detailed assessment of changes upon comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often mention comparison between current and previous images, focusing on changes over time like resolving findings, new developments, or stability in conditions such as pulmonary opacity or atelectasis. The detailed comparative language used often signals a pattern in radiologic assessment.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4536082474226804,0.44,100.0,100.0
+9211,latent_9211,681,0.001362,0.0013024644,3.5795135,Comparison to prior images with unchanged findings description.,"The pattern across activated examples involves providing descriptive findings comparing current images to prior ones, specifically noting previous or persistent abnormalities with terms like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', 'consistent with prior'. The presence of comparison language is key in determining the activation level in these reports.",0.6063424947145877,0.6122448979591837,0.631578947368421,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.4557020587554938,0.4972375690607735,0.4,0.2469135802469135,81.0,100.0
+9212,latent_9212,505,0.00101,0.0013440703,3.8782394,Requests for comparison with specific previous imaging findings despite placeholder used.,"The high activation examples frequently involve descriptions demanding comparison of current imaging with prior images while explicitly requiring detailed comparisons such as changes in specific findings related to pathology, tubes, or other visible indicators in the images. These examples use placeholders ('_') or without precise change noted, immensely feature instructions to compare the imaging to the previous radiographs to assess for changes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.392022792022792,0.4121212121212121,0.3769230769230769,0.7538461538461538,65.0,100.0
+9213,latent_9213,358,0.000716,0.00097343,6.7157564,Explicit analysis of changes in images compared to prior study.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference ""comparison with the study of _ ,"" indicating an explicit analysis of changes or similarities between current and prior imaging studies. This comparative analysis across examinations is a common practice in radiology reports, allowing for the assessment of new, stable, or resolved findings over time.",0.4534161490683229,0.4545454545454545,0.4074074074074074,0.5789473684210527,19.0,25.0,0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.3658536585365853,0.6382978723404256,47.0,100.0
+9214,latent_9214,845,0.00169,0.0014634809,3.5196311,Interval changes over serial imaging assessments.,"These examples describe changes or stability between current and prior imaging, often in the context of specific medical conditions or findings. Reports focus on identifying intervals or comparisons between studies and usually relate to a patient's ongoing condition or therapy.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.619572178813885,0.6212121212121212,0.6017699115044248,0.6938775510204082,98.0,100.0
+9215,latent_9215,2179,0.004358,0.002525828,2.2509913,Comparison with prior imaging as a key component in observations.,"The highly activated examples involve cases where findings from multiple images are described, usually with reference to current frontal and lateral images compared to a previous frontal image. These use phrases like 'as compared to the prior' and describe changes or stability in radiographic findings over time. The less activated examples do not emphasize comparison as much or lack prior image references.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3951612903225806,0.43,0.4527027027027027,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9216,latent_9216,652,0.001304,0.001110781,3.9510684,Presence of detailed image analysis comparing current and prior studies.,"Reports accompanied by image data that provide context for radiological findings tend to have higher activations, particularly when they infer or describe specific pathologies such as pneumonia, atelectasis, or other pulmonary conditions. In these cases, observations placed within a comparative framework (i.e., current vs prior imaging), alongside access to actual image data, likely increase the model's detection of meaningful variations and specific disease processes.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5001283697047497,0.5028248587570622,0.4513274336283185,0.6623376623376623,77.0,100.0
+9217,latent_9217,1241,0.002482,0.0015509495,4.0151434,No significant interval change in radiological findings.,"Most examples with higher activation levels describe little to no interval change in radiological findings compared to prior studies. The reason suggests unchanged features despite comparison, indicating steady state or resolution of concerns, which matches typical language used in radiology reports when findings remain stable over time.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6605102480301994,0.665,0.7142857142857143,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9218,latent_9218,713,0.001426,0.0014314211,2.3825142,Direct evaluation and documentation of changes compared to prior images.,"The presence of the phrase ""provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"" as well as numerous direct comparisons with prior images highlight the importance of analyzing and documenting changes or stabilities between current and prior imaging studies. This approach is consistent with the methodical practice of evaluating and noting any interval changes in patient condition or anatomy.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4978026712623868,0.5053191489361702,0.4796747967479675,0.6704545454545454,88.0,100.0
+9219,latent_9219,3332,0.006664,0.002800761,2.6505954,Comparison of current and prior radiographic studies indicating changes or stabilities.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve mentions of comparisons between current and prior radiographic studies, specifically noting changes or stabilities in pulmonary conditions or devices in the chest. This reflects a common practice in radiology of comparing current findings to previous images to assess for interval changes, indicating a pattern of interest in evaluating the evolution of medical conditions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9220,latent_9220,1920,0.00384,0.0021381965,3.0219738,Descriptive changes in pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often refer to a description of findings in direct comparison to prior imaging studies. Notably, these comparisons are often focused on changes in specific pathologies, with either improvement or identification of new conditions, distinguishing them from unchanged findings or absence of change, which often results in lower activation.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9221,latent_9221,9622,0.019244,0.0071123024,1.6446636,"Comparison to prior imaging, noting expected or notable changes.","Highly representative examples frequently describe iterative scanning findings, where emphasis is placed on changes compared to previous reports, especially with regards to expected or notable changes. Broadly seen in radiology evaluations where assessments often involve temporal comparisons due to chronic condition monitoring or acute assessments.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9222,latent_9222,1846,0.003692,0.001820178,3.0171936,Complex sequence of views and findings suggestive of thorough technical analysis.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve a sequence of sufficient detail that suggests thorough technical analysis, usually indicated by mentioning multiple imaging views and comprehensive descriptions of findings, implicating time order or changes over time.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9223,latent_9223,618,0.001236,0.0012005831,4.5739274,Comparison required of current image with prior image.,"Highly activated examples consistently ask for a description of findings by comparing current and prior images. When the findings are contrasted with previous images, the activation levels are higher.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4140491147915477,0.4385964912280701,0.4074074074074074,0.7746478873239436,71.0,100.0
+9224,latent_9224,2381,0.004762,0.0032393895,4.6840153,Stable or unchanged findings on radiological comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize stable findings or little change over time in radiological comparisons, using phrases like 'essentially unchanged', 'stable', or 'unchanged'. This pattern captures situations where stability over time is a key point of the report.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4444444444444444,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9225,latent_9225,1106,0.002212,0.0017998435,3.1283026,Follow-up or interval change evaluations in imaging studies.,"Examples with activations closer to 5 involve follow-up or comparative studies that emphasize stability or changes in specific pulmonary or pleural conditions across sequential studies, such as stability in opacities, atelectasis, mass size, or effusions. This indicates an emphasis on tracking interval changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9226,latent_9226,1092,0.002184,0.0018860905,3.9239204,Changes between current and prior imaging emphasizing acute conditions.,The identified samples focus on describing changes between current and prior imaging studies with specific emphasis on potential acute conditions or intervals of change. This frequently involves noting differences or confirmations of stability which are relevant to the patient's present complaints or clinical history.,0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4857142857142857,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9227,latent_9227,1084,0.002168,0.0018092797,5.1809244,Description of changes in pleural effusion between current and prior images.,"The high activation level examples specifically describe changes or stability in pleural effusions or similar fluid-related conditions across radiological comparisons, focusing on whether the effusion has increased, decreased, or remained unchanged in comparison to prior images, which is a key pattern in radiological assessment for these cases.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4643874643874644,0.53,0.6,0.18,100.0,100.0
+9228,latent_9228,641,0.001282,0.001473736,3.7905507,Description of radiological findings in comparison to previous imaging studies.,"The examples consistently involve radiological studies where findings are detailed with comparison to previous images. There is emphasis on changes or stability in the radiological findings, highlighting comparisons over time or between different images, using terms such as 'unchanged', 'little change', or 'interval change'.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4784764480504845,0.4887640449438202,0.448,0.717948717948718,78.0,100.0
+9229,latent_9229,893,0.001786,0.0017001699,3.19108,Importance of combining frontal and lateral chest imaging views.,"The highly activating examples focus on imagery from both frontal and lateral views, suggesting the model responds strongly to prompts that expect comprehensive imaging angles and interpretations, especially in the absence of acute findings or major changes. This is in contrast to earlier examples which don't elicit significant activation, likely due to more limited or less informative interpretations based on single image views or unchanged condition statements.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9230,latent_9230,730,0.00146,0.0014112385,3.5779974,Description of tube or catheter placement in radiology studies.,"These examples involve the positioning and placement of tubes, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or catheters, frequently described in radiology reports. They emphasize the position and any adjustment needed for these tubes, often verifying placement relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC using words like 'terminates', 'projects', or 'advanced'.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7233504608107006,0.7239583333333334,0.7142857142857143,0.7065217391304348,92.0,100.0
+9231,latent_9231,4832,0.009664,0.0042147604,3.622166,Indication of normal or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally involve descriptions where there is mention of normal or unchanged findings in relation to prior studies, focusing on stable conditions or absence of acute changes. Lower activations are associated with acute findings or new abnormalities without reference to previous stability.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5225648407707655,0.5226130653266332,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,99.0
+9232,latent_9232,13878,0.027756,0.01457859,3.1596358,Stable or unchanged findings compared to multiple prior radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on findings consistent with multiple prior radiographs, indicating stable or unchanged conditions compared to previous examinations. This pattern involves repeat evaluations over time, emphasizing monitoring stability of conditions.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6899689968996899,0.69,0.6862745098039216,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9233,latent_9233,2922,0.005844,0.0029252907,3.4073737,Emphasis on interval changes and assessment against prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels explicitly involve the comparison of current and prior imaging to identify new or changed conditions, demonstrating detailed assessment of interval changes, particularly focusing on specific alterations such as effusions, opacities, and placements of medical devices. These reports consistently address detailed state changes between successive images, which is a common radiological focus in follow-up studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5753715498938429,0.595,0.5664335664335665,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9234,latent_9234,1405,0.00281,0.0018005166,3.168261,Monitoring and changes in support devices compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention changes between current and prior images, focusing on the status and changes of indwelling support and monitoring devices such as 'ET tube,' 'chest tube,' 'Swan-Ganz catheter,' and other lines. These examples emphasize the importance of monitoring the positioning and condition of these devices over time, which often involves comparisons to previous imaging.",0.6933667083854819,0.6938775510204082,0.6956521739130435,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9235,latent_9235,787,0.001574,0.0016665664,3.9553976,Stable cardiac device positioning in the right ventricle.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings related to devices such as pacemakers, ICDs, or Swan-Ganz catheters placed within expected or unchanged positions over the right ventricle or other cardiac locations. The reports often mention positions related to prior imaging, indicating familiarity with devices' positioning and stability over time.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.689708320004653,0.7164948453608248,0.9534883720930232,0.4361702127659574,94.0,100.0
+9236,latent_9236,1966,0.003932,0.0021938349,3.0256722,Detailed interval changes in imaging findings with tube/effusion/opacity details.,"The examples primarily focus on providing descriptions of new findings or changes in abnormalities by comparing current and prior images. The high activation examples often note specific changes between the present and past images, especially in terms of increased opacification, adjustments to tubes or catheters, and other interval changes indicative of the presence or progression of medical conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5142812629829664,0.5276381909547738,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,99.0
+9237,latent_9237,817,0.001634,0.0015233727,3.4528542,Absence of prior image comparison.,"Examining the activations, examples with no prior comparison (""None"") have higher activations, whereas those with a specified comparison generally have activations closer to zero. This suggests the higher activation pattern is linked to the lack of prior comparison data.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6145277965507747,0.615,0.6236559139784946,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9238,latent_9238,7738,0.015476,0.0059969774,1.6215649,Comparative findings between current frontal and lateral views with prior images.,"The pattern revealed in these examples is the evaluation of findings using multiple views for comparison, specifically involving descriptions of frontal and lateral chest images or reports comparing current images with prior imaging. The consistent focus is on describing any changes in findings across these comparative studies, which is a common practice in radiological assessments.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9239,latent_9239,2080,0.00416,0.0022801447,2.5261974,Comparison of radiological findings to prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels involve reports that specifically describe changes or stability in certain radiological features compared to prior imaging studies, whereas those with low activation do not focus on comparisons. This suggests the pattern involves specific descriptions of the findings in the context of prior imaging comparisons.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9240,latent_9240,561,0.001122,0.0011942479,4.135374,Subtle or early opacity suggesting possible pneumonia or consolidation.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe chest x-ray comparisons indicating faint radiographic signs of potential pneumonia, consolidation, or infiltrate. Terms like 'patchy opacities', 'subtle opacity', or 'early pneumonia' reflect these patterns and guide radiologists to potential early signs of pathology.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6856485150383034,0.711764705882353,0.7058823529411765,0.5142857142857142,70.0,100.0
+9241,latent_9241,1622,0.003244,0.0019835143,2.7666404,Detailed interval changes in comparison to previous studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe detailed changes or comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, while those with low activation often either lack such comparisons or mention non-specific stability without detailed analysis.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5949088544922607,0.595,0.5979381443298969,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9242,latent_9242,695,0.00139,0.0011566556,3.6327145,Stable or improved findings on comparison with prior images.,The examples with higher activation values indicate a focus on stable/unchanged or improving radiological findings when compared to prior imaging. They describe minimal or no changes in identified conditions over time. The emphasis seems to be on the reassurance or normalcy provided by stability in the context of potential concerns raised by previous findings or historical indications.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5086771635444203,0.5263157894736842,0.5,0.3555555555555555,90.0,100.0
+9243,latent_9243,971,0.001942,0.001622007,5.836335,Comparison of current and prior images highlighting interval changes.,"These examples that show significant activation all involve direct comparisons and noted changes between current and previous imaging, with emphasis on detecting new findings, changes, or stability in pathology. This reflects the specific task of identifying changes over time, crucial in radiological analysis.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9244,latent_9244,8767,0.017534,0.0066489987,2.1797101,Significant interval changes or stability compared to prior image.,"Higher activation examples incorporate changes in specific findings on the image compared to the prior image, suggesting the significance of interval changes or stability in radiological studies. Activation values increase when those changes indicate stability or improvement of conditions, often ruling out major disease progression.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5663716814159292,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9245,latent_9245,7145,0.01429,0.005613805,2.115892,Comparisons with prior imaging studies to identify changes.,"The samples with higher activations consistently make comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. They often specify changes, stability, or resolutions between the two sets of images, highlighting the importance of temporal comparison in understanding the progression or stability of medical conditions in radiological analysis.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9246,latent_9246,3834,0.007668,0.0031304983,2.5712357,Reports focusing on interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with activations greater than zero all involve situations where specific radiographic findings are compared with prior imaging or there is an explicit call to provide a description of changes over time or monitor for interval changes. These comparisons often use terms like 'compared to the prior', 'unchanged', and 'increased since prior'.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4267714747864581,0.495,0.4970414201183432,0.84,100.0,100.0
+9247,latent_9247,526,0.001052,0.00110187,3.4576209,Notable interval changes in lung opacities or volume status compared to prior imaging.,"The cases with high activation levels focus on ""compared to prior"" studies that show changes in opacities (suggesting pneumonia or infection) or volume status changes that affect the lungs or pleura, emphasizing the importance of detecting interval changes rather than static findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4540549056678089,0.5029940119760479,0.3469387755102041,0.25,68.0,99.0
+9248,latent_9248,533,0.001066,0.0012593993,4.5592647,Comparison with prior imaging to describe findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently compare current imaging findings to prior studies, evaluating new findings or confirming stability of known findings. This involves describing the radiological study using comparisons to previous images, even if specific abnormalities are not always present or discussed.",0.28,0.28,0.28,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3676136363636363,0.369047619047619,0.2934782608695652,0.3970588235294117,68.0,100.0
+9249,latent_9249,1229,0.002458,0.0018772251,5.690795,Explicit requests for comparison to prior imaging in radiological analysis.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to explicitly ask for or involve a description of new radiological findings in comparison to a prior study. This pattern is apparent in descriptions where comparisons are necessary, as opposed to those where existing findings or absence of change are noted.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9250,latent_9250,830,0.00166,0.0016075482,4.4522142,Comparison of imaging findings with prior images.,"Many of the samples demonstrate a pattern where findings are explicitly compared to a prior image, using language such as 'comparison' with previous reports or images, indicating stability or interval changes. This approach is typical in radiological assessments focused on tracking changes over time in patient images.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4666666666666667,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.3552546744036106,0.375,0.4074074074074074,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9251,latent_9251,849,0.001698,0.001657995,3.5782914,Recognition of interval changes between serial exams.,"Examples with high activation are linked by the presence of distinct changes or differences noted between a current and prior image examination, using language that emphasizes changes or stability in findings such as 'intervalization'. The focus is particularly on recognizable changes in structures or devices, often related to resolving medical interventions.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4235294117647059,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9252,latent_9252,781,0.001562,0.0011805308,3.0000036,Longitudinal comparison of current and prior imaging.,"These examples utilize explicit comparisons with previous imaging, often describing stability or slight changes. The pattern involves analyzing interval changes or stability of findings in relation to past reports, which is common in longitudinal medical evaluations where historical context is required for diagnosis.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.513795827603359,0.5445026178010471,0.5135135135135135,0.8351648351648352,91.0,100.0
+9253,latent_9253,1305,0.00261,0.0020537847,2.8735275,Aortic tortuosity or unfolding in comparison with prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently highlight the presence of aortic tortuosity, unfolding, or calcification. These findings are noted in relation to previous imaging comparisons, either with consistent descriptors or emphasizing unchanged status. The lower activation examples typically lack this specific mention of aortic tortuosity or similar consistent descriptors in comparison with prior imaging.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5623386825272135,0.61,0.8235294117647058,0.28,100.0,100.0
+9254,latent_9254,590,0.00118,0.0011983266,2.9670892,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of changes, stability, or comparisons in medical imaging findings between the current and prior studies, often specifying 'no significant change' or resolving/improving conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4690737833594976,0.47953216374269,0.4308943089430894,0.7361111111111112,72.0,99.0
+9255,latent_9255,11390,0.02278,0.008381381,1.4075547,Resolution and stability of pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation describe specific lung pathologies, either as improvements or in comparisons with prior images. This often involves previous imaging results showing changes like resolution or stability of lesions, effusions, or pulmonary processes, suggesting that the model may activate strongly when changes or stability in such specific pathologies are noted compared to past imaging results.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+9256,latent_9256,612,0.001224,0.0011035557,4.234734,Detailed comparative assessment with prior radiographs highlighting notable changes.,"The active examples consistently involve comparison of current radiographic findings to prior images, highlighting specific changes such as improvement or worsening of conditions, fluctuation in pulmonary opacities, consolidation or other notable alterations. This includes previous findings of cardiac silhouette changes, resolution or progression of effusions or pulmonary infiltrates, and device status like the positioning of tubes or catheters. High activation levels are noted in examples describing such comparative evaluations in detail.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5731884760888544,0.5738636363636364,0.5053763440860215,0.618421052631579,76.0,100.0
+9257,latent_9257,5710,0.01142,0.004309072,1.5007719,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation often detail the radiological findings for a current image in relation to a prior image, with specific comparisons made. There is a frequent focus on assessing changes over time or confirming stable conditions by comparing with earlier images, regardless of any specific finding such as lung or cardiac abnormalities. This setup is common in follow-ups or ongoing evaluations for various conditions.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9258,latent_9258,828,0.001656,0.0014095128,3.1267793,"Presence of prior imaging comparison, often with clear lungs and normal cardiac silhouette.","This set of examples highlights the presence of comparison to prior imaging studies, and often involves a pattern where updated findings from the review of frontal and lateral images are assessed against those comparisons. The examples with high activation focus more on clear lungs and normal cardiac silhouette, suggesting stable or unchanged findings alongside these comparisons.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9259,latent_9259,9203,0.018406,0.0068060393,1.7558905,Explicit assessment of interval change in findings.,"Images indicating 'comparison' often refer to changes measured between current and earlier findings. Higher activation examples involve analysis of how findings have evolved, rather than simply describing current observations compared to prior images, suggesting the pattern includes identifying specific interval changes or the stability of findings.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9260,latent_9260,4614,0.009228,0.0042879237,6.048447,"Reports comparing current imaging findings to prior exam, noting stability or changes.","High activation levels in these examples are associated with explicit comparisons to prior studies that report stability or changes in findings, often indicating whether a condition has improved, remained unchanged, or worsened over time. This pattern is typical in serial radiology assessments where monitoring for changes or stability is crucial.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.3203125,0.7192982456140351,57.0,143.0
+9261,latent_9261,1257,0.002514,0.0015399916,4.471234,Emphasis on evaluating changes compared to prior images.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around the need for comparing current and prior radiology images to assess changes, particularly focusing on interval changes or stability. Many samples with higher activation levels include calls for evaluation of differences between images over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3839144728326991,0.405,0.4306569343065693,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9262,latent_9262,944,0.001888,0.0015851026,4.0923734,Reports indicating unchanged findings despite comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation do not change the description of findings despite providing a new comparison with previous imaging. The assistant confirms stability or lack of acute changes rather than validating any changes based on the prior image, suggesting the pattern is about unstated comparison outcome.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4285714285714285,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9263,latent_9263,1039,0.002078,0.0014704356,3.1269703,Presence of minimal or no change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The data shows high activation levels when findings explicitly state minimal to no change compared to prior imaging. The specific phrasing indicating stability or negligible change in radiological findings seems to be heavily emphasized, hence correlating with higher activation.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5974919093851132,0.5979899497487438,0.5887850467289719,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+9264,latent_9264,605,0.00121,0.0010959542,5.3854375,Comparison highlights interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly involve descriptions of ongoing conditions with comparisons to prior radiographic examinations, highlighting stability, worsening, or improvement of features like opacities, edema, device positioning, or pulmonary venous pressure. The key element marking the pattern is the frequent mention of comparison to previous imaging details with focus on changes or stability over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5486740026617327,0.5511363636363636,0.4867256637168141,0.7236842105263158,76.0,100.0
+9265,latent_9265,1112,0.002224,0.0014373875,2.602211,Assessment of interval change or stability relative to prior imaging.,"These examples feature specific references to changes, stability, or intervals since previous imaging studies, which is a common pattern when assessing current images in the context of prior studies to evaluate progress, deterioration, or stability of pathological findings.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9266,latent_9266,3944,0.007888,0.003087092,2.892444,Descriptions of findings with comparison to specifics or prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of current imaging findings compared to prior images, specifically focusing on notable changes or stability in conditions like opacities, effusions, atelectasis, and lung volumes. These examples consistently mention comparison with specific or prior studies and indicate changes or stability, suggesting the importance of monitoring changes over time in radiological assessments.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5146154675870995,0.55,0.5324675324675324,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9267,latent_9267,1534,0.003068,0.0019526974,2.852535,Frequent use of frontal and lateral views in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels regularly mention the imaging of both the frontal and lateral views, comparing them to prior images. This inclusion of technical details alongside comparison comments is a common pattern of radiological evaluations highlighting assessments involving multiple image perspectives coupled with previous studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9268,latent_9268,995,0.00199,0.001610598,2.9392865,Descriptions emphasizing device placements and stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions of devices or support systems in the body, such as tubes, catheters, and implants, and often highlight changes or stabilization in their positioning or function in relation to prior images. The focus is on device tracking and anatomical adjustments to new medical equipment placements.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5638297872340425,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9269,latent_9269,3687,0.007374,0.0031540652,2.4631138,Narrative involving descriptive comparison with prior findings and detailed commentary.,"The high-activation examples typically feature detailed narrative and commentary by the radiologist drawing conclusions from multiple sources (such as prior reports) and incorporating a summary of significant observations. These examples demonstrate a richer reporting style, which includes comparing past and present imaging studies to evaluate changes or stability in findings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9270,latent_9270,3138,0.006276,0.0030530004,5.4503584,Assessment of interval changes in specific pathologies across imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the presence or comparison of specific pathologies (e.g., pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or opacities) across current and prior imaging studies, and note interval changes or need for follow-up, while lower activation examples either lack specific comparisons or changes in pathology.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5295766189570613,0.53,0.4341085271317829,0.7272727272727273,77.0,123.0
+9271,latent_9271,632,0.001264,0.0012640563,2.9897134,Impact of patient rotation on chest radiograph assessment.,"Reports with high activation discuss the impact of patient rotation on the evaluation during a chest radiograph. Rotation is a frequent limitation noted, especially in portable imaging, affecting the assessment of cardiomediastinal silhouette and other thoracic structures.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,1.0,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6685185185185185,0.7206703910614525,1.0,0.3670886075949367,79.0,100.0
+9272,latent_9272,883,0.001766,0.001460657,2.530408,Use of 'congestion' in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation often reference specific congestion along with other noted imaging details like cardiomegaly or pleural effusion, usually in a context where vascular and mediastinal congestion is evaluated.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.7233748271092669,0.735,0.8983050847457628,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9273,latent_9273,967,0.001934,0.0014569273,2.6797142,Emphasis on stability or change of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The higher activation levels in examples correlate with reports emphasizing the resolution, persistence, or new findings of pathologies in relation to prior imaging. Specific mentions of unchanged findings or clear comparative statements in terms of stability or change are prominent.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4533463727776524,0.455,0.4594594594594595,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9274,latent_9274,1441,0.002882,0.0023431417,6.284322,Detailed interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe comparisons between current and prior imaging studies with specific changes or observations noted. These examples provide detailed interval findings indicating progression or stability, emphasizing nuanced clinical interpretation of imaging over time.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9275,latent_9275,757,0.001514,0.0014723545,3.9368913,Description of findings relative to a prior frontal image.,High activation levels correlate with instructions to describe radiological findings relative to a prior frontal image. This involves comparisons with previous images to assess changes or stability in findings.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4888010540184453,0.5051020408163265,0.4962962962962963,0.6979166666666666,96.0,100.0
+9276,latent_9276,5556,0.011112,0.004540447,1.9292833,Emphasis on findings by comparing with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples all emphasize the description of the findings by directly comparing current images to prior imaging data. This comparative focus is central to tracking changes in pathology or stability of conditions over time, which is critical in radiological assessments.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9277,latent_9277,11834,0.023668,0.008732022,1.3751025,Radiology findings compared to prior studies.,"The pattern observed across the highly activated examples is the presence of radiological comparisons, often with prior reports, images, or studies. These comparisons evaluate changes or stability in findings like opacities, effusions, pneumothorax, and anatomical structures over time.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9278,latent_9278,887,0.001774,0.0015727464,3.8449495,Interval change assessment compared to prior imaging.,"Examples that show activation primarily involve phrases suggesting intervals or comparisons with previous imaging studies, such as observing changes or stability over time ('unchanged', 'increased', 'stable', 'comparison'). These examples often assess interval changes to find progression or stability of noted abnormalities.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4418604651162791,0.445,0.4521739130434782,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9279,latent_9279,659,0.001318,0.0011664052,3.5597281,Findings reported as stable or unchanged from prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels often report findings as unchanged or exhibiting little overall change when compared to prior images. This is a frequent pattern in radiology reports to emphasize stability over time, indicating that there has been no significant development of new pathology.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3881578947368421,0.4193548387096774,0.3103448275862069,0.2093023255813953,86.0,100.0
+9280,latent_9280,1563,0.003126,0.0018661602,2.5238235,References to stable or unchanged conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference a process or condition that remains stable or has an improvement when compared to prior imaging, often implying no progress or worsening, which implies stability. Phrases like 'stable appearance', 'unchanged', or 'resolved' are key indicators.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.489159994916762,0.4924623115577889,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,99.0
+9281,latent_9281,2306,0.004612,0.0027322504,3.2781098,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve comparisons between current and previous imaging, regardless of the specific findings, indicating that the pattern is centered around the act of comparing images.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9282,latent_9282,934,0.001868,0.0014856254,4.3574896,Radiology reports often highlight stable or unchanged findings compared to prior examinations.,"Many examples involve a comparison to prior images, specifically highlighting findings like unchanged vertebral deformities, stable cardiothoracic contours, and minimal change in pulmonary opacities or effusions. Such reports often use language indicating stability or minimal change of findings compared to previous examinations.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9283,latent_9283,1276,0.002552,0.0020725788,2.1330538,Comparative analysis of interval changes in findings over time.,"Radiological reports with high activation frequently include findings which describe changes over time, often utilizing comparative adjectives or descriptions such as 'increase', 'decrease', or terms indicating lack of change or resolution, and they usually pull comparisons from prior studies to highlight these changes. These aspects are crucial in medical imaging to track disease progression or response to treatment.",0.5875420875420876,0.5918367346938775,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.551209269772144,0.5628140703517588,0.549618320610687,0.72,100.0,99.0
+9284,latent_9284,2966,0.005932,0.0040963427,2.4308212,"Direct comparison of current and prior imaging, requiring description of changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently reference a prior image explicitly for direct comparison, often prompting a description of changes or stability in the current study relative to the prior. These examples typically phrase the task as ""in comparison to the prior frontal image"".",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3655027607123415,0.3819095477386934,0.3235294117647059,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+9285,latent_9285,533,0.001066,0.0013225407,4.1020164,Indications related to syncope or acute concerns despite unremarkable findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels share themes of syncope or concerning symptoms, whereas examples with lower activation levels do not mention acute processes or challenging evaluations. This indicates a pattern based on the presence of such indications despite the normal findings.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5935792349726776,0.6705882352941176,0.7692307692307693,0.2857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+9286,latent_9286,1144,0.002288,0.0016606175,4.2093654,Absence of acute pathology in findings or impression.,"Examples with higher activation prominently include the absence of acute pathology in findings or impression compared to prior imaging, focusing on stability without any acute identifier.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9287,latent_9287,622,0.001244,0.0013529436,2.7871768,Direct comparison of current imaging to prior studies.,"The prominent pattern in high activation examples involves detailed descriptions of findings in the current imaging studies being compared directly to findings in prior studies. These descriptions consistently involve changes or stabilities noted between current and prior conditions, indicating that the model highly activates for comparative analysis tasks based on historical and current image assessments.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4099734042553191,0.4137931034482758,0.3771929824561403,0.581081081081081,74.0,100.0
+9288,latent_9288,759,0.001518,0.0013232646,3.799252,"Relevance of comparison to prior images, irrespective of prior availability.","The examples with high activation levels consistently have comparison with prior imaging even when noted as unavailable or not detailed (e.g., a note that no prior is available) which indicates a focus on the presence or absence of comparable studies rather than specific findings. These highlight the model's activation towards interpreting findings with respect to prior image comparison.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3941601516228382,0.4507772020725388,0.4591194968553459,0.7849462365591398,93.0,100.0
+9289,latent_9289,1528,0.003056,0.0020595547,3.4323313,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve assessments of changes over time, as indicated by comparisons to prior imaging. Specifically, these examples emphasize interval changes or lack thereof in a medical or procedural context, which is a common feature in radiological evaluations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9290,latent_9290,2628,0.005256,0.0033264318,4.430464,Evaluation of tube placement in medical imaging comparisons.,"The examples all describe a radiology study involving a change in medical tube placement, such as nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, in comparison to prior imaging. The reports detail repositioning or post-manipulation evaluation. This pattern frequently involves checking for proper placement or confirming successful repositioning.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6897207486738064,0.69,0.7021276595744681,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9291,latent_9291,619,0.001238,0.001340936,4.135127,Comparison of current findings with prior imagery.,"These examples actively reference findings and comparisons with prior imaging reports, often highlighting specific changes in patient condition over time. Descriptions include comparisons to prior events or examinations, observations on the current state as compared to historical data, and note any stable or unstable changes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4711925866236905,0.4857142857142857,0.4418604651162791,0.76,75.0,100.0
+9292,latent_9292,7165,0.01433,0.0056092967,2.8812501,Presence of comparative evaluation between current and prior images.,"Examples with activations closer to 5.0 consistently involve the comparison of current image findings with previous studies. They also frequently specify any improvements, resolution, or unchanged states of previously identified conditions. 'Comparison' is a critical element explicitly highlighted in the reports with high activations.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.498663101604278,0.55,0.5304878048780488,0.87,100.0,100.0
+9293,latent_9293,1236,0.002472,0.0015396182,3.7503495,High activation when findings are compared directly to changes or stability in prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels refer to cases where findings from older radiology studies ('prior frontal image') directly influence the interpretation or comparison of the current findings, particularly noting any changes or stability in significant findings such as lung opacities, lines/tubes placement, or cardiac silhouette, against prior examinations. This comparison dictate the essence of the pattern observed.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4780978439867244,0.485,0.4878048780487805,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9294,latent_9294,1266,0.002532,0.0016744621,5.0801125,Detailed comparison to prior images with specific observations of stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight descriptions of findings compared to prior examinations. This language is utilized to assess the stability or change of observed conditions, a common focus for radiology reports. Phrases indicating detailed comparative evaluations signify this representative pattern within high activation examples.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9295,latent_9295,1614,0.003228,0.0019795552,3.7353415,Detailed description of changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation scores explicitly describe changes or stability in radiological findings over time, with specific comparison to prior imaging. This shows that the key activating feature is explicit longitudinal analysis over temporal imaging studies, highlighting changes or lack thereof.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.509090909090909,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9296,latent_9296,688,0.001376,0.0013517218,5.8974395,Renal conditions/transplant context in comparative images analysis.,"The examples with high activation levels involve providing descriptions based on comparative analysis with prior imaging while including explicit references to medical conditions or interventions related to renal issues, transplants, or dialysis. Many cases emphasize renal failure, kidney transplants, or associated transplant complications, linking such references with interpreting radiological findings.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7331024313295154,0.7624309392265194,0.975,0.4814814814814814,81.0,100.0
+9297,latent_9297,1323,0.002646,0.0017361837,2.618744,Absence of prior imaging for comparison.,"These examples focus on requests for comparisons or notes about the absence of a prior image for comparison, often underlining changes or stability between current and previous examinations. Higher activations are linked with explicit indications of lack of prior imaging, which seems to be key in these examples, highlighting cases where lack of previous comparisons affects diagnosis.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5977011494252874,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9298,latent_9298,555,0.00111,0.0011111441,4.101623,"Descriptions of pulmonary interstitial edema, cardiac changes, or pleural effusion.","Examples with high activation generally describe evaluations of cardiac size, interstitial pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, and changes in pulmonary characteristics. These involve considerations of cardiovascular implications and edema-related pathologies, often including comparative assessments of interstitial and pleural features.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6400862068965517,0.6407185628742516,0.5327102803738317,0.8507462686567164,67.0,100.0
+9299,latent_9299,1377,0.002754,0.0022567047,4.607311,Stable or unchanged radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Stable or unchanged appearances in radiological findings compared to a prior exam are often associated with continued monitoring of known issues to rule out progression. High activations reflect descriptions where findings remain stable in comparison to prior imaging, demonstrating continued unchanged status despite clinical symptoms.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4549604382227632,0.457286432160804,0.4534883720930232,0.39,100.0,99.0
+9300,latent_9300,796,0.001592,0.0013181412,3.2847633,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with activation scores close to zero correspond to reports that lack prior comparisons in the description, indicating no prior images were used for comparison in the assessment, while several high-activation examples contain specific instructions to compare current images to prior images, or descriptions show the importance of noting changes over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9301,latent_9301,1766,0.003532,0.0020668206,2.477044,Focus on interval changes in medical devices or opacities in comparisons.,"Examples that refer to interval changes in medical devices, hardware positions, or findings in current medical imaging compared to previous images have consistently high activation levels, demonstrating a distinct pattern. This is a common situation in radiology reports, particularly with patients having ongoing procedural treatments.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9302,latent_9302,655,0.00131,0.0013273766,6.2714596,"Specific measurements or descriptions of nodules, masses or foreign bodies compared to prior images.","Higher activations correspond to references of specific measurements of opacities or masses described in terms of length or width in given units (e.g., cm, mm) and changes from prior studies. This numerical specificity and direct comparison with prior images are a common trend in these activations.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5508870214752568,0.5934065934065934,0.5909090909090909,0.3170731707317073,82.0,100.0
+9303,latent_9303,893,0.001786,0.0014191372,2.732956,Comparison of current and prior multi-view chest images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the presence of multiple radiographic views (e.g., 'frontal', 'lateral', 'prior'), mainly focusing on performing comparisons between these views, suggesting a pattern around multi-view image comparisons in radiology.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9304,latent_9304,411,0.000822,0.0011034069,3.7653668,Brief descriptions without detailed impressions or comparisons.,All highly activated examples lack detailed impression sections. They provide a brief description of images with no thorough comparison to prior reports or additional context. This pattern separates them from examples with explicit report sections.,0.7329140461215933,0.7346938775510204,0.6896551724137931,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6617965367965368,0.6666666666666666,0.5,0.82,50.0,100.0
+9305,latent_9305,7037,0.014074,0.0053496016,1.7143497,Consistent descriptions of device positioning or technique in image comparisons.,"Instances where findings were compared against a prior or current radiological image are quite varied, but in this case, common characteristics that emerged with higher activation included details on specific radiological techniques and detailed positional descriptions of any external or internal medical devices. These reports often describe consistent positional attributes indicating a degree of constancy.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9306,latent_9306,375,0.00075,0.0010684476,4.287326,"Current frontal, current lateral, and prior frontal chest images used together.","High activation examples focus on the presence of a current frontal, current lateral, and prior frontal chest image being provided, highlighting a comprehensive approach to evaluate changes. These examples use different views to validate findings over time, a detailed analysis approach enhancing diagnostic accuracy.",0.5820181731229077,0.5869565217391305,0.5333333333333333,0.7619047619047619,21.0,25.0,0.5938275652133189,0.5986394557823129,0.4285714285714285,0.7659574468085106,47.0,100.0
+9307,latent_9307,943,0.001886,0.0015775625,3.0223873,Presence of frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior images.,All examples with high activation mention the presence of both frontal and lateral images along with a comparison to prior frontal images. This consistency across the examples suggests that having both types of images and a comparative statement are crucial to the pattern detected by the model.,0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4728756092392456,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.71,100.0,99.0
+9308,latent_9308,2267,0.004534,0.0030553734,3.1817727,Use of both current and prior images for comparison in chest imaging.,The examples exhibit a consistent pattern where the text refers to findings in the context of a comparison with prior images and highlights the component views used to provide a comprehensive analysis. This involves both frontal and lateral imaging when available and illustrates a methodology in radiographic reporting that emphasizes comparisons over time to track changes or stability in findings.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9309,latent_9309,624,0.001248,0.0012299017,5.5500045,Reports emphasizing interval changes on serial imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve reports that provide a comparative analysis of a chest or thoracic imaging study, supported by explicitly stating findings in a side-by-side manner with prior imaging, focusing on interval change in findings or stability of indwelling devices and effusions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4926093514328808,0.5,0.4230769230769231,0.44,75.0,99.0
+9310,latent_9310,3062,0.006124,0.0021509284,1.4877528,Descriptive comparisons highlighting changes or stabilities in patient conditions.,"The pattern shows that providing descriptive findings that involve changes or stability of conditions compared to previous imaging, especially with specific details about interventions or physiological changes like effusion size, pneumothorax, or equipment placement, tends to result in higher activations. These descriptions often directly reference significant changes or the absence thereof, while low activation examples lack such changes or comparative analysis.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9311,latent_9311,1310,0.00262,0.0013966531,2.8250332,Descriptions emphasize changes compared to prior images.,"These examples consistently reference radiological comparisons with a prior image while noting changes, such as 'increased opacities', or description of persistence or stability of noted features. The reports emphasize interval changes or lack thereof in findings like effusions, opacities, or device placements.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9312,latent_9312,1144,0.002288,0.0017528076,2.9332008,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess stability of findings.,"These medical descriptions typically focus on the presence of a current frontal and lateral image being compared to a previous frontal image, with specific findings described particularly if they are stable, unchanged, or improved relative to a previous study. High activation is associated with specific references to comparison with prior studies to assess changes in pathological features, often highlighting stability or minor changes.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4107426153962378,0.415,0.4273504273504273,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9313,latent_9313,3428,0.006856,0.0027057917,1.7222278,Changes or stability in thoracic imaging compared to prior studies.,"In this set, the presence of references to 'comparison' or mentions of changes relative to previous studies indicate that the pattern is to identify findings that show changes or stability over time in the thoracic region. Substantial changes or stability in lung findings as compared to previous imagery trigger activation.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9314,latent_9314,3649,0.007298,0.0034513522,2.060379,Reference to changes based on prior imaging.,"The examples describe procedures where radiological findings are compared against prior images or the previous state of the patient, particularly focusing on any changes. Specific phrases such as 'interval removal', 'unchanged', 'remains stable', or 'compared to prior' highlight the key pattern of referencing changes based on past imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9315,latent_9315,1197,0.002394,0.0018787889,2.839614,Stable or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe stable or unchanged features compared to previous images. These features encompass various anatomical and pathological considerations like unchanged cardiac silhouette, effusions, opacities, or devices, promoting the pattern's association with stability across time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9316,latent_9316,2075,0.00415,0.0022540402,2.6205628,Inclusion of comparisons with prior images in radiology findings.,"Most examples describe the findings by comparing current images with prior images, often highlighting the stability or changes in features such as interstitial markings, pneumothorax presence, or bronchial pathology. They consistently use phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'unchanged', or similar language indicating a direct comparison with prior results.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9317,latent_9317,865,0.00173,0.0016298115,3.5696182,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,High activation levels are associated with prompts that request a comparison between current and previous imaging studies. The pattern includes an emphasis on evaluating radiological changes or stable findings across different time points or imaging views. This involves language indicating comparison and assessment of interval changes.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9318,latent_9318,824,0.001648,0.0014136413,2.393146,Description of radiological findings in comparison to previous studies.,"These examples predominantly focus on the requirement to provide findings in comparison to a prior study, often specifying the comparison despite the presence or absence of such imaging studies. Such descriptions commonly appear in radiology reports when evaluating changes or stability over time, emphasizing ongoing clinical assessments.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4781424243195763,0.4824120603015075,0.4830508474576271,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+9319,latent_9319,3000,0.006,0.0026190619,2.6872847,Detailed references to medical device placements in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve certain details of device insertion, specifically showing placements such as endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, or other medical devices in the chest view. These examples contain linguistic references to specific placements and configurations of medical devices observed in radiology images, which seems to be the pattern driving activation. The focus is not merely on the devices being present, but on their proper or changed positioning as confirmed by the radiological comparison.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4262295081967213,0.26,100.0,100.0
+9320,latent_9320,3274,0.006548,0.0025651695,2.0714698,Analysis involves explicit comparison to prior imaging results.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve the use of explicit comparisons or references to previous imaging results when evaluating the current findings. The high activation level emphasizes the explicit comparison with prior results or the indication of changes over time, showing a focus pattern on longitudinal comparison in these specific cases.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4087213599408721,0.44,0.4589041095890411,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9321,latent_9321,11129,0.022258,0.008119145,1.1795098,Radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples express findings in relation to previous imaging, which is explained using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', indicating that these image descriptions include a comparison component, focusing on stability or changes over time.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9322,latent_9322,6780,0.01356,0.0052940906,1.8612175,Descriptions in comparison to prior studies indicating stability or improvement.,"These examples generally contain language indicating comparison to prior imaging studies while noting either stability in findings or changes over time. The specific references to prior studies, interpretations of interval change, whether improvement or progression, are consistent in samples with higher activation levels, highlighting stability or improvement in conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5647058823529412,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9323,latent_9323,6856,0.013712,0.005068654,1.4329315,Description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on changes or lack of changes in findings compared to prior imaging studies, with particular emphasis on assessing interval changes, stability, or resolving of existing conditions. The reports typically include phrases like 'compared with prior', 'no significant change', 'resolved', or mention of specific previous dates.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5447154471544715,0.545,0.5428571428571428,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9324,latent_9324,1434,0.002868,0.0019050749,3.5593834,Emphasis on comparing current and prior frontal imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations involve descriptions comparing the current imaging findings primarily with a prior frontal image, with priority given to assessments of changes in conditions or devices since the prior report, such as pacemaker positions, lung opacities, effusions, or presence of devices like tracheal stents, noting any similarities or differences.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9325,latent_9325,801,0.001602,0.0014671916,4.570034,Descriptions of medical tube placements or changes in tubes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve problems or abnormalities related to positioning or entry points of medical tubes or support devices like endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or changes in tube positions, often mentioning whether they are appropriately placed or not. This pattern reflects assessments of interventional or supportive care devices in relation to previous assessments.",0.5596919127086007,0.5714285714285714,0.625,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5757575757575758,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9326,latent_9326,1535,0.00307,0.0024268494,4.172462,Explicit directive to compare findings with prior imaging.,Thorough examination of the dataset indicates that high activations are consistently associated with reports that explicitly describe or require analysis of the given observation's findings in direct comparison to those from prior imaging. The presence of the term 'comparison' along with specific directives for such an analysis leads to higher activations.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9327,latent_9327,710,0.00142,0.0013243573,4.100288,"Description of findings compared to prior images, focusing on device and anatomical changes.","The examples with high activation levels involve providing detailed comparative findings between current and prior radiological images. The descriptions emphasize changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical structures, indicating a pattern of focus on changes in these elements over time, such as tube placements and diagnostic observations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5210597826086957,0.5212765957446809,0.4895833333333333,0.5340909090909091,88.0,100.0
+9328,latent_9328,2687,0.005374,0.003001209,4.2820783,Describes postsurgical changes after lung surgeries.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes following surgical interventions, such as lobectomies or resections, including descriptions of volume loss and post-surgical changes. Typical phrases indicate an expected limited scope of alterations, stability, or specific postoperative anatomical changes.",0.9198717948717948,0.92,0.9565217391304348,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.90999099909991,0.91,0.9183673469387756,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9329,latent_9329,2291,0.004582,0.0024109576,4.9760675,Focus on interval change with comparison to prior images.,"These examples are indicative of a pattern where findings from current imaging are explicitly compared to prior images, but focus specifically on interval changes indicating either stability or progression of previously noted conditions. This pattern includes many instances referring to historical imaging results and comparing specific findings across time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9330,latent_9330,7330,0.01466,0.005586325,2.0600884,Analysis and interpretation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Activated examples involve descriptions, indications, or findings comparing specific radiographic or clinical characteristics with past images, mentioned as 'prior' or describing interval changes, emphasizing alterations or consistencies over time.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6314056390203746,0.6381909547738693,0.6062992125984252,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+9331,latent_9331,757,0.001514,0.0011861069,3.3242478,Comparison with prior imaging indicating stable or unchanged findings.,"The pattern consistently involves comparing current imaging findings with prior images as well as noting stable or unchanged conditions, reflecting continuity over time. Examples with high activation levels often provide detailed contrast against previous exams, highlighting unchanged aspects as significant findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3979968521963085,0.4352331606217616,0.3461538461538461,0.1935483870967742,93.0,100.0
+9332,latent_9332,940,0.00188,0.0014613485,2.9556644,Detailed comparative analysis between current and previous imaging findings.,"The high activation examples describe situations where current findings are not only compared to the prior image but emphasize changes or stabilities in the findings, such as device positions, pathological changes or stability, highlighting the clinical relevance of these observations. This suggests that the pattern involves describing detailed comparative interpretations related to current and past imaging.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4588235294117647,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9333,latent_9333,1222,0.002444,0.0016570956,2.7490537,Evaluations of stability or change using comparisons with prior images.,"The samples with higher activation involve either changes or stable findings from a previous state as seen in comparison with prior imaging, explicitly addressing findings in two or more different views or using comparison comments like 'unchanged' or 'compared to previous'. These examples call for evaluations that emphasize stability or noticeable changes through successive imaging, tying closely to radiological monitoring over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9334,latent_9334,767,0.001534,0.0013053467,2.8649335,Comparison and noting changes in findings from previous imaging.,"For this pattern, high activation occurs when there is a reference to changes or a lack thereof in radiological findings between current and prior images. This is especially true for findings involving alterations in lung volumes, presence of atelectasis, or structural changes referenced explicitly by comparing with prior studies. The reference and comparison phrases indicate this pattern.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4431725681725681,0.4472361809045226,0.452991452991453,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+9335,latent_9335,775,0.00155,0.0011046961,4.608447,Detailed comparison to prior imaging detecting changes in structures.,"The examples with high activation focus on detailed descriptions of the radiographic findings specifically comparing them to prior studies, including acknowledgment of changes or stability in the imaging findings. Keywords like 'unchanged', 'comparison', and 'prior study' are prominent, especially focusing on structures such as the cardiac silhouette, lung nodules, or aorta.",0.3552631578947368,0.3877551020408163,0.2857142857142857,0.1666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.400611620795107,0.4081632653061224,0.3717948717948718,0.3020833333333333,96.0,100.0
+9336,latent_9336,680,0.00136,0.0012892991,5.7124596,Evaluation of changes over time in radiology images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve is the analysis of current images compared directly with prior images, often noting changes or stability in radiological findings. This is a routine analytical method in serial imaging to track patient conditions over time, making it a distinct pattern of interest.",0.64349376114082,0.68,0.6097560975609756,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4593530239099859,0.5,0.48,0.8275862068965517,87.0,99.0
+9337,latent_9337,1402,0.002804,0.0018843249,2.9741764,Comparisons of medical device positioning between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe comparisons between current and prior images, highlighting specific changes regarding anatomical features or medical devices, especially endotracheal tube placement, central venous line placement, or other interventions. This pattern often includes terms like 'interval placement' and 'minor change' referencing specific objects or changes.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5806476663819212,0.595,0.6507936507936508,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9338,latent_9338,2534,0.005068,0.002496691,2.6451254,Stable findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples mostly refer to a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies, with some examples detailing changes or stable findings over time. Specific descriptions of unchanged or stable abnormalities are often noted, like mediastinal contours or pulmonary features, and concrete details such as dates of prior exams are commonly included. This pattern reflects the examination of radiological progression or stability.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.4347826086956521,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9339,latent_9339,12905,0.02581,0.0094412975,1.923127,Comparison with prior chest radiographs or imaging progression assessment.,"These examples involve the comparison of current images with prior radiographs to assess stability, intervals changes, or new findings. These often note comparisons directly in fields labeled 'COMPARISON', or discuss changes over time in the 'FINDINGS' or 'IMPRESSION' sections, which are crucial to identifying chronic versus acute changes or assessing device status.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5194805194805194,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9340,latent_9340,2837,0.005674,0.002626343,2.932127,Focus on stability or change between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight stability, improvement, or specific changes between the current and prior imaging studies. The focus is on identifying differences or notable constancies in the radiological findings over time, using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'decreased', and noting intervals or comparisons to prior studies.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9341,latent_9341,949,0.001898,0.0015210169,2.9958403,Correlation of findings with a specific clinical history or scenario.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention both the findings observed in the image and their correlation with the medical history or a specific clinical scenario. This suggests that these examples focus on providing clinical context to the radiological findings, which might be crucial for identifying the pattern that triggers high activation.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4432634882073084,0.45,0.4590163934426229,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9342,latent_9342,771,0.001542,0.0011991019,3.4957142,Descriptions of changes or stability in medical devices between current and previous radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports comparing current and previous radiographic studies. They often explicitly include detailed descriptions of changes or stability in medical devices (like catheters and tubes) or anatomical findings over time, suggesting a focus on serial examination.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5921052631578947,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9343,latent_9343,1103,0.002206,0.0017948254,6.217604,Comparison of current and prior image findings to evaluate progress or stability.,"The examples consistently emphasize radiological comparisons between current and prior imaging, which is a critical aspect in evaluating changes in clinical conditions over time. The pattern relates to contextual assessment based on past imaging studies to identify stability, resolution, or progression of findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9344,latent_9344,3763,0.007526,0.003114145,2.5295942,Comparative constellation of unchanged vascular or anatomical features.,"The pattern in these samples is the depiction of various images and changes noted in multiple chest radiographs over time, often involving comparisons to prior imaging in terms of size, position, or presence of medical devices (like tubes or catheters) or observing cardiopulmonary features (like heart size and pulmonary vasculature), despite the context variations. For example, in example 49, this involves descriptions of unchanged aortic tortuosity and calcifications along with heart size. High activations are associated with this complex pattern.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9345,latent_9345,9463,0.018926,0.0069098175,1.7796758,Emphasis on evaluation of medical device placement or changes.,"Instances where there is an explicit request for a comparison to prior imaging studies and emphasis on identifying changes in the position or status of medical devices (e.g., intubation, tube placements) yield higher activation values. These reports demonstrate an assessment approach focused on monitoring changes in device placement or implementation over time.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9346,latent_9346,1144,0.002288,0.0015711847,2.8920746,Detailed comparisons to prior imaging with noted interval changes.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently provide detailed interpretations of radiological findings and compare them with prior study data, indicating interval changes or you explicitly include comparisons to prior imaging. This suggests that focusing on interval changes and referencing prior images in the analysis is crucial.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9347,latent_9347,1930,0.00386,0.0021427132,3.001988,Comparison of current and prior images to evaluate changes or stability.,"The pattern distinguishes the inclusion of both current and prior imaging in the analysis and the explicit description of comparison or interval changes between them. It focuses on evaluating changes, stability, or resolution in the imaging findings over time, which is critical for monitoring conditions post-procedure or treatment.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9348,latent_9348,10697,0.021394,0.007840767,1.3449656,Descriptions of current versus prior device placement and tube positions.,"The pattern involves descriptions that compare findings between current and prior images, specifically assessments for any interval placement or positions of tubes, catheters, or pacemakers. These examples tend to focus on updates regarding medical devices or monitoring equipment based on direct image comparison.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5738636363636364,0.58,0.6052631578947368,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9349,latent_9349,931,0.001862,0.0014609591,6.3686986,Descriptions comparing current findings to prior images with detailed interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve specific references to or comparisons of certain physical changes over time, such as size and presence of lesions, opacities, or other features like pneumonias, pleural effusions, or fractures, often with targeted descriptions of their current status as compared to prior images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9350,latent_9350,1196,0.002392,0.002186246,2.7635508,Identification of acute findings or significant changes compared to prior radiographs.,"The reported examples with high activation levels involve the presence of new or persistent findings in comparison with previous radiological images, specifically focusing on acute processes or clinically significant changes, such as new consolidations, new opacities, changes related to previous medical interventions, or documented clinical indications with potential acute concerns.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9351,latent_9351,2397,0.004794,0.0027180698,2.697109,Low lung volumes impacting visibility of markings.,"The patterned examples detail low lung volumes which accentuate particular findings like cardiac size or bronchovascular markings, impacting the interpretation of imaging studies. Patient positioning, respiratory status, or underlying lung conditions can influence this descriptor in radiology reports.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4977617643847581,0.54,0.5952380952380952,0.25,100.0,100.0
+9352,latent_9352,2324,0.004648,0.002532678,3.9339168,Comparative analysis of current image to prior image if available.,"Most examples with high activation levels involve a description of the findings that specifically compares current findings to a prior image, even when no prior image exists, indicating an expected comparison. This suggests the model activates with the instruction to provide comparative analysis using prior images if available.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4202014037229173,0.43,0.4444444444444444,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9353,latent_9353,863,0.001726,0.0014768102,3.7691176,Exclusion of anatomical regions from imaging fields.,"The common feature among the examples with higher activation levels is the exclusion of specific parts of the anatomy from the imaging field, frequently due to the positioning during imaging (e.g., costophrenic angle, certain lung regions). This recurring mention indicates a theme where incomplete coverage in imaging is noted, often affecting diagnostic interpretation.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6440513428972063,0.67,0.8695652173913043,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9354,latent_9354,3630,0.00726,0.002866256,1.9783461,Emphasis on describing findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize the requirement for radiology reports to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images. The key pattern is the explicit instruction or emphasis to describe or address changes when comparing current and prior frontal images, which is evident in the task-driven language of the prompts.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9355,latent_9355,712,0.001424,0.0012317095,3.9421482,"Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, focusing on stability or change.","The highly activated samples revolve around describing radiological findings in a current image compared to prior images, particularly noting stability or changes in the findings. This involves evaluating changes in parameters such as lung volumes, the positions of tubes/devices, or conditions like atelectasis or effusions noted across the imaging timeline.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5016889924286546,0.5053763440860215,0.4741379310344827,0.6395348837209303,86.0,100.0
+9356,latent_9356,7205,0.01441,0.005402029,2.0561647,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies and reporting of changes.,"The reported activations tend to be higher for examples that require comparing current imaging to both previous imaging and providing detailed contrast or changes in findings, particularly where specific guidance or resolution of conditions is discussed. This contrasts with examples that simply describe findings without active comparison or conclusions.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9357,latent_9357,1805,0.00361,0.0020840794,3.0283854,Analysis based on interval changes from prior imaging.,"Samples that have activation levels indicate some kind of interval change, whether in clinical symptoms or radiological findings, demonstrated by comparison to previous images or reports. This is evident through descriptions that assess variations or modifications since a prior study.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9358,latent_9358,3830,0.00766,0.0039831474,3.986553,Comparison with prior imaging or reports to assess changes or stability over time.,Examining imagery findings compared with previous images or reports where intervals of change or stability are noted is significant for tracking disease progression or resolution. High activation values are associated with specific notes on observable change or reassessment over time.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9359,latent_9359,7720,0.01544,0.006596216,4.0876656,Comparisons with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,Samples with higher activations frequently reference comparisons with prior imaging. This pattern suggests that the task of comparing current findings with past imaging to assess stability or change in conditions is a distinguishing factor. Many descriptions also include specific findings in the context of stability or changes noted between images.,0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9360,latent_9360,569,0.001138,0.001152609,2.80138,Low lung volumes leading to bronchovascular crowding.,"The examples with high activation levels mention 'bronchovascular crowding' or low lung volumes, which are radiological observations indicative of specific conditions and patient positioning during imaging. This phrase appears repeatedly in the context of these high activation examples, highlighting its importance in the pattern recognition of typical findings associated with low lung volumes.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5908113532110092,0.6184971098265896,0.5636363636363636,0.4246575342465753,73.0,100.0
+9361,latent_9361,2550,0.0051,0.0023073757,2.2635345,Comparisons indicating no significant change in cardiopulmonary findings.,"Higher activation scores are associated with comparison to prior imaging and highlighting the stability or interval change in cardiopulmonary structures, such as persistent cardiomegaly, stable pleural effusions, or unchanged densities. Phrases indicating comparison to prior and evaluation of specific findings for change over time, like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'minimal interval change', are prevalent in high activation samples.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9362,latent_9362,14778,0.029556,0.010828371,1.4486085,Focus on description or status of medical devices or their placement.,"Based on the examples, priority is often given to the placement and/or presence of medical devices or equipment, particularly changes in positioning on follow-up imaging. Examples with low activations don't heavily focus on medical device placement. Conversely, when such descriptions are detailed, particularly changes in placement, a higher activation is observed.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9363,latent_9363,1874,0.003748,0.0022363637,3.2597103,Low lung volumes with accentuated bronchovascular markings.,These examples with higher activation frequently describe decreased or low lung volumes that lead to accentuated bronchovascular markings. This is a common radiographic finding indicating that the anatomical structures appear more prominent due to under-inflation of the lungs during the imaging process.,0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6952501050861706,0.71,0.875,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9364,latent_9364,652,0.001304,0.0014246777,4.6006403,Comparison with prior images to evaluate interval changes.,"These examples involve the comparison of current imaging findings with prior ones, particularly highlighting stable findings, unchanged device positions, or new developments as compared to previous exams. This pattern is common in radiological assessments where current images are evaluated in conjunction with historical images to assess changes over time.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4186908594283485,0.4293785310734463,0.4032258064516129,0.6493506493506493,77.0,100.0
+9365,latent_9365,6513,0.013026,0.005132487,3.4922166,Emphasis on comparison with prior images to assess change.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe changes or stability in chest imaging findings, with explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies evaluating size or extent of relevant features like pulmonary opacities or cardiomegaly. This indicates that the pattern focuses on describing and comparing findings in current and prior radiological images to determine if there is significant change.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9366,latent_9366,743,0.001486,0.0012100993,3.9345725,Comparison findings indicate stable or unchanged features.,"The pattern is found in instances where the radiology findings are evaluated in comparison to prior images, indicating unchanged or stable features in relation to earlier examinations. This stability or lack of interval change is often emphasized when providing radiological interpretations where chronic or consecutive comparison assessments are necessary.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5012987012987012,0.5052083333333334,0.4819277108433735,0.4347826086956521,92.0,100.0
+9367,latent_9367,2030,0.00406,0.002552765,3.9807513,"Comparison to previous imaging, emphasizing stable conditions or minimal changes.","The activation pattern correlates with situations where, despite the presence of various medical tools and altered views, the radiology findings focus on stable conditions or comparison to prior results. The comparison aspect, even without available priors, often still leads to an analysis of current findings against some prior baseline, either explicitly given or inherently assumed.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9368,latent_9368,1803,0.003606,0.0016868981,4.0449624,Focus on the placement and description of medical devices in imaging.,"The pattern here is the recognition and evaluation of medical devices within the radiology images, which includes detailing their position and suggested adjustments. The highly activated samples describe precise placement of devices such as pacemakers, catheters, and tubes, highlighting cases where positional assessment is relevant.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5686274509803921,0.29,100.0,100.0
+9369,latent_9369,3411,0.006822,0.002992417,2.3304465,Detection of changes or abnormalities in serial imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations mention a specific change or finding in successive radiographic comparisons, such as changes in device positions, tube placements, or lung opacities, which suggests a focus on detection of changes or abnormalities in comparison to previous studies.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5353535353535354,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9370,latent_9370,1974,0.003948,0.0020914986,2.9819646,Observation descriptions across current and prior imaging.,"The examples indicate a pattern of providing detailed observations across multiple existing and past images, whether current or prior, describing findings such as changes or stability in certain anatomical features. These examples reflect a specific interaction with images pertinent to detailed monitoring of conditions, often in patients requiring frequent imaging follow-ups.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9371,latent_9371,10514,0.021028,0.008320313,3.35022,Nodular formations or opacities assessed against prior imaging for change or stability.,"These examples primarily focus on the assessment of nodular formations and opacities, particularly in relation to their appearance compared with prior imaging studies. This pattern is common in reports that evaluate changes in potential lesions or opacities against prior images to discuss stability, growth, or resolution of the abnormalities.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6013564235976288,0.615,0.6825396825396826,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9372,latent_9372,1180,0.00236,0.0018064345,2.830099,Comparative analysis of interval changes referencing prior imaging studies.,"These examples highlight findings that are compared to prior imaging studies to assess stability or change over time. Highly activated samples note cardiodemediastinal and mediastinal changes, lung condition or stability, with references to prior images, showing the emphasis on interval changes correlated with patient history or clinical indications.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4590358704719533,0.465,0.4710743801652892,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9373,latent_9373,10914,0.021828,0.00801538,2.464874,Evaluation or mention of medical devices in radiology images.,"The examples with higher activation levels all mention the assessment or mention of medical devices such as catheters or tubes, as well as positioning or changes in these devices over time in the context of radiology studies. This suggests a pattern of focus on device placement or evaluation in comparison to prior studies, irrespective of other conditions described.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9374,latent_9374,719,0.001438,0.0012525812,3.511946,Explicit assessment of interval changes in comparison imaging.,Highly activated reports consistently contain direct comparative language assessing interval changes against prior examinations.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4497200447928331,0.4497354497354497,0.4242424242424242,0.4719101123595505,89.0,100.0
+9375,latent_9375,12375,0.02475,0.009012747,1.36215,Comparison with prior images shows stable or worsening findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels include situations where the current images are compared to prior images, particularly looking for either stability or specific changes (like improvement or worsening) in clinical findings across different medical conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9376,latent_9376,9610,0.01922,0.0071473867,2.2304933,Notable interval changes or confirmation of stability from prior imaging.,"The provided examples demonstrate that multiple radiological findings have comparisons made to prior studies, indicating evaluation for interval changes. Activation levels are higher when reports detail changes or confirm stability from previous imaging findings, particularly for new or persistent abnormalities.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5599559955995599,0.56,0.5588235294117647,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9377,latent_9377,4649,0.009298,0.0037128534,2.955948,Evaluation and documentation of catheter or tube placement.,"Despite varying contexts, examples with higher activation primarily involve new or recent placements of catheters or tubes, such as central venous catheters or feeding tubes, and the assessment of their position, often alongside stable cardiomediastinal and lung conditions. These examples emphasize evaluating placement and stability post-implementation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5408922414910439,0.5527638190954773,0.5735294117647058,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+9378,latent_9378,857,0.001714,0.0016610549,3.2015543,Documentation and interval comparison of medical device placement in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve situations where the chest imaging is used to document the position, placement, or change in medical devices such as tubes, catheters, and implants, and to compare these with previous images. These descriptions focus on the interval changes in these medical devices or support equipment between imaging sessions, often indicating the need for or outcome of medical interventions.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4782608695652174,0.33,100.0,100.0
+9379,latent_9379,7396,0.014792,0.0055039795,2.249446,Comparison showing interval changes related to underlying health issue.,"Instances approximate higher activation when comparing specific pathological or anatomical changes related to an underlying health issue as indicated in previous imaging results, particularly worsening or new findings as compared to prior studies, or conditions that require urgent attention. Descriptions are focused on interval changes, which may influence clinical decision-making such as treating detected complications firsthand, ensuring significant changes in patient's health are communicated swiftly.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5454545454545454,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9380,latent_9380,2350,0.0047,0.0029513875,3.8230553,Descriptions involve detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels involve describing findings by comparing them with previous images or noting interval changes. This pattern appears in reports explicitly when stating differences or similarities over time, using phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph' or 'interval improvement', indicating a focus on longitudinal analysis rather than just a static or singular view.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5251798561151079,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9381,latent_9381,8840,0.01768,0.006581172,2.2121909,Presence of prior image for comparison in study findings.,"Most examples where significant activation occurs involve scenarios where multiple views (like current and prior images) are given, allowing for detailed comparison, especially when changes such as tube placements or lung opacities are observed. The provision of a ""prior image"" for comparison is a significant feature, even if activation is not maximal, it signifies attention to detail and continuity in care.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9382,latent_9382,6095,0.01219,0.004642767,1.9848589,Changes or stability noted on comparison with prior images.,"The higher activation levels in this dataset align with examples where observations of prior radiographic features have changes noted. Typically, these changes could be improvements, reductions, or intervals where certain features remain stable. This aligns with the structure of radiological reports which frequently highlight comparisons with prior studies to track progression, resolution, or stability of pathologies.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9383,latent_9383,2104,0.004208,0.0028652714,2.1165311,"Comparative analysis of imaging findings over time, especially cardiopulmonary features.","Examples with high activation levels involve reports comparing current and prior imaging, particularly noting changes like persistence, increase or decrease in observed pathologies between images. This pattern focuses on comparative descriptions to assess the patient's condition over time, frequently involving gauging cardiopulmonary features.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4948794093974633,0.545,0.5276073619631901,0.86,100.0,100.0
+9384,latent_9384,544,0.001088,0.0010789615,3.651779,Stable chest radiograph findings with normal or unremarkable descriptions.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention a clear chest image with an absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, alongside unchanged cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes. These reports emphasize normal findings or the lack of significant pathology in follow-up comparisons, which may trigger the model's high activation when detecting stability or lack of change in the radiographic findings.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6578975741239892,0.6586826347305389,0.5543478260869565,0.7611940298507462,67.0,100.0
+9385,latent_9385,1059,0.002118,0.0017539173,3.3223495,Report includes device positions or changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently include changes or stability assessments in medical devices or anatomical features as compared to prior images. These references to device status, such as catheter positioning or pleural effusion changes, are indicative of a pattern where current imaging findings are evaluated for consistency or change against a baseline.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9386,latent_9386,8783,0.017566,0.006451213,1.5997403,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Example activations mainly highlight reports comparing current and prior imaging where pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette size, atelectasis, or device positioning are discussed for changes or stability. These aspects often reflect a stable clinical state or a change that requires follow-up, hence their repeated observation prompts higher activations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9387,latent_9387,4276,0.008552,0.0036109432,3.8492339,Discussion of medical device placement/removal details over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature adjustments to medical devices or lines, indicating detailed examination findings related to their placement or removal. These examples also highlight slight changes in specific medical conditions such as effusions, opacities, or lung aeration. The narrative includes detailed comparisons between current and past images, particularly focusing on interventional or observable changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.6060606060606061,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9388,latent_9388,822,0.001644,0.0014983874,4.2563972,Description of findings showing stability or resolution compared to prior images.,"The pattern involves identifying changes or stable findings in imaging studies, especially when there are no acute concerning issues like pneumothorax or effusion. Reports highlight stable or unchanged aspects in relation to prior studies, often focusing on lung parenchyma clarity or cardiomediastinal silhouette.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5276573787409701,0.5376884422110553,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,99.0
+9389,latent_9389,965,0.00193,0.0017599869,4.616609,Stable features or findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated samples contain detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic images, specifically noting the stability or unchanged conditions of certain features like cardiac silhouette, mediastinal contours, or identified abnormalities. This suggests that the pattern is about consistently describing lack of change between imaging studies.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4455086198205464,0.45,0.4390243902439024,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9390,latent_9390,9394,0.018788,0.0071162544,2.4971254,Detailed comparison of current and prior images indicating interval change.,"Examples with higher activations utilize extensive comparisons with prior imaging, emphasizing changes, particularly new opacities, infiltrates, effusions, or pneumothorax that require detailed comparison and potential clinical action. These reports feature back-and-forth descriptions of similarities and differences, indicating a detailed comparative analysis.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5698924731182796,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9391,latent_9391,2158,0.004316,0.0034425352,3.0799513,Frontal and lateral chest imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation (e.g., 5.0 or higher) frequently request or utilize frontal and lateral chest images compared to prior studies, emphasizing providing descriptions of findings based on a structured examination summary including history, technique, and comparison results.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9392,latent_9392,1941,0.003882,0.001998339,3.539421,Explicit comparisons with previous imaging noting significant change or stability.,"High activation levels are observed when the findings of a radiology study are described in direct comparison to previous images and particularly focus on noting significant changes or lack thereof. Sentences describing the findings often lead with summaries of findings compared to prior studies, indicating whether stability or change has occurred.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4455086198205464,0.45,0.4390243902439024,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9393,latent_9393,663,0.001326,0.0013181705,3.5007725,Explicit description of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The provided examples have high activation levels when they include explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, noting specific interval changes like removal or repositioning of tubes, presence or exacerbation of pathologies, or stability of a noted finding. These changes are crucial in medical imaging interpretation, particularly in acute or critical care settings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3456298975286317,0.358695652173913,0.2702702702702703,0.238095238095238,84.0,100.0
+9394,latent_9394,6245,0.01249,0.005109834,3.9229476,Descriptions of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of interval changes, often in the size or presence of lesions or pathologies, when compared with previous imaging. Lower activation examples may not have significant changes or may focus on conditions without specific interval observations.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5794392523364486,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9395,latent_9395,3603,0.007206,0.003183528,1.9540356,"Explicit comparison required with prior imaging, often with undocumented prior findings (""N/A"" reports).","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where there is an explicit request for comparison to prior imaging, especially situations with new findings or changes from a previous image not documented yet (""N/A"" in prior reports). This emphasizes the importance of confirming the presence or change of specific findings through comparison.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3869455463397043,0.49,0.4945054945054945,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9396,latent_9396,3014,0.006028,0.0026215445,2.7095554,Comparative analysis of imaging findings with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently deal with situations where current findings are compared against prior imaging exams to determine specific changes or stability. This shows that the model is recognizing requests for comparative descriptions of imaging results as a key pattern, especially those noting interval changes or stability in the presence of new images.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9397,latent_9397,1055,0.00211,0.0015527513,2.7364883,Prompt to provide detailed comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often include phrases prompting the assistant to specifically provide a description of findings in comparison to a prior image, suggesting that the model is activating on instructions for detailed comparative analysis.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4748201438848921,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9398,latent_9398,1751,0.003502,0.001458392,2.5190022,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves describing findings that are unchanged or stable when compared with prior imaging studies. These examples frequently mention comparing current images with previous ones, and highlighting unchanged features such as heart size or mediastinal contours.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4285714285714285,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9399,latent_9399,1207,0.002414,0.0020780785,3.4417064,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe detailed observations and changes in findings from current to prior imaging, often involving clinical interventions or recommendations based on interval changes or stability over time. This highlights the importance of comparison to prior studies to track changes in patient condition.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9400,latent_9400,885,0.00177,0.0014741138,4.2372036,Positioning and description of medical devices in imaging.,"The examples highlight findings related to the presence and location of medical devices, often involving endotracheal tubes (ETT), enteric tubes, or other catheter and lead placements such as PICC lines. Descriptions frequently include distances from anatomical landmarks such as the carina, indicative of proper positioning of these medical devices in the context of trauma or other conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.2750870528648306,0.44,0.3928571428571428,0.22,100.0,100.0
+9401,latent_9401,2074,0.004148,0.0021807472,2.2975774,Explicit comparison of current to prior images with direct commentary on changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples involve direct language for explicitly comparing current and prior radiographic images, focusing on differences or stability over time. There is often a clear mention of finding stability or changes without the presence of comparative ambiguity or lack of comparison data.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4448750968968017,0.445,0.4432989690721649,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9402,latent_9402,724,0.001448,0.0013728444,2.6988497,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest radiographs for thoracic changes.,"High activation examples consistently involve examination of both current and prior frontal and lateral chest radiographs, which allows comparison of changes in various thoracic structure appearance like cardiac or mediastinal contours, pneumothorax, pneumonia, or effusion.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5124767225325885,0.5133689839572193,0.4835164835164835,0.5,88.0,99.0
+9403,latent_9403,953,0.001906,0.0016010363,2.6837213,No persistent pattern or correlations among example activations.,"The examples exhibit no significant pattern involving consistent activation due to technical differences or data characteristics among examples. High activation is observed in diverse examples without notable commonality, indicating the model might be responding to random variability or terms.",0.3717948717948718,0.5102040816326531,1.0,0.04,25.0,24.0,0.3931407825213135,0.4974093264248704,0.4705882352941176,0.0833333333333333,96.0,97.0
+9404,latent_9404,1280,0.00256,0.0017520611,2.7437584,Evaluation and adjustment of airway and feeding tube placement.,"The examples with high activations describe airway devices (endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes) placement, focusing on their positions relative to anatomical landmarks such as the carina or the gastroesophageal junction for ensuring proper placement, often requiring precise measurements and comparisons to prior imaging.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5471698113207547,0.29,100.0,100.0
+9405,latent_9405,1570,0.00314,0.002088387,5.0718155,Mention of low or reduced lung volumes.,"The pattern in these examples relates to mentions of low lung volumes or reduced lung volumes. This can be observed in the context of various diseases or conditions that impact lung capacity or expansion, and it is a common finding in thoracic imaging reviews.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4874827518233786,0.545,0.6363636363636364,0.21,100.0,100.0
+9406,latent_9406,1292,0.002584,0.0019293174,2.5693727,Detailed examination of interval changes by comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels are the ones that involve direct comparison to a prior imaging study, specifically referencing changes or stability in certain findings over time. This includes noting discrepancies, improvements, or resolutions in various conditions as compared with previous images.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9407,latent_9407,13488,0.026976,0.009814493,2.138745,Comparisons or requests for changes between current and prior images.,The pattern observed seems to be related to the request for a detailed comparison or change assessment between current and prior imaging studies. This pattern is often present in radiology reports that involve a close analysis of progress or diagnostic consistency based on visual comparison.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9408,latent_9408,1463,0.002926,0.0021638784,3.984612,Reports have partial or missing historical comparison context.,"The examples with higher activation levels often lack explicit information on prior findings or include partial or missing comparison context. These reports generally do not rely on direct historical comparison as much as they lack completion of specific findings and omissions. Instead, the focus is more on current findings without adequate historical contextualization, suggestive of incomplete comparative analysis being an essential component of this activation pattern.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3619567632773562,0.4924623115577889,0.4973544973544973,0.94,100.0,99.0
+9409,latent_9409,1592,0.003184,0.0019590864,2.467872,Focus on interval changes or stability of findings/devices.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve describing interval changes, or deliberately referencing interval removal or change in medical devices, supporting lines, or major findings compared to previous studies. This identifies the pattern of reports discussing differences or stability of certain medical conditions or placements from a previous state, crucial in radiological assessments where monitoring these changes is critical.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9410,latent_9410,7517,0.015034,0.005466337,1.3530827,"Description of tube, catheter, or line position and assessment.","Activation levels are higher in examples where specific positioning of tubes, catheters, or lines is explicitly evaluated, especially when changes or complications related to their position are discussed. Examples with descriptions of ""placement,"" ""position,"" or ""projection"" have higher activation levels, indicating a focus on line/tube positioning as part of the radiology report.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5469055710019566,0.56,0.5909090909090909,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9411,latent_9411,738,0.001476,0.0014779287,3.7014766,Recurring stable or unchanged cardiomegaly and aortic tortuosity findings.,"The highly activated samples describe findings such as tortuosity of the thoracic aorta and cardiomegaly as stable or unchanged over time. This reflects the linguistic pattern related to specific findings such as 'tortuosity' or 'cardiomegaly', indicating recurring descriptions without significant change based on imaging comparison.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6042378673957621,0.6424870466321243,0.8,0.3440860215053763,93.0,100.0
+9412,latent_9412,8285,0.01657,0.0061554154,1.7513679,Evaluation of tube/device position relative to prior with explicit comparison.,"The strongly activated examples involve the evaluation of tube or device positioning in relation to prior studies, such as endotracheal tubes. These evaluations often include explicit descriptions of unchanged positions across different instances relative to a specific anatomical landmark (e.g., carina), indicating a checklist-like comparison focused on device placement.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.6724137931034483,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9413,latent_9413,2234,0.004468,0.0024116032,2.5069244,"Comparison of current findings with prior images, emphasizing detection of changes.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions to provide radiological descriptions comparing current and previous images, often with specific findings or changes stated, despite some incompleteness. This emphasizes the analysis and comparison element of radiological interpretation, particularly in contentious cases with recent clinical changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9414,latent_9414,11381,0.022762,0.008312965,1.5441229,Interval changes in device positioning or lung condition compared to prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently illustrate instances where specific changes in medical device positioning, lung condition, or other findings are noted in comparison to a prior image. This involves detailed surgical device evaluation or significant lung changes, above simple observations from prior reports.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9415,latent_9415,4660,0.00932,0.0036129965,2.643448,Descriptive changes in findings compared to prior image.,"The examples exhibiting activations involve descriptions where explicit comparisons are made to prior studies to identify changes in conditions, improvements, or resolutions of findings. This pattern is clear in clinical radiology, where modifications in observations compared to prior exams or imaging are crucial for assessing patient progress or treatment impact.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9416,latent_9416,932,0.001864,0.0015606883,5.1726117,Emphasis on comparison details with previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels place strong emphasis on findings related to changes or details from previous imaging studies, which align with the request for a comparison statement in the prompt. This likely involves highlighting any interval changes, stability, or improvements in the findings described.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9417,latent_9417,721,0.001442,0.001296745,3.9236398,Evaluation for interval changes compared to prior radiographs.,"Most examples emphasize assessing interval changes and stabilization or progress of findings based on serial comparison of radiographic data, with stable, improved, or worsened findings indicated. The scenario in which prior images are available and comparisons are made reflects the richness and depth of breast radiology evaluations.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5185871964679911,0.5372340425531915,0.5036496350364964,0.7840909090909091,88.0,100.0
+9418,latent_9418,778,0.001556,0.0015072968,3.8041553,Stable lung with additional findings like cardiomegaly or interstitial changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe clear lungs with additional findings, such as cardiomegaly, mild pleural effusion, or interstitial changes, often indicating an overall stable radiological appearance but then noting a specific, sometimes progressing, pathology. These reports give a clear description of lung conditions while including secondary observations that suggest possible underlying issues without significant acute changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.51574286229179,0.5202020202020202,0.5185185185185185,0.4285714285714285,98.0,100.0
+9419,latent_9419,702,0.001404,0.0013998247,3.7245028,Stability in medical devices or previous pathologies compared with prior exams.,"The strongly activated examples frequently describe comparisons with prior exams, changes (or lack of changes) in radiological findings, and stability in indwelling medical devices' positions. Paper completion seems irrespective of the techniques or pathologies recorded, but focuses on unchanged pathological indications, stable support and monitoring devices, and minor revisions or improvements in recorded states from previous reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5071428571428571,0.5108695652173914,0.4642857142857143,0.4642857142857143,84.0,100.0
+9420,latent_9420,5964,0.011928,0.004279195,1.497168,Stability or mild changes in findings compared to prior images indicative of non-acute conditions.,"The examples with positive activation describe changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies, indicating stability or mild changes that are consistent with non-acute conditions. This is evident when findings like atelectasis, pleural effusions, or lines/tubes remain unchanged or slightly improved, suggesting stable conditions or follow-ups without new significant findings. These elements are present without acute pathological changes that might indicate new or worsening conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4928644240570846,0.4974874371859296,0.4957983193277311,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+9421,latent_9421,701,0.001402,0.0014296205,3.45601,Explicit comparison with prior radiological studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently refer to specific observations made on prior radiological studies and use these comparisons to describe current findings. These examples often specify changes or the stability of conditions between current and previous images, utilizing phrases indicating comparison like 'as compared to prior', 'unaltered since previous study', or similar language.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.541091330149081,0.5654450261780105,0.5277777777777778,0.8351648351648352,91.0,100.0
+9422,latent_9422,437,0.000874,0.001072301,3.6195512,Tentative wording indicating possible differential diagnosis.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings that may represent a potential pathology but are tentatively worded. Terms like 'may', 'suggest', 'could', or 'possible' indicate uncertainty or differential diagnosis, leading to activation. The low activation examples typically display clear and definite wording on findings.",0.7611874169251218,0.7755102040816326,0.6944444444444444,1.0,25.0,24.0,0.7795348058902276,0.7806451612903226,0.6179775280898876,1.0,55.0,100.0
+9423,latent_9423,586,0.001172,0.0011296932,4.073392,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in the presence of atelectasis or effusion.,"Highly activated examples often involve descriptions comparing current and prior images where both atelectasis or effusions and stable cardiomediastinal contours are observed. In these examples, findings frequently involve interval changes such as device placements, effusions, firmer lung conditions like bronchial wall thickening, or absence of changes in chronic features.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5368971992488714,0.6127167630057804,0.6,0.2465753424657534,73.0,100.0
+9424,latent_9424,866,0.001732,0.0012974452,3.9256227,Instruction emphasizes describing interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the model being tasked to provide descriptions of radiology findings with a specific directive to compare current images to prior ones, whether the prior exists or not. The explicit instruction to focus on interval changes emphasizes its representativeness of the pattern.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9425,latent_9425,803,0.001606,0.0014732442,3.9763203,Reports indicating no acute process despite symptoms.,Examples with high activation describe situations where no acute intrathoracic or cardiopulmonary process is detected despite thorough evaluations for acute symptoms or conditions. These reports often conclude with 'No acute findings' or a similar sentiment of absence of significant change or acute findings.,0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.648735447611401,0.65,0.6339285714285714,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9426,latent_9426,923,0.001846,0.0014252275,3.6006944,Comparison of findings with prior imaging to assess changes over time.,"The commonality in these examples is the explicit reference to changes observed in the current image compared to a prior study, often mentioning the stability, improvement, or progression of a condition such as effusions, opacities, nodules, or device placements. Examples with positive activations discuss modifications relative to prior imagery, indicating a focus on temporal change assessments.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9427,latent_9427,435,0.00087,0.00083313836,4.4650273,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in chest imaging reports.","Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to chest imaging findings using the format that describes the technique, comparisons, and a brief description of cardiomediastinal silhouettes and pulmonary vasculature, often concluding with unremarkable findings or normalcy of contours. This common structure reflects the typical concise and organized format in radiological reports.",0.6722408026755853,0.673469387755102,0.6818181818181818,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6097105508870215,0.6298701298701299,0.484375,0.5636363636363636,55.0,99.0
+9428,latent_9428,4328,0.008656,0.0034470167,2.73766,Comparison of findings indicating changes from prior imaging.,"More representative samples show descriptions of changes compared to prior images, often indicating changes in lung opacities or conditions like atelectasis, pleural effusions, or pneumonia. The findings often include changes in lung areas, mediastinal contours, or tubes placement when compared to previous imaging.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5377358490566038,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9429,latent_9429,1562,0.003124,0.0019609586,3.6631277,Comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation discuss findings by explicitly comparing them with prior imaging reports, noting changes or stability over time. This could suggest a focus on longitudinal assessment and changes in medical condition.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9430,latent_9430,4364,0.008728,0.0032624586,1.7900114,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate interval change or stability.,"The provided examples demonstrate radiological reports that make use of prior images for comparison, describing findings that show either interval change or stability over time. Activation levels are higher when the findings mention direct comparison to prior imaging studies, stating stability or change that indicates an ongoing process or stability, consistent with common radiological practice of using comparison to track patient progress.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5796553173602353,0.6,0.5694444444444444,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9431,latent_9431,991,0.001982,0.0018267453,3.2868264,Focus on inspiratory volume or its improvement.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to comparative descriptions of the lung's inspiratory volume and include terms indicating a difference in qualification (e.g., 'better inspiration'). This suggests that focus on measured or subjective improvement in lung expansion is central to the pattern.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5494505494505495,0.59,0.725,0.29,100.0,100.0
+9432,latent_9432,1224,0.002448,0.0014792241,2.7953727,Instruction to compare current image to prior image for interval changes.,"These examples feature instructions for comparing current images with prior images to identify interval changes in radiological findings. Even when specific comparisons are not available or made, the task involves assessing for changes in radiological characteristics over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4704361710216184,0.4723618090452261,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,99.0
+9433,latent_9433,1133,0.002266,0.0015803648,2.6842053,Omissions or lack of explicit description of prior image data in complex comparison tasks.,"Across the examples, the high activation levels correspond to contexts where explicit descriptions or inputs regarding a prior image are omitted, and the task involves generating a description from given image inputs without clear, direct reference or prior information. There is no actual text description of a prior image given, suggesting the task involves generating comparison without prior data directly provided for comparison, a likely nuanced challenging scenario.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3524714008202029,0.475,0.4866310160427807,0.91,100.0,100.0
+9434,latent_9434,3219,0.006438,0.0029031846,3.7995257,Comparative evaluation of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels include detailed descriptions comparing current images to prior ones, often indicating specific changes or stability in conditions. This involves using comparative language to emphasize alterations in radiological features.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9435,latent_9435,1156,0.002312,0.0018062658,3.874798,Reports requesting comparison to prior image despite limited or no comparison data.,"The provided examples primarily involve radiology reports that either mention the lack of a comparison image or a prompt to compare findings to previous images even though comparison data is minimal or absent. The high activation levels correspond to the explicit comparisons made or requested between current and prior imaging, common when existing data lacks direct comparative content.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.5563380281690141,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9436,latent_9436,1368,0.002736,0.0022309232,3.8331454,Presence of lung findings on chest imaging without explicit comparison details.,"The primary pattern observed in the samples with higher activation levels is the presence of lung imaging findings, such as opacities or structural changes, specifically when comparing chest X-rays. This is consistent with a focus on respiratory pathology evaluation, such as pneumonia, in radiology reports, particularly when no comparison to another study is explicitly noted.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3574051407588739,0.37,0.3194444444444444,0.23,100.0,100.0
+9437,latent_9437,3775,0.00755,0.0031169143,3.5524578,Comparisons and documentation of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with relatively higher activations involve the use of prior comparator images and describe the patient's interval changes, focusing particularly on significant changes like tube positions, effusions, or other internal changes over time. This pattern involves documenting the comparison with prior images and noting the interval changes in specific physical conditions or installations (such as tubes).",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9438,latent_9438,5614,0.011228,0.005169035,4.7256174,Emphasis on detailed comparison findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions that comprehensively compare the current and prior images, often noting specific changes or stability in findings. Reports frequently mention specific details such as unchanged opacities, stable nodules, or resolved effusions, suggesting a focus on changes over time as a key characteristic in these reports.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.3870967741935484,0.3789473684210526,95.0,105.0
+9439,latent_9439,9623,0.019246,0.0071449745,2.1346197,Attention to interval change noted in comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations all include specific interval changes compared to previous studies, such as increase, decrease, or no change in findings like pleural effusion, opacities, or devices. This kind of temporal comparison highlights interval changes, distinguishing between stable and dynamic clinical findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5212765957446809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9440,latent_9440,908,0.001816,0.0013545926,3.042386,Detailed comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"Most activated examples include comparisons of current radiological findings with prior findings. Specifically, they make explicit mention of stable or slightly altered features like heart size, atelectasis, or effusions over time, focusing on changes or stability of cardiothymic and respiratory attributes and devices, indicating a clear focus on stability or specific changes in imaging over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5135135135135135,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9441,latent_9441,5989,0.011978,0.004368296,1.8773891,Stability or lack of significant change in findings compared to prior studies.,"Throughout the examples, activation levels correlate with prompts that describe stability or lack of significant interval change in the radiological findings when compared to prior images. These examples consistently use phrases indicating unchanged findings or stability between current and prior studies.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9442,latent_9442,808,0.001616,0.0015829443,3.318196,Explicit changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The hallmark of the examples with high activation is the presence of explicit comparison points with prior studies and a specific narrative of changes or stability in the findings described. The comparisons are not just mentioned but are integral in structuring the report""s findings and impressions, emphasizing change over time as a focal point.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5280934343434344,0.5282051282051282,0.5145631067961165,0.5578947368421052,95.0,100.0
+9443,latent_9443,958,0.001916,0.0014301909,3.5484443,"Focus on interval changes in imaging, with emphasis on resolution or stability.","Highly activated examples revolve around descriptions of interval changes based on comparison with prior imaging, particularly emphasizing stability or resolution of clinical findings. Reports often highlight specific findings, sometimes subtle, but maintain a clear connection to previous observations, which is vital for monitoring ongoing clinical conditions.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9444,latent_9444,6950,0.0139,0.005040333,2.29702,Stable or improved findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with positive activation levels describe findings that indicate changes compared to previous images, specifically improvements or continued resolution compared to prior studies, often indicating a stable or unchanged condition.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9445,latent_9445,632,0.001264,0.0013840206,4.088366,"Comparison of current images to prior showing stability or change in key findings like atelectasis, effusions, or opacifications.","Most examples with high activation levels describe comparisons made to prior images where specific findings are marked either as stable, improved, or worsened. Often these findings include mentions of atelectasis, pulmonary edema, effusions, pneumonia, or cardiomegaly, and emphasize the stability or change in these observations in contrast to previous studies.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5658090054428501,0.5666666666666667,0.5092592592592593,0.6875,80.0,100.0
+9446,latent_9446,725,0.00145,0.0016342776,3.873273,Mention of cardiomediastinal silhouette in findings comparison.,"Higher activation examples consistently involve mentioning the cardiomediastinal silhouette in the interpretation of radiological findings. This appears to be a significant indicator, perhaps due to the relevance of this assessment in evaluating chest radiographs comprehensively over time, particularly in comparative contexts.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5896165191740413,0.6063829787234043,0.6129032258064516,0.4318181818181818,88.0,100.0
+9447,latent_9447,1508,0.003016,0.003206351,4.2455826,Explicit requirement to compare current to prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently include explicit requests in the prompt for a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to a prior frontal image. This key instruction is explicitly absent in examples with low activation, indicating this requirement is central to the pattern.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9448,latent_9448,6794,0.013588,0.0051335534,1.882373,Comparison of current and prior images indicating specific interval changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to specific, significant intervals or changes in conditions identified through direct comparison between current and prior imaging or studies, assessing developments such as worsening, improvement, resolution, or unchanged findings regarding medical devices, lung pathology, or other conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6080795899909557,0.61,0.627906976744186,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9449,latent_9449,900,0.0018,0.001685262,3.9918249,Instruction to compare the current findings with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently task the model with providing a description of the current radiology findings in comparison to a prior study or image. This requirement for comparative analysis, particularly the explicit instruction to 'provide a description in comparison', is a significant factor in high activation cases.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4294672457659788,0.445,0.4586466165413533,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9450,latent_9450,1830,0.00366,0.002355813,2.7994297,Reports with interval changes or significant findings in comparison with prior studies have higher activations.,"The presence of decreased activation is primarily due to the explicit comparison with prior imaging studies in some examples, while others feature significant interval changes, complex findings, or multiple views which generally result in higher activations. Frequent representation of distinct interval changes and findings usually results in higher activation levels.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5609092775041051,0.5678391959798995,0.5564516129032258,0.69,100.0,99.0
+9451,latent_9451,2526,0.005052,0.0024544839,3.1013858,Emphasis on providing comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize the requirement to provide a description or findings in comparison to prior imaging. This suggests the pattern focuses on providing comparative analysis to determine changes, stability, or lack thereof shown in current versus prior images, often prompted by explicit instructions to perform such comparisons in the exam instructions or reports.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9452,latent_9452,890,0.00178,0.001565573,4.3281474,Comparison of findings with prior imaging for intervention or post-operative assessment.,"Examples with high activation levels specify that findings are compared to prior imaging, particularly in scenarios involving line placements, post-operative follow-ups, or evaluations of intervention efficacy. In these cases, prior imaging is explicitly referenced to assess changes, whereas examples with low activation often lack detailed comparative analysis or significant interval changes.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.5702479338842975,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9453,latent_9453,6844,0.013688,0.004912212,1.2674569,Presence of cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette in imaging.,"The pattern is related to the existence of cardiomegaly or expanded cardiac silhouette being described, referenced frequently in the findings of these examples. Examples with higher activations involve reports that discuss the cardiac silhouette directly and its implications, often hinting at clinical significance like cardiomegaly.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.421152732986025,0.475,0.4358974358974359,0.17,100.0,100.0
+9454,latent_9454,3880,0.00776,0.002885442,1.7531132,Findings indicate stability or lack of significant change from prior images.,"These examples describe radiology findings where no acute changes are detected in comparison with prior images, often mentioning stability or minor updates in pleural effusion or pulmonary structures. Some mention improvements or resolution of issues like effusions since prior images, focusing on unremarkable or unchanged states despite being asked for a description.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5023114816218265,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+9455,latent_9455,2038,0.004076,0.001980288,3.519066,Comparison of current findings with explicit previous imaging results.,"The pattern identified involves interpreting chest imaging findings in conjunction with a detailed comparison to prior imaging studies, highlighting stability, change, or new findings. The model activates on examples where the image findings are contextualized by explicit historical references, which includes terms like 'as compared to', 'no significant change', or 'since prior'.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9456,latent_9456,1953,0.003906,0.0022790385,3.289953,Comparison to prior imaging studies is highlighted.,"The examples with higher activations all involve a comparison between current imaging findings and a prior study. This is a consistent pattern which suggests the importance of referencing previous results to evaluate changes or stability in the patient's condition. The outputs highlight the differences or improvements, underlining comparison as a key trigger for higher activations.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3924415611162599,0.41,0.4328358208955223,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9457,latent_9457,6671,0.013342,0.0050234986,2.1539655,Consistent interpretation of current versus prior images.,"The highest activation levels correspond to descriptions that involve comparison and interpretation of current images relative to previous images, emphasizing consistency and change in findings over time. The data suggests the pattern of interest lies in the technical approach and consistency of observations between current and prior imaging, which is a key focus in radiological studies to monitor progression or stability of conditions.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9458,latent_9458,1467,0.002934,0.0019485705,3.9819167,Interval changes in medical device placement relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently report interval changes in a medical device's placement from a prior imaging study, such as tubes, catheters, or pleural drains. This involves using phrases like 'interval placement', 'interval removal', and explicit comparisons to prior film studies where device changes are observed.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6986644194182691,0.705,0.7887323943661971,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9459,latent_9459,1030,0.00206,0.0017894045,8.288368,Focus on changes in placement or positioning of medical devices in relation to previous imaging.,"The examples often involve descriptions of medical devices' positions, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central venous lines, with a specific focus on how their positions have changed in comparison to prior imaging studies. Descriptors like 'advanced', 'pulled back', 'positioning', and exact measurements relative to anatomical landmarks support this focus on precise device placement changes.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6558356108917907,0.66,0.7051282051282052,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9460,latent_9460,752,0.001504,0.0012642642,4.3109927,Low lung volumes affecting image findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include findings of low lung volumes, which are directly mentioned as causing changes in visibility or diagnostic clarity, such as accentuating vascular structures or causing atelectasis. This is a specific radiological parameter that significantly affects image interpretation and clinical implications.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4134324596774194,0.4842105263157895,0.3823529411764705,0.1444444444444444,90.0,100.0
+9461,latent_9461,501,0.001002,0.0010666173,4.1547356,"Radiological findings described relative to previous study, noting changes or stability.","These examples include radiological findings described relative to a previous study, with a focus on changes or stability. This pattern is marked by phrases such as 'unchanged as compared to previous,' 'no significant change,' or detailing the constancy of the findings, such as unchanged device positions or pneumonia resolution, showing the importance placed on interval changes or stability in imaging reviews.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5286004056795132,0.536144578313253,0.4545454545454545,0.8333333333333334,66.0,100.0
+9462,latent_9462,7199,0.014398,0.0055772043,1.7302753,Descriptions contain explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"The examples that show high activation levels often involve descriptions indicating a direct comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, frequently using structured radiology reporting elements like direct verbatim mentioning of 'comparison' to prior imaging or detailed descriptions of interval changes and stability (such as unchanged cardiomediastinal contours, effusions, opacities). In contrast, lower activation reports often focus on describing current findings without these explicit comparative references.",0.5353448275862069,0.5510204081632653,0.5294117647058824,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9463,latent_9463,796,0.001592,0.0014345413,3.4365182,Stability or change in position of medical devices in imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on the stability or change in the position or condition of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or lines, often mentioning specific terminus locations such as the superior vena cava or right atrium. The low-activation examples did not emphasize or include this device-specific detail.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6214636183317674,0.6224489795918368,0.6222222222222222,0.5833333333333334,96.0,100.0
+9464,latent_9464,9466,0.018932,0.0068082674,1.4464452,Impact of patient positioning or low lung volumes on radiographic findings.,"Examples with moderate activation levels contain details on positional changes or low lung volumes which influence findings related to pleural effusions, atelectasis, or other lung conditions. There is a focus on the consistency of findings despite physical variability that might impact the radiographic appearance, emphasizing observations that differ from previous studies due to these factors.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5753424657534246,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9465,latent_9465,6998,0.013996,0.0053098723,1.9441313,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples involve detailed comparisons between current imaging and prior studies, focusing on changes or stabilities in medical devices, cardiac silhouettes, lung volumes, or opacities. The emphasis is on the descriptive changes or lack thereof related to specific radiographic findings over different examinations.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9466,latent_9466,1422,0.002844,0.0018346414,2.4349058,Focus on detailed placement and comparison of support devices.,"The samples with high activation levels often involve complex descriptions of multiple support devices, such as tubes or catheters, with references to changes in placement or their current position, frequently mentioning comparison to prior images. This suggests that the model activates on detailed discussions related to the positioning and changes of medical devices over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4064012406748843,0.445,0.3877551020408163,0.19,100.0,100.0
+9467,latent_9467,889,0.001778,0.0016390794,2.598592,Presence of prior report with history of serious conditions or interventions.,"The high activation levels are associated with examples explicitly involving prior reports, especially when previous conditions or treatments like pneumonia, chest tubes, or procedures such as thoracentesis are mentioned. These elements add complexity and are likely the focus of interest in these scenarios, highlighting ongoing or unresolved medical issues.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.496,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9468,latent_9468,3061,0.006122,0.0027440824,3.3692589,Repositioning or comparison of medical devices across imaging studies.,"These examples are primarily centered on the presence or repositioning of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters, lines) within the thoracic cavity across different radiological examinations. High activations are seen in examples that highlight changes or unchanged positions of these devices, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and PICC lines, often compared with prior imaging.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4927536231884058,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9469,latent_9469,1160,0.00232,0.0020103396,3.3984394,Direct comparison to prior imaging for interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature direct comparison with prior imaging studies to assess for interval changes in medical devices, fluid collections, or anatomical structures. This pattern is frequent in radiology, where specific findings are evaluated across time points for changes, often related to acute interventions or patient stability monitoring.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9470,latent_9470,2485,0.00497,0.003465489,4.028641,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing current imaging with prior imaging, highlighting specific changes or stability in findings such as opacities or catheter positions. The emphasis is on the interval changes or lack thereof, which is a key focus in these comparisons.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.568922305764411,0.57,0.5636363636363636,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9471,latent_9471,3375,0.00675,0.002830453,3.4349291,Incorporation of tasks or instructions in radiology study descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation levels have explicit tasks or instructions included in the prompt, such as specific evaluations, comparisons, or detailed procedural contexts. These are found alongside or within the description of radiological findings, indicating a task-oriented pattern that leads to activation.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9472,latent_9472,3673,0.007346,0.0030810277,3.409879,Comparative assessment of radiographic features relative to prior images.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern consistently mention a comparison to prior radiographic images with specific references to findings such as the placement of medical devices or changes in the status of pulmonary or cardiac features. Reports with activation levels close to zero don't focus on such comparisons or changes over time, indicating the pattern is about evaluating and noting stability or change in radiographic features relative to previous images.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9473,latent_9473,677,0.001354,0.0014830972,3.9206095,Use of 'possible' or 'possibly' indicating uncertainty.,"The examples with high activation levels describe conditions or processes as 'possible', 'possibly', or similar terms, suggesting uncertainty or a need for further evaluation. This pattern reflects a radiological finding that may be suspect but requires additional confirmation.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9583333333333334,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8617395676219206,0.8663101604278075,0.9696969696969696,0.735632183908046,87.0,100.0
+9474,latent_9474,1282,0.002564,0.0018379312,3.2050743,Comparison between current lateral and prior frontal images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve a current frontal and lateral image with specific comparison to a prior frontal image, suggesting that the pattern is related to tasks involving both lateral and frontal image comparison.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4540998217468805,0.51,0.5277777777777778,0.19,100.0,100.0
+9475,latent_9475,389,0.000778,0.0008958313,4.1116905,Provide findings compared to prior image despite stating 'COMPARISON: None.',"Examples with high activation levels consistently include directives to provide findings in 'comparison to the prior frontal image,' while explicitly stating 'COMPARISON: None.' This contradiction between the task direction and comparison information seems significant for the model, triggering higher activation.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.45,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4500827947225041,0.5103448275862069,0.25,0.2888888888888888,45.0,100.0
+9476,latent_9476,1562,0.003124,0.00149419,3.1354253,Use of images for diagnostic comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples illustrate explicit instructions to use provided image data to form a diagnostic comparison of current to prior imaging. This pattern shows a clear task of comparing current and prior imaging findings, often involving changes or stability over time, with terms like 'compare', 'prior', and 'frontal' consistently appearing along with image tags.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9477,latent_9477,6250,0.0125,0.0046209185,2.1798253,Reports emphasizing stability or lack of change compared to prior exams.,"The examples with higher activation levels often reference stable or unchanged findings from previous examinations when comparing with current images, indicating an emphasis on stability or lack of progression as a notable finding.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9478,latent_9478,3300,0.0066,0.0034343682,3.4034684,Subtle changes in medical devices or minor pathological details from prior to current imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings in chest radiographs that compare current with prior imaging specifically noting changes in medical devices or subtle pathological details like small pleural effusions or trace pneumomediastinal air. This pattern focuses more on changes detected around medical device placement or subtle clinical signs rather than gross pathological changes.,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9479,latent_9479,5773,0.011546,0.004482369,1.9610693,Mentions of indwelling medical devices or tubes in position.,"These examples feature explicit references to technical equipment such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, central lines, or pacemakers. This pattern is characteristic of radiology reports that involve assessments related to the positioning or presence of technical devices on imaging.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5444139194139195,0.5477386934673367,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,99.0
+9480,latent_9480,841,0.001682,0.0014511344,3.949162,Comparison with prior imaging studies for changes in findings.,"The examples that have high activation levels consistently request a comparison of current radiological study findings with their corresponding previous images. This involves analyzing findings on chest examinations in relation to past images, often focusing on any changes, or lack thereof, in the appearance of the lungs, heart, or other attributes related to the cardiomediastinal silhouette.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.25,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3088942307692308,0.31,0.2934782608695652,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9481,latent_9481,9585,0.01917,0.0093249,4.143513,Emphasis on interval changes or stability of findings in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically describe interval changes, such as worsening or improvement in certain conditions (e.g., pneumothorax, lung opacities) or highlight unchanged findings over time. The comparison with prior radiographs and presence of language indicating evaluation for changes is a recurring theme in these examples.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9482,latent_9482,1239,0.002478,0.0019000571,3.755435,Notable changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with low activation levels either do not mention comparison to previous imaging or describe findings as unchanged, without significant new indications or concerns. High activation examples describe notable interval changes from prior imaging, such as new or worsening findings, improvements, or other significant developments indicating a new or resolved condition.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4675324675324675,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9483,latent_9483,2476,0.004952,0.0024198447,2.7859595,Reports include comparison with prior images detailing interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels (example indices 1, 4, 8, 30, 31, 33, 38, 48) contain explicit comparisons with prior images within the findings or impressions section of the reports, often highlighting interval changes or stability in the radiological findings. This is indicative of a critical evaluative process in radiology reports involving sequential image assessment.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9484,latent_9484,930,0.00186,0.0015193254,2.738459,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation explicitly compare new radiology findings to prior images, often resulting in detailed descriptions of changes or lack thereof. This pattern of comparing with previous studies aligns with the task of evaluating interval changes in patient conditions, which is of high importance in clinical radiology reports.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4927536231884058,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9485,latent_9485,3474,0.006948,0.0029841391,3.208266,Detailed comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a comparison of the current radiologic findings with a prior image, evaluating changes in lung, cardiac, or mediastinal structures, or devices' positioning. The presence of detailed comparative changes often features more prominently in examples with higher activation.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9486,latent_9486,860,0.00172,0.0018400066,3.2787566,Detailed interval changes in condition or structure compared to prior image.,"These examples highlight an emphasis on providing detailed findings from current and prior images, specifically relating to changes in a specific condition or structure, as noted repeatedly through phrases like 'unchanged', 'resolution', 'new', or 'increased'. There is a focus on the interval change between studies, not just on the stability or comparison features but on the narratives of progression or improvement.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5641025641025641,0.44,100.0,100.0
+9487,latent_9487,7854,0.015708,0.0057472927,1.9457574,Presence and positions of medical devices and tubes in imaging studies.,"There is a consistent linguistic pattern of references to various medical devices and tubes such as endotracheal tubes, central venous lines, PICC lines, and pleural catheters, specifically noting their presence and positions within the body. This pattern reflects reports concerning placement and assessment of medical devices rather than changes in disease states.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5866767983789261,0.5879396984924623,0.5955056179775281,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+9488,latent_9488,2942,0.005884,0.0025424603,3.0842757,Emphasis on changes or resolution of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation often feature detailed descriptions of changes from previous images, specifically mentioning resolution or progression of issues such as opacities, effusions, or device placement. They frequently highlight specific changes in clinical observations or interventions as compared to prior images, emphasizing the importance of time trends and adjustments over stationary findings or consistently stable states.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5607476635514018,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9489,latent_9489,893,0.001786,0.0012675137,2.8727794,Detailed comparisons with previous imaging studies using explicit reference to changes or stability.,"This dataset exhibits a clear focus on comparing current findings in radiological images with those in previous images using direct comparisons. Various examples highlight this pattern with template phrases like 'as compared to the previous', focus on changes or lack thereof in medical conditions, often in the context of ongoing monitoring or treatment.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5263157894736842,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9490,latent_9490,6722,0.013444,0.005308625,2.2080925,Stability or minimal change in radiographic findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples illustrating the pattern of findings note stability or minor changes when viewed in comparison to prior radiographs, and they often include assessments for devices or lines, even where there might be minimal or no acute changes. This language provides a comparative framework emphasizing stability or lack of significant change in the radiographic findings, commonly encountered in follow-up imaging studies.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.2692307692307692,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5529411764705883,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9491,latent_9491,2585,0.00517,0.0023590927,2.4610255,Detailed comparisons of current chest images with prior imaging.,"The pattern observed in high activation examples highlights the presence of diagnostic language detailing comparisons between current and prior images. Such linguistic focus on stability, unchanged findings, or interval changes concerning specific radiological features in detailed imaging contexts appears to be strongly associated with the observed activations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9492,latent_9492,940,0.00188,0.0017767029,4.6667514,Reports noting moderate to severe cardiomegaly.,"Examples with high activation focus on moderate to severe cardiomegaly. These reports consistently describe changes in heart size, often noting moderate to severe cardiomegaly, a pattern indicating observed enlargement of the heart in these studies.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7074390276337137,0.725,0.9411764705882352,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9493,latent_9493,2456,0.004912,0.0025673106,2.8589783,Focus on interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation frequently involve the explicit mention of comparison between current and prior studies, especially the examination of interval changes, such as differences in tube positioning, size of lesions, or presence and size of pneumothorax. This pattern achieves high activation when the report focuses on longitudinal assessment of the patient's condition.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5145631067961165,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9494,latent_9494,4245,0.00849,0.0033663732,2.0588489,Evaluation of unchanged position of medical devices in imaging.,"The pattern identified consistently concerns the evaluation of medical imaging findings regarding devices like PICC lines, catheters, or tubes. Descriptions often include the position's stability, such as unchanged or stable from prior imaging. These sentences note specific placement details critical in clinical settings to ensure proper function and avoid complications.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4320486815415821,0.475,0.4444444444444444,0.2,100.0,100.0
+9495,latent_9495,692,0.001384,0.0012293122,4.493845,Reports indicating unavailability of prior imaging for comparison.,"Activated reports contain instances where the absence or unavailability of prior imaging is explicitly mentioned, implicating a challenge in evaluation due to lack of comparative data.",0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.5263157894736842,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4963520291837665,0.5,0.4642857142857143,0.4431818181818182,88.0,100.0
+9496,latent_9496,642,0.001284,0.001519202,3.283526,Monitoring bilateral pleural effusions in follow-up imaging.,Examples with high activation levels consistently mention bilateral pleural effusions and attempts to monitor these effusions over time through comparison with previous imaging. They highlight changes or stability in pleural effusions and associated conditions such as pulmonary edema and atelectasis.,0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7334244702665755,0.7527472527472527,0.8627450980392157,0.5365853658536586,82.0,100.0
+9497,latent_9497,2142,0.004284,0.0018559527,2.726528,Radiological assessment of medical tube placement or adjustment.,"The examples with higher activations consistently discuss the placement, adjustment, or confirmation of medical tubes like Dobbhoff or nasogastric tubes in the context of radiological imaging findings. Reports often emphasize positions of these tubes in relation to anatomical landmarks, such as the stomach or esophagogastric junction, which might explain the pattern.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.6101694915254238,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9498,latent_9498,14242,0.028484,0.010514052,1.4870152,Comparison of current with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The pattern highlighted by strong activations in the examples indicates a focus on identifying specific findings in chest radiology by comparing current images with prior ones, including changes or stability in key anatomical and pathological features such as cardiomediastinal silhouette, aortic tortuosity, or presence of devices. This comparison structure is prevalent in follow-up or ongoing-condition evaluations.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5307748597446946,0.5628140703517588,0.5394736842105263,0.8282828282828283,99.0,100.0
+9499,latent_9499,1723,0.003446,0.0022327024,2.6810756,Comparison of current study findings to prior images without significant change.,The pattern focuses on comparing current imaging studies with past ones and is marked by specific language indicating a lack of significant changes or acute findings. This suggests a focus on stability or subtle descriptive changes without evident acute pathology.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4769230769230769,0.31,100.0,100.0
+9500,latent_9500,450,0.0009,0.0009079129,4.566419,Comparison of medical device placement or change in imaging.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around radiological evaluations where current images are compared to prior images, with a focus on medical device evaluations or modifications such as placements of endotracheal tubes or monitorings of central lines. High activations are associated with precise comparisons concerning medical devices, rather than broader pathological concerns.",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5652173913043478,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5548969072164949,0.5796178343949044,0.4285714285714285,0.4736842105263157,57.0,100.0
+9501,latent_9501,890,0.00178,0.0014536487,3.5228207,Detailed placement verification of tubes and lines in imaging reports.,"These examples portray detailed descriptions and evaluations regarding the placement and position of tubes and lines such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or intravenous lines. This pattern involves verifying the precise tip location of these devices relative to anatomical landmarks, often in critically ill or surgical settings.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9502,latent_9502,976,0.001952,0.0015684811,4.6739573,Descriptions focus on unchanged or stable findings compared to prior studies.,"The activation levels indicate a pattern where descriptions are requested to compare current imaging findings to prior studies, emphasizing minimal or no changes. Examples commonly mention normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal, hilar contours, or heart size, with various representations of a stable appearance over interval studies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.426031746031746,0.435,0.4133333333333333,0.31,100.0,100.0
+9503,latent_9503,5186,0.010372,0.004215789,2.7655795,Reference to interval changes in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activations include those that clearly mention 'interval increase' or 'interval development' of specific, but often minor, radiological findings compared to prior studies. Such terms are commonly used to denote changes over time, suggesting an ongoing process or progression such as infection, edema, or atelectasis.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9504,latent_9504,1432,0.002864,0.0021221307,3.12155,Stable findings with comparison to prior radiographic studies indicating no change.,Examples with higher activation levels often include references to comparisons with prior radiographic studies and note no significant or relevant changes between them. This implies that a stable finding indicates a pattern even when new findings are not detected.,0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6202791461412152,0.63,0.6911764705882353,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9505,latent_9505,8575,0.01715,0.00825006,3.6198282,Assessment of medical device or tube placement in comparison images.,"The examples with higher activations indicate the presence of specific medical devices or interventions (like endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, nasogastric tubes) and assessment of their placement in known anatomical landmarks in contrast to previous images. This indicates a focus on analyzing technical/radiological changes relative to intervention positioning and impact rather than disease process alone.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5423728813559322,0.32,100.0,100.0
+9506,latent_9506,828,0.001656,0.0011883933,5.8649645,Tracking changes or placements of medical devices over time.,"The description shows the inclusion of specific measurements, changes, or positioning of medical devices relative to previous or current imaging, often indicating a diagnostic or preparative focus on tracking changes or placements over time. This includes details on support devices like nasogastric tubes, catheters, and PICCs in postoperative or post-procedural contexts, highlighting a pattern of close monitoring or intervention.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+9507,latent_9507,1033,0.002066,0.0022004326,4.884838,Assessment of images through comparison with prior studies.,The examples with activation levels above zero describe the procedure and findings in the context of reviewing current and previous images. They often reference specific radiographic procedures like chest radiographs and employ language indicating direct observation comparison between current and prior imaging to make assessments.,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4874827518233786,0.545,0.5269461077844312,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9508,latent_9508,576,0.001152,0.0011952758,5.12938,Marked cardiomegaly or abnormal mediastinal contours.,"Highly activated examples consistently contain detailed descriptions involving abnormal heart or mediastinal contours, particularly marked enlargement or tortuosity, often linked to prior conditions or surgeries.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5506812894649384,0.621301775147929,0.5757575757575758,0.2753623188405797,69.0,100.0
+9509,latent_9509,5936,0.011872,0.004662186,1.9788077,Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention specific findings or changes in conditions compared to prior reports highlighting interval changes or stability of conditions. This pattern involves a focus on interval changes or the stability of findings relative to previous imaging studies, rather than just repeating findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9510,latent_9510,794,0.001588,0.0015259575,4.2244763,Description of findings with explicit comparison to previous studies.,Examples that have low activations either discuss findings not in comparison to previous studies or lack the language typical of radiology report comparisons. The pattern focuses on textual reports with explicit comparisons made with previous imaging.,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9511,latent_9511,618,0.001236,0.0014019448,3.9669807,Descriptors of minor cardiopulmonary changes or subtle abnormalities compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels contain complex descriptions of the heart size, mediastinal contours, and pulmonary findings that suggest subtle cardiopulmonary abnormalities or changes. The reports often employ comparative language indicating minor changes, especially noting enlarged heart size or mild pulmonary changes.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6266968325791855,0.6333333333333333,0.5564516129032258,0.8625,80.0,100.0
+9512,latent_9512,1314,0.002628,0.0024283193,4.290967,Unchanged or stable placement of medical tubes or lines compared to previous imaging.,"These examples consistently describe the presence of medical tubes or lines placement being stable or unchanged in the current radiology study compared to previous studies, using terms like 'NG tube', 'ET tube', and 'central line'. They reflect follow-up imaging primarily concerned with monitoring the positions of these medical devices.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.6,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9513,latent_9513,12953,0.025906,0.00958361,1.6495811,Comparison with prior images showing stability or absence of significant change.,"Examples with activation levels describe chest imaging findings related to comparisons with prior imaging, signifying either stability or changes over time. They often note the absence of significant changes or newly identified features like pulmonary opacities or pneumothorax in relation to prior studies.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9514,latent_9514,5451,0.010902,0.004227313,2.0114636,Unchanged findings compared to prior radiological examinations.,"Examples with higher activation involve instances where specific findings in the radiology study remain unchanged compared to previous examinations. Common terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'not significantly changed' indicate this pattern.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+9515,latent_9515,942,0.001884,0.0014136026,2.6506271,Prompt requests direct comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing findings between current images and prior images, often explicitly stated with phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' High activation is not due merely to the presence of prior images, but the active process of explicitly comparing them.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9516,latent_9516,2169,0.004338,0.00226454,2.7622442,Comparison with prior imaging showing unchanged findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature a specific request to compare findings to prior imaging and often state that there are no new findings or unchanged conditions. The comparison with prior imaging is explicitly requested, and these examples contain narrative about unchanged conditions as compared to prior studies, indicating this pattern emphasizes stable or unchanged findings from prior imaging.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5692307692307692,0.37,100.0,100.0
+9517,latent_9517,1668,0.003336,0.0019841911,3.6342773,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior images.,"High activation examples focus on describing findings that are stable, unchanged, or resolved when compared to previous imaging studies. These examples clearly emphasize the lack of significant change or improvement in conditions over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4918032786885246,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9518,latent_9518,495,0.00099,0.0011362965,3.3420672,Comparison with prior imaging reveals changes or confirms stability.,"The examples selected have comparisons made using recent prior imaging, emphasize changes or stability in conditions, and typically note changes in specific clinical indications between the two imaging episodes. The high activation levels indicate a focus on updating the clinical status based on recent comparative imaging. This pattern is common in follow-up reviews of conditions where progress needs tracking.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.5061728395061729,0.3902439024390244,0.5161290322580645,62.0,100.0
+9519,latent_9519,1154,0.002308,0.0015664074,2.528933,Documentation of comparisons with prior imaging for object placement or stability.,"These examples utilize radiological findings directly compared to prior imaging in similar contexts, focusing heavily on changes or stability, particularly in emergency situations or devices positions (e.g., tubes, catheters), and noting the lack of substantial change or tracking the progress of identified issues such as tube positioning or device monitoring.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5644152595372107,0.5778894472361809,0.5555555555555556,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+9520,latent_9520,618,0.001236,0.0012213474,3.4426565,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples usually involve a direct comparison statement referencing specific changes between a prior and current imaging study. These statements provide findings in relation to earlier dates or images, reflecting interval changes or stability. This pattern is marked with phrases like 'no significant interval change', 'new since prior', and comparisons to specific dated studies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4502839192944303,0.4505494505494505,0.4134615384615384,0.524390243902439,82.0,100.0
+9521,latent_9521,7383,0.014766,0.0056530857,2.0485363,Descriptions involving interval changes based on prior imaging.,These examples highlight situations where prior radiographic images are explicitly used for comparison and examining interval changes in lung and cardiac conditions. The pattern involves documenting changes based on previously noted abnormalities while using technical language related to imaging and radiological analysis.,0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.61,0.61,0.61,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9522,latent_9522,6918,0.013836,0.005165456,1.7569821,Identification of changes in findings based on comparison with prior images.,"In these examples, the descriptions use explicit comparison to prior images, often noting stability, changes, or improvement in findings. The activation pattern suggests emphasis on identifying and verbally articulating notable differences or similarities when cross-referencing current imaging with 'prior' or previous examinations, as indicated by statements focusing on comparison and stability of features like pathological opacities or pleural effusions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5727272727272728,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9523,latent_9523,14990,0.02998,0.010802454,1.5788746,Compared findings to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently refer to an analysis of radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging studies. This involves examining and contrasting current images with previous ones to identify changes or stability in conditions, using explicit mentions of 'prior', 'comparison', or interval descriptors in the reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.550157444894287,0.575,0.5510204081632653,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9524,latent_9524,6706,0.013412,0.00505787,2.0348136,"Comparison of current imaging findings with prior, noting device changes or stability in pulmonary features.","The examples exhibit patterns where radiological examinations mention changes in findings compared to previous imaging studies, specifically highlighting repositioned medical devices or tubes, and stable or changing pulmonary features in detail. These are common practices in medical imaging to track patient progress or device positioning over time.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6116504854368932,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9525,latent_9525,1594,0.003188,0.001746019,3.2595758,Use of comparative language to prior or multiple views in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activations mention comparison to previous images or having multiple views (i.e., frontal and lateral), while those with lower activations either lack the usage of multiple views, or focus more on other elements without re-evaluating from prior comparisons. The pattern noticed heavily involves comparative language to prior or multiple views in the findings section.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3995943204868154,0.445,0.4645161290322581,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9526,latent_9526,923,0.001846,0.0015231755,5.657816,Step interval changes in device placements on chest imaging.,"The recurring pattern in high activation examples is the explicit step or interval changes documented in medical device placements, particularly endotracheal or nasogastric tube positions. This is distinct from general findings, focusing on specific procedural or intervention reports typically crucial in critical care settings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5305164319248826,0.57,0.6666666666666666,0.28,100.0,100.0
+9527,latent_9527,779,0.001558,0.0013198068,3.230266,Evaluation of changes in medical devices or stability of findings across multiple radiographs.,"The descriptions involve comparison of multiple chest radiographs over time, assessing changes in medical devices like catheters or tubes, and developments in lung or thoracic conditions. This pattern may be associated with monitoring of ongoing conditions or post-procedural evaluations, especially when devices are involved or there is a follow-up on prior findings for stability or progression.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5670258620689655,0.5816326530612245,0.5514705882352942,0.78125,96.0,100.0
+9528,latent_9528,1212,0.002424,0.0015693904,2.7326212,Lack of explicit comparison in contextually complex cases.,"The model shows high activation when none or very few explicit comparisons to previous imaging are mentioned and instead, findings require more interpretation or contextual judgment from a diagnostic standpoint. Such scenarios often involve scenarios with complex or varying clinical presentations aligning with specific indications.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9529,latent_9529,1921,0.003842,0.0021133244,3.4498475,Comparisons highlighting changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activations typically involve detecting any changes or stable conditions when comparing current images with prior images, especially when the comparison explicitly addresses changes or continuity of specific findings, such as effusion, opacities, or cardiomediastinal characteristics.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9530,latent_9530,4858,0.009716,0.0037277592,2.0850608,Comparison of current findings to previous imaging studies.,"The examples selected for high activation consistently involve the interpretation and description of radiological findings, specifically involving clear comparisons to prior imaging studies to evaluate for changes. This pattern uses past radiographic examinations as a baseline to determine changes, consistency, or progression in patient pathology, which is a crucial aspect of radiologic evaluation focused on stability or change.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9531,latent_9531,783,0.001566,0.0013015618,2.725765,Reports mentioning heart size as 'upper limits of normal' or 'enlarged'.,"The examples throughout this dataset primarily involve cases where the heart size is described in specific terms, such as 'upper limits of normal' or 'mildly enlarged'. These descriptions of heart size are often used to convey a notable observation in chest imaging, distinct from cases where the heart size is not mentioned or described as simply 'normal'.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5096320346320347,0.5329949238578681,0.543859649122807,0.3195876288659793,97.0,100.0
+9532,latent_9532,3174,0.006348,0.0028874439,2.7970436,Noticeable interval change or specific comparison to prior imaging highlighting differences.,"Examples with higher activations mention either an interval change or an explicit noticeable difference in successive radiographs, emphasizing findings that have evolved between images. This pattern is common in serial evaluations, where the focus is on observing changes over time based on comparisons with prior imaging.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9533,latent_9533,507,0.001014,0.0010357054,4.6039724,Normal cardiomediastinal contours and hilar structures.,"These examples consistently discuss normalized cardiomediastinal contours and hilar structures regardless of other findings or patient indications. They repeatedly use standard phrasing to report unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar findings, which is typical in radiology reports.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4917097657438393,0.7361963190184049,0.6179775280898876,0.873015873015873,63.0,100.0
+9534,latent_9534,720,0.00144,0.001670521,5.941245,Change or stability in findings through comparison with prior radiographs.,"The samples showing higher activation levels consistently emphasize alterations in the patient's condition or equipment positioning by comparing the current imaging study to prior ones. These reports denote changes or stability in clinical findings such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, monitoring devices or structural changes within the body as evidenced through comparison with earlier radiography or CT findings, serving as a significant focus point in these reports.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4211580845521939,0.4338624338624338,0.4296875,0.6179775280898876,89.0,100.0
+9535,latent_9535,8458,0.016916,0.0061181593,2.3281693,Comparison of device or intervention positions in imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of radiological findings related to medical devices or interventions like catheters and tubes (such as PICC lines or ET tubes) with specific mention of their positions or intervals changes compared to prior studies. These include the acknowledgment of stable, unchanged, or slightly altered positions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.567391304347826,0.5778894472361809,0.6086956521739131,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+9536,latent_9536,5841,0.011682,0.00456596,2.177158,Comparisons with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation focus on radiological reports that include a comparison with prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability in certain findings, using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'no change from prior', 'unchanged since', and 'compared to previous'.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5161290322580645,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9537,latent_9537,2667,0.005334,0.0023617677,2.7828095,"Explicit, significant findings compared to prior imaging.","The provided examples discuss pathology evaluations largely in the context of past comparisons. However, low-activation examples often lacked actionable or specific changes compared to previous reports. In contrast, higher activation examples feature explicit, significant, or actionable findings or changes, which provide clear and decisive follow-ups or interpretations based on past imaging.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5272727272727272,0.29,100.0,100.0
+9538,latent_9538,898,0.001796,0.0015658227,4.8315797,Stability or lack of change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the absence of significant change or acute findings in the lungs or heart across serial imaging assessments, especially indicating stability despite previous health concerns or known conditions, as indicated by terms like 'no change', 'stable', 'unchanged', 'resolved', or similar language with respect to the imaging findings when compared to prior studies.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4703754424950259,0.4824120603015075,0.4714285714285714,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+9539,latent_9539,1107,0.002214,0.002078159,4.998104,"Comparison of radiological images emphasizing view descriptions, not findings.","The pattern revolves around descriptions that involve comparative evaluation of radiology images without reference to any specific biological findings, but instead about the techniques and the presence of views like frontal and lateral, which appear in multiple examples. This process emphasizes clear description without medical conclusions.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4404545585647948,0.515,0.5086705202312138,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9540,latent_9540,1809,0.003618,0.002813925,4.7006245,Comparison of images with explicit inclusion of lateral views.,"Examples with higher activation mention the presence of frontal and lateral views or comparisons with prior adjudicated images, indicating that the task often focuses on interpreting changes or differences explicitly noted in the reports. While all examples discuss comparisons to previous images, the inclusion of lateral views seems to accentuate the pattern detected.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9541,latent_9541,7299,0.014598,0.005649051,2.7351136,Difficulty in evaluating change between current and prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently showcase scenarios where there is substantial difficulty in determining changes between current and prior radiological images. This nuanced comparison challenge is highlighted through complex cases where differentiating between technical factors or borderline findings and true pathological change is crucial.,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9542,latent_9542,709,0.001418,0.0011985697,3.5724487,Reports involve direct comparison to prior imaging.,"Higher activations consistently occur in examples where there is mention of prior imaging, specifically focusing on comparison phrases such as 'compared to prior chest radiograph', 'no significant change since previous', or 'improved since prior examination'. This indicates a pattern of reports that involve sequential comparison of current imaging to previous studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.481981981981982,0.5027027027027027,0.4744525547445255,0.7647058823529411,85.0,100.0
+9543,latent_9543,3354,0.006708,0.0031297097,2.2999806,Concurrent frontal and lateral chest views with prior image comparison.,"The examples suggest that including both frontal and lateral chest radiographs when analyzing studies, even when there is a prior image for comparison, tends to produce higher activation. This might be due to additional information provided by two viewpoints in assessing the findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.51,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9544,latent_9544,2680,0.00536,0.002879689,4.1195903,Comparison to prior images indicating stability or change in findings.,"The data set predominantly shows that reports make explicit comparisons to previous imaging studies. Most high activation examples involve assessments of stability or change in findings as compared to earlier images, often stating terms like 'as compared to previous','unchanged','improved' or 'constant'. These linguistic constructs identify a critical pattern where stability or minor progression/regression of labeled conditions is being actively monitored and reported.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9545,latent_9545,7196,0.014392,0.005568255,1.8888237,Alterations over sequential radiographs with explicit mentions of changes.,"Models show higher activations when findings or interpretations explicitly contrast or evaluate relative changes over serial radiographs, particularly when additional icons like 'new' are highlighted, providing temporal context within a medical image evaluation framework. This emphasizes findings that have altered over time, with stability or transformation, often over sequential review periods, impacting patterns relevant to the activations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9546,latent_9546,636,0.001272,0.0010322044,3.2616758,Detailed descriptions comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on comparing the findings in the current radiographic image with those in prior images, specifically noting changes, insertions, or stability of features like tubes or lesions. The key pattern is the emphasis on comparison and any resulting implications on the findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4782107152012304,0.480225988700565,0.4157303370786517,0.4805194805194805,77.0,100.0
+9547,latent_9547,2167,0.004334,0.0032673115,2.9556959,Focus on tube and line placement and their comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the description and positioning of medical support devices, specifically endotracheal, nasogastric, and other tubes or lines, with detailed measurements from anatomical landmarks like the carina. The reports emphasize the accuracy and changes in placement of these devices between compared images.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.767182913250329,0.77,0.7213114754098361,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9548,latent_9548,653,0.001306,0.0012737053,4.2914267,Comparison of tube/catheter positions across images.,"These examples highlight reference to the positioning and status of tubes or catheters, particularly how they appear in comparison to prior images, and evaluations of their positioning. This indicates a focus on the relative or changing placement of support devices and ensuing radiological interpretations.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6937969924812031,0.7016574585635359,0.6901408450704225,0.6049382716049383,81.0,100.0
+9549,latent_9549,2135,0.00427,0.0029036393,2.9128933,Position/change in medical devices (tubes/lines) in imaging studies.,"Highly activated samples specifically describe either the position or change in status of tubes or lines (endotracheal, NG tube, or chest tubes), suggesting importance in monitoring or comparison of device positioning related to the current and prior images. This addresses certain technical observations in radiographic evaluations that are crucial for patient management.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3957057675338912,0.435,0.3673469387755102,0.18,100.0,100.0
+9550,latent_9550,572,0.001144,0.0011085928,5.0829735,Low lung volumes and bronchovascular crowding in the chest radiograph findings.,"The examples with high activation levels all describe low lung volumes in the chest imaging, specifically highlighting bronchovascular crowding or limitations in evaluation. This feature often impacts the clarity of findings and correlates with certain clinical conditions or poor inspiratory efforts during radiograph acquisition.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.2857142857142857,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4522019334049409,0.5588235294117647,0.4,0.1428571428571428,70.0,100.0
+9551,latent_9551,7793,0.015586,0.009207978,2.9706101,Reports highlighting normal or mildly enlarged heart size with no acute cardiopulmonary findings.,"The active examples frequently involve descriptions of the heart size being normal or mildly enlarged and the phrase 'No acute cardiopulmonary process' or similar phrases that indicate a non-critical overall assessment. This suggests that the pattern relates to identifying non-severe conditions or findings in the chest radiographic reports where heart size is highlighted, typically remaining within normal limits.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.6,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9552,latent_9552,1915,0.00383,0.0016813773,2.3922791,High activation with partial or ambiguous request info.,"Highly activating examples often involve requests for detailed descriptions or evaluations in comparison to prior images despite lacking comprehensive information like techniques, comparison dates, or full histories. The absence of such details creates ambiguity, leading to higher cognitive load and activation as the model attempts to fill in missing information.",0.2647058823529412,0.36,0.4186046511627907,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4322789943227899,0.51,0.5057471264367817,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9553,latent_9553,476,0.000952,0.0013322174,4.921086,Detailed image comparison and interpretation required.,"Examples with high activation levels involve generating detailed reports based on frontal and lateral images and explicitly reference comparisons with prior images. These involve advanced comparison and interpretation, requiring the explicit detailing of changes or stability of findings, which contrasts with those with low activation where standard procedures or guidelines are present but not comparisons.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4065460809646856,0.4276729559748428,0.3769230769230769,0.8305084745762712,59.0,100.0
+9554,latent_9554,6650,0.0133,0.0051000006,2.0515604,Unusual or complex findings requiring detailed interpretation.,"The highly activated examples mention conditions such as pneumothorax, atelectasis, hiatal hernia, or similar opacities that require interpretation beyond standard findings, suggesting that unusual or complex findings drive significant activation when noted.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5855851279967492,0.5879396984924623,0.5739130434782609,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+9555,latent_9555,7619,0.015238,0.0058627957,3.2497725,High activations with specific lung findings on both frontal and lateral views.,"The scenarios illustrating higher activations involve references to both frontal and lateral chest images along with a focus on specific lung findings such as opacities, possibly explaining the higher activations due to detailed lung pathology.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5542168674698795,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9556,latent_9556,1151,0.002302,0.0015194173,5.2657967,Discussion of endotracheal tube placement or tube positioning near the carina.,"Examples that have high activation levels mention the presence of intubation or evaluation of the positioning of tubes, especially related to the carina. This pattern is not seen in the low activation examples, where there is no focus on tube positioning or respiratory support devices.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.7209590739975197,0.73,0.859375,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9557,latent_9557,9527,0.019054,0.0070110257,1.8974512,Comparison indicating stability or change in findings over time.,"The pattern corresponds to interpretations that include observations of stability or change in radiological findings compared to previous studies. Examples with higher activation levels describe findings in relation to earlier exams, indicating either stability or change.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5904507100226384,0.5979899497487438,0.5793650793650794,0.73,100.0,99.0
+9558,latent_9558,599,0.001198,0.0012187146,3.3939555,Description's comparison task excludes prior report narrative.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a request for a description or comparison of findings between current and prior images, without providing prior report data. This suggests that the task is focused on the new examination, sidestepping past narrative details.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5276619135383323,0.5284090909090909,0.4623655913978494,0.5657894736842105,76.0,100.0
+9559,latent_9559,806,0.001612,0.0014542356,4.3815875,Detailed change assessment compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation often feature assessments where image comparisons to prior imaging are done and clearly documented. These examples use terms like 'stable from prior', 'has increased since prior', or 'compared to the previous', indicating that the description focuses on changes or stability over time.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3982048143614851,0.41,0.375,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9560,latent_9560,4881,0.009762,0.0036108987,1.8130797,Assess change or status through image comparison findings.,"The examples are more activated when they involve identifying specific findings or changes between the current and previous images that require detailed evaluation and assessment. Examples with higher activation levels often include findings of interval changes, specific actionable conditions, or unresolved clinical questions highlighted by the comparison, such as changes in pulmonary status or device positioning.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9561,latent_9561,2090,0.00418,0.0026053358,4.5773478,"Detecting changes post chest tube removal, particularly pneumothorax assessment.","Examples with high activation levels consistently report findings specifically related to changes following chest tube removal, often confirming the absence of pneumothorax while providing a comparative assessment with previous imaging. This indicates the pattern is recognizing the common clinical practice of evaluating for pneumothorax post chest tube removal in imaging reports.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.8582852515436785,0.86,0.9615384615384616,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9562,latent_9562,874,0.001748,0.00153955,3.8514292,Reports involving explicit comparisons with prior imaging.,"The model consistently shows higher activation levels when reports involve the comparison of current imaging against prior imaging studies, using specific language that describes changes or stabilities in medical conditions or features.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4714285714285714,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9563,latent_9563,929,0.001858,0.0014541917,3.543068,Interpreting imaging findings in comparison to prior imaging.,activation 5.0 to 9.0 contains instances where a description is compared to prior imaging for changes.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3463555521775481,0.355,0.3821138211382114,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9564,latent_9564,1113,0.002226,0.0017018586,4.007544,Low lung volumes affecting findings.,"These examples consistently mention reduced lung volumes or low lung volumes, which often results in changes in bronchovascular markings or crowding. This pattern is noted across radiological reports in which low lung volume is recognized as a contributory factor to the findings, distinct from changes related to a specific pathology.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9565,latent_9565,1167,0.002334,0.0016926117,4.173451,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior radiographic findings.,"Highly activated examples involve descriptions of changes or consistency in findings between current and prior imaging, often with specific observations about lung volumes, cardiac size, or different positioning which affect visual comparisons.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4387755102040816,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9566,latent_9566,840,0.00168,0.0017687059,3.472147,Focus on stability and lack of significant change in comparison to prior imaging.,"This set consistently highlights reports that describe findings as 'unchanged' or 'same' compared to prior imaging, specifically mentioning stability, no new changes, or minor updates while maintaining previous conditions noted in prior imaging.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6507936507936507,0.6515151515151515,0.6448598130841121,0.69,100.0,98.0
+9567,latent_9567,899,0.001798,0.0016977644,4.0994787,Description of interval change between current and prior chest radiographs.,"The pattern involves descriptions of interval change or stability when comparing two chest radiographs. The texts consistently emphasize whether conditions such as pleural effusion, lung volumes, or cardiomegaly have changed compared to prior imaging. Activation levels correlate with this comparison-based evaluation.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.5959595959595959,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9568,latent_9568,1031,0.002062,0.0017428081,2.7419572,Comparison focusing on thoracic aorta tortuosity or calcification.,"Most examples with high activation levels involve descriptions comparing current images to previous ones, specifically noting changes or stability in the thoracic aorta's appearance, particularly its tortuosity and calcifications. This indicates a focus on evaluating its stability or alteration over time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6310061766357389,0.655,0.8163265306122449,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9569,latent_9569,4403,0.008806,0.0034791697,2.333746,Explicit request to compare current findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activations describe radiological findings with explicit requests to provide a description of current imaging findings in direct comparison to prior images, often using the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This is a specific instruction pattern, enhancing activation due to its emphasis on direct comparative analysis.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5368421052631579,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9570,latent_9570,617,0.001234,0.0013731677,3.7555244,"Repeated notation of ""no acute cardiopulmonary abnormality"" and comparison with prior images.","The examples with high activation levels frequently conclude with an invitation to describe findings in comparison to a prior image, where there is no discernible change noted. These reports typically confirm stability of features or cardiovascular silhouette amongst a list of standard structural checks.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6963162623539982,0.7159763313609467,0.6842105263157895,0.5652173913043478,69.0,100.0
+9571,latent_9571,664,0.001328,0.0013162132,3.6511996,Description of findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently demonstrate a clear description of findings in relation to the prior image with specific attention to changes or stability in conditions. Descriptions include terms like 'compared to prior', 'stable appearance', 'interval change', or specific observational phrases indicating comparison, frequently across multiple exam views.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5104788999525842,0.5112359550561798,0.4622641509433962,0.620253164556962,79.0,99.0
+9572,latent_9572,1460,0.00292,0.0019838987,3.0232644,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"Activation levels are high when a description explicitly compares current imaging with prior imaging studies, often using phrases like 'as compared to', 'has remained', 'interval', 'unchanged', or specific references to earlier dates. These comparisons help in identifying stability or changes in pathology over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9573,latent_9573,1362,0.002724,0.0016220195,2.9379504,Evaluations based on comparison with prior images.,"Most of the examples involving higher activation levels feature evaluations based on comparisons between current and prior images. They often use terms indicating a new finding or absence of change, specifically looking for intervals or stability in a radiological sense, such as stable cardiomediastinal silhouette, unchanged pulmonary opacities, or evaluations for intervals and changes from previous studies.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4950061721467849,0.55,0.5301204819277109,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9574,latent_9574,7956,0.015912,0.0059597855,2.2580001,Highlights findings with notable changes from prior images.,"Reports with higher activation levels consistently contain a change or notable finding when compared to previous images. Despite findings being stable, these descriptions specifically mention changes noted in comparison, such as minimal increase in or improvement of specific findings relative to past images, emphasizing the continuity of detailed monitoring.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5989974937343359,0.6,0.6111111111111112,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9575,latent_9575,1128,0.002256,0.0014158541,3.2192137,"Direct requests for finding comparisons with prior images, even when not feasible.","Samples with high activation levels often include requests for providing findings or descriptions in comparison to prior images, despite the assistant's instructions to do so even when comparison is not available or relevant. The presence of clear references to or instructions for comparison against prior evaluations in the text boosts the activations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9576,latent_9576,590,0.00118,0.0013266709,3.755739,Comparison involving both frontal and lateral images against a prior study.,"High activation examples consistently include references to both current frontal and lateral images compared against a prior frontal image, while low activation examples either lack lateral images or meaningful changes relative to prior studies. This suggests the pattern is recognizing the comprehensive comparison of multiple image views to prior studies.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5704962088492178,0.5810055865921788,0.5277777777777778,0.4810126582278481,79.0,100.0
+9577,latent_9577,1417,0.002834,0.0016466322,3.8642793,Interval changes or stability of findings in comparison with previous images.,"These examples describe findings in the context of comparing current images with prior images, particularly noting changes or stability of certain features like effusions, opacities, or lines. The pattern focuses on describing interval changes, improvements, or stable findings based on previous imaging, highlighting medical evaluation of the progression or remission of conditions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9578,latent_9578,1085,0.00217,0.0016199641,3.0047617,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Sentences containing direct comparisons between the current and prior imaging views tend to have higher activations, usually featuring details about the findings or affirming stability or changes from earlier images. This indicates the model is attuned to assess stability and changes as an essential part of analysis in radiology.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4228657524451594,0.435,0.4496124031007752,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9579,latent_9579,1691,0.003382,0.0022698303,3.5920596,Stable tube/device positioning with pulmonary changes over time compared to prior study.,"Examples with high activation levels describe stability in the position of tubes or devices across comparison studies alongside significant changes in pulmonary findings. This pattern suggests that stationary medical devices like tubes are not reflective of unstable pulmonary conditions, which leads to greater focus on reporting only pulmonary changes, resulting in higher activation.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.75997599759976,0.76,0.7653061224489796,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9580,latent_9580,788,0.001576,0.0011660287,4.019174,Instructions to compare findings with prior images are emphasized.,"Samples with higher activation levels frequently mention the need to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior instances, often listed alongside a clinical indication and imaging technique, which seems to be a prominent pattern across these examples. Lower activation samples more commonly lack clinical indications or do not specify comparison needs.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4734232498394348,0.4824120603015075,0.4841269841269841,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+9581,latent_9581,891,0.001782,0.0017305788,3.3509312,Emphasis on interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings in radiology studies explicitly in comparison with prior frontal images, emphasizing changes or the stability of findings over multiple visits. This pattern utilizes language addressing interval changes, stability, or resolution of observed abnormalities in the context of previous imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5263157894736842,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9582,latent_9582,2985,0.00597,0.002812476,2.9485273,Detailed description and analysis of medical tubes or lines in imaging.,"Many examples with higher activation levels involve detailed analysis and description of medical lines or tubes like NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, and central venous catheters. This includes noting placement, position, or interval changes, which are crucial for clinicians assessing patient status from radiographs.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4426229508196721,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9583,latent_9583,644,0.001288,0.001610856,5.237265,"Reports describing current imaging findings in comparison to prior images, indicating acute or altered findings.","The pattern focuses on providing radiological reports that involve comparisons to prior imaging, particularly those that identify acute or significant findings. The prompts with high activation scores consistently mention details of current findings in the context of previous comparisons.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3150912106135987,0.327683615819209,0.2236842105263158,0.2207792207792207,77.0,100.0
+9584,latent_9584,1485,0.00297,0.0020804182,3.2287128,Documentation of comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve instructions to compare the current imaging study with a prior study and the provision of detailed radiological findings, whether actual changes are noted or not. They also tend to report stability or minor changes. This suggests that the pattern the model is looking for is the comparative analysis process in radiology without requiring significant changes in findings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4455086198205464,0.45,0.4576271186440678,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9585,latent_9585,731,0.001462,0.0013910579,3.9667807,Pleural thickening or effusion comparatively analyzed with past studies.,"Highly activated samples repeatedly describe pleural conditions such as effusion, thickening or other pleural abnormalities, often with comparisons to prior imaging findings. Keywords identifying these conditions include 'pleural thickening' and 'pleural effusion', indicating a specific pattern concerning pleural pathologies.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5653011204481793,0.5916230366492147,0.6226415094339622,0.3626373626373626,91.0,100.0
+9586,latent_9586,10060,0.02012,0.007421043,2.0806606,Emphasis on cardiac and mediastinal contours being normal or unchanged without acute issues.,"High activation occurs with reports that primarily describe findings relative to the normalcy or unchanged status of the heart, mediastinal silhouettes, lungs, and hilar contours in the absence of acute changes or pleural effusions or pneumothorax. Reports often conclude with a statement of no acute cardiopulmonary process or maintain intra-thoracic stability.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4421052631578947,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9587,latent_9587,2527,0.005054,0.0022129924,2.478632,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"These examples largely describe comparison with previous imaging studies to evaluate for changes such as stability or interval change of specific findings. This is articulated through phrases like 'compared to prior', 'as before', and reference to specific dates or previous studies. They commonly include an assessment of stability or change in well-defined clinical indications like effusions, pneumothorax, or other cardiopulmonary assessments.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9588,latent_9588,568,0.001136,0.0011250033,3.5161567,New radiological findings reported without prior image comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels reflect radiological studies where current findings are reported without direct comparison to prior images, despite the prompt requesting comparison, usually indicated as 'N/A' in the comparison field. This pattern reflects a focus on the immediate findings, often associated with acute scenarios or new symptoms, where detailed prior comparison is not available or not prioritized.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5764411027568922,0.621301775147929,0.5555555555555556,0.3623188405797101,69.0,100.0
+9589,latent_9589,5574,0.011148,0.004318941,2.437436,Stable medical devices or surgical elements in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels include clear or normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours and the presence of medical devices or changes from surgery that are stable, indicating a focus on stable post-procedural states or unremarkable cardiomediastinal findings in the presence of interventions.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9590,latent_9590,1214,0.002428,0.0019842132,3.7131262,Explicit comparison to prior imaging identifying stable findings.,A key pattern in these examples is the use of explicit comparison to prior imaging studies or specifying stable findings in such comparisons. The descriptions often include detailed evaluations of changes or unchanged status in pathological or anatomical features observed in the images.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5846153846153846,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9591,latent_9591,822,0.001644,0.0016684302,3.9153512,Focus on comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation prominently request a description comparing the current imaging findings to a prior image, emphasizing the importance of comparison or stability of findings over time. This consistent requirement in the prompt suggests that the task heavily relies on prior referencing as the core pattern.",0.24,0.24,0.24,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.2990408415841584,0.299492385786802,0.3047619047619048,0.3298969072164948,97.0,100.0
+9592,latent_9592,973,0.001946,0.0016823567,3.2106805,Focus on evaluating interval changes and post-operative status.,"This pattern likely focuses on outlining the interpretative task given in the prompt explicitly when addressing radiological findings, as indicated by phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' Highly activated examples focus on the evaluation of changes compared with prior images, often associated with procedural history or follow-up on post-operative status, indicated by terms such as 'status post' or specific procedural references like 'TAVR' or 'thoracoscopy'.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4197633643633794,0.425,0.4369747899159664,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9593,latent_9593,1171,0.002342,0.001638912,3.141221,Normal cardiac silhouette with notable aortic findings.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe normal cardiac silhouette or heart size along with specific aortic findings like tortuosity or calcifications. This matches with the previous task of identifying normal cardiac features amidst other thoracic abnormalities.,0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4018069131386636,0.515,0.6153846153846154,0.08,100.0,100.0
+9594,latent_9594,4781,0.009562,0.0037832484,2.1649559,Request for a comparison description of current and prior radiological findings.,"The high activation examples include specific language requesting a description of radiological findings in relation to a prior image. The pattern appears to be centered around the act of providing clinical interpretations or summaries of radiological findings in the context of comparison to previous studies, an essential aspect of radiology practice and communication.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4554512802687985,0.53,0.5172413793103449,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9595,latent_9595,792,0.001584,0.0012746191,6.1647468,Pattern focuses on respiratory distress assessment.,"Both respiratory conditions and their exacerbations are addressed frequently, often in conjunction with comparisons to previous imaging. Examples with high activation mention possible pneumonia, asthma exacerbation, or other respiratory symptoms, suggesting a pattern focused on identifying respiratory issues. ",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9596,latent_9596,3303,0.006606,0.003904776,3.2998385,Stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"This pattern involves reports where the facilitator mentions a clear statement about comparison with prior imaging but still observes consistency or stability in changes, describing either no change or expected progression, even when there are multiple images provided. Activation is higher when there is a mention of stability or expected change in conditions where otherwise significant changes might be expected.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,100.0,100.0
+9597,latent_9597,6722,0.013444,0.0050772345,1.718553,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging in radiology findings.,"The activation levels are higher when the examples describe radiological findings using explicit comparisons with prior imaging. This pattern indicates that the model is identifying reports that maintain continuity in patient status over time by referencing previous examinations, a common clinical practice in medical imaging to track progress or changes over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9598,latent_9598,815,0.00163,0.0014977653,3.2394016,Detailed comparison to prior imaging in findings and impressions.,The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed radiological descriptions accompanied by comparison with prior images. The emphasis is on analyzing changes over time or stability of clinical findings. This is indicative of a pattern involving comparative evaluations rather than initial screenings.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4299429942994299,0.43,0.4285714285714285,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9599,latent_9599,3980,0.00796,0.0031107292,2.4990265,Interpretation involves findings from multiple chest views and comparison to prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently detail findings from multiple chest view images, such as frontal and lateral. They include comparisons to previous imaging for assessing interval changes and utilize specific diagnostic indications implying acute or notable conditions.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9600,latent_9600,732,0.001464,0.0010662015,6.4613547,Normal or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels describe normal or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging studies. This suggests that the activation pattern is focusing on stability or non-progression in radiological findings rather than detecting new or worsening conditions.,0.5274633123689727,0.5306122448979592,0.5238095238095238,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4658738216098622,0.4677419354838709,0.4318181818181818,0.4367816091954023,87.0,99.0
+9601,latent_9601,8579,0.017158,0.0064959307,2.1752439,Comparison of findings between current and prior images showing changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve both the current and prior frontal images, emphasizing comparisons between them regarding pathological findings, location changes, or improvements/worsenings. This indicates a focus on examining changes relative to the prior radiograph, often mentioning interval changes or stability in findings.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9602,latent_9602,984,0.001968,0.0017423994,2.966673,Detailed comparisons between current and prior chest images.,"The pattern described includes making direct comparisons between current and prior imaging of the chest, often across multiple views, to highlight stability or change in findings. High activations consistently occur in instances where detailed comparisons between current and past images are made to remark on stability or changes in the condition being assessed.",0.2694805194805195,0.28,0.2105263157894736,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9603,latent_9603,765,0.00153,0.0012353156,4.0835905,Presence of frontal/lateral chest views without prior comparison.,"The highest activation levels correspond to examples where both 'frontal' and 'lateral' views of the chest are provided, but there is 'no prior' comparison available. This suggests the pattern is highly activated by the absence of historic imaging benchmarks in comparative radiology reports.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5364329942503316,0.558974358974359,0.5789473684210527,0.3473684210526316,95.0,100.0
+9604,latent_9604,5306,0.010612,0.0043165265,1.9742548,"Interval changes in imaging findings, with comparisons to prior studies.","The highly active examples consistently involve descriptions of changes in imaging findings over time, especially in terms of interval changes in abnormalities such as opacities, effusions, or opacification. Descriptions make direct comparisons to prior studies, emphasizing on how abnormalities have progressed or resolved over time, often suggesting clinical implications or the need for further evaluation.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9605,latent_9605,1852,0.003704,0.0027908755,2.463284,Unremarkable stability compared to prior imaging without acute changes.,"High activation examples consistently include a stable or unchanged state in radiological findings with no acute changes noted, which are compared to prior imaging for consistency. Terms like 'no focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax', 'unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes', and 'comparison' are frequently seen in these stable or unchanged descriptions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9606,latent_9606,923,0.001846,0.001456794,3.5057638,Comparison with prior imaging to inform findings on current imaging.,"The examples show that a significant effort is exerted in comparing the current imaging findings with prior imaging, which can include changes in items like pleural effusions, pneumonia, and effusion drainage. This comparison forms a recurrent theme where changes from previous studies or comparisons are highlighted to infer stability or changes in the patient's condition.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9607,latent_9607,3231,0.006462,0.0026476795,2.381514,Direct comparisons to prior studies in imaging reports.,"The common linguistic element across the examples with higher activation levels is the use of direct, clear comparisons to prior studies. This is a routine aspect of radiological assessments which aids in identifying changes or stability in patient conditions. The inclusion of previous study dates and specific mentions of comparisons highlight this pattern.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9608,latent_9608,1213,0.002426,0.0016835673,3.4907675,Evaluation and comparison of fluid overload or related signs to prior imaging.,"The strongly activated examples describe cases where fluid overload and conditions leading to it, like pulmonary edema or pleural effusions, are evaluated and compared to previous studies, often in patients with predisposing conditions like heart failure.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5888888888888889,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9609,latent_9609,933,0.001866,0.0016642842,2.4345136,Comparisons to prior imaging focus on stable or unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently contain comparisons between current imaging findings and prior imaging exams. These comparisons often explicitly describe the condition of features like cardiac silhouette size or pulmonary characteristics in relation to previous findings, such as stability, enlargement, or changes. Examples that do not do this tend to have low activation.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5454545454545454,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9610,latent_9610,642,0.001284,0.0013283349,2.4997644,Multiple imaging comparisons for complex conditions or severe illness.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include diagnostic evaluations concerning complex or severe medical conditions, often involving multiple pathologies or complications. These reports emphasize a thorough examination of potential interval changes over multiple imaging instances, typically for patients with severe or multiple health issues.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5968143354902937,0.6,0.5344827586206896,0.775,80.0,100.0
+9611,latent_9611,2165,0.00433,0.0018392538,2.6260629,Use of multi-view imaging and explicit comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings that include multiple imaging angles (frontal and lateral views), and the observations explicitly compare current imaging against prior studies or indicate monitoring of medical devices. This linguistic pattern indicates the model is focused on identifying technical or diagnostic details in such comparative contexts.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9612,latent_9612,10561,0.021122,0.0075796787,1.3426933,Explicit changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature explicit comparisons highlighting changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies, specifically focusing on changes such as intervals of pulmonary or pleural abnormalities, new findings, or notable stability of prior conditions. These statements often conclude with recommendations or interpretations based on observed changes.
+",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6482765551200884,0.65,0.631578947368421,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9613,latent_9613,1304,0.002608,0.001958498,3.8860445,Clear lungs without significant pathology.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe clear lungs without significant pathology, using terms like 'lungs are clear', 'without consolidation', 'no pleural effusion', or 'pneumothorax'. This pattern indicates that the model is likely identifying reports where normal or unremarkable findings are noted, particularly concerning the lungs.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7439180537772088,0.745,0.7168141592920354,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9614,latent_9614,2207,0.004414,0.0022353732,2.8471901,Detailed evaluations and changes in positioning of tubes or invasive equipment.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve direct evaluations of positioning or observations related to tubes and other invasive equipment, such as enteric tubes, catheters, or stents, with specific comparisons to prior images or studies to note changes in position or other observational details. This specificity regarding equipment and position is what triggers high activation levels.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4545454545454545,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9615,latent_9615,773,0.001546,0.0014818644,3.324356,Comparison of current and prior radiology images noting changes or stability.,"The text samples that received high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings with direct comparisons between current and prior images. These descriptions often note changes (or lack thereof) in medical devices, pathological findings, or anatomical structures, indicating the model's pattern focus on detecting comparative evaluations in medical imaging reports.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9616,latent_9616,844,0.001688,0.0016118243,3.4359257,Active sternotomy or CABG postoperative status.,"The highly activated examples all frequently mention a status post median sternotomy, CABG (coronary artery bypass grafting), or a similar sternotomy-related cardiac procedure. This suggests that the model activation is keyed to imaging findings consistent with postoperative cardiac surgery.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7851662404092072,0.79,0.9142857142857144,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9617,latent_9617,1157,0.002314,0.0016743483,4.853846,Reports describing normal cardiopulmonary findings despite symptomatic history.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on reports that emphasize the patient's history or symptoms, such as cough or chest pain, in correlation with a normal cardiopulmonary status upon evaluation (""lungs are clear,"" ""heart size is normal""). These samples highlight the importance of the symptom in contrast to the imaging findings.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6997297567811029,0.7,0.7127659574468085,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9618,latent_9618,789,0.001578,0.0014780781,3.9679816,References to clavicular abnormalities or changes.,"The examples with high activations describe changes in or refer to specifically the clavicle, such as fractures, discontinuity, or other abnormalities. These examples show a pattern of identifying clavicular issues, likely because they're focusing on key structural changes or injuries in the thoracic area.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5616848151250449,0.6262626262626263,1.0,0.2448979591836734,98.0,100.0
+9619,latent_9619,1128,0.002256,0.0017090087,4.1624117,Comparison to prior imaging for interval change.,Activation levels indicate the presence of comparisons to previous studies for any change. The pattern doesn't require an unchanged finding but just the act of comparing findings to previous images to establish stability or change over time.,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5691374770605601,0.595,0.5637583892617449,0.84,100.0,100.0
+9620,latent_9620,695,0.00139,0.0013094791,4.3550477,Direct comparison of findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing detailed descriptions of current and prior imaging findings. These descriptions often compare current observations against prior images without relying on additional context or complicated setups. This straightforward comparison of images ensures easy pattern recognition, which seems key to the observed activation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4715952644578826,0.4734042553191489,0.4504504504504504,0.5681818181818182,88.0,100.0
+9621,latent_9621,851,0.001702,0.0015514921,2.907906,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette without acute changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention the absence of acute changes and a stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or normal cardiac silhouette. These reports tend to provide reassurance by emphasizing the lack of acute findings or changes compared to previous images, which may correlate with higher activation.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9622,latent_9622,1541,0.003082,0.0018650724,4.1950088,Explicit prompts for assistant to describe radiology findings.,"Highly activated examples include direct requests or explicit indications for an assistant to provide descriptions of radiology findings based on the images, emphasizing the explicit interaction or task handover to the assistant, which is a notable pattern across these activations.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4705882352941176,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9623,latent_9623,1405,0.00281,0.0020376528,2.9311376,Presence or reference to medical devices or interventions.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include references to devices or interventions such as tubes, catheters, or recent surgeries. This indicates a focus on medical interventions or devices present in the imaging or recent clinical interventions which might affect the anatomy seen.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4337662337662338,0.4494949494949495,0.417910447761194,0.2857142857142857,98.0,100.0
+9624,latent_9624,3892,0.007784,0.003574377,3.6035032,Comparison of cardiac and mediastinal silhouette with prior imaging.,"The examples with non-zero activations emphasize descriptions relating to changes or evaluations of the cardiac and mediastinal silhouette, including stability or changes that's compared with previous images. The lower activation for situations merely mentioning them as unchanged or normal supports this focus rather than simple mentions.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5858585858585859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9625,latent_9625,789,0.001578,0.0015290673,4.2411523,Reports querying or describing pneumonia or infectious processes.,"Prompts describing radiological findings that specifically include indications or findings related to infection, particularly pneumonia, exhibit higher activation levels. Keywords like 'pneumonia', 'infection', or 'consolidation' are often mentioned alongside report details that evaluate for infectious processes.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6021253556948956,0.605,0.6265060240963856,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9626,latent_9626,3055,0.00611,0.0028526064,3.9768276,Comparison with prior imaging across multiple views; detailed assessments of changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often provide explanations of key findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, utilizing multiple imaging views for detailed assessment. These comparisons highlight significant changes, such as interval removal of tubes, stability of key features like the cardiac silhouette, or improvements/resolutions of previous findings. Descriptions often detail changes potentially significant to patient management.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9627,latent_9627,879,0.001758,0.0014289167,3.667592,Comparative analysis with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The pattern involves examining radiological findings in comparison with previous imaging studies, especially noting any interval changes. Descriptions often include relative comparisons such as 'no significant interval change', 'compared with prior radiograph', or terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', indicating longitudinal evaluation of the findings.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9628,latent_9628,1058,0.002116,0.0016897096,3.502987,Reports using standard language to state normal findings in chest imaging.,"The highly activated examples generally provide radiological findings and explicitly state that there is nothing acutely abnormal found, utilizing standard assessment language for normal findings like 'no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax', and 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal.' These phrases confirm the absence of acute conditions and this linguistic pattern is consistently similar across high activation examples.",0.7951505016722409,0.7959183673469388,0.75,0.875,24.0,25.0,0.7837837837837838,0.785,0.7478260869565218,0.86,100.0,100.0
+9629,latent_9629,754,0.001508,0.0014312657,3.2714581,Significant interval change or stability in comparison with prior radiological findings.,"High activations correspond with examples mentioning a specific radiological finding or indicator, typically a comparison with prior images related to significant pathologies like effusions, pneumothorax, or changes in aortic structure. These findings detail a meaningful interval change or stability of a noted condition, especially in cases of effusion, pneumothorax, or aortic changes.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4831781604460191,0.5,0.4769230769230769,0.3297872340425531,94.0,100.0
+9630,latent_9630,3047,0.006094,0.002817543,2.2471728,Descriptions specify changes since prior imaging.,"The higher activation samples commonly feature comparisons made with a prior imaging study and focus on the observation of changes such as stabilization, improvement, or worsening of a condition observed between the initial and follow-up imaging.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4874886946035573,0.49,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9631,latent_9631,558,0.001116,0.0012190104,3.8631759,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as normal. This is a common finding where radiologists often comment on these structures' appearance to confirm the absence of abnormalities, as it reflects no significant change or disease in these regions.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6067681895093062,0.6204819277108434,0.5294117647058824,0.5373134328358209,67.0,99.0
+9632,latent_9632,4964,0.009928,0.0035228215,1.2165267,Focus on tube positioning or changes in radiological studies.,"The activation levels indicate a focus on cases with endotracheal or enteric tubes and their positional descriptions. These examples repeatedly highlight the position and changes in the placement of these medical devices in relation to prior imaging, reflecting a keen interest in monitoring their consistent positioning or noting any changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9633,latent_9633,8037,0.016074,0.0070235673,3.766132,Little interval change or slight improvement in findings on comparison.,The pattern involves stabilizing trends or slight increases observed in sequential radiological examinations. More likely to relate to conditions like fluid levels or lines positioning but does not achieve the significant changes usually detected in evaluations seeking acute pathologies.,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5555555555555556,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9634,latent_9634,2451,0.004902,0.0023226195,2.959121,Detailed comparison emphasizing technical and positional adjustments impacting interpretation.,Examples with high activation levels all emphasize patient positioning detail or procedural change in between comparative studies. They mention explicit comparisons with detailed focus on technical aspects of positioning or procedural adjustments impacting findings.,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9635,latent_9635,1448,0.002896,0.0019879148,2.6617403,Changes in interval findings compared to previous radiographs.,"These examples consistently discuss the relative change in findings compared to previous radiographs. Adjustments or stability in conditions such as fluid overload, nodules, pneumothorax, or consolidations are emphasized, indicating a pattern focused on interval changes observed in comparison to prior imaging.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9636,latent_9636,2511,0.005022,0.0030384946,2.1045122,"Explicit comparisons with prior imaging, noting stability or changes in findings.","Examples with high activation levels illustrate a pattern of comparing current and previous imaging studies, particularly when changes or stability in pathology or findings are clearly outlined. These examples often include observations about the respiratory or cardiac system stability, the presence of effusions or other features, and most importantly, significant emphasis on prior imaging for comparison.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9637,latent_9637,3148,0.006296,0.0028803921,2.633492,Detailed analysis of stability or changes in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with highest activation all specify the comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, often noting stability or changes in conditions. They involve a detailed comparison process commonly seen in radiology to track the progress or stability of medical conditions over time using precise observational data from images.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6181288312732389,0.62,0.6052631578947368,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9638,latent_9638,1942,0.003884,0.001941195,4.2651668,"Detailed comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies, highlighting stability or changes.","Higher activation levels correspond to examples where there is a detailed comparison of current imaging findings with prior radiographic exams, highlighting differences or stability over time. There is a specific focus on comparing changes in pulmonary conditions, such as pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, or vascular congestion.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9639,latent_9639,1058,0.002116,0.0015469169,4.717598,Specific positioning of medical devices in imaging studies.,"A common attribute among high-activation examples is the specification of the placement and position of medical devices within the body, like pacemaker leads, endotracheal, or nasoenteric tubes. This specificity and the mention of device position compared to prior imaging are salient features that increase model activation.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7385284010511421,0.7386934673366834,0.7238095238095238,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+9640,latent_9640,1177,0.002354,0.0018788052,3.799952,Detailed comparison or change description between prior and current imaging.,"The pattern present in examples with higher activations is the presence of detailed comparisons or descriptions of changes based on imaging studies, often noting stabilization, recurrence, or opacities across prior and current images. In contrast, examples with lower activations emphasize findings within a single study without such comparisons.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4455445544554455,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9641,latent_9641,874,0.001748,0.0013769327,4.099909,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images emphasizing stability or subtle changes.,"The commonality in high activation examples is detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons to prior images, often involving subtle changes or stability in certain conditions, alongside consistent usage of prior findings for reference. These reports focus on subtle evolutions in findings, comparing them rigorously to historical imaging.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4680851063829787,0.44,100.0,100.0
+9642,latent_9642,2732,0.005464,0.0026774446,3.5179935,Emphasis on the positioning or changes in medical devices or implants.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on the presence and position of medical devices such as tubes, lines, and catheters, highlighting changes or stability in their placement. These reports typically include language that compares current and prior studies, specifically emphasizing these details.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6798719487795117,0.68,0.6730769230769231,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9643,latent_9643,1302,0.002604,0.0018434005,3.1158438,Utilizing both current frontal and lateral images for comparison with prior imaging.,"Higher activations are seen in examples involving comparisons with both current frontal and lateral images in addition to prior imaging, and where direct comparisons to prior findings are emphasized. The inclusion of lateral images allows for a more comprehensive evaluation, which aligns with the higher activation levels indicating these scenarios match the pattern of interest better.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9644,latent_9644,1299,0.002598,0.0016870884,2.667736,"Changes in findings compared to prior images, especially in pathologies or device positions.","Examples with high activation levels focus on interpreting the changes noted from previous studies, highlighting terms such as 'no significant interval change,' 'improvement,' 'enhancement,' or 'unchanged,' often in the context of medical devices, lung opacities, or monitoring conditions over time. They include clear descriptions regarding shifts in findings from prior evaluations, typically post-operative statuses or device placements like ET tubes, in comparison to earlier images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4516129032258064,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9645,latent_9645,719,0.001438,0.0012186294,4.4301004,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette across comparisons.,"The description of unchanging cardiomediastinal borders, absence of pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or consolidation reflects normal findings that do not specify acute pathology but rather consistent, stable findings across imaging comparisons.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7331516555389017,0.734375,0.735632183908046,0.6956521739130435,92.0,100.0
+9646,latent_9646,1672,0.003344,0.0018483433,3.907052,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in chest radiographs.,"Highly activated examples report on normal cardiovascular findings or the absence of acute abnormalities specifically focused on the heart and surrounding structures. The purpose likely emphasizes normal findings or the exclusion of certain conditions in chest radiographs, as seen in the stable, normal mediastinal and hilar contours of these examples.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6286631874749097,0.63,0.6477272727272727,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9647,latent_9647,1554,0.003108,0.0022838297,3.1236753,Stable cardiac device positions in comparison to prior imaging.,"The data samples show radiology reports focusing on cardiac devices and their lead positions. Reports often mention similar anatomical regions, such as the right atrium or right ventricle, indicating the stable position of these devices compared to prior imaging. This focus on cardiac devices is a recurring theme among the examples with high activation levels.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5062288941229887,0.565,0.7096774193548387,0.22,100.0,100.0
+9648,latent_9648,5260,0.01052,0.004053745,3.109873,Comparison of current to previous imaging findings indicating stability or change.,"This pattern is characterized by comparing current radiological findings to previous ones, typically leading to a conclusion or noting stability over time. Reports with explicit comparisons to past studies highlight this more distinctly, and activations reflect the presence of this linguistic and diagnostic pattern.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9649,latent_9649,6611,0.013222,0.005005993,1.6288835,Evaluation of findings with reference to multiple images in relation to prior comparisons.,"The pattern identified in these examples involves a consistent reference to multiple images across both current and prior time points, as specified by noting comparisons. These examples frequently involve evaluations of changes in medical conditions or placements of medical devices or tubes within the chest, as punctuated by 'comparison to prior' or similar phrasing about multiple images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4068188620717803,0.455,0.4713375796178344,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9650,latent_9650,14180,0.02836,0.010359102,1.7365031,Analysis or comparison of current imaging with prior studies to assess changes.,"Examples with an activation suggest a focus on analysis of current and prior images, particularly those detailing changes or stability over time, while examples with activation close to zero often forego such direct historical comparison or lack specific prompts to assess changes.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9651,latent_9651,867,0.001734,0.0015288846,4.1642346,No significant change compared to prior radiograph.,"Examples focus on textual cues indicating stability or lack of change following a comparative analysis of current findings with prior imaging studies. The steady-state language, ""no relevant change"" or similar phrases, signals a fundamental shared pattern across high activation samples.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.6166666666666667,0.37,100.0,100.0
+9652,latent_9652,3154,0.006308,0.002870842,2.9490788,Presence of current and prior imaging for comparison.,"Higher activation levels are consistently associated with instances where both the current and prior image are provided for detailed comparison of findings. Examples consistently feature explicit notes on comparison between two reports, regardless of findings or techniques used.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9653,latent_9653,1207,0.002414,0.0014259097,3.2239141,Monitoring changes in metastatic or malignant conditions via comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the detection and analysis of metastatic or malignant processes in comparison to prior imaging. This pattern is crucial for monitoring progression or stability concerning malignancy, often highlighted using terms like 'metastases', 'nodule', 'effusion', and comparison to prior imaging.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.6097560975609756,0.25,100.0,100.0
+9654,latent_9654,11232,0.022464,0.0082893465,1.7697101,Presence of medically significant findings or changes in current image.,"The common thread among examples with higher activation scores is the presence of specific descriptions and direct interpretations of radiological findings visible in the current image. These examples require precise evaluation as they often include medical conditions, devices, or changes that need detailed assessment, possibly related to current pathology or treatment.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5907928388746804,0.6,0.5769230769230769,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9655,latent_9655,8681,0.017362,0.0065099187,1.6558119,Analyzing interval changes in medical imaging by comparing to previous studies.,"Examples with heightened activation levels involve comparing current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on changes or stability in structural or pathological presentations. This pattern reflects a core function in medical imaging analysis where comparison aids diagnosis, particularly for interval changes.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.475177304964539,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9656,latent_9656,1608,0.003216,0.0020182985,2.4710188,Requests for imaging interpretations without prior comparisons available.,"Examples with high activations involved descriptions of findings in radiology imagery where explicit comparisons were described, but did not require external references or previous reports, as indicated by phrases stating 'provide a description', 'findings', or 'impression', typically focusing on analytical or evaluative content beyond basic observations. These lack earlier imaging or full sets of history yet ask for interpretation as though prior specifics are unavailable in conclusions or impressions sessions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4742268041237113,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9657,latent_9657,8295,0.01659,0.006043957,1.7705891,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' and detailed findings comparison.,"Examples with higher activations explicitly link a prior report or findings to a radiological study while providing a detailed assessment of imaging changes, often indicating findings or stability over time, as compared to the prior image. They usually include the phrases 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'FINDINGS', 'COMPARISON', and some change or detailed comparison in findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9658,latent_9658,2613,0.005226,0.0030528696,3.008825,Directive for findings comparison with prior imaging.,"The common pattern in these examples involves a directive to evaluate or assess the radiological findings explicitly against a specified prior study. These instructions are often provided in prompts after a 'Provide a description...' directive, indicating a pattern where there's an effort to linearly trace changes or assess findings over time with direct comparative statements.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4705882352941176,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9659,latent_9659,1027,0.002054,0.0016721316,5.10363,Detection of free air under diaphragm or hemidiaphragm changes.,"The examples with higher activations frequently involve observations related to free air or changes in the hemidiaphragm, often seen in post-surgical contexts suggesting pneumoperitoneum or evaluation for pneumothorax, consistent with urgent assessment in these conditions.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.778207607994842,0.785,0.9384615384615383,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9660,latent_9660,1404,0.002808,0.002173371,4.4641376,Emphasis on tube positioning using measured distances.,"Examples with high activation compare current with prior images specifically noting positions of tubes and other support devices like endotracheal and nasogastric tubes. These examples focus on exact measurements, indicating consistency in tube positioning or noting slight changes in placement. This suggests a pattern where the model identifies and prioritizes reports emphasizing precise tube positioning using numerical measurements related to the carina or similar anatomical landmarks.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6169964752574172,0.655,0.918918918918919,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9661,latent_9661,826,0.001652,0.0013117853,3.2063582,Explicit evaluation of interval changes on radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels consist of descriptions that explicitly compare current and previous radiographs, indicating whether specific features (such as lines, tubes, or pathology) have changed. Examples with low activation often lack this direct comparison or only mention stable features without specific interval changes.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5107838913247332,0.5125628140703518,0.5135135135135135,0.57,100.0,99.0
+9662,latent_9662,11571,0.023142,0.008416879,2.2926493,Changes in medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions of changes in devices, such as pacemakers, tubes, or catheters, between the current and prior radiographic imaging. This focus on device position alterations is distinct from other findings like lung pathology or heart size.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,100.0,100.0
+9663,latent_9663,5773,0.011546,0.004329397,1.5452402,Device positioning or change in findings influencing management decisions.,"The examples with higher activations often involve abnormalities in the positioning or status of medical devices or findings that can influence clinical management, such as pacemaker placement, nasogastric tubes, and changes in pleural effusions or pneumothorax size. These examples likely highlight clinical scenarios where comparisons to prior studies are critical for management decisions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5074626865671642,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9664,latent_9664,2964,0.005928,0.0027017533,2.3630936,Emphasis on interval change in imaging findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation describe clear pathological changes in imaging findings compared to the prior report or image, such as noted interval improvements or worsening of conditions like consolidations or effusions, while maintaining the same baseline elements (e.g., normal heart size). Reports that don't focus on such interval changes tend to have lower activations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5468117408906883,0.5477386934673367,0.5555555555555556,0.5,100.0,99.0
+9665,latent_9665,6866,0.013732,0.00536278,2.3915455,Focus on positioning of tubes or medical devices in chest imaging.,"Examples with a focus on device positioning, such as endotracheal or enteric tubes, consistently show higher activation levels. This suggests the model is particularly attuned to references in radiology reports that mention the placement or positioning of medical devices or tubes, as this is a common aspect of analysis in chest X-ray readings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4285714285714285,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9666,latent_9666,672,0.001344,0.0011700789,4.2950935,Presence of a hiatal hernia in chest imaging.,"A consistent finding in the highly activated examples is the mention of a hiatal hernia, a condition where abdominal contents herniate into the thoracic cavity. This is notable amidst other described conditions and process outcomes in chest imaging, such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax; however, the hiatal hernia is consistently noted across the examples with higher activations.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6530264279624893,0.7027027027027027,1.0,0.3529411764705882,85.0,100.0
+9667,latent_9667,4406,0.008812,0.0036077732,1.8824778,Explicit comparison and changes between current and prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in current images explicitly compared to prior images, emphasizing interval changes such as resolution or worsening of pathological findings. Comparison is a critical aspect, focusing on significant changes over time noted in radiology reports.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9668,latent_9668,745,0.00149,0.0014880969,3.510438,Changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed is the focus on identifying changes in findings when radiology results are compared with prior images. Activated examples emphasize differences or stability in comparison with a previous study, with clinical implications if changes are significant. This highlights the importance of comparison in radiological interpretation for diagnostic decision-making.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4373187238156623,0.4432989690721649,0.4125,0.351063829787234,94.0,100.0
+9669,latent_9669,971,0.001942,0.0012845505,4.699937,Stable cardiomegaly or unchanged pulmonary findings upon comparison with prior images.,"These examples focus on the reinterpretation of chest imaging findings, comparing current images to prior ones, and often involve evaluating the stability, unchanged nature, or extent of certain conditions such as cardiomegaly or pulmonary edema. The common link is the use of prior comparison to comment on changes or stability, especially concerning heart size or lung conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5128205128205128,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9670,latent_9670,1072,0.002144,0.0014820799,3.198801,Instructions for comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels specifically involve instructions for comparing current and prior imaging, often involving incremental or notable changes, improvements, or stability of certain findings. These are linguistic patterns specifying a detailed comparison in medical imaging.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+9671,latent_9671,9114,0.018228,0.0066305655,2.0112886,Description generation by comparative analysis of current and prior images.,The activation levels are higher when the task involves comparing current images with prior images to describe findings. This suggests that the model's pattern focuses on generating descriptions based on changes or stable features in comparative radiological studies.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5060949978982766,0.53,0.5208333333333334,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9672,latent_9672,1002,0.002004,0.0014138857,4.672551,Detailed comparison to prior studies focusing on acute trauma-related changes.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on interpreting and describing the findings in the current images in detail, especially concerning changes or stability in conditions like pneumothorax, fractures, and other acute conditions compared to prior imaging studies, emphasizing specific changes or the necessity for follow-up. This indicates that the pattern is associated with discussing stability or change in critical conditions especially trauma-related.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4198391100212327,0.515,0.5789473684210527,0.11,100.0,100.0
+9673,latent_9673,1191,0.002382,0.002047496,2.9035585,Analysis of image findings prompted by comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern is highly activated in reports that include side-by-side comparisons between current images and prior ones, focusing on detailed findings of stability and changes. The key elements are the structure provided by the comparison prompt and the implicit task of describing findings in the context of the prior image, aligning with the description prompted in each example.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4419642857142857,0.45,0.4596774193548387,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9674,latent_9674,709,0.001418,0.0011692133,5.340784,Presence of multiple image views for examination.,"Examples with higher activations include references to multiple images, including frontal and lateral views, as part of a detailed imaging examination. This frequent mention of multiple views in radiology reports aligns with the necessity for compound imaging for thorough assessments.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.459017915158266,0.5053191489361702,0.4838709677419355,0.8522727272727273,88.0,100.0
+9675,latent_9675,10703,0.021406,0.0078092674,1.651625,Comparison with prior study findings.,"The samples with moderate to high activation levels consistently involve a direct comparison between current and prior imaging studies, particularly focusing on interval changes or stable findings over time. This pattern is recurrent across examples where descriptors indicate stability or change compared to prior images.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4800509337860781,0.51,0.5067567567567568,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9676,latent_9676,555,0.00111,0.0011163623,3.8082488,References to placement or adjustment of lines or tubes.,"High activation examples consistently reference interventions such as placement or adjustment of lines, tubes, or catheters. Reports also often describe their positioning, especially when compared to prior imaging.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5970695970695972,0.6022727272727273,0.5375,0.5657894736842105,76.0,100.0
+9677,latent_9677,1481,0.002962,0.002030629,2.9903598,Comparison involving both frontal and lateral images and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature the use of both frontal and lateral image comparisons, often utilizing a prior image reference for comprehensive assessment. This detailed technique, including multiple views and historical comparisons, aligns closely with high activation patterns.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9678,latent_9678,3942,0.007884,0.004239187,6.36187,Description of pathologic progression or resolution compared to prior imaging.,"The activation levels correspond to cases where there are descriptions of specific changes or progressions in pathology compared to prior imaging studies, such as interval increase in opacification, development of new lesions, or resolution of previously identified issues.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.4387755102040816,0.5657894736842105,76.0,124.0
+9679,latent_9679,652,0.001304,0.0013765723,8.710414,"Stable, unchanged abnormalities in comparison to previous imaging.","Examples with high activation levels focus extensively on persistent abnormalities like stable cardiomegaly, atelectasis, pleural effusions, or nodules in sequential imaging studies without significant changes in findings, emphasizing stable conditions over time. The comparative aspect distinguishes these examples from others where changes or acute findings might lead to the absence of such stability.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5493261455525607,0.5681818181818182,0.5,0.4210526315789473,76.0,100.0
+9680,latent_9680,941,0.001882,0.0018221335,6.426019,"Position changes or placement of lines, tubes, or catheters.","This pattern among the examples appears when there are positioning or placement changes of lines, tubes, or catheters, such as PICC lines, NG tubes, or catheters, as compared to prior imaging. Such adjustments or the mention of unchanged placement relative to earlier studies are recurrently highlighted in the reports, indicating a significant aspect of procedural imaging follow-up.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6691729323308271,0.67,0.6888888888888889,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9681,latent_9681,11512,0.023024,0.008528056,2.307014,Describing subtle interval changes or improvements compared to prior imaging.,"The higher activation examples tend to describe findings where a subtle change or improvement is noted in the image upon comparison with a previous radiograph. These changes are interpreted or highlighted as significant findings, often with improved clinical symptoms or resolutions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5732151623989045,0.5829145728643216,0.6231884057971014,0.43,100.0,99.0
+9682,latent_9682,4948,0.009896,0.003974129,2.6146886,Emphasis on stable imaging findings compared to prior images.,"The examples involve the task of comparing current radiological images to prior images, but the activation varies based on whether findings indicate change or stability. High activation levels occur when findings are explicitly stable or unchanged compared to prior images. This pattern underscores the focus on monitoring stability or change over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4583560152422428,0.4723618090452261,0.4626865671641791,0.31,100.0,99.0
+9683,latent_9683,508,0.001016,0.0010612091,3.5356681,Detailed procedural findings or feeding tube placements compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels provide detail on findings in the radiology study that are compared against prior imaging but explicitly mention specific procedural details like feeding tubes, tracheostomy tubes, stents, etc., indicating a focus on accurate and specific procedural or device placement findings as part of the image comparison.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6293785310734463,0.6585365853658537,0.5740740740740741,0.484375,64.0,100.0
+9684,latent_9684,1265,0.00253,0.0019439606,4.0267015,Description of line or tube placements and comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples exhibit structured narratives revolving around the insertion or adjustment of medical devices, such as PICC and IJ lines, as well as comparisons to previous findings to note changes or stability in the positioning and conditions observed within the chest imaging.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6482765551200884,0.65,0.631578947368421,0.72,100.0,100.0
+9685,latent_9685,2100,0.0042,0.0023840857,4.4453464,Comparison of current radiological findings to prior imaging.,"The examples with highest activation involve descriptions of findings as compared to previous studies, focusing on interval changes or assessments of stability. Key phrases include 'comparison to prior', 'no change', and 'unchanged' when comparing current findings to prior images, indicating routine radiological practice of monitoring changes over time.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4315744315744316,0.47,0.4802631578947368,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9686,latent_9686,784,0.001568,0.0015380357,3.6440413,"Normal or unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","The examples with high activation levels often contain descriptions of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours being within normal limits or unchanged. This pattern suggests the model is focusing on evaluations where these structures' stability or normalcy is noted, without acute findings.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6357690342360757,0.6363636363636364,0.6203703703703703,0.6836734693877551,98.0,100.0
+9687,latent_9687,868,0.001736,0.0013911793,3.147878,Low lung volumes affecting thoracic visibility.,"The samples with higher activation levels tend to describe low lung volumes, often highlighting their impact on the visibility and evaluation of cardiac silhouette, bronchovascular markings, and other thoracic structures. Terms such as 'low lung volumes', 'accentuates', and 'crowding' are commonly used to describe the effects of this condition.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4288174512055109,0.4974874371859296,0.4838709677419355,0.1515151515151515,99.0,100.0
+9688,latent_9688,824,0.001648,0.0013670408,3.8383825,"Instructions to describe or compare imaging findings, focusing on medical device positions and interval changes.","The instances with high activation levels often include specific instructions or responses to provide or compare findings from current imaging studies with prior studies, focusing on the positioning and evaluation of medical devices (like endotracheal tubes, PICC lines) and interval changes in lung pathology. High activations often occur when there's an explicit directive to describe findings in comparison to the previous studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9689,latent_9689,5507,0.011014,0.0041759126,2.7726727,Stable findings or lack of new pathology in current versus prior images.,"This pattern specifically highlights instances where both current and prior imaging studies (frontal and/or lateral) are available but show little to no acute or new pathological change. Language indicating no new findings or changes frequently evidences this pattern, particularly when unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal contours are noted or when unchanged conditions are emphasized.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5273398019001414,0.5276381909547738,0.5238095238095238,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+9690,latent_9690,1415,0.00283,0.0015952558,3.4809058,"Presence of interstitial opacities, pleural effusions, or atelectasis in findings.","The data exhibits noticeable activations when the findings include descriptions involving interstitial opacities, pleural effusions, and atelectasis. These are common radiological patterns related to pulmonary conditions such as pulmonary edema, pneumonia, or effusion, which may require explanation or follow-up.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9691,latent_9691,1674,0.003348,0.0017927837,3.2906632,Focus on findings for monitoring changes affecting patient management.,"The examples with high activation tend to focus on specific findings that support ongoing monitoring or follow-up. This implies a primary interest in changes that could affect management, particularly in cases where active or worsening conditions might be suspected.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.5594405594405595,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9692,latent_9692,1050,0.0021,0.0017126966,3.691001,Frequent use of comparison with prior imaging despite minor or no changes.,The examples with higher activation levels often describe chest imaging findings by explicitly comparing them to prior imaging. This pattern is consistently seen in the presence of provided previous reports and is particularly emphasized when evaluating changes or stability over time.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9693,latent_9693,1443,0.002886,0.0021776976,6.2725673,Explicit comparison of current images to prior ones with noted changes.,"The pattern consistently observed in higher activation examples is the explicit mention of an image comparison, usually with the term 'comparison', indicating a follow-up or evaluation of changes over a period. Significant or notable changes (e.g., interval improvement, placement changes) seem to trigger higher activations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9694,latent_9694,984,0.001968,0.0013253337,2.6775002,Focus on stable or unchanged chronic conditions in imaging comparisons.,"The highly activated samples describe findings such as cardiomegaly, unchanged size of prior masses, persistent lymphadenopathy, and other chronic conditions that tend to remain stable over time. They highlight the importance of comparing current imaging findings to previous reports to identify changes or stability in chronic conditions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9695,latent_9695,16158,0.032316,0.011685701,1.2421165,Assessing findings in comparison to prior imaging for stability or minor changes.,"Examples demonstrating a pattern involve referring to a comparison with previous imaging studies to note stability or minor changes in findings. This language is typical in radiology reports when evaluating follow-up studies and checking for alterations since prior imaging, focusing on terms such as unchanged, stable, or minor changes in condition.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9696,latent_9696,2364,0.004728,0.0027953358,3.825727,Identification of interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involved descriptions indicating changes from previous imaging studies, but not always indicating common clinical findings like pneumonia or effusion. Instead, they illustrate changes in opacification, lung volumes, and cardiac silhouette, which are often specified in scenarios where progressive disease monitoring or treatment response is assessed.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9697,latent_9697,820,0.00164,0.0015282826,4.1402316,Focus on normal heart and mediastinal contours without acute findings.,"The highly activated examples focus on radiological findings with an emphasis on normal heart and mediastinal structures, which is a standard aspect in reports, specifically in comparison scenarios without pathology. They emphasize a lack of acute findings, signifying routine and expected results.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7442455242966752,0.75,0.6923076923076923,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9698,latent_9698,550,0.0011,0.0013790912,3.6250415,Comparison of imaging findings to prior images with limited data.,"These examples focus on the comparison of images with prior frontal images and often involve limited or specific findings, such as comparisons despite minimal information or available data. Activation is high when even limited comparative elements are highlighted, expressing the focus on comparative analysis despite available data constraints.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4493696903261167,0.4502923976608187,0.3925233644859813,0.5915492957746479,71.0,100.0
+9699,latent_9699,5613,0.011226,0.0044062263,1.8573879,Evaluation of cardiopulmonary findings based on specified indications.,"The examples exhibit a pattern of evaluating radiological findings in relation to specified medical indications, mostly involving cardiorespiratory symptoms or conditions. These evaluations often involve comparing current images with previous studies, and specifically feature cardiac or pulmonary findings based on the provided indications.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5024875621890548,0.56,0.5357142857142857,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9700,latent_9700,7547,0.015094,0.0057253847,1.8809578,Comparisons to prior images showing stable findings or changes in medical devices.,"The examples have the pattern of comparing current imaging findings to previous ones in terms of changes in medical devices or patient anatomical areas like opacities, tubes, effusions, but with stable observations over time often indicating no major change or serious progression.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9701,latent_9701,1471,0.002942,0.0018246588,2.8513007,Stable or improved findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings with a specific focus on stability or improvement in the context of prior radiological studies. This involves evaluating for changes or confirming stability, which is a common practice in medical imaging reports to monitor progress or stability over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+9702,latent_9702,956,0.001912,0.0016606682,3.9490442,Interval change or stability comparison to prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include a description in comparison to a prior frontal image, indicating evaluation over time. This temporal comparison suggests interval change or stability in the findings, which is crucial for assessing progress or lack thereof in the patient's condition.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4615384615384615,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9703,latent_9703,12784,0.025568,0.009276517,1.1556187,Comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples consistently compare current imaging findings with previous studies, indicating a pattern of tracking changes over time. This pattern is focused on detecting or ruling out interval changes, stabilization, or resolution of findings, suggesting ongoing monitoring of a condition.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9704,latent_9704,719,0.001438,0.0013588647,3.3740916,Complex comparison instructions without specific radiological pattern.,"These examples involve complex instructions with multiple images for comparison, yet they do not present a clear radiological finding or diagnosis indicating a specific pattern as the activation levels are low throughout. There is no specific trend or recurring theme identifiable that corresponds with the examples given or explained in the activations near zero and fluctuating.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.542997542997543,0.543010752688172,0.504950495049505,0.5930232558139535,86.0,100.0
+9705,latent_9705,2201,0.004402,0.0021913454,2.2671041,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate change or stability.,"Highly activated examples reveal a pattern of providing a radiological assessment by specifically referencing and comparing current imaging results to prior ones, highlighting changes or stability over time. This involves mentions of comparisons and uses descriptors indicating temporal assessments, which are central to monitoring progression or stability in medical imaging reports.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5321448737597806,0.565,0.5424836601307189,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9706,latent_9706,398,0.000796,0.0009858728,4.403373,Monitoring for stability or interval changes in comparison to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation include radiological reports where findings are described in terms of stability or unchanged conditions when compared to prior imaging studies. This recurring reference to stability, mild changes, or lack of significant change suggests monitoring for interval changes as a key pattern.",0.5675544794188861,0.5957446808510638,0.5405405405405406,0.9090909090909092,22.0,25.0,0.4916387959866221,0.4934210526315789,0.3853211009174312,0.8076923076923077,52.0,100.0
+9707,latent_9707,4943,0.009886,0.0040520625,2.1864643,Changes identified in findings from prior comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve the presence of specific changes noted when comparing current imaging findings with prior studies over time or between exams. Examples frequently note changes such as effusion removal, lung volume, or other clinical observations, often with temporal or contrastive comparisons.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9708,latent_9708,1301,0.002602,0.0015903818,3.1007116,Presence of prior imaging for comparison in the report.,Examples with high activation consistently involve comparison to previous radiological studies. This pattern suggests that the algorithm places importance on the presence of a prior image comparison when evaluating new findings in radiological studies.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5054945054945055,0.55,0.53125,0.85,100.0,100.0
+9709,latent_9709,583,0.001166,0.0010662973,3.1359324,Comparison with prior images highlighting change or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve a prior image for comparison, focusing on detecting changes or stability in intrathoracic conditions from known baselines, typically within reports that ask for detailed descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images, indicating a pattern of temporal evaluation.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4639566395663956,0.4651162790697674,0.391304347826087,0.5,72.0,100.0
+9710,latent_9710,775,0.00155,0.0013504751,3.531311,Significant imaging findings or changes compared to prior studies.,"The prompt indicates a study requiring comparison of current imaging findings against prior studies. High activation levels correspond to examples where significant findings or changes are clearly detailed in comparison to prior images, demonstrating the model's focus on detecting relevant changes or the absence thereof.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4331201740653275,0.4438775510204081,0.410958904109589,0.3125,96.0,100.0
+9711,latent_9711,5655,0.01131,0.00463634,2.7115686,Changes in thoracic structures or features compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a comparison of current radiological findings to a prior image, with changes noted in the condition of specific physical anomalies or conditions, such as ""right upper lobe wedge resection"" or ""multifocal patchy parenchymal opacities."" These examples often provide details about changes noted in the condition or placement of medical devices, changes in the structure or appearance of specific lung areas, or identification of issues related to thoracic treatments and procedures.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9712,latent_9712,465,0.00093,0.0009641511,3.3945425,Description of interval changes or worsening findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe interval changes in imaging findings between previous and current studies, especially worsening or new pathologies such as pulmonary opacities, effusions, atelectasis, edema, or cardiomegaly. These descriptions all emphasize changes over time and comparisons to previous imaging.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6962812436496647,0.7044025157232704,0.581081081081081,0.7288135593220338,59.0,100.0
+9713,latent_9713,818,0.001636,0.0014466728,4.536864,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,All examples with higher activation involve descriptions of findings regarding a frontal image compared to a prior image. The presence of directives to compare the current imaging with previous ones or describe findings relative to them appears to trigger higher activation. This suggests a focus on identifying changes over time and comparing current with past states in radiology evaluations.,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4308359264874065,0.465,0.4765100671140939,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9714,latent_9714,3065,0.00613,0.0027338818,2.4013188,Comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on stable findings.,"Examples with high activations involve a description comparing findings of current imaging to prior imaging without referring to additional complications or deviations. They focus mainly on stability or minor changes in the findings and describe clear outcomes of the comparison process with terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or explicit dates of prior studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4693877551020408,0.23,100.0,100.0
+9715,latent_9715,1401,0.002802,0.0024382484,8.625096,Shallow inspiration causing apparent cardiac enlargement or venous congestion.,Higher activation is observed when the radiological reports indicate apparent suspicion or mention of potential obliteration or obscuration due to cardiomegaly or venous congestion in the chest images. The specific observation of ‘shallow inspiration’ or a related note about change in heart size or increased pulmonary vascular markings are key indicators that activate the desired pattern.,0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4700582935877053,0.575,0.5909090909090909,0.146067415730337,89.0,111.0
+9716,latent_9716,604,0.001208,0.0013670053,4.3617525,Emphasis on stability and positioning of medical devices in comparison to previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples include consistent verification and specific descriptions for the correct positioning of medical devices or tubes like ET tubes, PICC lines, and nasogastric tubes, terminating at particular anatomical junctions such as the cavoatrial junction or SVC. This focus on accurate device placement and stability, especially in comparison with past studies, is a key factor.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6371308016877637,0.6395348837209303,0.5581395348837209,0.6666666666666666,72.0,100.0
+9717,latent_9717,2041,0.004082,0.0022876293,2.3354254,"Comparison to prior imaging, focusing on change or stability in medical context.","All examples with high activation levels include findings described in comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing either stability or change in certain aspects like medical devices or structural features (e.g., tubes, lung volumes, mediastinal contours). This indicates a focus on continuity or change over time in the patient's condition.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9718,latent_9718,1153,0.002306,0.0015808683,2.4857404,Findings described in relation to current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently show a pattern where radiological findings are described in relation to the current and prior images, often noting changes, similarities, or stability. These changes refer specifically to imaging details like opacity, effusion, or structure positions, indicating a pattern of chronological comparison across exams to highlight diagnostic conclusions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9719,latent_9719,10365,0.02073,0.007715796,2.2665663,Comparison of current findings to prior images or reports.,"The prompt describes instances where findings are routinely compared against previous imaging or reports, specifically in radiological assessments. ""Comparison to previous studies"" is a common practice to evaluate any changes or developments in a patient's condition, distinguishing ongoing from new issues.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9720,latent_9720,801,0.001602,0.0014475577,3.6296313,Stable cardiac silhouette with no acute changes; evaluation often includes mild enlargement or top normal size.,"Example 38, with the highest activation, and closely matched examples (such as 21, 42, 46) consistently involve assessments where the cardiac silhouette is either at the upper limits of normal or mildly enlarged, but there is no significant acute change, and the overall findings suggest stability. These examples emphasize similar mediastinal and hilar stability, and report mild degenerative changes or stable findings without acute alterations.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.628575099575999,0.6313131313131313,0.6506024096385542,0.5510204081632653,98.0,100.0
+9721,latent_9721,1071,0.002142,0.0018963679,4.062256,Mention of both current frontal and lateral views in the prompt.,The examples that exhibit high activation levels share the characteristic of having both current frontal and lateral views described in the prompt. This suggests the pattern is related to analyzing multiple angles of the current imaging study.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6329689619404771,0.655,0.6040268456375839,0.9,100.0,100.0
+9722,latent_9722,1264,0.002528,0.0017924635,3.635085,Changes in position or presence of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions where new medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) are reported as compared to previous imaging studies. This indicates a pattern in which comparisons specifically highlight the addition, position, or removal of medical devices in the patient's current imaging relative to prior exams.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.2745658729333471,0.43,0.3968253968253968,0.25,100.0,100.0
+9723,latent_9723,1094,0.002188,0.0015298366,3.8250446,Focus on stability or lack of change compared to prior studies.,Examples that exhibit the pattern often mention stable findings or unchanged positions of medical devices related to previous imaging. These descriptions highlight a focus on changes (or lack thereof) in the context of various clinical interventions or baseline measurements in radiology.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6047529706066291,0.605,0.6,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9724,latent_9724,1928,0.003856,0.0018306619,2.7695925,Low activation when no prior studies are available for comparison.,"The data shows that examples with findings reported without available prior studies for comparison generally have a low activation score. When there is no reference to prior findings, it affects the activation level as comparison is a key evaluative marker in image studies.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5450367647058824,0.5454545454545454,0.5543478260869565,0.51,100.0,98.0
+9725,latent_9725,7180,0.01436,0.0054628984,3.2995126,Presence of medical devices and stable imaging findings.,"The examples show the model has higher activation when image reports include findings of medical devices or tubes (like NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, PICC lines) alongside descriptions of stable or unchanged opacities or features from previous images. This combination suggests a focus on devices and stability in conditions for high model relevance.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5064935064935064,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9726,latent_9726,939,0.001878,0.0014988811,3.4115944,Detailed description of cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior images.,"Samples with high activations often involve detailed descriptions of the cardiomediastinal silhouette, hilar contours, and pleural surfaces, with comparisons to the prior images, focusing on whether these elements are unremarkable or normal.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3913894842687412,0.425,0.3584905660377358,0.19,100.0,100.0
+9727,latent_9727,833,0.001666,0.0017182747,2.6665924,Comparison between current and prior imaging.,"In situations where prior imaging is available, these examples consistently refer to the comparisons between the current and previous imaging, especially noting changes or stability in specific findings. These comparisons are provided in the context of specific clinical indications, reflecting standard practice in radiology to assess change over time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9728,latent_9728,3066,0.006132,0.0026634117,2.720596,Emphasis on comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with a high activation level emphasize the need to compare current and previous radiographic findings, explicitly using phrases such as 'compared to' and 'no new findings' to assess stability or changes over time. This reflects the radiologist's task of noting changes or stability in patients with ongoing or chronic conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9729,latent_9729,1153,0.002306,0.0017950219,3.5929108,Presence of moderate to severe cardiomegaly.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe severe or moderate cardiomegaly observed in radiological images, often in comparison to prior images. Cardiomegaly is a significant abnormal finding that draws attention in radiology reports, explaining its prominence in activation levels when mentioned consistently.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6829439434496738,0.695,0.819672131147541,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9730,latent_9730,2502,0.005004,0.0026410068,3.7840676,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding effects.,"The observation pattern here focuses on low lung volumes leading to crowding of bronchovascular structures, which is consistently noted in the findings. This indicates that the model activates on patterns indicating low lung volumes and the related impacts on thoracic structures, which are interpreted across various imaging cases. Such descriptions are specific and distinct in radiology terminology.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5561378646487873,0.585,0.673469387755102,0.33,100.0,100.0
+9731,latent_9731,15863,0.031726,0.011533434,1.4792067,"Comparative analysis emphasizes changes in chest tubes, effusions, and pneumothorax presence.","These examples typically highlight changes or comparisons made over time between imaging studies, focusing on the imaging of chest tubes, lines, effusions, and nodules in conjunction with mentions to specific indications or HISTORY contexts like trauma, surgery, or other diseases (e.g., aid of post-surgical tubes, post-traumatic lung changes). The pattern also seems to be associated with findings that often link to acute changes such as pneumothorax or changes in effusions that might be informed by clinical context.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5997536945812808,0.61,0.6617647058823529,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9732,latent_9732,2210,0.00442,0.0024085501,3.1962693,Finding descriptions impacted by technical limitations or projection.,"These examples involve the description of findings in chest radiography, with particular emphasis on technical limitations, positioning, or projection impacting the clarity or interpretation of the images. This pattern is common when the details of the image acquisition such as 'allowing for projection', or 'given low lung volumes' influence the report conclusions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6016949152542372,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9733,latent_9733,571,0.001142,0.001256973,3.0925286,Focus on identification and assessment of medical devices' position.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings that mention specific devices or interventions in place, such as pacemakers or tubes, and their positions. These cases are distinguished by a focus on the identification and assessment of such devices, as opposed to describing natural anatomical or pathological findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4812814442142645,0.52046783625731,0.3962264150943396,0.2957746478873239,71.0,100.0
+9734,latent_9734,5043,0.010086,0.0039013124,2.4299202,Comparative analysis of current versus prior image findings to assess changes.,"High activation examples frequently require comparing current and prior imaging to assess changes or stability in findings such as atelectasis, effusions, pneumonia, or tube placements, whereas non-activated examples may not focus on such comparisons.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9735,latent_9735,768,0.001536,0.001137323,3.8368468,Comparison of current image findings to prior images.,"These examples all focus on providing descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior images to detect any changes, which is frequently utilized to identify new developments or evaluate the progression of known conditions.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4508824508824509,0.4742268041237113,0.4714285714285714,0.7021276595744681,94.0,100.0
+9736,latent_9736,4272,0.008544,0.0035722544,2.4976397,Comparison of current images with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the process of comparing the current imaging findings with at least one prior image as part of the detailed analysis. This indicates that the pattern is specifically focused on evaluations that discuss changes or lack thereof in anatomy or pathology through comparative imaging.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9737,latent_9737,981,0.001962,0.0016540991,3.1753807,Stable findings with no significant change compared to prior images.,"High-activation examples focus on providing detailed findings in comparison to a prior study. They emphasize stable, unchanged features and subtle or no interval changes in medical findings, often describing stable cardiac silhouette, unchanged pulmonary or mediastinal contours, unchanged opacities, or other features that signify consistency in image observations over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,100.0,100.0
+9738,latent_9738,8559,0.017118,0.006294362,2.0043814,Comparison of current vs prior images for stability or progression.,"These examples all involve the comparison of current frontal chest radiograph images to prior images, where specific evaluation of change, stasis, or progression of findings like medical devices, opacities, and pleural effusions is described. They frequently highlight stability or change over time, often referencing specific imaging modalities or device placements, and emphasize evaluating comparisons to track changes in medical conditions or interventions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9739,latent_9739,825,0.00165,0.0017589282,4.2710876,Explicit comparison to prior images with significant findings.,"Examples with high activation relate to providing explicit comparisons of the current radiology study with previous imaging, showing interval changes or stability of specific findings and involving observations of significant pathologies or interventions such as tubes or catheter positions. The key pattern is discussions of contrasts or confirmations of persistence/change in the patient's condition.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9740,latent_9740,929,0.001858,0.0014721137,2.7863097,Detailed comparison findings with stability or normalization.,"The highly activated examples often involve comprehensive synopses of radiology reports that describe the findings in comparison to a prior examination. Frequently, these reports emphasize stable or unchanged findings, denote clear structures, and highlight explicit statements about the absence of concerning findings like pneumothorax or pleural effusions.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4669642857142857,0.4874371859296482,0.4754098360655737,0.2929292929292929,99.0,100.0
+9741,latent_9741,4987,0.009974,0.005402146,3.1029456,Absence of meaningful comparison in image findings or technique alignment.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings that involve clear descriptions distinguishing the comparison of images or specific changes related to interventions, techniques, or findings regarding positioning, which do not directly involve describing changes over time or stability in medical conditions, unlike other clinical details often included without active comparison terms. Examples describe situations without a meaningful reference comparison or technique descriptions don't align with evaluable differences across images.",0.5609318996415771,0.5918367346938775,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.4466145833333333,0.49,0.4935897435897436,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9742,latent_9742,987,0.001974,0.0016339796,3.5724518,Documentation of tubes and medical device placement in imaging.,"Examples with high activation frequently reference tubes or medical devices (such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, Nasogastric tubes, Dobbhoff tubes) in radiology reports. This pattern indicates a focus on documenting the positioning and placement of these devices within patients, whether they are related to intervention or ongoing monitoring.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5929237063413895,0.592964824120603,0.5979381443298969,0.58,100.0,99.0
+9743,latent_9743,845,0.00169,0.001724558,3.5124834,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging showing progression or stability of significant conditions.,"Across the examples with higher activation levels, the reports make detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies about the progression or stability of medical conditions, often related to significant conditions like cancer, pneumonia, or pleural effusions. This implies a pattern is recognized that ties the diagnostic image evaluation to a noticeable change or stability assessment across imaging sequences, often with medical conditions in focus.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9744,latent_9744,819,0.001638,0.0013511091,3.5211713,Explicit or implicit comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"Instances with high activation ratings prominently feature the provision of context about prior imaging studies, allowing the report to deliver comparative findings on changes or stability. Key phrases indicate past exams or comparisons, often stated explicitly or implied through contexts like dates or specific comparisons.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4622715518493767,0.5326633165829145,0.5174418604651163,0.898989898989899,99.0,100.0
+9745,latent_9745,2006,0.004012,0.0030221343,3.2799232,Stable or unchanged findings from prior studies.,"These examples contrast a current radiological study with a prior study, focusing on unchanged or persistent findings that are consistent over time despite any interval changes. This involves emphasizing diagnostic stability, often discussing slight or no significant changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3964538455556419,0.4120603015075377,0.373134328358209,0.25,100.0,99.0
+9746,latent_9746,1807,0.003614,0.0020682467,3.4128327,Mention of interval change or comparison to previous imaging in identifying condition progression.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention intervals changes or comparisons with prior radiographic findings and display a trend or progression of conditions such as effusions, pulmonary edema, or pneumothorax. This pattern signifies an emphasis on detecting temporal changes in conditions to assess treatment effectiveness or disease progression.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4336319637524456,0.45,0.4626865671641791,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9747,latent_9747,1597,0.003194,0.0018119274,3.492055,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"High activation levels occur in examples containing clear descriptions of findings explicitly compared to prior imaging studies, using phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'interval change', or some indication of a previous similar study. This denotes attention on how the current images differ or remain stable compared to the past.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4677419354838709,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9748,latent_9748,4661,0.009322,0.0038676388,2.948897,Detailed descriptions of lung conditions or interventions compared with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve detailed evaluations of lung conditions and pleural effusions, often in comparison to past findings, specifically associated with complex cases or recent surgical interventions. They typically require precise and technical descriptions often associated with detecting pneumothoraxes, lung volume changes, or line placements.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9749,latent_9749,2152,0.004304,0.002421711,2.1204095,Radiology findings compared to prior imaging for changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of findings in radiological imaging studies that involve a direct comparison to prior imaging. This includes noting specific changes, stability, or improvement in findings such as device placement, opacities, or pathologies when compared to prior images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9750,latent_9750,4961,0.009922,0.0038882832,2.53011,Description of stable findings compared to prior images.,Many of the examples with high activation levels involve descriptions where imaging outcomes are either unchanged or stable compared to earlier studies. This reflects a focus on stability or lack of progression in previously noted conditions.,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.6081081081081081,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9751,latent_9751,8993,0.017986,0.0067127547,2.1864562,Changes noted in findings when compared with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit changes or interval changes identified through comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. This includes phrases like 'now mild', 'interval improvement', or 'gains noted', indicating changes over time. Comparisons often chronologically relate specific changes in pathologies or features as seen in progressive scans, reflecting a pattern of comparative longitudinal analysis.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9752,latent_9752,2442,0.004884,0.003036266,4.2910995,Reports focus on immediate or close interval imaging comparison highlighting stable or recurrent pathologies.,"Higher activations corresponded to reports that describe or hint at monitoring of known pathology using same-day or close interval imaging—illustrated by the presence of recent or minimally changed pathological observations, often in a postoperative or acute condition assessment. These situations evoke specific medical knowledge of immediate comparison or monitoring scenarios.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9753,latent_9753,6335,0.01267,0.005007309,2.6842663,Discussion of tube placement and adjustments in relation to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often reference the placement, positioning, or change involving tubes or support devices like endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, or Dobbhoff tubes. This includes discussions about adjusting or confirming their positions based on imaging findings from prior reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5735294117647058,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9754,latent_9754,14295,0.02859,0.01030598,1.1768554,Use of interval changes in imaging findings through comparison to prior studies.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently refer to comparisons made with prior chest radiographs or imaging studies. The reports include discussions of interval changes in pleural effusions, lung opacities, device placements, or other radiographic findings, highlighting interpreting temporal changes in imaging.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.5681818181818182,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9755,latent_9755,953,0.001906,0.0015075984,5.1114635,Presence of pleural effusions or atelectasis without pneumothorax.,"Examples with high activation often describe radiological findings indicating the presence of lung opacities, pleural effusions, or atelectasis, usually in association with other unrelated findings. These descriptions commonly suggest or hypothesize potential contributory processes like infection or overhydration, but without the presence of pneumothorax being explicitly noted as an alternative consideration.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.6375,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9756,latent_9756,864,0.001728,0.0013828614,3.7929833,Focus on aortic tortuosity or calcification and heart size in image descriptions.,"The pattern in this data involves detailed examination and changes in the heart and aorta, with frequent mentions of aortic tortuosity and calcification. High activations emphasize these findings coupled with evaluations involving previous imaging. The recurrent terms 'aortic tortuosity', 'calcification', and 'cardiac size' indicate focus on vascular features common in age-related or pathological conditions.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6836634781953754,0.685,0.7126436781609196,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9757,latent_9757,7815,0.01563,0.0055870246,1.4727162,Significant changes or resolutions noted compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently refer to descriptions of radiological findings that involve significant or notable changes when compared to previous studies. This often includes descriptions of resolution, new persisting disparities, or slight improvements despite ongoing conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.6119402985074627,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9758,latent_9758,1236,0.002472,0.0020316236,3.2570963,Comparative analysis of radiologic findings concerning acute processes.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve comparing current imaging findings with prior images in relation to detecting acute pulmonary or pathological processes, even if no significant change is noted. However, the mere mention of comparison to prior images does not suffice unless there is an emphasis on identifying changes regarding specific conditions.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4117647058823529,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9759,latent_9759,1265,0.00253,0.0016674049,3.8525567,Unchanged placement of monitoring/support devices compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to describe the unchanged positioning of monitoring or support devices compared to prior images, focusing on the stability and unchanged condition of these devices which were placed intentionally.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3634477392582346,0.4422110552763819,0.3103448275862069,0.09,100.0,99.0
+9760,latent_9760,8646,0.017292,0.006478561,1.6417259,Significant interval changes detected in imaging comparisons.,"The higher activation levels are associated with descriptions of new or significant changes in imaging findings between current and prior images, especially when specifying notable changes like opacification or tube placements. Keywords include ""interval increase"", ""new"", or ""substantial change"". Patterns of stability or no change do not correlate with high activation, indicating the model is focused on identifying significant developments between imaging studies.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5208333333333334,0.54,0.5666666666666667,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9761,latent_9761,1292,0.002584,0.0018860257,4.0088315,Task-directed comparison of current and prior images.,"High activation examples consistently use a comparative analysis of current images to prior ones, with clear instructions to identify changes (or the lack thereof) in the positioning or presence of medical devices, tubes, or anatomical features, indicating a task-directed image comparison pattern.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9762,latent_9762,1309,0.002618,0.0019633216,3.8573828,Stable or minimally changed findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve specific mentions of comparisons between current and previous imaging that indicate stability or minimal change over time, suggesting chronic or long-standing conditions. This pattern shows focus on evaluating progression or stability of findings, particularly regarding cardiomediastinal contours or faint opacities.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5056179775280899,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9763,latent_9763,10403,0.020806,0.0076731313,1.4634671,Comparison of radiology findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels include frequent references to radiographic comparisons against prior images, as seen in the explicit instruction to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This distinguishes them from other radiological reports and justifies higher activation levels.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9764,latent_9764,1233,0.002466,0.0014171824,2.6574187,Direct comparison of findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a direct comparison between current and prior radiological images, specifying interval changes, stability, or resolution of findings. This pattern is indicative of radiologist reports where comparison with previous studies is explicitly detailed.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4171502256608639,0.435,0.4518518518518518,0.61,100.0,100.0
+9765,latent_9765,923,0.001846,0.0015329026,2.6951659,Use of prior image comparisons to describe interval change or stability.,Examples with high activation levels consistently utilize the explicit comparison between current and prior imaging studies to document interval changes or stability in clinical presentations. This specific task of describing findings in relation to previous images is central to understanding the pattern.,0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9766,latent_9766,3092,0.006184,0.002850484,2.7250788,Frequent comparisons to prior imaging to assess changes.,The examples with high activation levels consistently make reference to comparisons with prior imaging studies and provide descriptions of any changes or stability. This pattern is often used to assess progression or resolution of medical conditions. Comparisons help in identifying changes in medical status over time.,0.5170250896057348,0.5510204081632653,0.5263157894736842,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9767,latent_9767,2322,0.004644,0.0033942559,3.387701,Comparison requests without actual prior images available.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include the instruction to provide a description in comparison to a prior image despite often lacking an actual prior comparison, as indicated by phrases like 'COMPARISON: None'. This creates a pattern focusing on identifying changes or lack thereof, and verbalizing findings even when comparison isn't possible, which suggests the system is tuned to activate when faced with this kind of task repeat instruction in the absence of actual comparative data.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4522529971062422,0.47,0.4779411764705882,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9768,latent_9768,5650,0.0113,0.0044192877,2.5650811,Emphasis on comparison to prior images and changes in pathology or equipment.,"High activation samples focus on changes in radiographic findings compared to prior exams, which are critical for assessing progression or stability of conditions. These comparisons often involve the presence of lines, tubes, or changes in pathology.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9769,latent_9769,804,0.001608,0.0011794104,3.626964,Detailed comparison to prior imaging for stable findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on detailed radiological findings with comparisons to prior imaging studies. These comparisons often determine changes in medical condition, specifically highlighting stable or unchanged findings over time, such as cardiac size or chronic pulmonary features.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4626865671641791,0.31,100.0,100.0
+9770,latent_9770,1042,0.002084,0.0015492085,3.5354803,Comparison to prior imaging and assessment of interval change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings with a comparison to prior studies, indicating changes or stability over time. This pattern underscores the importance of temporal context in interpreting radiological results.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4621848739495798,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9771,latent_9771,5255,0.01051,0.0041085384,2.4788382,Use of comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"Examples with high activations include descriptions of findings from current imaging studies and provide comparisons to prior images, citing changes, stabilities, or new findings noted in the current images compared to previous ones. This highlights a focus on intervals and differentials over time between studies, which is common in radiological assessments.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9772,latent_9772,2238,0.004476,0.0022313788,3.4751058,Assessment of changes or stability from prior imaging.,"The given examples with higher activations consistently include descriptions of changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging studies. This reflects a pattern of assessing interval changes or stability over time, a critical aspect in evaluating the progression or resolution of conditions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9773,latent_9773,10313,0.020626,0.007486544,1.6573751,Descriptions of monitoring/support devices and changes over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe specific reference to additional monitoring or support devices, especially with respect to their changed, stable, or removed statuses. These references often indicate involvement of additional medical interventions or devices in the patient's current health management context, which is a focal point in radiology imaging observations.",0.6733333333333333,0.673469387755102,0.68,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5604395604395604,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9774,latent_9774,761,0.001522,0.0015587447,2.553852,Requests for findings description in current vs. prior image.,All examples with high activation mention the explicit task of providing a description of the current findings in radiology compared to a prior image. The existence of specified comparison and reference to a routine check tasks aligns with the pattern.,0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4475631238990017,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.8645833333333334,96.0,100.0
+9775,latent_9775,1325,0.00265,0.0017055874,4.750973,Meticulous description of findings with reference to prior imaging for comparison.,"High activation examples consistently provide thorough descriptions of radiological findings based on comparing images directly to prior studies. These examples emphasize changes or stability in specific anatomical features and use straightforward language to verify or rule out potential issues. The emphasis on meticulous comparison with earlier images and descriptions appears to trigger the model's pattern recognition, relating to efficiently updating medical status through imaging comparison.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+9776,latent_9776,1156,0.002312,0.0016403851,2.8173215,Lung pathology or changes described in imaging comparisons.,"The examples with activations primarily describe findings that are directly associated with the lungs, often mentioning abnormalities like opacities or consolidations. Additionally, these examples commonly include references to specific comparisons with prior studies or mention changes in conditions that affect the lungs, pleura, or associated structures.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9777,latent_9777,686,0.001372,0.0014597471,4.023228,Use of multiple imaging views and comparison with prior images.,"Prompts with high activation levels involve instances where multiple imaging views (frontal, lateral) and prior image comparisons are used to assess current findings. This approach enhances diagnostic accuracy by comparing different perspectives and historical imaging to evaluate changes or stability in features, which is crucial for a thorough radiological assessment.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4254962779156327,0.4814814814814814,0.4716981132075472,0.8426966292134831,89.0,100.0
+9778,latent_9778,2553,0.005106,0.00217784,2.825098,Evaluation for acute processes or significant findings in chest X-rays.,"High activation levels correlate with mention of findings that are evaluated in the context of a possible acute process or significant pathology such as infections, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax. Lower activation levels appear with instances where there is stability and no acute changes are addressed, or when the text lacks a strong clinical question or concern.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4459520578923564,0.51,0.5059523809523809,0.85,100.0,100.0
+9779,latent_9779,2294,0.004588,0.0027014501,4.3351192,Changes in support or monitoring device positions in between radiographs.,"The pattern observed in the activated examples involves changes in support and monitoring devices (like tubes or lines) depicted in chest radiographs, meant for evaluating post-procedural changes, confirming placements, or adjustments as compared to prior imaging, particularly in intensive care settings.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6807782929239188,0.685,0.7402597402597403,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9780,latent_9780,2125,0.00425,0.0021641222,2.6166482,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and unremarkable findings.,"The pattern emerges from examples where the findings depict normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or normal heart size, unremarkable mediastinum, and clear lungs. Such descriptions indicate stable, unchanged conditions in the radiology follow-ups, often used to confirm absence of acute or alarming processes.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4923076923076923,0.32,100.0,100.0
+9781,latent_9781,8105,0.01621,0.0063554505,2.487521,Discussion of pneumothorax or change in its size.,"Examples with higher activations all included discussions of pneumothorax or changes in pneumothorax size, often with associated findings like subcutaneous emphysema or pleural effusion. These are key radiological features that are distinct and notable in chest imaging, suggesting the model is highly activated by the presence or discussion of pneumothorax.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.6136363636363636,0.27,100.0,100.0
+9782,latent_9782,2641,0.005282,0.0032535593,4.4935594,Findings describe stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern is centered around the description of changes or stability in findings when compared to prior imaging. High activation levels occur when there are mentions of stable or interval changes between current and prior imaging, often involving descriptive terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'has been', or 'interval'. This pattern reflects the importance of comparing current with prior imaging to assess progression or resolution.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+9783,latent_9783,528,0.001056,0.0009187436,3.8734238,Post-procedural changes observed across temporal imaging studies.,"Most of these examples include information regarding the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, pointing out specific interval changes, particularly for post-procedural outcomes such as pneumothorax or hydropneumothorax changes. Common phrases involve descriptions of changes like 'slightly increased', 'unchanged', 'interval change', etc., showing a focus on temporal comparison of findings, often related to procedural outcomes or monitoring of known pathologies.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6366375836574512,0.6411764705882353,0.5555555555555556,0.6428571428571429,70.0,100.0
+9784,latent_9784,8320,0.01664,0.0061966,2.1197042,Improvement or stabilization of previous findings compared to prior images.,"A consistent aspect among the high activation examples is the reduction or improvement in previously noted abnormalities when compared to prior imaging. These examples frequently highlight signs of recovery or stabilization, such as 'resolved', 'improved', 'decreased', or 'stable', which indicates improvement or non-deterioration in a clinical context.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4708994708994709,0.49,0.4838709677419355,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9785,latent_9785,611,0.001222,0.0011338907,4.276292,'Status post' surgical procedure description in findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature phrases describing patients as 'status post' various surgical procedures, such as 'status post coronary artery bypass graft surgery' or 'status post sternotomy'. This suggests that the observed pattern is related to identifying patients who have undergone specific surgeries and noting postoperative anatomical changes.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.8846153846153846,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7222222222222222,0.7333333333333333,0.75,0.6,80.0,100.0
+9786,latent_9786,6881,0.013762,0.0052665784,2.2999945,Explicit comparison between current and prior image findings.,"This analysis follows a pattern primarily depicted within radiology reports where previous imaging comparisons are explicitly highlighted, often indicating specific findings and improvements or deteriorations in patient conditions subsequent to clinical interventions, positioning, or any changes between imaging intervals.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9787,latent_9787,10141,0.020282,0.0074044634,1.932143,Emphasis on medical device positioning and comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention the positional relationship of tubes and devices (e.g., endotracheal, IJ lines, or nasogastric tubes) in the reviewed imaging studies, along with comparison to prior images. This suggests the primary focus is on the position and changes in medical devices.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9788,latent_9788,2691,0.005382,0.0023862505,2.3233285,Reports highlighting stable or changed findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern is based around reports that provide findings in comparison to previous imaging, particularly noting changes such as stability or resolution of specific conditions like atelectasis, pneumonia, heart size, or other thoracic abnormalities. These comparisons frequently mention terms like 'no significant change', 'improved from', or specific dated prior imaging as the basis for comparison.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9789,latent_9789,1407,0.002814,0.0020808307,4.8554688,Analysis of findings over multiple serial radiographs or CT scans to assess changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly correlate findings across multiple serial radiographs or CT scans to assess progression or stability of certain conditions. These examples frequently mention terms like 'comparison', 'previous exam', or 'prior film', indicating an emphasis on analyzing changes over time.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9790,latent_9790,3520,0.00704,0.0029639597,2.3059776,Priority given to interpretation of changes from prior reports.,"The reports with higher activation levels tend to emphasize conclusions drawn from notable changes or comparison of new findings with previous (prior) imaging reports, as opposed to just mentioning standard findings or unchanged conditions without further interpretation.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4565126050420168,0.4773869346733668,0.4820143884892086,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+9791,latent_9791,1221,0.002442,0.0017890978,2.3578565,Standardized language describing non-acute or normal findings in medical imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe normal or non-acute radiographic findings. They are standardized and concise, commonly used in dictations for clear or stable imaging results, often in routine follow-ups or where no acute findings are reported.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5326161072808546,0.5326633165829145,0.5306122448979592,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+9792,latent_9792,842,0.001684,0.00120949,3.4901934,Evaluation and positioning of endotracheal (ET) and/or nasogastric (NG) tubes.,"The examples all focus on evaluating the placement and position of endotracheal tubes (ETT) and/or nasogastric (NG) tubes, in addition to any noted changes or stabilities in the surrounding anatomy or findings compared to prior studies. Descriptions often specify tube position in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina or diaphragm, reflecting frequent clinical situations where accurate placement of such lines is critical.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7647058823529411,0.77,0.8857142857142857,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9793,latent_9793,1183,0.002366,0.0017314185,3.9830356,Stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference findings that are unchanged compared to previous images. This indicates a focus on stability in findings, especially related to the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal contours, or other anatomical structures, with some references to unchanged devices or consistent lung volumes.",0.816020025031289,0.8163265306122449,0.7777777777777778,0.875,24.0,25.0,0.689875950380152,0.69,0.6826923076923077,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9794,latent_9794,11293,0.022586,0.0082302755,1.6536115,Explicit and substantive comparisons to prior imaging findings or reports.,"The balance of activations correlate with reports describing comparisons of current radiographic findings with prior images, indicating that the model likely focuses on reports with explicit or substantive content regarding changes or stability over time as significantly more relevant.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9795,latent_9795,4665,0.00933,0.003674367,2.9715312,Interval worsening or improvement of significant radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or lack thereof in the context of illness progression or medical interventions, specifically evaluating the interval changes in conditions like pneumothorax or cardiopulmonary processes. In contrast, low activation examples describe observations not related to interval worsening or improvement attributable to a significant disease process.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5813953488372093,0.25,100.0,100.0
+9796,latent_9796,1360,0.00272,0.0015354267,2.7976382,Mentions of cardiac silhouette being 'top-normal' or qualified normal sizes.,"These examples prominently feature mentions of various observations about the cardiac silhouette or heart size in the chest radiographs, often stating that the heart is ""top-normal"" or similarly qualified sizes. This suggests that the pattern involves the detection and reporting of heart size as a significant feature of the chest imaging reviews.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.61,0.8666666666666667,0.26,100.0,100.0
+9797,latent_9797,465,0.00093,0.0009604012,5.6943855,Analysis of interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"These examples reference interval changes or status assessments that rely on comparisons with prior studies. They showcase a pattern of monitoring or evaluating changes over time, often using wording like 'unchanged', 'interval change', 'worsening', or specific descriptions of comparison to previous imaging for conditions such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, effusion, or positioning of medical devices.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5088649544324773,0.5128205128205128,0.4122807017543859,0.8392857142857143,56.0,100.0
+9798,latent_9798,2694,0.005388,0.0024263114,2.8725204,Comparative analysis with prior imaging focusing on devices.,"The highly activated examples involve a narrative comparison between current imaging findings and those from prior images, with mentions of devices such as tubes, lines, or ports. The presence, position, changes, or stability of these devices according to comparative imaging is a crucial aspect of these examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4696969696969697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+9799,latent_9799,836,0.001672,0.0015647004,4.5675473,Positioning and interval changes of medical tubes and lines in chest imaging.,"These examples primarily discuss the positioning and changes in medical equipment like tubes and lines in relation to the imagery. High activation indicates radiology statements focused on such adjustments, repositioning, or placement of these elements in the thoracic area, rather than direct pathology changes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5003138731952291,0.5175879396984925,0.5238095238095238,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+9800,latent_9800,3366,0.006732,0.0042591826,6.139052,Stable appearance with no significant change from prior imaging.,"The examples that are highly activated show stability or lack of significant change between the current and prior images. This stability is often conveyed through phrases like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'stable', or 'no significant change', which imply a consistent appearance over time.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5767584881486227,0.5829145728643216,0.6133333333333333,0.46,100.0,99.0
+9801,latent_9801,1709,0.003418,0.0018959309,5.5385857,Descriptions based on single frontal chest images without prior comparison.,Examples with higher activation levels focus on single frontal images or interpret changes when no prior comparison is available or explicitly stated. This likely emphasizes the isolated and independent visual assessment of chest images without needing corroboration from other angles or prior data.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4240322219735959,0.5404040404040404,0.4736842105263157,0.1,90.0,108.0
+9802,latent_9802,2937,0.005874,0.0029464571,3.5846438,Evaluations based on prior and current image comparisons.,"High activation examples prominently involve using both current and prior imaging to describe observations, with references to findings or changes between these time points. This pattern is related to assessing changes or stability in a patient's condition using direct comparisons, which is significant when evaluating conditions over time.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4074074074074074,0.48,0.488235294117647,0.83,100.0,100.0
+9803,latent_9803,699,0.001398,0.0012639512,4.3874884,"Cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in comparison to prior images.","These examples focus on providing a comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, while explicitly addressing observations on the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours. The pattern captures reports where stability or change in these specific areas is noted in comparison to prior images.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6221978021978022,0.6230366492146597,0.5871559633027523,0.7032967032967034,91.0,100.0
+9804,latent_9804,9446,0.018892,0.006948616,1.7332169,"Directive to describe findings in comparison to prior imaging, suggesting analysis of interval changes.","The pattern evident from these examples is the mentioning of 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', emphasizing an analysis of current imaging relative to a previous study, typically prompted by specific questions regarding changes in certain medical conditions.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5281840637229053,0.575,0.5460122699386503,0.89,100.0,100.0
+9805,latent_9805,1186,0.002372,0.0015433857,3.0791826,Reports consistently comparing imaging findings to prior studies.,"These examples consistently reference detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies to assess current conditions. This pattern involves identifying stability, change, or progression of conditions over time, frequently expressed with specific mentions of prior examinations, image dates, and the context of no significant change or progression in specific findings.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.535031847133758,0.84,100.0,100.0
+9806,latent_9806,2625,0.00525,0.0022232116,2.3670437,Identification of interval change or stability on imaging compared to prior study.,"These examples consistently contain references to a change or lack of change between current images and prior images, often explicitly comparing the two using phrases like 'as compared to prior'. The inclusion of specific changes relating to imaging studies is the common pattern noted.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9807,latent_9807,748,0.001496,0.0013168169,3.9233708,Presence of comparison with prior images.,"These examples specify findings developed via direct comparison with previous images, using explicit terms like 'comparison' or 'compared to'. Many examples without prior comparisons are marked low, indicating that discussion on comparison is the activating pattern.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4269923731623742,0.4375,0.4365079365079365,0.5978260869565217,92.0,100.0
+9808,latent_9808,3465,0.00693,0.0030887974,3.8692904,Detailed comparison of pulmonary conditions to prior states or treatments.,"The pattern shows a focus on evaluating changes from prior states, specifically regarding the progression or resolution of pulmonary conditions such as atelectasis, consolidation, effusion, or other chest findings. The detailed analysis in these reports emphasizes interval changes or stability of these features, particularly in relation to prior symptomatic evaluations and treatments, such as fluid removal or pneumonia management.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6410424934907354,0.645,0.6198347107438017,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9809,latent_9809,894,0.001788,0.0015392976,4.2538066,Comparison with prior images noting stability or minor changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain descriptions and comparisons of radiological findings from the current image to prior images, often noting stable conditions or small changes. This pattern of reporting in radiology emphasizes continuity of observations across different studies.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5773195876288659,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9810,latent_9810,1572,0.003144,0.0018012827,4.9506836,"Mentions of wheezing, SOB, or respiratory-related evaluation.","The highly activated examples focus on radiological findings related to comparisons across imaging studies, where specific patterns, such as wheezing and SOB, are associated with particular respiratory pathologies or conditions. The concentration on descriptions involving respiratory symptoms suggests the model is activated by mentions of wheezing, SOB, or pneumonia.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9811,latent_9811,2819,0.005638,0.002693267,2.1866276,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention both the current and prior images, often specifying types of views like 'frontal image' and 'lateral image', and addressing changes or comparisons directly tied to multiple image types unlike those with low activation levels.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4935064935064935,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9812,latent_9812,4005,0.00801,0.0033573662,2.2098207,Hyperinflation or well-expanded lungs.,"A common aspect in these examples is hyperinflation or well-expanded lungs, which are described explicitly across several examples. This feature is commonly seen in conditions like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), where lungs exhibit features such as hyperinflated lung fields, which are detailed in the findings or impressions of multiple radiology reports.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.44234099380705,0.525,0.6086956521739131,0.14,100.0,100.0
+9813,latent_9813,573,0.001146,0.0012410708,3.99638,Evaluation in comparison to prior frontal images.,"The representative samples often mention 'comparison to the prior frontal image' or 'findings in radiology study in comparison to prior images,' which exemplify the practice of comparing current findings with past examinations. This indicates the pattern of evaluating changes or stability in medical imaging over time.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3768511431328829,0.3885714285714285,0.3709677419354839,0.6133333333333333,75.0,100.0
+9814,latent_9814,2045,0.00409,0.002639432,4.3843546,Comparison to prior image with prior report or historical context present.,"Examples that exhibit a higher activation consistently involve providing a description of findings in radiology compared to a prior frontal image but with the presence of a prior report or historical context mentioned in the prompt. This suggests the model activates on the task of comparison with provided historical reference, trusting prior insights for current analysis.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.460431654676259,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9815,latent_9815,1163,0.002326,0.0013725345,6.1356535,Evaluations involving both current frontal and lateral images compared to prior images.,"The highly activating samples describe evaluation findings where both frontal and lateral images are being compared, particularly focusing on comparing current and prior images in a comprehensive manner. This pattern is common in radiology reports conducting detailed examinations that involve multiple perspectives.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3717919252279169,0.385,0.3380281690140845,0.24,100.0,100.0
+9816,latent_9816,4966,0.009932,0.0063137305,4.017619,Unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"The pattern includes descriptions where the cardiomediastinal silhouette is noted as unchanged or unremarkable, indicating no significant changes or acute abnormalities, despite other findings being mentioned in the reports.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,100.0,100.0
+9817,latent_9817,670,0.00134,0.0013790762,4.0029874,Presence of surgical markers in the chest like sternotomy wires and stents.,"The pattern evident is the presence of markers for prior surgical interventions such as coronary artery bypass grafts, sternotomy wires, stents, and other surgical clips in the chest area. These are common postoperative findings and are frequently documented in radiology reports where comparison with prior imaging is involved.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,1.0,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6534099833506111,0.6844919786096256,0.8181818181818182,0.4137931034482758,87.0,100.0
+9818,latent_9818,1424,0.002848,0.0014295529,3.0723972,Change description between current and prior chest images.,"Examples with high activation describe the evaluation of current images against prior images to assess changes, specifically for conditions like pneumothorax, opacities, or cardiopulmonary issues. This comparison illustrates stability or progression, which is key to high activation in these examples.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9819,latent_9819,3993,0.007986,0.0046382914,3.806664,Description of findings based on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations consistently mention 'comparison to prior imaging,' specifically in the context of providing a description based on current and prior frontal images or evaluating changes in findings relative to past data. These examples use phrases like 'compared to the previous radiograph' or 'comparison to prior,' indicating the model is recognizing contexts where comparison is a key component of the analysis.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.402475458813487,0.405,0.415929203539823,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9820,latent_9820,467,0.000934,0.0011395307,5.017634,Clear lungs and normal findings despite indications for potential pathology.,"Examples comprising high activation levels frequently report clear lung fields with no significant pathological findings despite being linked with indications or clinical history of potential issues like pneumonia, heart disease, or infections. This denotes a pattern where reports expect disease but affirm normality contrary to those expectations.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5193510224776069,0.5443037974683544,0.390625,0.4310344827586206,58.0,100.0
+9821,latent_9821,911,0.001822,0.0015573783,3.7272372,Radiological findings related to thoracic interventions or pleural changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels include language suggesting monitoring or evaluation for potential complications following thoracic procedures or conditions, such as thoracentesis or pleural effusion management. They frequently involve pleural changes, device placements, or thoracic interventions that need follow-up. This pattern explains the emphasis on the right settings, previously reported issue resolutions, or lack of new complications given prior interventions or conditions.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5470085470085471,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9822,latent_9822,990,0.00198,0.0018641297,4.235555,Comparison of chest images showing stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or no significant interval change.,"These examples emphasize the comparison of current and prior radiological images and findings, specifically noting the stability or unchanged nature of the cardiomediastinal silhouette. They refer to 'comparison' but often do not provide significant interval changes that would suggest new pathology, focusing instead on stability and lack of acute findings.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,100.0,100.0
+9823,latent_9823,3139,0.006278,0.0028994617,2.1128278,Stable imaging findings when compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or comparisons against a prior image, emphasizing stability or resolution of a medical condition, or lack of new pathologies. This pattern highlights the utility of prior imaging in assessing a patient's progress or status.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9824,latent_9824,10054,0.020108,0.007182976,1.2846022,Evaluation of interval change in images with noted improvement or resolution.,"The examples all involve radiology findings that compare current images with previous ones, noting improvement or resolution of specific abnormalities. Phrases like 'unchanged from prior', 'comparison suggests improvement', or 'there has been a decrease in' highlight this pattern.",0.4731182795698925,0.5102040816326531,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,24.0,0.5062282572101897,0.56,0.6764705882352942,0.23,100.0,100.0
+9825,latent_9825,1297,0.002594,0.0018295466,2.8550851,"Comparison with prior imaging studies, noting changes in medical devices or clinical status.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve imaging cases that emphasize comparison with prior imaging studies, highlighting changes in medical devices or clinical status. The inclusion of phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'no significant interval change', or indicating movement or adjustment of medical apparatus is a characteristic element.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5149878746968675,0.515,0.5151515151515151,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9826,latent_9826,663,0.001326,0.0011893326,2.6121242,"Use of multiple image views (frontal, lateral) and comparison without prior images or explicit comparison statements.",Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of multiple images combined to provide detailed comparison or description.,0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5560975609756098,0.5604395604395604,0.5121951219512195,0.5121951219512195,82.0,100.0
+9827,latent_9827,1232,0.002464,0.0021383415,3.5000112,"Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with no acute findings, using PA and lateral views.","The pattern involves reports where lungs are clear, cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal, and no acute findings are identified, often with PA and lateral views, and there is explicit reference made to prior imaging for comparison. The pattern highlights the common structure and language used in radiology reports focusing on affirming normalcy, typical for follow-ups or checking stability.",0.7043103448275863,0.7142857142857143,0.8125,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5901639344262295,0.61,0.6964285714285714,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9828,latent_9828,539,0.001078,0.0011437316,4.302559,Comparison of findings to prior imaging studies emphasizing changes or stability.,"These examples consistently mention specific prior imaging examinations and use comparison language to evaluate specific changes, improvements, or stability in conditions like lung volumes and opacities. These reports describe imaging findings in the context of comparison to previous imaging studies, indicating stable, improved, or new findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4991508093306991,0.5,0.4299065420560747,0.6571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+9829,latent_9829,576,0.001152,0.0013198947,4.79676,Stable or normal findings without acute changes.,"Higher activation levels often correspond to descriptions where findings are normal or unchanged. This might indicate that currently stable findings, such as ""heart size is normal"" or ""hilar contours are normal"" without acute changes, trigger stronger activation.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3853894191115825,0.5930232558139535,0.5112781954887218,0.9444444444444444,72.0,100.0
+9830,latent_9830,931,0.001862,0.0016035772,2.8589694,Assessing changes or consistency between current and prior radiology images.,"These examples repeatedly involve descriptions where the assistant provides a comparative analysis between a current image and a prior image, highlighting any changes or consistencies. The task typically involves assessing interval changes or noting stability, often referencing technical details like changes in catheter or tube positions, or stability in lung findings. Examples with high activation levels consistently involve such comparisons and evaluations.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9831,latent_9831,378,0.000756,0.00088238035,5.2037206,Normal heart and mediastinal contours across imaging views.,"In cases with high activation, the descriptions consistently report a normal heart size and mediastinal contours across multiple views. The comparison with prior imaging often reinforces the absence of new abnormalities, suggesting that this combination is indicative of the pattern being studied.",0.8441365660564077,0.8444444444444444,0.7407407407407407,1.0,20.0,25.0,0.7663123167155426,0.7733333333333333,0.6081081081081081,0.9,50.0,100.0
+9832,latent_9832,701,0.001402,0.0016802446,5.1117296,Focus on changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently mention changes or discrepancies compared to previous imaging reports, specifically about variations in the patient's condition or devices. The language used often highlights new issues, interval changes, or improvements concerning prior findings, indicating a pattern where the model is attentive to these temporal or diagnostic comparisons.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5406896551724139,0.5621621621621622,0.5142857142857142,0.8470588235294118,85.0,100.0
+9833,latent_9833,952,0.001904,0.0018766716,5.323607,Description and comparison of changes in radiological findings across multiple views.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve the description of frontal and lateral imaging data with findings that specify changes or comparisons with prior images. These reports use quantifiable descriptions such as 'opacity', 'pleural effusion', or descriptions of inserted devices or their placements, often noting the interval changes.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5746446726838883,0.59,0.5652173913043478,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9834,latent_9834,1956,0.003912,0.002037266,3.2534828,Descriptions involving direct comparison with prior images.,"This pattern is related to images or studies being referenced that involve prior or comparison images. The activation of examples aligns with whether descriptions involve identified changes, improvements, or stabilized observations when directly compared to previous diagnostic images. Higher activation likeliest involves when obvious changes are noted or discussed in these follow-up comparisons.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+9835,latent_9835,1405,0.00281,0.0024275328,4.016404,Comparisons in imaging highlighting stability or unchanged findings.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe comparisons between current and prior imaging, often highlighting stability or stability in particular findings such as cardiac silhouette, lung conditions, or presence of devices, whereas low activation examples often lack such specific comparative elements or focus on more dynamic changes or findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+9836,latent_9836,2104,0.004208,0.0026891541,5.6356244,Comparison images unavailable despite prompt indicating comparison.,"The pattern identified here is the presence of a prior radiology report or images to compare, which contrasts the expectation set by the original prompt where 'none available' was mentioned incorrectly. Higher activations actually correlated to examples where comparison was stated as 'none available', contradicting initial prompt but revealing the pattern.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.5208333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4326506437233081,0.545,0.5238095238095238,0.99,100.0,100.0
+9837,latent_9837,922,0.001844,0.001292859,2.9949946,Structured findings comparison with prior images or reports.,"The high-activation examples consistently compare current image findings with previous reports or images, focusing on radiological stability, progression, or resolution of findings. These reports often involve a structured comparison in which existing conditions are assessed for changes over time using prior images or reports.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9838,latent_9838,831,0.001662,0.0017547726,4.9883876,Explicit interval changes in lung opacities or pleural effusions on comparison with prior images.,"The pattern identified is that the model activates on reports with detailed comparisons with prior images, explicitly stating changes in lung opacities, atelectasis, pleural effusions, or pneumonia. These reports emphasize interval changes or lack thereof, which seems to trigger higher activations.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5813953488372093,0.25,100.0,100.0
+9839,latent_9839,1153,0.002306,0.0019464135,4.1182175,"Emphasis on comparing current images, especially both frontal and lateral, with prior images for interval changes.","The examples with high activation levels generally involve the comparison of current images, often including both frontal and lateral views, with prior images to evaluate changes or stability in findings over time. This pattern reflects a common practice in radiology where images are compared to previous studies to assess for any progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5112781954887218,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9840,latent_9840,1285,0.00257,0.0017969009,3.428577,In-depth assessment and description of radiological findings on images.,"The pattern emerges from detailed descriptions of medical scenarios requiring comparison to previous images to discern stability, change, or presence of specific findings. These reports emphasize objective assessment and documentation of findings in similar contexts, typically structured to describe observations with technical precision. The examples with high activation frequently include this descriptive format indicating an involved review and comparison to previous findings to identify any medical evolution.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.545442098633588,0.585,0.5534591194968553,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9841,latent_9841,8017,0.016034,0.005973191,2.0175486,Direct comparison of findings to prior images with a focus on interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve direct comparison between current and prior radiologic images, usually emphasizing changes or stability in conditions like pleural effusions, opacities, or line placements. This linguistic pattern is a hallmark of analyzing interval changes over time in radiology.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9842,latent_9842,900,0.0018,0.001513526,4.0564995,Current image analysis without historical comparison.,"The examples with high activation involve the analysis of chest radiographs where the assistant is tasked with bedside interpretation of current imaging, primarily focusing on changes to thoracic structures (cardiac, mediastinal, hilar contours) without requiring a comparison across historical studies. The emphasis is on the ability to describe and recognize anatomical structures, ruling out abnormalities, and identifying stable or unremarkable findings based on only the current images.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6111407181829718,0.6130653266331658,0.6352941176470588,0.54,100.0,99.0
+9843,latent_9843,1283,0.002566,0.0020148996,3.898004,Comparison of current image to prior frontal image.,"The examples demonstrating activation levels mostly contain instructions or actions that compare current images to a prior frontal image. This pattern explicitly involves analyzing images in the context of a former baseline image set, as indicated by the consistent mention of 'comparison' to a 'prior frontal image.'",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3420386678813645,0.35,0.3770491803278688,0.46,100.0,100.0
+9844,latent_9844,696,0.001392,0.0012104535,4.738113,"Changes in positions of tubes, lines, or medical devices.","These examples frequently mention changes in tubes, lines, or devices, particularly related to their position. This pattern is common in radiology reports where the focus is on evaluating medical hardware and devices, rather than anatomical or pathological changes in comparison to prior images.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5729772691146082,0.6032608695652174,0.6078431372549019,0.369047619047619,84.0,100.0
+9845,latent_9845,8916,0.017832,0.006676939,1.7147796,Descriptions of changes in findings between current and prior images.,"The consistent pattern seen in the higher activation examples is that they contain clear descriptions of changes in findings or interval changes between the current and prior imaging studies. The focus is often on specific pathological changes such as resolution of a condition or no interval change, which is central to longitudinal evaluation in radiology.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5765765765765766,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9846,latent_9846,1009,0.002018,0.0018005684,2.807543,Comparative analysis of unchanged cardiovascular structures.,"The pattern is the examination of radiological findings by referencing or comparing to previous or known configurations, particularly focusing on stability or changes in mediastinal, cardiac, or aortic contours, often indicating mild enlargement or calcification.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9847,latent_9847,3348,0.006696,0.003342327,3.78574,"Comparison focuses on changes in opacities, effusions, or cardiomediastinal dimensions.","These examples focus on identifying changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, or cardiomediastinal dimensions. Reports with higher activations often include detailed comparisons between current and prior images, highlighting subtle changes like effusion alterations, consistent with or leading to possible congestion or changes in heart/mediastinal dimensions along with specific clinical context like post-surgical states that augment the observed features.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6038014995360967,0.605,0.5945945945945946,0.66,100.0,100.0
+9848,latent_9848,6063,0.012126,0.004669605,2.6338813,Clinical and radiological comparison with sequential imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of changes or constant findings concerning cardiopulmonary features or devices across successive imaging sessions, while addressing relevant clinical history. This pattern is common in monitoring patients for disease progression, stability, or treatment response.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9849,latent_9849,1183,0.002366,0.0019550805,4.6692033,Description of interval changes or stability on imaging comparison.,"These examples all feature a specific comparison between current and prior imaging, with notes on interval changes or lack thereof. These reports emphasize stability or specific changes in radiological findings over time, indicating a focused evaluation related to ongoing pathologies or device placements, which is a standard practice in longitudinal monitoring of patients.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.5508474576271186,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9850,latent_9850,1128,0.002256,0.001817165,4.619917,Comparison indicates changes or detailed attention to findings from prior imaging.,"Examples with activation demonstrate specific changes or slightly altered findings compared to previous imaging studies. Keywords like 'interval decrease', 'better lung volumes', 'unchanged heart silhouette', or positioning of tubes indicate attention to detailed comparison, which affects activation level.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4279405861099959,0.43,0.4375,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9851,latent_9851,894,0.001788,0.0014411825,6.116663,Frequent mention of eventration of the hemidiaphragm.,"Highly activated examples contain references to the eventration or tenting of the diaphragm, a pattern noticeable in the descriptions involving consistent emphases on 'eventration of the right hemidiaphragm.' This pattern involves anatomical changes in the diaphragm, a common focus in thoracic radiology reports.",0.898989898989899,0.9,1.0,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7755682559565751,0.785,0.9830508474576272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9852,latent_9852,706,0.001412,0.0011641277,3.8901553,Description of findings relative to prior imaging studies with references to stability or unchanged findings.,"The observed pattern is common in radiology reports where findings in current imaging are evaluated in relation to previous studies, using terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improvement' or explicit dates of prior images for comparison. Examples show this linguistic style extensively, emphasizing no relevant change or stability of conditions over time.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5440871810880608,0.5502645502645502,0.5256410256410257,0.4606741573033708,89.0,100.0
+9853,latent_9853,1495,0.00299,0.001948941,4.560185,"Aspiration, pneumonia, or infiltrate findings in lung opacities.","Examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings or changes related to aspiration, pneumonia, or infiltrates when compared to previous imaging. These are significant pathologies involving lung opacities, often seen in patients with compromised respiratory systems or those likely to aspirate.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7696314102564102,0.77,0.75,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9854,latent_9854,9556,0.019112,0.007345865,2.722159,Comparative imaging findings indicating interval change or stability.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels consistently present a structure where the radiology descriptions emphasize interval changes, stability, or comparisons of specific findings over time. This suggests that descriptions involving significant changes contrasted against prior imaging, or the use of comparison and stability language, trigger a pattern recognition in the model.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.611783066718689,0.6231155778894473,0.5939849624060151,0.79,100.0,99.0
+9855,latent_9855,1099,0.002198,0.0016127683,2.3614657,Comparison to prior imaging that identifies stability or changes over time.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight descriptions of stability or changes over time as derived from prior reports and medical imaging. They often include comparison phrases such as 'unchanged', 'however', and 'stable'. Many of these reports suggest awareness of prior states and evaluations, typically linked to patient history which seek to identify ongoing conditions. These aspects provide a thorough understanding of the patient's condition over time.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+9856,latent_9856,1830,0.00366,0.0021500867,3.413981,Bilateral lung opacity or pleural effusion noted.,"These examples describe findings where lung opacities are noted, often bilaterally, and associated with pulmonary edema, atelectasis, or vascular congestion. Many instances discuss pleural effusions, interstitial edema, or structural changes in the lungs, often revealing aspects of pulmonary interstitial conditions.",0.6287878787878788,0.6326530612244898,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.6680201230879236,0.675,0.7464788732394366,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9857,latent_9857,1168,0.002336,0.0016407146,3.5656703,Presence of both frontal and lateral images alongside previous frontal images.,Examples that activate strongly typically involve analysis or interpretation in scenarios where both frontal and lateral view images are provided together or where prior image comparisons are explicitly required. Such contexts necessitate more comprehensive and comparative analysis.,0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9858,latent_9858,1854,0.003708,0.002078662,3.5303578,"Detailed findings from series of images compared with previous, including lateral views.","Examples with higher activation specifically mention features of multiple images being compared, including lateral views, while examples with lower activation either lack a detailed comparative context or mention none or an unspecified comparison.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4803921568627451,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9859,latent_9859,7655,0.01531,0.005851428,2.3943064,Comparison and assessment of medical tube placements with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions involving medical tubes and their placement or repositioning, especially those assessed in the context of prior imaging (e.g., endotracheal tubes, catheters, and other supportive devices). These reports highlight findings related explicitly to the comparison of the current versus prior positions of such devices.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.6375,0.51,100.0,100.0
+9860,latent_9860,911,0.001822,0.0015141817,3.336281,Emphasis on change over time compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation specifically describe comparisons to prior images, emphasizing changes in size or presence of conditions like cardiomegaly or pneumothorax. These contrast with examples showing stable findings or no change, which have lower or zero activation. This suggests the pattern is recognizing and highlighting changes over time in radiology reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9861,latent_9861,4020,0.00804,0.0033681986,2.979887,Radiology reports evaluating acute chest changes without comparative data.,"High activation levels indicate radiology reports primarily focusing on evaluating findings related to changes concerning acute processes, often providing no comparison or emphasizing unchanged findings as justification for stability or lack of acute findings—especially in the context of pneumonia evaluation or similar concerns.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4353472614342179,0.475,0.4468085106382978,0.21,100.0,100.0
+9862,latent_9862,1340,0.00268,0.0022312433,3.9569428,Comparing current and prior radiographic images.,"The examples with high activation frequently contain detailed instructions to compare current and prior radiographic images, focusing on evaluating differences, interval changes, or confirming stability over time. This suggests an emphasis on comparative analysis in radiological evaluations, likely due to a clinical interest in observing progressions or stability of findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9863,latent_9863,7438,0.014876,0.0056229443,2.2130203,Inconsistencies in findings of multiple chest examinations.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature inconsistencies between chest examinations, despite the presence of similar appearances. Typically, these inconsistencies could point to potential pathological changes, prompting further investigation. Conversely, examples with zero activation level primarily indicate overall stable images without mention of inconsistencies.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9864,latent_9864,4066,0.008132,0.0031244897,2.2547095,Detailed comparison of current images to prior ones for interval changes.,"Highly activated samples consistently mention findings from current imaging studies explicitly compared to prior imaging to assess changes over time. This indicates a focus on longitudinal analysis of findings, stability, and interval changes in medical imaging.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+9865,latent_9865,834,0.001668,0.0012964981,4.3237176,Detailed comparison findings with focus on medical tubes/devices.,"The pattern seen in examples with higher activation levels involves clear instructions or structured prompts to provide detailed descriptions of radiological findings, often in comparison to prior imaging, addressing specified clinical questions, and observing changes in medical devices or tubes placements. These descriptions are detailed and involve interpreting changes across multiple studies.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6572235104345197,0.66,0.6951219512195121,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9866,latent_9866,1361,0.002722,0.0018863716,3.4652412,Structured comparison using current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels use a consistent format, indicating a focus on patterns in structured report generation involving frontal, lateral, and prior images. They describe findings in the format of analyzing current images in light of prior or comparator images, a common practice in radiology for assessing changes or stability of findings.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+9867,latent_9867,3750,0.0075,0.0031609503,2.02371,Low lung volumes identified in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe low lung volumes, a radiological finding often seen in conjunction with other observations like atelectasis or accentuated bronchovascular markings. This pattern is evident in multiple high-activation examples with descriptions emphasizing these reduced volumes.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.6181818181818182,0.34,100.0,100.0
+9868,latent_9868,2254,0.004508,0.0020537758,2.688272,Comparison with prior images reveals changes or new findings.,"Higher activations appear in examples that describe changes or findings in the chest radiograph by making comparisons between the current and prior images. Specifically, the focus is on diagnostic insights gained from comparison with prior images, especially highlighting changes such as new developments or resolutions of conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5833333333333334,0.35,100.0,100.0
+9869,latent_9869,1200,0.0024,0.0019614282,3.4904466,Descriptions involving medical device placement and changes.,"Highly activated examples focus on describing findings in relation to the placement and condition of medical devices within the body, such as lines, tubes, and catheters, even if clinical significance is minimal. Terms like 'termination at', 'coiled', or 'placement' often feature prominently in these cases.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5694444444444444,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9870,latent_9870,352,0.000704,0.0010504259,3.8235762,Instruction to describe or compare imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation specifically reference direct tasks or instructions to provide descriptions or comparisons in radiology reports, often involving specific directives such as correlating findings or assessing interval changes. These examples explicitly involve a description or comparative evaluation based on the image inputs provided, aligning with their higher activations.",0.3918561607615018,0.4565217391304347,0.45,0.8571428571428571,21.0,25.0,0.3592252699893525,0.3732394366197183,0.3057851239669421,0.8809523809523809,42.0,100.0
+9871,latent_9871,1846,0.003692,0.0024081818,4.932514,Presence of pulmonary opacity or consolidation in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to findings in the current imaging that indicate some form of parenchymal or pulmonary opacity, consolidation, or similar abnormal potential pathology related to lung changes. These findings are often associated with specific conditions such as opacity, consolidation, pleural effusion, or other notable lung conditions, while many lower activation examples focus on describing placement or presence of medical devices without these findings.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6334513318771811,0.635,0.6551724137931034,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9872,latent_9872,817,0.001634,0.0014739705,3.6072931,Changes in cardiac silhouette or mediastinal structures in imaging comparison.,"The activation levels are high when there is a prominent finding of changes in cardiac silhouette, mediastinal or pulmonary vascular abnormalities, often indicating conditions such as heart enlargement, increased pulmonary vascular pressure, or aortic tortuosity. These findings are typically compared to prior imaging to highlight progression or stability of these conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9873,latent_9873,1511,0.003022,0.001896068,2.905764,Detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging findings.,"These examples prominently feature the description of radiological findings in direct comparison with prior image findings, using explicit mentions of changes, intervals, or stable conditions. They frequently involve detailed analysis of specific elements, such as fluid levels, surgical changes, or unchanged medical devices. Descriptive language related to comparisons helps to identify this pattern.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9874,latent_9874,1128,0.002256,0.0016394973,3.5317552,Detailed comparison to prior images with specified findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed analyses of prior imaging reports, often specifying the rationale for changes or stability in a patient’s condition. These often discuss prior patients' histories and provide comprehensive comparisons to previous findings, especially in the context of possible changes or lack thereof related to a specific medical query or perspective.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.5,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9875,latent_9875,1164,0.002328,0.0017577359,4.6027026,"Absence of focal consolidation, effusion, and pneumothorax.","All highly activated examples describe normal findings with specific reference to absence of focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax in the radiology report. This consistent reference to these three absent findings is the pattern extracted from these examples.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.698340874811463,0.715,0.6462585034013606,0.95,100.0,100.0
+9876,latent_9876,800,0.0016,0.0014421722,4.387215,Comparison with prior images and mention of healed rib fractures.,These examples primarily document comparisons with prior imaging studies and note healing or old rib fractures as part of stable findings or background information. This pattern is common in radiology reports to explicitly establish the context of stability in long-standing conditions like healed fractures and to track changes over time.,0.9194847020933976,0.92,1.0,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.95,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9877,latent_9877,12204,0.024408,0.0089494735,1.3885173,Findings comparing current and prior imaging studies with notable interval changes.,"Samples with high activation levels are characterized by being asked to provide comparison descriptions with previous images using specific phrases like ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"" and have notable descriptions regarding interval changes or the stability of findings. These patterns reflect a requirement for a direct comparison with past imaging studies to determine changes.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5875,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9878,latent_9878,1724,0.003448,0.001995156,4.2904906,Stability over time in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference stable findings over time after comparing the current image with prior imaging studies. The focus is on tracking changes in specific findings such as 'scarring', 'atelectasis', 'opacification', and ensuring stability or a lack of significant change over multiple studies.",0.3663793103448276,0.3877551020408163,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,24.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5783132530120482,0.48,100.0,100.0
+9879,latent_9879,3801,0.007602,0.0033315064,2.469713,Low lung volumes with exaggerated vascular markings.,"Many examples describe findings of lung volume reduction and increased bronchovascular marking, which are common in cases of pulmonary conditions like atelectasis or early pulmonary edema. This pattern contrasts with normal inspirations where the lungs are fully expanded without crowding. It is consistently mentioned across high activation samples and seems to be a primary focus of interest.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3897923516691844,0.485,0.4285714285714285,0.09,100.0,100.0
+9880,latent_9880,1679,0.003358,0.0022073092,3.8945003,Significant changes or developments compared to prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples frequently mention significant changes or updates in specific findings compared to previous studies, such as the placement of tubes or worsening conditions, indicating a pattern of highlighting changes or developments in conditions from prior imaging rather than unchanged or stable findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.392,0.43,0.36,0.18,100.0,100.0
+9881,latent_9881,1090,0.00218,0.0015721364,3.9322224,Structured comparison with prior studies noting device or condition stability/change.,"The consistent element in the examples with high activation levels is the explicit, structured comparison with prior imaging or studies. This involves assessing any changes in medical devices or conditions relative to previous exams, highlighting their stability or changes.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7033248081841432,0.71,0.6615384615384615,0.86,100.0,100.0
+9882,latent_9882,1684,0.003368,0.0028388838,3.810698,Comparisons with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"High activation is linked to comparisons made between current and prior imaging reports noting changes, stability, or progression of findings. Lower activations often correspond to descriptions without such comparisons or with no prior studies for reference.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6612083568605307,0.685,0.6209150326797386,0.95,100.0,100.0
+9883,latent_9883,1094,0.002188,0.0015917934,3.17424,"Stable abnormalities like pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or mediastinal shift compared to prior imaging.","Examples with high activation levels describe either unchanged or stable abnormalities in pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or mediastinal shift. These findings are compared with prior images, which suggest stability rather than acute changes. The pattern involves recognizing unchanged appearances or conditions in specific pulmonary or thoracic abnormalities in imaging reports.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.59375,0.61,0.6833333333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9884,latent_9884,583,0.001166,0.0011358378,3.8332796,Normal radiographic findings with absence of major pathologies.,"Highly activated examples primarily involve descriptions of normal findings in chest radiographs, specifically focusing on the absence of pathologies like pneumothorax, effusion, and consolidation, alongside descriptions of the heart, mediastinum, and osseous structures being normal. This recurring pattern of normal findings, regardless of the indication for the study, stands out in these samples.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,0.78125,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8092230576441102,0.8092485549132948,0.7040816326530612,0.9452054794520548,73.0,100.0
+9885,latent_9885,6017,0.012034,0.0046699573,1.8303242,Detailed interval changes with multiple time comparisons in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation scores often feature descriptions emphasizing direct comparisons between imaging - particularly noting changes over short time intervals, or multiple points of comparison within the provided contexts. These signify a detailed longitudinal analysis in the patient's medical history, contributing to diagnosing or managing conditions over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5975609756097561,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9886,latent_9886,7607,0.015214,0.0056849346,2.1447997,Emphasis on stability or similarity to prior imaging despite lack of acute changes.,The examples with high activation consistently involve requests for descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging even when the most recent study indicates stable or unchanged findings. This suggests a pattern of emphasizing intermediate observations and longitudinal stability despite lack of acute changes.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5684210526315789,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9887,latent_9887,854,0.001708,0.0014842239,3.9613454,Use of comparative analysis with prior images to evaluate changes.,"All highly activated examples included comparative analysis with a prior image, emphasizing changes, resolutions, or stabilities in identified pathologies or features. This suggests the pattern is focused on evaluating intervals and changes over time in radiological findings.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4640605296343001,0.49,0.4930555555555556,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9888,latent_9888,640,0.00128,0.0013769569,3.6113875,Direct comparisons with prior imaging showing interval changes or stability.,The examples with higher activation levels discuss scenarios where current radiographic findings are compared to prior ones with clear descriptions of changes or stability in findings. Sentences describing comparison results or indications of an interval change are particularly common in radiology reports to track patient progress or response to treatment over time.,0.297470895222802,0.3,0.3214285714285714,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4735311227457824,0.4751381215469613,0.4222222222222222,0.4691358024691358,81.0,100.0
+9889,latent_9889,3063,0.006126,0.00432753,2.7146268,Explicit invocation of 'PRIOR_REPORT' in imaging prompt.,The highly activated examples depict a pattern of providing clinical imaging instructions with specific mention of prior reports to compare current findings and explicitly invoking the 'PRIOR_REPORT' within the prompt. This structure implies a reconfiguration of information presented in a radiological context by referencing and directly comparing prior imaging findings.,0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4568578419510096,0.495,0.4967320261437908,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9890,latent_9890,3271,0.006542,0.0035123916,3.6553564,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"Many of these examples involve situations where a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lung fields are noted, which often appears in routine descriptions of radiographic studies where the focus is not on any acute or significant abnormal findings. The examples tend to note normal findings across the heart and lung region, with no significant pathological findings emphasized.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.677386833350136,0.68,0.7195121951219512,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9891,latent_9891,2019,0.004038,0.002169772,2.5783057,Changes in tube or line placement on serial imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels mention explicit findings or changes in tube or line placements between the current and previous imaging. These involve details about the positioning or alteration of medical devices on subsequent examinations. The pattern focuses on changes regarding the placement and positioning of medical tubes or lines as observed from prior imaging studies.,0.5353448275862069,0.5510204081632653,0.5625,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4705882352941176,0.24,100.0,100.0
+9892,latent_9892,918,0.001836,0.0013796417,2.4745958,Frontal and lateral images compared to nominally absent prior comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of current frontal and lateral images, with a comparison to a prior frontal image, yet report 'COMPARISON: None.' This may indicate a pattern of reporting where lateral views are heavily relied upon despite nominally non-available comparisons, perhaps emphasizing stability or no acute change in non-existence of detailed prior data.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4659090909090909,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9893,latent_9893,1761,0.003522,0.002676267,3.9764273,Detailed description of medical device or tube placements.,"The examples consistently feature a description of medical devices or tubes and their placements, like ET tubes, PICC lines, or pacemakers. These descriptions usually contain observations about their positions relative to anatomical landmarks and notes on whether these positions are stable or changed.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6374493927125506,0.6381909547738693,0.6483516483516484,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+9894,latent_9894,493,0.000986,0.0011526685,5.784367,"Normal heart and lung contours with absence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or significant pathology.","Highly activated examples consistently lack findings of significant pathology, describing normal heart and lung contours, with normal bony structures, and absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax. These reports commonly conclude with phrases indicating unremarkable or stable normal findings.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7222222222222222,0.725,0.5952380952380952,0.8333333333333334,60.0,100.0
+9895,latent_9895,1318,0.002636,0.0018957881,2.9491787,Active direct comparison to prior imaging with noted interval changes in findings.,"The examples that have higher activation consistently involve a direct comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, often noting interval changes over time, such as improved aeration, positional changes of tubes, or stability/lack of new findings in repeated evaluations. This pattern indicates that the presence of direct comparison language along with specific mentions of clinical implications or changes over time elevates activation levels.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4601276520598401,0.465,0.4567901234567901,0.37,100.0,100.0
+9896,latent_9896,314,0.000628,0.0009263488,4.8497176,Evaluation of tube or line placement in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the analysis or evaluation of tube or line placement (e.g., OG tube, NG tube), particularly in cases where there are concerns about their positioning or adjustment. These medical devices are evaluated to ensure they are correctly placed, as this can have significant implications for patient treatment.",0.4814814814814815,0.5238095238095238,0.4166666666666667,0.2777777777777778,18.0,24.0,0.4738562091503268,0.5942028985507246,0.2352941176470588,0.2105263157894736,38.0,100.0
+9897,latent_9897,1667,0.003334,0.0022144164,3.5479195,Detailed comparison to prior images with specific interval changes or stability.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels consistently provide a description of findings in comparison to prior imaging. This is explicit in the instructions and fits the task of noting interval changes or lack thereof, which is crucial in evaluating progress or stability of medical conditions.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5101535924131533,0.5151515151515151,0.5189873417721519,0.4141414141414141,99.0,99.0
+9898,latent_9898,1845,0.00369,0.0019603884,3.4314935,Descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on descriptions and evaluations of prior conditions and seek to identify interval changes or stability. The pattern highlights the importance of comparing current findings with previous observations to monitor new developments or improvements, commonly expressed with terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or specific past imaging results.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,100.0
+9899,latent_9899,659,0.001318,0.0014342132,4.88548,Unchanged moderate to severe cardiomegaly compared to prior imaging.,The highest activation level examples consistently involve the presence of moderate to severe cardiomegaly that remains unchanged compared to previous imaging. This often includes references to related findings like pulmonary congestion or effusions but consistently highlights the stable nature of the cardiomegaly between examinations.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6957698333570717,0.7303370786516854,0.875,0.4487179487179487,78.0,100.0
+9900,latent_9900,2102,0.004204,0.0023476593,3.1665096,Comparison to prior images with unchanged device placements or findings.,"In this set of examples, there is a common occurrence of comparing current imaging findings with previous examinations and identifying changes or the lack thereof. The presence of support devices like lines and tubes with unchanged positions or evaluated placements is often noted in these reports, suggesting monitoring of stability or correct placement.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5896306676008407,0.59,0.5849056603773585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9901,latent_9901,1507,0.003014,0.0019695812,2.8316355,Comparisons indicating interval change or stability of findings in radiographs.,"The highest activations are observed in samples reporting new, unchanged, or interval changes detected in chest radiographic findings in comparison to previous imaging. This pattern involves specified intervals of comparison, which is crucial for monitoring progression or stability of findings, such as pleural effusion or cardiomegaly.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6016949152542372,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9902,latent_9902,697,0.001394,0.001246847,5.5171776,Lack of specific prior image for comparison.,"The examples with higher activations involve scenarios where there's no or limited available prior imaging comparison. These examples refer mostly to creating reports or descriptions of current images without specific prior comparisons due to absence or non-specific prior references, often explicitly stating 'COMPARISON: None.'",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6213485881207401,0.6284153005464481,0.56,0.8433734939759037,83.0,100.0
+9903,latent_9903,683,0.001366,0.0013857048,5.1772447,Comparison between current and prior images leading to unchanged findings.,"The highly activated samples consistently include interpretations of current imaging findings specifically in relation to previous ones. The pattern emphasizes the presence of a prior and current image set explicitly directing the comparison. This contrasts with examples having no prior images, which consistently show lower activations.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.44602048857368,0.4864864864864865,0.4,0.2352941176470588,85.0,100.0
+9904,latent_9904,777,0.001554,0.0015376402,4.032533,Assessment of interval change through comparison to previous images.,"The highly activated examples consistently assess interval changes by directly comparing to prior exams. Each report evaluates changes or stability in medical conditions or findings by referencing explicit past imaging studies, indicating a focus on longitudinal assessment over time.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,0.5952380952380952,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5415616445781499,0.5728643216080402,0.5460526315789473,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+9905,latent_9905,11576,0.023152,0.008576272,1.562253,Comparison of current and previous studies focusing on device positioning and interval changes.,"The highly activated examples tend to involve the comparison with previous images, particularly focusing on evaluating changes in medical devices like tubes and leads, as well as assessing current findings against prior reports for stability or change. This is consistent across examples with higher activation scores.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6349178565177165,0.635,0.6391752577319587,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9906,latent_9906,13894,0.027788,0.010231838,1.8004341,Monitoring or support devices and changes in their placement.,"Examples with high activation levels often refer to indwelling support or monitoring devices like tubes or catheters. Changes or confirmations of these devices regarding their placement are a common pattern in several radiology reports, particularly those requiring frequent follow-up imaging.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6114937309215671,0.615,0.6419753086419753,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9907,latent_9907,2525,0.00505,0.0025600381,2.18618,Comparison and description of findings in relation to prior images.,"Examples with a high activation level involve a reference to a prior imaging study followed by a detailed comparison of findings, often indicating changes or stability. This pattern focuses on the analysis of differences or similarities in radiological findings compared to a previous study.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4416263204225352,0.4874371859296482,0.4904458598726114,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+9908,latent_9908,1191,0.002382,0.0018813553,3.9576564,Frequent mention of mitral valve or annulus calcification.,"This collection of examples includes consistent mention of the ""mitral annulus"" or ""mitral valve"" in connection with descriptions of cardiac findings, often specifying calcification. This pattern is seen in medical imaging when discussing cardiac conditions related to the mitral valve, a common point of interest in cardiac evaluations.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3967398280066743,0.53,1.0,0.06,100.0,100.0
+9909,latent_9909,2390,0.00478,0.0021900856,3.826579,Comparison to prior imaging suggests stable findings without acute disease.,"Examples with activation primarily involve comparisons to prior imaging, indicating stable or unchanged findings without evidence of acute disease. These reports are routine in radiology for tracking stability and monitoring changes over time, especially when evaluating potential diseases or changes that may require intervention.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.38,100.0,100.0
+9910,latent_9910,3579,0.007158,0.0036822346,5.0962005,Noting low lung volume and its effects on imaging interpretation.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in lung volumes as a notable finding, emphasizing how lower lung volumes affect the appearance of other structures such as the heart or bronchovascular markings. This focus on lung volume as a significant finding, particularly its reduction, is the pattern highlighted by the activations.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5321448737597806,0.565,0.6382978723404256,0.3,100.0,100.0
+9911,latent_9911,730,0.00146,0.0015067207,7.0881925,Detailed comparisons to prior images indicating significant changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide detailed comparisons between images or use specific language to describe changes in findings compared to previous images, suggesting significant updates or findings in the current image when juxtaposed with previous studies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5820449941358354,0.5918367346938775,0.6142857142857143,0.4479166666666667,96.0,100.0
+9912,latent_9912,2894,0.005788,0.0025566786,2.6261084,Analysis of changes compared to prior images provided.,"Examples with positive activation include radiological studies that explicitly analyze and describe findings of the current images in comparison with prior images provided, focusing primarily on whether there is any change or no change in the current condition compared to previous imaging.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9913,latent_9913,725,0.00145,0.0013853342,3.050975,Increasing pleural effusions and associated pulmonary changes compared to prior imaging.,"These samples prominently document pathological findings regarding pleural effusions, either in terms of increased amounts or associated changes like atelectasis and pulmonary edema, often with reference to changes observed compared to prior imaging. The presence of pleural effusions is significant in each sample with high activation.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6184044310562627,0.6631016042780749,0.8333333333333334,0.3448275862068966,87.0,100.0
+9914,latent_9914,10407,0.020814,0.0076124044,1.872398,Assessment and reporting of tube/device placement in radiographs.,"These examples frequently mention findings related to the positioning and placement of medical tubes and devices, such as endotracheal tubes, Swan-Ganz catheter, central venous lines, etc. The reports focus on the specific placement and any changes in location to assess appropriate positioning.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9915,latent_9915,2112,0.004224,0.0022339148,2.610742,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies.,"The prompts describe radiological findings based on analysis of current images with reference to previous imaging studies for comparison. This comparison often highlights changes in medical devices or tubes, or the stability of existing conditions. Such comparisons are critical for evaluating the progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9916,latent_9916,1868,0.003736,0.002477658,4.1131816,Emphasis on stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples highlight the presence of descriptions regarding certain imaging findings appearing 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'consistent' with prior exams. This pattern of reporting stable or unchanged findings is common in longitudinal studies where the presence of consistency or stability is critical in patient management and diagnosis progression tracking.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6491228070175439,0.65,0.6666666666666666,0.6,100.0,100.0
+9917,latent_9917,848,0.001696,0.001512046,2.9750903,Lung hyperinflation and flat diaphragms indicate COPD.,"Examples with high activation consistently mention lung hyperinflation and flat diaphragms, a feature indicative of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and illustrated with the expression 'hyperexpansion' or 'flattening of the diaphragms'. These linguistic cues are key indicators in radiological observations.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6561908679555739,0.6834170854271356,0.9090909090909092,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+9918,latent_9918,436,0.000872,0.0010091547,3.5294805,Detailed comparison of findings with prior imaging indicates significant pathologies.,"The high activation examples describe radiological studies where significant changes, abnormalities, or pathologies are detailed based on comparison with prior imaging, including specific findings such as cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or tortuous aorta. These phrases like 'compared to prior', 'from the previous study', and 'no significant interval change', combined with specific identified pathologies, are consistent with the notable pattern detected by the model.",0.4731182795698925,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.25,24.0,25.0,0.3966037735849056,0.4743589743589743,0.2045454545454545,0.1607142857142857,56.0,100.0
+9919,latent_9919,4777,0.009554,0.0036731234,1.9658535,Description indicating pneumonia or atelectasis with interval change.,"The pattern shows radiology reports that mention changes or findings in the imaging consistent with pneumonia or atelectasis, along with descriptions of previous imaging for comparison and intervals of change. Indications often include symptoms like cough, fever, or similar respiratory issues, suggesting a focus on ongoing lung pathology.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9920,latent_9920,1071,0.002142,0.0017296226,3.3325863,Comparison findings with both frontal and lateral chest images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include a side-by-side comparison of both frontal and lateral chest images for a more comprehensive evaluation of the chest's anatomy and pathological findings. This dual view approach enhances diagnostic accuracy. Additionally, these descriptions consistently feature clear documentation of the radiological findings and conclude with a statement assessing the current images relative to the prior ones, indicating either stability or change.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9921,latent_9921,991,0.001982,0.0016975281,2.6759543,Comparison of medical device positions between images.,"The examples with high activation frequently mention comparisons to prior imaging studies in conjunction with monitoring changes in medical devices or treatment apparatus (e.g., catheters, lines, tubes). The pattern involves tracking changes in such devices over consecutive imagery.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5185185185185185,0.28,100.0,100.0
+9922,latent_9922,2820,0.00564,0.003088332,3.3381212,No or unclear comparison with prior imaging.,"This pattern highlights situations where the comparison to prior imaging studies is either unspecified, limited, absent, or not utilized in the report, despite the presence of a prior image. This is evidenced by the discrepancy where the prior image is acknowledged but not systematically compared, as exemplified by 'N/A' or vague terms in the 'COMPARISON' section.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9923,latent_9923,2514,0.005028,0.0030248945,2.8404486,Requesting explicit comparison description between current and prior imaging.,"High activation examples repeatedly request descriptions of findings by evaluating the current image in comparison to a prior image, typically using the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This prompts action-focused rather than interpretive language.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4685314685314685,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9924,latent_9924,914,0.001828,0.0015256963,3.8053536,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation involve interpreting chest imaging with an emphasis on the interval changes compared to prior studies, specifically focusing on findings that suggest stability or change in conditions such as effusions, atelectasis, or catheter placement between studies. This indicates the model is identifying descriptions of changes over time as a key pattern.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9925,latent_9925,959,0.001918,0.0015676349,2.5539033,Reports focus on absence of acute changes or findings.,"This pattern emerges from descriptions that do not involve any specific radiological findings or follow-up from prior examinations, but rather focus on routine descriptive language that includes common findings like ""No focal consolidation"" or ""pleural effusion"". These examples do, however, emphasize the absence of acute changes or findings, which is a consistent pattern in radiology reports that relay unchanged or expected findings.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6226030191758466,0.63,0.6015625,0.77,100.0,100.0
+9926,latent_9926,748,0.001496,0.001535043,3.8178096,Extensive comparison of current imaging findings with prior exams.,"The model tends to exhibit high activation when current imaging findings are compared extensively to prior exams, highlighting specific intervals or changes over time. Sentences indicate this comparison explicitly, using phrases like 'compared to previous exam', indicating that comparison description features prominently.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3648120300751879,0.3697916666666667,0.3253012048192771,0.2934782608695652,92.0,100.0
+9927,latent_9927,701,0.001402,0.0012817186,3.1747108,Changes in tube or catheter position compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples describe specific findings regarding tubes and catheters, including their position and changes from prior images. This pattern arises due to the clinical importance of monitoring device positions in radiology.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.25,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3956043956043956,0.4923076923076923,0.4090909090909091,0.0947368421052631,95.0,100.0
+9928,latent_9928,3169,0.006338,0.0026253702,3.852138,Comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Examples with activations greater than zero suggest a pattern involving comparisons with prior imaging studies, while examples with zero activation often lack sufficient comparison detail or context related to patient status changes. These examples emphasize the need for comparative analysis in understanding radiological findings.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4213342067911344,0.47,0.4810126582278481,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9929,latent_9929,909,0.001818,0.0016683296,4.995454,Normal anatomical features and structures with comparisons to prior images.,"The examples with high activation have common elements: the descriptions involve a comprehensive check of anatomical features and structures (heart size, mediastinal contours, pulmonary vasculature, lungs) with a note of ""normal,"" ""clear"", or ""no"" findings, especially in the context where progression or change is noted compared to previous images. The model focuses on standard severity indications and pattern observations without acute findings, combined with abstract comparisons to prior images.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+9930,latent_9930,1677,0.003354,0.0017195649,3.3711588,Mentions of fiducial markers indicating interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels highlight specific mentions of fiducial markers, which are key indicators for evaluating interval changes in radiological studies possibly related to precise localization for targeted therapies like radiation. This explicit mention of fiducial markers correlates with the higher activation levels, distinguishing these examples from others.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.0,0.0,25.0,25.0,0.3443491506341269,0.505,1.0,0.01,100.0,100.0
+9931,latent_9931,621,0.001242,0.0012390332,3.339729,"Structured report format with indication, technique, and comparison.","The highly activated examples consistently include structured information such as the indication, technique, and detailed findings based on multiple views and comparison to prior images. These examples also effectively communicate clinical questions or patient history in a structured format that captures comprehensive radiological assessments.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3779053869291769,0.4057142857142857,0.3941605839416058,0.72,75.0,100.0
+9932,latent_9932,658,0.001316,0.0013485678,4.156118,Atelectasis and low lung volumes.,"The pattern involves the radiological identification and description of atelectasis and the consistent mention of low lung volumes, as seen in examples with higher activation levels. This suggests the model specifically responds to findings that note reduction in lung volumes and presence of atelectasis, likely due to its relevance in pulmonary assessments.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5868307920700213,0.6010928961748634,0.5757575757575758,0.4578313253012048,83.0,100.0
+9933,latent_9933,1952,0.003904,0.0026312117,4.297815,"Device placement assessment, unchanged since prior imaging.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed findings regarding the placement and status of medical devices such as tubes and catheters in relation to previous imaging, with little change from previous assessments. These findings are a specific focus of medical imaging and are often highlighted in radiology reports to confirm stability or proper placement.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.9,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6901408450704225,0.49,100.0,100.0
+9934,latent_9934,3034,0.006068,0.0029460327,2.39807,Explicit comparison of current vs. prior imaging findings for clinical context.,"High activation is associated with examples that include specific indications for the current examination, descriptions of current images, and explicit requests or instructions for comparing findings with prior imaging for specific diagnoses or therapeutic contexts. Examples frequently involve juxtaposing current imaging findings with prior images to discern changes over time, specifically mentioning how findings relate to prior studies or clinical indications.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4778761061946903,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9935,latent_9935,1307,0.002614,0.0014908601,4.257633,Lack of acute changes compared to prior imaging study.,These examples focus on assessments of stability and comparison between current and prior imaging. High activation examples consistently make explicit reference to the absence of acute changes or abnormalities but within the context of comparison to prior imaging.,0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,100.0,100.0
+9936,latent_9936,5849,0.011698,0.0050875433,2.5918376,Comparison of current and prior imaging for interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation typically involve references to both current and prior imaging, along with explicit descriptions of interval changes. This suggests the model is particularly attuned to cases where there is a clear comparison between imaging studies, emphasizing potential changes or stability over time and their implications for diagnosis or management.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3837691935524942,0.395,0.4173228346456692,0.53,100.0,100.0
+9937,latent_9937,1105,0.00221,0.001981501,6.1616173,Structured comparison to prior imaging findings.,"These examples contain explicit references to findings compared across radiology images in a structured format, with terms such as 'comparison', 'prior frontal image', 'stable', 'unchanged', 'redemonstration'. This pattern highlights the use of multiple imaging instances to ascertain changes or stability in radiological findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.43994399439944,0.44,0.4411764705882353,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9938,latent_9938,658,0.001316,0.0010908091,3.0579221,Analysis or comparison with current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include references to observations that involve comparisons with prior or current images. This implies that the pattern being identified involves analyzing data by systematically comparing it with previous records, often used to assess progression or stability of the findings.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3993080781871648,0.4581005586592179,0.4423076923076923,0.8734177215189873,79.0,100.0
+9939,latent_9939,598,0.001196,0.001098469,5.8359275,Emphasis on interval change or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve interpretations or descriptions of imaging findings either showing interval change or being stable upon comparison with prior imaging studies. Phrases like ""compared to previous radiograph,"" ""essentially unchanged,"" or ""improved since prior"" appear often, suggesting that evaluating changes from prior images is critical in these cases.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6582286957977566,0.6589595375722543,0.5648148148148148,0.8356164383561644,73.0,100.0
+9940,latent_9940,1311,0.002622,0.0018891804,3.4678159,Changes or status of medical devices and lung features compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, specifically focusing on the detection or description of changes related to interventions (e.g., the position of medical devices like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes), changes in effusions or consolidations, or alterations to other features such as lung volumes or pleural effusions.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9941,latent_9941,3001,0.006002,0.003092101,2.8882697,Low lung volumes as a key finding.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention 'low lung volumes', which often leads to particular radiological conclusions like atelectasis and altered appearances of cardiac silhouettes. This consistent aspect of determining lung volumes as a precursor to understanding other findings is central to the pattern.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4977617643847581,0.54,0.5952380952380952,0.25,100.0,100.0
+9942,latent_9942,1210,0.00242,0.001603901,3.2774363,Stable findings over time in comparison to previous images.,"The samples with high activation levels describe stable medical findings when comparing current images to prior ones, emphasizing a lack of significant change. These reports are structured around this comparative analysis, confirming no noticeable progression or resolution in symptoms. Such patterns highlight the model's focus on consistency over time in imaging analysis, which is pertinent in monitoring long-term conditions or treatment outcomes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.489159994916762,0.4924623115577889,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,99.0
+9943,latent_9943,1602,0.003204,0.0017684716,2.5903964,Comparison findings indicating interval change or stability.,"These examples feature detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic images, often indicating changes in pathological findings or procedural interventions, such as placement or changes in medical devices and changes in lung opacities, cardiomegaly, or effusions. The consistency lies in emphasizing findings that have 'changed' or remained 'unchanged' relative to the previous exams.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4615384615384615,0.54,100.0,100.0
+9944,latent_9944,5044,0.010088,0.004217938,3.5059822,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior exams.,"Examples with activation consistently describe stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior studies, indicating no progression of disease or resolution of issues.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9945,latent_9945,821,0.001642,0.0012037592,3.6116562,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The higher activation examples consistently reference findings and their comparison or stability relative to a prior imaging study. These descriptions focus on the stability or change of specific findings, which is key in longitudinal assessment in radiology reports.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4419401744910677,0.457286432160804,0.4328358208955223,0.2929292929292929,99.0,100.0
+9946,latent_9946,4466,0.008932,0.0034464481,3.2036288,Detailed interval change assessment with multiple previous comparisons.,"High-activation examples extensively discuss interval changes by directly comparing multiple past studies with the current study, using contrast phrases such as 'no change since prior' or 'compared to previous study.' This detailed longitudinal assessment of findings across time distinguishes them.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+9947,latent_9947,7820,0.01564,0.0058778273,2.4266295,Explicit task instructions for image comparison or description.,"Examples with higher activation levels have explicit instructions to provide descriptions or comparisons between current and prior images. Phrases signaling direct engagement with a radiographic assessment task, such as 'provide a description' or 'comparison to the prior image', are more frequently present in these activated samples. This pattern suggests that activation is associated with prompts engaging directly with image comparison tasks.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3771391569794332,0.495,0.4973262032085561,0.93,100.0,100.0
+9948,latent_9948,4242,0.008484,0.003342095,3.271665,Studies involving detailed comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on comparison findings between current and prior images to note changes or stability. These examples detail changes such as regression or stability of pathologies, positions of medical devices, or improvement in conditions like effusions or pulmonary edema. They use phrases like 'compared with', 'there is improvement', or 'stable'.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+9949,latent_9949,1844,0.003688,0.0022684396,4.6533184,References to medical device or tube changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often reference changes in medical devices or tubes, such as repositioning or removal, in the chest x-ray findings. This pattern suggests a focus on the modification or stability of medical instruments within the radiological findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5866518802298619,0.59,0.6097560975609756,0.5,100.0,100.0
+9950,latent_9950,865,0.00173,0.0014180891,3.11311,Comparison of interval findings to previous imaging.,"The representative samples describe findings of interval changes, such as improvements or worsening of observed features, when compared to a prior examination. These descriptions are common in radiology reports when assessing disease progression or treatment response. Examples with higher activations often include terms like 'interval', 'unchanged', 'increased', or 'improved' when discussing observations relative to prior imaging.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+9951,latent_9951,4334,0.008668,0.0036192064,3.4074588,Change or stability in radiological findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels occur in examples that include comparison with prior imaging and show changes or stability in features such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, cardiomegaly, surgical tools, or medical devices over time. These examples appear to focus on illustrating alterations or consistencies observed compared to past radiological assessments.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9952,latent_9952,2105,0.00421,0.002188098,2.8502817,Evaluations of stability over time using prior images.,"The highest activation examples mention comparison with prior studies, showing stable or unchanged findings. This aligns with scenarios where stability over time is noted, often associated with chronic conditions or follow-up evaluations for no new changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5045045045045045,0.56,100.0,100.0
+9953,latent_9953,986,0.001972,0.0012617209,4.2605596,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation often explicitly have a comparison between current and prior frontal images, focusing on describing changes or stability in findings, indicated by terms like 'compared to prior', 'are unchanged', or specific reference of comparison dates. The focus is more on the result of comparison than just descriptive findings.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4792588285851513,0.485,0.4876033057851239,0.59,100.0,100.0
+9954,latent_9954,4604,0.009208,0.003824056,2.7012868,Need for description and comparison of current and prior images.,"The most representative examples focus on the descriptions of radiological findings while explicitly detailing comparisons either to prior studies or prior images. These details involve phrases like 'in comparison with', 'provide a description', and 'compared to'. This pattern highlights the linguistic structure used to compare current imaging results with previous ones.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4221802683143111,0.495,0.4970760233918128,0.85,100.0,100.0
+9955,latent_9955,1084,0.002168,0.002237993,4.2171345,Comparison of findings between current and prior or multiple imaging perspectives.,"These examples involve comparison with prior imaging or current dual image perspectives, such as frontal and lateral views. Emphasis is placed on describing findings in relation to a prior study or both current perspectives, indicating the analysis of change or lack thereof. There is consistent mention of specific comparisons and observations of conditions over time or views.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9956,latent_9956,6740,0.01348,0.005098992,1.5910763,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"These examples involve interpretation and comparison of current images with prior imaging as part of the radiological evaluation process. This comparison is a key aspect of ongoing patient monitoring, often noting changes in medical devices, findings of regression or progression of certain conditions, or stability of previous abnormalities.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9957,latent_9957,545,0.00109,0.0012962485,5.1713586,Reports affirming absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the absence of acutely abnormal findings in radiological images, typically concluding with phrases like 'No acute cardiopulmonary process' or 'Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette'. This implies the pattern focuses on reports affirming the absence of significant acute abnormalities.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7408536585365854,0.7411764705882353,0.6382978723404256,0.8571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+9958,latent_9958,602,0.001204,0.0014601141,3.5234077,Atherosclerotic calcifications noted at the aortic knob or thoracic aorta.,"High activation examples exhibit the presence of atherosclerotic calcifications noted at the aortic knob or within the thoracic aorta, often in the context of stable mediastinal and hilar contours. This specific descriptor of calcifications tends to activate strong neural network responses.",0.96,0.96,0.96,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8903829907068431,0.8959537572254336,0.9508196721311476,0.7945205479452054,73.0,100.0
+9959,latent_9959,901,0.001802,0.0015427428,4.7740297,Impact of low lung volumes on image interpretation.,The pattern observed involves descriptions of low lung volumes in chest radiographs and how these low volumes often lead to misinterpretation or accentuation of other structures like the cardiac silhouette. This can include phrases like 'accentuated by low lung volumes' or 'with low lung volumes possibly exaggerating findings'. Such patterns result in significant activation as misinterpretations based on lung volumes are crucial to avoid in accurate clinical diagnosis.,0.8972746331236897,0.8979591836734694,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,24.0,0.6895032051282051,0.69,0.7065217391304348,0.65,100.0,100.0
+9960,latent_9960,9401,0.018802,0.0070154406,1.5978585,Focus on stability or change in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with positive activation values frequently highlight findings that are compared against previous studies. Many refer to 'changes', 'interval', or explicit references to 'prior images', showing focus on the differences or stability of medical conditions over time. Low activation examples mention no or minimal change or state right at the start that there is 'No comparison'.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9961,latent_9961,556,0.001112,0.0011280206,4.6806717,Comparison of current and prior images to identify interval changes.,"Activation levels are high when there is a direct comparison being drawn between current and prior imaging, indicating these examples likely focus on interval changes noted through comparison, often incorporating phrases like 'interval change', 'compared to prior', or similar descriptors. This is characteristic of follow-up imaging assessments in radiology reporting.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3660862214708368,0.3662790697674418,0.3203883495145631,0.4583333333333333,72.0,100.0
+9962,latent_9962,7435,0.01487,0.0054702084,1.7891774,Focused evaluation for specific changes or pathology in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings related to pathology, abnormalities, or clinical indications that suggest careful evaluation for changes or diagnostic confirmations. Phrases like 'evaluate for pneumonia','concern for pneumothorax', and 'check PICC placement' indicate a heightened clinical focus during image review.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+9963,latent_9963,593,0.001186,0.001306278,2.7761755,Stable or improved findings on successive imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings that either remain stable or show improvement in comparison to previous imaging. This involves phrases indicating no significant interval change, resolution, stability, or improvement of specific conditions, suggesting the system might be flagging such stable or resolving states as significant anomalies or relevant findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5095982142857143,0.5384615384615384,0.423728813559322,0.3623188405797101,69.0,100.0
+9964,latent_9964,1495,0.00299,0.0018716421,2.7155077,"Evaluating respiratory pathology, often pneumonia or SOB.","The examples with high activation levels consistently describe conditions or abnormalities related to respiratory symptoms, often involving shortness of breath, pneumonia assessment, consolidation, or infiltrates. The reports are focused on evaluating acute respiratory conditions.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+9965,latent_9965,1112,0.002224,0.0017461395,4.2956185,Comparison of interval changes in imaging (including devices or pathologies) over time.,"These examples frequently involve radiological studies comparing current findings with prior images and indicating interval changes, especially involving medical devices, opacities, or pleural effusions. The specific pattern involves significant changes in placement or condition over comparison periods, often marking new, resolved, or adjusted anatomical or device-related findings as compared to the previous. The activation pattern is linked to descriptions of incremental or stabilizing changes when comparing current and prior images, not merely unchanged states.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,100.0,100.0
+9966,latent_9966,515,0.00103,0.0011358599,5.068872,Reports consistently stating normal findings or absence of significant abnormalities.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve reports that reiterate normal findings, such as 'clear lungs', 'normal cardiac and mediastinal contours', or 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax'. These suggest no significant change or abnormalities, typically after an evaluation against a prior study or without notable findings, highlighting the importance of the absence of abnormalities in radiological evaluation.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6830389091867867,0.6909090909090909,0.5945945945945946,0.676923076923077,65.0,100.0
+9967,latent_9967,3096,0.006192,0.0037863068,3.3257418,Comparisons with prior imaging highlighting stability or interval changes.,"Activation is high when reports contain comparisons with previous imaging studies and indicate observed changes like stability, worsening or improvement. High activation examples often provide explicit comparison results, emphasizing stability or change since prior images.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.384245700983705,0.385,0.3763440860215054,0.35,100.0,100.0
+9968,latent_9968,2552,0.005104,0.002455776,3.8707104,Presence of atelectasis in chest imaging.,Examples with high activation consistently mention atelectasis. Atelectasis refers to the collapse or closure of a lung resulting in reduced or absent gas exchange. It is a structural abnormality frequently described in radiological reports. The presence of specific descriptive phrases related to atelectasis seem to cause notable activation.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.6716417910447762,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9969,latent_9969,741,0.001482,0.0012485756,2.6996734,Detailed comparative assessment against prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings and impressions compared to previous studies, especially focusing on changes over time or confirming stability seen across multiple radiographs. These reports tend to emphasize any interval changes or stability in a structured comparison context.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4865178007162418,0.4871794871794871,0.4766355140186916,0.5368421052631579,95.0,100.0
+9970,latent_9970,2991,0.005982,0.0029179004,2.6686516,Focus on stability or change by comparing current images to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on comparing current imaging studies with prior ones to describe stability or change in findings, commonly assessing for stability of known conditions or progression of a disease. This involves specific language indicating comparison like 'unchanged', 'increased', 'improved', and direct references to prior exams.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+9971,latent_9971,5738,0.011476,0.0043772035,2.1833987,Emphasis on stability or minor changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently describe conditions where there are two images being compared: a current and a prior image. However, the focus in the examples with activations is on describing small or minor changes, findings, or conditions that have remained unchanged when compared to prior studies. This implies a pattern of stability or minimal interval change as the radiological conclusion, particularly when these details are explicitly noted.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5525830491347732,0.5527638190954773,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,99.0
+9972,latent_9972,622,0.001244,0.0010654505,4.144998,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings for interval change assessment.,"The examples consistently involve assessment of imaging findings through explicit comparison with prior imaging studies, even when not available for comparison, forming a pattern where interpretation is conducted relative to previous images. This radiological approach aids in understanding changes over time, using terms like 'unchanged' or 'interval change'.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5343459088682019,0.5397727272727273,0.4830508474576271,0.7402597402597403,77.0,99.0
+9973,latent_9973,1112,0.002224,0.002260586,4.9306297,Low lung volumes accentuate cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions that relate abnormal findings, such as low lung volumes, accentuating or exaggerating the mediastinal or cardiac silhouette and vascular structures. This common radiological observation considers how low lung volumes make these structures appear larger or more prominent, a key pattern across these examples.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.9047117530529852,0.905,0.9550561797752808,0.85,100.0,100.0
+9974,latent_9974,1124,0.002248,0.0014750916,2.892141,Presence of cardiac or mediastinal devices like pacemakers or sternotomy wires.,"The pattern is observed in examples where detailed descriptions of radiological findings are given, specifically when there are cardiac or mediastinal devices present such as pacemakers or sternotomy wires. This is consistent with reports focusing on stable or post-operative conditions involving these devices.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6838025295797634,0.69,0.7638888888888888,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9975,latent_9975,1684,0.003368,0.0023165112,2.9079378,Descriptions of findings using both frontal and lateral images.,"Examples with high activations focus on analyzing not only the given images but also lateral images, providing additional perspectives that might capture more diagnostic features compared to a single frontal view. This inclusion suggests a more thorough examination and comparison.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5149775925780329,0.5326633165829145,0.5217391304347826,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+9976,latent_9976,15948,0.031896,0.011551739,1.325652,Comparison of current and prior imaging emphasizing changes in abnormalities.,"The model exhibits stronger activation when examining changes between current and prior images, particularly focusing on alterations in present abnormalities such as infiltrates, opacities, or effusions. These changes are noted in contexts where findings from prior images are explicitly compared or contrasted with current ones.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5775862068965517,0.67,100.0,100.0
+9977,latent_9977,4259,0.008518,0.0033812313,3.2646518,Focus on changes in pulmonary findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently include observations of changes or stability in pulmonary findings between the current and prior images. There is a focus on alterations (or lack thereof) in lung features such as opacities, volume changes, and devices, highlighted by terms like 'interval', 'change', 'persisting', or explicit comparison descriptions. The pattern indicates an emphasis on temporal comparisons for pulmonary assessment.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5360824742268041,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9978,latent_9978,2003,0.004006,0.0018735124,3.0820544,Focus on changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The highest activation levels seem to be attributed to reports that make explicit efforts to compare the current imaging results with 'prior' studies, indicating radiologists' attempts to track changes over time across the patient's conditions, which is a significant pattern in radiologic evaluation.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.34375,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9979,latent_9979,586,0.001172,0.0011365507,3.4685798,"Detailed comparison of findings to prior images, emphasizing stability or interval changes.","The higher activation level examples feature comparative analysis between a current image and previous study, particularly emphasizing stability or interval change of findings, such as devices, opacities, or cardiomediastinal contours. This pattern is prevalent in radiology when assessing for progression or resolution of a condition by explicitly comparing with prior studies.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5642255623067903,0.5654761904761905,0.4725274725274725,0.6323529411764706,68.0,100.0
+9980,latent_9980,2037,0.004074,0.0023630725,3.5196748,Comparison for device placement or change in position.,"The examples with higher activation involve a radiological comparison that explicitly mentions devices like tubes, catheters, etc., and their placement or changes in position. These examples emphasize evaluation or diagnosis related to medical apparatus in the chest area, which may be critical for patient management and thus receive heightened attention.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6788438378161381,0.68,0.7045454545454546,0.62,100.0,100.0
+9981,latent_9981,729,0.001458,0.0012357681,5.5972233,Presence of mass-like findings or opacities in imaging.,"High activation levels are associated with findings of masses, suggesting that radiology reports highlighting masses, opacities, or similar focal lesions exhibit strong pattern activation. The mention of comparisons with prior imaging doesn't influence the activation levels if not tied to mass findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6048283627032547,0.6071428571428571,0.6190476190476191,0.5360824742268041,97.0,99.0
+9982,latent_9982,4797,0.009594,0.0038344872,4.272764,Explicit significant findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The lower activation examples focus on a stable presentation despite prior imaging comparisons, but exhibit sparse, ambiguous descriptions, while the higher activation instances explicitly describe meaningful, significant comparisons that are consistent with expected changes due to disease progression or treatment, especially in chronic pulmonary conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5602745602745602,0.59,0.5,0.4024390243902439,82.0,118.0
+9983,latent_9983,1459,0.002918,0.0025096957,3.9090827,"Comparison highlights changes in lung conditions (e.g., atelectasis, pneumothorax) over time.","Examples with high activation levels consistently mention changes in lung conditions such as atelectasis, pneumothorax, or fluid collections, in the context of comparisons with prior imaging. This includes both improvements and worsening conditions, reflecting a focus on the description of dynamic changes over time.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+9984,latent_9984,1502,0.003004,0.0018139709,4.104727,Finding consistency or change in medical devices' positions across images.,Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions that pinpoint explicit changes or consistency in the positions of tubes or catheters upon comparison with previous images. These specific references to placement and adjustment of medical devices are patterns observed in these examples.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5556190278354798,0.5678391959798995,0.5970149253731343,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+9985,latent_9985,954,0.001908,0.0014346701,4.644574,New findings or interval changes noted compared to prior imaging.,"In these examples, the high activation is associated with cases where radiological findings include either changes or new developments in the thoracic area compared to prior imaging. These differences are explicitly noted and can be critical for diagnosing progressive or new conditions in patients.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.582089552238806,0.39,100.0,100.0
+9986,latent_9986,3076,0.006152,0.0028791926,2.8564868,Accurate articulation of findings in comparison to prior imaging results.,"Examples reflect discrepancies between reports and images, possible over-interpretation or under-interpretation by the assistant, and the accurate articulation of unchanged conditions or routine findings. High activation levels describe comparisons where detailed variables like device position, exact measurements, or unchanged results since prior exam are presented, indicating high attention to comparison accuracy.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.424985624640616,0.425,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9987,latent_9987,8909,0.017818,0.008503967,8.184472,Explicit requests to provide comparative findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels specifically request the assistant to compare the current imaging with prior imaging, as highlighted by phrases like ''provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior frontal image.'' Such explicit requests guide the assistant to interpret differences or similarities between sets of images.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3243243243243243,0.631578947368421,19.0,31.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+9988,latent_9988,1692,0.003384,0.0016618172,2.9537961,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiographs focusing on changes.,"The examples with higher activations provide specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or stability of certain findings. This pattern forms a common part of radiology report narratives and is drilled down by practitioners as critical changes, or lack thereof, guide clinical decisions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,100.0,100.0
+9989,latent_9989,5218,0.010436,0.0041435687,2.466863,Reporting findings in comparison to previous imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation make use of a structure where findings are compared with previous studies, using phrases like 'in comparison with', 'compared to prior', 'since previous', indicating unchanged or worsening conditions. This pattern emphasizes the role of comparative observation in radiological assessments.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+9990,latent_9990,992,0.001984,0.0015120573,2.6661482,Comparative changes observed in imaging over time.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain specific references to changes observed in comparison to prior imaging studies, such as 'as compared to', 'interval change', and direct descriptions of how findings have altered over time. This suggests a focus on detecting changes over time versus static descriptions.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.514018691588785,0.55,100.0,100.0
+9991,latent_9991,660,0.00132,0.0014696289,3.4999816,Mild to moderate cardiomegaly noted on imaging.,"These examples consistently describe cases where there is an observation of mild to moderate cardiomegaly (enlarged heart) on imaging, whether or not this finding is stable or compared to previous images. Reports indicate heart size as something to note, often using terms like 'mildly enlarged' or 'mild to moderate cardiomegaly', linking the activation pattern strongly to this specific observation.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8208679322789825,0.8216216216216217,0.7954545454545454,0.8235294117647058,85.0,100.0
+9992,latent_9992,10158,0.020316,0.0075846957,2.3241007,Reports with unremarkable or normal findings despite symptoms or indications for acute conditions.,"These examples mostly focus on findings of clear lungs without consolidation or other acute pathologies, and prominent cardiomediastinal and hilar contours that seem unremarkable. However, each report lacks significant findings related to acute conditions in the context of the patient's symptoms or indications.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.46875,0.45,100.0,100.0
+9993,latent_9993,624,0.001248,0.0008388489,3.4236825,Comparison with prior image to assess interval changes.,"High activation levels seem to occur in examples that describe ongoing or follow-up evaluations using current images in comparison with prior studies, often indicating active medical management decisions like assessing for interval changes in the context of a known condition or suspected acute changes.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4581577363034316,0.4722222222222222,0.4418604651162791,0.7125,80.0,100.0
+9994,latent_9994,787,0.001574,0.0013319703,3.7194173,"Reports providing comparison with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.",The examples with high activation levels primarily involve descriptions that reference previous imaging studies for comparison and often mention changes or stability in the findings. This represents a pattern where radiology reports evaluate current findings relative to prior investigations and update the status.,0.2788461538461538,0.28,0.2608695652173913,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3402331847598902,0.345,0.3675213675213675,0.43,100.0,100.0
+9995,latent_9995,831,0.001662,0.0014216271,2.5981562,Pacemaker presence and description in chest imaging reports.,"The presence of a pacemaker or similar cardiac device is a common finding in these higher activation examples. These reports frequently describe the position and status of pacemakers and other cardiac devices, indicating that such descriptions trigger the model's activation, likely due to their clinical importance and technical specificity.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.95,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.853056674520534,0.855,0.961038961038961,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9996,latent_9996,1298,0.002596,0.0019961349,4.769367,"Direct comparison with prior imaging, noting changes in positioning or procedure-related elements.","These examples involve repeated references to 'side-by-side' or 'direct comparison' with prior images, and often include descriptors of interval change, such as 'increased',' stable', or 'decreased'. They typically involve analysis of procedural elements related to changes in tubes or line placement, such as for a Dobbhoff or PICC line, or surgical changes post-procedure.",0.6892177589852009,0.6938775510204082,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,100.0
+9997,latent_9997,8531,0.017062,0.006479043,1.6334271,Instructions prompting analysis of image comparison results in higher activation.,"The activation examples indicate higher values for cases where there is likely a modal flag, command, or instruction that elicits the need for an assistant's response. Many examples explicitly mention or imply the need for providing a comparison with prior images or changes, with active instruction for providing a description or analysis by an assistant which aligns with the nature of high activation levels.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5161290322580645,0.8,100.0,100.0
+9998,latent_9998,1642,0.003284,0.0020788463,3.3225956,Changes or procedures involving medical devices or tubes.,"These examples frequently describe changes or procedures involving medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or lines, indicating an interest in procedural changes or tube placements. The presence of new devices, tube advancement, removal, or changes in positioning seems to correlate with higher activation levels.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5858585858585859,0.59,0.575,0.69,100.0,100.0
+9999,latent_9999,14386,0.028772,0.010465396,2.1902637,Description of changes in specific chest findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently reference changes or stability in opacities, lesions, or effusions in comparison to prior studies. They highlight the observation and comparison of specific regions in the chest with the prior imaging findings, particularly focusing on changes or the lack thereof.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6111407181829718,0.6130653266331658,0.6017699115044248,0.68,100.0,99.0
+10000,latent_10000,1056,0.002112,0.0017270376,2.4307497,Describing findings in current images compared to prior images without prior report details.,"The pattern revealed in the highly activated examples involves describing the findings of current images specifically in comparison with prior images listed in the prompt structure. These examples refer to previous film studies and provide a detailed comparison using a structured format. The comparison lacks pre-existing information or indications of what the 'prior report' entailed, emphasizing imaging studies' visual changes rather than historical clinical data.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4491185897435897,0.45,0.4537037037037037,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10001,latent_10001,1439,0.002878,0.0017517331,3.9636497,Descriptions comparing current images to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation describe the findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, evaluating changes or stability of specific features, which is a common diagnostic practice when interpreting radiology images.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.365079365079365,0.375,0.4,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10002,latent_10002,4496,0.008992,0.0034537134,1.8047915,Low or reduced lung volumes noted in the findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention findings related to lung volumes or expansion. These reports describe instances where lung volumes are noted to be low, affecting the overall assessment and findings in the radiology report, which is a common consideration in imaging interpretations.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5714285714285714,0.24,100.0,100.0
+10003,latent_10003,1193,0.002386,0.0020100065,2.6274896,"Direct, recent comparison with same-day or close-timeframe prior studies for interval change.","The examples with high activation levels all describe radiological findings that are directly compared to a prior study from the same or very recent time frame, often clearly noting changes or stability in critical clinical indicators, while other examples either lack such explicit direct same-day or recent timeframe comparisons or do not state changes in critical indicators. This pattern indicates an emphasis on monitoring acute or interval changes by comparing back-to-back immediate studies.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5564336372847012,0.5577889447236181,0.5681818181818182,0.5,100.0,99.0
+10004,latent_10004,9314,0.018628,0.0067318208,1.7569818,Presence of complex medical terms related to pulmonary conditions.,"Examples with activation mostly involve the use of advanced medical terminology and conditions such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pneumonia to describe changes between the current and prior images.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5629724208375895,0.5678391959798995,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,99.0
+10005,latent_10005,6341,0.012682,0.004605169,1.8983967,Highlighting changes compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently feature specific radiological findings in comparison to prior images or studies. These descriptions often mention changes in specific characteristics like opacifications, tube placements, or lung aeration, emphasizing temporal progression from prior imaging.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10006,latent_10006,1721,0.003442,0.0018442463,3.531608,Enlargement of cardiac silhouette often with pulmonary vascular changes.,"The patterns represented in the examples with higher activation levels involve findings or conditions indicative of cardiomegaly, such as enlargement of the cardiac silhouette, often with associated pulmonary vascular changes. Findings frequently include mild elevation of pulmonary venous pressure or cardiac-related differential diagnoses like pulmonary edema or volume overload.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4523809523809524,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10007,latent_10007,1739,0.003478,0.002039452,3.425992,Describing interval changes in pleural effusions or pulmonary pathology.,"These examples involve documentation intended to provide diagnostic context or assessment on medical imaging studies. There is a consistent focus on describing changes or developments in pleural effusion, pulmonary conditions like pneumonia, or cardiac conditions between current and prior imaging. This often includes comparing size, presence, or resolution of fluid collections and pulmonary status.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6949923748093703,0.695,0.693069306930693,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10008,latent_10008,2088,0.004176,0.0023008245,4.3589716,Reports focus on changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels often include a comparison with prior images or reports and highlight significant interval changes or stability in certain findings. This pattern emphasizes the importance of changes between current and prior studies in the evaluation process.,0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5116279069767442,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10009,latent_10009,886,0.001772,0.0012602671,3.271441,High activation if no prior report ('N/A') and explicit request for comparison.,The pattern is evident in cases where either no prior reports are available (indicated by 'N/A') or where there is a lack of direct comparison data. This suggests high activation when there is an explicit request for a comparison with prior imaging data but insufficient prior data available (N/A as prior report) to make a detailed comparative assessment or no comparison was given.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10010,latent_10010,817,0.001634,0.0016007846,4.8392305,Descriptive evaluation of cardiomediastinal silhouette and pulmonary features.,"The prominent characteristic of the highly activated examples indicates a focus on detailed description of radiological findings, particularly regarding cardiomediastinal silhouette and pulmonary features. It contrasts those with normal or minimal descriptions as seen in low activation examples.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5414988784086916,0.5538461538461539,0.5303030303030303,0.7368421052631579,95.0,100.0
+10011,latent_10011,596,0.001192,0.0013906027,3.5069776,Image description focusing on comparison with prior radiographs.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions for given images, especially when instructed to describe findings in comparison to prior frontal images. The emphasis on analysis between current and prior images is key, utilizing specific indicators for pneumonia or other conditions within this comparative context.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.2692307692307692,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.366896088635219,0.3699421965317919,0.3392857142857143,0.5205479452054794,73.0,100.0
+10012,latent_10012,791,0.001582,0.0014042453,4.129112,Notable interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with activation levels of 4.0 or more consistently show interval changes in radiographic findings compared to previous imaging, such as changes in tube placements or alterations in opacities, effusions, or infiltrates. These examples involve tracking changes or stability over time in radiological observations relative to previous images.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6266107909900471,0.6363636363636364,0.6911764705882353,0.4795918367346938,98.0,100.0
+10013,latent_10013,7769,0.015538,0.0058704666,2.5801296,Assessment of interval changes relative to prior imaging.,"The pattern here involves comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifically analyzing for interval changes or stability of pathology with explicit mentioning of time intervals, such as 'interval resolution', 'interval removal', or 'interval change'. This highlights a clinical assessment of progression or lack thereof over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10014,latent_10014,3685,0.00737,0.003248126,2.365579,Report of changes in clinical status compared with previous imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference the findings of previous radiographs or prior reports, but also describe a notable change in clinical status or intervention. Patterns that feature comparisons of current imaging to previous studies without direct notation of a change tend to have lower activations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.431578947368421,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10015,latent_10015,1171,0.002342,0.0016710738,2.3743067,Significant changes or complications in current versus prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples describe findings in radiology studies where there is a substantial change or notable findings compared to previous images, particularly focusing on severity or emergence of specific complications such as pneumothorax, opacities, or device placements, with significant clinical implications noted.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5061728395061729,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10016,latent_10016,729,0.001458,0.0013980939,4.2559967,Structured radiology reports with comparisons to prior imaging.,"Examples that show the pattern all include structured radiological reports with segmented headers and a description provided both for the current imaging findings and in relation to prior imaging studies, if available. These detail comparisons are a key feature when discussing changes or stability over time.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4619135207731161,0.4894736842105263,0.4755244755244755,0.7555555555555555,90.0,100.0
+10017,latent_10017,1263,0.002526,0.0017396371,2.9191937,Unchanged cardiac structures or atherosclerotic calcifications.,"Examples with higher activation involve the stable or unchanged appearance of certain cardiothoracic features, especially in the presence of atherosclerotic calcifications. This theme reflects a focus on consistency in specific vascular or cardiac markings despite other imaging findings.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.6666666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10018,latent_10018,8096,0.016192,0.007679469,2.3500428,Focus on detailed comparison to prior radiographs for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels are consistently referencing detailed comparison between current and prior images, with attention to specific findings such as changes in opacities, tube placements, or device positioning. They use temporal language to describe progression or stability of findings, highlighting any interval changes or the lack thereof.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10019,latent_10019,653,0.001306,0.0012487549,4.91363,Explicit comparisons with specified prior imaging.,"The highest activation examples focus on providing a description of radiological findings explicitly comparing current images to prior images when those prior images are specified. The pattern emphasizes the comparison itself, which is key to interpreting findings in radiology and important for tracking disease progression or improvement.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5110970797158643,0.5112359550561798,0.4563106796116505,0.6025641025641025,78.0,100.0
+10020,latent_10020,9135,0.01827,0.006971731,2.2720482,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples where the activation level is greater than zero consistently require a description of radiology findings that compares the current imaging to prior imaging studies, particularly focusing on changes or stability over time. This comparison is precisely what prompts higher activation levels.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10021,latent_10021,2330,0.00466,0.0027815597,4.495361,Presence and assessment of opacities in chest imaging.,"Examples include descriptions of imaging findings with the word 'opacity' mentioned. Opacity refers to areas on X-rays that appear denser and may indicate consolidation or fluid. The cited examples contain phrases highlighting the presence or changes in opacities, suggesting this activation pattern focuses on identifying or tracking opacities in chest imaging, often indicative of pathology like pneumonia or atelectasis.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7171717171717171,0.72,0.6833333333333333,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10022,latent_10022,1146,0.002292,0.0015830834,3.8921673,Descriptions focusing on pulmonary abnormalities in the radiology study.,"The high activation levels are associated with examples that provide descriptions of the findings in the radiology study, but lack a comparison to prior images, as they include requests for specific descriptions. Additionally, common themes include evaluating potential infiltrates, effusions, or other pulmonary abnormalities, often using certain keywords or phrases.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10023,latent_10023,2430,0.00486,0.0024058414,2.514402,Comparison to prior imaging showing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations consistently reference specific comparisons to prior images, highlighting changes or stabilities in conditions. This consistent patterning emphasizes the importance of comparative image analysis in identifying disease progression or stability.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10024,latent_10024,723,0.001446,0.0015580899,4.858705,Emphasis on changes visible in comparison with prior images and recommendations for further assessment.,"The highly activated examples include detailed observations of changes in condition or new findings that are directly compared with prior images, often with clinical recommendations for further action. This suggests the pattern emphasizes identifying changes that have occurred over time, particularly those requiring further assessment or intervention.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6911748045768664,0.6914893617021277,0.6415094339622641,0.7727272727272727,88.0,100.0
+10025,latent_10025,7311,0.014622,0.005557292,2.1750581,Comparative analysis of imaging findings relative to previous studies.,"Examples track findings using descriptions of changes or stability relative to previous imaging studies, noting interval changes such as size increase or stability, particularly respiratory findings like pleural effusions or pulmonary edema. Descriptive phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' illustrate comparative analysis.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5064935064935064,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10026,latent_10026,938,0.001876,0.0015371195,3.6687226,Normal cardiac-mediastinal-hilar contours and clear lung fields.,"The examples with higher activation generally include mentions of clear lungs and normal cardiac-mediastinal-hilar contours without significant abnormalities, which signifies a specific pattern or finding that triggers an activation in the model.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.5866666666666667,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10027,latent_10027,1272,0.002544,0.0017719949,3.7480843,Comparison of multiple current and prior imaging views.,"These examples contain radiologic examinations using multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral), and a reference to prior imaging for comparison, which align with investigation findings.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.477124183006536,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10028,latent_10028,1904,0.003808,0.0021090352,2.9547236,Mention of pleural effusion comparison with previous images.,"The high-activation examples consistently mention pleural effusion as a notable finding. This indicates the model strongly triggers on mentions of effusion, possibly with accompanying features like atelectasis or effusion comparing to prior studies.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4253384282709796,0.515,0.5714285714285714,0.12,100.0,100.0
+10029,latent_10029,775,0.00155,0.0012855362,2.8674176,Mild cardiomegaly or altered cardiac silhouette with low lung volumes.,"High activation levels in these examples correspond to reports that include a comparison of new findings with prior studies and describe specific pathological or anatomical changes such as mild cardiomegaly, low lung volumes, crowding of bronchovascular structures, and changes in the cardiac silhouette. The pattern is identified with increased detail in the cardiac and vascular description, often in context with low lung volumes or increased bronchial crowding.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5957268537913699,0.6113989637305699,0.6451612903225806,0.4301075268817204,93.0,100.0
+10030,latent_10030,1270,0.00254,0.0017942956,2.7364407,Description involving interval changes or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation show a pattern of interval changes or unchanged findings between current and prior imaging studies, with specific attention to changes or stability in clinical indications like effusions, pneumothorax, or other pulmonary conditions. Phrases like 'interval change', 'remained stable', or 'provide a description of the findings in comparison' are used.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4554455445544554,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10031,latent_10031,1122,0.002244,0.0014298287,3.2077267,Comparison to previous image with 'study of _' as comparison placeholder.,"Examples with higher activation often involve comparisons of findings between a current image and a prior image mentioned as 'study of _', indicating missing date placeholders, which are potentially significant in these scenarios, suggesting the need for clarification in visual data analysis contexts.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.575,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10032,latent_10032,1134,0.002268,0.0017299482,4.8875275,Reference of prior reports without explicit findings comparison.,"Examples exhibit references to a previous report alongside the request to provide current findings relative to prior imaging, but without direct comparison. This suggests a pattern focusing on referencing prior examinations although not explicitly comparing current results with direct findings from previous studies.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10033,latent_10033,1447,0.002894,0.002145716,4.4594727,Changed tube or catheter positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe or imply changes or the need for evaluation of changes in the context of medical monitoring or diagnostic support devices, such as tubes and catheters, compared to prior imaging or previous placements. Reports often mention the position and movement of such devices, which may indicate the primary focus of these examples.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6607427124924972,0.675,0.7966101694915254,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10034,latent_10034,4452,0.008904,0.0034914634,2.3725605,Descriptive imaging evaluation without prior comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve providing radiological descriptions based on a given image or sequence of images that do not have any prior examinations for direct comparison. This setup prompts the evaluation of current images in isolation or requests a description of findings without historical data, reflecting an emphasis on current observation rather than comparative analysis.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4173805197427244,0.495,0.4814814814814814,0.13,100.0,100.0
+10035,latent_10035,1198,0.002396,0.0017662029,3.5734766,Focus on line and tube placement and their positioning.,"Examples that are highly activated consistently include references to the status or placement of lines and tubes (such as PICC lines, NG tubes, endotracheal tubes) and comments on their positioning or any changes in their placement relative to previous images. This suggests an interest or focus on evaluating and documenting the positioning of these devices for patient management purposes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10036,latent_10036,695,0.00139,0.0013305644,3.0110912,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"The representative examples predominantly focus on detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies, similar to other patterns seen in radiology, but with a specific emphasis on unchanged or stable findings across comparisons. These examples highlight variations in descriptions of stability such as ""unchanged"", ""as seen"", or ""again noted"" based on comparisons with prior images.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6089506172839506,0.6132596685082873,0.5679012345679012,0.5679012345679012,81.0,100.0
+10037,latent_10037,8682,0.017364,0.0065572085,2.7215798,Comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Samples showing increased activation often involve explicit instructions to compare to prior imagery, which is a critical analysis step stressing the longitudinal assessment of findings rather than immediate diagnostics or no comparisons available.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10038,latent_10038,12437,0.024874,0.00910576,1.4019356,Analysis of interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around references to changes observed between current and prior imaging studies. Phrases indicating stable or unchanged findings, evaluation of new or progressive changes, and comparisons with previous imaging dates are common when analyzing interval changes in medical conditions based on imaging data.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10039,latent_10039,988,0.001976,0.0015748951,3.236996,Explicit comparison to prior images for findings assessment.,"Activated examples highlight reports where findings are described with reference to previous imaging studies, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'interval change', or specifying a previous date for comparison. This pattern involves explicit comparison to prior images to assess changes.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4555902812783546,0.46,0.4661016949152542,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10040,latent_10040,1040,0.00208,0.0018843627,4.5224113,Changes or positioning of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where there has been a placement, adjustment, or specific positioning of medical devices, such as catheters, tubes, or leads, compared to prior imaging. This indicates that the model has learned to associate changes or positioning in medical devices with the pattern of interest.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6329352608422376,0.635,0.6588235294117647,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10041,latent_10041,1237,0.002474,0.0019655174,3.4198625,Evaluation of interval change or device positioning compared to prior images.,"The examples that activate highly often include reference to both current and prior images and involve some form of interval changes or interpretation related to supportive devices or findings. They typically require a description in comparison with prior imaging to assess any device or pathological changes, particularly focusing on placements or progression of known issues.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5182481751824818,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10042,latent_10042,11094,0.022188,0.008271483,2.7942674,Comparative analysis of current versus prior image findings.,"Higher activation levels in these examples are seen when specific radiological findings are noted in comparison with prior imaging. Terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'decreased', 'persistent', or 'interval change' facilitate this comparative description between current and previous images, indicating the continuity of observation.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5321448737597806,0.565,0.5424836601307189,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10043,latent_10043,811,0.001622,0.0013140874,4.4928303,Significant changes or updates in medical devices' positions compared to prior.,"Reports with moderate to high activation scores all reference significant changes or updates in medical devices' positions or associated anatomical areas as compared to prior radiographs, indicating the importance of tracking medical devices in relation to other anatomical changes.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4450642180840413,0.515,0.5517241379310345,0.16,100.0,100.0
+10044,latent_10044,982,0.001964,0.0019287149,4.0288076,Detection of interval change or stability in imaging findings when compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings where there is an apparent pathological or abnormal change (e.g., opacities, effusions, fluid changes) present on the current imaging when compared to prior studies. These narratives include specific mentions of interval changes, stability in conditions, or improvements/worsenings, which appear to be central to the activation pattern.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6613300492610837,0.67,0.6287878787878788,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10045,latent_10045,3036,0.006072,0.004004991,2.6090274,Comparison with prior imagery along with a prior report.,The pattern observed is related to the inclusion of a prior report and prior imaging for comparison in the activation examples. The presence of both current images and explicit comparison with prior images indicates a consistent pattern used when evaluating radiological changes over time.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4432952833320565,0.455,0.4651162790697674,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10046,latent_10046,2341,0.004682,0.0029280535,4.0456033,Kyphotic positioning affecting radiographic interpretation.,The examples that activate strongly often mention kyphotic positioning or related terms indicating the patient's position might obscure or complicate radiographic interpretation. This implies that kyphotic positioning is relevant to the pattern sought by the model due to its impact on imaging findings.,0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3981191222570532,0.52,0.7,0.07,100.0,100.0
+10047,latent_10047,1240,0.00248,0.001559295,3.2433162,Comparison with prior imaging specifically referenced or required.,These examples highlight the presence of specific directions to compare current images with prior radiographs. Queries for specific image views or missing comparisons also seem to influence the response.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4714285714285714,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10048,latent_10048,10948,0.021896,0.00807192,1.3435918,Comparison with prior imaging reports to note changes.,The highly activated examples revolve around explicit mention of findings from prior imaging studies and provide a comparative analysis with current findings. This recurring theme indicates that the expected pattern is based on comparing changes over time using prior imaging reports as reference.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10049,latent_10049,916,0.001832,0.0014007462,3.4290872,Technical limitations in evaluating chest radiographs.,"The activated examples often reference technical limitations affecting the evaluation of chest radiographs, such as patient rotation, obesity, or suboptimal positioning. These limitations can lead to ambiguous assessments requiring further clarification from the radiologist. Phrases like 'limited due to', 'difficult to assess', and 'limited by' are commonly used.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6269785260610949,0.63,0.6585365853658537,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10050,latent_10050,9178,0.018356,0.006972411,2.2334056,Emphasis on pre-existing or stable pulmonary findings compared to prior.,"The activation levels in this dataset suggest that the main pattern relates to specific conditions like bilateral calcified pleural plaques and interstitial abnormalities, which are typically described as previous findings and matched or compared in new studies. This involves recognizing existing chronic conditions rather than the acute changes or abnormalities described in some examples.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10051,latent_10051,7968,0.015936,0.0058565624,2.0293117,Comparison with prior imaging showing improved or worsened findings.,"The higher activation examples explicitly mention improved or worsening imaging findings in comparison with prior images, suggesting patient progress over time. This focused evaluation contrasts with unchanged findings, seen in low activation examples, which lack dynamic evaluation of improvement or worsening.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5245901639344263,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10052,latent_10052,1369,0.002738,0.0017879495,5.896047,Comparison of current and prior images assessing changes related to pneumonia.,"The highly activated examples consistently include comparative descriptions between the current and prior imaging, especially when changes or evaluations for pneumonia are involved, alongside the radiological indication or clinical context. This suggests a focus on evaluating changes over time related to lung pathology.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4025887819449054,0.46,0.3947368421052631,0.15,100.0,100.0
+10053,latent_10053,1294,0.002588,0.0018325772,2.7738223,Emphasis on comparison between current and prior images despite missing comparisons.,The pattern demonstrates a specific aspect of linguistic structure in reports and images that focus on the presence or absence of available prior images for comparison. This often affects the specificity of findings being duly noted or described in the context of other data. The conductive comparative aspect within the given image descriptions and different kinds of available radiology techniques and inputs define the core of the pattern.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10054,latent_10054,9706,0.019412,0.0073635243,1.9383286,Usage of frontal and lateral images with interval findings.,"The examples with higher activation often mention the presence of more than one image type (such as frontal and lateral views), and also frequently reference previous findings or intervals that demonstrate specific changes or stability in the images over time.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10055,latent_10055,5113,0.010226,0.0040398496,2.3715076,Explicit comparison to previous images highlighting changes or confirmation of positioning.,Higher activations are associated with prompts that encourage detailed descriptions with explicit comparisons to previous images. This usually involves specific indices of change over time or confirmation of tube placements using previous images for reference. Lower activations lack this precision or detailed comparative assessment with past imaging.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10056,latent_10056,2598,0.005196,0.0028403138,3.7547662,Comparison to prior image highlights stability or changes.,"Several reports mention intervals or comparisons with prior studies, but they focus on changes or stability in specific clinical contexts, such as post-surgical findings or monitoring specific conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6648847043804356,0.685,0.6241610738255033,0.93,100.0,100.0
+10057,latent_10057,3309,0.006618,0.0028821568,2.1272652,Comparison of findings to prior images focusing on change or stability.,"These examples focus on identifying recent changes or stability of findings when current imaging is directly compared to prior images. Specific emphasis is placed on variations, or lack thereof, when compared to previous studies.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5263157894736842,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10058,latent_10058,8658,0.017316,0.0063051665,2.1681225,Reports emphasizing interval changes from prior images.,"The pattern among higher activation examples revolves around the explicit provision of radiographic findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on changes over time in specific conditions or features such as pleural effusions, opacities, and effusions. This kind of repeated comparative analysis suggests an emphasis on dynamic changes in patient condition as part of the diagnostic process.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6498599439775911,0.65,0.6442307692307693,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10059,latent_10059,1313,0.002626,0.0015910709,3.01906,Description of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples specifically use language to describe the findings on radiology studies in direct comparison to prior imaging. These examples focus on changes or stability of findings between a current and prior exam, often noting specific anatomical or medical devices and conditions in both present and previous images.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5334352701325178,0.5376884422110553,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,99.0
+10060,latent_10060,750,0.0015,0.0012418552,2.539546,Focus on indications investigating acute symptoms like pneumonia or dyspnea.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize patients presenting with specific symptoms that necessitate investigation through comparison with prior imaging, particularly for conditions like pneumonia or other acute illnesses. These examples often mention specific symptoms in the clinical indication that are suggestive of acute or potentially life-threatening conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4207985958753839,0.4270833333333333,0.425,0.5543478260869565,92.0,100.0
+10061,latent_10061,4183,0.008366,0.003652467,2.8567295,Focus on radiological comparison to prior images.,"The examples detail findings from the study, but what predominately prompted higher activation levels are the explicit requests for comparisons to previous studies. This consistent language pattern in radiology reports provides insight into diagnosis and tracking changes over time.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10062,latent_10062,988,0.001976,0.0018465278,3.9972467,Reports indicate interval changes or new pathological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings that show progression, change, new developments, or comparison with previous states that indicate worsening or new pathologies. These examples emphasize dynamic changes in imaging findings that could signify worsening conditions or new developments in a patient's radiological profile.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10063,latent_10063,1304,0.002608,0.0018921861,3.552721,Comparison and detailed assessment with prior radiographic images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently contain phrases that indicate a retrospective comparison and detailed interval assessments. These examples explicitly describe changes or stability of radiographic findings when compared to prior images, highlighting either stability or changes like improvement or worsening, alongside specifying any residual or new conditions. This pattern is indicative of a structured comparison-based assessment in radiology reporting.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10064,latent_10064,1675,0.00335,0.0023644704,5.7654657,Unchanged findings compared to prior radiographs.,"These examples repeatedly feature unchanged findings when compared to prior radiographic examinations, often using terms 'unchanged', 'stable', 'not changed', or equivalent to highlight continuity over time. This specific repetitive emphasis on lack of interval change from prior imaging is the pattern identified.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3080123450474875,0.47,0.4657534246575342,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10065,latent_10065,1090,0.00218,0.0018465513,3.5259943,Mention of interval findings or changes between current and prior images.,"The pattern shows focus on descriptions of interval changes in imaging findings when compared to prior studies. It identifies specific changes like worsening or improvement of conditions (e.g., opacities, effusions) between the given current and prior imaging, often involving specific lung or thoracic anomalies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10066,latent_10066,727,0.001454,0.001242187,3.1022418,Descriptions of interval changes or statuses of medical devices compared to prior images.,The examples with the highest activation levels describe changes or lack of changes in medical devices or catheters between current and prior imaging studies. This involves detailed observations of fragments reported with monitoring and support devices.,0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6259072492494243,0.6290322580645161,0.5726495726495726,0.7790697674418605,86.0,100.0
+10067,latent_10067,1346,0.002692,0.0016194405,3.7463646,Comparison shows change or unchanged positioning of medical devices.,"Examples with high activation consist of a comparison between imaging studies that show changes in the position of medical devices such as tubes and catheters, or unchanged pathologies despite such devices, whereas examples with low activation discuss unchanged or normal findings without emphasis on device positioning. This pattern is marked by radiological scrutiny of device placement or changes over time.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.55,0.22,100.0,100.0
+10068,latent_10068,7937,0.015874,0.007755487,3.486275,Presence or improvement in pulmonary/cardiac condition without acute abnormalities.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on detailed findings in chest radiographs, especially the presence or change in condition of pulmonary or cardiac features, and specifically highlight phrases like 'no acute cardiopulmonary process', 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette', or 'improvement in condition'. These descriptors signify stable or unchanged pulmonary and cardiac conditions, without acute abnormalities, which contrasts with other examples where acute pathology is a predominant concern.",0.4508620689655172,0.4693877551020408,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.538941365175548,0.542713567839196,0.5338983050847458,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+10069,latent_10069,2142,0.004284,0.0023673843,3.512135,Radiological findings compared to previous images.,"The activation is higher in examples where there are references to radiological findings being compared to previous images, particularly when findings are stable, partially changed, or require follow-up. This pattern matches how radiologists monitor progression or stability of certain conditions by explicitly noting comparison with earlier imaging.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.4469696969696969,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10070,latent_10070,1068,0.002136,0.0017882598,4.6552095,Detailed comparison to previous imaging describing stability or changes.,"Highly representative examples include detailed comparisons of current imaging with previous studies, often using descriptive language to describe stability or changes such as 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or 'stable appearance'.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4004961899698742,0.4020100502512563,0.3932584269662921,0.35,100.0,99.0
+10071,latent_10071,951,0.001902,0.0015437213,2.660112,Findings described as stable or unchanged from previous studies.,"High activation levels are seen when findings are described in relation to a previous exam, especially when there's mention of stability or lack of significant change, emphasizing 'comparison' and 'stable' or 'unchanged' descriptors.",0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4677419354838709,0.29,100.0,100.0
+10072,latent_10072,893,0.001786,0.0012880485,4.2041645,Significant interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight substantial interval changes identified via comparison with prior imaging. Specific findings such as new pneumothorax, new opacities, tube placements, and changes in pleural effusions are emphasized. This contrasts with lower activations where no significant changes are noted.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6465073388150311,0.655,0.7246376811594203,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10073,latent_10073,409,0.000818,0.0010211029,3.6973302,"Comparison to prior imaging studies, indicating stable or changed conditions.","High activation is observed when there is a comparison to prior findings, whether explicitly mentioned or implied by the description of current changes. These examples consistently include evaluation against prior imaging, even if indirectly communicate stability or changes against previous observations.",0.3400673400673401,0.3469387755102041,0.3,0.25,24.0,25.0,0.3947331559041882,0.4161073825503356,0.2361111111111111,0.3469387755102041,49.0,100.0
+10074,latent_10074,1090,0.00218,0.0015241578,3.1203594,Changes or stability in medical device placements across images.,"Across the examples with higher activations, there is a consistent emphasis on changes or stability concerning medical devices in the images. Comparisons to previous images often highlight changes or stability in placements of tubes, catheters, or other implanted devices, which is a critical component of monitoring in radiological assessments.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5844155844155844,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10075,latent_10075,14545,0.02909,0.010569531,1.3345587,Detecting changes or significant actions from analysis of current and prior images.,"The criteria are not uniformly met in every example, as some have varied specifics, but consistent triggers for higher activations include mentions of radiological changes compared to prior images, actions to be taken due to observations (like worsening conditions), complex multi-focal findings, and presence of notable histories or procedures. These elements align with higher activations as they suggest significant findings or require clinical action, aligning with patterns observed in the dataset.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10076,latent_10076,1761,0.003522,0.002306657,4.463797,"Findings evaluated by comparison to prior images, often involving devices or specific changes.","These examples reflect scenarios where findings are evaluated through comparison with prior images, often involving monitoring or support devices such as PICC or ET tubes, or specific conditions or changes like pneumonia, pneumothorax, or effusions over time. The comparison is crucial, whether noting changes or stability, aligning with radiology reporting practices that help track patient progress.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10077,latent_10077,7495,0.01499,0.005617924,1.8093121,Description involves interval changes leading to recommendations.,"Examples with high activation levels describe further analysis or changes noted in follow-up studies, with specific recommendations for care or evaluation based on past information. The focus isn't just on comparison but on subsequent clinical actions or considerations due to these comparisons.",0.4521091811414392,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.1739130434782608,23.0,25.0,0.4763814616755793,0.53,0.5833333333333334,0.21,100.0,100.0
+10078,latent_10078,1087,0.002174,0.0019170201,3.3312569,Stability or normal state of cardiomediastinal silhouettes or heart size.,Examples with higher activations involve description of cardiac and mediastinal structures that are noted as normal with possible mild abnormalities or stability. There is a frequent mention of similar yet stable mediastinal contours or notable but benign features like unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouettes and mediastinal and hilar contours being within normal limits.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+10079,latent_10079,1772,0.003544,0.0020702486,2.6065142,Reference to changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,Examples with high activation levels often contain references to comparison with prior studies and feature a focus on describing interval changes. These are usually essential for clinicians to understand the progression or stability of a medical condition.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10080,latent_10080,293,0.000586,0.001067675,4.0034156,Precise evaluation of tube position relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference the position of tubes, such as endotracheal, nasogastric, or enteric tubes, often with precise measurements from anatomical landmarks like the carina or gastroesophageal junction. The pattern focuses on evaluating tube placements using specific language denoting precision and position relative to previous imaging.",0.8558352402745995,0.8571428571428571,0.7619047619047619,0.9411764705882352,17.0,25.0,0.6754807692307692,0.7333333333333333,0.4883720930232558,0.6,35.0,100.0
+10081,latent_10081,1726,0.003452,0.001667055,3.4465976,"Gaseous distention, often noted in stomach or intestines, seen in imaging comparisons.","Higher activation examples consistently refer to observations of gaseous distention, particularly of the stomach or intestinal areas, in the context of radiological comparisons. This suggests the model is recognizing a pattern related to gaseous distention as noteworthy or unusual in its training context for comparison studies between radiological images.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,100.0,100.0
+10082,latent_10082,8997,0.017994,0.0064868177,1.4857986,Descriptions emphasize comparisons or interval changes in medical imaging.,"Each example with high activation notes specific changes or stability in imaging findings over time, focusing on interval changes, stability, or modifications in the patients' condition as evident in multiple radiological investigations. This pattern demonstrates the emphasis on temporal comparison in radiological interpretations.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679197,0.555,0.5329341317365269,0.89,100.0,100.0
+10083,latent_10083,1176,0.002352,0.0018503716,2.4831903,Interval changes indicating insertion or removal of medical devices or notable changes.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on changes indicated by 'interval' such as placement or removal of tubes, lines, or significant changes in pulmonary features between the current and prior images. This emphasizes a pattern in radiology reports where 'interval' denotes a change of noteworthy clinical significance.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5227720717916796,0.54,0.5645161290322581,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10084,latent_10084,861,0.001722,0.0012201362,4.1766944,Comparison with prior studies and evaluation of device positioning.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention two key elements: 1) comparison with earlier similar studies to note interval changes or stability, and 2) specific medical device placements like tubes or leads, often noting their unchanged positions. This insight aligns well with processing intervals and verifying device placements as indicative patterns.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5284552845528455,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10085,latent_10085,10382,0.020764,0.007752663,1.6160194,Concerns with positioning or stability of invasive medical devices.,"The higher activation occurs in examples describing new or unchanged medical support devices (e.g., pacemaker leads, feeding tubes) with an emphasis on any changes or stability in their positions compared to prior imaging.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,100.0
+10086,latent_10086,9438,0.018876,0.0069833687,1.6942025,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently make a statement comparing current findings with prior imaging or studies. In these cases, the current findings are often described as similar or unchanged relative to the patient’s past images. This comparison often uses terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'comparison'.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5252525252525253,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10087,latent_10087,1018,0.002036,0.0016342055,3.9109836,Discussion of image comparison and interval changes in findings.,"These examples typically involve the analysis of chest radiographs. Highly activated examples emphasize specific comparisons between current images and prior imaging studies, often denoting interval changes in findings like improvement or worsening conditions, and addressing follow-up on identified abnormalities or pathologies. The pattern highlights how radiology assessments are frequently benchmarked against previous imaging to determine trends.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4147058823529411,0.4271356783919598,0.4418604651162791,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+10088,latent_10088,623,0.001246,0.0012960641,4.974327,Reports comparing current and prior imaging with detailed descriptions of stability or change.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe the findings comparing current images with prior ones, and mentions of stability, lack of interval change, or improved condition. Reports that explicitly make these comparative descriptions with wordings like 'compared to prior','no significant interval change','stable from prior', align with the given task to provide such comparative assessments, leading to higher activation levels.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.509983229440243,0.5112359550561798,0.4505494505494505,0.5256410256410257,78.0,100.0
+10089,latent_10089,907,0.001814,0.0015094234,3.1150136,Reference to unchanged or newly placed medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions of the position or placement of medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) and their unchanged status, often compared with previous studies. This focus suggests that the pattern activation tracks reports emphasizing the verification of device placement across multiple studies or views.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5714285714285714,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10090,latent_10090,1156,0.002312,0.0014348563,4.390131,Frequent comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Reports demonstrating high activation levels frequently refer to imaging findings that are compared to prior studies. Phrases such as 'similar compared to', 'new compared to', or other comparable expressions denote that the report discusses changes or stability rather than simply current findings, which is less emphasized in lower activation examples.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10091,latent_10091,955,0.00191,0.0012391516,4.484842,Comparisons highlighting interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels provide a comparison of current imaging findings to previous imaging studies, explicitly indicating differences or changes. This is a standard process in radiology to track progress or changes in a patient’s condition and is reflected through specific phrases highlighting differences or stability in medical findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4731182795698925,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10092,latent_10092,4219,0.008438,0.0034036445,2.5230265,Focus on comparison of medical devices' positions across imaging studies.,"The dataset indicates a pattern related to detailed comparison and description changes in the interval findings using current and prior imaging studies, including assessment of lines, tubes, or devices. The examples provide detailed descriptions of location and state of medical devices (like catheters or tubes) and compare these with previous images when available.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.46,0.23,100.0,100.0
+10093,latent_10093,1097,0.002194,0.0018689986,2.7769258,Comparison to prior study for changes and device stability.,"The samples consistently mention two key elements: the findings are explicitly compared with prior images, and there is a focus on evaluating whether any devices (such as tubes, lines, or prior structural alterations) remain unchanged. This dual emphasis on comparison and stability of certain features is a recurring linguistic pattern across the highly activated examples.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10094,latent_10094,2096,0.004192,0.0025342023,3.1296701,"Conclusive comparison with prior imaging, evaluating change or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels typically have descriptions comparing current imaging findings to prior studies, specifically emphasizing any changes or stability in the findings. References to comparisons with prior imaging, along with detailed descriptions of differences or unchanged conditions, often indicate an active analysis of progression or stability of observable conditions.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.46,0.46,0.46,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10095,latent_10095,5849,0.011698,0.0046593533,1.6789949,Changes in medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently show adjustments in the reported position of medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, compared to previous imaging. The reports note whether devices should be advanced, retracted, or are appropriately placed, often involving precise measurements. This indicates a pattern focusing on changes or confirmations in medical device positioning over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5853658536585366,0.24,100.0,100.0
+10096,latent_10096,3446,0.006892,0.0028422556,1.9870285,Explicit interval changes and specific interventions compared to prior imaging.,"The activation levels suggest the pattern is identifiable when findings describe significant changes or specific interventions explicitly compared to prior evaluations. Many examples emphasize comparisons and interval changes indicative of our intended pattern. Lower activation occurs when findings show no significant change, routine descriptions, or unclear observations.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.648735447611401,0.65,0.6704545454545454,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10097,latent_10097,637,0.001274,0.0012852442,3.0199597,Mild tortuosity or calcification of the aorta in imaging descriptions.,"Examples with high activation describe findings related to a mildly tortuous, unfolded, or calcified aorta. The pattern involves descriptions of anatomical alterations of the aorta in radiological reports, often including mild enlargement, diffuse calcification, or contour changes. Such descriptions do not typically change across multiple imaging examinations, indicating stable findings.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.774518123408898,0.7849462365591398,0.8833333333333333,0.6162790697674418,86.0,100.0
+10098,latent_10098,430,0.00086,0.0011220947,4.0617967,Stable findings or unchanged conditions on radiological comparison.,"The analysis indicates that examples with observed activation describe stable conditions or lack significant change in findings when comparing current images with prior ones. Phrases like 'no interval change', 'stable appearance', and 'unchanged' are commonly used in these examples, highlighting a focus on stability or unchanged findings in radiological assessments.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7007692642009649,0.7058823529411765,0.55,0.8301886792452831,53.0,100.0
+10099,latent_10099,965,0.00193,0.0014432053,4.0126166,Explicit comparisons between current and prior images in radiology reports.,"Reports with high activation levels include those that explicitly request or provide a description or findings in comparison to prior images, alongside specific medical indications and technical details. These emphasize the need for comparative analysis over current images only.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10100,latent_10100,1000,0.002,0.0014300358,3.6841319,Evaluations of endotracheal tube (ETT) placement or other support devices.,"The pattern is exemplified by reports that specifically describe cases involving the placement or assessment of endotracheal tubes or other support devices. This includes evaluations of ETT positioning, comparisons to placement in prior images, and device-related descriptors, marking this as a key pattern in the activation data.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6009060511271707,0.63,0.782608695652174,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10101,latent_10101,934,0.001868,0.0015927063,3.708597,Reports noting 'multiple' findings such as nodules or fractures.,"The highly activated examples frequently mention multiple specific and localized findings that are enumerated or quantified (e.g., 'multiple nodules', 'multiple rib fractures', 'multiple clips'). These references to 'multiple' findings are distinct and patterned.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,1.0,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6938021328265231,0.71,0.8888888888888888,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10102,latent_10102,1117,0.002234,0.0015132705,2.8689334,Request for direct comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels often directly solicit a comparison between the given images and prior reports while emphasizing changes or stable findings over time in the context of respiratory, cardiovascular, or oncological conditions. This pattern of detailed comparisons is frequently used in follow-up imaging or in cases where a patient's current state needs to be evaluated in the context of previous data, particularly when assessing changes in pulmonary or pleural conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10103,latent_10103,911,0.001822,0.0011584866,3.9690146,Identification of nodular opacities likely to be nipple shadows in imaging comparisons.,"Most highly activated examples provide descriptions of findings in current image comparisons, focusing on identifying nodules or opacities likely to be nipple shadows rather than actual pathological findings. This pattern highlights attention to differentiating normal anatomical variations (nipple shadows) from actual findings.",0.5,0.5918367346938775,1.0,0.1666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4451198603447738,0.555,1.0,0.11,100.0,100.0
+10104,latent_10104,10101,0.020202,0.0074961367,2.644204,Use of prior image comparison to assess respiratory conditions or changes.,"Examples with higher activations consistently require comparison to prior images and often involve cases of breathing-related observations, such as lung opacities, pneumonia likelihood, or follow-up of treated conditions, indicating a focus on respiratory progress tracking over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10105,latent_10105,4425,0.00885,0.0036216062,2.2822514,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"Even in complex radiology reports, examples with higher activations consistently include a portion that explicitly compares findings to previous imaging studies, indicating either stability or change in clinical context. This is familiar practice in radiography for monitoring disease progression or resolution.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10106,latent_10106,2556,0.005112,0.0024847097,3.1400979,Focus on descriptions comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations typically provide a comparison of the current imaging findings with previous images, documenting changes or lack of changes in certain findings and often using specific language like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', or listing technical comparisons. This pattern emphasizes the importance of comparative imaging to monitor changes over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10107,latent_10107,2099,0.004198,0.003020956,2.8659942,"Detailed, comparative assessment of imaging findings over time.","Examples with high activation levels involve detailed comparative assessments focusing on changes or stability in specific pulmonary or cardiac conditions over time, typically between multiple imaging views or with consideration of previous reports, employing such evaluation terms as 'mildly enlarged', 'unchanged', 'increased interstitial markings'.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10108,latent_10108,882,0.001764,0.0017057204,5.513726,Comparison identifies notable changes or actions needed.,"The examples with higher activation values describe changes or comparisons between current imaging and prior studies primarily focused on noticeable differences or recommendations for further actions (e.g., tube positioning, appearance of new infiltrates). The pattern is the mention of newly identified findings, placement, or removal of medical devices when compared to prior imaging, indicating significant updates or alterations in the patient's status that might warrant further action.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6238621831038893,0.625,0.6404494382022472,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10109,latent_10109,9600,0.0192,0.00735073,3.0291417,Detailed assessment of findings compared to reference prior imaging.,"The higher activation examples consistently mention the presence of prior imaging as a reference for comparison. They highlight changes, stability, or similarities across time, integrating findings about changes in placement or conditions like atelectasis, effusion, or tube positions. These descriptions focus on temporal evaluation relative to a baseline or prior image.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10110,latent_10110,1263,0.002526,0.0016154805,3.1613731,No explicit prior imaging results for comparison.,"Examples with high activations consistently feature a lack of explicit previous comparison availability. In these cases, specific reference to a previous image for direct comparison is absent, focusing more on evaluating the findings based on the current examination alone or in absence of specified comparisons.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.54,0.54,0.54,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10111,latent_10111,4738,0.009476,0.0040139295,2.2044885,Focus on change or new significant findings in medical imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe specific changes in medical imaging reports, such as newly identified conditions, presence or removal of medical devices, or other noted changes compared to prior images. These type of narratives show an increased focus on interval changes or new significant findings across different imaging settings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10112,latent_10112,1020,0.00204,0.0016770354,2.6000497,Detailed findings and impressions with explicit comparisons to prior images.,"The pattern in the examples with high activation shows a focus on describing new or existing pathologies, especially within a structured impression section. These often mention specific changes compared to previous studies, while detailing technical observations and anatomical conclusions related to the current image findings.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10113,latent_10113,1105,0.00221,0.0013553208,4.8224077,Comparisons of current findings to prior images explicitly noting unchanged or stable conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve analyses where the radiological findings or impressions are provided in direct comparison to prior images, specifically noting unchanged features or slight modifications of previous findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10114,latent_10114,768,0.001536,0.0012626403,3.4208226,Updates or stability in comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples highlight analysis involving interval comparisons of current and prior imaging results. They focus on describing updates or stability of findings over time, specifically changes in conditions such as opacities, effusions, or tube placements. Activation tends to be higher when there are notable changes or stability in previously identified abnormalities, often significant in ongoing diagnoses or treatment monitoring.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.606827731092437,0.6142131979695431,0.5826771653543307,0.7628865979381443,97.0,100.0
+10115,latent_10115,684,0.001368,0.0015912681,3.9314144,Describing findings without available comparison imaging.,"These examples describe findings or requests for comparison, especially when there is ""no comparison available at the time of dictation"". This situation implies limited information which can lead to higher activation due to the focused effort of describing the current findings exclusively, often indicated by phrases like ""no comparison available"".",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7211782630777044,0.7213114754098361,0.6538461538461539,0.8192771084337349,83.0,100.0
+10116,latent_10116,1348,0.002696,0.0018678966,3.826203,Mention of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight findings described in the context of radiographic comparisons that include references to stability, unchanged conditions, or specific terminology indicating no progression of previous pathology, such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'top normal heart size'. This consistent reference to non-progression is a common pattern when evaluating the stability of findings over time.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5925925925925926,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10117,latent_10117,11598,0.023196,0.008492087,1.3421,"Comparison with prior imaging for changes in heart, lungs, or mediastinum.","The pattern involves comparing current imaging with previous studies, particularly identifying any changes or new findings in cardiac, thoracic, or pulmonary structures, although not as significant as new imaging findings. Terms like 'comparison', 'prior', and 'unchanged' are prevalent, suggesting stability in chronic issues or slight changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10118,latent_10118,604,0.001208,0.0012392695,3.2508252,"Descriptions of findings with provided image and prior image, for direct comparison.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions or comparisons of current radiological findings with prior images using structured contexts, where there is no prior comparison explicitly provided by default. The focus is on describing findings in comparative context, often involving templates for comparative analysis.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3482876712328767,0.3641618497109826,0.3543307086614173,0.6164383561643836,73.0,100.0
+10119,latent_10119,1403,0.002806,0.0016744954,3.0473344,Observations of cardiomegaly or presence of medical devices.,"The descriptions in the examples with higher activations often include observations about either the cardiomediastinal silhouette, findings of moderate or stable cardiomegaly, or the presence of devices. Low activation examples feature clear lungs and normal cardiac findings without specific mentions of those observations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5229357798165137,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10120,latent_10120,460,0.00092,0.0008787965,3.8982763,Highly structured radiology report format and language.,"Examples with higher activation tend to feature detailed examination descriptions formatted in a highly specific and structured manner typically used in radiology or medical imaging reports, particularly when including a list of findings, indications, techniques, and comparisons with previous images. This structured format is distinctive of such formal reports.",0.3055555555555556,0.44,0.4680851063829787,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3232965606748864,0.3734177215189873,0.3566433566433566,0.8793103448275862,58.0,100.0
+10121,latent_10121,629,0.001258,0.0014405714,3.437061,No comparison is available; normal or unchanged current findings in PA and lateral views.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to involve radiological descriptions where there is no prior comparison image available, prompting primary findings to be detailed based only on the current images. These examples highlight unchanged cardiopulmonary contours, lungs appearing clear, or no pleural effusion from PA and lateral views.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5968468468468469,0.6201117318435754,0.5964912280701754,0.430379746835443,79.0,100.0
+10122,latent_10122,7670,0.01534,0.0056071626,1.5704093,Comparison to prior imaging studies.,"This dataset includes reports with explicit references to prior imaging studies for comparison, suggesting a linguistic pattern where findings are assessed relative to previous exams. Examples mention unchanged or interval changes compared to prior exams, a common theme in radiology for tracking progress or stability of conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4461025516926138,0.485,0.4901960784313725,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10123,latent_10123,902,0.001804,0.0015342506,3.6988804,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples have high activation levels when describing radiological findings that involve stability or no significant interval change in imaging comparisons. This pattern indicates a focus on confirming stable pathological or anatomical features over time, such as unchanged atelectasis, cardiomegaly, or pleural and mediastinal contours.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4404761904761904,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10124,latent_10124,7040,0.01408,0.005348916,2.8865173,Explicit comparative analysis with a prior image.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently utilize the phrase 'compared to the prior image' and provide a description of findings relative to previous tests, particularly when using explicit comparison to showcase changes, stability, or the absence of change.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10125,latent_10125,720,0.00144,0.0014607585,4.302481,Descriptive stability compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples frequently mention comparison with prior imaging, focusing particularly on the findings being stable, unchanged, or without significant interval change. This suggests the pattern is linked to consistent findings across multiple imaging comparisons, specifically highlighting lack of significant change.",0.4337568058076225,0.4583333333333333,0.4285714285714285,0.25,24.0,24.0,0.4626179245283018,0.4731182795698925,0.4246575342465753,0.3563218390804598,87.0,99.0
+10126,latent_10126,950,0.0019,0.0015822396,3.2614317,Instructions to compare current findings with prior images.,"Examples that include explicit instructions to 'compare to prior images' and descriptions of findings in relation to these previous images show high activation. This indicates a pattern where the task is focused on assessing the current findings against prior studies to note stability, changes, or the lack of information about the prior state used for comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10127,latent_10127,1122,0.002244,0.0015268868,2.65629,Explicit comparison between current and prior images in the findings.,Examples with high activation levels describe findings by specifically making clear comparisons between current and prior images and include the process of reporting changes or stability. They have structured details and assistant conclusions that indicate changes based on comparison with prior studies.,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3915776241357637,0.395,0.408695652173913,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10128,latent_10128,1331,0.002662,0.0018880077,5.458972,Explicit interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations contain descriptions of medical imaging changes over time, suggesting interval change. Terms such as 'improved', 'stable', 'new', 'interval change', or explicit comparisons related to time are present in higher activation examples, denoting explicit temporal evaluation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10129,latent_10129,440,0.00088,0.0010485369,4.4025483,Complex evaluations involving frontal and lateral chest views.,"The examples consistently describe radiological findings in both frontal and lateral views of the chest, often referencing complex or multifaceted conditions like post-operative changes, dyspnea evaluations, and changes since prior exams—specifically using both views for assessments. These are indicative of thorough evaluations involving multiple dimensions or comparisons using the specific descriptor 'frontal and lateral views,' implying detailed examination often compared against prior imaging.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,0.5681818181818182,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5742296918767507,0.5789473684210527,0.4521739130434782,0.981132075471698,53.0,99.0
+10130,latent_10130,13990,0.02798,0.011095357,2.3752906,Revealing structural changes or shifts in cardiac/mediastinal areas.,"High activation levels are consistently associated with descriptions that include deviations or shifts in the mediastinal or cardiac structures, such as mediastinal masses, cardiomegaly, and significant opacifications. These indicate attention to notable structural changes or abnormalities, even in challenging imaging conditions or complex cases. When reports highlight stable or unchanged findings, activations tend to be lower, emphasizing the focus on dynamic or significant alterations in thoracic structures as a trigger for higher activations.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5555555555555556,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10131,latent_10131,983,0.001966,0.001564232,3.636491,Emphasis on comparison to prior images.,"The presence of descriptions comparing current to prior imaging demonstrates a focus on identifying changes over time. Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference direct comparisons to previous studies, underscoring the significance of temporal evaluation in these reports.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.5853658536585366,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5265434954150907,0.565,0.5414012738853503,0.85,100.0,100.0
+10132,latent_10132,1644,0.003288,0.001741076,2.8369532,Providing comparisons to prior imaging is emphasized and linked to higher activations.,"Examples with higher activations consistently provide comparisons to prior imaging, even when the specifics of the comparison are not defined. Such examples often identify structures such as Port-A-Caths, changes in lung opacities, or heart size, indicating stability or change. This pattern highlights the importance of evaluating changes through prior imaging.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.477124183006536,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10133,latent_10133,1475,0.00295,0.0017803911,2.8563704,Comparison with prior imaging or unchanged findings noted.,"These examples all entail the assessment of a current radiographic image in relation to prior imaging and associated clinical history, particularly focusing on specific findings with potential for change like catheters, tubes, or recent surgeries. These reports use phrases like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', 'stable', or descriptions of modifications such as improvement or deterioration seen from earlier studies.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10134,latent_10134,1249,0.002498,0.001776269,2.4539201,"Detailed comparison to prior studies with emphasis on changes or stability, including device positioning.","The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed comparisons to previous studies, focusing particularly on any changes in findings and specific medical device positions or changes. Reports compare previous and current findings extensively, emphasizing stability, improvements, or new findings in a clinical context.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10135,latent_10135,912,0.001824,0.0015531275,2.681149,Provision of findings in direct comparison to a previous image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the radiologist providing a description of current radiological findings in explicit comparison to a prior image, including the use of phrases about changes, stability, or resolution of specific findings. This structure highlights the importance of comparative analysis in evaluating patient progress or stability.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10136,latent_10136,7065,0.01413,0.005375324,2.828181,Comparisons indicating changes from prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations involve the presence of a\n'comparison' element where there is explicit instruction or indication for the findings to be 'compared' or contrasted with prior images to assess for 'interval change', 'no significant change', or 'stable' findings. This pattern highlights the importance of longitudinal comparison in radiological assessments.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5833333333333334,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10137,latent_10137,864,0.001728,0.0016600074,4.6863375,Radiological findings comparison with prior exams.,"The consistent pattern in the examples with high activation involves the description of findings in radiology studies, especially when there are references to previous reports using terms like 'compared to the prior study' or discussing changes in conditions over time.
+
+High activation examples often document minimal changes or the stability of findings over time, suggesting an emphasis on longitudinal assessment.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3970256644118466,0.405,0.4227642276422764,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10138,latent_10138,1144,0.002288,0.0019076028,4.8379817,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"Examining images with reference to 'prior reports', 'comparisons', and similar wording suggests previous observations being made again, with the new context of evaluating ongoing or unchanged conditions since prior studies. Higher activation in examples where ongoing stability or progression in conditions like ARDS, imaging of stabilization, or assessment of pulmonary congestion are noted helps establish the pattern.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10139,latent_10139,3083,0.006166,0.0029692021,3.7226338,Focus on tubes and line placements with reference to changes or positioning.,"The pattern indicates the presence of medical tubes or lines with specific reference to their positions or adjustments (e.g., endotracheal, Dobbhoff) and mentions of changes or repositioning compared to prior imaging, indicative of careful management of these devices in clinical settings.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5588235294117647,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10140,latent_10140,9858,0.019716,0.0075877695,2.5618618,Analysis of current image findings versus prior image findings.,"The examples with higher activations feature a direct comparison between current findings and prior imaging or reports, particularly focusing on changes, stability, or resolution of findings in the current frontal image compared to the prior frontal image. These examples task the assistant to actively evaluate differences or confirmations in radiological findings based on historical data, which aligns with the pattern of interest in this dataset.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10141,latent_10141,923,0.001846,0.0015539278,4.859968,Stability or unchanged findings in the presence of pathological history or interventions.,"Many examples show the absence of new findings or changes despite various pathological history or procedures. These often reinforce a pattern of stability or 'unchanged' radiological observations, even in the presence of previous interventions or health concerns.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10142,latent_10142,575,0.00115,0.0012387866,4.1674547,Template and incomplete text in radiological reports.,"The examples all feature use of template or incomplete text where specific radiological terms, dates, or patient details are placeholders or partially missing, indicating a standardized or prototypical structure possibly used for comparison and synthesis with previous results.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3294117647058823,0.4385964912280701,0.4285714285714285,1.0,72.0,99.0
+10143,latent_10143,1890,0.00378,0.0019281011,2.6123352,Significant changes or new findings on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight either increased opacification, changes in presence of devices (e.g., tubes or catheters), or the presentation of new infiltrates or masses compared to prior images. They describe significant changes or new findings that are alarming, indicating progression or new onset of disease processes, while the zero activation examples did not demonstrate remarkable changes.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5636363636363636,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10144,latent_10144,795,0.00159,0.0014324915,3.335986,Descriptions comparing current and prior images in diagnostic radiology.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently use comparison to prior imagery to highlight stability, change, or diagnosis in radiological findings, particularly for focal changes or diagnostic follow-ups. This pattern is integral to tracking patient progress through imaging.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5852544826818131,0.6122448979591837,0.5666666666666667,0.8854166666666666,96.0,100.0
+10145,latent_10145,726,0.001452,0.0013852852,3.2797892,Structured comparison-based findings with imaging views and patient history.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include a specific pattern where the findings include both a description of changes compared to prior imaging (indicating stability or a noted change like improved or resolved state) and explicit mentions of certain imaging views or techniques such as 'frontal image', 'lateral image', or 'AP portable chest radiograph', combined with specific medical history or conditions. High activation levels are associated with detailed and structured comparison-based narrative in radiology reporting.",0.2921492921492921,0.34,0.3947368421052631,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4082324455205811,0.4468085106382978,0.4459459459459459,0.75,88.0,100.0
+10146,latent_10146,1515,0.00303,0.0023812088,3.4985337,Evaluation of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in comparison to prior images.,"These examples demonstrate a specific pattern of evaluating cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, as well as heart size, with a focus on comparing these structures to prior images to determine any interval changes or stability. Such comparisons are routine in radiological evaluations but particularly emphasized in these examples to assess consistency over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4459459459459459,0.33,100.0,100.0
+10147,latent_10147,1419,0.002838,0.0018032447,2.3558824,Placement or advancement of medical devices/tubes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the presence, placement, or advancement of medical devices and tubes in the chest cavity, such as Swan-Ganz catheter, PICC lines, or endotracheal tube, often comparing their placement to previous imaging for any noted changes. This pattern highlights significant interest or notable changes related to these devices or tubes.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4883720930232558,0.21,100.0,100.0
+10148,latent_10148,4925,0.00985,0.003888573,1.7968371,Findings indicate stability or non-significant change compared to prior imaging.,"The sample examples with higher activations focus on either the absence or non-significant change of specific pathological findings, often concluding with a statement of stability or a lack of acute changes. These examples suggest that even though findings might be present, they are not indicative of an acute or significant pathological process compared to prior images. This indicates the pattern might be related to stability or lack of urgent findings in radiological analysis.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5017072615524698,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+10149,latent_10149,1053,0.002106,0.0017760185,3.260704,Stable or normal cardiac silhouette size.,"These examples focus on the description and comparison of cardiac silhouette size across multiple images. There is an emphasis on stable cardiac silhouette size, normal size, or in some instances mild enlargement, often in conjunction with normal or unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours. The heart size is carefully assessed in both current and comparative imaging.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10150,latent_10150,8178,0.016356,0.0060454956,1.5025531,Interventional or device-related changes across multiple radiographic views.,"Examples with an activation value greater than zero often reference specific changes or comparisons in multiple radiographic views, particularly mentioning 'frontal', 'lateral', or 'portable' and include implications about interventional findings, as indicated by devices, tubes, or cardiopulmonary conditions. High activations seem linked to specific changes observed across multiple views.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5989974937343359,0.6,0.6111111111111112,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10151,latent_10151,948,0.001896,0.0015545312,3.8138566,Contextualization of findings based on prior medical or imaging history.,"The examples consistently refer to historical information about the patient that affects their current condition, such as prior surgeries, chronic illnesses like COPD and CHF, or previous acute events leading to current examinations. This pattern is about contextualizing radiology findings with prior medical history and comparisons to previous images or patient states.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4895104895104895,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10152,latent_10152,7488,0.014976,0.005775303,2.897654,"Interval changes, placements, or stability assessments in comparison to prior imaging.","Examples with higher activations involve radiology findings that specify interval changes, removals, placements, or stability of objects such as tubes or nodules compared to prior imaging. These descriptions focus on changes between current and prior images, often in the context of interventions or specific changes in findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10153,latent_10153,1350,0.0027,0.0019351746,3.6186888,Descriptions focused on changes from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations tend to include a direct comparison with findings from a previous image, describing specific progress or changes. They often provide details regarding how current observations compare with past radiological results, making comparisons an integral part of the report's explanation.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10154,latent_10154,735,0.00147,0.0017366671,3.700893,Emphasis on minimal interval change in pleural effusions or atelectasis.,"These examples consistently focus on the evaluation of radiological findings using comparison to previous imaging studies when limited relevant prior images are available. These cases often focus on minimal changes between studies by taking guiding text into account, for example 'MINimal atelectasis' or 'MINimal pleural effusion'.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6009240457902946,0.6282722513089005,0.7,0.3846153846153846,91.0,100.0
+10155,latent_10155,587,0.001174,0.0013648091,3.300572,Detailed comparisons of anatomical structures between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit descriptions or comparisons of lung parenchyma, cardiac silhouette, tubes (ETT, OGT, NG tubes), and vascular structures (aorta) between the current and previous imaging studies. These examples appear focused on describing precise intervals or changes in these specific anatomical structures or positions over time.
+",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.390865894096332,0.4046242774566474,0.2972972972972973,0.3013698630136986,73.0,100.0
+10156,latent_10156,640,0.00128,0.0017809647,6.5259976,Endotracheal tube position described with a specific distance from carina.,"The examples with high activation levels feature a description of the position of an endotracheal tube in relation to the carina. The position is often expressed with a specific distance measurement in centimeters, such as ""6.5 cm above the carina."" This precise measurement is a common pattern in radiology reports checking the placement of tubes after intubation.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6706885245901639,0.7096774193548387,0.9444444444444444,0.3953488372093023,86.0,100.0
+10157,latent_10157,1186,0.002372,0.0018286889,3.6528854,Reports with detailed comparisons to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation typically involve a description of current imaging findings in relation to prior imaging results, using explicit comparative analysis of changes or lack thereof regarding specific medical devices, tubes, opacities, and other notable findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10158,latent_10158,2908,0.005816,0.002882384,3.66643,Detailed descriptions of chest X-ray device placements.,"The pattern involves descriptions of radiological findings, particularly focusing on technical placements of devices, instruments, and tubes in chest X-rays. High activation examples detail precise positioning, such as endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, or other medical devices, indicating that these descriptions heavily influence the model's recognition of patterns.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5217391304347826,0.24,100.0,100.0
+10159,latent_10159,875,0.00175,0.0011703741,3.2749918,Reference to comparison images and confirmation of stability or improvement.,"Examples with higher activation involve a comparison to prior imaging and tend to confirm stability or improvement of a condition (e.g., pulmonary edema or atelectasis) or focus on unchanged anatomical features across studies. The presence or absence of acute changes comparably leads to lower activation regardless of the existence of prior images.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4935064935064935,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10160,latent_10160,2531,0.005062,0.002487305,2.8218973,Comparison to prior studies and interval changes noted.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include references to prior imaging for comparison, highlighting findings that are unchanged or compared to previously noted conditions. This pattern involves specifying interval changes or stability, indicating a reevaluation following therapy or over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10161,latent_10161,2684,0.005368,0.0022806213,1.979757,Stable positions of devices or catheters noted in comparison with prior imaging.,"Most examples involve findings that mention unchanged or stable positions of medical devices or catheters compared to prior imaging. Descriptions commonly focus on unchanged positions of tubes, catheters, sutures, or any medical monitoring/support devices without acute changes.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.15,100.0,100.0
+10162,latent_10162,1703,0.003406,0.0019218816,2.56879,Stable findings or lack of significant change from prior imaging.,"The pattern is focused on instances where changes in imaging findings are compared with previous studies and show a lack of significant change or stabilization in the patient's condition, rather than new findings or worsening conditions. Terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant change' frequently appear in high activation examples.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5104166666666666,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10163,latent_10163,945,0.00189,0.0017676809,3.1797829,Requests for findings description by comparing with prior images.,"In these examples, the activation is high when the prompt explicitly requests to provide a description of radiologic findings by comparing current images with prior ones, focusing on interval changes in the images. This pattern involves comparison language explicitly tied to findings description, often framed as 'provide a description' followed by comparing with a previous frontal image.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10164,latent_10164,3445,0.00689,0.0030192866,3.748277,Focus on changes or management of medical devices.,"The examples with a higher activation level tend to emphasize changes in medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, catheters, or ports, indicating errors, placements, removals, or recommendations for repositioning. This suggests a focus on device management over static findings or anatomical changes in the imaging.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.52,0.39,100.0,100.0
+10165,latent_10165,2706,0.005412,0.0025040687,2.973268,Direct comparison of imaging findings to prior studies with noted changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve a specific kind of narrative: they focus on analyzing current imaging findings in direct comparison to definitive previous images, identifying stability, improvement, or change in certain clinical contexts. They note changes in findings, such as altered positions of lines, tubes, anatomical pathologies, or resolving conditions directly contrasted against prior imaging. Non-activated examples often include generic observations or images with unremarkable change.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5045045045045045,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10166,latent_10166,1132,0.002264,0.0015037627,3.421536,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on the stability or adjustment of medical devices/lines.,"The pattern involves comparing current images with prior images and identifying changes or stability in medical devices or lines, such as tracheostomy tubes, PICC lines, or internal catheters, while noting their precise positioning (e.g., position in the SVC, above carina, etc.). This pattern is consistent with follow-ups to assess any needed repositioning of these medical devices.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.5869565217391305,0.27,100.0,100.0
+10167,latent_10167,1670,0.00334,0.0022091866,3.6260014,Inclusion of both lateral and frontal image views and detailed comparison with prior images.,"Analysis of the examples reveals a consistent pattern where activations are higher when specific technical indicators of the imaging, such as image views (frontal, lateral) and comparison with prior images, are present. For higher activation, prompt content tends to focus on both current and past imaging findings.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10168,latent_10168,521,0.001042,0.0013025489,5.1024957,Evaluation of interval changes and technical differences in radiology.,"The examples that show high activation consistently describe a variety of changes and comparisons over time in radiological evaluations that involve recognizing technical differences and the language of change such as 'increase', 'decrease', 'improved', 'unchanged', and 'new'. This ability allows the radiologist or a model to track progress or regression of disease and mechanical placement impacts over multiple exams.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4834468369877573,0.5,0.4263565891472868,0.8870967741935484,62.0,100.0
+10169,latent_10169,2217,0.004434,0.0023227425,2.524051,"Comparison to prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability.","Highly activated examples involve descriptions of chest imaging studies requiring comparison to prior radiographs, often with a focus on changes or stability in features over time, using language like 'interval change', 'compared to prior', or noting dates of prior imaging.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.5448275862068965,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10170,latent_10170,600,0.0012,0.0011111854,4.2850275,"Atelectasis, opacities, enlargement, or congestion in imaging comparisons.","Higher activations correlate with comparisons between current and prior imaging related to visual evidence such as 'atelectasis', 'opacities', 'enlargement', and 'congestion'. These findings typically emerge from analysis of lung conditions or cardiac changes presented with imaging evidence.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6124313186813186,0.6140350877192983,0.5225225225225225,0.8169014084507042,71.0,100.0
+10171,latent_10171,1254,0.002508,0.0020282583,4.19508,Noticeable change in findings or patient management from prior imaging studies.,The examples with a high activation level involve cases where there is a noticeable alteration in patient management or diagnosis based on the comparison with prior images. This differs from unchanged or unremarkable comparative findings in other examples which have lower activation levels.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5540540540540541,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10172,latent_10172,1680,0.00336,0.0019459588,4.32223,Comparative evaluation of unchanged stable findings from previous imaging.,"Highly activated samples both provide image comparisons and discuss specific stable findings from previous imaging, which are identified in the new images as unchanged. This implies a focus on tracking the stability or progression of underlying conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3799915931063472,0.41,0.3392857142857143,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10173,latent_10173,12812,0.025624,0.009369284,1.5808511,Reports highlighting absence of acute findings or significant changes.,"Certain reports emphasize the absence of significant findings or acute disease while providing comprehensive descriptions of stable, normal, or unchanged clinical attributes. This is characteristic of consistent, unremarkable findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on stability rather than new developments.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4394366197183098,0.4422110552763819,0.4513274336283185,0.51,100.0,99.0
+10174,latent_10174,3083,0.006166,0.0023579597,1.6928571,Emphasis on comparison of medical device positioning/stability.,"The examples with high activation often include explicit prompts to compare the current image with a prior image and describe any changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical structures such as lines, tubes, and catheters. Delineated differences or stability in invasive devices and their positioning is a key feature driving higher activation.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.463768115942029,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10175,latent_10175,7093,0.014186,0.00561742,2.5382793,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation level in several examples is linked to the presence of detailed findings from comparison with previous imaging, specifically focusing on stable appearances or intervals without significant change. This pattern is emphasized via explicit mentions of previous imaging, absence of clinically significant change, and descriptions of findings as unchanged, stability being a common theme in activated examples.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4698795180722891,0.39,100.0,100.0
+10176,latent_10176,515,0.00103,0.0012663123,2.8415523,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently instruct to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images, with a focus on identifying any interval changes or stability. The tasks specifically emphasize the need to compare and document changes or stasis across multiple visits, which is a central task in follow-up or longitudinal studies.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.446718867999523,0.45625,0.3884297520661157,0.7833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+10177,latent_10177,811,0.001622,0.0016837933,3.5581636,Mild cardiomegaly or enlarged heart with tortuous aorta.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention a mildly enlarged heart or cardiomegaly, often alongside a tortuous aorta. These are common radiological findings typically highlighted in reports for their clinical significance.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.9,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5492071482506922,0.592964824120603,0.7368421052631579,0.2828282828282828,99.0,100.0
+10178,latent_10178,4326,0.008652,0.0035151164,3.162455,Focus on interval changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels use comparison language to describe changes or stability in the findings between images, suggesting the pattern involves radiological evaluation in relation to prior images, particularly around detecting interval changes, stability, or improvement in specific areas.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10179,latent_10179,6811,0.013622,0.0053272946,2.7273664,Changes in pulmonary opacities or pleural effusions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples exhibiting moderate activation levels consistently involve changes in pulmonary opacities and pleural effusions with references to prior images, indicating that what triggers activation may be about alterations in lung patterns over time, particularly opacifications and pleural effusions, compared to previous observations.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10180,latent_10180,469,0.000938,0.0011792446,3.6768048,Preoperative or follow-up comparisons for surgical indications.,"Highly activated examples emphasize preoperative assessments or follow-ups, using terminology such as 'pre' highlighted in the context of evaluating or preparing for procedures. This suggests a focus on reports related to pre-surgical evaluations or monitoring.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6491477272727273,0.6578947368421053,0.5066666666666667,0.7169811320754716,53.0,99.0
+10181,latent_10181,8944,0.017888,0.0068980656,2.1054828,Comparison with or evolution from prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels all involve explicit analysis or findings related to comparison with or evolution from prior imaging studies. These examples frequently utilize phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from', or 'stable since prior examination'.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5159235668789809,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10182,latent_10182,1648,0.003296,0.0019288869,4.2313685,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging assessments.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions indicating stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging, demonstrating was this state is explicitly documented, often with stable or unchanged pacemaker leads or silhouette and pleural/atelectasis states. This stability or lack of new acute findings is an explicit observation across multiple imaging techniques.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5138888888888888,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10183,latent_10183,6211,0.012422,0.0047018495,2.3896964,Comparative analysis of changes in consecutive imaging studies.,Examples with notable activations contain descriptions comparing current image findings to specific changes or stabilities in context of a previous image. This captures a consistent pattern of comparative imaging across different studies to identify changes in pulmonary or related conditions.,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5625,0.58,0.5571428571428572,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10184,latent_10184,883,0.001766,0.0015820278,3.4837883,Comparison of medical device positioning or changes with prior imaging.,"Instances such as 'pacing wires are similarly positioned compared to prior', 'there is a lead placement', 'right IJ catheter, endotracheal tube, and nasogastric tube appear essentially unchanged' all highlight the comparison of medical devices or anatomical changes with prior imaging. Thus, these examples primarily focus on the status, change, or placement of lines, tubes, and devices in comparison to previous imaging findings.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10185,latent_10185,1501,0.003002,0.0017822664,2.3793044,Comparison to previous imaging showing unchanged conditions or findings.,"The pattern exhibits simultaneous presence of references to prior imaging studies for comparison and observations of unchanged patient conditions between studies. The discussions often state dates or time intervals of previous exams, and emphasize stability or no appreciable change in findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10186,latent_10186,1491,0.002982,0.002049363,4.2591043,Resolution or improvement in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples receiving higher activation levels describe resolution or improvement of existing pulmonary or pleural findings compared to prior studies. Typical phrases include 'has decreased in size' or 'have decreased' with regard to pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or parenchymal opacities, indicating an improvement in the radiological findings.",0.5609318996415771,0.5918367346938775,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4721757144073327,0.535,0.6129032258064516,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10187,latent_10187,2052,0.004104,0.0019940846,2.1068623,Explicit and systematic comparison with prior imaging reports.,"Among the examples with high activation, there is a consistent reference to a specific comparison with prior images. These cases often indicate specific changes or no changes in the findings compared to a previous radiological study, but importantly, some have systematic or notable comparison against historical data.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10188,latent_10188,2647,0.005294,0.0029207512,4.5969396,Medical device positioning or changes relative to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve specific findings related to medical devices like tubes, catheters, or pacemakers, their positioning, adjustments, or changes noted over time compared to prior imaging. This is relevant in managing patient interventions and evaluating treatment or procedural success.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.6129032258064516,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10189,latent_10189,2367,0.004734,0.0025595159,3.4334986,Comparison of current imaging findings with a prior study.,"Highly activated examples contain comparisons between current findings and previous imaging studies to note changes or stability, a common practice in radiology to assess progression or resolution of conditions over time using phrases like 'consistent with', 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or similar.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4459520578923564,0.51,0.5059523809523809,0.85,100.0,100.0
+10190,latent_10190,1285,0.00257,0.001710053,2.95826,Detailed interval change analysis in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve comparing current and previous images to identify changes or stability, particularly changes in pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, and prostatic devices. This comparison allows for assessing the progression, resolution, or persistence of certain conditions, indicating that the model is looking for detailed analysis of interval changes over consecutive imaging studies.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10191,latent_10191,1900,0.0038,0.0029053066,3.1599736,"Explicit detailed findings comparison to prior radiographs, noting consistency or changes.","Highly activated examples describe the technique and findings clearly stated in comparison to prior images, specifically looking for changes or stability, even if comparisons were not made. Examples with clear, unchanged mention across multiple views (PA and lateral) or devices and structures like catheters show marked activation.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3997599039615846,0.4,0.3958333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10192,latent_10192,1124,0.002248,0.0017701613,2.766629,"Focus on comparison to prior imaging studies, emphasizing findings or changes.","The examples with high activation levels consistently make comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, and they focus on identifying changes or stability in findings, particularly related to pathologies or procedures. This pattern reflects an emphasis on evaluating radiological findings in the context of change over time.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10193,latent_10193,2825,0.00565,0.002786429,2.8669095,Presence of the word 'minimal' indicating slight abnormality.,"The examples with high activation levels show descriptions containing the adjective “minimal” or its variations, which seems to trigger a significant response from the model. This suggests that the pattern the model is learning from includes some minor degree of abnormality, as typically indicated by the use of such adjectives in radiological assessments.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4880952380952381,0.57,0.85,0.17,100.0,100.0
+10194,latent_10194,1165,0.00233,0.0018794051,2.8635628,Comparative assessment of medical devices or opacities from prior image.,"The pattern observed is consistent with reports focusing on interval changes or comparisons to determine worsening or improvement of findings. This often includes mentions of improved, resolved, newly emerged, or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging, specifically noting changes in tubes or opacities. Examples with high activation levels emphasize the presence of a medical device such as ET tubes and describe changes relative to previous images, indicating the importance of comparison for evaluating medical device positioning and status.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10195,latent_10195,5364,0.010728,0.004284141,2.6808782,Stability or no significant change in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe unchanged or stable radiological findings compared to prior studies. This often involves indicators such as 'unchanged', 'no relevant change', or 'stable appearance', suggesting normal continuity with prior imaging findings without new or acute processes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5510204081632653,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10196,latent_10196,1561,0.003122,0.0019881567,2.971668,Assessment of pulmonary changes against previous images often indicating acute or ongoing pulmonary issues.,"The examples with high activation levels are characterized by descriptions of findings regarding previous or current states of pleural effusions, pneumothorax, pneumonia, or pulmonary edema, and the need for evaluating changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging. These reports reflect acute or ongoing pulmonary issues, often requiring clarity in study indications or detailed observations about specific conditions affecting lung, pleura, or cardiac states.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4230185241421196,0.43,0.4426229508196721,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10197,latent_10197,6371,0.012742,0.0047439164,2.4695683,Stability or lack of change in findings compared to previous images.,The examples that activate more describe observations that are unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern is consistently seen in radiology reports where the findings focus on stability or lack of significant interval change since last examination.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10198,latent_10198,7306,0.014612,0.00561698,2.1158493,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations contain a comparison of current findings against one or more prior imaging studies, often noting stable or changing findings, which suggests the importance of historical context in radiological assessments. The use of words such as 'compared to', 'prior', and 'dated' indicates this pattern.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5714285714285714,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10199,latent_10199,837,0.001674,0.0015406073,3.6361346,"Stable, unremarkable imaging findings without significant change.","The examples with high activations explicitly detail a lack of significant pathological findings such as clear lungs, no pleural effusion or pneumothorax, and descriptions indicating stability or absence of new issues. They also provide direct visualization instructions for prior and current images, which form the basis of the pattern.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5242718446601942,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10200,latent_10200,5579,0.011158,0.0045140204,2.9652755,Emphasis on interval change or comparison with prior radiology findings.,"These examples frequently describe comparisons and serial observations of radiological findings with references to prior imaging studies. They often focus on interval changes in pulmonary features, vasculature or pleural components between images. Such a pattern indicates that the reports are geared towards monitoring progression or resolution of conditions over time, often in chest imaging.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10201,latent_10201,2049,0.004098,0.0021805712,3.1447906,References to previous imaging comparisons or changes/stability since prior studies.,"High-activation examples involve the inclusion of prior or comparison imaging information, indicating changes or stability in the clinical findings compared to previous studies. Low-activation samples lack such comparative elements or only involve straightforward, direct findings without previous image discussion.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10202,latent_10202,834,0.001668,0.0014254233,4.3570457,Surgical history notation with clarification of unchanged post-surgical findings on follow-up imaging.,"Highly activated examples emphasize the presence of surgical history, such as CABG or sternotomy, in conjunction with unchanged expected post-surgical findings on the comparison radiographs. They consistently mention cardiac changes, pleural effusions, or mediastinal alterations related to past surgeries, and discuss these in the context of follow-up imaging.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5438033285460844,0.595,0.7878787878787878,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10203,latent_10203,1437,0.002874,0.0017833117,3.367428,"Stable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours in imaging comparison.","These examples consistently describe stable, unchanged, or normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours despite other observations or assessments made in the imaging reports, suggesting these elements have remained stable over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10204,latent_10204,1065,0.00213,0.0015460902,2.9148574,Comparison of both frontal and lateral images with prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels feature explicit use of frontal and lateral images compared to prior studies in the radiology reports. This pattern shows a focus on analysis through multiple view comparison, particularly emphasizing the acknowledgement and description of changes or stability over different angles.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4868421052631579,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10205,latent_10205,1192,0.002384,0.0014258117,2.8630896,Assessment involves visual temporal comparison of current and previous images.,"The entries with high activation levels consistently show a pattern of finding descriptions that involve judgments based on visual comparison across time or different studies. In particular, they often entail observing changes or stability in a condition over time as visualized in radiographic images, indicating an emphasis on continuity and time as critical elements in the activation pattern.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10206,latent_10206,804,0.001608,0.0015741885,3.0644078,Stability or unchanged findings in comparison with prior images.,"The models exhibit high activation levels for descriptions indicating stability or lack of significant changes from prior references, such as unchanged cardiac silhouette, stable mediastinal contours, or persistent but unchanged medical devices and findings between the current and prior studies.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5217391304347826,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10207,latent_10207,5912,0.011824,0.004474832,2.0509722,Detailed comparison with prior imaging revealing unchanged or evolving pathologies.,"Higher activation levels appear in examples where findings in current imaging are compared directly with specific prior imaging, highlighting new or unchanged pathologies or structures. Sentences or phrases explicitly stating 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from previous', or involving detailed analysis of progression help illustrate the pattern.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10208,latent_10208,1014,0.002028,0.0019613148,5.622768,Focus on acute findings without comparison to prior studies.,"The high activation samples indicate specific radiological findings without prior studies available for comparison. This shows the model is less influenced by previous comparisons and is focused on detecting acute conditions, especially concerning indications for cardiopulmonary processes.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3586638956657932,0.4623115577889447,0.3,0.0606060606060606,99.0,100.0
+10209,latent_10209,1421,0.002842,0.001892034,3.60007,Comparison of current radiology study to prior images emphasizing changes.,"The high activation level examples frequently contain explicit directives to compare current imaging findings with prior images, suggesting that the model strongly associates comparison tasks with the desired activation pattern.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5284552845528455,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10210,latent_10210,5429,0.010858,0.004167925,2.7668204,Focus on stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation specifically discuss the comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, emphasizing stability, change, or presence of devices or pathologies. This suggests the model is sensitive to the explicit analysis of how images evolve over time, particularly focusing on stability or changes of anatomical features or equipment.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10211,latent_10211,1086,0.002172,0.0015713891,6.5602107,Detailed comparisons and assessments against prior imaging studies or findings.,"The examples with high activation levels contain comparisons of current imaging findings with prior studies, often focusing on changes (or lack thereof) in specific abnormalities or interventions, such as device placements, opacities, or lesions. This suggests the model is highly activated by the presence of comparison details to past imaging for evaluating changes, positional assessments, and related observations.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10212,latent_10212,861,0.001722,0.0015859035,4.081725,Continued enlargement of cardiac silhouette compared to prior images.,"Both highly activated examples consistently mention the continued enlargement of the cardiac silhouette when comparing current imaging with prior studies. This implies that the pattern relates to tracking changes in heart size across sequential medical imaging studies, indicating potential concern or abnormality.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,1.0,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6571521863350658,0.685,0.9302325581395348,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10213,latent_10213,1416,0.002832,0.0015831625,4.100619,Analysis of interval changes in lung conditions or device placements between imaging.,Highly representative examples focus on interval changes in pulmonary conditions or device placement and their specific evolution when compared to prior imaging. This lends insight into how medical devices or conditions evolve over time using comparative descriptions.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5258620689655172,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10214,latent_10214,642,0.001284,0.0011477629,6.2263393,Changes in opacity or effusion compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently show changes from a previous condition, particularly an increase or improvement in lung opacity, effusions, or device positions, using comparative language like ""since prior"" or ""compared to"" to assess progression or improvement.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5390753053966291,0.5597826086956522,0.5245901639344263,0.3809523809523809,84.0,100.0
+10215,latent_10215,695,0.00139,0.0013279009,4.522724,Detailed findings with comparison to prior images and clinical context.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate language suggesting detailed and specific interpretations or comparisons with prior imaging, capturing complex descriptive language inherent to radiology reports with structured descriptive assessments. The most highly activated examples typically illustrate careful and precise interpretation of findings, often providing multiple insights or diagnostic considerations.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4548192771084337,0.4585635359116022,0.4260869565217391,0.6049382716049383,81.0,100.0
+10216,latent_10216,2560,0.00512,0.0029068112,6.699415,Detailed radiology comparisons to prior findings.,The data indicates a pattern where examples include detailed radiological comparisons and assessments of current findings relative to prior studies. High activations correlate with the presence of detailed comparisons explicitly evaluating changes or stabilities in medical findings over time. These details often mention specific medical equipment placements or subtle changes in medical conditions.,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4691473495285523,0.475,0.3083333333333333,0.6271186440677966,59.0,141.0
+10217,latent_10217,737,0.001474,0.0012490392,3.25951,Bibasilar atelectasis or opacities in chest imaging.,"Instances with high activation levels consistently discuss bibasilar atelectasis or related findings such as streaky airspace opacities or pleural effusion. These examples use terms like 'bibasilar opacities,' 'streaky bibasilar atelectasis,' or 'bibasilar airspace opacifications.' The focus is on bilateral lung bases showing atelectasis or similar findings, which commonly indicate underlying pathology like atelectasis or early infection, leading to the higher activation.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.60508916048888,0.6137566137566137,0.6111111111111112,0.4943820224719101,89.0,100.0
+10218,latent_10218,1076,0.002152,0.0014414323,4.3506556,Interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"These examples describe changes in radiological findings across intervals, including worsening or improvement of specific conditions, as denoted by words like 'interval', 'unchanged', or 'resolution.' They often correlate findings to previous reports or studies, providing narrative comparison rather than just descriptive of the current state.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10219,latent_10219,642,0.001284,0.0010932462,4.5878077,Marked changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,The examples generally involve situations where there is a need to evaluate or describe radiological findings relative to previous exams. High activation levels are observed in contexts where significant differences or notable changes are marked and explained between current and prior images. The key indicator is clear comparative language or descriptions of marked changes or stability of findings over time.,0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6073032849503438,0.6077348066298343,0.5471698113207547,0.7160493827160493,81.0,100.0
+10220,latent_10220,4756,0.009512,0.0037402443,2.0573106,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The activation levels suggest a pattern where radiology reports emphasize comparisons with prior images, specifically indicating either change or stability in the findings. This involves descriptions of changes to devices like tubes or catheters, opacifications, or cardiomegaly across studies, illustrating patterns of medical reasoning in evaluating images.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10221,latent_10221,957,0.001914,0.0015369124,4.674887,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples describe evaluation and description of findings compared to prior images, indicating stability or changes, often using language indicating interval changes or comparisons. This signifies reports focusing on temporal progression which could have clinical significance.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5210205391527599,0.5477386934673367,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,99.0
+10222,latent_10222,2414,0.004828,0.00256939,5.4309516,Reference to unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Samples showing the pattern reference comparisons with previous imaging studies and emphasize stability or unchanged findings. This suggests the pattern emerges when unchanged or stable conditions are confirmed by comparing with past exams, highlighting ongoing conditions without progression, often noted through specific instruments or opacities showing stability.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5186750515568908,0.5226130653266332,0.524390243902439,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+10223,latent_10223,2908,0.005816,0.004385955,3.5761714,Focus on the placement and position of PICC lines in the SVC or atrium.,"PICC lines are mentioned frequently in high activation examples and their placement in relation to the SVC is a notable focus. The examples consistently describe their position in relation to the atrium or cavoatrial junction, which seems to trigger patterns in the model's activations.",0.96,0.96,0.96,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8846510694851927,0.885,0.9325842696629212,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10224,latent_10224,725,0.00145,0.0014457109,4.5751824,Detailed evaluation against prior imaging findings.,"Many of the highly activated examples emphasize changes, comparisons, or evaluations made against prior imaging. The presence of explicit comparison statements, such as ""compared with prior chest x-rays"" or direct requests for evaluation in relation to previous results, indicate these reports are focused on assessing changes or stability over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3428703810957952,0.3440860215053763,0.3333333333333333,0.4186046511627907,86.0,100.0
+10225,latent_10225,1453,0.002906,0.0022183491,4.8552537,Reports focused on the positioning and adjustment of medical tubes.,"Examples with high activation levels describe positioning and adjustments of medical tubes and devices (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric tubes), especially in relation to the carina or stomach, and include recommendations for further adjustments or confirmatory details. The specific focus on tubes and their positioning seems to be the consistent pattern.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6558356108917907,0.66,0.7051282051282052,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10226,latent_10226,572,0.001144,0.0009913581,3.3141952,Observation of changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings based on either lateral or frontal radiographs in conjunction with the examination of prior imaging studies for comparison, often noting changes, stability, or concern for complications. The prompt often requires interpretation of images juxtaposed with earlier imaging to provide a more comprehensive analysis.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4482758620689655,0.4482758620689655,0.39,0.527027027027027,74.0,100.0
+10227,latent_10227,837,0.001674,0.0014017638,3.435999,Detection of tube/catheter position and interval changes from prior studies.,"These examples feature discussions of medical devices or catheter placements in conjunction with their positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC. Intervals of change in these devices are notably highlighted, along with their current positions, using language typical in device positioning reports.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7049926248156204,0.705,0.7070707070707071,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10228,latent_10228,4576,0.009152,0.0038638492,2.1757758,Differential analysis of sequential chest images for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current chest images with previous ones to note any interval changes, describing either persistence or alterations in observed conditions or positions of medical devices. This is often indicated by phrases like 'unchanged', 'compared with prior', or detailing specific interval changes.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10229,latent_10229,1498,0.002996,0.0016432444,5.5295267,Description of changes from prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include comparisons with prior imaging studies, highlighting any changes or stable findings in specific medical conditions. Words like 'stable', 'improved', 'unchanged', or 'compared to' are commonly present, indicating evaluations against previous imaging results, portraying a pattern of tracking interval changes which is significant in longitudinal medical follow-up.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.464665415884928,0.465,0.4666666666666667,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10230,latent_10230,1208,0.002416,0.0017291686,3.1113095,Emphasis on findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples focus on the analysis and comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies. This pattern highlights the clinical relevance of identifying changes or lack thereof over time, using terms like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison' or stating findings as 'in comparison with prior'. Such comparisons are crucial in understanding the significance of findings in radiological reports.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10231,latent_10231,1171,0.002342,0.0019147292,3.0853968,Stable or non-acute lung findings with unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette.,"Highly activated examples consistently mentioned clear lungs with no evidence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, and indicated stability or improvement of pre-existing lung conditions rather than any acute cardiopulmonary disease. This suggests the model strongly activates on reports indicating stability rather than detecting new acute issues.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10232,latent_10232,1305,0.00261,0.0019252384,3.84217,Detailed comparison with unchanged or stable findings over time.,"The high activation examples involve detailed changes noted during comparison with prior images, including mentions of unchanged or stable findings in devices or anatomical features like lung volumes or heart size. This observation indicates a pattern focused on the detailed articulation and description of consistent radiological findings over time, within the context of given indications and techniques.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10233,latent_10233,1741,0.003482,0.0021976628,4.2015166,Significant changes noted between current and prior radiology images.,"The examples generally emphasize comparisons with prior images, which chart the unchanged or minimal progression of certain pathological findings. High activations occur when there is significant or notable change in these findings, or when the presence of specific devices or tubes is emphasized.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+10234,latent_10234,1347,0.002694,0.0020731217,4.7779574,"Clear lungs with no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","The examples exhibiting higher activations consistently include the conclusion that the lungs are clear with no significant findings like focal consolidation, effusions, or pneumothorax. Despite differing reasons for imaging, the key pattern is the explicit mention of clear lungs with unremarkable findings, frequently emphasizing the absence of focal pathology in lung evaluations.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8526984126984127,0.855,0.784,0.98,100.0,100.0
+10235,latent_10235,1699,0.003398,0.0023816484,4.0083094,Comparison with previous imaging explicitly requested.,"Examples show prompts that explicitly direct the assistant to compare current imaging findings to prior imaging findings. High activation is associated with settings where previous imaging studies have been provided or mentioned for comparison, facilitating pattern evaluation over time, and assisting radiologists in identifying changes or stabilities.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10236,latent_10236,1402,0.002804,0.002247798,5.2386346,Identification and comparison of findings not significantly changed from prior imaging.,"The examples frequently describe changes in the size, position, or persistence of known findings, emphasizing comparisons with previous imaging reports. This indicates that the pattern involves reporting stable or minimally changed findings over time, confirmed through follow-up imaging comparisons.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4135810377962844,0.4221105527638191,0.3947368421052631,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+10237,latent_10237,1071,0.002142,0.0017936269,3.4191022,Cardiomediastinal silhouette and aortic condition within normal limits or unchanged.,"In these examples, the pattern revolves around describing the cardiac silhouette, cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, and the condition of the aorta (often highlighting elongation, tortuosity, or calcification), which typically remains within normal limits or unchanged, even as other pathologies are presented.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4404761904761904,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10238,latent_10238,835,0.00167,0.0012950317,4.9674706,Detailed comparisons between current and prior radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve inclusion of detailed comparisons between the current and prior radiological findings, particularly those that involve descriptions of significant or new clinical developments between the two sets of images. These comparisons are critical to assessing changes over time, which are important in monitoring patient conditions.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4534883720930232,0.39,100.0,100.0
+10239,latent_10239,4324,0.008648,0.003731676,3.0747683,Focus on hardware positioning and changes in medical imaging.,"Examples describe changes or interventions related to medical hardware, such as position adjustments of tubes or lines, stabilizing interventions, or no change in hardware positioning. The focus is on evaluating hardware in chest imaging, often inclusive of clinical communication about these changes. This pattern occurs when there is a need for follow-ups on medical hardware placements or conditions.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5949088544922607,0.595,0.5979381443298969,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10240,latent_10240,3302,0.006604,0.0030151007,2.3049057,Comparison to prior imaging results emphasizing unchanged or improving findings.,"The consistent feature in the highly activated examples is the improvement, stabilization, or comparison of findings over time using images that reference prior data. The language indicates a focus on longitudinal changes in patient imaging findings relative to previous studies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10241,latent_10241,754,0.001508,0.0013510556,5.2367496,Presence of significant changes or findings compared to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a change or significant finding in the radiological report compared to previous imaging studies. This includes descriptions of changes in lung or heart appearance, presence or absence of tubes, effusions, or pathologies such as pneumothorax or effusions, often with specific recommendations or adjustments.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4280391739408132,0.457286432160804,0.4181818181818181,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+10242,latent_10242,797,0.001594,0.001409991,4.106366,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change in findings.,"Examples exhibit a pattern of findings being directly compared to prior imaging to note any changes, or lack thereof, often related to certain conditions or surgical outcomes. These examples use similar terms and phrases to describe such observations, focused on stability or subtle variations in radiological findings over time.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5670525615435795,0.576530612244898,0.5503875968992248,0.7395833333333334,96.0,100.0
+10243,latent_10243,8782,0.017564,0.0063317306,1.3462884,Comparison to prior imaging for assessment of change.,"These examples consistently refer to comparing imaging findings to prior radiographs or mention providing descriptions based on changes from previous studies. They involve reevaluation or reassessment over time, highlighting a pattern of monitoring the progression or stability of findings using phrases like 'compared to prior' or 'unchanged'.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5143068313800021,0.54,0.5273972602739726,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10244,latent_10244,940,0.00188,0.0016977721,2.5407298,Higher activation for lack of prior image comparison.,"Examples with lower activation levels describe radiology studies that frequently emphasize the importance of previous imaging comparisons, but those with higher activation levels show a notable lack of prior comparison. The absence of comparative assessment leads to high activation, contrasting to typical practices of radiology where prior comparison is common for comprehensive assessment.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5270529935275081,0.5276381909547738,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,99.0
+10245,latent_10245,1220,0.00244,0.0019785918,3.8654137,Involves evaluation of medical tube/catheter changes on imaging.,"The examples that have high activation levels consistently revolve around descriptions where specific changes or interventions related to medical tubes or catheters (e.g., chest tubes, nasogastric tubes, Dobbhoff tubes) are noted compared to prior images. These include notations on re-positioning, placements, and changes related to these devices.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6995192307692308,0.7,0.717391304347826,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10246,latent_10246,4807,0.009614,0.003829286,3.946578,Detailed observations about tube placements or device adjustments.,"The examples with higher activations contain descriptions of specific devices or tubes, their positions or adjustments, or notable changes such as removal or stable positioning, reflecting detailed procedural or device-related observations. These details include positions of endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or comparisons to previous studies specifically focusing on devices.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5692307692307692,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10247,latent_10247,2006,0.004012,0.002100661,3.2811437,Detailed description of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently use detailed textual descriptions of image comparisons to note interval changes in clinical devices (e.g., endotracheal tube), cardiothoracic measurements, and parenchymal findings between current and prior imaging.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5340909090909091,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10248,latent_10248,1453,0.002906,0.0016319964,2.6339188,"Changes in findings relative to prior imaging study, assessing improvement or stability.","The pattern in these examples involves descriptions of findings relative to previous imaging studies, specifically noting stability or changes in state. The language often includes terms like 'unchanged,' 'compared to prior,' and focuses on whether conditions have improved, worsened, or remained stable.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10249,latent_10249,2217,0.004434,0.0023693664,3.054607,Emphasis on comparison between current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples that show high activation levels consistently include the simultaneous evaluation of current and prior images, using phrasing that focuses on comparing current findings against prior findings. This is a common approach in monitoring for any change in medical conditions, typically seen in radiology reports. Notably, phrases suggest evaluating differences or continuity in imaging features between examinations, influenced by clinical indications and history.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4087213599408721,0.44,0.4589041095890411,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10250,latent_10250,8120,0.01624,0.0060745548,2.0541825,Significant changes or updates in comparison to prior images.,"Higher activations are observed in examples involving comparison to prior images where explicit changes are noted or specific alterations in the condition are described such as device positions, new infiltrates, or status of existing lesions. This indicates a pattern where significant or noteworthy changes in comparison to prior studies contribute to higher activation values.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10251,latent_10251,11358,0.022716,0.008210889,1.162628,Radiological findings stable compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples exhibiting activation often include specific findings that have remained stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging studies, suggesting the importance of stability or lack of interval change in these descriptions. The focus is on documenting ongoing conditions without acute developments.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10252,latent_10252,6304,0.012608,0.004908581,2.949237,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples often involve descriptions comparing recent imaging with prior images, but typically show stable or unchanged findings rather than specific evidence of new abnormalities or significant clinical change. This suggests that the pattern sought is not specific to significant clinical events but rather involves consistent reviews with stable comparisons.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4941176470588235,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10253,latent_10253,3678,0.007356,0.0030805315,2.3534062,Comparison of findings to prior images highlighting stability or changes.,"These examples show findings on current images described in direct comparison to previous images, with either stable findings or specific changes highlighted, indicating the necessity of comparing a sequence of images to assess progression or stasis of medical conditions, typical in follow-up situations, especially related to pulmonary conditions or post-operative evaluations.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4292395545334745,0.4422110552763819,0.4538461538461538,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+10254,latent_10254,1236,0.002472,0.0016080529,3.9379535,Detailed comparison of current radiological findings to prior images.,"The highly activated examples all involve detailed descriptions of changes seen in current radiographic images, often using language that explicitly describes comparisons to prior studies, with particular note on findings such as nodule visibility, effusion, or pneumothorax. The variance in activation levels seems to be aligned with the specificity and detail in describing these changes or stability in medical findings when compared to prior images.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4859813084112149,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10255,latent_10255,8140,0.01628,0.006173877,1.867649,Significant interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples that describe significant interval changes observed in imaging findings when compared to prior images. These changes often indicate a worsening or improvement in a patient's condition, which appears to be the key factor the model is activating on.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10256,latent_10256,1337,0.002674,0.0017198108,2.6963646,Comparison of findings with prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings by comparing current imaging with prior studies over time, focusing both on changes and the stability of previously noted conditions. They include language indicating this evaluation, such as 'compared to previous', 'no change', 'unchanged from prior', emphasizing the comparative assessment of conditions.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.4424778761061947,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10257,latent_10257,1548,0.003096,0.0025280074,6.9971876,Comparative analysis showing interval changes in imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe intervals or changes over time in radiological findings, often associated with patient management or treatment progress. They're structured to illustrate the comparative analysis of radiographs over time, documenting stability, resolution, or progression of findings like opacities, pneumothorax, etc. This reflects a pattern of documenting temporal changes in imaging studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10258,latent_10258,4303,0.008606,0.004525852,2.3850334,Comparison to prior imaging studies detailing stability or change.,"The explanation identifies references to comparison with prior imaging studies as the key element that leads to higher activation scores. The description of changes or lack thereof between current and previous imaging is a central point in these radiological interpretations, focusing on stability or progression of findings and adjustments in patient management or monitoring devices.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10259,latent_10259,3461,0.006922,0.0034821795,3.421629,Mentions of tube or line placement/removal on imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activations frequently mention the placement, removal, or unchanged status of tubes, catheters, or drains. These changes or comparisons specific to medical tubes and devices on chest radiographs or images are consistent in reports with elevated activation levels.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7688383838383839,0.7688442211055276,0.7623762376237624,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+10260,latent_10260,9227,0.018454,0.006801886,1.736071,Inclusion of explicit patient history and indications of symptoms in radiology reports.,"The pattern observed is a presence of radiological reports that include specific history and indications of symptomatic presentations in patients, highlighted in the `HISTORY`, `INDICATION`, or `FINDINGS` sections. These detailed history indications correlate with the higher activation examples, signaling the model's focus on understanding symptom-driven evaluations.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4393716521883933,0.495,0.4969325153374233,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10261,latent_10261,974,0.001948,0.001573314,4.221287,"Consistent format for describing findings in comparison to prior images, focusing on interval changes and stable findings.","The examples show descriptions following the same template that involves comparing current and prior radiography images, with frequent noting of stable findings or interval changes. This repeated structure highlights the ongoing evaluation and detailed comparison across a series of prior and current images.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5296225695768204,0.5326633165829145,0.5357142857142857,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+10262,latent_10262,1205,0.00241,0.0013263546,2.6389742,Comparison or assessment of interval change in radiology studies.,"High activation levels correspond to examples where some form of comparison or interval change assessment is explicitly mentioned, whether it's about interval change, stability, or resolution of findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10263,latent_10263,5026,0.010052,0.0038787893,2.0948071,Changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature changes in findings or conditions when compared to prior imaging studies, particularly emphasizing improvements, deteriorations, or stability over time. They often mention specific comparisons to previous imaging dates, indicating important diagnostic evaluations based on historical data.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5648148148148148,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10264,latent_10264,4301,0.008602,0.0035790573,2.1926956,Comparative analysis assessing changes from prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently provide an overview or summary by describing findings as compared to previous studies and addressing observed changes or confirming stability, even in the absence of comparison details. They are focused on evaluating the data with respect to prior imaging, capturing longitudinal assessment crucial in radiology for tracking patient conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10265,latent_10265,689,0.001378,0.0013191521,4.1355495,Comparison with prior imaging for interval change or stability.,"The examples consistently involve requests to evaluate radiological findings in comparison to prior images, often specifically looking for changes or stability in conditions like pneumonia, pleural effusion, nodules, or cardiopulmonary abnormalities. These comparisons, regardless of specific findings, are a central focus and reflect a common practice in analyzing radiological data.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4502913597775608,0.4510869565217391,0.4205607476635514,0.5357142857142857,84.0,100.0
+10266,latent_10266,1288,0.002576,0.0021246274,3.1199024,Changes in cardiothoracic conditions detected when comparing with prior images.,"The data indicates that high activation levels correlate with changes or progression in specific conditions when compared with prior images. Mentions of mild enlargement of the cardiac silhouette, changes in bilateral pleural effusions, or comparisons indicating conditions like pulmonary edema or atelectasis influence the activation, especially when they differ from previous findings.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7588182092252035,0.76,0.7280701754385965,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10267,latent_10267,8800,0.0176,0.009575821,2.9938016,Focus on interval changes or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe interval changes or stability in the imaging findings compared to prior studies. This suggests the pattern involves making comparisons to note changes over time, where stability or specific changes in pathology are highlighted.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6073542600896862,0.6130653266331658,0.5934959349593496,0.73,100.0,99.0
+10268,latent_10268,575,0.00115,0.001540613,4.575568,High activation with specific findings without detailed prior study comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe specific findings without comparison studies, particularly focusing on details observed in both PA and lateral views, while examples with lower activation levels often reference detailed comparisons or do not provide new findings.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.421744719926538,0.4739884393063583,0.3125,0.2054794520547945,73.0,100.0
+10269,latent_10269,3887,0.007774,0.0029383472,1.8610888,Comparison findings highlight stability or change.,"Highly activated examples focus on comparing current findings to prior imaging, particularly emphasizing the stability or change in the medical situation over time.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10270,latent_10270,2382,0.004764,0.0027419017,5.667316,Emphasis on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently prompt the model to provide a comparison between current findings and prior imaging, emphasizing the importance of identifying changes from previous findings, especially in relation to patient history or clinical indications.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5470085470085471,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10271,latent_10271,941,0.001882,0.0017390352,4.0974216,Task of comparing current and prior images in radiology.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature a prompt to compare a current and prior image, implying that the task involves identifying and describing differences or similarities between sequential imaging studies. This specific task is frequently used in radiology to assess changes in a patient's condition over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4321783952148625,0.485,0.4906832298136646,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10272,latent_10272,2090,0.00418,0.0025815275,3.4040122,Explicit comparison to prior images in radiology reports.,"These examples consistently describe and emphasize comparison of findings with previous imaging studies or reports. The consistent element is the act of radiological evaluation involving direct comparison to prior studies, using phrases like 'unchanged', 'compared with', and specific references to past images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4230185241421196,0.43,0.4426229508196721,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10273,latent_10273,1627,0.003254,0.0018612792,4.1362348,Pulmonary vascular congestion and mild edema.,"Highly representative samples often include detailed patterns of pulmonary vascular congestion and edema, which are key indicators of potential acute cardiopulmonary conditions. This pattern is characterized by findings that illustrate distinctions from previous radiographs, particularly concerning pulmonary vascular congestion and edema without major effusions or other acute features.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6635453244895305,0.6733668341708543,0.7575757575757576,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+10274,latent_10274,2034,0.004068,0.0023063773,2.8880155,Findings are compared to prior imaging with emphasis on changes or stability.,"Activations are high when current and prior images are explicitly present and used for comparison, particularly for evaluating changes (or lack thereof) in specific lesions or findings (e.g., infiltrates, opacities, tube placements). Lower activations are noted when explicit prior comparisons are missing or focus is on evaluation without changes.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4538941356246398,0.455,0.4587155963302752,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10275,latent_10275,11016,0.022032,0.008113268,1.737374,"Findings compared with prior imaging, often with unspecified or absent technique details.","The higher activation examples frequently include references to the assessment or comparison of radiological changes over time or with previous imaging, often in context where specific techniques like PA or lateral views are absent or unspecified. This indicates a focus on analysis without detailed procedural context or new imaging context provided.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5132204889921451,0.56,0.5370370370370371,0.87,100.0,100.0
+10276,latent_10276,1259,0.002518,0.0012682257,2.957627,Comparison in the context of medical device changes or clinical condition improvement.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe changes in clinical conditions or devices, such as improvements or stabilization, as evident in terms like 'unchanged moderate', 'unchanged stable', or 'improvement' related to medical devices or conditions. The activation is linked to noting such significant clinical context changes along with detailed technical or clinical observations.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.40625,0.43,0.3833333333333333,0.23,100.0,100.0
+10277,latent_10277,1170,0.00234,0.0017443778,5.0433173,"Descriptions of interval changes over time, including improvement or regression.","These examples often involve a description of changes over time, particularly improvement or regression of findings observed in relation to the prior study. Expressions such as 'improved', 'decreased', 'resolved', or similar are used to indicate such interval changes.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6874684948079444,0.69,0.6610169491525424,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10278,latent_10278,1148,0.002296,0.0016426424,2.3434322,Use of both frontal and lateral chest images.,Examples with high activation predominantly specify the presence of both a frontal and lateral radiograph of the chest. This suggests that the pattern of interest involves a comprehensive imaging approach with multiple views providing detailed assessment.,0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10279,latent_10279,2079,0.004158,0.0022395568,4.587523,Emphasis on stability or change of medical equipment or devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize descriptions of interval changes or stable conditions over time, often noting particular attention to lines, tubes, or devices in the body, and their status as unchanged, inserted, or repositioned. This pattern involves detailed comparisons alongside observations of stability or alterations in medical equipment positioning.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10280,latent_10280,1196,0.002392,0.0015936575,3.129309,Tortuosity or elongation of the thoracic aorta and bilateral chest opacities.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe radiological findings such as tortuosity or elongation of the thoracic aorta, diffuse haze or opacities suggestive of specific conditions (often with descriptors like increased interstitial markings or bilateral opacities). These features are highlighted irrespective of the presence of other pathologies or devices and often in comparison to prior studies.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.6136363636363636,0.27,100.0,100.0
+10281,latent_10281,1205,0.00241,0.001523919,3.617577,Positioning of medical devices or tubes within the chest.,"These examples describe various medical devices or tubes (e.g., Dobbhoff tube, intra-aortic balloon pump, PICC) seen within the chest, where there are recommendations for positional adjustments or confirmations of positions within anatomical landmarks, such as bronchus, atrium, or venous structures.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10282,latent_10282,4975,0.00995,0.003973781,3.1802392,Detailed comparison with prior images for specific findings.,"The samples with higher activation levels often include a statement of comparison between the current and prior imaging, specifically noting changes in opacities, pneumothorax, or device placements. These are detailed observations about changes compared to previous images, showcasing the model's sensitivity to descriptions of changes over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5584102769971899,0.56,0.5681818181818182,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10283,latent_10283,906,0.001812,0.001579535,2.5238912,Emphasis on comparing current imaging to prior images/reports for stability or change.,"These examples focus heavily on the presence of descriptions that indicate stability or change in findings over time based on prior images/reports. Descriptions like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no significant change', and explicit comparisons are central to these activations, emphasizing monitoring over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4249131944444444,0.47,0.4807692307692308,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10284,latent_10284,953,0.001906,0.0015145417,3.888989,Allowance for variations in imaging technique or positioning in report descriptions.,"These examples primarily demonstrate that descriptions of findings often include terms like 'allowing for differences in technique' or mention limitations due to things like 'patient rotation' or 'low lung volumes'. It indicates an attempt by radiologists to account for potential variability in image interpretation. This pattern is observed even when lung volumes or cardiac silhouettes change slightly, placing emphasis on individual differences in imaging technique that can affect diagnostic impressions.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6451612903225806,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10285,latent_10285,873,0.001746,0.0015449082,2.3993223,Description includes comparison to previous images.,"These examples emphasize the comparison between current and prior images, using linguistic markers such as 'compared to', 'unchanged from', or specific mentions of previous studies. This pattern highlights the importance of temporal comparison in medical imaging reports.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5157232704402516,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10286,latent_10286,1254,0.002508,0.0017750104,3.9903805,Stability or change of medical device/catheter positioning compared to prior.,"The key distinguishing factor appears to be the stability or change in status or positioning of medical devices, diagnostic catheters, tubes, etc., highlighted explicitly in the reports. These activations are high in narrations comparing stable and supported positioning or change of these supportive devices from previous studies, emphasizing patient management perspectives.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.475,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10287,latent_10287,859,0.001718,0.0012707491,2.6750574,Emphasis on stability or minor changes compared to prior studies.,"These examples frequently describe stability, slight changes, or direct comparison regarding cardiomediastinal or pulmonary findings, often using terms like ""unchanged,"" ""persistent,"" or ""compared to prior,"" indicating focus on comparisons with previous states without significant worsening or new acute findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.46,0.46,0.46,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10288,latent_10288,4497,0.008994,0.0036339634,2.1019726,"Explicit comparison with prior findings, focusing on changes or stability of medical conditions.","The examples show a pattern where activation levels are higher when comparisons with prior images are emphasized or explicitly detailed, especially when noting changes in medical condition (e.g., no change, resolved, worsened). Additionally, examples that signal changes or continuity in the context of potential pathologies demonstrate higher activation.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5295766189570613,0.53,0.5283018867924528,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10289,latent_10289,1014,0.002028,0.0018195043,5.600124,Evaluation and comparison of pleural effusions in radiology reports.,"The examples provided show patterns related to the evaluation of pleural effusions, particularly noting whether there are new or stable findings in bilateral pleural effusions or any associated atelectasis or consolidation. Reports tend to differentiate between left and right effusions and might mention additional signs like cardiac silhouette size and stability.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7244419950399559,0.725,0.7472527472527473,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10290,latent_10290,5017,0.010034,0.0038408067,1.9691068,Focus on tube and line positioning in radiology reports.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on ensuring the correct placement of tubes and lines in radiological images, suggesting an emphasis on device positioning rather than the underlying pathological findings. This indicates that accurate monitoring of line and tube position is crucial for patient management in the dataset.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.6075949367088608,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10291,latent_10291,712,0.001424,0.0015618065,2.8421307,Importance of interval change or stability in radiological reports.,"Examples with non-zero activation consistently compare current radiological findings with previous imaging reports, highlighting the presence of changes or stability across intervals. This pattern emphasizes the clinical importance of evaluating changes over time to assess stability or progression of conditions.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.60508916048888,0.6137566137566137,0.5625,0.8089887640449438,89.0,100.0
+10292,latent_10292,820,0.00164,0.0014891712,3.5948894,Mild enlargement of the cardiac silhouette.,"The pattern shows a noteworthy emphasis on evaluating heart size, specifically mentioning 'mildly enlarged' or similar terms, across examples with activations greater than zero. These descriptions often accompany assessments of cardiomediastinal silhouette and other thoracic findings, highlighting heart enlargement as a critical observation.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6656239887822242,0.69,0.9130434782608696,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10293,latent_10293,817,0.001634,0.0014356006,3.477526,Inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images plus prior frontal images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve prompting the model with both current frontal and lateral images as well as prior frontal images, suggesting that the inclusion of multiple image perspectives (frontal and lateral) along with historical images strongly activates the pattern recognition in this context.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6100164203612479,0.62,0.5909090909090909,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10294,latent_10294,4118,0.008236,0.0035673585,3.115223,Assessment of interval change against prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often refer explicitly to findings being assessed against prior images, highlighting changes like stability, improvement, or worsening. This assessment of interval change between current and previous images is a core aspect of radiology interpretations focused on monitoring pathologies over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5075757575757576,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10295,latent_10295,5373,0.010746,0.004133072,2.4725382,Comparison to prior images and associated changes in patient condition or management.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize the presence of notable indications or changes in patient management or conditions (e.g., catheter placements, new positioning of tubes, or changes in lung conditions like atelectasis) that arise when comparing current and prior images. They specifically call attention to changes with respect to previous examinations, suggesting an importance placed on comparison to prior images and subsequent management adjustments.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.53125,0.51,100.0,100.0
+10296,latent_10296,2376,0.004752,0.0022002673,2.9008625,Describes significant interval change compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves a significant or interval change in the findings when comparing the current image to the prior, notably involving opacities, effusions, or other new developments since the previous study. This reflects radiological findings emphasizing changes over time, often related to disease progression or response to treatment.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5185483870967742,0.5477386934673367,0.6,0.3,100.0,99.0
+10297,latent_10297,1953,0.003906,0.0020328283,2.8748815,Utilization of multiple imaging views with comparison to prior studies.,"The examples that exhibit activation refer to multiple views (frontal and lateral) and utilize previous imaging studies for detailed comparison. This pattern highlights how radiology reports frequently use prior studies as a basis for evaluating current findings, especially when the same imaging techniques and angles are implemented.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10298,latent_10298,1330,0.00266,0.0020241637,3.951961,Comparison of changes in medical devices between current and prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize findings related to subsequent imaging exams that highlight changes in medical devices, particularly those related to cardiovascular or respiratory support, such as PICC lines, tubes, and stents, observed through comparative analysis. The pattern indicates evaluations of device placement or state by comparing with prior imaging studies.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.3333333333333333,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4390243902439024,0.18,100.0,100.0
+10299,latent_10299,1201,0.002402,0.0021029972,4.429549,Details of medical device placement and its adjustment compared to prior image.,"The pattern of focus in these examples involves evaluating specific changes in the chest or medical devices (like tubes or catheters) compared to prior imaging, especially under conditions that are acute or involve rapid evaluation (e.g., post-operative or post-intubation scenarios). There is often mention of acute processes, small adjustments needed, or monitoring of known conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5636363636363636,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10300,latent_10300,846,0.001692,0.0010383351,4.085165,Explicit comparison of findings in the current and prior images.,"The activation pattern shows a higher activation level when there is a comparison made with prior imaging reports and explicit descriptions of the assignment to provide or analyze these findings. Repeated references to various comparisons are central to the pattern, potentially also linked with resolving, unchanged, or newly identified pathologies from previous reports.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4349858746468661,0.435,0.4356435643564356,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10301,latent_10301,1006,0.002012,0.0014138304,2.5575984,Unchanged positioning of medical devices or tubes in chest evaluations.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus primarily on visualizing stable, unchanged aspects or minimal changes of key medical lines and tubes (like PICC lines, tracheostomy tubes) in the chest across different imaging studies. The emphasis is often on the unchanged position or condition of such medical devices compared to prior images.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.5208333333333334,0.25,100.0,100.0
+10302,latent_10302,681,0.001362,0.0014415537,3.7537153,Evaluation or comparison indicating new changes or concerning cardiac/vascular findings.,"Examples assigned high activation levels involve evaluation or comparison of diagnostic images concerning cardiac or vascular abnormalities. Activation is particularly high when these are associated with new or concerning changes suggesting monitoring or further evaluation for potential progression of disease, atypical findings, or clinical intervention.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3535723806984804,0.4207650273224044,0.2195121951219512,0.108433734939759,83.0,100.0
+10303,latent_10303,565,0.00113,0.0011589634,4.50638,Pulmonary vascular redistribution indicating fluid overload or heart failure.,"Highly activated examples consistently identify pulmonary vascular redistribution in association with changes such as increased cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or pulmonary edema, which suggest fluid overload or heart failure despite other radiographic findings. The pattern emphasizes the vascular redistribution as a key finding.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5076219512195123,0.6023391812865497,0.56,0.1971830985915492,71.0,100.0
+10304,latent_10304,7759,0.015518,0.005731549,1.456039,Detailed comparison of interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on identifying interval changes when comparing current to prior images. This implies the importance lies in providing a detailed and specific narrative of what has changed between imaging studies, often highlighting improved or worsened conditions, newly appearing findings, or stability of prior noted conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5813953488372093,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10305,latent_10305,1977,0.003954,0.0026242093,3.8508463,Comparisons of imaging findings to prior studies for changes over time.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve analysis of the current imaging findings in explicit comparison to previous exams, often describing stability, improvement, or progression of lesions or abnormalities. This pattern appears to reflect a focus on identifying changes over time based on past images.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10306,latent_10306,2122,0.004244,0.0023946185,2.4952927,Instructions to describe findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include instructions to compare a current image with previous or prior images, explicitly including the task of analyzing interval changes. This process of comparison appears to be the main factor contributing to the activation level, as it potentially indicates a task focused on description of changes over time.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10307,latent_10307,821,0.001642,0.0010672262,5.273781,Comparison with prior images focusing on findings.,"Higher activation levels are associated with instances where the prior imaging study is incorporated into the comparison, often with explicit references to findings, such as changes or stable appearances between studies. The use of ""compared to previous study"" is a common linguistic pattern in such reports, aiding in assessing changes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4658332694225017,0.4723618090452261,0.4793388429752066,0.58,100.0,99.0
+10308,latent_10308,2488,0.004976,0.0024073685,3.8613591,Unchanged findings from prior examination with focus on stability.,"The pattern in these examples is the reference to unchanged findings compared to a prior examination or imaging, with a focus on stability or resolution of previous findings. Reporting unchanged aspects is common in radiology to reassure the reader, even while noting other distinct differences or changes.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4727272727272727,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10309,latent_10309,590,0.00118,0.0010566965,2.9835997,Explicit mention of normal heart size.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention the evaluation of heart size, particularly emphasizing that the heart size is within normal limits. This suggests a pattern where the model tends to activate strongly when the report explicitly states normal heart size, often in the context of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation not being present.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.660570836264021,0.6936416184971098,0.717391304347826,0.4520547945205479,73.0,100.0
+10310,latent_10310,1042,0.002084,0.0014590259,4.0043035,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"From the dataset, the examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight findings related to interval changes such as minor or significant variations in lung opacity, effusion, or tube placement compared to prior images. This reflects a focus on evaluating radiological findings for changes over time, particularly new or evolving issues that may suggest an acute process or worsening condition, which are crucial clinical observations during image interpretation.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.389490148591034,0.395,0.4117647058823529,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10311,latent_10311,6591,0.013182,0.0049105897,1.7309023,Comparison reveals stable or unchanged conditions or devices.,"Examples with notable activation levels compare radiological findings with prior studies, indicating status changes such as stability, improvement, or notable absence of changes. These reports often highlight unaltered conditions or device placements, signaling a lack of progression in certain medical conditions or maintaining medical device integrity as discussed in the review or as expected against previous images.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10312,latent_10312,911,0.001822,0.0016593296,2.7702088,"Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, often unchanged.","Examples with high activation levels emphasize normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, often highlighting their unchanged status in comparison to prior imaging. This demonstrates the model's focus on stability and absence of significant change, particularly with the heart and mediastinum, as key indicators.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4839550088930083,0.485,0.4835164835164835,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10313,latent_10313,767,0.001534,0.0014975234,4.084167,Detailed descriptions of line/tube placements or monitoring in chest imaging.,"The pattern detectable here relates to the detailed descriptions of lines, tubes, and other installations in chest exams, and either confirmation of their proper placement or absence of complications, often in the context of acute medical indications or critical care monitoring, reflected by high activation levels.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.420998003992016,0.4336734693877551,0.3943661971830985,0.2916666666666667,96.0,100.0
+10314,latent_10314,1252,0.002504,0.0017833996,4.2630005,Unchanged cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"The presence of unchanged or stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, or normal heart size is commonly noted in these findings. These reports are typical in medical imaging where the heart and surrounding structures are evaluated but show no change or significant issues from previous images.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6147592245153221,0.615,0.6210526315789474,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10315,latent_10315,7242,0.014484,0.0054333047,1.8090233,Significant lung pathologies or device position changes.,"In the sampled reports, high activation levels correlate with findings of anatomical and positional issues in devices or pathological features described in the lungs, such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or masses. The presence of new or changing features such as air-fluid levels, cavitating masses, pneumothorax, and other pulmonary pathology tend to have higher activation, indicating a focus on significant changes or anomalies in the lungs rather than standard descriptions of cardiac and mediastinal features.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5996396757081373,0.6,0.5943396226415094,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10316,latent_10316,2457,0.004914,0.0026171203,3.023549,Reports highlight notable change or significant comparison from prior study.,"The examples that bear high activation often mention changes or comparisons from previous studies. While the examples follow the common pattern of radiological comparison, those with a specific mention of improved or significantly changed findings from prior reports highlight a pattern where the finding itself reflects a notable change, such as resolution or exacerbation of a condition, rather than mere similarity or stable findings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.469150641025641,0.47,0.4673913043478261,0.43,100.0,100.0
+10317,latent_10317,717,0.001434,0.0014141325,4.645935,Unchanged position of monitoring and support devices across comparisons.,"The analysis highlights minimal interval changes, particularly emphasizing the consistency or lack of significant change in monitoring and support devices across images. Stability of these devices is frequently noted as a comparative metric in follow-up imaging, suggesting that the activation pattern is driven by recognition of constant device positioning as a stable reference point in serial imaging comparisons.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.829530022633471,0.8298969072164949,0.8351648351648352,0.8085106382978723,94.0,100.0
+10318,latent_10318,5235,0.01047,0.004113554,2.0426114,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples frequently discuss findings that are unchanged or stable when compared to prior imaging. This suggests a pattern of detecting no new or acute abnormalities, which is common in follow-up studies to ensure conditions remain persistent and do not deteriorate.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10319,latent_10319,2373,0.004746,0.0022428269,2.5470605,Reports of unchanged or stable findings compared to prior exams.,"The highly activated samples refer to unchanged or stable findings across multiple imaging studies, where there is no significant change or worsening in the findings from previous exams. This pattern involves explicitly stating that findings are unchanged or that there is a lack of significant interval change.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5068493150684932,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10320,latent_10320,7819,0.015638,0.005916698,2.5340707,Comparison indicating interval changes in imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve imaging procedures where the findings are noted specifically in comparison to prior images, indicating an interval change or stability. These reports emphasize changes or lack thereof over time, which is a common pattern in radiology reports when evaluating progression or resolution of a condition.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5591397849462365,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10321,latent_10321,1150,0.0023,0.0016334775,3.3267927,Stability or lack of significant change in imaging findings over time.,"The examples with higher activations frequently involve a reduction, lack of significant change, or comparison of findings between images despite various diagnoses or interventions being described. These inputs emphasize notable changes or stabilities in findings against prior examinations, often touching on stability or minor changes in conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5394736842105263,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10322,latent_10322,2930,0.00586,0.002959945,2.6659055,Precise assessment of tube placement and positioning in radiological imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe the placement status of tubes (e.g., NG tubes, ET tubes) in relation to specific anatomical landmarks or optimal positions. The focus is on precise placement details and necessary adjustments for better positioning, which are typical points of interest in radiological evaluations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5486814345991562,0.5678391959798995,0.6101694915254238,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+10323,latent_10323,4630,0.00926,0.0042555444,3.1191998,Focus on stability or mild changes in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern identified from these examples indicates that references to findings in comparison with prior images about stability or change in specific conditions lead to activation. Stable conditions or minor changes tend to trigger the pattern, evidenced by continually used terms describing unchanged states, implicating emphasis on longitudinal stability.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.6171875,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10324,latent_10324,3327,0.006654,0.0028338009,2.5770748,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations involve comparing a current finding to a prior one, particularly noting changes or stability over time in the radiological findings. This is evident in their detailed description of changes or stability in lung opacities, effusions, cardiomegaly, or the position and condition of tubes and catheters in relation to prior images.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10325,latent_10325,1309,0.002618,0.0018835155,2.9687166,Direct comparison of current and prior imaging to note changes.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe observations where current imaging is directly compared with previous imaging reports. The consistent recognition and noting of changes or stability over time in these reports suggest that the pattern involves the explicit evaluation of imaging changes through time.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10326,latent_10326,5889,0.011778,0.004481921,1.7102822,Interval findings and changes since previous imaging.,"Examples that show high activation levels consistently involve comparison of current and prior imaging with explicit mention of intervals like increases, decreases, significant interval findings, or mentioned intervals and interval changes since previous examinations. These focus on detecting changes or lack thereof between reports.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.5826771653543307,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10327,latent_10327,10763,0.021526,0.00790958,1.7082267,Cross-reference findings with multiple imaging modalities.,"High activation levels are seen in examples where explicit comparison to at least two imaging modalities (e.g., CT, multiple prior radiographs) is made, noting changes or stability across images. This pattern emphasizes cross-referencing findings with various imaging studies to provide a comprehensive evaluation.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5263157894736842,0.3,100.0,100.0
+10328,latent_10328,3430,0.00686,0.0045479415,4.892156,"Dilated, tortuous thoracic aorta reference in findings.","Three of the examples show references to thoracic aorta tortuosity and dilation as a significant finding across various radiological reports. This specificity is acknowledged as an indicator of cardiovascular anomalies or hypertension, which need further evaluation.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,1.0,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3784880771182141,0.51,0.625,0.05,100.0,100.0
+10329,latent_10329,1090,0.00218,0.0018873791,4.809181,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation all involve a focus on describing changes or stasis in imaging findings by comparing current images to previous ones. This is a common approach in interpreting follow-up radiographs, emphasizing changes such as resolution of previous conditions, new developments, or unchanged observations in complex cases.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10330,latent_10330,3231,0.006462,0.0030305744,2.4021394,Integration of historical imaging context with prior report details.,"Examples with higher activation levels include reminders or indications of specific historical context or findings directly from the prior report, indicated by phrases like ""PRIOR_REPORT"" or direct references to prior radiological findings. These patterns suggest prioritization of how the current findings relate to previous historical data.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10331,latent_10331,870,0.00174,0.0014636894,4.3674364,Normal cardiac silhouette combined with no acute significant findings.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently describe normal heart size or silhouette and combine it with an evaluation or lack of acute findings like effusion, pneumothorax, or pneumonic consolidation. These reports do not contain significant pathological findings outside of normal heart size.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6176173139158576,0.6180904522613065,0.6304347826086957,0.58,100.0,99.0
+10332,latent_10332,10144,0.020288,0.0073538,1.426236,Comparison indicating stability or minimal change in findings from prior imaging.,Most examples describe or request evaluation of findings in the given image that influence the overall impression when compared to prior imaging but note the persistent non-change in significant findings. They often discuss 'unchanged' characteristics or minor changes alongside comparative analytics.,0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4964574898785425,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.45,100.0,99.0
+10333,latent_10333,2623,0.005246,0.0028031878,2.5556073,Expressions emphasizing image comparison and change detection.,"Cases with high activations involve comparing current radiology images with previous ones, consistently asking for descriptions that note differences or similarities. Low activations often lack specifics on previous comparisons or focus on unchanging findings.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10334,latent_10334,1060,0.00212,0.0017116,3.4514143,Focus on changes or positions of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently reference positions or changes in the placement of medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) or observe stability or interval changes compared to prior images. This pattern highlights the emphasis on changes related to device positioning or stability over time in these radiology reports.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10335,latent_10335,1994,0.003988,0.0028224622,5.0053635,Stable cardiomegaly compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on reports that explicitly compare current imaging findings with prior images to highlight consistent, stable, or unchanged conditions regarding cardiomegaly. This pattern highlights reports where previous evidence of cardiomegaly remains unchanged in subsequent studies.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.525,0.21,100.0,100.0
+10336,latent_10336,5259,0.010518,0.0039238413,2.1979332,Comparison with prior imaging and detailed report findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, specifically when there's an explicit mention of a detailed report and findings in the context of previous imaging indicated in the generated text. This suggests an emphasis on detecting changes, stability, or evolving pathologies over time through comparison.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10337,latent_10337,555,0.00111,0.0014785388,5.2866106,Requests for findings comparison with prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently involve direct comparison of current and prior imaging studies to assess changes or stability in findings. The inclusion or request for a description based on these comparisons, such as 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,' is the distinctive characteristic of these samples.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4154717392093513,0.4156626506024096,0.3402061855670103,0.5,66.0,100.0
+10338,latent_10338,597,0.001194,0.0012901672,3.1145735,Detailed interval changes noted in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples prominently feature the need to directly compare current and prior imaging studies, often noting interval changes in findings. There are clear directions or implications to assess progression or stability. This frequent comparison and assessment of change is crucial in medical imaging for tracking disease progression or response to treatment.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4457347972972973,0.4857142857142857,0.3584905660377358,0.2533333333333333,75.0,100.0
+10339,latent_10339,385,0.00077,0.0010405121,3.7655385,Comparison and description of findings to prior images indicating change or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels often contain detailed descriptions and comparisons of current and prior imaging findings to evaluate for changes or stability. These descriptions are integral to assessing the progression or resolution of a condition, especially in cases involving known abnormalities or potential new findings.",0.5619047619047619,0.5652173913043478,0.5172413793103449,0.7142857142857143,21.0,25.0,0.5206349206349207,0.5231788079470199,0.3820224719101123,0.6666666666666666,51.0,100.0
+10340,latent_10340,611,0.001222,0.001134622,5.570032,Pulmonary hypertension or related vascular features on chest imaging.,"The highly representative examples involve pulmonary hypertension, edema, or related pulmonary vascular features in the context of chest imaging. Terms like 'enlarged pulmonary artery', 'pulmonary arterial hypertension', 'bibasilar atelectasis', and 'pulmonary edema' occur frequently in the high activation examples. This suggests a pattern focused on pulmonary vasculature or hypertension.",0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.548469387755102,0.6384180790960452,0.8095238095238095,0.2207792207792207,77.0,100.0
+10341,latent_10341,781,0.001562,0.0014670322,3.5612361,Low lung volumes affecting interpretation of other structures.,The examples with high activation frequently describe low lung volumes and related effects such as bronchovascular crowding or exaggeration of cardiac silhouette and other structures. This recurring observation emphasizes the importance of evaluating lung volumes and their influence on other radiological features.,0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6357586901322125,0.6614583333333334,0.7755102040816326,0.4130434782608695,92.0,100.0
+10342,latent_10342,1021,0.002042,0.0016297683,2.8197074,High activation correlates with comparative analysis in radiological findings.,"Activation levels are higher in examples where comparative analysis of the chest images, particularly those indicating some sort of change or stability in the radiological findings, are presented. Phrases that describe findings in comparison to previous images or studies, such as 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', or 'interval change', tend to have higher activation levels, supporting a pattern of focusing on describing continuity or change in patient condition over time.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5511165974638088,0.6,0.5602409638554217,0.93,100.0,100.0
+10343,latent_10343,694,0.001388,0.0013163685,3.5803313,Explicit detailed comparisons to prior images showing stability or change.,"Higher activation levels correspond to examples where findings explicitly describe changes, differences, or additions in the lung, heart, or other thoracic structures compared to prior images, emphasizing stability and clear annotations of no new findings or relevant changes. This suggests attention to stability or explicit detailed comparisons to prior states.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.43,0.431578947368421,0.4,0.4,90.0,100.0
+10344,latent_10344,7475,0.01495,0.005430388,1.3658714,Emphasis on comparisons with prior imaging or reports for assessment.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently use any available prior radiographs for comparison and describe findings in relation to documented changes from these comparisons. This pattern shows how assessments are made relative to previous states, assessing stability or change, particularly when prior images or reports were explicitly referenced.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4370404411764705,0.51,0.5058139534883721,0.87,100.0,100.0
+10345,latent_10345,781,0.001562,0.00166261,4.775838,Reports making comparisons to prior images with focus on interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels involved comparisons with prior imaging studies, and frequent references to observed changes between examinations, mostly within the context of assessment for lung pathologies or cardiac conditions. They contained phrases noting intervals of change, or lack thereof, and referred specifically to clinical contexts such as pneumonia or cardiopulmonary complications.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5029152613276858,0.5051020408163265,0.495575221238938,0.5833333333333334,96.0,100.0
+10346,latent_10346,12745,0.02549,0.009423365,1.6920153,Consistent positioning of medical devices/tubes in imaging across studies.,"Examples with activation levels above 0 focus on the presence of medical devices or tubes, reporting their positions consistently across images, and noting changes or lack thereof. This often includes comparing current and previous studies specifically concerning these devices and tubes, contrasting normal findings elsewhere.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10347,latent_10347,601,0.001202,0.0011964915,3.3775516,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, emphasizing unchanged or stable findings.","Examples with high activation often mention findings that remain unchanged or stable when compared to prior imaging. Descriptive phrases like 'compared with the previous radiograph' or 'no significant interval change' highlight the stability of conditions over time, contrasting with acute changes or new findings that are absent in these cases.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.588631156930126,0.5976331360946746,0.5066666666666667,0.5507246376811594,69.0,100.0
+10348,latent_10348,1109,0.002218,0.002053426,4.4517937,Clear lungs without focal pulmonary pathology.,"Examples with high activation consistently describe normal lung findings without any abnormalities such as opacities, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax. The reports specifically mention that the lungs are clear or that there is no sign of pneumonia or similar pathologies, emphasizing an overall clean chest radiograph.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6222222222222222,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10349,latent_10349,1075,0.00215,0.0014885723,2.9699671,Explicit image comparison and change analysis.,"The key difference in activation is the presence of explicit comparisons between current and prior images. Those examples with activation levels greater than 0 contain explicit text suggesting a comparison with previous imaging, often describing stability or changes relative to prior conditions, while those with activation levels of 0 lack such comparisons or the ability to make them due to the absence of prior images.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10350,latent_10350,7697,0.015394,0.0070489966,2.399266,Focus on right-sided pleural or lobar changes.,"The pattern observed in high activation examples emphasizes the presence or change in right upper lobar or pleural abnormalities, either improving, worsening, or requiring description. These reports tend to highlight specific observations related to right-sided pleural or pulmonary conditions.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5084745762711864,0.3,100.0,100.0
+10351,latent_10351,10006,0.020012,0.0074254023,1.366534,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings where the current imaging study is directly compared to a previously available image ('prior') to assess changes or stability, especially in the context of monitoring known issues (e.g., cardiomegaly, opacities, changes in lung volumes, etc.). This suggests that comparisons with prior studies regarding specific pathologies or findings trigger higher activations.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10352,latent_10352,1080,0.00216,0.0017494983,2.9012198,"Comparison with previous imaging, noting device or anatomical changes.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference a comparison between current and prior radiology images. The inclusion of previous imaging for direct comparison is a common practice in radiology reporting and is highlighted in these examples, particularly noting changes or lack thereof concerning medical devices or anatomical changes.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.575166034793364,0.605,0.5686274509803921,0.87,100.0,100.0
+10353,latent_10353,915,0.00183,0.0015873341,4.6662836,"Focus on comparison to prior imaging, highlighting changes.","Examples with high activation levels often involve a comparison to prior imaging studies, which is explicitly sought in radiology for assessing changes over time, indicating the model is identifying such linguistic structures. Lower activation examples lack or marginally use such comparative focus.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4959349593495935,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10354,latent_10354,8785,0.01757,0.006593589,1.7469229,Comparative analysis in radiology involving medical devices and anatomical changes.,"The pattern focuses on descriptions of findings that show changes, or lack thereof, when compared to prior images, with attention given to specific medical devices and structural changes over time such as tubes, catheters, masses, consolidations, or effusions, suggesting stability or transformation. Activation correlates with explicit mention of comparison to previous studies and altered states since those studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5874818568409259,0.595,0.5748031496062992,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10355,latent_10355,790,0.00158,0.0013709161,2.75722,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes over time.,"The common feature among high activation examples is the indication or request for comparison to prior imaging studies. This indicates the detection or ruling out of interval changes, especially regarding cardiomegaly or pulmonary conditions. Evaluations specifically call for recognizing changes over time as a key part of the diagnostic purpose in each report.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5290183165260341,0.5376884422110553,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,99.0
+10356,latent_10356,2678,0.005356,0.0036452583,3.406867,Reports describing interval changes between compared images.,"The pattern observed in these samples is a radiology report style focused on interval comparison. Higher activations correspond to examples where changes are noted in findings between current and prior images, using specific terms like 'interval change', 'new', 'unchanged', and 'compared to'. These examples often describe changes in pathology, device position, or anatomical appearance.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5176470588235295,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10357,latent_10357,1156,0.002312,0.0017291217,2.89345,Assessment for traumatic injury or non-standard device placement.,"Examples with higher activation seem to involve discussions of rib fractures, pneumonia, potential traumatic injuries, pneumothorax, internal devices like PICC lines, and non-standard findings or complications, often asking for immediate follow-ups or detailed comparisons. These elements assess or indicate abnormal and potentially life-threatening conditions, especially following traumatic incidents.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5384615384615384,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10358,latent_10358,963,0.001926,0.0014885339,2.7716396,Comparison of current image findings to prior studies.,"The high activation examples consistently involve the task of comparing current radiological imaging with prior studies. This is indicated by repeated references to 'comparison', 'prior study', or 'change' across these examples, identifying it as the focal point in the model's analysis for these prompts.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10359,latent_10359,3078,0.006156,0.0035827789,3.080501,Dual comparison of frontal and lateral chest x-rays against previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature dual comparisons using both frontal and lateral chest images, often against previous imaging to track changes. These cases analyze cardiac and lung conditions, requiring comparisons of anterior-posterior or lateral projections to assess differences over time.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5081967213114754,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10360,latent_10360,1029,0.002058,0.0016241729,4.151546,Identification of nodules or opacities in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference the presence and identification of nodules and/or opacities. These findings describe specific sizes, locations or changes of such features which are often critical indicators in follow-up radiology, attracting marked attention within reports.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6995192307692308,0.7,0.717391304347826,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10361,latent_10361,4008,0.008016,0.003305158,2.64276,Assessment of interval changes against prior imaging.,"The pattern evident in these examples is the examination of current imaging findings in light of previous images or reports, showing changes or stability over time. Changes discussed include the status of medical devices or the presence of pleural effusion - indicating ongoing monitoring conditions in a clinical context. High activation is seen where explicit imaging comparison is present.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4216720779220779,0.43,0.4435483870967742,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10362,latent_10362,4771,0.009542,0.0035749462,2.5796683,Direct comparisons or unchanged findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include comparative elements with prior images or explicitly state 'compared to the prior image', suggestive of a pattern where direct comparison or continuity of findings across images is evaluated, often in the context of monitoring changes over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10363,latent_10363,10302,0.020604,0.0075796545,2.3563614,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels often document radiological findings that are stable or unchanged in comparison to prior studies. Such descriptions are indicative of routine comparison in radiology to monitor changes over time, thereby maintaining consistent communication related to patient status.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5662650602409639,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10364,latent_10364,6151,0.012302,0.004952123,2.9191096,Importance of comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero consistently include comparisons to prior imaging studies, showing an emphasis on assessing differences or lack of progression in clinical findings over time. The mention of ""prior"" imaging is directly related to stronger activation patterns, indicating the importance of temporal comparisons in the data.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10365,latent_10365,2985,0.00597,0.002632427,3.1967013,Focus on anatomical structure evaluations over disease assessment.,"Examples with higher activation involve the evaluation and identification of anatomical structures or medical devices particularly the position of tubes and catheters (e.g., Dobbhoff tube, chest tubes) rather than simply assessing disease or physiological changes. These reports often compare current findings to prior images to confirm placement and stability, showcasing procedural utility over diagnostic.",0.375,0.3877551020408163,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,24.0,0.4426451758680425,0.445,0.4367816091954023,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10366,latent_10366,3424,0.006848,0.003501879,2.7216115,Comparisons with prior imaging to assess interval change.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons to prior imaging studies to assess changes in medical conditions. This comparison is a typical approach in radiology to evaluate the progression or stability of a clinical finding, often with mentions of specific changes or stability over time.",0.64349376114082,0.68,0.6097560975609756,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6072270227808326,0.65,0.5903614457831325,0.98,100.0,100.0
+10367,latent_10367,2789,0.005578,0.0031062705,4.2725616,Emphasis on comparative changes in pulmonary vasculature or lung volumes.,"Activation levels are high in examples involving comparative analysis of current imaging with previous ones, especially where there's a focus on the pulmonary vasculature (e.g., crowding, cephalization) and specific cardiac or lung changes such as edema or volume variations.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.67996799679968,0.68,0.6836734693877551,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10368,latent_10368,6999,0.013998,0.0054040113,1.978684,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in radiology reports.,"Examples with activation levels refer to radiology assessments of unchanged or stable findings, often after prior imaging comparisons, with descriptions like 'no change', 'unchanged', or stable status over time. This indicates a pattern where reports emphasize consistency and lack of new adverse developments between current and past evaluations.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4647887323943662,0.33,100.0,100.0
+10369,latent_10369,3093,0.006186,0.0034255947,3.7509317,"Complications in image evaluation, such as low lung volumes or obscuring opacities.","Examples with higher activations often involve the presence of findings that complicate clear imaging, like low lung volumes, patient positioning issues, or opacities that obscure evaluation despite consistent comparisons to prior images. The pattern emphasizes these complicating features that hinder assessment of changes or findings.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7781838919563471,0.7839195979899497,0.7175572519083969,0.94,100.0,99.0
+10370,latent_10370,6741,0.013482,0.005052402,1.7869595,Comparison of current vs. prior images highlighting stability or changes.,"Activation levels are high in examples that describe changes or stability over time in radiological findings, especially when there’s reference to past images and the assessment involves some form of stabilization, resolution, or persistent findings over those comparisons.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10371,latent_10371,1550,0.0031,0.0020074886,2.4534435,Stable findings compared to prior radiological exams.,"The pattern here involves radiographic comparisons where explicit, detailed descriptions of 'unchanged' findings relate to prior examinations. This includes analysis that specifically concludes stabilization or lack of significant change in certain medical conditions, procedures, or anatomical features, often related to surgical history or chronic conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10372,latent_10372,845,0.00169,0.0013787136,3.5785804,High activations correlate with 'question pneumonia' and findings indicating 'no change'.,This pattern shows that reports not explicitly indicating 'no change' or 'stable' when comparing current and prior imaging tend to have higher activations. It shows that variations relying on complex findings or changes tend to result in lower activations.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5047619047619047,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10373,latent_10373,5300,0.0106,0.004041014,1.9354455,Temporal changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"Examples with higher activation consistently refer to temporal changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies. These changes are often qualitative, described in terms of intervals like 'increase', 'decrease', 'unchanged', etc. They reflect the particular pattern of identifying and interpreting changes over time in radiological imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10374,latent_10374,694,0.001388,0.0012945826,4.366066,Reports emphasize comparative analysis with prior images.,"These examples all describe findings in current images compared explicitly to prior imaging, often preceded by a narrative including 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. Comparisons are central to these reports, as they help in assessing changes over time.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4342674868990658,0.4554973821989528,0.4525547445255474,0.6813186813186813,91.0,100.0
+10375,latent_10375,3058,0.006116,0.0022811773,2.090405,Describing stable findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples often highlight the unchanged or stable nature of certain findings, in the context of comparison to earlier imaging, using terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', and noting lack of new developments, or small new changes against prior exams. Reports emphasize consistency or lack of significant interval change, suggesting a need for monitoring rather than immediate concern.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10376,latent_10376,2400,0.0048,0.002825865,3.6998117,Monitoring/support device presence or positioning in radiological comparisons.,"These examples that exhibit the pattern contain explicit mentions of monitoring and support devices in one of the images described or changes to the positioning of these devices across compared imaging examinations. For instance, mentions of endotracheal tubes, pacemaker leads, or other similar devices and their positions appear in examples with higher activation levels.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5340909090909091,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10377,latent_10377,848,0.001696,0.001312588,3.406546,Requests or provides descriptive comparison over time with prior images.,"The higher activation examples often request or provide a description of the changes compared to prior images, which signals a task that is more detailed than a basic finding description and requires text-based descriptions to identify changes over time, reflecting complex interpretation tasks generally associated with higher activation levels.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10378,latent_10378,3178,0.006356,0.0029624577,3.433731,Unnecessary or unwarranted comparison statement.,"The pattern involves the presence of an unwarranted comparison statement where a radiologist is tasked with evaluating or describing findings as if a comparison to previous imaging is supposed to be made, even when no prior imaging is relevant or specific changes are insignificant. Reports aiming to assess the findings against previous studies feature observations and comparison even when unnecessary or detracting from the primary goal of assessing an acute process.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4030504668802541,0.455,0.4716981132075472,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10379,latent_10379,5925,0.01185,0.0045284466,1.933429,Focus on device positioning in chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve elements of device positioning such as endotracheal tubes (ETT) or central lines, in terms of their adequacy or adjustment relative to anatomical landmarks. The specific mention of devices and their positions for treatment or monitoring seems related to the observed pattern.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5614035087719298,0.57,0.5972222222222222,0.43,100.0,100.0
+10380,latent_10380,8939,0.017878,0.0065951683,1.8569846,Comparison of findings with prior imaging focusing on observed changes.,"Examples with high activation levels show a specific pattern where the model reports findings on current images in relation to prior images, with particular attention to comparative commentary on changes, if any, in the radiological appearance since the last image was taken. Reports are structured around explicit comparison and evaluation of changes noted.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5738636363636364,0.58,0.5645161290322581,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10381,latent_10381,873,0.001746,0.0014747902,2.975978,Comparison to prior imaging shows stability or systemic changes without acute processes.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels predominantly involve situations where imaging findings are compared to previous studies, showing either stability or changes in specific conditions like device positions, opacities, or vascular structures without acute processes. This pattern indicates a focus on systemic changes, stability, or the absence of acute changes over time in relation to prior imaging.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.514018691588785,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10382,latent_10382,628,0.001256,0.0012883996,4.4389553,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include comparisons to prior imaging and specifically describe stable or unchanged findings alongside some identifying pathology or medical device that remains constant. They frequently include detailed radiological descriptions using phrases like ""unchanged"", ""similar as"", and retain some structural observation between studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5213903743315508,0.5307262569832403,0.4666666666666667,0.4430379746835443,79.0,100.0
+10383,latent_10383,1072,0.002144,0.0020252375,3.1002517,Comparative radiographic analysis with prior imaging.,"Many examples provide findings based on the comparison with previous images, which is a standard practice in radiology to identify changes or confirm stability over time. This pattern is consistent in examples where explicit phrases indicate ongoing monitoring and assessment between current and prior studies, hence resulting in high activation scores.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5334201388888888,0.57,0.5448717948717948,0.85,100.0,100.0
+10384,latent_10384,9043,0.018086,0.0067740353,1.5734648,Significant changes or stability between current and prior imaging findings.,"The common factor in highly activated examples is the presence of detailed comparisons between current and prior findings, indicating significant changes or resolution, alongside potential pathology or stable conditions. This includes language describing alteration, stability, or improvement of findings between studies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10385,latent_10385,7046,0.014092,0.0051748906,1.6883502,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging for assessing changes.,"The pattern focuses on studies providing detailed comparisons of the imaging with prior studies, particularly making specific observations of changes or stability, and assigning significance to those changes (or lack thereof) in the context of the patient's clinical history or indicators.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10386,latent_10386,1790,0.00358,0.0020767672,2.5049531,"Comparison between current and prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation explicitly involve comparison between the current and previous imaging studies, highlighting changes, worsening conditions, or stability of findings. This comparative analysis is a key component of these exemplars, drawing attention to the differences or consistencies over time, which aligns with the pattern sought after in the task.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10387,latent_10387,671,0.001342,0.0013747892,3.874747,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"This pattern consistently includes specific instructions to compare findings from given image sets with prior images, with varying levels of details provided regarding new or unchanged radiological data. The emphasis is on analysis based on comparison rather than descriptive findings alone, specifically noting changes or stability in features like opacities, effusions, or other structures.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.498774324365221,0.5,0.4505494505494505,0.5,82.0,100.0
+10388,latent_10388,1066,0.002132,0.0013874806,3.1524184,Attention to positioning and stability of medical devices in images.,"These examples generally involve images or studies where there is some level of complexity or intervention within the thoracic area, such as presence of medical devices, tubes, or anatomical changes due to procedures or conditions. The pattern exhibits attention to details related to positioning and stability of devices like catheters, drains, or tubes, and changes or stabilities in these details are highlighted in the activations.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10389,latent_10389,3582,0.007164,0.0032228304,2.8181894,Emphasis on comparison to prior radiological images.,"Examples with higher activation scores prominently feature explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, often using phrases like 'Given the current frontal image...in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This indicates a pattern of reports emphasizing changes or stability relative to previous imaging, a common analysis approach in medical radiology to assess disease progression or treatment effects.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4652777777777778,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10390,latent_10390,1837,0.003674,0.0021652135,2.2604198,Comparisons of medical device positioning or changes with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels discuss potential changes or updates to medical devices and support structures, such as tubes or catheters, positioning, or removal compared to prior imaging, using terms like 'unchanged', 'interval removal', 'appropriately positioned', etc. This focuses on device management rather than imaging findings.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6596937243519168,0.66,0.6509433962264151,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10391,latent_10391,1937,0.003874,0.0019683791,3.714545,Stability or comparison to prior of medical devices or interventions.,"The examples with non-zero activations consistently describe scenarios where specific medical devices or previous interventions have either remained stable or been compared to prior, indicating a focus on the stability or known progression of the patient's state or medical device positioning.",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4202898550724637,0.29,100.0,100.0
+10392,latent_10392,2321,0.004642,0.0024103494,2.6350653,Use of explicit comparison to prior imaging studies to evaluate changes.,"These examples consistently make comparisons to previous imaging studies, using explicit references to prior exams for evaluating changes. The focus is on identifying changes such as stable findings or interval changes, which is typical in longitudinal radiological assessments.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10393,latent_10393,1377,0.002754,0.0017281421,3.225187,Comparison of medical device position or stability with prior imaging.,"The pattern in examples with higher activation includes specific descriptions about the radiographic findings related to supportive or monitoring devices such as catheters, ports, or screws, and their positions compared to prior imaging studies. This indicates interest in tracking the position and stability of these medical devices over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10394,latent_10394,1221,0.002442,0.0017537451,3.1697063,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves identifying stable findings across radiographic comparisons. Wording such as 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'no significant change' often indicate this pattern, signifying that no new or progressive changes are observed between the current and prior imaging studies.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5701698378240327,0.5707070707070707,0.5607476635514018,0.6122448979591837,98.0,100.0
+10395,latent_10395,1098,0.002196,0.0017155341,3.861529,Comparison to prior imaging and stability/change assessments.,"The activation levels highlight analyses where changes or stability in conditions and prior acts as a significant factor. These reports consistently mention changes or lack thereof when comparing with previous imaging analyses, often focusing on stability of existing conditions or addressing changes (or comparisons) over time or with treatment.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10396,latent_10396,939,0.001878,0.0014182618,5.4177485,Comparison of radiological findings with prior images.,"The pattern in the examples with high activation levels is the documentation of radiological findings being compared with previous imaging studies. Specific keywords denote this comparison, such as 'compared to', 'as compared to', 'unchanged since', or explicit mention of prior changes like 'resolved', 'improved', or 'stable'. These comparisons inform the diagnostic insights and are often a key component of radiology reports.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10397,latent_10397,1002,0.002004,0.0017537293,3.3502934,Evaluation of tube and line placement or change compared to prior imaging.,"The common pattern involves evaluating the placement, condition, or adjustment of tubes and lines in comparison to prior studies. This pattern includes descriptions of endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, and other indwelling devices, often alongside improvements, unchanged positioning, or need for repositioning based on interval changes.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7199719971997199,0.72,0.7156862745098039,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10398,latent_10398,3260,0.00652,0.0030016396,3.458197,Stable cardiac devices over time in comparison studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain explicit mentions of cardiac devices, such as pacemakers and their leads, being described as stable or unchanged when compared to prior imaging studies. This indicates a focus on device stability over time in the reports.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4255514705882353,0.5,0.5,0.14,100.0,100.0
+10399,latent_10399,1135,0.00227,0.0015287895,5.814803,"Detailed findings compared to prior imaging, particularly qualitative or quantitative changes.","The examples with notable activation focus on providing descriptions of findings on current radiology images in comparison to prior images. This pattern indicates making qualitative and quantitative observations about interval changes over time on serial images, suggesting a link with detailed comparison rather than the absence of comparison or detailed measurements.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3622836319465533,0.37,0.3333333333333333,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10400,latent_10400,668,0.001336,0.0013085016,4.1419234,Comparison of current and prior radiograph findings emphasizing stability in absence of acute process.,"Many examples show findings relevant to the assessment of multifaceted or complex clinical scenarios combining new and prior images, with emphasis on observing changes and stability over time. Prominent findings noted in the impression section like stable cardiomediastinal features or unchanged presence of known issues seem central to identifying whether an acute process is not present.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4473191712906721,0.4861878453038674,0.3846153846153846,0.2469135802469135,81.0,100.0
+10401,latent_10401,1116,0.002232,0.0016507604,3.430478,Analysis of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The most representative examples describe radiology findings by emphasizing any interval changes or stability compared to previous studies, often indicating dimensions or visible changes in findings over specific intervals. This lends particular attention to phrases indicating comparison to prior studies and evaluation of stability or variation.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10402,latent_10402,2053,0.004106,0.0022477582,2.3189583,Radiology reports describing findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation involve comparing current radiological images to prior studies, and they often contain phrases suggesting stability or change in specific features over time, indicating subtle findings are emphasized in discussions with radiologists.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10403,latent_10403,6440,0.01288,0.0051982896,2.3914464,Explicit comparison of findings with prior images indicating change or stability.,"Across the examples, reports with higher activations consistently make explicit comparative statements regarding interval changes or stability in radiological findings against prior images. This reflects a focus on identifying and updating specific changes or lack thereof over time in medical imaging reports.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10404,latent_10404,1012,0.002024,0.0015134742,3.336759,Change in position or presence of tubes/devices compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels feature specific findings regarding tubes or devices in the chest area, their changes in positioning, or new insertions compared to prior images, frequently involving respiratory-supporting devices like Dobbhoff or nasogastric tubes. This is distinct from general evaluations of anatomical appearance or disease processes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5969408846630839,0.61,0.671875,0.43,100.0,100.0
+10405,latent_10405,1405,0.00281,0.0020880955,2.83314,Interpretation of both frontal and lateral views against prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference information provided in both frontal and lateral chest images and require a description that compares or interprets these images. Specifically, it requires interpretation of current frontal and lateral images against a prior image, often without clear or specific comparison data, reflecting patterns of imaging interpretation that look at comprehensive thoracic imaging rather than standard reports that rely heavily on explicit prior reports.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.59,0.59,0.59,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10406,latent_10406,1301,0.002602,0.0014442129,2.095364,Prompts involving multiple image comparisons with findings from current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include multiple image references, such as 'frontal', 'lateral', and 'prior' images. These prompts focus on comprehensive evaluation using comparisons and updates from various imaging perspectives, including prior studies, showing significant changes or interval findings.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4938271604938271,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10407,latent_10407,528,0.001056,0.0012916536,4.7659197,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated samples consistently show descriptions involving changes or stability of medical conditions in comparison to previous imaging reports. The examples mention changes in findings like pleural effusion, opacities, or pneumonia, and how these relate to prior images, indicating that pattern recognition of changes over time is a key aspect of activation.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5477777777777778,0.5515151515151515,0.4608695652173913,0.8153846153846154,65.0,100.0
+10408,latent_10408,841,0.001682,0.001494494,3.008951,Descriptive assessment without prior imaging comparison.,"High activation levels correlate with cases having no prior study available for comparison, but where a clear description of findings is expected from the model regarding characteristics like heart size and mediastinal contours. This indicates reliance on current image descriptions rather than comparisons with prior images to make evaluations.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4800309768779732,0.53,0.5789473684210527,0.22,100.0,100.0
+10409,latent_10409,9486,0.018972,0.006786872,1.4505149,Comparison to prior imaging noting interval changes or stability.,"The pattern in these observations includes descriptions of findings in radiology studies that highlight interval changes or stability by comparing current images to prior studies, often noting changes or lack thereof in the condition or appearance across exams. This is typical in scenarios where continuous monitoring via imaging is required, thus commonly describing changes from previous imaging results.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10410,latent_10410,1031,0.002062,0.001698982,2.5701423,Emphasis on comparison with and reference to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern indicates a focus on performing and comparing current radiological findings with prior images, specifically analyzing for any changes or consistencies over time between the different image studies.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5220125786163522,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10411,latent_10411,7840,0.01568,0.006057089,2.4346023,Focus on unchanged medical devices or stable cardiac findings on imaging comparisons.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions where the stability or persistence of medical devices (such as tubes, catheters, or wires) or unchanged cardiac findings are highlighted in the comparison to prior studies. This suggests a focus on unchanged devices or stable cardiac findings being a pattern of interest.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10412,latent_10412,1027,0.002054,0.0018247352,3.1890714,Multidimensional imaging analysis with stable thoracic findings.,These examples detail cases where multiple images from different views (frontal and lateral) are analyzed and descriptions include findings such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax but consistently note normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal or hilar contours. This pattern involves multidimensional imaging analysis with findings focusing on a stable thoracic appearance despite variations in other details.,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.55,0.55,0.55,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10413,latent_10413,848,0.001696,0.0015266285,2.7955172,Request to compare findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently request a description of the findings with an explicit requirement for comparing current and prior images, particularly when specifying elements suggesting stability, unchanged position, or comparison, which is a common request in radiological follow-ups.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4516129032258064,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10414,latent_10414,1696,0.003392,0.0021248914,4.5043545,Detailed comparison using multiple (frontal and lateral) chest views and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently included scenarios where multiple views (frontal and lateral) are referenced and are used for a detailed comparison with prior images. The focus is on recognizing stable findings or detecting any changes, which is critical in longitudinal imaging assessment for conditions like pneumonia or chronic diseases.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5700934579439252,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10415,latent_10415,1378,0.002756,0.0020242927,3.5211787,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with stable or unchanged findings.,Examples with high activation levels describe normal findings in cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with additional stable observations like stable masses or unchanged hardware position. This suggests the model associates normal cardiac and mediastinal contours with stability in findings.,0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3735600942248454,0.395,0.3333333333333333,0.21,100.0,100.0
+10416,latent_10416,11168,0.022336,0.008263182,1.6870873,Radiological findings emphasize interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples mostly feature radiological findings that compare current imaging to prior studies, particularly for observing changes, stability, or progression in conditions such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or cardiomegaly. They consistently mention variations in these conditions, signifying the importance of interval changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5576923076923077,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10417,latent_10417,1064,0.002128,0.0015413128,2.9234085,Detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies focusing on stability or changes.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently include multiple image descriptions (such as frontal and lateral views) and emphasize comparisons to prior exams, often mentioning stable findings or changes over time. This indicates a pattern of reports that focus on detailed longitudinal assessment and comparison with previous imaging studies, addressing changes or the stability of certain visual findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6323436831104732,0.635,0.6153846153846154,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10418,latent_10418,8078,0.016156,0.005931409,2.7193747,Stability or change in lung findings compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern shows high activation when imaging reports include changes or stability in lung findings over time, often involving densities, opacities, or device placements, with explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies. Even though comparison is a workaround, it's particularity is on observed pulmonary findings differences or consistencies over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10419,latent_10419,5322,0.010644,0.004293279,3.2255683,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral chest images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve both a frontal and lateral view of a chest image. This suggests the model activates more when both orientations are included, compared to only frontal images. This may be due to richer contextual data available from both views, enhancing diagnostic comparisons.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10420,latent_10420,6890,0.01378,0.0055354554,1.9345827,Significant interval changes in comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Samples with activation levels show comparison with prior imaging studies and substantial interval changes in findings, highlighting how the model detects alterations in medical imaging. Phrases detailing changes such as 'may be slightly more prominent' or 'unchanged from most recent' are noted, emphasizing evolution over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5819110370193962,0.605,0.6981132075471698,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10421,latent_10421,2069,0.004138,0.0029404685,5.3110414,Descriptions of radiology findings compared to prior images or studies.,"High activation is associated with reports comparing current radiology findings to prior images or studies. Each high activation example features radiological findings described relative to previous examinations, where differences and continuities from past records are emphasized.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10422,latent_10422,855,0.00171,0.001395935,4.854974,Provide descriptions of findings in relation to prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation often describe current radiological findings and ask for comparison with prior frontal images to evaluate changes, suggesting the pattern focuses on using current observations to determine changes over time. The request to provide descriptions of findings in relation to prior images indicates the emphasis on evaluating interval changes rather than standalone findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10423,latent_10423,903,0.001806,0.0012636079,2.7968562,Technical comparison of images with emphasis on device placement and pathology changes.,"High activation levels correlate with descriptions involving direct analysis of current and prior images, as well as changes in specific medical devices (e.g., catheter placement) or significant pathologies. The focus on technical aspects of imaging and specific comparisons draws a direct link to the pattern represented in high activation examples.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.5,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10424,latent_10424,6628,0.013256,0.0050533,2.4056184,Detailed evaluation or interval change detection in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with activations closer to 0.0 typically indicate direct comparisons to prior images or explicit statements that no change is evident, thus limiting new findings. Those with higher activation levels include significant interval changes or comparisons that require detailed evaluation, which often reflects more complex analysis or significant change detection.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10425,latent_10425,1316,0.002632,0.0016929442,4.703043,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation focus on comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies, specifically noting stable or unchanged findings compared to previous examinations. This is a frequent pattern in radiology reports, providing consistency of findings over time.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.6363636363636364,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10426,latent_10426,985,0.00197,0.0018251948,3.1152751,Detailed medical and technical descriptions with complex pathophysiologies.,"These examples show a substantial use of technical radiological descriptions and specific medical patterns contrasting the current imaging findings with past medical conditions, devices, or interventions, such as changes in cardiac size, mediastinal shift, or the presence of medical devices. The focus is on comprehensive comparisons and detailed pathophysiological descriptions, indicating complex pathologies or interventions.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10427,latent_10427,7466,0.014932,0.0055670966,1.5607381,Stable or changed respiratory signs/devices compared to prior imaging.,"A significant pattern in these examples is the frequent observation of respiratory findings such as opacities, effusions, and devices in context of previous conditions and clinical settings. This suggests that the key pattern involves interpreting stable or changed radiographic signs, especially respiratory and device placements, in series with prior imaging, particularly when context like pneumonia, devices (like NG tubes), or cardiomegaly is indicated.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10428,latent_10428,1135,0.00227,0.0016082237,2.7062013,Close comparison with specified prior imaging studies.,"These examples describe situations where current findings are closely compared to a specified prior imaging study, indicating attention to interval changes or stability in a clinical context. The use of terms like 'interval', 'compared to prior', or citing specific dates reflects this focus on comparison.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10429,latent_10429,621,0.001242,0.0013119496,2.8018184,Direct comparison with prior imaging for stability or interval change.,"These examples consistently incorporate a narrative pattern of analyzing current imaging findings in direct comparison to prior studies, with an emphasis on how findings have changed or remain stable over time. The format often includes the technical phrase 'direct comparison with the next preceding similar study' or similar wording. This highlights the importance of tracking changes or stability in radiological studies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4995794785534062,0.5142857142857142,0.4615384615384615,0.8,75.0,100.0
+10430,latent_10430,754,0.001508,0.0015635672,3.5935285,Resolution or reduction of previous findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention resolution or reduction of a previously noted finding, such as an opacity or pneumothorax, when comparing current imaging to prior studies. Phrases indicating change, like ""resolved"", ""decreased"", or ""improved"", are key indicators of this pattern.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6531917789573976,0.6683673469387755,0.7758620689655172,0.4639175257731959,97.0,99.0
+10431,latent_10431,894,0.001788,0.0017087644,4.1213446,Descriptor of moderate or larger pulmonary/pleural findings.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight specific mentions of moderate or larger pulmonary or pleural findings such as effusions, edema, cardiomegaly, or pneumothorax. The pattern includes severity descriptors like 'moderate' or 'large' to characterize these findings, indicating that identifying significant pathological changes in lung and pleural conditions correlated with activation.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8695652173913043,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7186212440960708,0.72,0.7558139534883721,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10432,latent_10432,1011,0.002022,0.0016249358,3.0224652,"Precise tube positioning related to anatomical landmarks, with implications and evaluations.","Examples with high activation all demonstrate detailed descriptions of tubes (e.g., endotracheal and enteric tubes) with precise measurements of their positions relative to anatomical landmarks, particularly the carina. These descriptions suggest that the pattern involves detailed tube placement, its positioning, and subsequent discussion of their implications.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5789911380233373,0.595,0.6557377049180327,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10433,latent_10433,7132,0.014264,0.0052630464,1.4634928,Explicit references to stable findings or changes since prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations are those where a prior report or comparison with a previous study is made, and there is an explicit reference to findings either not changed or notable since the previous exam, focusing on stability or specific changes in pathology.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5847404627892432,0.585,0.580952380952381,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10434,latent_10434,1011,0.002022,0.0015904633,4.176979,Normal cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contour.,"The pattern here involves the usage of phrases that describe 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette' or 'cardiac silhouette is normal/unchanged', which are commonly used in radiology reports to confirm that the heart and mediastinal contours appear without abnormality.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4603174603174603,0.29,100.0,100.0
+10435,latent_10435,953,0.001906,0.001468597,3.2488756,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The samples show activation when findings from current and prior images are consistent or stable, indicating no significant change or newly identified pathology. Reports frequently use terms indicating stability or unchanged findings, such as 'unchanged', 'similar position', 'stable appearance', or 'moderate cardiomegaly again noted'.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5952380952380952,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10436,latent_10436,1312,0.002624,0.0018994655,3.1523385,High detail findings in reports with no prior comparison images.,"The data shows that activations are high when the description involves the current frontal image and current lateral image but specifies there is no prior imaging available for comparison. Reports state 'COMPARISON: None.' yet provide detailed findings, indicating a pattern where findings are described as comprehensive studies despite the absence of previous frames for direct comparison.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6014306151645208,0.6130653266331658,0.676923076923077,0.44,100.0,99.0
+10437,latent_10437,1527,0.003054,0.0029319772,5.0021753,Focus on evaluation or confirmation of placement of medical tubes and lines in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on evaluating the appropriate placement or changes in various tubes and lines shown in chest radiographs. The descriptions generally center on confirming or indicating no change in the medical devices' positions from prior imaging, which is crucial in managing patients with such interventions.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6535361904044588,0.655,0.6781609195402298,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10438,latent_10438,7347,0.014694,0.0054779155,2.6384244,Detailed comparison of current findings to prior images.,"Examples with activation levels provide a detailed comparison to prior imaging, acknowledging changes or stability over time. This method often uses specific anatomical or pathological detail, dates, and explicit references to prior studies to gauge the progress or stasis of conditions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.5288461538461539,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10439,latent_10439,687,0.001374,0.0012123784,3.8675854,Findings described without available prior study for comparison.,"The consistent feature in the high activation level examples is the explicit mention of 'comparison' with other imaging studies being 'none' or absent. These examples also have a directive to provide descriptive findings despite lacking prior imaging for comparison, emphasizing the absence of available prior images.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6749062792877225,0.6756756756756757,0.6373626373626373,0.6823529411764706,85.0,100.0
+10440,latent_10440,2554,0.005108,0.0028948174,2.3405113,"Description of changes in chest imaging, focusing on intervals or newly noted alterations.","The highly activated examples include specific descriptions and comparisons of current and prior frontal, frontal and lateral views, or findings associated with change relating to fractures, invasive devices, or effusions, focusing on intervals and changes rather than merely confirming stability or lack of change.",0.4225589225589226,0.4285714285714285,0.4,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.51995199519952,0.52,0.5196078431372549,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10441,latent_10441,825,0.00165,0.0012904883,6.888539,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding or accentuation.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe reduced lung volumes resulting in secondary crowding of bronchovascular markings or structures. This pattern was frequently characterized by the terms 'low lung volumes' or similar phrases indicating reduced lung capacity which leads to specific radiological appearances.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4456893501592169,0.53,0.6363636363636364,0.14,100.0,100.0
+10442,latent_10442,1648,0.003296,0.0026548966,3.3640807,Complex comparison to prior imaging addressing subtle or significant changes in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels feature complex nodal points of comparison between multiple images and prior reports, involving changes in radiographic findings such as opacities, cardiomegaly, pulmonary findings, and diverse technical indicators like effusions and edema, often recording slight adjustments in comparison with previous studies. The examples often involve intricate detailed analyses leading to recommendations for further assessments.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5444444444444444,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10443,latent_10443,1273,0.002546,0.0017154146,3.44494,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies with interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on comparing current and prior examination images, often noting changes or stability in abnormalities (e.g., pulmonary opacities or device positions), especially when there are updates on disease progression or the impact of interventions. This indicates a linguistic structure and thematic focus on interval changes and their medical significance in serial imaging studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.431578947368421,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10444,latent_10444,1407,0.002814,0.0019072837,3.4715178,Explicit historical context or conditions in findings.,"These examples share the inclusion of historical context, conditions for comparison, or pleural information present in the findings of radiology studies. The references often relate to prior imaging comparisons or expected conditions, which are not included in lower activation samples.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3748415983779674,0.445,0.467065868263473,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10445,latent_10445,1677,0.003354,0.0018948913,2.8500326,Radiology reports referencing stability or minor changes compared to prior observations.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include interpretations that hinge on comparisons with prior findings and contain language indicating stability, or subtle changes in findings. The comparisons are made across current and prior images, and focus on stability or minor changes noted.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.399459513562206,0.4,0.3936170212765957,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10446,latent_10446,1222,0.002444,0.0015321776,3.0277832,Description of interval changes in device positions or fluid levels.,"The high-activation examples often involve descriptions of interval changes associated with medical interventions, including devices like catheters and tubes. This provides clinical context and a narrative of stability or changes over time, with common phrases describing stability or change, particularly in regard to fluid levels and device positioning. These reports facilitate clinical decisions based on whether prior interventions are effective, indicating the model's focus on these comparisons as representative.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6088888888888889,0.615,0.6533333333333333,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10447,latent_10447,1375,0.00275,0.0022915117,4.4670343,Descriptions of pleural effusion or atelectasis changes compared to prior.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include descriptions that report on the presence and changes of pleural effusions or atelectasis in comparison to prior imaging. Mentioning trace or small effusions indicated by blunting of the costophrenic angles is common in these instances, showing that the model recognizes stable or slightly changed pleural findings as a pattern of interest.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10448,latent_10448,769,0.001538,0.0013927381,3.0439975,Evaluation of stability or change in medical devices and cardiopulmonary features using images.,"The high activation examples primarily involve reports with provided images for direct radiological evaluation, where distinct medical devices or apparatuses (e.g., pacing leads, tracheostomy, endotracheal tubes, stents) and/or specific cardiopulmonary findings (e.g., cardiomegaly, atelectasis) can be assessed in terms of stability, positioning, or changes, especially within a comparative context to prior images or reports. These comparisons emphasize tracking persistent conditions or changes.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4999484589217606,0.5050505050505051,0.5042016806722689,0.6060606060606061,99.0,99.0
+10449,latent_10449,1477,0.002954,0.0022640508,3.0918446,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Most examples with high activation levels involve descriptions comparing current radiographic findings with prior images, often emphasizing the absence of changes or confirming stability. The language used such as ""no change,"" ""stable,"" or comparisons to previous images is key in these descriptions, highlighting the concept of continuity or lack of new findings.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.2777777777777778,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4220260613703237,0.45,0.4107142857142857,0.23,100.0,100.0
+10450,latent_10450,1864,0.003728,0.0019408249,3.277511,Mentions of stability or consistency in findings from multiple prior studies.,"The examples show consistent phrasing patterns where findings are described in comparison to prior studies or are noted as unchanged—these features suggest stable conditions. The pattern is identified by descriptions of intervals, comparisons, and unchanged features.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4893071000855432,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+10451,latent_10451,818,0.001636,0.001739918,3.6482203,Findings affected by overlying anatomical structures.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe findings with reference to overlying anatomical structures, which suggest obscured views or those where technical considerations affect image interpretation. This obscuration often accompanies changed or unchanged pathologies.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6997297567811029,0.7,0.7127659574468085,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10452,latent_10452,841,0.001682,0.0016789576,3.7590287,Descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of current imaging findings directly compared to prior imaging findings. Common phrases include 'compared to prior', 'since prior', or 'in comparison with previous study'. This linguistic pattern emphasizes the assessment of interval change as a distinct element in radiological evaluations.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10453,latent_10453,975,0.00195,0.0015168096,3.265383,Description of findings with changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation describe radiological findings in terms of changes from prior studies, highlighting interval changes. This pattern uses phrases such as 'interval', 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', and 'since prior', to elucidate the progression or stability of conditions over time.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10454,latent_10454,3319,0.006638,0.0036137477,4.401138,Comparison indicating stability or changes over time.,"The examples show a pattern where there is a comparison to prior images or studies, often noting changes or stability in findings. Stable, unchanged, or resolved conditions are typically highlighted, with reference dates often provided, indicating thorough follow-up or monitoring over time.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.6486486486486487,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.691324347454001,0.7085427135678392,0.6438356164383562,0.94,100.0,99.0
+10455,latent_10455,465,0.00093,0.0012110268,4.1986823,Detailed description of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"The high activation levels typically involve cases where there is a specific request for detailed comparison or description of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as a primary consideration. This suggests a pattern where clear communication of specific cardiological or mediastinal details in context with known patient history or specific indications results in higher activations, irrespective of presence or absence of pathologies in other areas.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7605421686746988,0.7610062893081762,0.6195652173913043,0.95,60.0,99.0
+10456,latent_10456,1023,0.002046,0.0016668336,4.3864384,Tasked comparison of current image to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit instructions or tasks for comparison of the current imaging to prior images, even if details are sparse or very brief. This emphasis on comparison indicates a linguistic pattern focusing on changes over time, which is specific in medical image analysis reports.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10457,latent_10457,735,0.00147,0.0013419375,3.3897827,Instruction to describe radiology findings in comparison to prior image.,"The high activation examples consistently include instructions to provide a comparative description using previous examinations. Despite potential missing elements, the instructions explicitly request comparisons based on prior frontal images, which indicates emphasis on describing changes over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4577120223671947,0.4842105263157895,0.4718309859154929,0.7444444444444445,90.0,100.0
+10458,latent_10458,12812,0.025624,0.009440055,1.6288801,Analysis of interval changes in radiology images compared to prior studies.,"Activated examples consistently assess interval changes by comparing current radiological findings with previous ones, describing the presence or absence of new developments, unchanged pathologies, or changes in conditions using comparative language such as 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'new'. These reports emphasize the status of findings in relation to earlier images.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.5522388059701493,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10459,latent_10459,1558,0.003116,0.0017381074,3.5409124,Comparative description of imaging findings to prior images.,"These examples consistently refer to the radiologist providing a comparative description of current imaging findings in relation to previous images, often explicitly requesting such a comparison to document any changes between studies. The activation levels indicate that emphasis is placed on noting changes or the stability of findings over time, rather than simply stating current findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10460,latent_10460,536,0.001072,0.001197334,3.5390027,Interval change assessment comparing current to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently refer to findings in the current imaging compared to a prior imaging study, with an emphasis on using previous studies to assess any interval change or stability of observed features.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4949862637362637,0.4970760233918128,0.4324324324324324,0.676056338028169,71.0,100.0
+10461,latent_10461,2228,0.004456,0.0020895149,2.69205,Highlighting interval changes compared to prior images.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently mention interval changes in radiographic findings, specifically improvements or resolution of previous abnormalities in lung or cardiac findings, post-procedure evaluations, or other interval changes. The focus is on differences observed in new imaging compared to prior images, denoting interval changes or evaluations based on historical comparisons.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4465513754045307,0.4472361809045226,0.4408602150537634,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+10462,latent_10462,1446,0.002892,0.0018471042,5.222052,Stable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes with no acute pulmonary changes.,"These examples highlight stability or lack of significant changes in cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes or lung conditions, as compared to prior images. The pattern involves conclusions of no acute changes or continued normalcy, often explicitly mentioned or implicitly compared to prior reports.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7057587221521648,0.72,0.6527777777777778,0.94,100.0,100.0
+10463,latent_10463,835,0.00167,0.00145678,2.88481,Task to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples with high activation levels consistently involve the task of explaining or providing descriptions based on comparing current and prior imaging findings, while low activation examples lack such a requirement.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10464,latent_10464,429,0.000858,0.001034517,4.1930685,No significant interval change when compared to prior imaging.,The highly activated examples consistently feature descriptions of stable or unchanged conditions when compared to prior imaging. This is a common pattern in radiology reports emphasizing the absence of significant changes or interval changes in pathology across multiple studies.,0.914855072463768,0.9148936170212766,0.875,0.9545454545454546,22.0,25.0,0.6992721236112884,0.7133757961783439,0.6,0.6724137931034483,58.0,99.0
+10465,latent_10465,1969,0.003938,0.003152535,4.181167,Unchanged or stable positioning of internal medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize findings related to the positioning and stability of internal medical devices or tubes, such as PICC lines, ET tubes, or NG tubes, in comparison to prior studies. These examples frequently note 'unchanged', 'stable', or specific positions of these devices.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6997297567811029,0.7,0.7127659574468085,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10466,latent_10466,816,0.001632,0.0016485001,2.732817,"Frequent, explicit comparison with prior imaging reports.","High activation examples often involve direct references to prior imaging for comparison, which is evident when 'PRIOR_REPORT' is explicitly noted multiple times or comparisons are drawn with specifics from previous studies. Lower activation is associated with absence or minimal reference to such comparisons.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5075757575757576,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10467,latent_10467,1871,0.003742,0.0023178484,2.4294653,Observed changes in lung or heart on comparison with prior images.,"Examples showing high activation have clear indications or findings that denote conditions with potential acute or recent changes as observed in radiological images. These examples often include comparisons to prior images, mentioning stability or changes in conditions like effusions, opacities, or lung volumes. High activation occurs when the task involves discernible acute findings compared to prior assessments or evaluating changes over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4859813084112149,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10468,latent_10468,1059,0.002118,0.0016746888,3.2808692,"Interval change noted in radiological findings (e.g., removal, improvement).","The pattern involves noting interval changes or resolutions in a given radiological finding, often through removal or improvement of prior conditions. This includes phrases like 'interval removal', 'interval improvement', or 'unchanged', which denote comparison and change over time in a given set of radiographs.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6892230576441103,0.69,0.6727272727272727,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10469,latent_10469,3007,0.006014,0.0036029832,4.001621,Comparison with prior images focusing on stable or unchanged cardiac silhouette.,"Many examples reference techniques, findings, or changes in cardiac silhouette size using terms like ‘the heart is top normal’ or 'heart size continues to be enlarged, exaggerated'. These reports describe stable cardiomediastinal contours in the context of comparison with previous images to evaluate cardiac disease or treatment effects.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4346741006239214,0.4623115577889447,0.4363636363636363,0.24,100.0,99.0
+10470,latent_10470,946,0.001892,0.0012455423,4.7191386,Reports noting 'minimal atelectasis' as a finding.,The examples with high activation levels include terms like 'minimal atelectasis' commonly associated with incidental findings on chest imaging. These describe small areas of incomplete lung expansion ('atelectasis') and are presented as minor or non-alarming findings in comparison to other potential diagnoses.,0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4624143034037027,0.555,0.8235294117647058,0.14,100.0,100.0
+10471,latent_10471,1990,0.00398,0.0026759517,5.527566,Findings indicating new interval changes or developments compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation level describe changes over time through comparison between current and prior imaging studies, specifically highlighting intervals where there is a new abnormal finding such as a new opacity, increased opacification, or interval change suggesting a new development (e.g., pneumonia, effusion) which tends to reflect clinically significant changes.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6620878424614137,0.6633165829145728,0.6896551724137931,0.6,100.0,99.0
+10472,latent_10472,2877,0.005754,0.0023137156,2.962725,Multiple imaging perspectives increase activation level.,"Prompts with multiple imaging angles (e.g., both frontal and lateral images) seem to exhibit higher activation levels. The presence of detailed imaging descriptions from multiple perspectives appears to be a key factor in increasing the activation level, likely providing more comprehensive data for analysis.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4120307553143374,0.48,0.4880952380952381,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10473,latent_10473,2679,0.005358,0.0025101702,3.1123295,"Description of non-critical pulmonary opacities, stable or minimally changed from prior.","The pattern observed across the representative examples is a focus on lung opacities that are indicative of non-critical conditions such as atelectasis. Reports consistently identify changes in linear opacities and discuss their stability or minor transformations over time without significant acute abnormalities, indicating a consistent pattern of interpreting low-risk pulmonary findings.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10474,latent_10474,1829,0.003658,0.001991742,3.1565533,Detailed comparison or stability of medical devices/anatomy between radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve reference to detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies, particularly noting changes or stability in medical devices or anatomical findings. These examples often involve intricate findings or cases with significant clinical context, reflecting how changes or lack thereof are important.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.492411041240498,0.4924623115577889,0.4901960784313725,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+10475,latent_10475,6108,0.012216,0.004831972,2.3781135,"Comparative analysis with previous radiologic findings, noting changes or stability.","Examples with significant activation discuss the comparison of current radiologic findings with prior imaging, emphasizing the changes or stability noted over time. Changes like nodule enlargement or new devices placed are highlighted as significant.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10476,latent_10476,664,0.001328,0.001020285,5.217539,Focus on stable or unchanged findings over time compared to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern is that examples with higher activation levels involve findings compared to prior imaging studies, with a focus on stable or unchanged conditions following previous interventions or findings. The descriptions often include statements of stability or minor changes over time, which emphasizes the importance of historical comparison in the analysis.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603864,0.5277777777777778,0.4657534246575342,0.425,80.0,100.0
+10477,latent_10477,10556,0.021112,0.0075689545,1.6822494,Presence of structured guidance and specific requests for findings comparison in the text.,"Examples with higher activation levels are characterized by descriptions containing both technical report guidance ('Provide a description of the findings...') and specific radiological findings with comparison to prior images, often denoted by instructions or indications within double brackets or formal requests from the assistant. Examples with a clear request for examinatory explanations seem to activate more.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4123636363636364,0.495,0.4971428571428571,0.87,100.0,100.0
+10478,latent_10478,2789,0.005578,0.0023969745,3.014631,"Presence of both frontal and lateral views described, and comparison with priors.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention two types of images (frontal and lateral), along with the request to compare these findings with prior images. This indicates that the presence of both frontal and lateral view descriptions and direct comparisons to prior imagery seem to be stronger indicators of the pattern.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10479,latent_10479,2202,0.004404,0.0025764534,4.0843,Evaluation of interval changes from prior imaging.,"The examples highlight radiological assessments focusing on interval changes such as pneumothorax resizing, effusion changes, or tube placements with respect to prior imaging. These changes indicate dynamic conditions or treatments being monitored over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5226274224414436,0.5527638190954773,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,99.0
+10480,latent_10480,646,0.001292,0.0009893577,3.6523423,Comparisons and evaluations of interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The pattern most distinctive in high activation examples is the frequent references to the current and previous images, specifically how current findings are laid out in relation to prior radiological exams, denoting an interval change or stability.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4651107335539062,0.4756756756756757,0.4523809523809524,0.6705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+10481,latent_10481,667,0.001334,0.0012789865,3.424241,Description of interval changes or stability when compared to prior images.,"High activation levels consistently involve radiology reports that discuss changes or stability over time by comparing current imaging findings to previous reports, indicating a focus on interval changes or stability.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5938823122785795,0.601063829787234,0.552,0.7840909090909091,88.0,100.0
+10482,latent_10482,463,0.000926,0.001056199,6.289629,Stability or comparison of imaging findings to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve a radiology interpretation comparing findings to prior imaging, often focusing on unchanged or stable conditions. This includes direct language about previous images, stability of observed features, and no significant interval change, indicating a pattern of evaluating subtle changes or the stability of conditions over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4173905780153691,0.4193548387096774,0.3394495412844037,0.6727272727272727,55.0,100.0
+10483,latent_10483,908,0.001816,0.0016875862,3.6077275,Stability or unchanged status of cardiomediastinal features or anatomical structures in comparative studies.,"Descriptions of findings typically acknowledged without changes compared to prior imaging, mention normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or aortic configuration. These reports often focus on unchanged cardiomediastinal, cardiac, or anatomical features over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+10484,latent_10484,1344,0.002688,0.002115321,4.0580564,Comparison with prior imaging illustrating changes in lung and mediastinal findings due to specific conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of imaging findings, especially lung-related, correlated with specific clinical indications. This includes evaluating for conditions like pneumonia, effusions, or congestion against prior imaging studies to assess interval change, often seen in follow-up studies or when probing for acute conditions. This pattern reflects heightened radiological activity against clinically relevant queries or indications.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5384615384615384,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10485,latent_10485,768,0.001536,0.0014775954,3.6785293,Providing descriptive findings for current vs prior images.,"The examples indicate high activation levels when there is explicit reference to providing descriptive findings of current imaging in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern involves identifying expected details of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, lung status, and any changes or stability since prior images.",0.4225589225589226,0.4285714285714285,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.3969545264914476,0.3979591836734694,0.3981481481481481,0.4479166666666667,96.0,100.0
+10486,latent_10486,1094,0.002188,0.0017459787,3.479838,Comparison to prior imaging showing no new findings or changes.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve a comparison between current and prior imaging without finding any new acute changes or abnormalities. This pattern often signifies a stable radiological report, even though the presence of prior images is noted for reference.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10487,latent_10487,1224,0.002448,0.0017651385,3.4007888,"Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging, often focusing on devices or opacities.","The pattern observed here often involves descriptions of stable or unchanged findings in comparison to previous imaging, with specific attention to medical devices, opacities, effusions, and structural heart features being highlighted in the comparison comments. This shows a focus on interval assessments, highlighting stability or changes over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5806451612903226,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10488,latent_10488,1502,0.003004,0.0019508228,3.036464,Detailed technical and procedural context alongside clinical findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference technical aspects like the exposure and positioning of the images, and discuss the present state of equipment like tubes and catheters in addition to radiological findings. These reports tend to give a more complete diagnostic picture by including procedural context alongside clinical observations.",0.4367816091954022,0.5306122448979592,0.5111111111111111,0.9583333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.451199040767386,0.5376884422110553,0.5224719101123596,0.93,100.0,99.0
+10489,latent_10489,6356,0.012712,0.00657233,5.1642656,Descriptive comparison indicating interval changes or stasis.,The examples that have higher activation levels almost consistently include evidence of interval changes or assessments made in comparison to previous images. This pattern indicates that the model is activated by descriptions that discuss changes over time or compare findings with those of past radiological studies.,0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10490,latent_10490,3310,0.00662,0.0030854377,2.0795324,Direct comparison with specific prior image findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently provide a direct comparison or reference to the findings on a current image against those on a prior image. They frequently mention technical or positioning details, ongoing evaluations (like tube positions or line placements), and incremental assessments of change over time. In general, these reports focus on continuous monitoring or stable conditions compared to previous imaging, whereas low activation reports often have no explicit comparison or focus on new findings without prior context.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10491,latent_10491,10966,0.021932,0.007909403,1.5936278,Comparison with prior images showing change or stability in findings.,"Examples with activations describe specific radiological findings and changes or stability in these findings when compared to previous imaging reports. These describe how findings correlate over time, often noting changes, stability, or resolution of observed conditions, which are indications of the pattern the model is capturing.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,100.0,100.0
+10492,latent_10492,797,0.001594,0.0014556692,4.0789704,"Comparison with prior frontal images emphasizing stability or interval changes, often after sternotomy.","An explicit comparison is made to prior frontal images, even when multiple imaging modalities and current lateral images are involved, focusing on interval findings or stable conditions. Common radiological terms used include 'ystatus post median sternotomy' which indicate surgical history that affects further analysis.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7527687378591791,0.755,0.7142857142857143,0.85,100.0,100.0
+10493,latent_10493,994,0.001988,0.0015136857,5.9141912,Comparison with prior imaging where no true prior images exist.,The pattern identified is that a comparison with no identified previous imaging is described as such. The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight a contrast or absence of comparison with prior images while still being tasked to assess current images for findings.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10494,latent_10494,9810,0.01962,0.0071598035,1.5897447,Comparison of current with prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently utilize descriptions comparing current imaging findings to prior images, emphasizing changes or stability in specific radiological features. Phrases such as 'compared to', 'since prior', and 'unchanged' are key indicators.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4030813906590303,0.445,0.4640522875816993,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10495,latent_10495,3590,0.00718,0.0029086554,1.7374278,Evaluation of changes in chest conditions between images using dated comparisons.,"Examples with high activation include references to past radiographs and subsequent changes noted in respiratory or chest pathologies. This indicates the pattern involves evaluation of changes or stability of identified conditions over time, often with reference to dates and descriptive intervals in the report.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10496,latent_10496,717,0.001434,0.001344601,6.3034425,References to prior studies for comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently refer to comparisons with earlier studies, indicating the importance of making comparisons in radiology reports.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4333333333333333,0.46875,0.4662162162162162,0.75,92.0,100.0
+10497,latent_10497,1126,0.002252,0.0015159551,3.6486323,Descriptive analysis comparing current findings with prior image study results.,"The pattern involves descriptions of radiological findings from current studies that are explicitly compared to prior studies, including specific imagery analysis, ordinal language for changes like 'interval placement', and conditions remaining 'stable'. These reports use comparison to prior imagery to assess stability or changes over time, a typical method in tracking disease progression or resolution.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4906100311731759,0.4924623115577889,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,99.0
+10498,latent_10498,6502,0.013004,0.0049318485,1.8171232,Findings compared to previous imaging with intervals noted.,"The pattern of description derives from radiology study reports where findings are compared to prior imaging. Cases often note 'unchanged’ or ‘stable’ findings or slight changes since prior exams, particularly focusing on cardiomediastinal silhouettes, pleural effusions, lung volumes, or specific medical devices and opacities.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.5277777777777778,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10499,latent_10499,1087,0.002174,0.0013705752,4.797269,Reports instructing to compare current images with prior but not listing specific prior findings.,"Highly representative examples involve reports focusing on the evaluation with current imaging contrasted against prior images, specifically without listing prior findings in detail, aligning with interpretations based on reference image comparisons as direct instructions for creating reports.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10500,latent_10500,1435,0.00287,0.0017936823,3.61772,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently provide a detailed narrative of the current imaging findings directly compared to a prior imaging study, noting specific changes or stability in medical conditions or device placements. This focus on change or constancy in sequential imaging studies indicates the pattern sought by high activation levels.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10501,latent_10501,11211,0.022422,0.008024564,1.583604,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging findings highlighting stability or changes over time.,The examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions detailed in comparison to previous imaging findings or observations denoting slight changes and stable conditions over time. Emphasis is often on stability or specific intervals since prior imaging which suggests a focus on chronological analysis of certain radiological features in comparison with past studies for observing progression or resolution of conditions.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.528169014084507,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10502,latent_10502,1072,0.002144,0.001714917,3.8319614,Presence and positioning of pacemaker leads or medical devices.,"Highly active examples consistently describe the presence of pacemaker devices or other medical leads in the thorax, with notable mention of positions such as 'right atrium' and 'right ventricle', often with particular details like 'dual-lead' or 'unchanged in position'. These are consistent findings in scenarios involving cardiac device monitoring.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.7383252818035426,0.74,0.7857142857142857,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10503,latent_10503,3494,0.006988,0.0029473638,2.1976535,Analyzing interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"The pattern seen across the examples relates to analyzing radiological findings with an explicit comparison to previous imaging studies. The task requires noting changes or stability in specific radiological features such as effusions, opacities, or device placement when comparing current and prior images. Descriptions often involve identifying changes in issues like effusions or condition progressions, consistent with radiological monitoring and follow-up.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10504,latent_10504,714,0.001428,0.0011612906,3.7844512,Explicit descriptions of interval changes or stability compared with prior imaging.,Samples with high activation levels often explicitly highlight changes or assessments based on prior imaging comparisons. This suggests a pattern where significant differences or noteworthy observations between the current and prior images are emphasized.,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.557843137254902,0.5614973262032086,0.5432098765432098,0.4943820224719101,89.0,98.0
+10505,latent_10505,682,0.001364,0.0013780826,3.2553167,Frequent mention or assessment of pneumothorax in reports.,"The examples with high activation levels include frequent mentions of pneumothorax, particularly regarding changes in its size, new appearance, or stability compared to previous imaging. This specific condition appears to be a primary concern as evidenced by the consistent mention in the high activation examples.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6970760233918128,0.6972972972972973,0.6442307692307693,0.7790697674418605,86.0,99.0
+10506,latent_10506,1962,0.003924,0.0020818245,3.615279,Influence of explicitly stated comparison availability.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently feature phrases like 'comparison available/not available,' often in contexts where the comparison with previous images is discussed or emphasized. These specific contrasts in comparison availability seem to trigger higher activations.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10507,latent_10507,1890,0.00378,0.0020680702,3.0524423,Persistent or new pleural effusions alongside other changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings that reference the presence and persistence or new development of pleural effusions, alongside other pathologies. Pleural effusions are often highlighted in radiology as they can be indicative of various acute or chronic conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,100.0,100.0
+10508,latent_10508,3525,0.00705,0.0032057948,2.9112883,Clear cardiac silhouette and lungs without severe pathology.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the cardiac, mediastinal, and pulmonary features in normal terms, indicating images with little or no pathological findings. This pattern focuses on clarity of the cardiac silhouette, normal mediastinal contours, and clear lung fields without any mention of severe pathologies.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5945032665014642,0.595,0.6021505376344086,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10509,latent_10509,1731,0.003462,0.0023235283,4.7415485,Medical device assessment or mention in imaging reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the analysis where a specific medical device such as a chest tube, pacemaker, or endotracheal tube is referenced, often noted for its presence, position, or assessment in the radiology study. This involves evaluating device placement or related changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5423632464277408,0.5527638190954773,0.5714285714285714,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+10510,latent_10510,1232,0.002464,0.0015858094,2.945192,Requests to describe findings by comparing current and prior images.,Samples with high activation consistently include instructions or tasks for the assistant to provide descriptions of findings from a current image explicitly in comparison with findings or changes from a prior image. This pattern highlights the emphasis on evaluating interval changes between imaging studies.,0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4676131322094055,0.505,0.5032679738562091,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10511,latent_10511,2695,0.00539,0.0022088487,2.4417338,Comparison of current and prior images assessing significant new developments.,"Samples with higher activation levels include scenarios with specific mentions of changes or comparisons in the current and prior radiological findings, with context suggesting new developments or assessments, highlighting the model's sensitivity to detecting significant updates in imaging reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5584102769971899,0.56,0.5681818181818182,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10512,latent_10512,901,0.001802,0.001283424,3.8457284,Explicit comparison of current images to prior ones with detailed directives.,"Highly activated examples consistently have explicit directives to compare current radiographic findings to prior images, often with substantial interpretation or noting of changes. Mention of indicating a ""description of the findings in comparison to the prior"" reflects systematic monitoring of progress or change, common in evaluating treatment or disease progression.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4594594594594595,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10513,latent_10513,3353,0.006706,0.0028501856,2.6132925,Detailed comparison with findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often highlighting changes or stability in medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathologies. These examples provide explicit findings when compared to a prior image, indicating notable changes or consistent observations based on historical imaging data.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10514,latent_10514,1105,0.00221,0.0016812714,3.958857,High activation linked to 'syncope' indication.,"The pattern emerges where 'syncope' appears prominently in cases with high activation levels. Syncope is a specific clinical indication mentioned frequently, suggesting this term influences activation despite various image findings.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5282462554546526,0.6,0.9545454545454546,0.21,100.0,100.0
+10515,latent_10515,1091,0.002182,0.0018203963,4.830611,Monitoring and support devices status compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations often describe the presence and status of monitoring and support devices, including pacemakers, catheters, prosthetics, and other implants, comparing their positions or conditions with prior images. This reflects the importance of documenting artificial support devices and any change in their position or status in patient reports. Examples with lower activations do not emphasize these features.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5227272727272727,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10516,latent_10516,1034,0.002068,0.0015520249,3.125697,Comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature mentions of comparison between current and prior imaging findings. The reports seek to evaluate changes between current and prior radiological images, with explicit mention of comparing for interval changes. This indicates a heightened focus on comparative analysis.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10517,latent_10517,793,0.001586,0.0014085065,3.7267604,Presence of atelectasis in the radiological findings.,"The pattern that consistently activates the model involves the mention of 'atelectasis'. Reports with atelectasis, especially 'basilar atelectasis', often include descriptions of lung changes like reduced lung volume, yet without significant new pathologies like pleural effusion or pneumothorax. The high activation indicates that this finding is likely key in the model's focus.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8020618556701031,0.8020833333333334,0.7647058823529411,0.8478260869565217,92.0,100.0
+10518,latent_10518,1191,0.002382,0.0016584479,2.7059822,Explicit comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Despite various imaging findings, the pattern that emerges is the presence of explicit or detailed 'comparison' tags, indicating a direct or indirect comparison with prior imaging, providing context for stability, change, or new findings in the current study.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10519,latent_10519,2455,0.00491,0.0029634344,3.1582885,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs without acute findings.,"The highly activated examples focus on descriptions of normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, with the lungs being clear and unremarkable, and no presence of pleural effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax. This combination of findings corresponds to reports indicating no acute cardiopulmonary process or pathological findings despite the indications.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7648530331457161,0.765,0.7789473684210526,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10520,latent_10520,4574,0.009148,0.0036154415,2.088664,Direct analysis or comparison of specific anatomical features in imaging.,"High activation examples feature specific radiological findings described through direct image comparison or analysis of specific anatomical features, such as heart size, lung opacities, or presence of medical devices. Lower activation examples lack these forms of analysis or focus on more generalized descriptors without detailed comparative assessment.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4565061929689064,0.525,0.5146198830409356,0.88,100.0,100.0
+10521,latent_10521,1201,0.002402,0.0016320477,2.6852443,Focus on changes or improvements compared to prior imaging findings.,"The high activation examples place emphasis on the presence of previous imaging for comparison, similar to the first dataset, but specifically focus on how current findings show changes or improvements compared to prior scans. Low activation examples typically either lack detailed findings comparison or report on unchanged or stable conditions without notable changes.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10522,latent_10522,1136,0.002272,0.0017490451,3.437037,Emphasis on findings being stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels all contain the presence of findings that were described in comparison to prior imaging, where some aspect is either stable or unchanged. This pattern is captured by the model likely due to its emphasis on monitoring changes over time in pathologies that are often chronic or require multiple follow-ups.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4782608695652174,0.33,100.0,100.0
+10523,latent_10523,1034,0.002068,0.0014988866,5.085971,Evaluating changes by comparing current images to prior ones in radiology studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate a comparison of current radiographic findings to previous studies. This pattern is signified by phrases like 'in comparison to', 'as compared with', or mentions of changes from prior imaging.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5635964912280702,0.5879396984924623,0.5616438356164384,0.82,100.0,99.0
+10524,latent_10524,6648,0.013296,0.0048676874,2.6262786,New or worsening clinical findings in comparison to prior radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve identification of new conditions or changes across multiple comparisons and prior reports. They often shift focus to critical interpretations such as symptom worsening, new effusions, or indications for more significant medical attention. Such instances typically reflect heightened concern or substantiated diagnostic observations predicting or tracking the trajectory of medical issues and are commonly used in interpreting urgent or evolving medical needs.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5671641791044776,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10525,latent_10525,6013,0.012026,0.0044012233,1.7494209,Pleural effusion changes likely linked to patient positioning.,Evidence of slight to moderate changes in pleural effusions being correlated with patient positioning rather than substantial pathological changes are being described. Reports note shifts in size or appearance related to differing imaging circumstances or oblique patient setup.,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3582338595815684,0.5,0.5,0.03,100.0,100.0
+10526,latent_10526,1320,0.00264,0.0019639856,3.239012,Comparison of findings to prior frontal image.,"The examples indicate a consistent pattern where the task is to describe radiological findings by comparing current images to prior images. The prompt explicitly directs the comparison to the 'prior frontal image', underlining the importance of comparing current imaging studies to previously acquired ones, even when specific diagnostic details are not provided.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4891237127261971,0.525,0.5163398692810458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10527,latent_10527,872,0.001744,0.0014735955,3.9038186,Absence of prior comparison in technique or findings sections triggers higher activation.,"The more active examples all include prompts that do not offer prior comparisons, both in the technique and the description sections. This pattern suggests that the absence of comparison in the specified sections activates the model more strongly.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10528,latent_10528,799,0.001598,0.0014000493,2.5139582,Structured comparison of current imaging findings to prior reports using template format.,"High activation examples typically describe the radiological findings specifically as compared to a prior report, focusing on evaluation of interval change and emphasizing rapid comparison within templates or preamble format. The use of comparison phrasing with explicit template or structure for reporting changes in a structured manner seems to characterize these examples.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10529,latent_10529,837,0.001674,0.00144382,3.1557114,Notation of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples demonstrate the consistent pattern of language in radiology reports related to changes or stability in findings over time by specifically referring to prior images. Highly activated examples frequently include explicit descriptions of interval changes or stable conditions between the current imaging and previous studies, underscoring the radiologist's effort to interpret the images dynamically in relation to patient history and treatment progression.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10530,latent_10530,4063,0.008126,0.003485001,2.303615,Evaluations focused on NG or enteric tube positioning.,"The pattern observed in high activation examples is the request to provide a description or assessment of the findings concerning nasogastric (NG) or enteric tube placement as depicted in the images. It includes specific evaluations related to the positioning and impact of these tubes, which involve instructions or details about where the tube is positioned, terminologies pointing to its correctness or need for adjustment, and often references to prior comparative images to assess position changes.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4589090909090909,0.535,0.64,0.16,100.0,100.0
+10531,latent_10531,769,0.001538,0.0012268132,4.147584,Stability in imaging findings compared to previous studies.,"Reports that describe stable or unchanged findings in comparison to previous imaging demonstrate a focus on longitudinal stability across imaging studies. This is evident from phrases that highlight lack of significant change or maintenance of previously noted conditions, indicating stability is the common feature that triggers activation.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4213381555153707,0.453125,0.3818181818181818,0.2282608695652173,92.0,100.0
+10532,latent_10532,743,0.001486,0.0013024478,3.1566603,Providing descriptions that compare current imaging findings to prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a description of the radiology study findings in comparison with prior images. This task reflects a core functionality in follow-up imaging assessments to evaluate changes over time.,0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5085730012384753,0.515625,0.4959349593495935,0.6630434782608695,92.0,100.0
+10533,latent_10533,1033,0.002066,0.0017423473,4.5945215,"Detailed evaluative language of findings, focusing on changes from prior studies.","Examples with high activation levels involve a detailed description of radiological findings with reference to changes noted in comparison to previous images, focusing on progressions or stabilities of conditions like opacities or device placements. This indicates a pattern where evaluative language considering prior studies is more detailed.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4084784751889583,0.415,0.4297520661157025,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10534,latent_10534,772,0.001544,0.0013176106,4.216493,Stable cardiac silhouette and mild pulmonary findings in serial imaging comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently detail comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifically noting stability or changes in cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes or mild pulmonary conditions consistent over time, without acute changes or developments. The reports often highlight regularity or normality in specific thoracic structures while also mentioning some improvement or stable anatomical conditions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3949843260188088,0.4196891191709844,0.3442622950819672,0.2258064516129032,93.0,100.0
+10535,latent_10535,639,0.001278,0.0014787775,5.572335,Monitoring precise end placement of tubes and catheters.,"The examples with high activation consistently focus on the precise end positioning of tubes, lines, or catheters within the chest cavity, often described in close relation to anatomy landmarks such as the carina, superior vena cava, or heart chambers. This level of detail and reference likely triggers a higher activation due to the focus on the management of critically placed devices in chest radiographs.",0.8357963875205254,0.84,0.7575757575757576,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8210989010989012,0.8216216216216217,0.7363636363636363,0.9529411764705882,85.0,100.0
+10536,latent_10536,573,0.001146,0.0011338968,3.6754158,Reports noting changes or discrepancies upon comparison with prior image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate evidence of change or comparisons with previous images that highlight a clear change in condition, placement, or findings. Specific language in the reports such as 'more conspicuous than', 'minimally larger', 'interval placement', 'as compared to' indicates that a key aspect of findings is the observation of differences or tracking change over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5166412730658541,0.5174418604651163,0.4408602150537634,0.5694444444444444,72.0,100.0
+10537,latent_10537,2439,0.004878,0.002479542,4.0600624,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies with emphasis on stability or change.,"These examples involve evaluating a current radiology study against one or more prior studies, with emphasis on detecting changes, whether new or unchanged findings. This approach allows tracking the stability or progression of clinical findings, a common task in follow-up imaging studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5327868852459017,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10538,latent_10538,448,0.000896,0.0010539606,4.897819,Comparison of current chest images with prior for cardiopulmonary changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels request comparison with prior imaging and involve the evaluation of acute changes or stable conditions, especially relating to cardiopulmonary pathology, in a structured radiological report format. These reports follow a consistent pattern asking an AI assistant to evaluate for particular conditions like pneumonia, consolidation, or edema by comparing current images with previous studies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4629280821917808,0.4640522875816993,0.3644859813084112,0.7358490566037735,53.0,100.0
+10539,latent_10539,1616,0.003232,0.0021707898,2.3586545,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently compare findings in the current imaging with those from prior imaging, as indicated by specific instructions to describe changes or stability over time. They utilize comparative observations of anatomical structures or findings, often noting new changes or the stability of previous findings.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4758064516129032,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10540,latent_10540,6404,0.012808,0.0049743406,2.4336846,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar features.,"Examples with high activation levels involve explicit mentions of normal heart size, mediastinal contours, and hilar features. They consistently indicate normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, which often signifies a stable state in radiology, making these features central to the pattern.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5409836065573771,0.33,100.0,100.0
+10541,latent_10541,8534,0.017068,0.0064447178,1.7361562,"Radiological findings described as unchanged, stable, or improved compared to prior imaging.","These examples describe radiological findings that are either unchanged, stable, or improved when compared to prior imaging studies, using specific terminology such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improved', 'interval improvement', etc.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10542,latent_10542,625,0.00125,0.0011401686,3.1042042,Chest imaging detailing medical device placement or changes.,"The examples exhibit descriptions of findings related to changes or placement of medical devices and tubes in the chest area, such as endotracheal tubes and central venous catheters. This is a pattern often discussed in critical care imaging settings where device positioning is crucial.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.513656043490999,0.5388888888888889,0.4745762711864407,0.35,80.0,100.0
+10543,latent_10543,599,0.001198,0.0011472784,4.9608727,Changes in presence or positioning of medical devices.,"The examples with high activation explicitly involve changes or stability in the presence, position, or removal of external monitoring or support devices such as endotracheal tubes, Dobbhoff tubes, nasogastric tubes, or catheters, which are often highlighted in radiology reports as they can indicate relevant clinical actions or conditions.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5046521931767833,0.5465116279069767,0.44,0.3055555555555556,72.0,100.0
+10544,latent_10544,1096,0.002192,0.0016108289,2.7753952,Symptom of 'weakness' as the indication for examination.,"Across these examples, the presence of 'weakness' as an indication or symptom correlates with high activation levels. The mention of weakness, often associated with a diagnostic evaluation for underlying issues such as pneumonia or structural abnormalities, consistently triggers higher activations, suggesting a focus on the symptom in these contexts.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,1.0,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5170909090909092,0.585,0.84,0.21,100.0,100.0
+10545,latent_10545,4177,0.008354,0.0031999368,3.3884406,Unchanged findings on comparison with prior radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to describe findings where the heart, lungs, and associated structures appear unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging studies. This suggests the model is activated by confirmatory reports indicating lack of significant interval changes in the most recent imaging findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5056179775280899,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10546,latent_10546,3676,0.007352,0.0042719604,3.6854131,Use of frontal and lateral images for comparison to prior frontal image.,"The examples with high activation often involve the use of frontal and lateral chest X-ray images being compared with prior frontal images and/or have a clear indication or history accompanying the request. These elements create a context where changes or stability in conditions between current and prior studies are analyzed, especially when both frontal and lateral images are used for comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4100294985250737,0.42,0.4365079365079365,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10547,latent_10547,1390,0.00278,0.0017913163,3.809043,"Detailed description of imaging findings in comparison to prior, noting subtle changes or implications.","Examples with high activation levels frequently involve precise descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to previous imaging, focusing on subtle changes and the clinical implications of those changes. This involves detecting changes that are often complex or nuanced, requiring detailed radiological knowledge to interpret the significance or differential diagnosis.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5344827586206896,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10548,latent_10548,1482,0.002964,0.0018177428,4.96222,Descriptions involving changes relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention ""comparison"" or ""prior imaging"" (e.g., ""as compared to"", ""interval change"", ""unchanged since prior"") and often assess changes over time, whether it’s resolution or persistence of certain radiologic findings, suggesting the pattern heavily relies on evaluating progression or regression against previous data.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.616816431322208,0.6381909547738693,0.5918367346938775,0.8787878787878788,99.0,100.0
+10549,latent_10549,2669,0.005338,0.0026272482,3.0859144,Emphasis on comparison to priors in imaging assessment.,"Activation levels are higher when explicit comparison is made to prior imaging studies, encouraging radiologists to highlight changes or stable findings over time, which is crucial in medical diagnostics. The pattern emphasizes comparison contexts regardless of the specifics or conditions noted.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10550,latent_10550,824,0.001648,0.0014514638,3.3294318,Evaluation against prior imaging with descriptions provided.,"The examples indicate a pattern where activation increases when findings descriptions involve evaluation against prior imaging, especially with specific instructions for comparisons. Examples with terms like 'provides a description' or 'compared to prior imaging,' noted in the examples, seem to generate higher activation levels.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10551,latent_10551,751,0.001502,0.0014480548,3.340061,Uncertain or subtle findings noted in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activations frequently reference radiographic findings suggesting a faint or uncertain result in the context of image comparison, as observed in descriptions like ""appears slightly increased,"" ""unchanged,"" or making note of minor changes compared to prior studies. These references highlight uncertainty or subtlety in findings that require closer scrutiny over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4909690177982861,0.4923076923076923,0.4777777777777778,0.4526315789473684,95.0,100.0
+10552,latent_10552,559,0.001118,0.0010135219,3.8686006,Chronic or persistent elevation of the hemidiaphragm.,"The pattern here revolves around the persistent or chronic elevation of the hemidiaphragm across multiple examples. This observation is consistently documented as a notable finding without being part of acute changes or processes, as reflected in the descriptions, indicating its significance in broader analysis or patient management.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,0.9615384615384616,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7689903745989417,0.8035714285714286,1.0,0.5147058823529411,68.0,100.0
+10553,latent_10553,6835,0.01367,0.005015622,1.9764808,Focus on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention explicit changes compared to previous imaging studies. They identify intervals changes such as placement or removal of medical lines, tubes, or catheters, or increased/decreased opacities or effusions. These changes indicate a focus on identifying alterations over time as a pattern of interest.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10554,latent_10554,988,0.001976,0.0013892575,4.4453106,Precise details about tube/catheter positioning in chest x-rays.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently have specific details about the position of tubes, catheters, and other medical devices relative to anatomical landmarks, particularly the carina in chest x-rays. These details are crucial for assessing proper placement and are directly compared to prior examinations, emphasizing positioning changes.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10555,latent_10555,1063,0.002126,0.0015934178,2.9549878,Explicit instructions to compare current imaging with prior exams.,The pattern involves reference to a comparison with previous imaging studies. Examples with lower activations do not explicitly highlight comparison or interval changes. The instructions to compare with previous exams are integral to understanding findings in these reports.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.4489795918367347,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10556,latent_10556,862,0.001724,0.0015342062,2.8859282,Significant interval changes or new findings on imaging.,"The provided examples without substantial activation demonstrate a lack of significant or new changes in the findings compared to prior reports. On the other hand, the examples with higher activation levels indicate either new findings, interval changes, or significant comparisons to previous imaging, which are critical for clinical decision-making.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4329569892473118,0.4673366834170854,0.4313725490196078,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+10557,latent_10557,10982,0.021964,0.008268001,1.7463906,Evaluation of interval changes or stability on follow-up imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include phrases indicating observation of changes or stability in a patient's condition by comparing the current imaging with previous images, often involving conditions like atelectasis, pleural effusion, or device placement. The pattern focuses on the measurement of stability or change compared to prior imaging.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10558,latent_10558,424,0.000848,0.0012799097,3.513127,Mentions of moderate cardiomegaly.,"These examples frequently mention the presence of moderate or significant cardiomegaly, which indicates an enlarged heart size. This finding, such as 'moderate cardiomegaly', is a consistent pattern across examples with high activation levels, suggesting that the model likely focuses on reports indicating notable enlargement of the heart.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.9444444444444444,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.8107152720243027,0.8456375838926175,0.8611111111111112,0.6326530612244898,49.0,100.0
+10559,latent_10559,576,0.001152,0.0012292386,3.9640656,Stability or interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Most examples highlight the importance of identifying and reporting interval changes or stability in cardiopulmonary findings across imaging studies, frequently using language to comment on differences from prior images, the presence or absence of stability, and any progression noted.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3722129319955407,0.3764705882352941,0.2906976744186046,0.3571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+10560,latent_10560,451,0.000902,0.0010050748,4.6151237,Comparison of current and prior imaging focusing on device positions and stability of findings.,The highly activated examples involve descriptions of imaging findings that specifically include the presence and confirmation of various medical devices or lines (like PICCs or catheters) and their positions relative to prior imaging. This pattern involves comparing current and prior studies to track device placements and assess conditions like stability or changes in abnormalities.,0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6089668615984405,0.6143790849673203,0.4634146341463415,0.7169811320754716,53.0,100.0
+10561,latent_10561,6423,0.012846,0.004767786,2.0913293,Reports focus on comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve the evaluation of chest radiographs where a comparison is made to prior imaging studies, noted as terms like 'comparison', indicating changes in the imaging findings over time or stability of previous findings. These reports focus heavily on the evolution or comparison information rather than acute findings on the current image only.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5021573182874212,0.55,0.5308641975308642,0.86,100.0,100.0
+10562,latent_10562,693,0.001386,0.0011738507,4.4572806,Focus on placement or change of medical devices and lines.,"The key in this pattern is a focus on medical devices, lines, and tubes being placed in patients and evaluating their positioning or changes across imaging studies. High activation levels are indicated when these devices and their positioning or re-positioning details within images are a primary focus. Terms like 'ET tube', 'PICC line', 'Pacemaker', 'Dobbhoff', and comparisons of their placement across images are prominent.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5527950310559007,0.5597826086956522,0.5194805194805194,0.4761904761904761,84.0,100.0
+10563,latent_10563,1611,0.003222,0.0023835066,4.556116,Atelectasis mention or assessment in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve findings characterized as atelectasis or comparisons to prior images looking for atelectasis, such as 'potential atelectasis', 'likely atelectasis', 'probably atelectasis', or similar descriptors. Lower activation examples either lack such findings or emphasize other pathologies instead.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.595034595034595,0.5979899497487438,0.6219512195121951,0.51,100.0,99.0
+10564,latent_10564,1014,0.002028,0.0014555798,3.5187001,Comparison against prior imaging studies post-thoracentesis or other procedures.,"These examples focus on analyzing current imaging against previous studies, specifically assessing the interval changes regarding post-procedural evaluation. Additionally, they reference findings after procedures like thoracentesis, highlighting any consequential changes such as resolution of effusions or persistences.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5667945405673426,0.585,0.6440677966101694,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10565,latent_10565,395,0.00079,0.000978585,5.0125566,Complex comparative analysis of current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically involve a detailed comparative analysis of current and prior images, addressing specific pathologies or complicated conditions like changes in pneumonia extent or opacities. This pattern reflects a complex radiological workflow in assessing detailed ongoing issues versus simple single imaging statements.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4931278831977933,0.5,0.3373493975903614,0.6086956521739131,46.0,100.0
+10566,latent_10566,760,0.00152,0.00141722,2.9839413,High activation correlates with comparison to prior reports or images.,"The examples with higher activations all include references to previous findings or reports, implying that the model is triggered by contexts that involve comparison between current and prior examinations, similar to radiology practices which focus on changes over time for diagnosis or progression assessment.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.431540856686022,0.4559585492227979,0.4571428571428571,0.6881720430107527,93.0,100.0
+10567,latent_10567,820,0.00164,0.0013622424,4.5396147,"Given images with ""COMPARISON: None"" in tasks requiring comparison.","Examples with activation levels above average frequently involve current images and the explicit requirement to compare them with the prior image, despite later stating 'COMPARISON: None.' This suggests an inconsistency or a lack of available prior images while the task demands a comparison, leading to noticeable activation. In contrast, lower activation examples align clearly with the presence of actual previous images to enable comparisons or don't require such contextually.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5510204081632653,0.27,100.0,100.0
+10568,latent_10568,2283,0.004566,0.002274275,3.5369427,Presence of action-oriented directives in findings and comparisons.,"The data indicates that examples with high activation levels frequently involve a call-to-action directive about findings, which could involve planning future steps, making recommendations for further evaluation, or directly addressing changes observed. Common phrasing includes imperatives to describe, evaluate, or compare findings with prior images as well as potential instructive elements.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.490566037735849,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10569,latent_10569,1514,0.003028,0.0017082738,2.6029263,Descriptions of findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons to prior imaging studies, focusing on interval changes or stability in the findings - whether devices, pathological conditions, or anatomical changes. This pattern is typical in radiology to assess treatment progress or the natural course of a condition.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10570,latent_10570,10108,0.020216,0.009573313,5.076625,Stable findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently discuss comparison with prior radiographic findings, especially noting differences that have remained stable or unchanged over time, such as stability in heart or vessel size, absence of new lesions, or resolution of previously noted anomalies.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10571,latent_10571,818,0.001636,0.0012789747,2.8861508,Description of findings without prior image comparison.,"The highly activated examples frequently contain requests for describing radiological findings despite the lack of a prior comparison image or previous report, yet they often feature multiple-view imaging (e.g., both frontal and lateral views) for comprehensive assessment. This leads to a detailed evaluation of the current condition without referencing prior studies or having clear prior reports available.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5813953488372093,0.25,100.0,100.0
+10572,latent_10572,4078,0.008156,0.003305862,2.601866,"Detailed comparison with prior images, focusing on stability or subtle changes.","Examples with high activation levels provide a detailed description for radiology findings and specifically mention comparing current images against prior images to assess any changes, with a focus on stability or subtle changes. These examples often include explicit notes about what didn't change or remained stable.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10573,latent_10573,3679,0.007358,0.0029597054,2.5481226,Changes in positioning or removal of medical devices in imaging comparison.,"When compared to prior imaging, findings such as placement or removal of medical devices are described as resulting in significant change, such as interval removal or advancement of catheters or tubes, despite other aspects remaining unchanged. High activation corresponds to descriptions highlighting changes in medical device positioning or removal rather than unchanged pathology.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.584,0.61,0.72,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10574,latent_10574,11619,0.023238,0.008473184,1.6029435,Examples emphasize precise descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation describe findings using adjectives or adverbs for specific changes or positions of structures, indicating certainty or precision in radiological conclusions. These are patterns about clarity and precision in imaging reports, often focusing on specific details becoming clearer or confirmed as stable from previous imaging comparisons.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10575,latent_10575,7708,0.015416,0.0057246145,2.2318327,"Clear and concise description of findings, aligned with standard radiology reporting, often compared to prior images.","Examples with higher activation levels typically involve straightforward descriptions of findings and comparisons with prior studies, without overly complex narratives or unclear conclusions. High activations suggest concise reporting practices, including clear aligns within standard radiological assessment language.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10576,latent_10576,3068,0.006136,0.0025919408,2.5823536,Focus on interval changes compared to previous imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation show findings compared explicitly to previous imaging. This comparison tends to reveal interval changes or stability in disease processes, particularly focusing on the continuity of findings such as device positioning, consolidations, or effusions.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10577,latent_10577,626,0.001252,0.001289312,4.5566406,Limitations in evaluation due to low lung volumes or technique constraints.,Consistent mention of properties regarding the limitation of the evaluation due to low lung volumes or suboptimal techniques suggests that these factors heavily influence activation. These elements provide constraints in interpreting chest imagery and are noted throughout the relevant examples.,0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5884784293464221,0.5932203389830508,0.5308641975308642,0.5584415584415584,77.0,100.0
+10578,latent_10578,1611,0.003222,0.0014860409,3.255081,Use of specific terms for comparison with prior imaging results.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention evaluating findings in comparison with prior imaging reports and using specific phrases like 'compared to', 'unchanged from', or displaying terms indicating stability or change over time. These linguistic patterns are typical in clinical practice when monitoring a patient's condition.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10579,latent_10579,888,0.001776,0.0017156864,2.7936053,Cardiac silhouette at the upper limits of normal size.,"These examples are concerned with findings that describe the cardiac silhouette as being at the 'upper limits of normal' or slightly enlarged along with other details about pulmonary or mediastinal structures. This is a common observation noted during radiology interpretations for comparative insight, often noted with slight variations in descriptive language without necessarily indicating acute pathology.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.9285714285714286,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5741893219783819,0.61,0.7619047619047619,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10580,latent_10580,1249,0.002498,0.001617993,3.3942425,Enlarged cardiac silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe an enlarged cardiac silhouette or heart size. This specific finding is a common pattern noted in radiology reports, often signifying pathologies such as cardiomegaly or heart-related issues.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.539894512400404,0.59,0.7647058823529411,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10581,latent_10581,12703,0.025406,0.009145678,1.2484039,Unchanged or stable findings on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels address findings related to interval changes in imaging, reflecting stability or improvement over time. This indicates a focus on the lack of significant change from previous imaging studies. The pattern likely involves unchanged findings or persistent abnormalities upon comparison with prior images.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.4942528735632184,0.43,100.0,100.0
+10582,latent_10582,874,0.001748,0.001567431,3.6007528,Normal findings compared to prior imaging without interval change.,"The highly activated examples are characterized by descriptions indicating no abnormal findings after a comparative evaluation with prior imaging studies, often noting stable or normal cardiomediastinal features, osseous structure, and absence of pleural effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax. Lesser activated examples either lack this comparative context or note the presence of abnormalities.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4213342067911344,0.47,0.4285714285714285,0.18,100.0,100.0
+10583,latent_10583,920,0.00184,0.0016100535,6.6643353,"Unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours are noted.","Examples with higher activation consistently include observations on the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours as unchanged or normal, often with an additional commentary on the heart size. These observations are connected with the use of routine descriptive phrases in chest radiograph descriptions where anatomical comparisons are made with no significant findings to report.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.6164383561643836,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10584,latent_10584,10731,0.021462,0.007869194,1.6766313,Comparison with prior images to assess changes or stability.,"Examples with a higher activation tend to focus on comparing current findings with prior imaging to identify changes, stable conditions, or necessary adjustments, often leading to clinical actions like further checks, probable interventions, or concluding stability. This pattern indicates that the model identifies the referencing of past studies to evaluate changes as key information in radiology reports.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10585,latent_10585,469,0.000938,0.0010564699,6.1547666,Detailed normal findings without noteworthy pathology in chest imaging.,"The examples consistently show that reports focusing on normal findings and no significant changes, particularly when there is no prior image for comparison, result in lower activation levels. Conversely, detailed assessments of the lungs being clear, absence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or significant specific pathology do not activate the model unless the situation is notably unusual.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5771106941838648,0.6086956521739131,0.4821428571428571,0.4426229508196721,61.0,100.0
+10586,latent_10586,1058,0.002116,0.0014896349,3.9140723,Explicit diagnostic task based on findings or stability analysis.,"Samples with positive activations consistently involve a PROCESS or TASK that the model performs (e.g., description of findings, evaluation of stability or change), while zero activations lack this explicit process focus, focusing instead on straightforward observations. Examples are highly activated when they describe performing a diagnostic task based on findings, especially involving elements like exact terms found in prior studies (e.g., comparison, findings, techniques).",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4149776086562605,0.435,0.4525547445255474,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10587,latent_10587,5783,0.011566,0.0056560757,3.2909312,Mentions of 'unchanged' findings compared to prior studies.,"Higher activation examples frequently mention the term 'unchanged' or descriptions of stability, often referencing previous imaging studies. This suggests a pattern of monitoring for stability or lack of interval change over time.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.25,100.0,100.0
+10588,latent_10588,1666,0.003332,0.0020167455,5.9101915,"Focus on simple, direct comparison with prior images.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on generating comparative findings rather than describing detailed medical conditions or using complex comparisons specifically. The less detailed or more straightforward the comparative description, the higher the activation, suggesting a focus on stating changes rather than evaluating a condition in detail.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10589,latent_10589,2460,0.00492,0.0030317975,3.25285,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The key theme across these examples is the presence of radiological descriptions highlighting stable or unchanged conditions over previous comparisons. These descriptions commonly reference stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes, unchanged hardware like tubes or pacers, and similarly unchanged pathologies or anatomical features relative to previous imaging studies. This theme accounts for a significant portion of high activation scores.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.59,0.59,0.59,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10590,latent_10590,12011,0.024022,0.008990464,2.1801906,Low inspiratory volumes in chest imaging affecting interpretation.,"The examples with higher activation levels seem to focus on descriptions that involve low inspiratory volumes affecting image interpretation, particularly in the context of chest radiographs where heart size and mediastinal prominence are evaluated under these conditions.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.421152732986025,0.475,0.4358974358974359,0.17,100.0,100.0
+10591,latent_10591,1108,0.002216,0.0017548058,2.5997632,Detailed comparison to prior imaging indicating change or stability.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently refer to changes or potential changes in the findings when comparing current images to previous ones, focusing on interval change or stability over time. They're typically detailed observations of improved or worsened clinical findings, not just static descriptions.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10592,latent_10592,11329,0.022658,0.008296827,1.6600722,Multi-view analysis with consistent findings across views.,"Higher activations are found in examples where the assistant makes observations of anatomical or pathological features across multiple views, particularly emphasizing aspects that are unchanged or consistent across different perspectives, such as PA and lateral views, implying comprehensive multi-view analysis.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4878048780487805,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10593,latent_10593,5406,0.010812,0.0043159095,1.8117205,Descriptions claiming comparison to prior images regardless of actual comparisons available.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include a structure where findings or recommendations clearly respond to prompts that explicitly ask for a descriptive comparison with a prior image, even when there seemingly isn't a previous image stated available. Such prompts and completions typically do not perform actual comparisons, as indicated by procedural constraints, yet pretend to do so or provide detailed descriptions without explicit comparisons, such as 'description of findings' or 'comparison to the prior frontal image', even if no such image is compared, highlighting the fabricated assessment process.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4095365418894831,0.47,0.4817073170731707,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10594,latent_10594,1570,0.00314,0.0019851234,2.6154423,Report stability or improvement compared to prior exam.,"Examples show findings that are stable or unchanged when compared to prior reports, or demonstrate improvement. This indicates that the activation levels are high when studies refer to consistency over time, unchanged findings, or resolution of conditions such as effusions or opacities as noted in serial exams.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5949263502454992,0.5959595959595959,0.6136363636363636,0.54,100.0,98.0
+10595,latent_10595,1416,0.002832,0.0022172884,4.242565,Detailed positioning of medical tubes on chest imaging.,"These examples note various medical tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric) with explicit mentions of their positions in specific anatomical contexts, often using precise distances from anatomical landmarks like the carina. The pattern also includes evaluations of these tubes' positions over time, highlighting any adjustments or changes noted since prior imaging.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,0.8620689655172413,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8260869565217391,0.83,0.7538461538461538,0.98,100.0,100.0
+10596,latent_10596,5874,0.011748,0.004520239,2.3297899,Interval change or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels all describe interval changes or comparisons between the current and previous imaging studies, particularly noting changes in conditions like pneumothorax, atelectasis, or effusion. These examples use explicit comparative language or suggest specific actions based on observed changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10597,latent_10597,682,0.001364,0.001306542,3.7081983,Detailed comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Reports with high activations often reference detailed comparisons and show a progression or change of assessed conditions, such as improvement or stability in comparison to prior imaging, particularly with respect to cardiopulmonary structures or pathologies (e.g., effusions, cardiac silhouette). Phrases such as 'when compared to previous', 'from prior exam', or descriptions of changes in pulmonary or cardiac findings distinguish these examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5819632495164411,0.5824175824175825,0.5319148936170213,0.6097560975609756,82.0,100.0
+10598,latent_10598,1356,0.002712,0.0019203477,2.8487537,Comparisons to prior images with noted changes or stability.,"Activation levels are higher for examples that both request and provide descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior images, particularly when they specify changes or stability in findings across time. This focus on 'interval change', 'comparison to prior', and explicit observation of change or stability with reference to previous examinations strongly activates the model, aligning with substantial patterns in medical reporting where trending and comparison are crucial.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5217391304347826,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10599,latent_10599,2317,0.004634,0.0027115555,4.753827,Description and adjustment of medical device positioning in comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples predominantly involve the description of the positioning and adjustment of medical tubes and devices, such as Dobbhoff tubes, PICC lines, or enteric tubes, in comparison with prior imaging. This includes identifying changes or stability in the position of such devices, often with specific measurements related to anatomical landmarks.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7171717171717171,0.72,0.775,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10600,latent_10600,2317,0.004634,0.0020579626,2.5957136,Complex comparison analysis involving current images and findings.,"A pattern emerges where the report requests a detailed investigation of findings, particularly for complex or new pathologies or comparisons to a prior image. These tasks require a higher level of interpretation and insight regarding any differences or concerns indicated in the findings section. This may involve interpreting changes from a prior record or a deeper analysis, generally related to current frontal and lateral images, and findings significance.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10601,latent_10601,972,0.001944,0.001479617,4.0863676,Comparison highlighting pleural effusions or cardiomegaly changes.,"Examples with higher activations commonly include findings of contrast between two radiological images showing changes or lack thereof in cardiac size or silhouette, pleural effusions, or pulmonary opacities. These reports often highlight changes in these parameters as crucial for persistent conditions such as pulmonary edema or cardiomegaly.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10602,latent_10602,732,0.001464,0.0013496779,2.5128863,Expectation of comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern observed in activation levels is that higher activations are associated with the presence of phrasing that suggests an expectation or previous plan for comparison with a prior study, often marked by phrases like 'comparison made to prior...' or 'in comparison to previous...'. It indicates an ongoing comparison-centric narrative.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3917267597984491,0.453125,0.4596273291925465,0.8043478260869565,92.0,100.0
+10603,latent_10603,2975,0.00595,0.0025907573,3.0114079,Unchanged findings in comparison with prior imaging.,These examples have significant intervals where findings are evaluated as 'unchanged' or 'stable' despite comparisons between current and previous radiographs. The language used suggests consistent or unchanged findings between the current and prior imaging studies.,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5365853658536586,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10604,latent_10604,2454,0.004908,0.0033386832,3.168916,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability in pulmonary findings.","Highly activated samples consistently include a comprehensive evaluation of the lung fields in comparison to prior imaging, highlighting any stability or changes in features such as opacities, nodules, or consolidations. This indicates the importance of descriptive comparisons in assessing radiological changes over time.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5194805194805194,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10605,latent_10605,1133,0.002266,0.0019754542,3.0205069,Mild prominence of cardiac silhouette or pulmonary vasculature.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly mention mild prominence or enlargement of the cardiac silhouette or pulmonary vasculature, often without significant corresponding changes in associated pathology such as effusions or pneumonia. This pattern emphasizes subtle findings in cardiac or vascular status without acute processes.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7070707070707071,0.71,0.7625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10606,latent_10606,863,0.001726,0.0013817971,3.5597873,Detailed comparison to prior chest imaging with specific descriptors.,"Examples with high activation emphasize the use of specific descriptors for conditions observed compared to prior images, including differences and consistencies. These descriptors often denote incremental findings or stability, but hinge on comparison expressions like 'unchanged', 'as compared to prior', 'similar to previous'.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10607,latent_10607,2351,0.004702,0.0019709636,2.8182726,Descriptions of medical device positions or adjustments on radiographs.,"The more representative examples are related to descriptions of position and adjustments of medical devices (e.g., subclavian catheters, ET tubes) visualized in the radiographs. These adjustments often include measurements from anatomical landmarks, emphasizing the correct or incorrect positioning of the device",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5063291139240507,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10608,latent_10608,925,0.00185,0.0015059633,2.6911597,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs without effusion or pneumothorax.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe imaging findings where the heart size is normal, the pulmonary vasculature is normal, and the lungs are clear, with no pleural effusion or pneumothorax seen. These are typical phrases in radiology reports to indicate an absence of abnormal findings in specific areas of the chest, particularly highlighting a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6282243894986123,0.635,0.684931506849315,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10609,latent_10609,11923,0.023846,0.008815386,2.30391,Reports emphasize the placement or removal of medical devices in chest imaging.,"The pattern involves identification of changes, removals, or stable positions of medical devices and lines located within the thoracic cavity, such as tubes, wires, catheters, and pacers. These reports stress the position or extraction of devices relative to prior states, frequently comparing to past radiographs. This focus on the status and location of medical apparatus is the consistent feature within high activation level examples.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,100.0
+10610,latent_10610,451,0.000902,0.0010133802,4.5817213,Full integration of both current and prior images in chest radiology reporting.,"Highly activated examples focus on comprehensive descriptions involving frontal, lateral, and prior chest images, encompassing reports with history and comparison segments even when some fields are incomplete or indicated as none. This reflects standard radiological report components while incorporating prior report context.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3693244065733414,0.3694267515923566,0.2941176470588235,0.5263157894736842,57.0,100.0
+10611,latent_10611,1008,0.002016,0.0013810218,2.6068463,"Highlighting changes or stability compared to previous images, especially in devices or anatomical features.","High activation samples detail comparisons between current and prior images, noting changes or lack thereof in medical devices, internal anatomical features, and fluid levels. These comparisons highlight patient management updates and are critical in longitudinal patient care.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5944700460829493,0.615,0.5793103448275863,0.84,100.0,100.0
+10612,latent_10612,3389,0.006778,0.0029864388,3.2677073,Normal heart and mediastinal contours on chest images.,The high activation level is associated with examples that describe findings with normal cardiac size and mediastinal contours in the imagery. The repetition and emphasis of these specific descriptions in the findings are prevalent in documenting stable or normal cardiac conditions in radiologic reports.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3926510780443365,0.4,0.3717948717948718,0.29,100.0,100.0
+10613,latent_10613,1568,0.003136,0.0020944558,3.8428943,"Comparisons of lungs and pleural changes between current and prior imaging, while cardiomediastinal silhouette remains largely unchanged.","Examples with moderate activation depict descriptions related to interval changes, follow-ups, or comparisons between current and prior radiographic studies, focusing largely on cardiomediastinal silhouette changes, pleural conditions, or pulmonary findings. Such comparisons usually note normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal contours while highlighting focal improvements or new findings elsewhere.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.3,100.0,100.0
+10614,latent_10614,1310,0.00262,0.0021628558,3.2995992,Findings normal or unchanged compared to prior radiographs.,"High activation examples refer to assessments with no deviation in cardiac, mediastinal, or pulmonary findings between current and prior images, often summarized with ""within normal limits"" or ""clear."" This includes stable internal device position or no new pathologies despite elaborate practice prompts which can describe full studies and prior reports.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5339805825242718,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10615,latent_10615,1048,0.002096,0.0018996535,4.528651,Changes in lung opacities or lung regions compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples predominantly require descriptions of chest radiographs compared to prior frontal images, often noting changes or stability in anatomical features like cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, but particularly focusing on lung opacities or other changes potentially indicative of pathologies.",0.2694805194805195,0.28,0.2105263157894736,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3424969584012839,0.365,0.2857142857142857,0.18,100.0,100.0
+10616,latent_10616,897,0.001794,0.0013215023,4.3261776,Presence of unchanged status compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation systematically involve the presence of a prior report or comparative study, whereas lower activating examples either lack a prior for accurate comparison or have indeterminate changes. These comparative analyses are crucial for activating this pattern in evaluation.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4857142857142857,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10617,latent_10617,1520,0.00304,0.0017879665,2.0378315,Dobbhoff tube placement and positioning details in radiology findings.,"Highly activated examples refer explicitly to Dobbhoff tube placement or corresponding positioning details. This is a common focus in radiology reports when the management and placement of Dobbhoff feeding tubes are being scrutinized, showing a linguistic pattern related to feeding tube positioning and stability.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,1.0,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4388085473775092,0.545,0.8461538461538461,0.11,100.0,100.0
+10618,latent_10618,828,0.001656,0.0015229811,3.4217336,Normal heart size and absence of acute cardiopulmonary findings.,"These examples consistently describe the heart size as normal and emphasize the absence of significant findings such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal lung consolidations. This pattern might specifically align with standard templates or structured reports used in radiology for cases when no acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities are detected.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7773053952829234,0.78,0.7295081967213115,0.89,100.0,100.0
+10619,latent_10619,5780,0.01156,0.006529816,3.8023455,Emphasis on stability or minimal change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on clear conclusions drawn from the comparison between current and prior images, often emphasizing stability or minimal change, which are typical outputs expected from such an analysis in follow-up studies rather than highlighting specific pathology findings alone.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10620,latent_10620,1226,0.002452,0.0018560722,2.3358192,Evaluation of interval change with specific indications for acute conditions.,"The highly activated examples include specific indications for the imaging studies, often related to acute, potentially serious conditions such as chest pain, dyspnea, or altered mental status, which may prompt careful analysis against prior imaging for significant changes. These examples emphasize the need for explicit reference to previous studies to accurately assess interval changes.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10621,latent_10621,1865,0.00373,0.0023823017,2.2245336,Chest radiograph interpretation noting stable or unremarkable findings.,"The highly activated examples typically involve the interpretation of a single view or paired views of the chest without any definite consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax but focus instead on documenting stable, unchanged, or expected findings related to support devices, aeration, or sillhouette appearances. This observation indicates that the pattern likely involves routine comparisons noting stability or the lack of acute findings in various thoracic cases.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7049002096761668,0.715,0.656934306569343,0.9,100.0,100.0
+10622,latent_10622,1046,0.002092,0.0016199591,3.3158383,"Inclusion of detailed comparisons with prior imaging findings, particularly cardiac or pulmonary changes.","The examples all provide radiology findings in comparison with prior imaging, focusing on subtle changes like size alterations, persistence, or no change, often with notable cardiac or pulmonary considerations. Examples with high activations feature detailed descriptions in relation to past findings, underlining awareness of historical conditions and their evolution (or lack thereof) in the current scan.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5146966854283928,0.515,0.5157894736842106,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10623,latent_10623,1482,0.002964,0.0023355477,4.1313257,Focus on comparing current to prior images for changes.,The examples with high activation levels focus on the comparative element of radiologic findings between a current set of images and prior ones. They explicitly ask for interpretations that compare current images to previous studies to assess changes in patient's condition.,0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10624,latent_10624,535,0.00107,0.0014208546,4.507677,"Evaluation in comparison to prior images, particularly for changes in medical device placement or lesion stability.","Examples contain explicit references to previous imaging for comparison, especially when evaluating the placement or changes in medical structures such as tubes, catheters, or lesions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5583928916360827,0.5590062111801242,0.4468085106382978,0.6885245901639344,61.0,100.0
+10625,latent_10625,861,0.001722,0.001449949,3.152566,Use of current frontal and lateral images without prior comparison.,"The instances with higher activation levels reference both frontal and lateral images but specify that there is no explicit prior comparison. This frequent pattern in radiology reports suggests a detailed assessment is made without needing past image reference, with the focus being on current frontal and lateral views.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.627906976744186,0.27,100.0,100.0
+10626,latent_10626,1233,0.002466,0.0016176068,2.6533742,Focus on stability or minimal change in findings over time in radiology studies.,"The examples with high activation involve detailed analysis of radiological studies compared to previous studies with emphasis on identifying and describing specific incidental findings or chronic conditions that remain stable, without a significant change or progression. The context typically involves evaluation over time to assess an aspect's stability, such as nodules, cardiomediastinal structures, or device placements.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4906100311731759,0.4924623115577889,0.4886363636363636,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+10627,latent_10627,598,0.001196,0.0012901977,4.370382,"Focused direct comparison to prior imaging, assessing stability or lack of acute changes.","Higher activation levels were linked to phrases indicating the report's focus on providing a clear comparison to prior imaging studies without distraction, specifically related to comparisons that clarified current stable findings or negative for acute changes. Cases with lower activation often involved either a lack of comparison or focus on unrelated pathology such as pacemaker leads or tubes.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4026283147272788,0.4046242774566474,0.3333333333333333,0.410958904109589,73.0,100.0
+10628,latent_10628,1123,0.002246,0.001684284,4.2149096,Provide radiological findings without prior imaging for comparison.,"The highly activated examples all request a description of radiological findings specifically without an available prior image for direct comparison, emphasizing the unique challenge of interpreting without historical context to guide diagnosis.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5272009966777409,0.5353535353535354,0.547945205479452,0.404040404040404,99.0,99.0
+10629,latent_10629,1947,0.003894,0.0025831752,3.825379,Precision in tube placement description.,"The examples most representative of the pattern describe tube placement, including endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, nasogastric tubes, and venous catheters, often specifying their exact position in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina or stomach. The focus on tube placement is consistent across examples with higher activation, indicating specific attention to these procedural details.",0.9198717948717948,0.92,0.8888888888888888,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8596491228070176,0.86,0.8272727272727273,0.91,100.0,100.0
+10630,latent_10630,599,0.001198,0.0014652275,4.0641994,Placing and positioning of medical tubes or catheters in imaging.,"The most representative examples describe endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, central catheters, nasogastric tubes, or other tube placements and their precisions in radiographic examination. This pattern is common in radiological interpretations where specific tube positions within the body are noted.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.747119179163378,0.7471910112359551,0.6701030927835051,0.8333333333333334,78.0,100.0
+10631,latent_10631,713,0.001426,0.0013580375,4.124524,"Presence and positioning of medical tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric) in chest imaging.","These examples discuss the positioning of tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, etc.) in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina or diaphragm, which is crucial for assessing correct placement and potential complications. This pattern is typical in radiology reports focusing on interventions or post-procedural checks, reflected in the high activation levels.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8212874330376745,0.8216216216216217,0.782608695652174,0.8470588235294118,85.0,100.0
+10632,latent_10632,835,0.00167,0.0014212092,3.6217394,Emphasis on low lung volumes and subtle pulmonary changes.,Low lung volumes with mild atelectasis or small pleural effusions are consistently noted in the high activation examples. These findings suggest a specific focus on assessing subtle or mild findings of low lung volumes and related minor pulmonary issues such as pleural effusions or atelectasis in comparison with previous images.,0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5599559955995599,0.56,0.5612244897959183,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10633,latent_10633,1055,0.00211,0.0016717605,2.4862888,Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Many of these examples involve radiological comparisons that note changes or stability in findings over time, applying both subjective and objective commentary on observed intervals. The instances focus on observing changes, stability, or resolution of pathologies, devices, or conditions compared to previous images, which is critical in tracking disease progression or improvement.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4185899542455573,0.425,0.4380165289256198,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10634,latent_10634,1161,0.002322,0.0014471299,4.581966,Descriptions focus on interval changes compared to prior images.,"Many high activation examples involve providing comparison to prior images, indicating interval changes either improvement or worsening of specific findings like opacities, effusions, or tube placements. The pattern emphasizes detailed comparisons and assessments over time, reflecting follow-up and disease monitoring, rather than initial diagnosis.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10635,latent_10635,5814,0.011628,0.0044762017,2.8642077,Changes in tube or line positions compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve changes in the status, positioning, or findings associated with tubes, lines, or devices in a radiological report. This is consistent with clinical reviews involving clinical interventions or statuses that require tracking of differences across imaging.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10636,latent_10636,743,0.001486,0.0013707599,4.195216,Blunting of costophrenic angles suggesting pleural effusion.,"Examples with high activation levels often mention blunting or the presence of a small pleural effusion, specifically at the costophrenic angles. Blunting could be due to effusions or suggest other abnormalities. The pattern may arise because costophrenic angle blunting is a significant finding that often requires specific clinical interpretation or management.",0.9599358974358976,0.96,0.925925925925926,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8553105787576849,0.8564102564102564,0.9036144578313252,0.7894736842105263,95.0,100.0
+10637,latent_10637,1476,0.002952,0.0015191977,3.755218,Observation of interval change compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels commonly involve explicit documentation of interval change since prior imaging. Descriptions often include finding stability or specific changes, such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'new', emphasizing a comparative approach to assessing radiological findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10638,latent_10638,662,0.001324,0.0014397854,5.441454,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"The pattern involves mentions of normal or unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours along with clear lungs and an absence of consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. Each example emphasizes stability or lack of acute change in cardiopulmonary findings, often following evaluation of PA and lateral chest views.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.875,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.728641456582633,0.7311827956989247,0.7195121951219512,0.686046511627907,86.0,100.0
+10639,latent_10639,7674,0.015348,0.0057249675,1.5480105,Descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels request a description or comparison of radiological findings between two films captured at different times. This is characteristic of clinical scenarios where identifying interval changes is critical for patient management, such as determining progression or improvement of a condition.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5523568810817642,0.5527638190954773,0.5523809523809524,0.58,100.0,99.0
+10640,latent_10640,6273,0.012546,0.0050825835,3.1014357,Detailed reporting of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,Examples with higher activation levels involve a process of directly referring to and describing changes or lack thereof in imaging studies when comparing with prior reports. It emphasizes the detailed examination of interval changes in findings.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5125,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10641,latent_10641,7720,0.01544,0.0058070133,1.771591,Stability or unchanged status in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples include language regarding comparisons to prior imaging and unchanged findings across exams. Moreover, they often involve terms indicating stability, such as 'unchanged', 'no relevant change', 'stable appearance', or reference prior dates in relation to findings on current images.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5945945945945946,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10642,latent_10642,1164,0.002328,0.0016755237,4.2466407,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on comparison of current and prior imaging findings to detect clinical changes, employing phrases like 'compared to', 'since prior', 'unchanged from prior', and referencing prior reports or examinations explicitly.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10643,latent_10643,999,0.001998,0.0018663664,4.245412,Immediate notification of findings by telephone upon discovery.,"The pattern involves prompt communication of radiological findings by telephone immediately following their discovery. This is indicated by references to telephone notifications, usually marked with time stamps shortly after determining exam results.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.9523809523809524,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.95,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10644,latent_10644,2891,0.005782,0.0024358705,2.7344568,Emphasis on standalone analysis of current images without requiring prior comparison.,"All examples with high activation focus on providing a description of current findings with no explicit need for comparison to a prior image included in the Assistant's report. There's consistency in examining the current images by themselves as opposed to in relation to previous studies. This could imply a pattern where the system is identifying when a comprehensive or standalone analysis of the present findings is required, irrespective of prior documentation, potentially due to lack of available comparisons or being undefined in the task setup.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4233378561736771,0.49,0.46875,0.15,100.0,100.0
+10645,latent_10645,495,0.00099,0.0012446826,4.5330195,Presence and assessment of pacemaker or pacing devices in imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence, position, and stability of pacemaker or pacing devices. These examples often highlight the presence of such devices in the provided radiographic images, using phrases like 'dual-lead pacemaker' in relation to their positioning or changes compared to prior images, which is a distinctive pattern linked to internal device monitoring in radiological reports.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6717094017094017,0.7245508982035929,0.8181818181818182,0.4029850746268656,67.0,100.0
+10646,latent_10646,758,0.001516,0.0014789853,3.423254,Comparison with prior images showing stability or unchanged findings.,"These examples demonstrate findings described by comparison to prior imaging studies, followed by the unchanged status or stability of specific observations across the images, indicating the radiological stability or resolution status over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5282413350449294,0.5408163265306123,0.5441176470588235,0.3854166666666667,96.0,100.0
+10647,latent_10647,1016,0.002032,0.0016491326,3.844026,Focus on changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The information provided uses comparative language between current and prior imaging findings, focusing on identifying changes or stability (e.g., 'stable', 'increased', 'unchanged'). Examples with significant activation frequently describe findings of increased consolidation, effusion, or positioning changes, which may indicate interest in changes over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5218533556245522,0.5404040404040404,0.5289855072463768,0.7373737373737373,99.0,99.0
+10648,latent_10648,4693,0.009386,0.004482914,4.314159,Key findings primarily identified on lateral chest X-ray views.,"Examples with higher activations consistently emphasize findings on lateral views of chest X-rays, indicating unique observations that may not be apparent or confirmed in the frontal view.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7256089668918744,0.735,0.873015873015873,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10649,latent_10649,648,0.001296,0.0014396586,3.311172,Reports with 'COMPARISON: None.',"The mention of 'COMPARISON: None.' distinguishes this pattern by indicating a lack of previous comparative imaging, often leading to more declarative descriptions in findings that do not rely on prior studies, even if images are supplied.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5312658356136617,0.5945945945945946,0.65625,0.2470588235294117,85.0,100.0
+10650,latent_10650,8731,0.017462,0.006645038,1.8050941,Instructions for describing findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations include direct instructions to provide descriptions of imaging findings by comparing current images with prior images. This implies a specific focus on detecting changes or stability between examinations, suggesting diagnostic emphasis on assessing interval change. Reports that include this structure, ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,"" tend to have higher activation levels.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10651,latent_10651,1589,0.003178,0.0025132718,4.4742756,Interval changes in indwelling support devices compared to prior imaging.,"The common pattern observed among highly activated examples is the presence of descriptions that involve interval changes in indwelling support devices, such as catheters, tubes, or pacemakers, compared to prior imaging studies. Significant changes in device positioning or status are highlighted, indicating this pattern is central to the observed high activation levels.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5543293718166383,0.58,0.6538461538461539,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10652,latent_10652,584,0.001168,0.00091460504,4.2000256,Comparison to prior imaging focusing on medical device placement or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently refer to comparisons with prior images and evaluations for changes in specific medical devices like tubes or catheters. This pattern mostly involves ongoing monitoring or adjustment of such devices, which is crucial in patient management and warrants higher activation as it directly impacts clinical decisions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4712904037680221,0.5086705202312138,0.3888888888888889,0.2876712328767123,73.0,100.0
+10653,latent_10653,6957,0.013914,0.0052414797,2.1496782,Change or stability in findings compared to prior radiographs.,"Higher activation levels are seen in examples where there is explicitly described interval change or comparison indication on the current chest radiograph's findings relative to prior images. This comparison often focuses on the reduction or stabilization of previous abnormalities, suggesting a deliberate assessment of change over time provides an identifiable pattern.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10654,latent_10654,7172,0.014344,0.005411004,1.9322325,Absence of prior studies for comparison in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels lack prior studies for comparison, indicating that the absence of previous imaging data is a key trigger for activation. These examples ask for assessments when only a current study is provided without historical reference, emphasizing standalone analysis.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5068493150684932,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10655,latent_10655,2108,0.004216,0.002182254,2.2685435,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"The samples with high activation levels describe a methodology involving comparison of current imaging studies to prior studies, which is critical in radiology for assessing changes over time or stability of findings, emphasizing longitudinal analysis in diagnostic processes.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4192799070847851,0.45,0.4657534246575342,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10656,latent_10656,996,0.001992,0.001653748,4.1416736,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"These examples show reports focused on comparing current radiological findings to previous ones. Descriptions involve observing changes or stability of specific features, such as opacities, pulmonary markings, or implanted devices. Such language indicates the emphasis on identifying changes over time between current and prior imaging studies, which is critical in radiological assessments.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.463914426714096,0.465,0.4678899082568807,0.51,100.0,100.0
+10657,latent_10657,657,0.001314,0.0011882321,3.829699,Detailed change detection between current and prior radiographs.,"Cases with a high activation level involve direct comparisons and detailed findings between current and prior radiographs for detecting changes, often emphasizing interval stability or resolution. Phrases used indicate explicit evaluation of changes against past images. Lower activation examples often lack detailed comparisons, or the comparison is unable to detect significant change.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4580328994599993,0.4581005586592179,0.4123711340206185,0.5,80.0,99.0
+10658,latent_10658,801,0.001602,0.0013596067,3.332623,Description focuses on positioning or changes of medical devices in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve analysis of changes or stability in medical devices' positions (e.g., tubes, lines, leads) within the body between radiographic images. This specific focus on medical device positioning distinguishes these examples from those focusing on soft tissue findings or cardiopulmonary evaluations.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.413823659725299,0.4489795918367347,0.3846153846153846,0.2083333333333333,96.0,100.0
+10659,latent_10659,8694,0.017388,0.0065996516,3.9151359,Descriptive evaluation of medical device or line positioning in chest images.,"Examples show either explicit indication or description of findings pertaining to lines, tubes, or implanted medical devices in chest radiographs and their positions are described or evaluated compared to prior images. Activation occurs when positioning of such devices is the primary focus rather than broader chest findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4884910485933503,0.5,0.5,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10660,latent_10660,1130,0.00226,0.0018490925,3.6414938,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples focus on explicit references to prior imaging for comparison and assessment of changes over time, emphasizing specific findings like cardiomegaly or pulmonary changes.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4076171004691882,0.435,0.4545454545454545,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10661,latent_10661,1076,0.002152,0.0017493211,3.4783556,"Reports focusing on stable, mild, or non-acute cardiothoracic findings.","Examples with high activation levels consistently reference findings such as mild or stable cardiomegaly, tortuous aorta, unchanged hilar prominence, etc., often indicating these are less concerning or chronic findings. Reports emphasize stability or minimal change over time rather than acute pathology.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5298013245033113,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10662,latent_10662,6015,0.01203,0.005018122,2.5205495,Comparison of unchanged indwelling medical device positions in imaging.,"Most examples with high activation describe findings on current imaging compared to prior imaging, noting consistent or unchanged positions of indwelling devices like pacers, catheters, and leads, or stability in conditions of the lungs and cardiac structures. They emphasize the stability or small changes in the presence of these devices over time, which requires careful observation and documentation in radiology.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5609756097560976,0.23,100.0,100.0
+10663,latent_10663,927,0.001854,0.0016987312,2.7190018,Continued substantial enlargement of the cardiac silhouette.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention 'continued substantial enlargement of the cardiac silhouette' or similar phrases. This suggests the model activates strongly on expanded or enlarged cardiac silhouettes, possibly indicating a concern for potential underlying cardiac conditions.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6072270227808326,0.65,0.9411764705882352,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10664,latent_10664,5967,0.011934,0.0045583835,2.131222,Detailed comparison with changes noted between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve direct comparisons being made with a prior radiographic image and the current images, highlighting detailed changes or stability in radiographic findings. These comparisons are specific and involve complex details of internal findings, such as the presence/absence of pathologies or devices relative to previous states, which is characteristic of higher activation compared to low activation examples which lack such detailed comparative analysis.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.568922305764411,0.57,0.5636363636363636,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10665,latent_10665,1844,0.003688,0.0021157013,4.965854,Comparisons with prior imaging studies highlight changes or stability.,"The examples consistently describe findings or changes in relation to prior images. They use phrases like 'compared to prior', 'as compared to previous', or specific dates of the comparisons, typical of follow-up evaluations in radiology to track progress or stability of findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6155035165005023,0.6231155778894473,0.5984251968503937,0.76,100.0,99.0
+10666,latent_10666,1628,0.003256,0.0020244867,3.2376683,Aortic tortuosity or dilation findings on chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels describe significant findings of aortic tortuosity or enlargement, often with additional features such as calcification, cardiomegaly, or other alterations in the aorta's structure which are particularly emphasized in relation to previous findings or expected conditions, like aortic dilation or tortuosity.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4590695997115038,0.55,0.7777777777777778,0.14,100.0,100.0
+10667,latent_10667,581,0.001162,0.0012438549,3.234058,Reference to changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples showing high activation levels consistently involve a specific comparison between current and prior imaging findings, often focusing on stability, changes, or lack of acute findings. This mimics medical contexts where past versus present comparisons are crucial for monitoring patient conditions longitudinally.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3612621255729666,0.3630952380952381,0.2857142857142857,0.3823529411764705,68.0,100.0
+10668,latent_10668,7153,0.014306,0.005576538,2.796399,Need for explicit comparison of current and prior radiographic images.,"Although all examples involve radiology images and findings, those with high activation levels consistently involve phrases or instructions to compare current radiology findings with prior images, regardless of the changes found.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5189873417721519,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10669,latent_10669,1441,0.002882,0.001745658,4.8486433,Mentions of new interventions or device positioning.,"Examples with higher activations tend to refer explicitly to recent interventions or changes in equipment, positioning, or severe conditions. These radiology descriptions often focus on a specific change or device placement (e.g., new chest tubes, recent sternotomy), signifying significant recent interventions or positioning changes.",0.2916666666666667,0.32,0.2,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3813333333333333,0.42,0.34,0.17,100.0,100.0
+10670,latent_10670,670,0.00134,0.0013218847,5.029781,Requirement for comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve radiological descriptions that require comparing current imaging findings with those from prior studies. Specific comparisons to past images, even when no significant changes are noted, appear to drive the pattern recognition in these sketches.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5084684684684685,0.5268817204301075,0.4962962962962963,0.7701149425287356,87.0,99.0
+10671,latent_10671,7948,0.015896,0.005995987,1.58307,Detailed description of medical device positioning in radiographs.,"These examples often involve radiographic findings in comparison to prior exams, indicating stability or change. Additionally, placement or changes in medical devices such as tubes or catheters feature prominently, often described with exact positions or configurations, forming a pattern where technical details about medical device management are highlighted.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5490196078431373,0.28,100.0,100.0
+10672,latent_10672,1332,0.002664,0.0019777564,4.2938533,Focus on interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior radiological examinations.,"Examples with significant activation levels include references to changes, stability, or updates from previous examinations, focusing on altered pathologies like pleural effusions or consolidations. Radiological descriptions highlight interval changes, reassessing conditions identified previously, indicating updates in the patient's health status or recovery, which is a key focus in these radiology reports.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10673,latent_10673,1863,0.003726,0.002300032,2.3590682,References to unchanged conditions compared to prior images.,"Examples that indicate the comparison of findings with a prior image, especially highlighting stability or change, were consistently marked with higher activation. This pattern is frequently observed in radiology reports where a previous exam is referenced to validate or note changes in the pathological or normal condition noted in the current exam, emphasizing unchanged findings as significant.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.453510048775505,0.465,0.4507042253521127,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10674,latent_10674,601,0.001202,0.001205441,3.3029342,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern in examples with higher activation levels often includes instances of assessed stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging. These phrases show stability over time, a characteristic often needing validation in radiological evaluations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5678576472249682,0.5764705882352941,0.4868421052631579,0.5285714285714286,70.0,100.0
+10675,latent_10675,3993,0.007986,0.0034624473,3.2942479,Rapid change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These examples predominantly highlight changes in radiological findings over time, especially in cases where there is explicit rapid improvement or worsening of certain conditions, such as opacification, edema, or other significant pathologic findings, between current and prior imaging studies. The pattern involves directly assessing rapid change using terms that describe speed, like 'rapid'.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4283248840470283,0.47,0.4347826086956521,0.2,100.0,100.0
+10676,latent_10676,951,0.001902,0.0013781998,3.8799903,Interval changes in findings between current and prior images.,"These samples show activation in cases where changes in findings between a current and a prior study are noted, typically using terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', or descriptions of previous conditions for comparison.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10677,latent_10677,958,0.001916,0.0017531947,3.3560116,"Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, noting change or stability.","The higher activation examples consistently involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, specifically noting whether such images are unchanged or improved. This pattern includes detailed observations of changes or stability over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5217391304347826,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10678,latent_10678,1029,0.002058,0.0015439504,3.2913814,Use of frontal and lateral images with stable cardiac silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern evident here involves providing a description of findings using both frontal and lateral images from a current examination, often with contexts involving potential changes from a prior examination, despite an absent prior examination description being explicitly noted. The examination technique focuses on PA and lateral views, and the assistant descriptions maintain a stable cardiac silhouette and lung evaluation against prior imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10679,latent_10679,2408,0.004816,0.0033730944,5.21811,Stability or change in pathologies in comparison to prior studies influence activation.,"This data set includes references to findings that discuss either the resolution or stability of previously identified pathologies, or changes detected upon comparison with prior studies. These two factors of comparison (stability or change) in the context of the given findings directly influence the activation levels more so than mention of unrelated details.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5863019995403356,0.595,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10680,latent_10680,1019,0.002038,0.0017407668,4.1491895,Detailed comparative analysis noting interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently provide a detailed description of radiographic findings while explicitly noting changes in comparison to prior images, particularly identifying new or resolved findings. This specific variability in imaging findings is central to the reports and gives them a purpose for noting developments over time.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4891826923076923,0.49,0.4891304347826087,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10681,latent_10681,756,0.001512,0.0013706936,3.514395,Focus on the presence and status of medical devices.,"These examples consistently emphasize the importance of specific medical devices like 'Port-A-Cath' or other vascular access devices being described, their placement, or status comparing current and previous images. These reports reflect careful monitoring of placement or changes related to medical devices.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6223297399767989,0.6223404255319149,0.5918367346938775,0.651685393258427,89.0,99.0
+10682,latent_10682,898,0.001796,0.0015608617,3.1026523,Temporal comparison of imaging findings indicating unchanged status.,"The pattern involves using comparative language to evaluate changes between the current imaging and prior studies. Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings as unchanged, stable, or provide direct comparisons to previous imaging, highlighting the use of temporal or comparative language.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3799915931063472,0.41,0.3392857142857143,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10683,latent_10683,1774,0.003548,0.0019024535,3.052429,Focus on stability or changes in lung findings between current and prior imaging.,"These examples mention comparison with prior imaging or lack thereof, similar to the previous task. However, highly activated examples explicitly involve considerations or direct mentions of changes or stability in findings between current and prior studies without introducing complicating factors unrelated to lung conditions such as device placements or extra-pulmonary findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3999399939993999,0.4,0.4019607843137255,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10684,latent_10684,1783,0.003566,0.0021106342,4.387165,Comparison indicating stability or minor change over prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes in the findings of certain anatomical structures between current and prior images, using language that indicates comparison (e.g., 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improvement'). The focus is on noting stability or slight changes over time, particularly about detected pathologies or clinical concerns, rather than on reporting entirely new findings or acute conditions.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10685,latent_10685,797,0.001594,0.0014086484,2.5243962,"Comparative analysis with prior images, highlighting stability.","Examples with high activation describe findings observed in radiology images and include some form of comparison with prior images, emphasizing either 'no significant change' or stability of the findings. This common radiological practice is part of routine imaging report language.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5072731470791965,0.51010101010101,0.5058823529411764,0.4387755102040816,98.0,100.0
+10686,latent_10686,781,0.001562,0.0013917616,5.393902,Monitoring tube and catheter placement in chest imaging.,"These examples demonstrate focus on the position and status of tubes and central lines in patients, which is key in many critical care scenarios. Keywords like 'endotracheal tube', 'central venous catheter', 'enteric tube', and consistent checking of their placements are emphasized, signifying attention to procedural outcomes and potential complications related to tube placements, frequently seen in intensive monitoring settings.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,0.78125,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,100.0,100.0
+10687,latent_10687,874,0.001748,0.0013817234,3.769189,Presence of support or monitoring devices and their positioning.,"Examples with high activations consistently include the presence of monitoring, support devices like endotracheal tubes or catheters, and assessment of the placement of these devices, implying that these are the patterns highly sought for by this model.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5128205128205128,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10688,latent_10688,2069,0.004138,0.002831467,4.697456,Use of comparison to prior imaging studies to evaluate changes.,"Examples with high activation levels typically describe findings compared to prior images, focusing on changes or stability in conditions and explicitly mentioning comparison with previous examinations.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.5190839694656488,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10689,latent_10689,1151,0.002302,0.0025392277,4.71966,Use of both frontal and lateral images along with prior image comparison.,Examples highlighting a radiological examination that includes both frontal and lateral chest images in addition to comparison with prior images show higher activation levels. This combination often indicates a comprehensive assessment of changes over time using multiple image views.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4906100311731759,0.4924623115577889,0.4942528735632184,0.43,100.0,99.0
+10690,latent_10690,7116,0.014232,0.0053886855,1.7550678,Focus on changes between current and prior radiological studies.,"These examples focus on making comparisons between current and prior radiological imaging studies, typically highlighting changes such as improvements, worsening of conditions, or stability. The examples repeatedly refer to these changes explicitly indicating it is a central part of the report, signaled by phrases like 'as compared to prior', 'interval changes', and 'no change compared to prior'.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10691,latent_10691,3898,0.007796,0.003552165,2.2518456,"Changes in clinical findings or management, often involving device placement.","These high activation examples contain descriptions that reference specific patient interventions or changes in imaging findings over time, particularly in relation to comparisons with prior images. This often involves noting the placement or removal of medical devices, progression or resolution of pulmonary opacities, consolidation, atelectasis, effusions, or other conditions, thereby focusing on changes in clinical findings or management implications.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6249156060113525,0.625,0.6288659793814433,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10692,latent_10692,1298,0.002596,0.0015541321,4.811883,Comparison to previous imaging findings that highlight changes or stability.,"The pattern is characterized by making explicit comparisons between a current radiologic finding and prior images, accompanied by assessments of changes or stability in pathologic conditions. Specific emphasis is given to changes such as increased opacities, removal of medical devices, and positions of tubes and catheters, which are critical in radiology reports for patient management.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10693,latent_10693,2403,0.004806,0.0029870993,4.4264836,Comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"The key characteristic pattern involves reports that include instructions or prompts to compare the current imaging findings with those from previous imaging studies, explicitly or implicitly indicating involvement of multiple images for comparative analysis. Such instructions often involve comparison with specific reference to positions, changes, or confirmations of the same condition or aspect across different timelines.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4966887417218543,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10694,latent_10694,9430,0.01886,0.00708824,2.2714684,Emphasis on interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Most examples with higher activation levels describe new or interval changes in the radiological findings when compared to prior images, indicating attention to changes over time is key for the model's activation.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10695,latent_10695,2457,0.004914,0.002229765,2.5916219,Explicit instructions for comparing with prior imaging.,"The pattern involves explicit requests or instructions for comparison between imaging studies on radiology reports. Reports commonly specify comparison to a prior imaging study and may provide findings or impressions on interval changes, using language such as 'interval change', 'compare to prior', or similarly to indicate evaluation against previous studies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10696,latent_10696,2061,0.004122,0.002862906,5.8643503,Changes in consolidation or opacity compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe changes or stability in findings like consolidation, opacity, or other abnormalities on current imaging compared to prior studies, focusing on acute conditions, pneumonia, or resolution of prior indications. This pattern often reflects monitoring or re-evaluation of pulmonary diseases or effusions.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.2222222222222222,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4285869772251095,0.475,0.4418604651162791,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10697,latent_10697,11421,0.022842,0.00844482,1.6661488,Interval changes identified through medical device positioning or anatomical changes.,"Samples 2, 4, 5, and 49 have high activation levels and contain descriptions of comparison to prior images identifying changes especially related to medical devices or anatomical features, such as tracheostomy and catheter placement, changes in opacities, or removal of a port. This suggests the pattern is focused on interval changes and comparisons, with emphasis on notable alterations in appearance of medical devices or anatomical structures.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.562539283469516,0.565,0.5764705882352941,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10698,latent_10698,637,0.001274,0.0011111138,4.9851875,Prompts requesting detailed comparative descriptions of radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain requests for providing detailed descriptions of the radiology study findings in comparison to a prior image, even if previous comparison information is either not referenced or temporarily ""None"" in the text. This emphasis on generating a comparative narrative seems to trigger a higher model activation.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4144736842105263,0.4269662921348314,0.4047619047619047,0.6538461538461539,78.0,100.0
+10699,latent_10699,5609,0.011218,0.0049891504,3.4966211,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies for changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels mostly involve comparison of current imaging findings with prior images or exams, explicitly noting changes, stability, or persistence of findings over time. The pattern emphasizes the dynamic aspect of tracking changes rather than static observations.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10700,latent_10700,2944,0.005888,0.0026353588,1.8738024,Comparison of findings with prior imaging results.,"These examples provide descriptions of imaging findings while comparing them to prior studies, often noting significant changes or stability of certain conditions. The focus here is on relative changes stated, such as in effusions, edema, or device placements, which helps in ongoing patient evaluation, especially in critical or dynamic conditions.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10701,latent_10701,3961,0.007922,0.0033884686,2.468877,Describes findings that are unchanged from previous images.,"The pattern involves reference to a known abnormality or intervention that is described as 'unchanged' or 'stable' when compared to prior imaging, indicating no new findings or changes in the known condition. This is seen through terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'similar to prior'.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5638297872340425,0.53,100.0,100.0
+10702,latent_10702,795,0.00159,0.0015196383,5.496687,Explicit instructions to compare current images with prior images.,"The examples with higher activations typically feature instructions to compare a set of current images (frontal and sometimes lateral) against prior images. This pattern of interpretation, particularly when prior images are explicitly directed to be compared, seems to account for the higher activation as it involves detailed analysis and comparison between current and previous imaging.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5017072615524698,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+10703,latent_10703,1678,0.003356,0.002347098,3.6869912,"Detailed, multifaceted findings and evaluations.","Examples with the highest activation levels involve complex, multifaceted observations across multiple areas, often with detailed descriptions. These examples often involve more detailed evaluations, including tracking changes in complex, compounded pathologies or specific changes in pulmonary/cardiac conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5059742647058824,0.57,0.5406976744186046,0.93,100.0,100.0
+10704,latent_10704,9969,0.019938,0.007470558,2.3770545,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activations consistently reference ""comparison"" and focus on unchanged or stable findings relative to a previous imaging study. This pattern emphasizes expected stability indicating no progression of previously noted conditions.",0.4863731656184486,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.5277777777777778,0.38,100.0,100.0
+10705,latent_10705,1445,0.00289,0.0019035187,3.1523302,Comparison of monitoring and support devices between current and prior images.,"The higher activation examples consistently mention a comparison between current and prior images, particularly highlighting changes in monitoring and support devices, such as tubes and lines. This pattern emphasizes the role of evaluating device positions or changes over time for patients under intensive monitoring.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6464646464646464,0.65,0.6875,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10706,latent_10706,1290,0.00258,0.0017261734,2.775769,Detailed positional information for tubes and medical equipment.,"Examples with activations closer to 7.0 consistently mention the presence and precise location of medical equipment, such as tubes and catheters, often specifying their positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC. This precise notation and attention to placement detail are a focal point in the radiological findings leading to high activation.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5918367346938775,0.29,100.0,100.0
+10707,latent_10707,626,0.001252,0.0013091414,3.5524924,Focus on device positioning and changes over time in chest imaging.,"Most highly activated examples explicitly involve interpretations of chest radiographs with a primary focus on identifying and comparing the locations and conditions of medical devices such as NG tubes, central lines, PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, and chest tubes, particularly looking for changes in their positions or appearances compared to prior images.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6442948717948718,0.6536312849162011,0.6197183098591549,0.5569620253164557,79.0,100.0
+10708,latent_10708,394,0.000788,0.00093672425,4.707572,Prompt asks for comparison of current and prior radiology findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often use the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This suggests a pattern where reports are organized to specifically prompt an assistant to compare findings explicitly with prior images, which is indicated by the phrase itself and variations of it, irrespective of additional content details.",0.4252771618625277,0.4375,0.4375,0.6086956521739131,23.0,25.0,0.3741206960385043,0.3741496598639456,0.2772277227722772,0.5957446808510638,47.0,100.0
+10709,latent_10709,1761,0.003522,0.0022679903,4.850304,"Findings indicate clear lungs with no signs of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, consolidation, or pulmonary edema.","Highly representative samples contain descriptions of clear lungs without any signs of consolidation, edema, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. These are phrased consistently as 'clear without consolidation or edema', 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax', and 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is normal', indicating no acute cardiopulmonary pathology.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8686868686868687,0.87,0.8083333333333333,0.97,100.0,100.0
+10710,latent_10710,1577,0.003154,0.001946572,3.4760983,Description of findings in comparison to prior images or studies.,"Reports with higher activations involve a pattern of providing descriptions of findings by comparing current images to prior images. They contain explicit language indicating comparisons, describing changes (or lack thereof), and often mention specific timeframes or dates as references to past images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4303733089207608,0.44,0.4523809523809524,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10711,latent_10711,4772,0.009544,0.004030435,3.0782905,Emphasis on tube/catheter placement or change in position.,"Examples with higher activations often mention new or changed medical equipment positions, or confirm the positions as unchanged with a focus on tube/catheter placement positions as part of the examination findings. This implies the model activates highly when there's a focus on the technical evaluation of intervention placements over other radiologic changes.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5555555555555556,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10712,latent_10712,4190,0.00838,0.0034852698,2.3020177,Use of current imaging for comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to using current imaging in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern stands out in the given data, as these are cases where the imagery comparison is specifically emphasized as part of the analysis and description process.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10713,latent_10713,10779,0.021558,0.008028357,2.197479,Explicit comparison with prior imaging for detailed assessment of changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently contain detailed comparisons with previous imaging, emphasizing changes or stability in specific features like medical devices, opacities, or fluid levels. This involves explicit language about changes or lack thereof from prior studies, indicating a theme of close temporal comparison and progress tracking of clinical features.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.5486111111111112,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10714,latent_10714,1130,0.00226,0.0018302854,2.7439399,Comparative analysis with multiple prior studies; focus on stable findings.,"The activation levels are higher for examples including a prior radiology report while integrating the assessment of comparisons from multiple previous studies, particularly when differentiating stable or unchanged conditions. The pattern shows emphasis on the comparative aspect and stability of findings in reference to multiple comparisons with older images, showcasing an appreciation for stability amidst previous differences.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4830072651084324,0.525,0.5581395348837209,0.24,100.0,100.0
+10715,latent_10715,870,0.00174,0.0016904214,3.5695033,Focus on cardiac and mediastinal features in report findings.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on findings related to the heart and mediastinum, such as heart size, cardiac silhouette, cardiomediastinal contours, or mitral calcifications. Descriptors like 'heart enlarged', 'cardiomediastinal silhouette stable', 'normal cardiac silhouette', or 'aorta tortuous' indicate that the pattern encompasses recognition or description of cardiac or mediastinal features.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5129865003552538,0.5326633165829145,0.5214285714285715,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+10716,latent_10716,11822,0.023644,0.008665862,1.5923278,Noted persistent or small interval change regarding condition.,"The pattern identified involves observations indicating slight changes or variations described as part of ongoing processes or conditions, such as 'interval development', 'unchanged since prior', or 'stable appearance'. These descriptions highlight persistent or small interval changes noted on subsequent imaging, typically without drastic alterations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5776228016979987,0.5778894472361809,0.5851063829787234,0.55,100.0,99.0
+10717,latent_10717,1451,0.002902,0.002073205,2.285779,Descriptions emphasizing interval changes between imaging studies.,"Higher activations occur when there is explicit mention of a change or lack thereof in pathology or clinical indicators between current and previous images. These examples emphasize descriptions based on interval changes or stability, showing a comparison pattern across multiple imaging studies.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10718,latent_10718,1763,0.003526,0.0024362693,3.4944656,Significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation primarily focus on significant interval changes between the current and prior imaging studies, such as large pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or new opacities, which indicate symptomatic or clinically relevant alterations compared to prior images.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5776915113871635,0.5879396984924623,0.6323529411764706,0.43,100.0,99.0
+10719,latent_10719,4586,0.009172,0.004013886,2.5979743,"Consistent, detailed comparison to prior images indicating stability or changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently provide a systematic, clear comparison with prior imaging results, often expressing detailed observations about unchanged or stable findings. Moderate activation examples may include comparisons but are less detailed or conclusive about stability. Low activation levels often lack coherent or conclusive comparison statements regarding changes in patient condition over time.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10720,latent_10720,1289,0.002578,0.0017526197,4.5841165,Assessment of tube placements and device positioning.,"These examples highlight evaluations of medical devices or internal tubes and their positions, a common aspect of radiologic exams for hospitalized or post-operative patients. Descriptions often include terms like endotracheal tube, orogastric tube, nasogastric tube, and comparisons of their positions relative to anatomical landmarks, typically ensuring correct placement as part of clinical assessments.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5945945945945946,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10721,latent_10721,967,0.001934,0.0014974278,3.470593,Use of current frontal and lateral chest radiographs with comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention comparison between frontal and lateral chest radiographs in contrast to prior frontal images. This reflects the need to evaluate new imagery against historical records to identify changes, anomalies, or improvements, a common practice in radiological assessments. Instances where both current frontal and lateral images are used and a comparison is made tend to exhibit the pattern significantly.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.460431654676259,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10722,latent_10722,4371,0.008742,0.0034381999,2.1325908,Language comparing current and prior imaging studies revealing interval changes or stability.,"These examples frequently involve comparing the current imaging study with prior images and identifying interval changes in medical devices or conditions, suggesting a pattern of language used to describe stability or change in lung volumes, opacities, effusions, or device placement.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10723,latent_10723,5400,0.0108,0.0042271074,1.9038477,"Reports highlighting unchanged, improving, or worsening conditions in comparison to prior exams.","The examples with higher activation levels involve radiology findings where noticeable improvements, stabilizations, or changes are observed in patients' conditions as compared to previous examinations. These reports emphasize modifications in pathologies over time, such as resolution or persistence of pathologies, and often relate to an assessment of treatment efficacy or disease progression.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5663716814159292,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10724,latent_10724,843,0.001686,0.0017316517,4.9194508,Limited assessment due to patient positioning or technique.,"The pattern in high activation examples involves reports that are labeled as limited (typically due to technical reasons or patient positioning) and have accompanying descriptions that may highlight this limitation, frequently impacting the assessment or visualization of certain areas, contributing to the complexity of accurately interpreting the findings.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8254385964912281,0.8291457286432161,0.7578125,0.97,100.0,99.0
+10725,latent_10725,798,0.001596,0.0014320696,3.0492601,Focus on detailed comparative analysis of radiological findings.,"The highly activated examples often emphasize the comprehensive changes or comparisons from previous images, often focusing on detailed observations of changes in medical conditions, such as increased opacities or fluid changes, especially in the context of acute or significant clinical indications.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5299145299145299,0.5454545454545454,0.5294117647058824,0.7346938775510204,98.0,100.0
+10726,latent_10726,1286,0.002572,0.0018325709,3.264764,Comparative evaluation of current imaging findings with previous studies.,"The pattern involves comparing findings to prior radiological studies, especially in the context of change or stability in observed conditions. Those examples with higher activation levels mention comparative changes or findings relative to prior examinations and include indications or impressions of such comparisons.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10727,latent_10727,654,0.001308,0.0010736374,3.4841535,Detailed description of current state with no prior comparison.,"This pattern is characterized by reports that explicitly state 'no comparison' to prior images, thus focusing on a detailed description of the current state rather than changes over time. The lack of prior examination makes the findings descriptive without reference to change, providing a thorough status of the present condition.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5523756599055294,0.5977653631284916,0.5952380952380952,0.3125,80.0,99.0
+10728,latent_10728,1626,0.003252,0.0014594764,2.76693,Descriptions of line or tube placements in chest radiographs.,The examples with higher activations consistently involve details of line or tube placements in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC. These are crucial findings in clinical settings that require precise localization to ensure safety and proper function of medical interventions such as ventilation or intravenous administration.,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4705882352941176,0.24,100.0,100.0
+10729,latent_10729,488,0.000976,0.0007727409,5.5653486,Patient rotation affecting image interpretation in reports.,"Examples with higher activations include descriptions of patient rotation in images, which is noted in radiology reports as it can affect the interpretation and accuracy of findings. The specific mention of 'rotated' indicates a need for caution or additional imaging and correlates with the pattern in the given examples.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6248559670781894,0.7295597484276729,1.0,0.2711864406779661,59.0,100.0
+10730,latent_10730,1477,0.002954,0.0021585329,2.7448995,Emphasis on comparison to previous images for detecting changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently focus on explicit comparisons to previous imaging studies, noting changes or stability in findings over time. This pattern in reporting is essential for tracking patients' progress or the efficacy of treatments, particularly with regards to the placement and position of medical devices or changes in medical conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10731,latent_10731,3451,0.006902,0.0038628166,5.3419003,Status post median sternotomy and CABG with stable cardiomediastinal contours.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve status post median sternotomy and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with stable cardiomediastinal contours, often including descriptions of mediastinal or cardiac silhouettes that are unchanged from prior imaging. This pattern appears significant due to frequent references to surgical history and stable post-operative findings.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.622114515731537,0.655,0.8780487804878049,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10732,latent_10732,1239,0.002478,0.0016269598,3.2065742,Comparisons of findings with prior images emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activations mention comparisons with prior imaging, often highlighting changes or stability in specific findings. This indicates that the model highly associates comparative language, especially noting stability or change in conditions, with the pattern.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10733,latent_10733,6284,0.012568,0.004716897,2.2786357,Providing detailed comparative findings between current and prior images.,"The presence of a positive activation is associated with the task of providing a current radiological description in comparison to a prior image, as seen in examples where specific comparative insights are described accurately based on current and prior observations.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.5775862068965517,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10734,latent_10734,945,0.00189,0.0014619383,3.3391767,Emphasis on traumatic injury or related pathological evaluation.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve traumatic contexts or related pathological changes for evaluation, such as rib fractures, pneumothorax, or pleural effusions. These scenarios typically require intricate comparison between current and prior images to evaluate trauma-related developments.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5713265063110264,0.595,0.6792452830188679,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10735,latent_10735,1044,0.002088,0.001992547,4.0595007,Significant interval change or insertion of medical devices compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the analysis of changes or stability in specific observed objects (e.g., catheters, tubes, lines) compared to prior imaging studies. They emphasize the positioning, adjustment, or insertion of these devices over other changes in the radiographic image.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6439228666716819,0.645,0.6306306306306306,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10736,latent_10736,1059,0.002118,0.0016130711,4.436542,Change or removal of tubes or lines on imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve language indicating procedural changes or direct comparison with previous studies, particularly ""have been removed"", or changes related to medical devices (e.g., extubation, tube removal). This contrasts with examples discussing stable or unchanged findings which have low activation levels.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8645903859174001,0.865,0.8288288288288288,0.92,100.0,100.0
+10737,latent_10737,1913,0.003826,0.002270046,2.859505,Detailed comparison indicating interval changes compared to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed comparisons between the mention of the current images and previous ones, specifically indicating interval changes or stability. This shows a pattern of focus on examining changes across multiple instances to understand patient progress or stability.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+10738,latent_10738,1070,0.00214,0.0016491867,3.6044998,Interval changes or comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes, improvements, or interval resolutions comparing current and prior radiographic findings. This indicates a pattern where reports highlight interval changes using terms like 'resolved', 'unchanged', or 'improved' in reference to prior images.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10739,latent_10739,516,0.001032,0.0009329257,4.8004713,Stable findings across serial radiologic images.,"Clarifications repeatedly state to account for previous imaging silence on the said conditions to establish continuous stability without introducing new variables via radiological imaging, focusing on a consistent depiction across multiple time points.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4263035965212107,0.4518072289156626,0.3125,0.2985074626865671,67.0,99.0
+10740,latent_10740,9051,0.018102,0.006779704,1.9880706,"Multiple views and detailed comparisons with previous imaging, assessing cardiac silhouette and lung pathology.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention multiple image views (frontal and lateral) or comparing the findings to prior images. They focus on evaluating cardiac silhouette and lung pathology like nodules, pleural effusion, or consolidation, demonstrating an analysis of stability or change over time. In the absence of computer analysis, this task involves human judgment, reducing pattern similarity.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4729954530331596,0.5151515151515151,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,98.0
+10741,latent_10741,1989,0.003978,0.0020175863,3.3199198,Absence of meaningful comparative data between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels generally do not include any new comparison data despite the prompt asking for descriptions of findings relative to prior imaging, indicating the described observations are not adding new comparative insights. When comparisons are omitted or deemed irrelevant, technical and step-based descriptions are prioritized instead.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10742,latent_10742,1682,0.003364,0.0021901,4.484976,Evaluations of imaging changes or device placement/comparison over time.,"Examples with a high activation often involve a change or confirmation of findings across imaging studies. This includes reference to devices (like tubes or catheters), changes in lung opacification, or pleural effusion. High activation occurs when there's notable comparison and monitoring of disease or condition progression/stability over time, often with interventions involved (e.g., tube placements, surgeries).",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4523809523809523,0.54,0.5222222222222223,0.94,100.0,100.0
+10743,latent_10743,783,0.001566,0.0013056811,3.1267529,Comparison of medical devices or conditions between current and prior imaging.,"All examples with high activation levels emphasize changes between the current and prior imaging studies, often noting specific medical devices or conditions that have changed or remained unchanged. Key phrases like 'as compared to the previous' in combination with findings about medical devices or medical conditions indicate this pattern.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5393159058395111,0.5527638190954773,0.5373134328358209,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+10744,latent_10744,3582,0.007164,0.0032009343,2.9819686,Interval changes or stability assessments based on prior imaging comparisons.,"Examples with relatively high activation levels frequently include descriptions of changes or evaluations made based on intervals, such as assessing stable cardiac silhouettes, changes in pleural effusion or device positioning, and changes compared to prior imaging. This pattern often involves comparing multiple views (frontal and lateral) and looking for stability or interval changes over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10745,latent_10745,3530,0.00706,0.003074993,2.7571049,Comparison of thoracic structure changes in prior versus current images.,"Higher activation examples consistently involve a description of findings in comparison to prior imaging, specifically noting changes or stability in lungs, pleura, or mediastinal structures. This signifies that the model is sensitive to details about changes in thoracic structures over time, likely focusing on stability or progressions in conditions like effusions or pneumonia.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10746,latent_10746,3150,0.0063,0.004051715,3.7047167,Inclusion of comparison or contrast formatting in radiology reports.,"These examples primarily focus on the explicit format of radiological report comparisons using phrases like 'comparison', 'compared to', or 'with prior imaging'. This pattern includes evaluations based on prior images and assessments mentioned with comparison or contrast terminology, but not all examples consistently display this format.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,0.5555555555555556,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4134897360703812,0.505,0.5027932960893855,0.9,100.0,100.0
+10747,latent_10747,1009,0.002018,0.0012439785,4.7524076,"Focus on comparing findings to prior studies, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation indicate a focus on comparing current imaging results with prior studies, specifically noting changes or the stability of findings, often within the context of previous conditions or interventions. This emphasis is reflected repeatedly in the reports and match patterns of follow-up evaluations in radiological practice.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,100.0,100.0
+10748,latent_10748,2729,0.005458,0.0037411698,3.1957965,Stability or no new findings confirmed via comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples consistently refer to the absence of new findings or changes in the report when comparing current and prior images. This seems to show a pattern where reports focus on confirming stability or absence of acute changes across imaging studies, especially when prior images are available for comparison.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10749,latent_10749,667,0.001334,0.0011921959,3.8347433,"Position and comparison of internal lines or catheters, especially Port-A-Caths.","Examples with high activation levels commonly report findings on position and changes to internal lines or catheters, particularly Port-A-Caths and other intravascular lines. These findings include catheter positions, adjustments, and stability over time, often in comparison with previous images.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,1.0,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6587976539589442,0.7094972067039106,0.935483870967742,0.3670886075949367,79.0,100.0
+10750,latent_10750,2965,0.00593,0.0027409839,2.6070018,Explicit mention of unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,The examples with high activation frequently indicate a lack of acute change when comparing current radiological findings to prior exams. This stability or unchanged status in findings is a common observation noted explicitly in reports to reassure that no new acute pathology has developed.,0.4583333333333333,0.4693877551020408,0.4444444444444444,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4912280701754385,0.28,100.0,100.0
+10751,latent_10751,1714,0.003428,0.0020680996,2.7594662,Comparison paradox where current images have or state no prior reference.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions where multiple images are available for comparison, yet sometimes explicitly state there is no comparison available or no prior study. This pattern reflects the scenario where there are current images to describe, but little-to-no available historical comparison data or explicitly note the absence of reference data, creating a paradox in the intended report structure.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4714285714285714,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10752,latent_10752,782,0.001564,0.001484534,2.9649088,Mild cardiomegaly or pulmonary abnormalities often stable compared to prior.,"Examples with significant activation levels often describe mild cardiac or pulmonary abnormalities like cardiomegaly or vascular congestion. These examples highlight interactions between cardiac and pulmonary observations, often noting stability or mild changes compared to previous studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6639267990074442,0.6649746192893401,0.6396396396396397,0.7319587628865979,97.0,100.0
+10753,latent_10753,4895,0.00979,0.0037980427,3.5871615,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior exams.,"The examples that receive high activation levels often involve conditions where there is a lack of significant change or minimal change in radiographic findings when compared to previous studies, implying stability or a typical progression of a condition. This is a common scenario in radiological follow-ups.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.5581395348837209,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10754,latent_10754,3442,0.006884,0.0036891757,5.843439,Emphasis on comparison between current and prior images focusing on changes.,"The activation values are higher for reports involving an explicit comparison to prior images and a clear change in the findings or a detailed comparative description (even though sometimes incomplete or truncated). The use of phrases such as 'compared to the previous radiograph' and 'no new consolidation detected' are indicators of comparisons being made, regardless of image data being present or not.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4190705128205128,0.42,0.4086021505376344,0.3838383838383838,99.0,101.0
+10755,latent_10755,1123,0.002246,0.0017041968,2.2058992,Comparison and description of findings between current and prior images emphasizing interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on providing a description of findings specifically in the context of comparing current imaging with prior frontal image comparisons, emphasizing interval changes in clinical presentation or findings due to medical interventions.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,100.0
+10756,latent_10756,4805,0.00961,0.0037278517,2.124403,Stability or no change in conditions when compared with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparative analysis in radiology studies, particularly focusing on unchanged conditions or stability after comparison with prior images. These examples often mention stability, persistent features, or no interval change in conditions. This indicates that the pattern detected by the model is the presence of stability or unchanged findings in radiology comparisons.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10757,latent_10757,437,0.000874,0.0009502173,4.777292,Stable or unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours.,"Highly activated examples mention the presence of cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours being 'normal', 'unremarkable', or 'stable'. This is often noted when comparison images are evaluated as part of a report with no new significant findings in those regions.",0.7657540199913082,0.7755102040816326,0.6857142857142857,1.0,24.0,25.0,0.6317061986743924,0.632258064516129,0.490566037735849,0.9454545454545454,55.0,100.0
+10758,latent_10758,764,0.001528,0.0010192478,6.954862,Emphasis on comparison with prior images and interval changes in radiology findings.,"The higher activation levels consistently occur in examples where a radiological comparison is made between current and prior images, specifically highlighting interval changes or stability in findings. These reports detail what has remained unchanged or what has improved or worsened, reflecting a keen focus on change over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4831781604460191,0.5,0.4888888888888889,0.7021276595744681,94.0,100.0
+10759,latent_10759,2710,0.00542,0.0024889617,3.003208,"Focus on tube, line, or device placement changes compared to prior image.","The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the importance of identifying or confirming the proper placement, presence, or adjustment of tubes, lines, or devices in relation to the previous image. This is a key task in radiological comparisons, particularly following medical procedures, to ensure there is no misplacement or complications.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5952765183534414,0.605,0.6521739130434783,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10760,latent_10760,2178,0.004356,0.0026136106,5.542554,Emphasis on unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The radiological reports describe a specific process of comparing current imaging with prior images to assess for changes. This pattern is often emphasized when certain findings are notably unchanged upon comparison, such as 'stable', 'unchanged/constant', 'similar', and are not indicative of an acute change or worsening condition. It highlights stability in the context of potential or existing medical concerns.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.620253164556962,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10761,latent_10761,1045,0.00209,0.0014890294,2.965322,Comparison across multiple imaging angles or frontal-lateral views.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve comparisons between current and prior frontal views and often include multiple imaging angles (frontal and lateral), leading to detailed assessments of stability or changes. While normal cardiac or lung findings are present, comparison across views adds a dimension of thorough evaluation, which seems to contribute to increased activation levels.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.508679986898133,0.55,0.5316455696202531,0.84,100.0,100.0
+10762,latent_10762,850,0.0017,0.0015804673,3.2902458,Detailed historical context and medical device descriptions enhance sensitivity.,"The activation levels indicate that detailed descriptions involving patient medical history and the presence of medical devices enhance sensitivity to findings. These examples often include specific historical context involving complications or interventions, as well as the precise location and status of medical devices affecting interpretation.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.5508474576271186,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10763,latent_10763,3666,0.007332,0.006757986,4.1181293,"Descriptive interval changes compared to prior images, especially with worsening or unchanged findings.","Highly activated examples consistently reference specific changes observed in imaging, particularly interval changes in lung conditions or medical device placements. Statements like 'worsened', 'unchanged', or introducing new findings since the prior exam are prevalent in these examples, indicating a pattern of detailed temporal comparison of radiological findings.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.584070796460177,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10764,latent_10764,5856,0.011712,0.0045322455,3.2371945,Detailed analysis of anatomical or equipment changes from prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe detailed Reviews and interventions on the radiology report, focusing on the specifics of the current findings and their direct comparison to prior images, including positioning or changes in medical devices such as cathether location. This suggests attention to detail about anatomical or equipment changes is key in these examples.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10765,latent_10765,488,0.000976,0.0011870826,3.7080846,Descriptions involving changes in mediastinal structures or devices compared to prior imaging.,"All examples describe changes in radiographic features by comparing them to a previous study, specifically focusing on changes in mediastinal structures or devices. Descriptions often mention stability or changes in conditions such as cardiomegaly, PICC line placement, or mediastinal widening, emphasizing on comparison to previous findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.523574669560071,0.5341614906832298,0.4078947368421052,0.5081967213114754,61.0,100.0
+10766,latent_10766,9374,0.018748,0.006986886,1.5350816,Assessment of interval change between current and prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples show explicit references to previous imaging for comparison, but include details on the interval change between the current and previous images, indicating stability or variation over time. Examples not showing the pattern lack these temporal assessments or observations about changes.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6180387563341907,0.625,0.5984251968503937,0.76,100.0,100.0
+10767,latent_10767,1390,0.00278,0.0018006351,2.589085,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging for change or stability.,"The examples predominantly focus on providing descriptions based on current imaging in comparison to prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability. This task emphasizes observing and reporting variations or consistencies across different imaging timelines, highlighting the expert handling of image comparisons and historical changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10768,latent_10768,939,0.001878,0.0015153693,3.1715076,High activation examples have notable pathologies and no available comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels typically provide detailed descriptions of abnormalities, suggesting a specific pathology or significant imaging finding (such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or lung opacities) without unresolved indications within the report. Moreover, there's a lack of available comparison at the time of dictation, and instances with 'comparison not available' or imaging technique details cited specifically correlate with higher activation levels.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.6274509803921569,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10769,latent_10769,550,0.0011,0.0012417776,4.9293346,"Comparison of current findings to prior imaging, noting changes or stability.",Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings in radiological images specifically in comparison to prior imaging studies and include changes or stability over time. Phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' highlight this pattern.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3857677902621723,0.3902439024390244,0.3421052631578947,0.609375,64.0,100.0
+10770,latent_10770,570,0.00114,0.0011087555,4.0156,Descriptive comparison between current and prior images.,"These examples often feature comparative evaluations between the current images and prior images or findings. This pattern involves noting changes, or the lack thereof, in various structures and conditions such as tube placements, pleural effusions, lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, and other pathologies, typically associated with continuous patient monitoring contexts.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5697511881464915,0.5789473684210527,0.5,0.8611111111111112,72.0,99.0
+10771,latent_10771,1382,0.002764,0.0019508314,4.103799,Worsening or stability of pulmonary opacities compared to prior imaging.,"The highest activation examples are characterized by findings that emphasize changes or stability of prior pulmonary opacities, opacification, or masses, specifically correlating with worsening eatenlectasis or opacities on current imaging compared with previous studies. The other examples do not emphasize changes in such opacities as strongly or at all, focusing instead on non-opacification issues like effusions, edema, or device positions.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6088888888888889,0.615,0.6533333333333333,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10772,latent_10772,1124,0.002248,0.0016892845,5.7453117,Improvement or resolution of abnormalities relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve radiological descriptions that specifically focus on indicating an improvement or resolution of a previous identified abnormality, such as pulmonary edema or consolidation, through comparison with prior studies. This often involves phrases noting improvements, stability, or resolution compared to past findings.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4226813186813186,0.5025125628140703,0.52,0.13,100.0,99.0
+10773,latent_10773,2112,0.004224,0.0025857345,3.632937,Explicit comparisons with prior images indicating stability or change.,"Examples with clear comparisons to prior images, particularly indicating consistency or stability of findings over time, such as unchanged sizes and unchanged opacities, are highly activated. These examples explicitly state changes or lack thereof in comparison to previous reports, aligning with radiological practice of continuity checks over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4216867469879518,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10774,latent_10774,967,0.001934,0.001705442,2.6889534,Increased heart size or observations accentuated by low lung volumes.,"Examples with high activation include findings or implications where the heart appears enlarged or accentuated, often due to low lung volumes or specific technical conditions like lung under-inflation. Reports with references to cardiomegaly or descriptions where heart size is influenced by imaging conditions consistently show higher activation.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5632183908045977,0.49,100.0,100.0
+10775,latent_10775,930,0.00186,0.0017239851,5.5596905,Low lung volumes accentuating cardiac silhouette on chest imaging.,"The pattern identified involves descriptions of chest imaging findings with low lung volumes, which often accentuates cardiac silhouette, making them appear enlarged even if they might not be. This is a frequent consideration in radiology when interpreting chest images in certain body positions or inspiratory effort levels.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3427579365079365,0.47,0.25,0.03,100.0,100.0
+10776,latent_10776,3726,0.007452,0.0029686524,2.893734,"Detailed comparison of pleural effusions or lung conditions with prior imaging, noting stability or improvement.","Highly activated examples consistently involve detailed observation of pleural effusions or changes/differences noted on radiographs or findings indicating stable/improved conditions in comparison to the date or state of prior imaging. This general observation is combined with how the current findings match previous ones, indicating no significant change, which is a common approach in these radiological contexts.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.6131528046421664,0.625,0.6923076923076923,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10777,latent_10777,1059,0.002118,0.0018365718,3.2752056,"Mentions of cardiomegaly, aortic tortuosity, or their changes.","The highly representative examples consistently mention descriptive findings related to either changes in the heart size such as cardiomegaly or the presence of aortic tortuosity. These are specific radiological findings that are often noted in reports and can hint at underlying cardiovascular conditions. Therefore, the pattern is both the presence of such findings and their changes or comparison to prior images.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.6101694915254238,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10778,latent_10778,970,0.00194,0.0015738511,3.9126842,"Findings affirm absence of pathologies (e.g., lungs clear, no effusion).","Examples with higher activation contain findings descriptions that affirm the absence of particular pathologies or conditions, often stating 'lungs are clear', 'no pleural effusion', 'cardiac silhouette is normal', etc., as seen in examples with high activation levels. This pattern aligns with radiology practices where a lack of significant findings is explicitly communicated.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+10779,latent_10779,1330,0.00266,0.0022180758,3.0987313,"Stable cardiomegaly, lung volumes, or interstitial edema compared to prior.","The activation level is higher for examples that describe findings of stable cardiomegaly, lung volumes, atelectasis, or interstitial edema. These examples include radiological findings that are subtly changed or stable compared to past images, reflecting chronic conditions rather than acute pathological changes.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5746446726838883,0.59,0.6451612903225806,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10780,latent_10780,1151,0.002302,0.001545032,3.5529113,Detailed analysis of radiographic findings with clear comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on providing detailed analysis and interpretation of radiographic findings, despite some declaring 'no change' or being unchanged when compared to previous exams. Additionally, they generally don't contain incomplete sentences because they focus on meaning which aligns with model output priorities.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3749843746093652,0.375,0.3737373737373737,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10781,latent_10781,6290,0.01258,0.0049977847,2.550852,Detection of interval change or stability in serial imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on identifying and describing a notable change or interval comparison in radiological findings across repeated imaging studies. This pattern emphasizes tracking changes, stability, or improvement over time, especially in relation to pathologies like effusions, pneumothoraces, opacities, or changes in equipment positions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10782,latent_10782,6029,0.012058,0.0043170634,1.2823241,Descriptive changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions where there are specific changes or notable comparisons made with previous imaging studies. Specifically, these tend to involve detailed assessments of changes, stability, or resolutions in radiological findings over sequential imaging studies.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.508679986898133,0.55,0.5316455696202531,0.84,100.0,100.0
+10783,latent_10783,1244,0.002488,0.0017215385,4.37133,"Clear lungs; no pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation.","The pattern involves providing radiological descriptions that identify clear lungs without any acute findings like pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation, which encompass many typical radiological observations for healthy or stable chest outcomes.",0.8585858585858586,0.86,0.8,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.689875950380152,0.69,0.6979166666666666,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10784,latent_10784,9214,0.018428,0.0067875194,1.6480993,Emphasis on stability or minor changes in findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation involve findings compared to previous imaging, mainly indicating no significant change or stability in conditions such as effusions, lines, or opacities. This pattern highlights following stability over time, which may represent the model recognizing stable conditions as significant when constant with or without minor fluctuations.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10785,latent_10785,8707,0.017414,0.0062706945,1.2773552,Description of findings in comparison to prior studies noting consistent support device placement.,"Many examples involve findings described by comparing multiple radiographs, especially focusing on the monitoring and support devices and certain lung or cardiac changes. The language suggests consistency in these patterns across comparisons, leading to interval assessment.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5907928388746804,0.6,0.6428571428571429,0.45,100.0,100.0
+10786,latent_10786,1070,0.00214,0.0014478788,3.621509,Prompt requires comparison but lacks prior image for reference.,"Examples with high activation describe scenarios where comparisons are explicitly mentioned, but no previous images are available or compared. The pattern seems to focus on the expectation or instruction to compare with prior images, yet no such images are available for reference, hence the juxtaposition of providing findings with a directive to compare without available comparisons leads to higher activation.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4705454545454545,0.545,0.5257142857142857,0.92,100.0,100.0
+10787,latent_10787,823,0.001646,0.0015877081,3.7197287,Descriptions comparing current radiology study to prior images despite missing prior details.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize providing descriptions of the findings in the study by explicitly needing a comparative analysis with prior images, even when key details like prior findings are missing or noted to have no recent priors available. This analysis focuses on differences observed or the lack of new changes compared to previous imaging.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3871754107048225,0.3979591836734694,0.4126984126984127,0.5416666666666666,96.0,100.0
+10788,latent_10788,6289,0.012578,0.0047564413,2.1165802,Explicit comparison to prior study with attention to stability or change of findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings or stable changes within the lungs, heart, or devices that have explicitly been compared to prior imaging. The pattern indicates a focus on evaluating changes or stability in medical implants, cardiorespiratory features, or other conditions over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.60984393757503,0.61,0.6057692307692307,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10789,latent_10789,822,0.001644,0.0015139666,3.650752,Comparison of current imaging with prior reports or images.,"The consistently mentioned element in these examples is the presence of descriptions of radiology images in conjunction with previous reports or images, and any notable changes or stability in findings. The mentions of 'PRIOR_REPORT', 'COMPARISON', and references to differences or unchanged findings support this focus.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.420197345674087,0.455,0.4697986577181208,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10790,latent_10790,5220,0.01044,0.0042652003,3.1336884,Radiographic changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with notable activation describe radiographic changes relative to prior imaging studies, which is a common practice in radiology reports that compare current findings with past imaging to assess stability, progression, or improvement of any identified abnormality.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10791,latent_10791,9741,0.019482,0.0071717026,1.4401844,Focus on interval change in tube or device placement between images.,"The highly activated examples focus on changes in devised placements like tubes, catheters, and other medical devices between current and prior images. Reports compare the position of these devices and any interval changes, highlighting placement accuracy and any complications related to positioning.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.9090909090909092,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5388245388245388,0.57,0.6458333333333334,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10792,latent_10792,2292,0.004584,0.002226,3.1803381,Reports depicting unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"These examples involve radiological reports that compare findings between current and prior images, taking note of any changes or stability in the condition depicted, using the pattern ""unchanged"" or ""no new changes."" This is typical in follow-ups to assess progression or resolution.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5359641255605381,0.542713567839196,0.56,0.42,100.0,99.0
+10793,latent_10793,496,0.000992,0.0012039326,4.0625935,Description includes interstitial markings in lung imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention 'interstitial markings', which are indicative of pulmonary conditions like edema or fibrosis. These examples highlight the presence, change, or prominence in interstitial markings within the lungs.",0.92,0.92,0.92,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7917576756645375,0.8098159509202454,0.8076923076923077,0.6666666666666666,63.0,100.0
+10794,latent_10794,1327,0.002654,0.0020384085,3.8159242,Description of atelectasis in chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activations involve identifying and describing atelectasis, a common lung condition characterized by localized partial collapse or incomplete expansion of lung tissue, often appearing as linear or platelike opacities on chest imaging. These reports consistently describe linear or band-like opacities indicative of atelectasis.",0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.7857142857142857,0.88,100.0,100.0
+10795,latent_10795,3427,0.006854,0.0032665469,2.9729912,Comparison with prior images specified or requested.,"Higher activations occur in examples where there is a direct request or comparison to a prior imaging study, either explicitly mentioned or indicated by structures such as 'as compared to' or 'comparison is made'. These comparisons are central to the evaluations requested in the report.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10796,latent_10796,1623,0.003246,0.0019338066,2.9100308,Comparing current and prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with activations involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, explicitly stating whether interval changes are present or noting stable findings. These reports often emphasize stability or changes in findings since the previous images, such as 'no significant interval change'.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5102040816326531,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10797,latent_10797,7872,0.015744,0.0057247537,1.7579651,Comparison of current and prior imaging with specific changes noted.,"The lower activation levels indicate that mere reference to images without providing detailed changes in comparison with prior images, especially specific changes over time, are not part of the activation pattern. Instead, higher activations correlate with specific comparison language indicating evaluation of changes from prior imaging studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5949088544922607,0.595,0.5922330097087378,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10798,latent_10798,1881,0.003762,0.0021148084,2.9130688,Stable findings with normal cardiac silhouette upon comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently highlight comparisons between current and previous imaging evaluations that reveal stable or unchanged findings, coupled with observations of normal cardiac silhouette or heart size. Examples with new or worsening abnormalities, as evidenced by variation in findings, typically show lower activation levels.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4175824175824176,0.47,0.425,0.17,100.0,100.0
+10799,latent_10799,12503,0.025006,0.00911547,1.5616866,Focus on describing interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples emphasize findings based on current imaging in relation to prior images with explicit mention of interval changes or stability. This pattern is evident by the focus on changes over time ('remains unchanged', 'increased', 'persistent', 'unchanged').",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10800,latent_10800,429,0.000858,0.0010158638,4.51734,Detailed radiological comparative analysis over time.,"An important pattern in these examples is the comparative analysis of findings across different imaging sessions to gauge changes and stability. The comparisons often focus on lung volumes, opacities, pleural effusions, and heart size, highlighting stable appearances or intervals of improvement. References to detailed descriptions based on prior examinations are common in highly activated examples.",0.5493311036789297,0.5510204081632653,0.5357142857142857,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.558744874309146,0.56,0.4130434782608695,0.76,50.0,100.0
+10801,latent_10801,1028,0.002056,0.0015850622,3.6603665,Comparison emphasizes interval change in devices or pneumothorax.,"The highly activated examples typically involve pulmonary or prominent anatomical changes when comparing current and prior radiological images, focusing on specific structures or devices (e.g., pneumothorax, endotracheal tube placement) with emphasis on position, stability, or interval change between images. The pattern emphasizes comparisons around devices, pneumothorax, or significant structural changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4749042417364165,0.5326633165829145,0.6060606060606061,0.2,100.0,99.0
+10802,latent_10802,882,0.001764,0.0016946518,3.16499,Explicit or implied comparison with prior image findings.,"The high activation levels correlate with examples that include a direct or implied comparison between current and prior radiological images, a recurring theme involving comparing framing in these examples. This indicates that the model is sensitive to comparative analysis rather than just descriptive or standalone observations.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.49,0.4939024390243902,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10803,latent_10803,1687,0.003374,0.002275173,2.965962,Use of current frontal and lateral images compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve the use of frontal and lateral images in conjunction with prior images, often noting anatomical or positional changes over time. The task requires comparison with prior studies to identify changes, using terms like 'since prior study' and detailed analysis of serial imaging findings.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+10804,latent_10804,7689,0.015378,0.005842999,1.5680255,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging using specific descriptors.,"The highly activated examples involve explicit and particularized comparisons with previous imaging studies, and they delineate changes (or the lack thereof) in specific thoracic findings using consistent and detailed descriptors. Lower activation levels often correspond to either lacking comparisons, less specific detail, or not using explicit prior comparison.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.5581395348837209,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10805,latent_10805,941,0.001882,0.0016140838,2.6891747,Comparison with prior imaging showing stable chronic findings.,"Examples with high activation involve explicit comparisons to prior images without significant acute changes, while focusing on stable findings. This pattern indicates a consistent theme of monitoring chronic conditions with stable imaging findings over time, without new acute issues.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.45,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10806,latent_10806,1396,0.002792,0.0019479874,4.2039795,Comparison of medical devices or interventions between current and prior images.,"This pattern involves detailed description and comparison of findings to prior images, often highlighting changes, stability, removals, or new placements of medical devices, but not limited specifically to just changes in disease states. It reflects radiographic evaluations that take into account device positions or interventional changes over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5223880597014925,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10807,latent_10807,7029,0.014058,0.005410646,2.7210815,Comparison of current and prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve comparisons between current and prior images, with clear identification of changes or stability in specific abnormalities or devices like pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette, or pacemaker leads. This suggests that the pattern involves recognizing changes in clinical findings between sequential images, especially related to specific pathologies or medical devices.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10808,latent_10808,4243,0.008486,0.0042806244,2.452591,No significant change in imaging findings or lack of comparison.,"The examples show that the pattern involves situations where there either is no comparison available or the comparison does not reveal any significant interval changes in the current imaging findings. This corresponds to instances where the findings on imaging are constant or cannot be evaluated against previous studies, utilizing phrases like 'no comparison available', 'no interval change', or 'unchanged from'.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5555555555555556,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10809,latent_10809,11472,0.022944,0.00839811,2.1385763,Comparative analysis with prior imaging focusing on device placement or pathology presence.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently include structured comparisons between current imaging and prior imaging, specifically focusing on specific radiological findings such as presence of medical devices or pathologies. These reports often reiterate measurements, pathologies, or device locations, indicating that the task of comparison is crucial to their understanding.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5614035087719298,0.57,0.5546875,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10810,latent_10810,576,0.001152,0.0013413726,4.545964,Emphasis on positioning and stability of tubes or medical devices compared to prior images.,"High activation levels are associated with reports that focus on the evaluation of the placement and positioning of medical devices such as tubes or catheters across sequential radiographs for monitoring stability and appropriate configuration. These examples mention stability, accurate position, and comparisons with prior images, emphasizing the positioning of these devices.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7158823529411764,0.7261904761904762,0.6617647058823529,0.6617647058823529,68.0,100.0
+10811,latent_10811,4774,0.009548,0.003829043,3.3274574,Comparative assessment of interval changes in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging, indicating a focus on assessing the interval changes or stability of clinical findings across multiple radiological examinations. These comparisons are closely associated with monitoring disease progression or stability, which likely heightens the model's activation.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10812,latent_10812,685,0.00137,0.0013917405,5.6247044,Direct comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"The pattern that emerges from the examples with high activation levels is the emphasis on describing findings in current images in direct comparison to prior studies or reports. This involves noting changes, stability, or specific comparisons to previous conditions of structures seen in the radiographic images.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4260764099454215,0.4285714285714285,0.4017857142857143,0.5487804878048781,82.0,100.0
+10813,latent_10813,876,0.001752,0.0016186277,4.0352244,Detailed comparison to prior findings emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently report findings in relation to a previous radiological report, specifically focusing on the presence or resolution of pathologies such as effusions, atelectasis, tubes, or opacities. This pattern indicates thorough comparison and interpretation based on previous examinations, highlighting any changes or persistent features from prior imaging.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4538941356246398,0.455,0.4505494505494505,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10814,latent_10814,757,0.001514,0.0013912816,3.2500565,Focus on stability or lack of significant change in imaging findings.,"Patterns that involve clear references to stable, unchanged, or unperturbed aspects of the reported findings, particularly when items of interest, like abnormalities (e.g., cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or calcifications) remain consistent, suggest these examples are focused on observations that remain unchanged over time. This pattern involves radiological stability rather than acute findings or changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4679270403408334,0.4690721649484536,0.4505494505494505,0.4361702127659574,94.0,100.0
+10815,latent_10815,995,0.00199,0.001795862,3.858395,Comparison of radiological findings related to lung opacities with prior images.,"These examples contain a request to compare current radiological findings with prior images and include analysis of lung opacities. This specific comparison in the context of evaluating lung conditions, with emphasis on opacities, suggests that the pattern involves descriptions of findings in terms of changes over time while evaluating lung abnormalities.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,100.0
+10816,latent_10816,548,0.001096,0.0013034174,5.284008,Emphasis on detailed comparison with prior frontal image.,"The given examples with high activations frequently involve the term 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating comparison between current and prior images. This pattern of requiring detailed comparison with previous imaging seems to be closely related to higher activations.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5528792912513842,0.5529411764705883,0.4752475247524752,0.676056338028169,71.0,99.0
+10817,latent_10817,879,0.001758,0.0015810761,2.671402,Use of comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological descriptions that include specific comparisons to prior images. This feature indicates a focus on detecting changes or stability over time in imaging findings, which is a key aspect of thorough radiological assessment.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3839144728326991,0.405,0.4306569343065693,0.59,100.0,100.0
+10818,latent_10818,2170,0.00434,0.0025002721,4.7718525,Significant change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize a significant change between current and prior imaging findings, especially noting new or worsening pathologies, resolving conditions, or notable changes in clinical devices' positions. This illustrates comparison not just at the level of presence but significant difference or actionable change.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5344827586206896,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10819,latent_10819,721,0.001442,0.0015012054,3.2584982,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and absence of focal lung abnormalities.,"The high activation levels consistently appear in examples where there is a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and no focal lung abnormalities such as consolidation, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion are identified. These are typical descriptions in radiology reports where the findings are negative for acute respiratory or cardiovascular pathology.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7732497387669801,0.7741935483870968,0.75,0.7674418604651163,86.0,100.0
+10820,latent_10820,918,0.001836,0.0014037035,2.6918664,Stability or change in comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples frequently discuss stable cardiomediastinal and cardiac silhouettes, or specific pulmonary or vascular changes, and often include statements comparing the current findings to previous imaging, indicating an interest in recognizing stability or change over multiple studies. This suggests a pattern of detailed comparative analysis of previous and current radiological images, with an emphasis on stable or gradually changing conditions rather than acute changes.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4893071000855432,0.5025125628140703,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,99.0
+10821,latent_10821,712,0.001424,0.0011830581,4.184916,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging with observations on stability or changes.,"Highly activated examples involve language describing an extensive comparison between current and previous imaging findings, often with specific observations on stability or changes in structures such as cardiac size, lung opacities, or presence of medical devices, including follow-up advice if needed.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.40365133249579,0.4072164948453608,0.3764705882352941,0.3404255319148936,94.0,100.0
+10822,latent_10822,1415,0.00283,0.0016616621,3.8230004,Comparisons to prior images highlighting stability or change.,"The examples measure the consistency and changes in imaging findings over time as compared to previous studies. The references to prior imaging results are central to these reports, providing a basis for observational stability or progression of noted pathologies, indicative of radiology practices focusing on longitudinal comparisons.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10823,latent_10823,762,0.001524,0.0012900012,4.548908,"Changes in lung aeration, often right lower lobe.","The examples with higher activations consistently describe changes in the aeration of lung fields, often in the context of right lower lobe changes or improvements. This implies that the pattern being activated here relates to the observation of changes or improvements in lung aeration, commonly associated with prior conditions such as atelectasis or pneumonias.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6406352683461117,0.6476683937823834,0.6712328767123288,0.5268817204301075,93.0,100.0
+10824,latent_10824,1799,0.003598,0.0018963944,3.324969,Comparisons over time with explicit reference to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve comparison with a prior radiographic image and highlight changes or stability in anatomic or pathological conditions over time. References to previous studies, stability or instability of findings and medical imaging jargon, are dominant features in these cases, indicating that the neural network is responsive to cues of longitudinal change assessment in diagnostic imaging.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10825,latent_10825,3753,0.007506,0.0029837405,2.5116692,"Positioning of medical lines (e.g., CVL, Dobhoff, PICC) in radiology reports.","The pattern here involves the radiological evaluation focusing on the positioning and evaluation of various medical lines, such as central venous lines, dobhoff tubes, or PICC lines in relation to prior imaging. These reports frequently discuss changes or stability in their positions, and whether adjustments are recommended.",0.6131578947368421,0.6326530612244898,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5246157041960947,0.5376884422110553,0.5606060606060606,0.37,100.0,99.0
+10826,latent_10826,1485,0.00297,0.0022260067,4.0447803,Stability or change assessment in comparison to prior imaging.,"The cases with high activation levels consistently involve comparison to previous studies, often emphasizing stability or change over time. These examples include specific references to prior imaging studies and provide assessments in terms of new or unchanged findings.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10827,latent_10827,7227,0.014454,0.005267455,1.446892,Descriptions emphasize interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of findings in relation to prior images, emphasizing radiological changes, stability, or improvement over time. Patterns often include terms like 'worsening', 'unchanged', 'interval increase', etc., suggesting sensitivity to detecting changes from past to present.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10828,latent_10828,3650,0.0073,0.0038686367,2.5318732,Multiple view comparisons to assess positional or structural changes.,"Descriptions that require multiple views for comparison often entail evaluations of complex conditions like pneumothorax, pneumonia, or conditions post-surgery. These comparisons typically involve a PA or AP view alongside lateral views to assess changes in positioning, structures, or the condition of tubes and lines, resulting in higher activation.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10829,latent_10829,1274,0.002548,0.0019857644,3.909699,Pulmonary opacities compared against prior imaging indicating abnormality or change.,"Examples with high activation levels demonstrate significant pulmonary opacities or findings that are compared against prior imaging studies, highlighting changes or stable abnormalities relevant to the patient's clinical indication. They include comparisons indicating either stability or progression of lung opacities, which typically represent pneumonia, atelectasis, or pulmonary infection, confirming the presence or resolution of a significant pulmonary process. Low activation examples lack explicit comparison of pulmonary findings with previous studies or fail to highlight significant lung pathology.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.8275862068965517,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7,0.7,0.7,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10830,latent_10830,790,0.00158,0.0015819146,3.3556383,Confirmation of stability or lack of change from prior imaging.,"These highly activated examples emphasize stable findings across multiple aspects including cardiac silhouette, lung clarity, and lack of acute changes. They focus on confirming what is unchanged from prior studies, indicating stability and lack of new issues rather than describing abnormalities.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4419401744910677,0.457286432160804,0.4328358208955223,0.2929292929292929,99.0,100.0
+10831,latent_10831,877,0.001754,0.0015390706,3.5572867,Descriptions of pulmonary artery enlargement or abnormalities suggestive of pulmonary hypertension.,"Examples with high activation levels include descriptions of pulmonary artery abnormalities or enlargement, often in the context of pulmonary hypertension. This pattern captures diagnostic findings common in pulmonary assessments where arterial hypertensive status is inferred from imaging.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,100.0,100.0
+10832,latent_10832,6729,0.013458,0.005418417,2.40017,Observed interval changes in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"These examples often indicate comparison to prior imaging, which suggests a focus on identifying interval changes such as improvements or resolutions in opacities, effusions, or atelectasis seen previously. The reports describe observations within the context of comparing radiographic findings over time.",0.5493311036789297,0.5510204081632653,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10833,latent_10833,2205,0.00441,0.0029518385,5.9989576,Follow-up for complications such as pneumothorax or tube placements compared to prior radiographs.,"These examples emphasize the investigation for complications or changes post-procedures involving tubes or catheters, like NG tubes or Dobbhoff, and for pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum, all compared with prior imaging. This pattern captures the follow-up and monitoring aspect of post-procedural status, focusing on complication detection.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.22,100.0,100.0
+10834,latent_10834,683,0.001366,0.0010765317,4.7169957,Emphasis on interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on the comparison of current findings on chest imaging to prior imaging studies. They highlight changes or stability of noted findings, emphasizing interval changes (or lack thereof) between past and current images, especially regarding pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, and presence or absence of infiltrates or devices.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4437070938215103,0.4438502673796791,0.4123711340206185,0.4597701149425287,87.0,100.0
+10835,latent_10835,7370,0.01474,0.0056025255,1.666129,Structured comparison of current findings with prior studies.,"The pattern observed is reports that provide a detailed, structured comparison of the current imaging findings with prior studies to note changes or stability in conditions. These examples exhibit a structured approach to describe both the images and condition progression, specifically noting any differences since the last study.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10836,latent_10836,10987,0.021974,0.008245471,1.9216535,Change in intubation or procedural support device positioning.,The examples that show high activation levels describe changes (or lack thereof) in position or status of intubation tubes or other similar procedural equipment like central lines between the current and previous imaging results. This is likely a key diagnostic insight being detected by the model.,0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10837,latent_10837,1201,0.002402,0.0016704566,3.2196882,No significant interval change indicated in comparison.,The examples with higher activations consistently involve assessing interval changes by comparing current and prior imaging studies. The model is highly activated by scenarios where the comparison explicitly indicates no significant interval change or where specific professional terminology (such as 'no significant interval change') is used repeatedly without detailed changes in findings between the referenced studies.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.52,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10838,latent_10838,5562,0.011124,0.004224879,1.9319425,Presence of low lung volumes with associated findings.,"These examples display descriptions involving low lung volumes, which typically result in crowding of pulmonary and bronchovascular structures. Common phrases like 'low lung volumes', 'crowding of vasculature', and 'atelectasis' are repeatedly noted in both findings and impressions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.6078431372549019,0.31,100.0,100.0
+10839,latent_10839,7305,0.01461,0.005365159,1.6541388,Device change or assessment in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation describe changes related to medical devices, such as feeding tubes or pleural drains, when they are compared against previous imaging to assess for stability, positioning, or complications. The language often highlights the introduction or examination of these devices through phrases like ""new feeding tube"" or ""pleural drain"" and compares against prior imaging.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.595034595034595,0.5979899497487438,0.6219512195121951,0.51,100.0,99.0
+10840,latent_10840,5151,0.010302,0.0042893584,1.9886742,Reports indicating significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve significant interval changes when compared to prior imaging, such as changes in devices, lung conditions, or other notable findings. The lower activation levels generally describe stable findings or lack of significant interval changes aside from minor adjustments or indications regarding devices or tubes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5263157894736842,0.3,100.0,100.0
+10841,latent_10841,974,0.001948,0.00136111,4.1840506,"Unremarkable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours without pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe chest imaging findings without pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation, often mentioning normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours. This pattern indicates a routine observation where these aspects of the report are explicitly stated as normal or unremarkable.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5614035087719298,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10842,latent_10842,1034,0.002068,0.0015826036,3.6004548,Lung or heart stability and interval findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern is indicated by detailed commentary on lung or heart conditions, often in relation to prior imaging studies, using explicit descriptions or indications of stability, changes, or interval findings. Low activation values generally describe stable situations without significant mention of findings that address changes or stability suggestions.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5478603154339211,0.575,0.5503355704697986,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10843,latent_10843,2785,0.00557,0.0023201038,2.5444908,Emphasis on comparing current and prior image findings.,"Prompts with strong activations involve the task of providing a description or comparison of current imaging findings against prior studies, suggesting that the model is focused on comparing features or changes over time between multiple images when prior comparisons are made explicit.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+10844,latent_10844,8958,0.017916,0.006724191,2.0885994,Assessment of interval change in radiological findings.,"These examples are concentrated on observing interval changes when current and prior chest images are compared. The pattern involves evaluating stability versus change in specific findings like effusions, atelectasis, cardiomegaly, or opacity, indicating disease progression or resolution.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.5826771653543307,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10845,latent_10845,1457,0.002914,0.0018000352,2.5269558,Detailed description and comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels refer to radiology studies with a thorough description of findings in comparison to prior imaging. These examples contain detailed comparison to a previous exam, mentioning changes or stability in findings. This indicates the model is triggered by the presence of comparative language in radiographic descriptions.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5115113304565774,0.5226130653266332,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,99.0
+10846,latent_10846,6146,0.012292,0.0048415447,2.068841,Comparison focusing on changes in the position of tubes or devices.,"These examples highlight instances where radiological descriptions focus on changes in positions of medical devices, tubes, or anatomical structures in relation to prior imaging, or the presence of such devices affecting interpretations. High activations are linked with descriptions of both the presence and positional changes of devices rather than stable clinical findings alone.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5964912280701754,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10847,latent_10847,1254,0.002508,0.0015673455,3.3701015,Comparison with prior images and noting changes in device positions.,"Highly activated examples frequently include references to comparison with prior images and descriptions of changes in conditions or positions of medical devices (catheters, tubes). This pattern highlights follow-up evaluations or monitoring of developments, commonly seen in radiology reports for tracking patient progress or device placement.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10848,latent_10848,1138,0.002276,0.0017989763,3.1884115,Radiology findings provided with directives for comparison with prior images.,"All examples with significant activation contain explicit instructions to describe current radiological findings and include their relationship or comparison to prior studies. They emphasize the consistent methodology of evaluating changes or confirming stability of findings, highlighting a standard diagnostic approach in radiology.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,100.0,100.0
+10849,latent_10849,2781,0.005562,0.0025262516,2.2391987,Radiological comparison over time for patient monitoring.,"The examples show continued radiological comparison with previous images. Many reports involve monitoring changes over time, particularly for suspected or ongoing conditions, or post-surgical status checks. The use of comparative phrases like 'as compared to prior study' or 'interval changes' is indicative of this pattern.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10850,latent_10850,6724,0.013448,0.005123776,2.564726,Presence of multiple imaging views and comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe scenarios involving multiple views (both frontal and lateral) and explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies. Such descriptions often highlight the significance of detailed, thorough imaging evaluations using multiple perspectives and changes relative to prior exams. The pattern ""Given the current frontal image <image>, the current lateral image <image>, and the prior frontal image <image>"" frequently appears in higher activation cases.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3813672351655836,0.455,0.4733727810650887,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10851,latent_10851,546,0.001092,0.0012690276,4.7385654,Emphasis on 'no significant interval change' in radiology findings.,"Examples with high activation describe radiology findings detailing ""no significant interval change"" or ""no relevant change"" compared to prior studies. These texts emphasize stability in patient condition when compared with prior imaging, using similar language across different patient cases and contexts.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4969512195121951,0.6242424242424243,0.5882352941176471,0.1538461538461538,65.0,100.0
+10852,latent_10852,927,0.001854,0.0015264743,3.0080395,Changes in medical apparatus or posture between current and prior imaging.,The pattern involves mention of new procedures or changes in medical devices and their assessment in comparison to prior radiographs. This includes identifying the installation of medical devices like tubes or lines and their positions compared to prior images. High activation examples consistently describe changes in medical apparatus or posture noted between current and prior imaging.,0.656140350877193,0.673469387755102,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.5526315789473685,0.42,100.0,100.0
+10853,latent_10853,7346,0.014692,0.0053436635,2.5220778,"Evaluation of findings in relation to prior images, noting changes or stability.","The most representative examples reference a comparison of current and prior images, highlighting changes or stability, and are typically associated with interpretations about stability, progression, or change of findings (e.g., nodules, effusions, etc.). These comparisons often mention specific details about changes or lack thereof, allowing for clinical assessment based on temporal changes.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10854,latent_10854,2679,0.005358,0.002591295,3.2402873,Mention of tube placement and positioning in radiology reports.,"The low activation scores indicate that the key pattern is not represented strongly in the examples. A recurring aspect of examples with slightly higher scores is the mention of intubation or tube placement, such as endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, and their positioning related to the carina or other structures. However, this pattern is not consistently highlighted across all examples since the guidance states these have scores near zero.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5969408846630839,0.61,0.671875,0.43,100.0,100.0
+10855,latent_10855,10006,0.020012,0.007447982,1.8555986,Descriptions emphasizing interval change from prior studies.,"The examples with non-zero activations consistently describe changes in findings from previous examinations, often emphasizing improvement, regression, or resolution of a condition. This aligns with a pattern of reports focused on the significance of interval changes, using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'resolved', or 'persistent'.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5476358860375834,0.5477386934673367,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,99.0
+10856,latent_10856,955,0.00191,0.001476295,3.693345,Focus on comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior ones or discussions of interval changes. This includes words or phrases like 'comparison', 'prior', 'no change', 'interval', and specific prior examination dates. These features are indicative of a focus on detecting or evaluating changes over time in radiological features.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10857,latent_10857,810,0.00162,0.0012861489,3.695736,Comparison to prior images to note changes or stability.,The activation levels are high for examples that involve detailed descriptions of changes or stability in radiological findings when compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern arises from the model's focus on how current study results differ from or match past results.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5315472415979708,0.5431472081218274,0.5267175572519084,0.711340206185567,97.0,100.0
+10858,latent_10858,6201,0.012402,0.005010897,2.9503996,Assessment or description of interval changes between current and prior images.,Examples with high activation consistently describe a change or assessment of change in identified pathologies or anatomical features directly between current and prior images. Phrases such as 'As compared to the previous radiograph' and explicit detailing of changes or lack thereof drive this pattern.,0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.56,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10859,latent_10859,9907,0.019814,0.007151916,1.454297,Description of changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples rated with higher activation often contain findings that compare current imaging to prior images. Specifically, they highlight changes, stabilities, or provide direct comparisons between old and new images, which is a significant aspect in sequential radiological assessments.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5564516129032258,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10860,latent_10860,1356,0.002712,0.001824029,2.636474,Emphasis on interval change or stability against prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently highlight comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes or stability of specific findings over time. The reports focus on identifying changes between the current and previous examination to track developments in patient conditions.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10861,latent_10861,770,0.00154,0.0017836767,3.2776885,Presence of 'minimal' findings in radiology reports.,"The reports with high activation levels consistently reference 'minimal' abnormalities, such as 'minimal atelectasis', 'minimal pleural effusion', or 'minimal opacity'. The consistent use of the term 'minimal' indicates findings that are noted as small or insignificant, not prompting immediate concern or intervention.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7431927875421183,0.7606382978723404,0.9215686274509804,0.5340909090909091,88.0,100.0
+10862,latent_10862,1548,0.003096,0.0020515737,4.170918,Description of unchanged findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"Activation levels reflect radiology reports with descriptions of unchanged findings upon comparison with previous imaging. Reports use terms like 'unchanged', 'no new', 'stable', 'interval removal', indicating lack of progression in patient condition or stability of certain findings over time.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3882816032341286,0.425,0.3529411764705882,0.18,100.0,100.0
+10863,latent_10863,2081,0.004162,0.002381506,3.1456606,Evaluative focus on positioning or changes in inserted medical devices.,"Highly activated examples describe specific patterns, placement, or changes in inserted medical devices such as nasogastric tubes, catheters, or endotracheal tubes, often compared with previous images to assess migration or unchanged position, while low activation examples lack this device focus.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5517241379310345,0.32,100.0,100.0
+10864,latent_10864,2013,0.004026,0.0019936054,2.9459705,Focus on stability or change compared to prior imaging studies.,"This pattern involves providing descriptions of radiological findings with particular emphasis on comparisons to prior imaging studies, often discussing changes or stability in features over time. Specifically, the provided data highlights identifying stability or changes in anatomical structures, devices, or conditions compared to longitudinal data in the radiological context.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5212363330529857,0.5353535353535354,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,98.0
+10865,latent_10865,972,0.001944,0.0013094065,3.5420465,Detailed radiological findings and comparisons in chest imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions, comparisons, or indications of findings in current images using specified techniques, irrespective of image set variation, within chest radiology. These examples demonstrate a focus on image analysis details such as projections used (frontal, lateral), presence of comparisons to prior images, and detailed findings of specific pathologies relevant to the chest area.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10866,latent_10866,531,0.001062,0.0011144074,4.0167503,Provide findings from direct image observations with comparisons to prior images.,"The highly activated examples tend to describe findings based on direct observation of images and explicitly mention comparisons to prior images, which is a structure often used in radiological assessments.",0.259703881552621,0.26,0.25,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4246902522764592,0.4268292682926829,0.3636363636363636,0.625,64.0,100.0
+10867,latent_10867,1596,0.003192,0.0020452535,4.660316,Focus on unchanged hardware positioning compared to previous imaging.,"Cases with higher activations include comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifically referencing unchanged hardware positioning (such as pacemakers, endotracheal tubes, or catheters). This indicates an emphasis on consistency or stability in medical equipment placement over time, suggesting not only the importance of imaging comparisons but also hardware status.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3336397058823529,0.42,0.2142857142857142,0.06,100.0,100.0
+10868,latent_10868,1257,0.002514,0.0018120394,2.9761689,Positioning and distance of medical tubes or lines in relation to anatomical landmarks.,"Every example with high activation involves the description of tubes or lines such as endotracheal, enteric, or PICC in relation to anatomical landmarks in the chest, often including the distance above the carina, suggesting a focus on line placement and management in chest radiographs.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6948092557848655,0.695,0.7052631578947368,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10869,latent_10869,4637,0.009274,0.0036266574,2.0626416,Evaluation and comparison of tube placement with prior images.,"Higher activation levels commonly occur in examples that specify an evaluation or comparison of the current imaging findings with prior images, often related to the positioning and length of endotracheal tubes, Dobhoff tubes, or PICC lines. This pattern reflects a focus on identifying changes or ensuring correctness and context provided by previous studies, critical in verifying device placement.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+10870,latent_10870,1067,0.002134,0.0017907078,2.8657618,"Comparison with prior imaging, highlighting unchanged findings or resolution.","Examples with high activation levels mention continuous evaluation and comparison of current imaging with prior studies, emphasizing unchanged or resolved pathologies, which seem to prompt detailed descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging, even when no new findings are present.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4057142857142857,0.415,0.3866666666666666,0.29,100.0,100.0
+10871,latent_10871,6472,0.012944,0.004923992,1.84499,Consistent assessment of changes or stability across multiple imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve the description of changes or stability in findings across consecutive radiology studies. These descriptions often relate details across current and previous images, aiding in assessing new developments or affirming stable conditions over time without introducing new variables or formats, demonstrating a pattern of thorough longitudinal assessment in radiology reports.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5211267605633803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10872,latent_10872,780,0.00156,0.0015556726,5.0294075,Specific lung pathology identified regardless of comparison.,"These examples focus on specific pathologies observed in the lungs, such as nodular opacities, densities, fractures, or other identifiable lung abnormalities but do not consistently engage with findings from previous studies for comparison, nor do they fully utilize the ongoing timeline narrative in radiology reports, which causes high activation when focused purely on the specific pathology identified with current examines.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4079491255961844,0.4183673469387755,0.3783783783783784,0.2916666666666667,96.0,100.0
+10873,latent_10873,1344,0.002688,0.0019413107,3.1290436,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve references to a prior imaging study for comparison. This pattern emphasizes the comparative analysis across time to track changes in the patient's condition, using imaging evidence to note stability or change in findings related to various pathologies such as pleural effusions, lung opacity, etc.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.5290322580645161,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10874,latent_10874,4197,0.008394,0.0035360134,2.2269263,Explicit instruction to compare findings with prior imaging.,The examples that show higher activation levels involve a prompt that explicitly instructs the model to provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior imaging. This directive structure often signals the need for a comparison-based evaluation.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10875,latent_10875,713,0.001426,0.0013907995,3.673143,Descriptions of radiological findings relative to prior imaging studies.,"The provided examples consistently show radiological studies where current findings are described relative to prior imaging, allowing evaluation of changes over time. This is evident in stable findings or identified changes, contrasting with previous studies. The pattern spans across respiratory evaluations and other conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4710582334587233,0.481283422459893,0.464,0.6590909090909091,88.0,99.0
+10876,latent_10876,954,0.001908,0.0015666493,2.3748627,Description of findings based on interval changes from prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions based on comparison between current and prior images, indicating small interval changes. This pattern includes specific language such as 'in comparison to', 'describe findings', etc., without providing a complete list of detailed radiological findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5093912822467912,0.5125628140703518,0.5130434782608696,0.59,100.0,99.0
+10877,latent_10877,2929,0.005858,0.002712056,2.0578556,Emphasis on changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"These samples show activation for cases where prior images are referenced for changes or findings, especially in contexts where significant change or unchanged pathology compared to previous imaging is highlighted. The use of comparison of current with prior imaging to assess stability or change is evident in these activations.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10878,latent_10878,4039,0.008078,0.0032935098,2.6031358,Significant interval change or stable pathological findings on imaging comparison.,"The given examples highlight particulate findings or conclusions from recent diagnostic image comparisons, often with reference to specific image techniques and conditions like pneumothorax or pneumonia. High activation scores correspond to intervals or conditions indicating significant change or stable pathological findings.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.58,0.58,0.58,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10879,latent_10879,1028,0.002056,0.0017345414,2.9808586,Absence of acute or progressing pathology across current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the absence of significant abnormal findings such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation across both current and prior images. Furthermore, they often conclude with reassurances that maintain this impression, using phrases that negate acute or progressing pathology, aligning with the pattern identified as significant by activation levels.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6193910256410255,0.62,0.6111111111111112,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10880,latent_10880,549,0.001098,0.0012091005,3.940605,"Unchanged findings compared to prior images, emphasizing longitudinal observations.","The samples with higher activation focus on subtle changes, such as scarring, effusions, fractures, or device placements being noted as unchanged, whereas zero activation examples highlight new conditions or complications, showing the absence of these unchanged elements.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5478390228625117,0.5757575757575758,0.4576271186440678,0.4153846153846154,65.0,100.0
+10881,latent_10881,7939,0.015878,0.0058093257,2.0178442,Reports emphasizing 'no significant interval change' in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the findings of a radiology study overall as 'unchanged' when compared with previous images, often focusing on stability or slight intervals of change.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4631294964028777,0.5477386934673367,0.75,0.15,100.0,99.0
+10882,latent_10882,1268,0.002536,0.0022277231,3.3274426,Comparison of current and prior images with multiple views.,"Highly activated examples prominently include the examination of multiple views with reference to prior images, indicating a focus on comparison over a timeframe to assess changes or stability in radiological findings. Non-activated examples either lack prior image comparisons or focus primarily on findings in isolation.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10883,latent_10883,13949,0.027898,0.010012625,1.1735698,Focus on interval changes or stability by comparing current and prior radiological findings.,"The pattern involves specific comparisons with prior images or previous studies while noting changes or lack thereof in observed findings. Activation is higher in cases where there is a focus on changes in specific radiological findings over time, especially noted as stability or progression/regression of certain observations, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'improvement', etc.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5414346544382574,0.58,0.5506329113924051,0.87,100.0,100.0
+10884,latent_10884,823,0.001646,0.0015775281,2.9422154,Confirmation of stable findings compared to previous images suggesting minimal or no change.,"Reports often discuss findings in relation to previous imaging studies with mention of 'no relevant change' or describing consistency with prior images, indicating stability or slight alterations in pathology or clinical devices. These samples which have high activation levels highlight unchanged findings and reassurance.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5211267605633803,0.37,100.0,100.0
+10885,latent_10885,1010,0.00202,0.0017198563,4.9045773,Comparison to prior imaging for assessing current findings.,The examples with higher activation levels all emphasize the use of prior imaging for assessing current conditions. The consistent aspect across these examples is that comparisons to prior images are crucial for drawing conclusions in the radiology reports.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4652553819013754,0.515,0.5093167701863354,0.82,100.0,100.0
+10886,latent_10886,6331,0.012662,0.004818899,1.5340995,Significant changes or multiple comparisons with prior imaging studies.,Examples with high activation levels often involve references to multiple comparative studies or notable changes observed compared to prior imaging. This pattern signifies a focus on assessing differences and changes over time in the imaging.,0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10887,latent_10887,619,0.001238,0.0012222922,3.9248188,Chronicling positions or adjustments of medical devices and tubes in chest images.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize descriptions of medical devices, lines, or tubes (e.g., port catheters, PICC lines, Endotracheal tubes) visible on chest radiographs, often indicating their position or changes thereof, alongside findings like no focal consolidation or effusion, consistent with routine procedural checks in medical settings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4910285322090401,0.5139664804469274,0.4354838709677419,0.3417721518987341,79.0,100.0
+10888,latent_10888,1493,0.002986,0.0020789255,2.633394,Instructions to describe findings based on comparison with prior images.,"These examples contain language that explicitly directs the assistant to provide findings based on comparison with prior images. This pattern is evident in the instructions or structure of the prompts, where the assistant is asked to describe interval changes by comparing current and previous studies.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4540888743312589,0.5,0.5,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10889,latent_10889,913,0.001826,0.0013356319,3.6047528,Detailed interpretation of pulmonary findings with comparisons.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe detailed pulmonary findings such as opacities, atelectasis, or effusions, particularly with comparisons to previous images. These descriptions often involve explicit interpretation of these findings in the context of potential pathologies like pneumonia or fluid status changes, using terms such as 'suggestive of', 'could reflect', and 'no interval change'. This pattern reflects detailed pulmonary interpretation in radiological assessments.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4806201550387597,0.62,100.0,100.0
+10890,latent_10890,970,0.00194,0.0015883642,3.5501163,Instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images.,"High activation examples feature instructions for describing radiological findings specifically in comparison to prior images. This pattern contrasts with instructions for single image analyses or cases where no comparison images are available, as seen in low activation examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+10891,latent_10891,630,0.00126,0.001204614,3.1295683,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior images.,"The high-activation level examples involve the explicit use of the phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', which highlights the task of comparing current images with prior ones. This pattern suggests an emphasis on identifying stability or changes over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4915566376377314,0.4916201117318435,0.4387755102040816,0.5443037974683544,79.0,100.0
+10892,latent_10892,3004,0.006008,0.0024280867,2.64766,Evaluation by comparing changes to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the evaluation or confirmation of changes in patient conditions by comparing current imaging with prior studies. These examples highlight changes over time, often stating improvements, stability, or progression in medical conditions, which appears to be the central focus of the pattern observed in the data.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10893,latent_10893,10819,0.021638,0.008188539,2.280219,Focus on medical device or tube placement in radiological comparison.,"Some samples show specific findings in radiological studies involving medical devices or tubing, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or NG tubes, in relation to their correct placement or changes over time. This is evident in descriptions focusing on tubes, their tips, and adjustments required for optimal placement, coupled with follow-up for confirmation or adjustment.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10894,latent_10894,801,0.001602,0.0012021924,4.285647,Emphasis on interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently mention the findings and implications of interval changes compared to prior studies. This includes phrases like 'no significant interval change' or describing slight clearing of conditions. The language suggests monitoring or no alteration in the condition over time, which is typical in follow-up scenarios.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5314621373749688,0.531578947368421,0.5048543689320388,0.5777777777777777,90.0,100.0
+10895,latent_10895,943,0.001886,0.0016201531,4.531724,"Radiology reports describing clear lungs, no pleural effusion or pneumothorax during record comparison.","The high activation examples typically involve radiology findings stating 'lungs are well expanded and clear', and 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax,' alongside the requirement to compare current imaging with prior images. These characteristics are common findings in reports focusing on evaluating stability or absence of new abnormalities in follow-up imaging, with an implied expectation of normalcy in chest structures but still emphasizing the need for a methodical review.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7044014128610436,0.705,0.7252747252747253,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10896,latent_10896,599,0.001198,0.0011524267,4.1639566,Normal or stable cardiac features; technical limitations or positioning issues noted.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve evaluation based on previous images or mention technical limitations or issues that obscure radiological features, leading to no definitive new findings, or difficulty in interpretation due to positioning or technical factors like underpenetration or rotation.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4808522114347356,0.4971428571428571,0.4057971014492754,0.3733333333333333,75.0,100.0
+10897,latent_10897,11709,0.023418,0.008473864,1.1743742,Detailed findings in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on changes or stability of findings in comparison to prior studies. This involves detailing incremental changes or lack thereof in interpretations, maintaining a consistent narrative about changes over time compared to past imaging. These reports tend to provide continuity rather than isolated analysis, which is typical in longitudinal patient monitoring or tracking chronic conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10898,latent_10898,1672,0.003344,0.0019197125,2.9066772,Direct instruction to compare findings with prior imaging without explicit examples.,"Prompts with moderate to high activation levels frequently involve direct instructions or settings to describe changes or make comparisons between current and prior imaging, without explicit prior image examples. This indicates a focus on the task of analyzing and describing interval changes in radiological findings.",0.3466666666666667,0.3469387755102041,0.3333333333333333,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10899,latent_10899,490,0.00098,0.0010997106,4.60529,Inclusion of 'PRIOR_REPORT' and comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples contain the phrase 'PRIOR_REPORT' along with some form of comparison indicating a previous examination. This suggests the model is identifying patterns related to the combination of prior report mentions and comparison with previous study, which informs and contextualizes the findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4607407407407407,0.4615384615384615,0.3679245283018867,0.6964285714285714,56.0,100.0
+10900,latent_10900,351,0.000702,0.00096892985,5.325734,"Evaluation for infiltrate, pneumonia, or infection.","The examples with high activation levels consistently include evaluations for pulmonary infiltrate, pneumonia, or infection, indicated by the presence of terms like 'evaluate for infiltrate'. These terms focus on potential infections or fluid in the lungs, a typical reason for ordering chest radiographs, especially when the clinical indication is present.",0.7006802721088435,0.7045454545454546,0.6,0.9473684210526316,19.0,25.0,0.6156040507773499,0.6258503401360545,0.4473684210526316,0.723404255319149,47.0,100.0
+10901,latent_10901,4612,0.009224,0.0034986523,2.1098027,Comparison with prior images showing stability or change.,"Patterns of comparing current and prior radiological images are often present in these examples, yet the activation levels suggest the model is specifically sensitive to descriptions that reference change over time or resolution of specific pathologies between the images, such as unchanged findings or subtle changes of noted conditions. These data points often use terms that indicate stability or change in a condition across imaging times.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6168968646032866,0.62,0.6016949152542372,0.71,100.0,100.0
+10902,latent_10902,1318,0.002636,0.0016380836,3.233552,Mild to moderate heart enlargement in imaging reports.,"Examples that received higher activation consistently involve findings of mild or moderate enlargement of the heart (cardiomegaly), which is often mentioned in the reports. This includes modifications in cardiac and mediastinal contours without additional acute findings like effusion or pneumothorax.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5940050219711237,0.6080402010050251,0.6666666666666666,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+10903,latent_10903,1433,0.002866,0.0015606438,2.4028583,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe a process of comparing current and prior radiological images, often making specific observations about changes or stability in findings. This pattern is evident in the focus on comparative analysis and the wording that is often framed in a template-like manner around comparison.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10904,latent_10904,1834,0.003668,0.0020256792,3.4352117,Describe changes or stability in device position compared with prior images.,"The radiology studies in these examples frequently involve comparisons with prior imaging studies and highlight changes in device placement or position, such as pacemakers, lines, or other monitoring devices.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.607853123169769,0.615,0.6575342465753424,0.48,100.0,100.0
+10905,latent_10905,1002,0.002004,0.0016503966,5.565851,Focus on comparative analysis with prior images in radiology reports.,The examples with high activation mention providing a detailed comparison or description between current and prior images within the radiology report workflow. They often mention 'comparison' to other images as a key element in understanding the changes over time. This is consistent across the examples with activation levels of 4 and above.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10906,latent_10906,13924,0.027848,0.010173805,1.3980789,Detailed tube positioning and interval changes comparison.,"The highly activated examples focus on specific anatomical findings, specifically positioning and length of tubes (NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, etc.) as well as interval changes compared to prior imaging. They emphasize the detailed tracking of specific medical devices or anatomical structures, and subtle interval changes in clinical context, as opposed to gross pathology.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+10907,latent_10907,782,0.001564,0.0016455965,5.320301,Descriptive comparisons of findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes in clinical findings or status by comparing current images with prior studies. This highlights the model's focus on identifying progression or change in patient condition over time, which is crucial in medical assessments.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5272418744289258,0.542713567839196,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,99.0
+10908,latent_10908,1116,0.002232,0.0017132353,3.0795388,Describes stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves language describing unchanged or stable findings in radiology images when comparing with previous studies, while using precise medical terminology and detailed findings. The activation patterns are related to descriptive findings made in the comparison context.
+",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4893071000855432,0.5025125628140703,0.5074626865671642,0.34,100.0,99.0
+10909,latent_10909,9814,0.019628,0.007264601,1.8327054,Technical description of tubes or lines in radiology reports.,"These examples show a focus on technical descriptions of imaging tubes and lines such as PICC lines, NG tubes, and changes around the mediastinal area. These are common details included in radiology reports but aren't directly associated with significant disease change unless specifically noted.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.46875,0.3,100.0,100.0
+10910,latent_10910,2143,0.004286,0.0029430778,5.7246513,Higher activation when no prior comparison images are specified.,"The examples with higher activation levels often lack prior comparison images explicitly, despite the task description calling for comparison. This highlights the model's focus on the absence of specified past imaging for maximal activation, indicating a pattern related to working without prior comparative data.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4831460674157303,0.43,100.0,100.0
+10911,latent_10911,1327,0.002654,0.0016185978,2.4079795,No prior comparison available in reports with multiple views.,"Reports with high activation use radiological images consisting of both frontal and lateral views or comparisons but lack previous imaging studies for meaningful comparative evaluation, indicated by asking for a description in relation to a prior frontal image without available comparable data. This necessitates a present image assessment without prior references.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5604395604395604,0.51,100.0,100.0
+10912,latent_10912,1498,0.002996,0.0019544694,2.9255903,Presence and description of findings from comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe radiological findings that specifically detail changes or stabilities observed when comparing current images to prior ones. The presence of references to prior imaging or comparison, even when results are stable, highlights the model's sensitivity towards changes over time in imaging.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5350877192982456,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10913,latent_10913,802,0.001604,0.0014247281,3.8786712,Findings related to cardiothoracic interventions or device placements.,"Highly activated examples include descriptions of medical interventions, especially placement or adjustment of devices like chest tubes, PICC lines, or pacemakers, along with cardiac procedures like coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. This aligns with the example highlighting findings related to cardiothoracic interventions and device placements.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4356863658719681,0.455,0.4285714285714285,0.27,100.0,100.0
+10914,latent_10914,1133,0.002266,0.0019945975,5.466327,Explicit instruction to compare findings in current vs prior images.,"Examples with higher activations explicitly instruct the task of describing radiology findings by comparing current and prior images using the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', emphasizing active comparison. This instruction present in the task itself indicates a focus on comparative analysis for generating results.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10915,latent_10915,1190,0.00238,0.0016096267,5.6805134,Explicit request to compare radiological findings with prior images.,The examples with high activation levels involve explicit instructions to compare a frontal chest image with a prior imaging study and provide descriptions or evaluations based on this comparison. They involve scenarios where such comparative analysis is explicitly requested.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10916,latent_10916,1326,0.002652,0.0017952675,2.5942473,Comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference comparison with previous imaging in the description of findings. This includes explicit statements noting changes or stability versus prior studies, demonstrating a specific pattern of relating current findings to past images within the reports.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.441530311333803,0.465,0.475177304964539,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10917,latent_10917,2809,0.005618,0.0026349141,2.192938,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern involves examples that make explicit comparisons between current and prior images to detect changes over time, particularly assessing for interval changes, stability, or development of new findings. High activations are coinciding with detailed descriptions of how current findings relate to prior images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4522613065326633,0.4522613065326633,0.45,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+10918,latent_10918,9695,0.01939,0.0069918865,1.3786716,Repeated emphasis on comparison to prior imaging studies with details of interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to changes or stable conditions identified by comparison with prior imaging studies. They outline differences or similarities between current and previous imaging, highlighting interval changes or lack thereof in a structured manner.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6549223575304444,0.655,0.6597938144329897,0.64,100.0,100.0
+10919,latent_10919,1995,0.00399,0.0026020212,3.602537,Descriptions of opacities or pleural effusions compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern focuses on the identification and description of opacities or pleural effusions observed in comparison to prior imaging. Frequently, terms like 'opacity', 'pleural effusion', and references to varying lung zones and changes from prior are mentioned and linked to pulmonary conditions like atelectasis, pneumonia, or edema.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6539532084555781,0.655,0.6741573033707865,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10920,latent_10920,776,0.001552,0.0013592081,5.0915966,Presence of stents or metallic medical devices in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels either explicitly feature metallic medical devices or stents noted in the imagery or in the description of the findings, which seems to be the pattern the model is responding to. These devices are described consistently across reports, emphasizing their presence and status as either 'unchanged' or 'in place'.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5789356799822336,0.5885416666666666,0.5915492957746479,0.4565217391304347,92.0,100.0
+10921,latent_10921,762,0.001524,0.0015711035,2.8239632,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"The pattern in these examples is consistent with the assessment of radiological findings without significant change or stability compared to prior examinations, often using language indicating stability or unchanged nature such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar to'. These phrases are used to highlight that there is no significant development or worsening of the observed condition.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.408294930875576,0.4247311827956989,0.3478260869565217,0.2790697674418604,86.0,100.0
+10922,latent_10922,830,0.00166,0.0016199313,3.2367985,"Absence of notable abnormalities (effusion, congestion, pneumothorax) in description.","Examples with high activation levels tend to describe normal findings in the radiology images. This includes statements indicating there is no evidence of certain conditions like consolidation, pleural effusion, vascular congestion, or pneumothorax, suggesting a pattern of detecting normal or unremarkable findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6363636363636364,0.64,0.6166666666666667,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10923,latent_10923,8881,0.017762,0.0065919715,1.6956962,Comparison with prior imaging and stability assessment.,"The pattern involves explicit comparison with prior studies to assess the stability or changes in the findings. In these reports, comparisons with prior radiographs are highlighted, especially when assessing the progress or regression of a condition based on multiple imaging sequences.",0.6063424947145877,0.6122448979591837,0.5806451612903226,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.584,0.73,100.0,100.0
+10924,latent_10924,519,0.001038,0.00093802117,6.8541408,Comparative descriptions of unchanged or resolved conditions with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels all describe comparisons of current imaging findings to prior images, where specific changes or lack thereof are critically discussed. The focus is on detecting changes such as atelectasis and improvements or stability rather than the introduction of new pathologies.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5048878665899943,0.5119047619047619,0.4125,0.4852941176470588,68.0,100.0
+10925,latent_10925,983,0.001966,0.0017597207,4.234201,Unchanged or stable findings compared to prior radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently feature unchanged findings or minor changes in comparison to prior radiographs, and lack new pathological evidence. Reports explicitly state that findings are consistent or stable when compared to previous images, emphasizing 'unchanged', 'no relevant change', or similar terminology.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6849291090495362,0.685,0.6796116504854369,0.7,100.0,100.0
+10926,latent_10926,721,0.001442,0.0012823544,4.152959,"Assessments relative to prior imaging, highlighting stability or interval changes.","The pattern in these examples is that findings are reported in comparison to prior images, focusing on the mention of stability or changes relative to earlier examinations. Phrases such as 'stable', 'unchanged', 'improved', and including descriptions from the prior report or examination are recurrent.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5603515120186094,0.5714285714285714,0.5307692307692308,0.7752808988764045,89.0,100.0
+10927,latent_10927,11495,0.02299,0.008572365,2.2183557,Radiology reports describing changes in medical conditions related to procedures or treatment.,"The model reacts notably to examples where changes between current and prior imaging specifically show resolution or progression of a condition related to both clinical procedure or treatment outcome. Descriptions often include technical or procedural terms like 'pleurodesis', 'pigtail catheter', or results like 'resolving opacifications' or 'placement of medical devices'.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5967335416876701,0.6,0.6219512195121951,0.51,100.0,100.0
+10928,latent_10928,1199,0.002398,0.0020756912,3.9070075,Cardiomegaly with pulmonary vasculature congestion or edema.,Many examples involve descriptions of cardiomegaly and pulmonary vascular congestion or edema. This pattern often indicates the presence of heart failure or fluid overload conditions. The reports frequently mention these cardiovascular and pulmonary findings even when other findings are stable or minor.,0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.9523809523809524,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7064480210547626,0.71,0.7692307692307693,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10929,latent_10929,12268,0.024536,0.008922319,1.4497204,Detailed comparative descriptions of images against prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention 'comparison' and 'provide a description', suggesting that specific attention to detailed, comparative descriptions of changes or stability in findings from prior images is what triggers higher activations.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5327868852459017,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10930,latent_10930,1222,0.002444,0.001600672,2.5036685,Calcifications within the aortic arch.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve findings of calcifications within the aortic arch, often alongside other descriptions of the heart and mediastinal contours. This indicates that the model is highly activated by reports containing the specific feature of aortic arch calcifications, which are a notable radiological finding.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5082792736751681,0.585,0.9047619047619048,0.19,100.0,100.0
+10931,latent_10931,1743,0.003486,0.0022667262,5.1357265,Comparison focuses on medical device placement and interval changes.,"High activations are correlated with the prompt providing details for comparing current and prior images, indicating the importance of noting changes or observations specifically related to medical devices (e.g., tubes, lines) and structural changes in the chest X-rays, especially related to interventions or treatments that require placement checks",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10932,latent_10932,1009,0.002018,0.0015768273,3.3541954,"Emphasis on changes in pulmonary opacities, effusion, or consolidation.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in relation to prior imaging, specifically focusing on pulmonary opacities, pleural effusion, and changes in consolidation which may suggest conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion. These descriptions often emphasize changes or stability in these pulmonary conditions across imaging studies, aligning well with the basic clinical requirement to track lung-related pathologies over time.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,0.6944444444444444,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,100.0,100.0
+10933,latent_10933,1488,0.002976,0.0018975219,2.4188077,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies focusing on changes or stability.,"The activation levels strongly correspond to examples where the main focus is on the presence and assessment of new changes or stabilizations of pathological findings by comparing the current imaging results to earlier studies. These examples include explicit references to previous radiological studies, using phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'no significant interval change', highlighting unchanged significant findings over time or slight alterations indicating stability.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+10934,latent_10934,1071,0.002142,0.0015892345,3.0601783,Detailed comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stabilities.,"Highly activated examples focus on providing a detailed comparison of current imaging findings with previous studies, emphasizing changes or stability. This pattern of comparison is critical in radiology to assess progression or resolution of medical conditions and aids in forming impressions about patient status.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.61,0.61,0.61,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10935,latent_10935,1229,0.002458,0.0022699293,4.24958,Comparative analysis with prior images in the instruction.,"These examples with higher activation levels contain specific instructions to provide descriptions of current findings in comparison to prior studies, explicitly indicating multiple images are available for comparison ('frontal image', 'lateral image', 'prior frontal image'), aligning with the focus on assessing changes or stability over time through comparative analysis using previous imaging.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,100.0,100.0
+10936,latent_10936,3306,0.006612,0.0050250106,4.453609,Emphasis on temporal comparisons of imaging findings.,"Samples with higher activation clearly emphasize comparisons between current and past findings. The explicit mention of changes or lack thereof, and detailed comparison using imaging from different times, aligns with common radiological practices to assess progression or stability of conditions in radiology reports.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.5471698113207547,0.87,100.0,100.0
+10937,latent_10937,1302,0.002604,0.0016345099,2.6328359,Device position compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation compare current radiographic findings with prior images and explicitly note device positions, such as PICC lines or catheters, indicating stable or unchanged positions. This consistency is highlighted in radiology reports to verify the continued proper placement of such medical devices across sequential imaging studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4171502256608639,0.435,0.4,0.26,100.0,100.0
+10938,latent_10938,2623,0.005246,0.0024577903,2.8763754,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The high activation levels appear to be associated with instances where detailed comparisons are made between current and prior imaging, indicating specific changes or stability over time in lung volumes, pleural effusions, and other pathologies. These examples use phrases like 'has improved', 'compared to the previous', and 'appears stable', highlighting a focus on temporal changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5135135135135135,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10939,latent_10939,1540,0.00308,0.0018794327,2.680282,References to position or state of medical devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently report the position or state of medical devices like tubes, catheters, or lines in comparison to prior imaging. Such mentions are critical for patients undergoing monitoring or treatment where device positioning affects the clinical outcome.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,100.0
+10940,latent_10940,2262,0.004524,0.0026039053,3.2961915,Comparison of current and prior radiology images for differences.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently feature instructions to compare current exposure to prior studies, interpreting the differences or lack of changes between imaging. This comparison context extends beyond mere mention and requires juxtaposing the findings to note disparities or stability over time.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10941,latent_10941,8782,0.017564,0.006401027,1.6154169,Current imaging findings compared explicitly to previous radiographs.,"The pattern exhibits descriptions where current imaging findings are detailed in comparison with previous radiographs. This includes phrases such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'unchanged compared to prior', and documentation of placement, stability, or removal of medical devices.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+10942,latent_10942,2210,0.00442,0.0018115944,2.7470455,Change or stability of imaging findings between current and prior exams.,"These examples focus on the new or changed findings in a series of photographic images compared to previous images, particularly examining the cardiomediastinal, pleural, and lung structures for changes or stability. Comparisons to prior images are explicit, showcasing a focus on stability or change over time, which is essential for monitoring patients over successive studies.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5496683573936793,0.5628140703517588,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,99.0
+10943,latent_10943,582,0.001164,0.0011335053,2.8922722,Describing findings using current and prior imaging for comparison.,"The pattern here involves the use of both current and prior images to describe findings or indicate comparison in the radiology studies. Activation is influenced by prompts that mention comparison to previous images, further demanding the contrast evaluation of findings over multiple imaging studies.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5202245670995671,0.5260115606936416,0.4621848739495798,0.7534246575342466,73.0,100.0
+10944,latent_10944,6904,0.013808,0.005297736,1.866835,"Radiological findings compared to prior studies, tracking changes.","The model shows activation when there is comparison to previous imaging studies, which is indicated in examples with explicit references to prior studies even when findings are unchanged. This linguistic pattern is common in radiology reports where changes are being tracked over time, using phrases like 'compared to previous', 'prior', or specific dates for comparison.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4959244959244959,0.53,0.5197368421052632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10945,latent_10945,3594,0.007188,0.0027546568,1.9370648,Descriptive evaluation of radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern demonstrates reports that provide a description or evaluation of radiographic findings particularly in relation to a prior image. The significant activations occur when there is a description of changes or stability of findings documented by comparing current images to prior images, often using phrases like 'compared to prior' or 'unchanged'. The focus is on highlighting how the current state compares to past imagery.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5075757575757576,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10946,latent_10946,800,0.0016,0.0010164813,5.265657,Comparison for procedural or device positioning changes.,"The salient feature is the focus on comparison between current and prior imaging to assess for changes, particularly in cases involving medical devices, tubes, or procedures like intubation, where precise positioning is crucial to the clinical context. These examples highlight procedural follow-ups rather than diagnostic changes.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.547945205479452,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10947,latent_10947,9683,0.019366,0.007089145,1.59757,Pattern of evaluating interval changes in comparison to previous studies.,"These examples include radiological findings that compare current images to prior studies, specifically looking for changes. The pattern observed involves documenting interval changes between current and prior studies, often noting stability, absence of change, or new developments. Terms indicating comparison and interval changes, such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', and dates of previous studies, are prevalent.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5234599089497645,0.542713567839196,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,99.0
+10948,latent_10948,10151,0.020302,0.007729015,2.2911458,Stable findings in comparison with prior images.,"These examples frequently include references to previous imaging for comparison, along with descriptions of unchanged findings, particularly in the context of evaluating potential pathological changes. The pattern suggests a focus on stable appearances in sequential radiologic assessments, involving expressions like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or 'stable'.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5897435897435898,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10949,latent_10949,8430,0.01686,0.0062557836,2.6677701,Stability or unchanged findings upon comparision to prior images.,"Higher activation levels correlate with examples featuring consistently stable or unchanged findings upon comparison with prior studies. Key terms indicating stability include 'normal', 'unchanged', and 'clear', often accompanied by comments on cardiomediastinal, hilar, or cardiac contour stability.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+10950,latent_10950,759,0.001518,0.0012403452,4.23823,"Assessment or placement of clinical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) and their position assessment on imaging.","The activated examples frequently relate to the assessment or placement of tubes or devices, such as NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, or catheters, and their positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the GE junction or the carina. This suggests a focus on radiographic interpretation related to procedural device assessment.",0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.5555555555555556,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.494973404995962,0.5230769230769231,0.5185185185185185,0.2947368421052631,95.0,100.0
+10951,latent_10951,808,0.001616,0.0013861525,3.7550788,Medical device/catheter positioning in the right atrium or SVC.,"The pattern in high activation examples is the reference to invasive medical devices (central lines, catheters, etc.) situated or recommended for precise placement in anatomical locations, primarily in the right atrium or superior vena cava, which indicates monitoring for correct device positioning.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6093337556752191,0.63,0.7407407407407407,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10952,latent_10952,1960,0.00392,0.0024467073,4.2651033,Findings are compared to prior imaging studies and note changes or stability.,"The pattern is that all examples with high activation include explicit comparisons to prior radiographic images within the description of the findings. These references often include observations about changes or stability over time, which are prominent at higher activation levels.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5278946965638631,0.5326633165829145,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,99.0
+10953,latent_10953,714,0.001428,0.001146283,2.8809726,"Normal cardiac silhouette with stability in lung volumes, compared to prior images.","The pattern involves normal heart size with evaluation against prior frontal images, particularly when the lung volumes are mentioned as decreased, suggesting a stable cardiomediastinal silhouette without signs of acute abnormalities post evaluation. This includes the use of comparison language to show stability of the cardiac silhouette and lungs, despite other incidental or varied findings.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4775475864970028,0.5597826086956522,0.5555555555555556,0.1785714285714285,84.0,100.0
+10954,latent_10954,890,0.00178,0.0015899744,3.2069743,Comparison with prior images showing resolution or prominence of significant findings.,Highly activated examples involve cases where comparison with prior imaging has led to clear identification or resolution of significant findings e.g. pneumothorax or effusions. It suggests an emphasis on identifying important changes over time and providing details on interventions or hardware position.,0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.3076923076923077,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5660377358490566,0.3,100.0,100.0
+10955,latent_10955,688,0.001376,0.0012469832,3.8459032,Stable cardiomegaly and pulmonary congestion compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels across examples highlight the pattern of changes in stable findings compared to prior imaging. These examples emphasize consistency in cardiomegaly, pulmonary vascular congestion, and device placements, and draw attention to subtle changes or lack thereof in these conditions. Consistency with prior imaging is often evaluated for stability.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6889375337076868,0.7135135135135136,0.8333333333333334,0.4705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+10956,latent_10956,6910,0.01382,0.005176922,1.5450865,Evaluation of interval change via current and prior imaging comparison.,"These examples display a focus on findings resulting from the comparison between current imaging studies and prior frontal images. The key pattern emphasized is the interval change or stability of conditions, as seen with references to terms like 'unchanged', 'likely reflecting', 'no relevant change', etc., which indicate whether an abnormality has changed or remained stable since the previous imaging.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10957,latent_10957,13952,0.027904,0.010428455,2.2403517,Descriptive focus on tube placement or repositioning within imaging comparisons.,"The consistently high activations are associated with descriptions involving insertion, positioning, or repositioning of tubes, whether diagnostic or interventional (e.g., Dobbhoff or enteric tubes) within the radiographs, indicating a focus on precise placement monitoring which is common in ICU or surgical settings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.6206896551724138,0.36,100.0,100.0
+10958,latent_10958,768,0.001536,0.0012676872,3.7199166,Descriptions focus on stability or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently evaluate changes over time via comparison with prior images, especially noting stability or changes in cardiomediastinal silhouettes, opacities, and effusions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4853709508881922,0.4923857868020304,0.4878048780487805,0.6185567010309279,97.0,100.0
+10959,latent_10959,8057,0.016114,0.006012593,2.6299193,"Verification and assessment of lines, tubes, and catheters.","Examples with activation levels above 2.0 all focus on verifying and describing the correct placement or status of lines, tubes, and catheters, such as PICC lines, NG tubes, and ET tubes. This focus on medical device assessment may drive the observed activation pattern.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10960,latent_10960,6431,0.012862,0.0069452897,3.0881693,Reports detailing changes or stability of thoracic findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve clear identification of semi-urgent or comparative changes in pulmonary or cardiac features, such as effusions, opacities, or catheter placements, particularly when relative stability or change is noted versus prior imaging, often with strong clinical implications for the patient's condition.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10961,latent_10961,1705,0.00341,0.0019786658,2.3409562,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"These examples often involve comparing current and prior radiographic images to assess changes over time, which is a common radiological practice. Critical comparisons typically relate to assessing changes in conditions like CHF, pneumonia, and catheter placement. The pattern shows the findings are compared to previous imaging to evaluate for interval changes, reflecting a focus on stability or progression of findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4361904761904762,0.445,0.456,0.57,100.0,100.0
+10962,latent_10962,1557,0.003114,0.0017228904,2.6647162,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging indicating change in condition.,"High activation levels are observed in examples where there is a notable change in a patient's condition as described explicitly in comparison to prior imaging. This reflects the importance of tracking changes in follow-up radiology assessments, particularly when there is notable improvement, deterioration, or stable conditions of certain features like lesions, pulmonary conditions, or device placement.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+10963,latent_10963,1271,0.002542,0.0019839644,3.4298952,Evaluation of changes in findings compared to prior radiological images.,"The pattern involves referencing prior studies and identifying changes or stability in the radiological findings. This comparison is often explicitly mentioned using terms like 'interval change', 'stable', 'improved', or explicit timestamps and dates to assess progression or lack thereof in findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10964,latent_10964,694,0.001388,0.0014728216,4.813868,Focus on positioning and changes of medical devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation level all mention medical devices, particularly position changes, comparisons, or stable placements of various catheters or tubes in the chest area. The reports focus on descriptions of how these devices are positioned relative to expected anatomical landmarks in successive imaging, often discussing cardiopulmonary devices like PICC lines, Port-A-Caths, and endotracheal tubes, and their consistent or changing placement as assessed through comparison with prior images.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8181350114416476,0.8181818181818182,0.7731958762886598,0.8620689655172413,87.0,100.0
+10965,latent_10965,1420,0.00284,0.0018445525,3.3274584,Multiple views and comparison to prior imaging findings.,Highly representative examples share the usage of multiple imaging modalities or views along with consistent comparison to prior reports. These descriptions often involve changes or stability observed in imaging findings relative to previous studies.,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10966,latent_10966,3638,0.007276,0.0032413183,3.2699935,Reports include detailed comparisons to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,The highly activated examples consistently include detailed reports that include specific changes identified compared to prior imaging. These changes can be either new changes or descriptions indicating stability in findings. The notion of temporal comparison and detailing changes aligns with prior analysis outputs matching the activation pattern.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10967,latent_10967,2406,0.004812,0.0029366154,4.2690077,Focus on the position/status of intervention-related devices in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe the placement, assessment, or changes in chest tubes, pigtail catheters, or similar interventional devices, with observations focused on their status, position, and potential changes compared to prior imaging. References to these devices indicate a focus on interventions related to pleural spaces or pneumothoraxes, consistent with high activations when these details are present.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7536140791954746,0.755,0.7217391304347827,0.83,100.0,100.0
+10968,latent_10968,533,0.001066,0.0011121833,5.1295786,Descriptive comparison of tube or catheter placement with prior imaging.,"The examples consistently focus on newly inserted tubes or catheters like nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, or other support devices, highlighting their placement and course, while ensuring there are no complications such as pneumothorax. This pattern emphasizes the updates since the prior examination, ensuring proper placement of medical devices without adverse effects.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6124995245159572,0.6347305389221557,0.55,0.4925373134328358,67.0,100.0
+10969,latent_10969,2343,0.004686,0.002151051,3.2919414,Evaluation of interval changes in chest images.,"Highly activated examples tend to involve imagery comparisons where significant interval changes or direct mention of progression (e.g., stable or increased pathology) are reported. Even without specific pathologies being noted in some, the pattern appears emphasized in reports with described changes or evaluations based on initial interpretation.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10970,latent_10970,3174,0.006348,0.0029910912,2.1910875,Emphasis on interval changes or comparisons in radiology studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on changes between current and prior studies, often using comparative phrases that highlight differences or intervals between findings. They frequently discuss interval removal or changes in medical devices, or note stable findings alongside changes in conditions, indicating a focus on temporal comparison in radiology interpretation.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10971,latent_10971,1645,0.00329,0.0021074398,2.4182425,Detailed specific comparisons or changes from prior images increase activation.,"The examples show divergence in the context of comparison with prior images. Low activation levels are often associated with vague, incomplete or other non-specific comparisons. High activation examples clearly describe specific findings or changes, emphasizing the role of precise comparison or change descriptions.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5169491525423728,0.61,100.0,100.0
+10972,latent_10972,786,0.001572,0.0013876868,3.899528,Routine chest X-ray findings with no significant abnormalities.,"The examples with high activation describe standard or routine findings in chest radiographs, particularly mentioning no abnormalities like focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, and often noting normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes. These reports generally demonstrate typical observations in a normal or expected range of findings for chest X-rays.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6533126293995859,0.6548223350253807,0.6666666666666666,0.5979381443298969,97.0,100.0
+10973,latent_10973,3500,0.007,0.0030863308,2.6245494,Stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal findings despite disease history.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve description of current image findings regarding cardiomediastinal silhouettes or pulmonary vascularity, specifically noting whether these features are unremarkable, stable, or unchanged compared to prior studies. These examples show no acute abnormalities despite potentially complicated clinical histories.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5360824742268041,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10974,latent_10974,9058,0.018116,0.0067793615,2.0812902,Detailed description of changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The more active examples commonly mention changes compared to prior imaging studies, focusing on updates or details of specific findings such as unchanged or new developments. They often identify comparison points, use terms like 'unchanged', 'interval change', or comparisons to previous exams explicitly, which suggests attention on comparison results as the main pattern being activated.",0.6312709030100334,0.6326530612244898,0.6071428571428571,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6145048957878235,0.625,0.5939849624060151,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10975,latent_10975,882,0.001764,0.0014335406,3.266972,Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently discuss findings in the current image with direct comparison to a specific previous image, focusing on interval changes or stable findings. This pattern includes direct use of prior image assessments to identify stability or change over time, suggesting a pattern of assessing intervals and stability.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+10976,latent_10976,601,0.001202,0.0011145115,5.529122,Focus on tube and line positioning or changes compared to prior imaging.,The majority of cases with high activation involve descriptions of tubes or lines in the imaging referring to their position or changes in position compared to prior images. This indicates that the model is recognizing patterns related to medical device positioning and interval changes reported in radiological assessments.,0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6546052631578947,0.6571428571428571,0.5882352941176471,0.6666666666666666,75.0,100.0
+10977,latent_10977,8054,0.016108,0.0061165425,2.2305808,Focus on unchanged anatomical/pathological conditions or medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with non-zero activations commonly describe static or unchanged pathology in either anatomical positioning or device placement, contrasted against prior imaging. This might include unchanged medical devices, persistent abnormalities like atelectasis, or stable positioning of catheters and lines.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5630252100840336,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10978,latent_10978,2404,0.004808,0.002393729,3.3788142,Explicit comparison to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations typically describe radiological findings in explicit comparison to prior imaging studies, emphasizing either stability or change, whereas those with lower activations tend not to focus on comparison or maintain findings that are essentially unchanged.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5842696629213483,0.52,100.0,100.0
+10979,latent_10979,6657,0.013314,0.0048736692,2.6609154,Documentation of interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often contain findings that are compared to previous images or observations, suggesting that the key pattern involves identifying changes or stabilities over time between past and current images. This involves comparing findings, noting stability, progression, or resolution of abnormalities, which is a common practice in follow-up imaging studies to track patient progress or evaluate treatment response.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.5798319327731093,0.69,100.0,100.0
+10980,latent_10980,4860,0.00972,0.005267551,2.9317532,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe imaging findings that are compared to prior images, identifying changes or stability over time. This linguistic structure of comparing changes or stability in the patient's condition is a specific pattern being recognized.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6348336905612448,0.655,0.6054421768707483,0.89,100.0,100.0
+10981,latent_10981,1729,0.003458,0.0027606369,5.3879123,"Cardiomediastinal and hilar contours within normal limits, clear lungs.","Examples with higher activations typically involved findings noted as 'within normal limits' (WNL) for both cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, in conjunction with clear lungs and absence of acute pathology such as pneumonia, effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation. This indicates the model's calibration towards identifying reports that highlight normal findings or stability in comparison findings.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7349403615813558,0.735,0.7422680412371134,0.72,100.0,100.0
+10982,latent_10982,8808,0.017616,0.0068813325,3.6292238,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in radiology findings compared with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation scores present a pattern of specific findings within radiological studies that demonstrate changes or comparisons with prior imaging, particularly interval changes, maintaining clinical relevance by identifying stable findings that are worth noting for reassessment or consideration for follow-up imaging.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6419437340153453,0.65,0.6153846153846154,0.8,100.0,100.0
+10983,latent_10983,942,0.001884,0.0014300863,3.318568,Instruction to describe findings by comparison and further evaluation.,"The prominent examples involve instructions to provide a description of radiological findings by comparing current images to prior images, focusing heavily on comparative analysis. These examples also include additional specific tasks or evaluations following the comparative descriptions, suggesting a pattern where repeating detailed comparison coupled with further instruction increases activation.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,100.0
+10984,latent_10984,499,0.000998,0.0014147566,2.9515543,"Description based on current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.","The highly activated examples focus on radiological interpretations where there is an explicit designation to provide a description based on multiple provided images (current frontal, current lateral, and prior frontal). This pattern strongly involves comparing across these views, typically with the presence of multiple imaging angles and prior image references.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3164682539682539,0.3459119496855345,0.3308270676691729,0.7457627118644068,59.0,100.0
+10985,latent_10985,850,0.0017,0.0014949486,3.1166215,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting stability or changes.,"Highly representative examples reflect a detailed analysis of findings in the context of prior radiographs or examinations, emphasizing changes or stability in clinical context. The activation is high where significant changes over time or specific patterns are noted against prior records, including specific disease progression, improvements, or equipment status like catheters.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4550686257034453,0.465,0.4724409448818897,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10986,latent_10986,7196,0.014392,0.0054845265,1.6923213,Samples lack notable interval changes or specific comparisons to prior.,"The samples with low activation levels primarily discuss or repeat various findings without providing a clear comparison, or lack notable changes from the prior study. This contrasts with the higher activation examples which explicitly describe changes, comparing findings with prior images, highlighting stability or identifying interval variances. References to specific comparisons and lack of changes in findings seem to associate with low activation.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5164835164835165,0.47,100.0,100.0
+10987,latent_10987,7304,0.014608,0.0056466344,2.0985208,Focus on interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples that have higher activation levels often feature changes in imaging findings when compared to prior studies, with specific focus on identifying interval changes or stability, such as 'improvement', 'unchanged', 'same', or mention of detail evaluations relative to prior structures or lines.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.613831841319993,0.615,0.6036036036036037,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10988,latent_10988,1603,0.003206,0.002003205,2.5981574,Moderate cardiomegaly with vascular congestion and/or mild pulmonary edema on comparison studies.,"The presence of comparison studies is a common linguistic pattern and contributes to high activation levels. Furthermore, moderate cardiomegaly, vascular congestion, and/or mild pulmonary edema are consistently described in these examples. This indicates a stability or mild change which might be indicative of congestive heart failure exacerbation or other cardiovascular conditions when combined with appropriate clinical context.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.1818181818181818,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3807673627974745,0.49,0.4375,0.07,100.0,100.0
+10989,latent_10989,7436,0.014872,0.005585832,2.459247,Recognition and comparison of interval changes in imaging studies.,The majority of examples with activations have detailed descriptions comparing the current image to either a prior image or a known baseline condition. These samples emphasize recognition of changes or stability over time between imaging studies.,0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.489903745553463,0.507537688442211,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,99.0
+10990,latent_10990,717,0.001434,0.0013936477,3.0144699,Use of 'given' to structure image comparison context.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently indicate structured comparisons between current and prior images. The use of 'given' is prominent in these examples, indicating a structured format that outlines the comparison context. This linguistic pattern may be indicative of a high-confidence or high-attention comparison instruction set in the model.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4267540983606557,0.4946236559139785,0.4756097560975609,0.9069767441860463,86.0,100.0
+10991,latent_10991,1190,0.00238,0.0018885459,4.0837536,"Detailed comparison of current imaging to prior studies, emphasizing changes in clinical findings.","The high activation level examples consistently make direct references to prior imaging reports and provide findings or interpretations in the context of comparisons to these previous images, focusing particularly on stability, improvement, or progression of noted features or conditions.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6247654784240151,0.625,0.6190476190476191,0.65,100.0,100.0
+10992,latent_10992,478,0.000956,0.001185235,3.5949748,Bibasilar opacities likely represent atelectasis with low lung volumes.,"Highly activated texts indicate a pattern where patchy bibasilar opacities are described as atelectasis in the setting of low lung volumes. These explanations consistently discuss similar lung findings alongside comments on the heart size, mediastinal contours or the presence of pleural effusions, using the phrase 'atelectasis' frequently.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7596755112388034,0.7721518987341772,0.671875,0.7413793103448276,58.0,100.0
+10993,latent_10993,11564,0.023128,0.008329012,1.1521726,Comparison with prior study indicating change or stability in pathological findings.,"Several examples show a pattern of describing pathological findings such as opacities, effusions, pneumothorax, or consolidation in direct comparison with prior imaging, highlighting changes in these specific areas or asserting their stability or improvement. The comparison often includes references to prior dimensions or pathology observed in lungs or heart.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5217391304347826,0.6,100.0,100.0
+10994,latent_10994,1136,0.002272,0.00172352,3.1673467,Focus on nuanced changes or stability in imaging findings over time.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently detail specific changes or stability regarding findings compared to prior radiological images, and often highlight findings such as interstitial changes or atelectasis. This reflects a focus on nuanced interpretations and comparisons in chronic or persistent radiological patterns over time, rather than acute changes or isolated findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+10995,latent_10995,8563,0.017126,0.006352119,2.2238474,Contain subtle changes or stability over time in comparison with prior images.,"The activations are not strongly tied to any specific detailed descriptions of findings, modality, or technique, but many examples involve the comparison of similar images with subtle changes or stability over time. The pattern seems to involve imaging comparisons where low or subtle changes are noted, instead of drastic findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+10996,latent_10996,6834,0.013668,0.005076363,2.3300426,Comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The higher activation levels are associated with the presence of descriptions that evaluate current radiological findings in comparison with previous imaging studies, indicating that these examples stress the progression, resolution, or stability of findings.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5096774193548387,0.79,100.0,100.0
+10997,latent_10997,478,0.000956,0.0015332801,3.8734803,Use of both lateral and frontal images with comparison to prior frontal images.,The pattern being identified involves using both lateral and frontal current images to provide a description of radiological findings while often comparing them to prior frontal images. It highlights comprehensive examination techniques and comparative descriptions relevant to identifying stable conditions or differences in radiological studies.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4015151515151515,0.4177215189873418,0.2702702702702703,0.3448275862068966,58.0,100.0
+10998,latent_10998,1126,0.002252,0.0016300499,3.3019924,Observing stable findings or interval changes against prior imaging studies.,"The pattern suggests a particular attention to interval changes in certain aspects like mediastinal and hilar contours, pleural effusions, or cardiac silhouette size in comparison to previous imaging studies. This comparison often explicitly refers to unchanged or persistent findings, particularly when dealing with chronic conditions or stable appearances through usage of terms like 'unchanged', 'persistent', and 'stable'.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5184038527691779,0.545,0.5306122448979592,0.78,100.0,100.0
+10999,latent_10999,1616,0.003232,0.0021888174,3.5145893,Subtle abnormalities like mild cardiomegaly or slight pulmonary changes.,"Examples with higher activations describe subtle or mild abnormalities which may not be clinically significant, such as mildly enlarged cardiac silhouettes or minor pulmonary changes. This reflects a pattern where the model responds to reports identifying mild or borderline findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11000,latent_11000,4503,0.009006,0.0045521436,4.174786,Radiological assessment focuses on interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently describe the process of evaluating radiological findings in conjunction with a prior image to ascertain differences, consistent with research questions focused on changes such as effusion development or catheter placement adjustments. Higher activations correspond to explicit directive to compare images for change detection.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4230619298838327,0.445,0.460431654676259,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11001,latent_11001,1938,0.003876,0.0021537603,3.600604,"Comparison of current imaging findings to previous studies, emphasizing stability or minor changes.","The highly activated examples focus on providing a detailed comparison against prior imaging studies in the context of assessing potential or actual pathological changes, often reiterating stability or noting minimal change in suspected diseases or conditions.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3897559023609444,0.39,0.3854166666666667,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11002,latent_11002,1785,0.00357,0.0020775644,4.6466885,Interval placement or removal of medical devices in imaging.,"Activation levels are higher in examples where there is interval placement or removal of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) that are described as changes compared to previous imaging. These changes are notable and specific in radiology reports, indicating their importance for patient status and care decisions. The presence of these changes is distinct from examples focusing only on findings without device alterations, which have lower activations.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11003,latent_11003,824,0.001648,0.001374772,2.5944862,Stable comparative findings in patient follow-ups or status.,"All examples with higher activation levels consistently provide indications or a history that describe a patient’s status or underlying conditions which relate to prior interventions or status, generally in the form of conditions persisting or unchanged upon reevaluation. They include comparative assessments against previous states, noting stability or minor changes, differentiating from examples with lower levels that either lack comparative context or describe changes without emphasizing consistency.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+11004,latent_11004,587,0.001174,0.0014015469,4.492443,Stable mediastinal and hilar contours in radiological comparison.,"These examples consistently describe stable or unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours between current and prior imaging studies. The pattern highlights a focus on unchanged anatomical structures in radiological comparisons, often in situations where acute changes are absent, as emphasized by repeated use of terms like 'appear within normal limits' or 'appear stable' in impressions.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6873493975903614,0.6878612716763006,0.6021505376344086,0.7671232876712328,73.0,100.0
+11005,latent_11005,861,0.001722,0.0014950455,3.4363482,"Comparisons to prior frontal images, with explicit description of change or lack thereof.","High activation examples consistently include comparisons to prior frontal images within the narrative structure, specifically referencing differences or similarities ('unchanged', 'new since prior', 'stable', etc.) and providing detailed contextual histories or reports. Contextual comparisons without these direct reference terms trigger low activation.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4130367624343528,0.43,0.3939393939393939,0.26,100.0,100.0
+11006,latent_11006,5392,0.010784,0.004121727,3.089711,Comparison of imaging findings to prior studies.,"The examples labeled with higher activation focus on comparing the current imaging findings explicitly with prior studies, where changes or stabilities in conditions are assessed. This pattern is significant in radiology reports where evaluations often involve longitudinal comparison to understand disease progression or stabilty.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11007,latent_11007,6758,0.013516,0.004929416,1.7372056,Emphasis on detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,"These examples feature reports that highlight detailed description and comparison of current radiological findings against prior images. They frequently use language like 'unchanged', 'similar to prior', and 'as compared to', indicating an emphasis on comparison for evaluation of stability or change over time. Presence of phrases such as 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' also emphasize this pattern.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11008,latent_11008,1333,0.002666,0.001985802,3.616202,Detailed comparison with previous radiographic images.,"Examples are activated when images are compared with prior studies and findings or changes are described. This involves detailed descriptions comparing the current and previous images, noting stability, improvement, or new developments. Examples focus on providing comparative change insights, critical in longitudinal patient monitoring.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11009,latent_11009,744,0.001488,0.0013474079,3.149826,Explicit interval change assessment from prior image findings.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly involve explicit directives to compare current images with prior images. The context focuses on determining changes in features, positions of medical devices, and monitoring ongoing conditions. High activations occur when details explicitly emphasize or request interval changes in the findings.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4250546061929847,0.4292929292929293,0.4096385542168674,0.3469387755102041,98.0,100.0
+11010,latent_11010,717,0.001434,0.0013844455,3.426353,"Cardiovascular abnormalities (pulmonary edema, effusion, cardiomegaly).","High activation levels are associated with findings of pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, or other cardiovascular abnormalities. These terms are commonly indicative of significant or acute changes in a patient's condition, and thus are highly representative of the model's pattern recognition focus on these critical cardiovascular markers.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5451127819548872,0.5555555555555556,0.5714285714285714,0.4081632653061224,98.0,100.0
+11011,latent_11011,8307,0.016614,0.006252208,1.9454013,Detailed comparison to prior images highlighting stability or change.,"Higher activation levels occur consistently where specific findings are compared to a previous image, using phrases like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'increased/decreased', especially when relating to specific pathologies or medical devices. This comparison often highlights stability or change over time, reflecting clinical importance in continuity of evaluation.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11012,latent_11012,2935,0.00587,0.0026922338,2.3515904,Providing descriptive findings from radiological images.,"The examples with high activation consistently contain phrases prompting for a text-based summary or interpretation of images, emphasizing the need to provide a description of radiological findings without a specific prior reference. This aligns with the interactive functionality where the system generates a written report by extracting and summarizing key findings identified in the imaging studies.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11013,latent_11013,4847,0.009694,0.0036783556,2.9672604,Evaluation of tube or device placement alongside pulmonary findings.,"Examples with higher activation feature the presence and positioning of tubes or devices such as endotracheal, nasogastric, or central venous catheters, as well as progress or changes in pulmonary conditions like effusions and pulmonary edema. These findings are common motifs in radiology reports that include device placement and evaluation in conjunction with thoracic findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.6376811594202898,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11014,latent_11014,755,0.00151,0.0013714562,3.8076098,PA and lateral chest radiographs without prior comparison.,"The examples with high activation involve interpretations of images that include specifically PA and lateral chest radiographs without a preceding study for comparison. This is suggested by the absence of prior comparisons and focusing on findings like cardiomediastinal silhouettes and structures, as opposed to detailed change descriptions compared to previous studies.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.9166666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5360723626852659,0.5656565656565656,0.62,0.3163265306122449,98.0,100.0
+11015,latent_11015,871,0.001742,0.0015625015,4.475398,Interval tube or device placement noted on comparison.,"These examples highlight new or interval placement of medical devices or tubes like endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, nasogastric tubes, etc., captured on follow-up imaging. The pattern focuses on these procedural changes that are often specifically noted in radiological comparisons as examples of interval changes.",0.939783219590526,0.94,0.8928571428571429,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.823406241327985,0.825,0.773109243697479,0.92,100.0,100.0
+11016,latent_11016,1478,0.002956,0.002303058,5.008258,Prominent mention of internal tubes/lines and their positioning in radiology comparisons.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently involve examining medical images for changes, placement, or abnormalities of internal tubes like endotracheal, orogastric tubes or PICC lines, and comparing with prior images. Reference to such tubes or lines and their analysis is a distinct feature linked to prominent activation.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6276167471819646,0.63,0.6547619047619048,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11017,latent_11017,1773,0.003546,0.0019353684,3.7163935,Focus on changes in pulmonary conditions or interventions over time.,"Examples with activations higher than zero often mention changes over time in lung conditions or interventions, with findings compared explicitly to prior imaging (e.g., resolving opacities, persistent effusions) or post-intervention states (e.g., ET tube position or improvement in aeration). High activation correlates with reports involving longitudinal assessment and intervention outcomes.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5454545454545454,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11018,latent_11018,481,0.000962,0.0010473505,3.9865873,Cardiomegaly and central pulmonary vascular congestion.,"The high-activation examples focus on cardiomegaly and central pulmonary vascular congestion, often associated with heart failure. This radiological pattern is frequently noted in cases of congestive heart failure where the heart is enlarged and vascular congestion is evident.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6358761677349085,0.676829268292683,0.6222222222222222,0.4375,64.0,100.0
+11019,latent_11019,1613,0.003226,0.0020733867,3.901031,Comparison with prior images highlighting consistency or change in specific findings.,"This set of examples highlights a focus on making comparisons with prior imaging studies, particularly indicating the consistency or resolution of previously identified abnormalities. Reports consistently mention techniques, comparisons, specific findings, and impressions based on the longevity of those changes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11020,latent_11020,674,0.001348,0.0011117862,4.140647,Comparison of current and prior radiological findings with detailed assessment of medical devices and changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often show a combination of current frontal and lateral images compared to a prior frontal image, focusing on various surgical changes and interventions like tubes, wires, and catheters. This detailed comparison in structural interventions is the hallmark pattern of these examples.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5634941329856584,0.5645161290322581,0.5229357798165137,0.6627906976744186,86.0,100.0
+11021,latent_11021,7859,0.015718,0.0059381225,1.8439401,Imaging comparisons indicating stability or change over time.,"Patterns indicating activation involve direct references to comparisons of current and prior imaging studies. Explanations include specific language about changes from prior imaging, such as stability, increases, or decreases of observed findings. This involves description of imaging characteristics across different time points.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11022,latent_11022,556,0.001112,0.0013994823,4.5580373,Instructions to compare findings with prior frontal image.,"These examples contain instructions for generating descriptive findings for radiology studies. The descriptions request comparison against prior images, utilizing a recurring phrase: 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This pattern emphasizes interpretation contingent upon previous studies.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4562199312714776,0.4651162790697674,0.4180327868852459,0.7083333333333334,72.0,100.0
+11023,latent_11023,2804,0.005608,0.0027226103,2.8767374,Detailed description of medical tube positioning on radiographs.,"Examples with activation levels suggest the pattern involves the presence and description of various tubes and their correct positioning within the body relative to radiological findings. Mentions of enteric and endotracheal tubes, IABP, central lines, and pigtail catheter positioning were commonly associated with higher activation levels.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.6071428571428571,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11024,latent_11024,1136,0.002272,0.002065402,3.2821186,Streaky or bibasilar opacities suggesting atelectasis.,"The pattern is characterized by descriptions of streaky or bibasilar opacities, often associated with atelectasis, in radiological reports. These opacities are frequently noted in lower lung areas and are a common finding that is emphasized explicitly across examples, regardless of other details.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6892230576441103,0.69,0.7111111111111111,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11025,latent_11025,959,0.001918,0.0015806468,3.8251972,Stable cardiac silhouette condition in radiological image comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels are descriptive comparisons of radiological findings with prior imaging, and the condition of the cardiac silhouette is stable despite other pulmonary or thoracic abnormalities. The pattern includes phrases like 'description of findings' and 'comparison to prior frontal image'.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11026,latent_11026,780,0.00156,0.0014676398,3.7342808,Detailed comparison to prior imaging showing interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention previous imaging comparisons to assess changes over time, reflecting monitoring or follow-up for chronic conditions. The use of specific dates or descriptions of changes is more detailed in these examples.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5566200931470393,0.5663265306122449,0.5774647887323944,0.4270833333333333,96.0,100.0
+11027,latent_11027,779,0.001558,0.0011569911,2.8030329,Task involves describing findings compared to prior images.,"Activation is high when the assistant is prompted to provide findings specifically in comparison to prior images, regardless of the presence or absence of such prior images. This pattern indicates that the task of analyzing interval changes from sequential imaging is particularly representative of the expected task to be performed by the system.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3840291325269866,0.4020100502512563,0.4253731343283582,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+11028,latent_11028,751,0.001502,0.0014140465,7.197646,Comparison or adjustments to medical device positioning from prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings related to positioning of various medical tubes, lines, catheters, or other devices in relation to previous images. Such reports often focus on inadvertent placement changes or recommend adjustments to achieve optimal positioning, using phrases like 'pulled back' or specifying positional measurements.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6218652037617555,0.6373056994818653,0.6885245901639344,0.4516129032258064,93.0,100.0
+11029,latent_11029,1283,0.002566,0.001866025,8.509965,Medical device positioning and changes noted in sequential imaging.,"The examples with high activation describe either accurate or inaccurate positioning of medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, identified through comparison with prior images. Reports highlight changes or misplacements that require attention, which could affect patient care, hence the model recognizes this pattern as noteworthy.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.4342105263157895,0.4125,80.0,120.0
+11030,latent_11030,2718,0.005436,0.0025877361,3.7396185,Stability or minor change in existing pulmonary or pleural findings.,"These examples highlight surveillance of existing pulmonary or pleural pathologies and their stability or minor changes over time. The marked change in activation occurs when comparing current images for changes in pleural effusions, atelectasis, pneumothorax, or opacity consistency. Notably, these comparisons emphasize unchanged pathology which allows ongoing monitoring and evaluation.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4948453608247423,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11031,latent_11031,657,0.001314,0.0012760438,3.2948918,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation all require providing a description by comparing current imaging findings with previous studies or images. These comparisons are integral to understanding changes or stability in medical conditions over time, which is crucial in radiological evaluations.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5410504844467109,0.5555555555555556,0.5,0.825,80.0,100.0
+11032,latent_11032,801,0.001602,0.0015610314,4.340315,Radiological assessment providing findings amidst acute or serious clinical concerns.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve scenarios where the radiological assessment must provide findings in the context of a recent medical concern, potentially serious condition, or sudden change such as seizures, acute pain, or cancer-related issues. Phrases like ""evaluate for"" suggest active monitoring of patient's condition, correlating radiological findings with clinical symptoms or history.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4041137326073805,0.467005076142132,0.4756097560975609,0.8041237113402062,97.0,100.0
+11033,latent_11033,776,0.001552,0.0010734755,2.780158,Comparison of current frontal image with prior frontal image.,The high activation samples consistently reference utilizing the current frontal image and making direct comparisons to a prior frontal image for findings evaluation. This pattern is specific to handling of radiology studies where prior studies serve as a critical reference point for evaluation of progression or stability of conditions.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4746894409937888,0.4874371859296482,0.4885496183206106,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+11034,latent_11034,3047,0.006094,0.003050337,3.0928698,"Detailed, systematic imaging comparisons with clear findings.","Higher activations are given to contexts with syntactically coherent prompts where a comparison between current and prior imaging is complete or detailed. Lower activations correlate with incomplete or incoherent contexts missing essential elements like detailed findings or full comparison data, often seen with placeholder text or unclear directives.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11035,latent_11035,3441,0.006882,0.0029847224,2.2787123,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples predominantly involve findings of unchanged previous pathologies or maintaining the status quo, with indications like ""unchanged"" and ""similar"" being common descriptors. Reports often confirm that known conditions show little to no progression compared to prior imaging studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11036,latent_11036,3178,0.006356,0.0029261129,2.8594148,"Comparison of findings with prior images, noting changes in stability or improvement.","Examples with higher activations consistently discuss interpretative changes in positioning of devices or structures such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, and mediastinal contours compared to previous examinations. They emphasize the stability, improvement, or resolution of findings, rather than descriptions of acute changes without reference to prior imagery.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11037,latent_11037,475,0.00095,0.0010229781,4.491306,Significant interval changes between prior and current imaging.,"The examples with higher activation generally involve description of significant interval changes between prior and current imaging, particularly indicating development or resolution of notable findings like opacities, effusions, or changes in support device positions. This suggests that the pattern is focused on interval changes and descriptions of their significance.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.563330499753926,0.61875,0.4883720930232558,0.35,60.0,100.0
+11038,latent_11038,654,0.001308,0.001318807,3.4473863,Comparative analysis of findings using multiple image views.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the use of multiple image comparisons, particularly including both frontal and lateral views, leading to a structured comparison of findings across different views or to prior images. This indicates that the pattern recognized by the model is tied to the detailed comparative analysis of multiple radiographic images.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4525792379732162,0.4756756756756757,0.4565217391304347,0.7411764705882353,85.0,100.0
+11039,latent_11039,2979,0.005958,0.004301092,3.4045331,Focus on unchanged findings or minimal progression compared to prior images.,"Many examples refer to 'comparison to prior' with identical or minimal changes in different parameters, such as heart size, lung condition, or medical device placement. This suggests an interested in highlighting stable observations or explicitly unchanged conditions over time, which is a common method in radiographic monitoring to ensure medical conditions are stable.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5648148148148148,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11040,latent_11040,1287,0.002574,0.002168909,4.7514825,Comparison using both frontal and lateral chest images with prior imaging.,Instances with high activation explicitly mention the use of both frontal and lateral chest images and structural comparison to prior imaging(s). Other examples lacking the combination of detailed comparison using both current frontal and lateral images and prior images exhibit low activation.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5647058823529412,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11041,latent_11041,986,0.001972,0.0018213904,5.2693577,Evaluation for new medical condition or diagnostic context.,"These examples consistently refer to 'new' medical conditions or diagnostic contexts that prompt the need for a radiological evaluation. This activation pattern is triggered when the radiological study aims to assess a new medical issue, such as new diagnoses or new clinical symptoms, which necessitates comparison to prior imaging for diagnosis or treatment decisions.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5240194807066079,0.5829145728643216,0.5502958579881657,0.93,100.0,99.0
+11042,latent_11042,1119,0.002238,0.0019316663,3.0611646,Explicit comparison to a specific prior frontal image.,The examples with high activation levels are consistently asking the assistant to provide a comparison to a specified prior frontal image as part of their task. This pattern of explicitly requiring comparison between current and prior images is a distinct feature in these cases.,0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4508196721311475,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11043,latent_11043,736,0.001472,0.0012552153,3.1916285,Explicit analysis of current and prior frontal images.,Examples with higher activations consistently describe scenarios in which a comparison between frontal views is explicitly called for within the prompt or the follow-up reports reference changes or findings in comparison to these images. The key pattern is the switching between current and prior frontal images of the same kind (frontal images) and providing an analysis based on this comparison.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4430959535548618,0.4656084656084656,0.4565217391304347,0.7078651685393258,89.0,100.0
+11044,latent_11044,976,0.001952,0.0016964924,3.0588682,Enhanced descriptions when comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature phrases related to the comparisons made between current and prior imaging studies, often facilitated by the assistant's instructions to provide findings in reference to such comparisons. These instructions prompt an specific attention to changed findings, demonstrating a focus on identifying differences or similarities in paired imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11045,latent_11045,4717,0.009434,0.0040243175,4.2422194,Changes or stability in device positioning or anatomical features compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern involves assessing changes in medical devices or anatomical features between current and prior imaging. Examples with higher activation specifically highlight changes or stabilities in device positioning or anatomical observations, frequently using explicit comparative language.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.637060187518903,0.64,0.6186440677966102,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11046,latent_11046,1729,0.003458,0.0022449195,4.77748,Specific interval changes described between current and prior imaging studies.,"Samples with high activation levels have detailed comparisons between the current images and prior imaging studies with specific descriptions of interval changes, showing radiological patterns or progression. This analysis involves technical evaluations which is important in assessing patient conditions over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5669534412955466,0.5678391959798995,0.5777777777777777,0.52,100.0,99.0
+11047,latent_11047,12738,0.025476,0.009189498,1.0946113,Comparisons with prior images showing changes or stability.,These examples often refer to prior imaging and describe any changes or stabilities in the observed features. This pattern of comparing current imaging findings with historical images is common in radiological reports to assess progression or stability of conditions.,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11048,latent_11048,1094,0.002188,0.0016525172,2.699761,Radiology findings indicating stability or lack of change compared to prior images.,"These examples with higher activation levels describe findings in radiology studies that highlight a lack of significant change or stability in the comparison to prior images. This pattern emphasizes the stability or consistent state of the condition being evaluated, whether it's patient devices, cardiomediastinal contours, or other health indicators.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11049,latent_11049,1155,0.00231,0.001734477,3.0551064,Repeated comparison to multiple prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation consistently feature references or comparisons across multiple prior imaging studies, such as explicitly naming previous dates, indicating lack of new or changing findings, or discussing changes in interval findings which reinforce repetition through prior comparisons.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4677419354838709,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11050,latent_11050,13673,0.027346,0.009926485,1.3601336,Evaluation of lung field changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or findings in the lung fields, such as opacity, consolidation, or effusion, in comparison to a prior image, often indicating conditions like pneumonia, atelectasis, or pleural effusion. They show attention to changes in lung conditions.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.574490558260556,0.5829145728643216,0.5669291338582677,0.72,100.0,99.0
+11051,latent_11051,530,0.00106,0.0013589434,3.3239985,"Normal/stable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with no new abnormalities.","Highly activated examples consistently mention normal or stable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, often with no abnormal pulmonary or pleural findings. This suggests the pattern recognizes intact thoracic contour descriptions and no new findings as indicative of typical or expected radiological outcomes.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6955548448992644,0.6964285714285714,0.5779816513761468,0.9264705882352942,68.0,100.0
+11052,latent_11052,13051,0.026102,0.009751956,1.7933259,Evaluation of changes in condition compared to prior exam.,"These examples often highlight changes in pathology when compared to prior imaging studies, especially concerning worsening conditions or persistence of acute findings. Despite variable structures like 'cardiac silhouette remains unchanged', keywords such as 'new', 'interval change', 'last', 'increasing', or 'similar' indicate focus on developments from previous exams.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11053,latent_11053,1242,0.002484,0.0016150395,3.6066186,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with a high activation level consistently include descriptions comparing current imaging findings to prior ones. This demonstrated pattern suggests an important focus on noting differences or stability between examinations, which is a common feature in follow-up radiological evaluations to assess progression or resolution of findings.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3717919252279169,0.385,0.4108527131782946,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11054,latent_11054,913,0.001826,0.0013247954,2.8937387,Description of unchanged normal findings in cardiac and pulmonary contours despite varying clinical indications.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently note unchanged normal findings across cardiac, mediastinal, hilar, and pulmonary contours, despite varying indications or techniques. This observation highlights a pattern where normal findings are emphasized for given conditions, likely reflecting routine checks for abnormalities in radiology.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6238621831038893,0.625,0.6404494382022472,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11055,latent_11055,5225,0.01045,0.0039956695,3.1294541,Descriptions of medical device placements or changes relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with higher activation show reports with medical devices or tubes in the chest image, mentioning their placement relative to anatomical landmarks. Examples frequently describe changes in medical device positioning compared to previous imaging.",0.595393307257714,0.6122448979591837,0.6666666666666666,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11056,latent_11056,2022,0.004044,0.0022196292,3.5565906,Assessment of stability or interval change compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports that discuss unchanged findings, stability, or interval changes in positioning or fluid collections compared to prior studies. These observations are important in assessing chronic conditions, resolving pathologies, or monitoring interventions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4850746268656716,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11057,latent_11057,2143,0.004286,0.0026744124,4.1620317,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting temporal changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings described in comparison with previous imaging, indicating that temporal change (improvement, stability, or worsening) of findings is a key component of the pattern observed. It focuses on the evolution and comparison of findings over time and in relation to prior images.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.5681818181818182,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11058,latent_11058,2655,0.00531,0.002436065,3.9425137,Detailed comparison of current with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve specific changes or the need to provide a detailed comparison between the current and prior imaging, often involving detailed anatomical or device-related observations. These examples frequently invoke a thorough longitudinal analysis comparing changes over time, such as positioning of tubes, wires, anatomical shifts or resolution of pathologies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11059,latent_11059,1587,0.003174,0.0020736847,2.8521276,Evaluation for pneumonia or infectious process.,"The examples with high activation prominently mention imaging findings or comparisons used to assess for pneumonia or infectious process. The model seems activated by terms like 'pneumonia', 'focal consolidation', or 'effusion', in context of direct evaluation for such conditions.",0.6933667083854819,0.6938775510204082,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.4871794871794871,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11060,latent_11060,913,0.001826,0.0014121737,3.9466217,Comparisons involving placement of intrathoracic devices or tubes.,"Activation levels are highest when descriptions involve observations related to the position or status of intrathoracic devices and the relevance of changes in their positioning. These examples specifically discuss comparisons of device placement between current and prior images, emphasizing stability or changes in positions of tubes, catheters, and other support devices.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6596937243519168,0.66,0.6702127659574468,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11061,latent_11061,1182,0.002364,0.0015734738,4.2244973,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include a comparison between current and prior images across various modalities. The reported observations often focus on changes or stability of findings related to pulmonary opacities, atelectasis, pleural effusion, or any structural changes since the previous imaging study. This specific pattern emphasizes evaluation of interval change over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11062,latent_11062,1502,0.003004,0.001957204,2.5143678,Instances of fragmented or incomplete information.,"Examples with high activation levels often contain incomplete sentencing or trailed-off words marked by repeated ""[[...]]"" or ""..."" which suggests missing or fragmented information. This pattern likely signals an incomplete text structure that may result in higher activations for this dataset.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3556824343721093,0.495,0.4974093264248704,0.96,100.0,100.0
+11063,latent_11063,8622,0.017244,0.006221778,1.6017433,Identification of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples commonly include the presence of language referring to stable, unchanged findings, or describing changes when compared with prior imaging studies. The presence of phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no change', or explicit comparisons to prior imaging indicators establish this pattern.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5389811426963129,0.5404040404040404,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,98.0
+11064,latent_11064,6070,0.01214,0.0048739593,2.334542,Comparisons indicating interval change in imaging.,"This data presents a mixed activation pattern, but the highest activations are associated with references comparing the current imaging with prior studies, especially mentioning interval changes or stability, as seen in Example 50 and also instances like Example 13. Activation levels tend to increase when specific findings are related back to prior comparisons.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11065,latent_11065,620,0.00124,0.0012219084,6.048353,"Presence of current frontal, lateral, and prior images with descriptive comparisons.","The activation pattern reveals a focus on descriptions of changes or observations from multiple given image angles, often with comparisons to previous images. High activations indicate current and prior images (frontal and lateral) are available, with emphasis on changes or stability over time in pathological conditions or diagnostic findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4507555315704263,0.480225988700565,0.4468085106382978,0.8181818181818182,77.0,100.0
+11066,latent_11066,4603,0.009206,0.0038045547,2.7277446,"Descriptive changes or stability in medical devices or internal structures, often compared to prior images.","Higher activations are associated with descriptions of radiological findings that highlight changes or stability in medical devices or internal structures, often compared to prior imaging studies. Details involve diagnostic interpretations regarding static or altered conditions, rather than purely descriptive anatomy.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11067,latent_11067,852,0.001704,0.00155614,4.2423778,Mildly enlarged cardiac silhouette.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe radiological findings where the cardiac silhouette is noted to be 'mildly enlarged'. This specific finding is often highlighted in radiology reports, indicating a pattern of interest for the model.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7042023663810689,0.71,0.7916666666666666,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11068,latent_11068,4448,0.008896,0.00375959,2.7599943,Frequent evaluation and comparison of pleural effusions over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on evaluating changes in pleural effusions and related conditions, especially post-thoracentesis procedures, suggesting a particular interest in tracking fluid accumulation and reduction in the pleural space across serial imaging studies.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.56887426299191,0.6030150753768844,0.7272727272727273,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+11069,latent_11069,4708,0.009416,0.0038380816,2.5044024,Comparison of current imaging findings against prior studies for interval changes.,"The examples focus on comparing medical imaging results to previous studies, noting any interval changes or stability in various findings. This pattern involves repeatedly referencing prior imaging to assess changes in the patient's condition, exemplified by tracking conditions like effusions, edema, device positions, or pneumothorax.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11070,latent_11070,1052,0.002104,0.0018131965,4.555494,Comparative analysis across multiple imaging modalities or time points.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature comparisons across multiple imaging modalities (e.g., CT, MRI, X-ray), discussing changes over time or stability in specific findings like lesions, opacities, or other notable changes in the patient's condition. This distinguishes them from reports focusing solely on findings from a single modality.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11071,latent_11071,723,0.001446,0.0013001328,3.331705,Incorporation of detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies to identify changes or stability.,"Despite the differences in conditions, the highly activated examples emphasize detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies to identify trends or changes over time, often noting stability or specific changes in conditions like pneumonia or effusions. Consistently, these reports utilize comparative analysis with prior images as a critical component of the interpretation process.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4596458100878322,0.4598930481283422,0.4368932038834951,0.5113636363636364,88.0,99.0
+11072,latent_11072,5852,0.011704,0.0050363797,2.666002,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing stability or lack of change.,The highly activated samples consistently include comparisons to prior imaging studies and focus on stable or unchanged findings. This stability or lack of significant change is often emphasized in radiology reports when assessing the progress or resolution of medical conditions.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4777777777777778,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11073,latent_11073,1798,0.003596,0.0019395747,2.3387525,Comparison of current findings with previous imaging.,"The pattern involves radiology reports indicating a comparison between current and previous imaging, with findings described in terms of changes or stabilities relative to past studies. This includes mentions of changes since a previous study, stability of findings, or a lack of notable changes over time, such as 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'interval changes'.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11074,latent_11074,562,0.001124,0.0010958199,3.7442772,"Comparison of image findings to prior studies, noting changes or stability.","These highly activated samples frequently involve the comparison of current imaging with prior studies, specifically highlighting stability or changes in critical findings such as effusions, opacities, and other abnormalities. There is significant emphasis on changes over time, including wording that acknowledges whether findings are new or unchanged compared to prior imagery, establishing a connection through comparison.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5337436332767402,0.5384615384615384,0.4615384615384615,0.782608695652174,69.0,100.0
+11075,latent_11075,1277,0.002554,0.0020500615,3.3293126,"Comparison of current imaging findings to prior exams, focusing on stability or improvement.",Many examples contain radiological descriptions that focus on identifying a lack of change or an improvement/stability in findings based on comparison to prior exams. This pattern is particularly evident in examples where imaging changes suggest resolution or stability rather than new findings.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.524390243902439,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11076,latent_11076,612,0.001224,0.0012037432,3.0633974,Historical comparison with past images to assess change.,"The pattern in these examples is the use of historical comparison of radiological findings with prior studies to assess changes. This is illustrated by explicit mentions of baseline or no baseline ('Compared to prior'), especially where there's focus on describing intervals or stability/changes over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4552424295466479,0.4678362573099415,0.4206349206349206,0.7464788732394366,71.0,100.0
+11077,latent_11077,866,0.001732,0.0015973687,2.412341,Language prompts focused on comparison of current and prior imaging.,"These examples all involve providing findings and comparisons between current radiological images and prior imagery, demonstrating a linguistic focus on interval changes, stability, or commentary on image positioning. Common terms include 'unchanged', 'in comparison with prior', or 'provide a description in comparison to prior'. The pattern is centered on comparative analysis requested in the language prompt.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11078,latent_11078,1136,0.002272,0.0014876232,4.523287,Interval change in pathology compared to prior imaging.,"These samples frequently describe changes in findings compared to prior studies, with a focus on the interval increase, decrease, or stability of specific pathological entities such as pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, or other notable features across time, highlighting comparison between previous and current imaging to assess progression.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.64996499649965,0.65,0.6530612244897959,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11079,latent_11079,3081,0.006162,0.0024613708,3.918355,Instruction to compare findings with prior images explicitly described changes.,"The examples contain a pattern where the assistant is requested to provide findings in comparison with prior radiological studies, but the degree of activation differs based on whether explicit descriptions of changes compared to the prior study are present. This suggests the pattern involves nuanced comparison instructions with variable precision.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11080,latent_11080,12988,0.025976,0.009689383,1.6178256,References to prior imaging for interval change assessment.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include reference to previous imaging studies for comparison. This language pattern is typical in radiology reports evaluating current findings against prior examinations to assess changes, such as progression or resolution of pathologies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5352112676056338,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11081,latent_11081,1000,0.002,0.0016877541,4.1747375,Consistent mention of normal heart size and mediastinal/hilar contours.,"These examples consistently mention the ""heart size"" in conjunction with the ""mediastinal and hilar contours"" and ""pulmonary vasculature."" The reports often state these anatomical features as ""normal"" or ""unchanged,” which is characteristic of a routine, structured observation in radiological assessments, focusing on these areas for consistent evaluations.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6247654784240151,0.625,0.631578947368421,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11082,latent_11082,1094,0.002188,0.0013801369,4.7184396,Prompting for comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"The consistent element in high activation examples is the presence of explicit instructions or prompts for evaluating interval changes or generating comparative descriptions of radiographic findings based on prior images. This aligns with the task of assessing disease progression or stability over time, a relevant function for clinical monitoring or decision-making.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5464100011063171,0.59,0.5555555555555556,0.9,100.0,100.0
+11083,latent_11083,1422,0.002844,0.0018201815,2.8750594,Detailed comparison to previous imaging with interval changes.,"The higher activation levels consistently correlate with reports that contain direct and specific comparisons to previous imaging studies. This is exemplified by usage of phrases like 'compared to', 'in comparison to', or specifying the nature of interval changes. This pattern is indicative of the model focusing on understanding and processing changes over time in radiological findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5107838913247332,0.5125628140703518,0.5113636363636364,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+11084,latent_11084,893,0.001786,0.0016924195,3.2603378,Comparative analysis with prior frontal chest images.,"These examples all prominently feature an analysis based on changes or comparisons made with prior frontal chest images, typically involving a change in a medical condition such as edema, pleural effusion, or tube placement. This pattern involves comparative analysis across multiple time points to assess progression or stability of findings.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11085,latent_11085,989,0.001978,0.0014444313,2.9628828,Radiological analysis involves comparing current images to prior images.,"The consistent pattern in high activation examples is the requirement to describe radiological findings by comparing the current images with prior images. These cases all include some form of comparison between current and previous studies, often described using expressions related to analysis over time or stability/change in findings.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11086,latent_11086,7422,0.014844,0.0054145996,1.4710399,Position and effects of tubes or medical devices compared to prior images.,"This set of examples frequently details the presence of various medical devices or tubes (e.g., ET tubes, NG tubes, Pacer devices) and mentions changes in their positions or effects on the body, often in comparison with past imaging studies.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5245901639344263,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11087,latent_11087,4586,0.009172,0.004970979,2.900003,Unchanged cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours upon prior study comparison.,"The stable cardiac silhouette, absence of new pulmonary findings, and references to prior imaging studies indicate a specific pattern of unchanged cardiomediastinal contours in chest imaging reports, even when there may be new or unchanged lung findings. This pattern is prevalent across many medical imaging texts where the focus is on comparative stability of the cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4174473067915691,0.4472361809045226,0.4,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+11088,latent_11088,719,0.001438,0.0013966174,4.880201,No prior images available ('N/A') for comparison in the context.,"All highly activated examples involve situations where the comparison to prior imaging is marked as 'N/A' or similar, suggesting that no prior comparison is possible. This context is crucial because it influences the type of findings the AI might focus on describing in its output, despite the instruction mentioning prior comparisons.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.6153846153846154,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7631252583712278,0.7643979057591623,0.7017543859649122,0.8791208791208791,91.0,100.0
+11089,latent_11089,735,0.00147,0.0016080232,4.559726,Notes on stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The higher activation levels are associated with reports that draw explicit comparisons of current imaging findings to prior states or images. This pattern emphasizes the stability or change of specific findings over time. The reports often mention stability or unchanged conditions like 'unchanged', 'not significantly changed', or references to the lack of new findings, indicating the significance of continuity and systematic comparison for this activation pattern.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5412174303683738,0.5473684210526316,0.5256410256410257,0.4555555555555555,90.0,100.0
+11090,latent_11090,3801,0.007602,0.003292886,2.3799262,New or unchanged findings without explicit prior comparison.,"Examples with the highest activation levels either lack prior images for explicit comparison or continue to have findings that are assumed ‘as before’ or ‘unchanged’, suggesting the focus is on clinical descriptive imaging without new comparisons.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5064612974807466,0.5226130653266332,0.53125,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+11091,latent_11091,4686,0.009372,0.003985916,2.8255556,Describes interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve interpretation of findings from current radiology images in comparison to prior studies, specifically emphasizing interval changes or stability in the findings. These reports often indicate changes or stability in pathology or anatomical features, which require a detailed comparison to the prior images.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6032956972841013,0.61,0.5873015873015873,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11092,latent_11092,6485,0.01297,0.005751841,3.9254255,Comparison against prior studies with changes emphasized.,"The most activated examples feature cases where a comparison is made between current imaging findings and previous documentation, focusing on changes or stability in specific features like lesions, opacities, or device positioning. The pattern seems to emphasize detailed assessments of existing conditions with new findings, requiring specific historical context for analysis.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.5853658536585366,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11093,latent_11093,1640,0.00328,0.0020940679,4.1255507,Interpreting interval change by comparing with prior images.,"Highly activated examples describe findings where previous comparisons are explicitly stated and show definite changes in the current images, such as new pleural effusions or change in lung opacities. This pattern emphasizes the significance of comparative analysis in identifying new or interval changes.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5882242840717666,0.615,0.5761589403973509,0.87,100.0,100.0
+11094,latent_11094,946,0.001892,0.0018270952,3.5047605,Focused assessment and adjustment of tube positioning in images.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly describe scenarios involving detailed evaluation of tube positioning, such as Dobbhoff tubes, NG tubes, or endotracheal tubes, and changes in their placement or recommendations for their adjustment in comparison to prior studies. This pattern suggests a focus on assessing medical device placement in radiology images, making this the key factor.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5536554542765723,0.585,0.6808510638297872,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11095,latent_11095,741,0.001482,0.0011953074,4.0420055,Patterns of change or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Comparing current findings with previous images frequently helps identify changes like increased size of anatomical features or the emergence of new pathologies. This pattern helps detect intervals, such as resolution or progression, of diseases. High activations focus on such comparisons and narrative details regarding slight adjustments or notable changes in various conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.545479732912199,0.5595854922279793,0.5298507462686567,0.7634408602150538,93.0,100.0
+11096,latent_11096,7797,0.015594,0.005738281,1.887361,References to medical device positioning or changes between current and prior images.,"The pattern demonstrated in these examples involves references to changes in medical devices, positioning or their findings on images over time. Frequently, the activation rises where descriptions mention removal, placement, or adjustments of medical devices like tubes, wires, and catheters, especially compared to prior studies.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11097,latent_11097,637,0.001274,0.0013996081,4.491239,Rib deformities or fractures noted in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions or findings of rib deformities, fractures, or other related rib cage changes such as scoliosis. These are indicated by mentions of terms like 'rib cage', 'rib deformity', 'rib fracture', and similar observations in chest imaging, often used for evaluating trauma or structural changes in the thoracic region.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7940095302927161,0.8089887640449438,0.9230769230769232,0.6153846153846154,78.0,100.0
+11098,latent_11098,1761,0.003522,0.0017717001,2.3007786,Images show stable or unchanged findings compared to prior exams.,"The pattern emerges from the radiology report descriptions where comparison is made with prior images, and findings are described in stable or unchanged terms, indicating no significant change since a prior examination. Phrases like 'no significant interval change' or emphasizing stable conditions appear frequently in samples with higher activation levels.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4202898550724637,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11099,latent_11099,1310,0.00262,0.0017953983,4.6717753,Unremarkable mediastinal and hilar contours in radiological comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels all include some form of evaluation or acknowledgement of mediastinal or hilar contours that are stable, unremarkable, unchanged, or unrelated to the main pathology being evaluated. These examples often emphasize the stable cardiac and mediastinal presentation, compared to lower or zero activation examples which mention acute changes or don't emphasize this stability.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6072368421052632,0.6080402010050251,0.6222222222222222,0.56,100.0,99.0
+11100,latent_11100,8255,0.01651,0.006153407,1.8649471,Specific comparison with prior imaging showing stable or unchanged findings over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention detailed comparisons of the current imaging with prior studies, frequently concluding with specific notations of changes or stabilities over time. These examples also include direct references to previous dates or conditions, emphasizing longitudinal assessment of stability or changes in pathologies or anatomical structures.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5087710084033613,0.5276381909547738,0.55,0.33,100.0,99.0
+11101,latent_11101,603,0.001206,0.001181844,4.2095046,Significant interval changes since prior imaging study comparison.,"The pattern in highly activated examples is a description of changes or stability in conditions when compared to previous imaging, and changes noted specifically in pathological or device placement findings that indicate significant developments since prior exams. This commonly involves clear observations on the interval change that are critical for patient management decisions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5618788819875776,0.6140350877192983,0.5609756097560976,0.323943661971831,71.0,100.0
+11102,latent_11102,698,0.001396,0.0011775263,3.2919865,Focus on pleural effusions' presence or changes in comparison imaging.,"The examples with high activation focus on imaging reports involving pleural effusions, especially in the context of evaluating or monitoring their changes over time. Keywords like 'bilateral pleural effusions', 'worsening', 'increased', or 'stable' often appear alongside other pathologies like atelectasis or edema but consistently highlight pleural effusions.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6632835820895522,0.6648936170212766,0.6106194690265486,0.7840909090909091,88.0,100.0
+11103,latent_11103,1118,0.002236,0.0017220045,3.8236847,Analysis of interval change between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging, emphasizing changes (or stability) in various findings. These descriptions often analyze the interval change in the radiological findings, particularly changes in structural opacities or other notable features that can be clinically significant. This is a common pattern in radiology reports where interval changes provide insights into evolving pathologies.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11104,latent_11104,608,0.001216,0.0012985986,5.2677817,"Normal pleural space, lung fields, and stable cardiac and mediastinal contours.","These examples consistently include normal evaluation of pleural space and lung fields, including no evidence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, alongside the observation of normal cardiac, hilar, and mediastinal contours, showing stability compared to prior images. This pattern highlights an emphasis on stability and normalcy in key anatomical features of the chest, in comparison with previous studies.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7330246913580247,0.7341040462427746,0.651685393258427,0.7945205479452054,73.0,100.0
+11105,latent_11105,576,0.001152,0.0012522307,4.1229734,Radiological findings described in comparison to prior images.,"These examples all focus on comparing current findings back to previous imaging, with an emphasis on noting stability or changes in conditions over time. Such comparisons are frequently found in radiology reports to track the progression or improvement of a patient's condition through past and current exams.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4852250182729456,0.488235294117647,0.4247787610619469,0.6857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+11106,latent_11106,1355,0.00271,0.0020816394,3.245879,Tube and catheter placement relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with high activation levels describe positioning of tubes and catheters, like endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, relative to anatomical landmarks such as the carina or diaphragm. The correctness of tube placement is commonly assessed and discussed due to its importance for patient safety.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6798719487795117,0.68,0.6730769230769231,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11107,latent_11107,927,0.001854,0.0014411634,3.8077974,Evaluative descriptions based on comparison to prior images.,"The samples with higher activation levels include phrases indicating a description or evaluation of the radiological image’s findings compared to a prior image. Specifically, these samples often detail differences in the findings due to patient conditions, treatments, or interventions by directly comparing them to the prior images. This comparison and description seem to trigger the higher activations.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4099409940994099,0.41,0.4117647058823529,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11108,latent_11108,1013,0.002026,0.0013141823,3.6183808,Focus on identifying interval changes between imaging studies.,"The examples selected often involve radiology reports where comparison to previous imaging is explicitly stated, focusing on identifying 'interval changes'. This phrase or concept is frequently used to track progression or stability between two imaging examinations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11109,latent_11109,1214,0.002428,0.001705197,3.7061293,Technical detail of tube/catheter/device placement or evaluation.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the technical details or outcomes related to the placement of various medical tubes, catheters, or devices provided within the images and reports. They often describe the successful placement or unchanged positioning of such devices (as in examples with precise tube placements or stable catheter positioning).",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11110,latent_11110,748,0.001496,0.0011866434,3.1953685,Stability or no significant change compared to prior imaging.,"These examples all include comparative analysis with prior imaging, focusing on intervals or stability without acute change. Notes of 'no change', 'stable', or 'unchanged' compared to prior findings suggest ongoing monitoring or resolution without progression.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.2914230019493177,0.4427083333333333,0.4050632911392405,0.3478260869565217,92.0,100.0
+11111,latent_11111,873,0.001746,0.0013761553,2.8863943,Comparison to prior imaging and correlation with historical findings.,"These examples consistently reference prior imaging for comparison, and many describe findings in relation to patient histories such as surgeries or chronic conditions. The pattern involves correlation of current images with previous ones, often to monitor stability or changes over time, which explains the model's attention to these details.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4928571428571429,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11112,latent_11112,1573,0.003146,0.0025777149,3.7830858,Detailed structural descriptions or evaluative comments elevate activation.,"The examples with lower activation involve simple, straightforward descriptions of findings without additional complexity, while higher activation levels correspond with reports offering more detailed observations or evaluations. Additionally, examples with explicit, structured reporting of technical and clinical indications or specific commentary from radiologists tend to get higher activation scores.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4068343004513217,0.425,0.4444444444444444,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11113,latent_11113,641,0.001282,0.001275775,4.8498588,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of both current and past imaging, focusing on changes or the stable state of pathologies in serial exams. The recurring elements in these examples include specific observations about changes, stability, or resolution of previously seen abnormalities, commonly related to lung pathology or heart conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4004524886877828,0.4111111111111111,0.3289473684210526,0.3125,80.0,100.0
+11114,latent_11114,2782,0.005564,0.0026754006,3.2859716,Improvement or resolution in comparison to prior exam findings.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on observations in radiological reports that specify either resolution or improvement of certain radiological findings in comparison to prior exams, signifying progress or resolution of previously identified issues.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4494735945968954,0.515,0.5483870967741935,0.17,100.0,100.0
+11115,latent_11115,5316,0.010632,0.0043440666,1.7743188,Unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette with other findings noted.,"Examples with high activation levels often mention specifics about the cardiomediastinal silhouette being unchanged, while describing other findings such as effusions, consolidation, or device placements. The statement indicates assessing other significant changes while maintaining stability in this particular anatomical feature.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5334776000206095,0.542713567839196,0.5555555555555556,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+11116,latent_11116,8244,0.016488,0.006399994,3.118777,Evaluations that involve comparison of current radiological images with prior images.,"The pattern generally involves referencing images to describe current radiological findings, often from frontal and sometimes lateral views. Reports compare current findings to previous or prior images, indicating presence or absence of changes. This potentially suggests images aid in evaluating stability or progression of certain conditions.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11117,latent_11117,995,0.00199,0.0015357849,2.8995566,Frequent use of language comparing current findings with prior imaging results.,"The highly activated examples show phrases indicating direct comparison to prior imaging, such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged since prior', or 'interval placement', all suggesting contrast or evaluation of change from earlier radiological images. The role of these comparative notes becomes clear in most activated examples, emphasizing tracking changes over time with a previous baseline.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11118,latent_11118,5491,0.010982,0.00431785,2.248009,Presence of explicit requests for assistance or further evaluation.,"The text with higher activations consistently contains specific guidance or requests for assistance directed to an artificial assistant or clinician for further interpretation or specific actions, often following an initial assessment or impression. These requests are not found in the examples with lower activations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11119,latent_11119,642,0.001284,0.0012134403,3.7441945,Detailed comparison to prior images with explicit reference to dates or previous findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently make detailed comparisons between current and prior images, noting specific changes or stability in findings with explicit references to prior study dates. They discuss unchanged features or interval changes using comparison language, like 'compared', 'unchanged', 'interval change', and rely heavily on historical imaging context.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4769923877582725,0.4861878453038674,0.4210526315789473,0.3950617283950617,81.0,100.0
+11120,latent_11120,2986,0.005972,0.003447278,3.5372865,Comparative image assessment with detailed findings over time.,"Higher activation levels correlate with reports that specifically include both the presence of comparison with prior images and detailed descriptions of changes over time or confirmation of findings. These reports emphasize continuity and longitudinal assessment, which is a common practice in radiological studies aiming to track disease progression or stability.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.2727272727272727,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.4509803921568627,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11121,latent_11121,742,0.001484,0.0014709334,4.0631814,New or increasing opacity on the current images.,"Radiology reports often involve comparison to previous studies, but here the activating pattern includes changes seen in opacity, specifically new or increased opacities from one study to another, described as new areas of density on chest radiographs. These opacities often obscure anatomical borders, indicating possible disease progression or new pathology like consolidation or effusion.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5729062395729063,0.5833333333333334,0.5857142857142857,0.4456521739130434,92.0,100.0
+11122,latent_11122,9820,0.01964,0.007132934,1.9100713,Focus on longitudinal evaluation of radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently emphasize the comparison of current and previous radiological findings, particularly highlighting changes, stability, or improvement in specific findings across time. This pattern is typical in reports that evaluate the progression of a known condition or monitor the effects of interventions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11123,latent_11123,546,0.001092,0.00093622925,3.685525,Comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with significant activation level focus on the presence of both a previous and current image being compared, often discussing any changes or reaffirming the stability of findings. The contextual prompt consistently instructs to provide findings in relation to the previous image, suggesting a temporal comparative analysis is central to the pattern.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3627937768950678,0.3636363636363636,0.3113207547169811,0.5076923076923077,65.0,100.0
+11124,latent_11124,2104,0.004208,0.0023259444,4.350177,Changes in placement or removal of tubes and lines.,"Highly activated examples frequently identify changes in tubes and lines, such as placement or removal, as indicative factors, whereas lower activation examples focus less on tube status. This pattern suggests that the radiological studies prioritize the assessment of such changes as significant.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6131528046421664,0.625,0.6923076923076923,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11125,latent_11125,1105,0.00221,0.0016805073,3.1699717,Reports mention technical limitations affecting image evaluation.,"Activation is higher in reports where technical limitations (e.g., patient rotation, underpenetration, limited inspiratory effort) are noted to affect the evaluation of the images. These limitations are explicitly mentioned, highlighting specific challenges in interpreting the imaging, which appears to trigger the observed pattern.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5686274509803921,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11126,latent_11126,358,0.000716,0.000790452,4.754194,"Detailed interval changes in tubes, lines, or anomalies compared to prior images.","Examples have high activation where there are descriptions emphasizing interval changes or stability compared to previous studies. There's focus on findings related to tubes, lines, and support devices between consecutive images, mentioning ETT, NG tube, pneumothorax, and effusions. The emphasis is on detailed comparison results between the current and prior images.",0.4978642619838633,0.5,0.4545454545454545,0.4761904761904761,21.0,25.0,0.540447695035461,0.5944055944055944,0.3529411764705882,0.4186046511627907,43.0,100.0
+11127,latent_11127,1340,0.00268,0.0018000292,3.1492162,Stable or unchanged cardiac and mediastinal silhouette on repeat imaging.,"Observations consistently relate to the stability or reference of cardiac, mediastinal, and sometimes lung features relative to prior imaging. These examples highlight the repeated stability of the cardiac and mediastinal silhouette when compared to prior images despite the presence of new or ongoing conditions.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11128,latent_11128,3003,0.006006,0.0036349948,6.1199374,Evaluating interval changes relative to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain references to pre-existing conditions or changes over time, often focusing on interval changes between current and prior imaging studies. They often emphasize worsening or improvement of specific conditions or anomalies actively monitored over time.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.5323741007194245,0.7872340425531915,94.0,106.0
+11129,latent_11129,1539,0.003078,0.0019427174,2.5502963,Round or oval shadows indicating potential pathologies.,"Examples with high activation levels identify specific radiological findings such as round or oval opacities (nodules, masses) which suggest possible pathologies like bronchiectasis or pneumonia. These distinctive shapes are key indicators in chest imaging for potential abnormalities.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4871794871794871,0.55,0.6666666666666666,0.2,100.0,100.0
+11130,latent_11130,3361,0.006722,0.0030916443,2.3882132,"Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","Radiology reports exhibiting high activation levels consistently involve a thorough comparison of current imagistic findings with prior studies, explicitly detailing changes or stability over time. Such comparisons often assess specific conditions like pulmonary edema, cardiomegaly, or other pathologies and include terms reflecting change (e.g., 'interval improvement', 'unchanged', or 'enlarged').",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11131,latent_11131,973,0.001946,0.0016131552,4.3698673,Specific evaluation of changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently mention specific changes or absence of changes when compared to previous imagery. They focus on evaluating the current study relative to prior images, identifying stable findings, absence of new pathologies, or describing interval changes, which is key in follow-up radiological assessments.",0.5202797202797202,0.5714285714285714,0.55,0.88,25.0,24.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11132,latent_11132,1588,0.003176,0.00221886,5.404548,Focused on medical tube placement and positions.,"Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions involving details about medical devices like endotracheal tubes, catheters, or lines, their positions, and changes related to tube placement, especially when compared to prior imaging.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6949923748093703,0.695,0.696969696969697,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11133,latent_11133,1052,0.002104,0.0017034599,5.6743736,Low lung volumes noted in radiographic findings.,Examples with low lung volumes seem to show higher activation. This is a common observation in radiology. Low lung volumes can lead to an appearance of crowded bronchovascular markings and magnification or accentuation of the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours. This pattern is recognized in reports when commenting on image interpretation difficulties or normal variations in imaging appearances.,0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7834353201883608,0.785,0.8433734939759037,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11134,latent_11134,8608,0.017216,0.0064564412,2.3014753,Reports emphasizing comparison to previous imaging studies.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently mention comparison to previous imaging studies, highlighting any interval changes or stability of findings. This pattern indicates the model is focusing on reports that involve monitoring progression or resolution of conditions or stability of pre-existing findings, as these provide more contextual information in a clinical setting.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4461025516926138,0.485,0.4901960784313725,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11135,latent_11135,2834,0.005668,0.0027471131,3.3999474,Normal cardiac silhouette amidst other notable chest findings.,"This set of examples demonstrates that higher activations often include mentions of a normal cardiac silhouette or heart size despite other notable findings in the chest, indicating that the AI likely focuses on this specific characteristic in chest radiographs irrespective of other issues present.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5703324808184143,0.58,0.6142857142857143,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11136,latent_11136,1460,0.00292,0.0019171155,3.5515015,"Describing findings compared to prior images, even if none available.","Examples with high activation consistently involve tasks where the assistant is instructed to compare current radiology images against prior images even when there are no comparisons available. This instruction indicates a focus on understanding change over time, which is a central task in follow-up imaging interpretations, despite the absence of prior data in some examples indicating the model's focus on the task prompt.",0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5062282572101897,0.56,0.536144578313253,0.89,100.0,100.0
+11137,latent_11137,1336,0.002672,0.0016405612,4.04764,Comparative evaluation prompted by known conditions that require monitoring.,"Examples generally discuss comparison between current and previous imaging, but those with high activation involve situations where there is a known condition prompting evaluation for changes, aiding in monitoring or adjustment of clinical management. This is evident when the indication describes conditions like heart failure, pneumonia, or other chronic illnesses requiring assessment for interval changes.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4041404598813374,0.415,0.4330708661417323,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11138,latent_11138,8356,0.016712,0.006215859,1.5089206,Detailed interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on the clear and explicit comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, highlighting interval changes, stability, or new findings. This common pattern in radiology involves detailed observation of variations over time, which explains the moderate activation level when such clear comparisons are present.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11139,latent_11139,614,0.001228,0.0011531096,4.404227,Focus on unchanged or chronic cardiomegaly in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples highlight the presence of either a visual comparison between current and prior imaging as well as explicit descriptions or findings regarding cardiac size, particularly cardiomegaly, as seen in the statements dedicated to cardiac evaluations. Many examples focus on unchanged or chronic cardiomegaly in various contexts or conditions, which stands out in the reports as a common element among the cases with higher activation levels.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5311564134944975,0.5898876404494382,0.5675675675675675,0.2692307692307692,78.0,100.0
+11140,latent_11140,1191,0.002382,0.0017437058,2.7146676,Comparison of current and prior images to identify changes.,"Examples with high activation levels typically reference current and prior images explicitly for comparison, using language that involves terms such as 'current image' and 'prior image'. The reports focus on providing findings or impressions that are evaluated in light of previous studies, indicating a pattern of linguistic structure centered around comparative analysis of imaging.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3648553281580804,0.37,0.3898305084745763,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11141,latent_11141,5194,0.010388,0.0044688634,1.9369001,Interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions of changes in findings compared to previous radiological imaging, indicating stability, improvement, or new developments. They all use language to describe these comparisons, often providing detailed accounts of interval changes or stability of previous pathologies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.5785123966942148,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11142,latent_11142,929,0.001858,0.0014405814,4.720182,Limited image evaluation due to positioning or other artifacts.,"Examples showing a high activation level consistently mention limited ability to evaluate images due to positioning, rotation, body habitus, or other artifacts like low lung volumes, showing a pattern where assessment is impeded by patient presentation or image quality issues.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7241656009428521,0.725,0.7528089887640449,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11143,latent_11143,5968,0.011936,0.0047016875,2.0329087,Emphasis on interval changes or stability since prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation contain explicit language comparing current imaging findings to previous studies. These statements frequently use phrases like ""as compared to"", ""unchanged from"" or mention specific changes since a prior examination, demonstrating a focus on interval changes or stability in findings compared to previously established baselines, which is indicative of a follow-up or evaluation context in radiology reporting.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11144,latent_11144,621,0.001242,0.001286395,4.6405597,Consistent reference to changes or stabilities from prior imaging study.,"These examples consistently involve comparing findings on radiographs with prior images. The description centers on observing and noting changes or stabilities in conditions over time, such as device placements, pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or lung infiltrates, often mentioning the intervals between studies or describing conditions as unchanged from or improved compared to prior examinations.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4040657198551935,0.4055555555555555,0.3761467889908257,0.5125,80.0,100.0
+11145,latent_11145,887,0.001774,0.0013810033,2.9132428,Explicit comparison and interval changes between current and prior images.,"The majority of these examples include distinct comparisons between the current and prior imaging, often using terms like ""interval change,"" ""new,"" ""unclear,"" ""compared to prior,"" and noting stability, improvement, or development of radiographic findings. This pattern is indicative of tracking disease progression or resolution.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11146,latent_11146,1157,0.002314,0.0015975593,3.553284,Stable or mild findings in chest images compared to prior.,"Looking at the examples with higher activation (e.g., example 2, 6, 10), these focus on describing findings like cardiomediastinal silhouettes, mild or normal cardiac enlargement, and low lung volumes, with certain descriptions of opacities or parenchymal findings which might reflect pulmonary issues but without acute processes. The pattern seems to incorporate mention of certain stable conditions or minor findings in comparing current and prior chest images.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5434782608695652,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11147,latent_11147,1876,0.003752,0.0020384267,3.4117246,Radiological findings compared against previous imaging studies.,"These examples discuss interval changes and findings relative to previous imaging, focusing on their stability or transformation over time. Specifically, they involve comparison with previous studies, highlighting unchanged conditions or notable alterations. This pattern illustrates the radiological practice of evaluating current studies in the context of longitudinal changes, often assessing stability or progression.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4685314685314685,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11148,latent_11148,695,0.00139,0.001343675,4.5055237,Status of monitoring and support devices in comparison to prior studies.,"These examples consistently mention the status of medical devices and support hardware in relation to prior imaging. Specific phrases indicating unchanged, stable, or persisting positions such as 'remains' or 'in place' are frequently used to emphasize the documentation and monitoring of these medical interventions.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7485480502388923,0.7486631016042781,0.7083333333333334,0.7816091954022989,87.0,100.0
+11149,latent_11149,705,0.00141,0.0010675092,3.6729767,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation often mention findings by directly comparing current and prior images. They consistently evaluate changes between the two sets of images, indicating the pattern involves noting differences or similarities between sequential images to understand the progression of any lung conditions.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4297269969666329,0.4414893617021276,0.4330708661417323,0.625,88.0,100.0
+11150,latent_11150,5969,0.011938,0.0046202135,2.485532,Explicit comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"Higher activation levels in these examples are noted where radiological findings are directly compared against previous studies, specifically identifying changes (improvement, stability, or new findings) in a consistent manner. The model responds strongly when previous examination findings are explicitly contrasted, suggesting that these comparative aspects drive activation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11151,latent_11151,3871,0.007742,0.0034849886,3.2102854,"Detailed current radiological findings, often without prior comparisons.","Examples with high activation levels involve specific radiological observations without comparison to prior images. They describe findings based solely on current radiographs and are typically extensive in detailing observations, implying that lack of comparison might focus more attention on current findings.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4415584415584415,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11152,latent_11152,762,0.001524,0.0013426084,3.4058256,Unchanged position of surgical or medical devices in imaging.,"These examples involve radiology reports that describe certain medical or surgical devices, such as the position of tubes or wires, common in cases of cardiac surgery or intervention, appearing unchanged in sequential imaging studies. The unchanged position of such hardware is often explicitly mentioned when assessing stability or post-operative monitoring.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.472394540942928,0.5238095238095238,0.4878048780487805,0.2247191011235955,89.0,100.0
+11153,latent_11153,8699,0.017398,0.006645896,1.6998442,Emphasis on unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The consistently higher activations recognize instances where there is a focus on describing interval or unchanged findings in the imaging, indicating stability or follow-up context. These examples emphasize comparisons with prior imaging that detect minor changes or no significant change, highlighting stability over time.",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5844155844155844,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11154,latent_11154,1905,0.00381,0.0021505286,2.9556792,Stringent focus on findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological findings documented in comparison to prior imaging studies, assessing whether changes or stability in conditions such as opacities, silhouettes, or other noted anatomical specifics occur over time. This reflects a pattern frequently seen in follow-up medical imaging reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4952380952380952,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11155,latent_11155,743,0.001486,0.0012334195,8.018767,Comparison findings that show change.,"The model appears to activate most strongly when there is a comparison between current and prior images that reveals changes in key clinical findings. Reports that explicitly reference stability or changes, whether for better or worse, in the context of medical imaging comparisons, have higher activations.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.353783174134618,0.3897435897435897,0.2777777777777778,0.1578947368421052,95.0,100.0
+11156,latent_11156,1392,0.002784,0.0016048524,2.661048,High activation in comparison with previous studies.,"Highly activated samples involve comparison of current findings with previous studies, often indicating stability or change in specific medical conditions or devices. This suggests that comparison with prior studies is crucial for recognizing and assessing expected or stable conditions, hence activating recognition patterns for such comparative analysis.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4710756722951845,0.4874371859296482,0.484375,0.31,100.0,99.0
+11157,latent_11157,694,0.001388,0.0012325055,2.839634,Detailed comparison of current and prior images with observed changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a detailed comparison between the current and prior radiographic images. These reports often include explicit changes or consistencies over time, with clear references to the technique and findings, leveraging precise descriptive language such as ""unchanged"", ""interval development"", ""stable"" or specific measurement changes.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4461672473867595,0.4545454545454545,0.4025974025974026,0.3563218390804598,87.0,100.0
+11158,latent_11158,837,0.001674,0.0015834117,3.9627872,Stability of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels indicate findings that are described with reference to unchanged aspects from prior examinations. Frequent mentions of unchanged positions or appearances are used to highlight stability in the radiological observations, often contrasted with any new findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6545768566493955,0.655,0.6448598130841121,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11159,latent_11159,1715,0.00343,0.0023932827,3.8857925,"Comparison of cardiopulmonary changes, particularly cardiomegaly and effusions.","Examples with higher activation contain descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images, specifically focusing on changes in cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, or pulmonary congestion. There's frequent mention of conditions like ""cardiomegaly"" or ""pulmonary vascular congestion,"" with emphasis on interval changes or stability compared to past exams, which indicates the importance of tracking the progression of cardiovascular and pulmonary conditions as a key pattern.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7064480210547626,0.71,0.6721311475409836,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11160,latent_11160,1485,0.00297,0.0021460617,2.8722858,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels all include comparative descriptions discussing changes or stability in imaging findings over time. These descriptions often involve specific mentions of interval changes in lung opacity, pleural effusions, atelectasis, cardiomegaly, or other features, while non-representative examples do not emphasize such comparative aspects.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6419437340153453,0.65,0.6153846153846154,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11161,latent_11161,1389,0.002778,0.0020631528,3.5250268,"Mention of stable, reduced, or improved pleural effusion or atelectasis.","Examples with higher activation generally involve comparisons about changes in pleural effusion, atelectasis, or similar features relative to earlier imaging. These descriptions emphasize stability, reduction, or minor progression of conditions like pleural effusions or atelectasis.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.6346153846153846,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11162,latent_11162,5190,0.01038,0.0053343796,5.039932,Describing interval changes or stabilities in findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation describe changes or stability in specific pathological conditions or medical devices in direct comparison to previous studies, often highlighting things like effusion status, atelectasis, or device positioning, and assessing their significance over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.5285714285714286,0.7956989247311828,93.0,107.0
+11163,latent_11163,10762,0.021524,0.007946896,1.9548013,Descriptive comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels all contain instructions asking for a description of the findings in the current images in direct comparison to prior imaging. This is a common practice in follow-up radiological evaluations, highlighting specific changes or stability between studies over time, using terms like 'compared to' or 'in comparison with'.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11164,latent_11164,536,0.001072,0.0012832739,4.2140756,Patterns focus on normal findings with comparisons to prior images.,"High activation examples consistently demonstrate normal findings across the heart, mediastinum, and lungs, with descriptions of the images being 'clear', 'unremarkable', or 'normal'. This pattern indicates a focus on identifying non-pathological observations when previous images are referenced as a context but not directly used for comparison in the analysis.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4849877450980392,0.5,0.375,0.421875,64.0,100.0
+11165,latent_11165,1354,0.002708,0.0023023577,3.3641913,Structured comparison with prior imaging noted as 'PRIOR_REPORT'.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to comparisons between current imaging findings and prior images or reports, including the specific format of indicating 'PRIOR_REPORT' and the comparison details of imaging changes over time.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5402298850574713,0.575,0.5483870967741935,0.85,100.0,100.0
+11166,latent_11166,803,0.001606,0.0013088365,4.427004,Mention of interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"The key pattern is the assessment of interval change in findings related to cardiopulmonary or thoracic pathology. High activation levels are triggered when the described changes or stability in imaging findings are clearly articulated, particularly with an emphasis on 'interval change' or stability since a prior exam.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6440625243020452,0.6532663316582915,0.6183206106870229,0.81,100.0,99.0
+11167,latent_11167,2868,0.005736,0.0030385002,4.8773746,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples feature language focused on evaluations and interpretations that compare current imaging findings directly with those from previous examinations, emphasizing stability or new changes. The language often includes terms such as 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'no significant interval change', highlighting continuity and comparison over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11168,latent_11168,1306,0.002612,0.0018862624,3.9795187,Emphasis on stability or change in conditions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve either changes or stability compared to past reports, indicating stability or progression in conditions such as cardiomegaly or pleural effusion. This suggests an interest in longitudinal assessment terms and how findings change over time. Specific observations, such as mild unchanged conditions, are emphasized over acute findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11169,latent_11169,2965,0.00593,0.0026570633,3.335655,Changes or placements of medical devices compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of newly placed or removed medical devices such as catheters or tubes, and their positions in the body, as compared to prior images. These descriptions highlight changes or checks for complications like pneumothorax. This type of comparison and details on medical devices seems critical in these activation patterns.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4561403508771929,0.26,100.0,100.0
+11170,latent_11170,1576,0.003152,0.0020607102,4.065789,Comparison with prior studies for changes in medical devices or interventions.,"The pattern in examples with high activation is the focus on changes or stability concerning medical devices, tube placement, and interventions compared to previous states. Identifications of unchanged positions or suggestions for adjustments are common language cues. These are often highlighted when comparing current and prior imaging studies to evaluate procedural success or detect complications.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6477455716586151,0.65,0.6785714285714286,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11171,latent_11171,670,0.00134,0.0013384256,3.0440474,Detailed interval change analysis with prior imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions that include interval changes in the context of prior imaging comparisons to identify any significant or subtle progression, regression, or stability of noted findings. The key aspect here is the use of comparison phrases indicating temporal progression (e.g., improvement, persistence, increase) between the current and prior exams.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.500609756097561,0.5054945054945055,0.4512195121951219,0.4512195121951219,82.0,100.0
+11172,latent_11172,889,0.001778,0.0013703008,3.5715072,Comparison of imaging findings to prior studies for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels specifically describe findings in comparison to previous imaging studies, often identifying changes, improvements, or stability of particular features such as opacities or effusions. This suggests the pattern is centered around detecting changes or continuity in radiological findings across different studies, as evidenced by descriptive comparisons.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11173,latent_11173,765,0.00153,0.001171722,4.896162,Pattern recognition of specified pathologies over time in radiologic comparisons.,"Higher activation levels are consistently associated with phrases that describe the presence or resolution of specific pathologies or features, and their stability or change over multiple imaging studies. This reflects a strong pattern recognition component concerned with tracking changes in identified features or pathologies over time. Examples with a focus on unchanged features, stability, or the mention of unchanged from prior can drive higher activations.",0.510212950890917,0.5306122448979592,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.628178072555522,0.63,0.6140350877192983,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11174,latent_11174,7753,0.015506,0.0061904574,2.499017,"Comparison with prior imaging, assessing tube placement or stability of findings.","Many examples reference prior imaging studies and assess stability or change in features like tubes, opacities, or anatomical structures in comparison to these previous studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11175,latent_11175,2120,0.00424,0.0025192038,6.065561,"Indication of interval change in pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or lung opacities on comparison with prior imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently express changes in findings related to fluid, such as pleural effusion or pulmonary edema, or lung expansion. Specifically, these examples describe an interval change, like an increase or decrease, that indicates a clinically relevant progression or resolution based on successive imaging studies.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.6111111111111112,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11176,latent_11176,1784,0.003568,0.0018905387,2.7281804,Comparison-focused radiology evaluation with specific findings instructions.,"Prompts with high activation levels consistently request a ""description of findings in comparison to the prior frontal image"" and include specific instructions to describe changes or assess stability against previous images, indicating a focus on radiological comparisons with prior studies.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11177,latent_11177,7868,0.015736,0.0057275654,1.3761396,Focus on evaluation of device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize changes in monitoring or support devices (e.g., tubes or catheters) compared to prior imaging, with detailed descriptions of their positions. This pattern involves specific evaluation of equipment placement alongside other clinical findings.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5588235294117647,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11178,latent_11178,2955,0.00591,0.002783399,2.7434022,Discussion of lung opacities or pleural changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons or descriptions based on the analysis of radiology images against previous imaging results, simultaneously mentioning clinical details related to pneumonic or pleural processes such as opacities or effusions.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11179,latent_11179,1346,0.002692,0.0020901426,4.44102,Descriptions of medical device positioning suggesting adjustments.,"The pattern observed is consistent with descriptions involving the positioning and potential adjustments of medical tubes or devices like nasogastric, endotracheal, or central venous catheters in relation to thoracic anatomy, often suggesting advancement for optimal placement.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6058538732394366,0.6381909547738693,0.8333333333333334,0.35,100.0,99.0
+11180,latent_11180,875,0.00175,0.0015051613,2.7055466,Explicit request for comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature instructions to provide or amend a report by comparing the current imaging findings with past ones, explicitly requesting the report provider, usually an assistant, to incorporate comparative analysis. These prompts specifically include phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison', indicating the examination of changes over time.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11181,latent_11181,3724,0.007448,0.0031136617,2.5521255,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Highly representative samples involve descriptions where findings are compared with prior studies, and there are documented changes or evaluations indicating stable or improving conditions, suggesting resolution or stability of clinical findings.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.4722222222222222,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11182,latent_11182,2005,0.00401,0.0020497194,2.1917026,Detection of interval changes indicating new or worsening conditions.,"The examples with high activation include findings that indicate changes or abnormalities such as new pneumothorax, pleural effusions, atelectasis, or changes in tube placements, while utilizing current and prior images for comparison. The comparison highlights interval changes suggesting a focus on identifying emerging or resolving issues.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.6190476190476191,0.39,100.0,100.0
+11183,latent_11183,1234,0.002468,0.0023559388,5.5480766,"Comparison of current and prior imaging findings, noting changes or stability.","The pattern is heavily represented by examples where the report specifically compares current and previous images, highlighting changes or stability in the radiological findings. Reports often mention intervals, improvements, or lack of change in findings like atelectasis, effusions, or device placement. Phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' are common, denoting a focus on temporal comparison of images.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.570999570999571,0.6,0.5657894736842105,0.86,100.0,100.0
+11184,latent_11184,9310,0.01862,0.007297627,2.652223,Changes in devices or findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation describe either specific changes in medical devices (e.g., nasogastric tube) or changes in radiological findings over time (e.g., increases in opacities or changes in lung aeration) compared to prior studies. These examples often note modifications in medical care or progression of clinical findings as explicitly connected to prior comparisons.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6098401357959008,0.615,0.5934959349593496,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11185,latent_11185,764,0.001528,0.0013968797,5.3499675,Detailed comparison to prior images indicating stability or minor changes.,"The highly activated examples demonstrate a pattern of providing a description of findings compared to prior images where clear, detailed changes in consolidation, effusion, or mediastinal structures are noted without suggesting an acute abnormal process. Comparison and detailed description are present even if no interval change is noted, using specific descriptors like 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'no interval change', indicating stability or minor changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5381578947368422,0.5384615384615384,0.5238095238095238,0.5789473684210527,95.0,100.0
+11186,latent_11186,6416,0.012832,0.005078249,2.2673311,Detailed comparison with prior image findings.,"Highly activated examples involve analysis of imaging findings by making detailed comparisons with previous studies. This includes phrases such as 'compared to' or 'compared with' to identify changes, stability, or progression of specific findings between images, indicative of monitoring changes over time or treatment effects.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5675662017384273,0.5678391959798995,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,99.0
+11187,latent_11187,1206,0.002412,0.0019075165,2.9643698,Frequent use of comparative evaluation of current and previous imaging.,"The pattern among these examples is the use of comparative language and the presence of the instruction to provide a description of the current imaging findings with explicit comparison to prior images, where interpretation involves changes over time or stability over time. This mirrors a typical linguistic style in radiological assessments where comparisons over time are crucial.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11188,latent_11188,1285,0.00257,0.0021074582,4.4492397,Emphasis on detailed comparison to prior imaging to note stability or change.,"Radiology reports frequently describe findings by comparing current images with prior studies to evaluate changes or stability. The examples consistently focus on the comparison aspect, often explicitly stating whether findings are unchanged, slightly changed, or significantly altered from the previous images.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.595959595959596,0.6,0.5833333333333334,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11189,latent_11189,713,0.001426,0.0012973801,2.719607,Detailed interval change descriptions in comparison to previous images.,"The activations are higher when the description explicitly states comparison between current and previous radiological studies with concise detail on interval changes noted. This comparison acts as a key element in evaluating the variations in clinical conditions, often omitted or generalized in lower activation reports.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3527186761229314,0.4,0.24,0.1411764705882353,85.0,100.0
+11190,latent_11190,5777,0.011554,0.004257649,3.193871,Significant changes in lung opacity on comparison with prior images.,"This pattern is seen in examples where the comparison between current and prior radiological images is explicitly presented, with significant findings, changes, or consistency noted. These examples often refer to subtle or significant radiological findings especially variations in opacification or positioning, which hold diagnostic significance. Significant changes, such as interval increases or losses in opacity, are highlighted more prominently in interpretations by radiologists.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4384876600978636,0.475,0.4489795918367347,0.22,100.0,100.0
+11191,latent_11191,1284,0.002568,0.0015886413,5.7439704,Comparison of device placement with previous images.,"Many samples describe the positioning and presence of medical devices like endotracheal tubes, catheters, or pacemakers in relation to previous studies. The focus on such comparisons is a specific linguistic pattern because tracking the stability or change in medical device placement is crucial to patient management.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5087719298245614,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11192,latent_11192,1108,0.002216,0.0017289725,3.2997234,Presence of opacities or interval change in lung imaging.,"These examples consistently show the presence of thickening, opacities, or shadows in radiographic results that are observed either through interval change or direct comparisons to prior imaging studies. Specific findings like the appearance of pulmonary edema, pneumothorax, or opacity in certain lung lobes are common indicators for clinical concern in nodal activation. The presence of adjectives indicating radiological features that might have implications for underlying pathology is consistently recorded across high activation examples.",0.2525252525252525,0.26,0.2,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3671542691150534,0.39,0.3225806451612903,0.2,100.0,100.0
+11193,latent_11193,9149,0.018298,0.006656642,1.4882743,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"In these examples, the model responds with a description of interval changes or lack thereof compared to previous imaging, specifically noting any stable or unchanged findings over time. This is a typical structure in medical imaging reports when evaluating progression or stability of conditions.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5268808957742158,0.5326633165829145,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,99.0
+11194,latent_11194,7921,0.015842,0.006144887,2.1498446,Identification of interval change in findings based on comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly mention the outcomes of interval changes by directly comparing current imaging with previous ones, often noting changes in device placement, effusions, pneumothorax size, and opacification which are central to evaluation. These examples contain actionable findings and judgments on stability or change based on past comparisons.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11195,latent_11195,1470,0.00294,0.0021297843,3.4723284,Complex cardiopulmonary conditions with intricate differential diagnoses.,"The activating examples frequently describe complex cardiopulmonary conditions characterized by multiple diagnostic findings such as congestive heart failure, cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, or significant vascular changes, often accompanied by explanations of possible differential diagnoses. These reports commonly present intricate, multifocal issues requiring thorough differential consideration showcased in the impressions.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.4722222222222222,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11196,latent_11196,10069,0.020138,0.0074314293,1.8598658,Comparison of current image findings to prior studies indicating changes or stability.,"The examples exhibiting the pattern involve findings described in relation to previous studies, often noting changes or stability in specific features like new devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) with phrases such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'in comparison to the prior study', or 'unchanged from prior exams'. This pattern focuses on interval changes observed when comparing current imaging to prior.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.5190839694656488,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11197,latent_11197,1305,0.00261,0.0015953289,3.2920642,Describing radiologic changes via comparison of current and prior images.,"The examples show the model activating highly when provided with multiple images (current and prior) and asked to compare findings. Abstaining from prior images leads to lower activation levels, linking to the need for historical comparison in radiology reports.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4958677685950413,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11198,latent_11198,11284,0.022568,0.008217058,1.9553659,Radiology report providing comparison to prior images highlights changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations often use comparisons with prior images to highlight changes or stable features, which is a common practice to assess interval changes in radiological findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11199,latent_11199,1163,0.002326,0.0014820464,4.5874844,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with clear lungs.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe images where cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours are normal, and there is no presence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax. This pattern highlights a focus on normal findings in specific anatomical regions in chest radiographs, particularly involving descriptions of heart and lung clarity.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.6266666666666667,0.47,100.0,100.0
+11200,latent_11200,3990,0.00798,0.003247322,2.8628745,Consistent description of findings as stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern indicates that higher activation examples describe imaging findings that exhibit stable or unchanged conditions, particularly when findings like effusions, pulmonary nodes, or other anomalies are consistently mentioned as ""unchanged"" or ""stable"" from prior comparative imaging.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4729729729729729,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11201,latent_11201,541,0.001082,0.0012076885,3.9423618,Normal cardiomediastinal findings despite acute thoracic symptoms.,"The instances with high activation feature normal findings regarding heart size and mediastinal structures after chest pain or other thoracic symptoms are noted. The reports commonly conclude 'unremarkable' findings from PA and lateral views, despite various indications usually suggesting a potential acute cardiac or mediastinal pathology. This consistency in concluding normalcy despite the indication is central to these cases.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7499907045919316,0.75,0.6138613861386139,0.96875,64.0,100.0
+11202,latent_11202,697,0.001394,0.0012584451,3.993583,Inclusion of frontal and lateral views for comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples often include references to both frontal and lateral images in a radiological context, particularly when making comparisons with prior studies. This pattern highlights the use of multiple views to assess the stability or changes in findings over time, as part of a comprehensive evaluation.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4973486868940416,0.5055555555555555,0.4634146341463415,0.7125,80.0,100.0
+11203,latent_11203,925,0.00185,0.0014565833,3.1063538,Explicit detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a direct comparison of current radiological findings to specific parts of prior images, despite not always having a complete record of comparisons available. This comparison requirement focuses more on explicit detailed instructions to derive analysis from comparison or follow-up perspectives.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4742268041237113,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11204,latent_11204,2164,0.004328,0.0020882755,4.3864474,Findings compared with prior or subsequent imaging studies.,"This pattern involves descriptions of radiological studies where a comparison with previous or subsequent images or studies is made. The term 'comparison' is often used in conjunction with identifying any changes in imaging findings. High activation occurs in instances where changes in conditions such as tube positioning, effusions, or infiltrates are highlighted in relation to past images.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.5471698113207547,0.87,100.0,100.0
+11205,latent_11205,4547,0.009094,0.0034989426,2.7296255,Structured comparison of current and prior radiology images.,"The higher activation levels in these examples indicate they include comparison of a current radiology image to a prior image within the context of a structured reporting format. The context involves following a set of components like indication, technique, and findings to direct comparison to assess for changes over time, reflecting progression, stability, or improvement of conditions.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4850746268656716,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11206,latent_11206,11554,0.023108,0.008426269,1.7426678,Explicit comparisons of imaging findings with focus on changes in medical devices or significant features.,"Reports with higher activation levels often involve evaluations comparing the current imaging findings directly against previous images, focusing particularly on specific changes over time in clinical features or treatments. The reports emphasize significant changes or status of medical devices such as tubes or pacemaker leads, making it crucial to track alterations like the positioning of assistive devices or reduction/increase in pathological findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6121981315000882,0.615,0.5982905982905983,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11207,latent_11207,756,0.001512,0.0011658082,4.2175584,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in imaging.,"The pattern in highly activated examples involves referencing findings with a focus on cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, heart size, mediastinal outlines, and repeated descriptions of stable or unchanged status with or without specific date or imaging details. Examples with high activation feature these recurring phrases indicating stable cardiac and mediastinal areas or unchanged heart silhouette.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6461166197627626,0.6461538461538462,0.6326530612244898,0.6526315789473685,95.0,100.0
+11208,latent_11208,4282,0.008564,0.0042123566,5.1656513,Descriptions of changes in imaging findings compared to prior exams.,"The provided examples include requests for the assistant to compare the findings from current images with prior images. The comparisons frequently mention changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, or other pathologies. High activation levels align with examples where there is a clear evolution or change in specific pathologies compared to previous imaging.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6408045977011494,0.65,0.6136363636363636,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11209,latent_11209,925,0.00185,0.0017676238,7.1059127,Comparison of medical device positions in current and prior images.,"The examples with high activations tend to emphasize detailed observations regarding medical devices or structural changes in the body, particularly highlighting positions or alterations of internal medical equipment such as tubes, catheters, pacemakers, and endotracheal tubes, and often provide comparisons to the observations of these devices in prior medical images.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6260150106303952,0.635,0.6956521739130435,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11210,latent_11210,5260,0.01052,0.0063650147,4.665872,Comparison indicating improvement or stability in findings.,"The model shows high activation levels for reports that describe changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies, especially those highlighting improvements or stability over time, such as resolution of previous conditions or unchanged findings despite new symptoms.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6940745755911633,0.695,0.6756756756756757,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11211,latent_11211,932,0.001864,0.0016179128,3.1555777,Description based on explicit comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where current images are explicitly compared to previous images, indicating interval changes or stability over time. This entails a direct comparison with prior imaging to report on changes, providing important contextual information for ongoing or resolved conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11212,latent_11212,5258,0.010516,0.0039371154,2.2827055,Compared images reveal unusual or significant pathological findings or their evaluated consequences.,"Samples with higher activations consistently describe the comparison of findings across multiple images and indication assumptions. These representations appear in cases where there is description or reevaluation due to complex conditions or progressions like pneumothorax or effusions. Key indicators include unusual findings, suspected changes in state, or detailed evaluations for explicit paths such as new infections or conditions associated with observed unexplained radiological features.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6238621831038893,0.625,0.6404494382022472,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11213,latent_11213,700,0.0014,0.001455708,3.4505935,Prompt asks for comparison without available prior images.,"The pattern seen here is prompts asking for a description in comparison to prior images when such a comparison is NOT available or when the instructions explicitly state 'None available.' Despite requesting a comparison, these cases either have no prior images or lack explicit details or comparisons against prior images and still receive high activation scores.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4885718168229379,0.5,0.4883720930232558,0.6702127659574468,94.0,100.0
+11214,latent_11214,1333,0.002666,0.0018205323,2.6384099,"Explicit comparison with prior images, noting changes or stability.","Activation levels are higher when there is an explicit comparison with prior imaging, regardless of whether changes were found. This indicates a focus on describing longitudinal radiological changes or stability in findings when prior reports are referenced.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3714644877435575,0.375,0.3529411764705882,0.3,100.0,100.0
+11215,latent_11215,3967,0.007934,0.0034027875,2.904765,Provide findings compared to prior image.,The pattern found in highly activated examples consists of requests to provide a description of findings compared to a prior image. These examples often include references to changes or stability in the findings over time and utilize comparative language explicitly focused on constructing an interpretation based on multiple imaging points.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4732552349503367,0.4924623115577889,0.4927536231884058,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+11216,latent_11216,891,0.001782,0.0016010443,4.2510166,Presence of both frontal and lateral views in the imaging study.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings in both frontal and lateral views of chest radiographs, using terms like 'PA and lateral views' or 'frontal and lateral chest radiographs', as opposed to examples with low activation which typically do not include lateral view descriptions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4918283963227783,0.4974874371859296,0.4958677685950413,0.6060606060606061,99.0,100.0
+11217,latent_11217,9905,0.01981,0.0074828034,3.5516224,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve cases where findings highlight changes observed over time from previous imaging, especially when imaging sequences and evolving conditions are central to the report. This highlights the relevance of evaluating and contrasting recent images with prior ones to indicate progression, stability, or changes in clinical conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.508679986898133,0.55,0.5316455696202531,0.84,100.0,100.0
+11218,latent_11218,9459,0.018918,0.0069465605,2.4488387,Descriptions of interval changes in radiological findings requested.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve situations where comparisons between images are explicitly requested, either because of potential changes in pathology or specific known conditions to monitor. The prompt specifies providing descriptions of changes, which indicates the task may not have been fully completed according to the prompt, hence some examples with activation 2.0.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5017072615524698,0.5025125628140703,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,99.0
+11219,latent_11219,1143,0.002286,0.0017165641,3.5263033,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and tube/device placement in a chest radiograph.,Examples with non-zero activation focus on the radiologically normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes alongside low lung volumes and conduction devices or tubes that are appropriately placed. Normal heart size with stable mediastinal contours despite low lung volumes or clear lungs seems to be a significant pattern.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5084745762711864,0.3,100.0,100.0
+11220,latent_11220,860,0.00172,0.0013650719,5.0241375,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiology imaging.,"The common thread among highly activated samples is the description of findings comparing current images with prior ones, often indicating specific changes or stability in the conditions described, although sometimes no prior comparison is explicitly stated. The reports highlight updates in findings related to cardiomediastinal contours, aortic tortuosity or calcification, pleural conditions, or changes in known lesions or opacities. This focus on comparative analysis is likely the pattern the model is detecting as frequently indicative.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4422994422994423,0.48,0.4868421052631579,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11221,latent_11221,1210,0.00242,0.0017090051,3.5539148,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,"The elevated activations are associated with examples that involve direct comparisons to prior imaging, specifically emphasizing detected changes or stability of findings over time. Reports mentioning intervals, changes, or stable features between successive images are common triggers.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4820143884892086,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11222,latent_11222,16408,0.032816,0.011866557,1.4540511,Comparison and description of findings against prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently provide a detailed comparison of the present imaging findings with a prior image (e.g., using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'as compared to previous', 'since earlier'). These comparisons help in assessing the stability or change of findings over time, a critical element in radiology reports for tracking patient condition or treatment response.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11223,latent_11223,3920,0.00784,0.003008962,2.5505724,Comparison with prior studies indicating change or stability in findings.,"Higher activations often involve comparison of the current imaging findings with prior studies, using direct terms such as 'compared to', 'since prior', or mentioning specific changes like 'new', or 'unchanged', indicating stability or change in condition. These elements are less prevalent or absent in examples with lower activations, which focus more on standalone descriptions without reference to previous imaging.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5267175572519084,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11224,latent_11224,1409,0.002818,0.002297043,3.8740335,Structuring a comprehensive radiology report from imaging observations and prior comparisons.,"The examples with low activation are direct descriptions without much procedural or comparative elements, while the ones with high activation involve straightforward report synthesis including comparisons. They all include multifaceted details like history, technique, and findings in a synthesized format that is central to radiology report writing, indicating that the pattern involves constructing comprehensive summaries from radiology results.",0.2857142857142857,0.4,0.4444444444444444,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3872549019607843,0.45,0.4695121951219512,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11225,latent_11225,515,0.00103,0.0011109539,4.011756,Cardiomegaly or associated cardiovascular issues.,"Highly activated examples consistently note findings involved in cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, or related cardiovascular pathology. The focus is on signs or enlargements indicating potential overload or pressure issues, using terms like 'cardiomegaly', 'to moderate', 'effusion', and similar descriptions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5472222222222223,0.5705521472392638,0.4444444444444444,0.4444444444444444,63.0,100.0
+11226,latent_11226,1636,0.003272,0.002379079,3.4373026,Instructional tone for comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples that are highly activated frequently involve comparisons between the current and prior imaging, and they often include instructions for the assistant to provide a description or assessment of specific changes or stability in findings over time. They focus on noting either the presence of unchanged features or the progressing nature of lesions. The imperative tone towards the assistant to assess changes in relation to past images is a key pattern.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11227,latent_11227,2583,0.005166,0.0024184808,3.1334138,Impressions or assessments of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The model assigns higher activation levels in reports that include impressions or assessments of findings that are described in terms of change (whether explicit or implied) compared to prior imaging. The comparative analysis is focused on identifying changes or confirming stability, rather than simply presenting the current state.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11228,latent_11228,976,0.001952,0.0015937517,4.0530014,Comparisons with multiple prior radiographs.,"The high activation levels are associated with cases that involved comparison of current images with multiple specific prior radiographs, possibly to assess changes over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11229,latent_11229,882,0.001764,0.0015349971,3.4469492,Findings related to thoracic hardware or foreign objects compared over time.,"Examples with high activation often discuss thoracic hardware or foreign objects with changes in the interval findings over multiple studies, suggesting the model shows notable activation when such objects are mentioned and compared in subsequent imaging.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4492753623188406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+11230,latent_11230,1435,0.00287,0.0016613558,4.321721,Comparisons with prior imaging showing stability or minimal change.,"High activation examples consistently compare new imaging findings to prior images, explicitly stating stability or minimal changes. This pattern matches a radiological assessment style where comparisons are made to note changes over time, emphasizing stability.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+11231,latent_11231,1405,0.00281,0.0020597854,3.451848,Evaluation of post-surgical changes and cardiac stability over time.,"The provided examples with high activation levels often describe the detection and evaluation of post-surgical changes in the chest, such as median sternotomy, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) clips, and prosthetic valves. These reports frequently assess the stability or change of cardiomediastinal contours over time, often in relation to previous imaging.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5975609756097561,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11232,latent_11232,1259,0.002518,0.0016903116,4.1595936,Radiological findings compared to previous images.,"All these examples highlight findings in radiology reports that specifically mention a comparison with previous imaging results, often indicating a key feature of either change or no change in specific observations. High activation levels are observed in cases where findings are described relative to previous images, implying a pattern of comparison being a trigger for higher activation.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11233,latent_11233,780,0.00156,0.0017238607,2.6237247,Interval change evaluation through prior image comparison.,"The pattern is characterized by comparing current imaging findings to previous studies, specifically indicating changes in the interval. This may include detecting interval changes, stability, or new occurrences of findings such as pneumothorax, effusions, or device placements. High activation examples frequently use phrases like '? interval change' or 'compare previous', emphasizing notable changes from prior assessments.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.522669220945083,0.5282051282051282,0.512396694214876,0.6526315789473685,95.0,100.0
+11234,latent_11234,1688,0.003376,0.0021009264,5.6115384,"Reports describe findings in comparison to prior images, noting interval changes.","The most representative examples typically include descriptions of findings in current images while specifically indicating comparison with prior images. They often note any interval changes, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'persistent', or specify new findings. This suggests the pattern is focused on evaluating stability or change over time in the imaging findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5276262626262627,0.5276381909547738,0.5247524752475248,0.5353535353535354,99.0,100.0
+11235,latent_11235,12782,0.025564,0.009269748,1.4204477,Comparison with previous studies to assess stability or change.,"These examples focus on providing a description of radiological findings in the context of comparisons, with varying degrees of relevancy. Activation levels reflect direct comparison to prior studies with explicit descriptions of change or stability, demonstrating a common pattern in radiology reports for assessing progression or stability of various conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11236,latent_11236,604,0.001208,0.0010993682,5.096972,Observations of change or stability in findings over time compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight a tendency in radiology reports to describe changes in findings over time, using phrases that indicate stability or variability. These observations relate to specific anatomical structures or medical devices, with a focus on the comparison with previous imaging studies. This process is intrinsic to radiological diagnostics, as it aids in monitoring disease progression or stability.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4595825426944971,0.4606741573033708,0.4166666666666667,0.5769230769230769,78.0,100.0
+11237,latent_11237,5974,0.011948,0.0046452964,2.2788684,Significant intervention involving tubes or catheters in imaging study.,"Highly activated samples involve direct imaging findings of tube placements or lung intervention devices (e.g., chest tubes, catheters) either newly placed or adjusted from prior positions. This pattern reflects a radiological focus on procedural changes or updates to device placements in sequential studies, relevant to patient management.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6153846153846154,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11238,latent_11238,1688,0.003376,0.0017459741,2.706404,Evaluation of medical device positioning or post-surgical changes on chest radiographs.,"The pattern in these examples is the focus on evaluating the position or condition of medical devices (such as tubes, catheters, or stents) or post-surgical changes on the chest radiographs. Many highly activated cases mention evaluations or changes related to medical devices or post-surgical status along with the imaging findings. This pattern is prevalent in complex clinical settings where such evaluations are crucial.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4100294985250737,0.42,0.3918918918918919,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11239,latent_11239,518,0.001036,0.0011598973,4.046616,Detailed observational differences over time between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature language that describes comparative changes between images, focusing on the presence or absence of interval changes in conditions indicated, such as pneumonia or device placement, noted in the narrative by terms like 'as compared to,' 'newly appeared,' and 'unchanged.' This suggests the model strongly activates when detailed observational differences between images over time are emphasized.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6000426393774652,0.6011904761904762,0.5054945054945055,0.6764705882352942,68.0,100.0
+11240,latent_11240,1365,0.00273,0.0020781404,4.3316197,Descriptions of findings related to chest tube placement or removal.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention the presence or positioning of chest tubes and their effects, such as changes in pneumothorax or pleural fluid. These examples highlight post-operative or intervention-related changes, particularly pertaining to chest tubes, in their radiological findings, which aligns with the pattern we seek to understand.",1.0,1.0,1.0,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.9449876222149984,0.945,0.9587628865979382,0.93,100.0,100.0
+11241,latent_11241,10233,0.020466,0.0075418744,1.6878133,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently include phrases indicating a comparison to previous imaging, along with an emphasis on unchanged findings or lack of interval change over time. These examples assess current findings relative to prior states, highlighting stability or minimal changes as a point of focus, which is a frequent focus in follow-up imaging.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.569620253164557,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11242,latent_11242,876,0.001752,0.0012832588,3.9690819,Comparisons of pathological changes in current versus prior imaging.,"Radiology reports with higher activations consistently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifying changes in pathological findings like pleural effusions, consolidations, and atelectasis. Less active examples tend to lack significant changes or don't involve such specific comparisons.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6006894422720724,0.6080402010050251,0.5826771653543307,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+11243,latent_11243,4216,0.008432,0.0033162977,2.650081,Comparison of chest radiographic findings to prior images.,"The primary focus of these examples is describing chest image findings in relation to prior images, specifically emphasizing changes or stability. The reports use terms like 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'interval change' to discuss findings relative to previous studies, illustrating a pattern of evaluating continuity or variation over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11244,latent_11244,2347,0.004694,0.002339743,3.5357368,Frequent mention of radiological findings in relation to prior image comparisons.,"These examples heavily rely on descriptions of radiological findings in relation to comparison with prior images, either mentioning the comparison explicitly or implicitly through evaluating changes over time. Phrases like 'as compared to previous', 'compared with prior', or specific descriptions of changes between current and prior states are prevalent.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4689900541764373,0.5025125628140703,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,99.0
+11245,latent_11245,535,0.00107,0.0011546395,3.3919058,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples all involve radiology findings where explicit comparisons with previous studies are given, involving unchanged positions of tubes, atelectasis, and pleural effusions, alongside phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'similar to prior'. This indicates a pattern of identifying persistent conditions without significant changes over time.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4490625,0.4756097560975609,0.328125,0.328125,64.0,100.0
+11246,latent_11246,2033,0.004066,0.0019191669,2.7746658,Focus on cervical or thoracic spine findings or hardware.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings or procedures related to the cervical spine or upper thoracic region, such as cervical fusion hardware, cervical trachea impressions, or similar features, that are identified and compared across sequential radiological studies, often with a focus on devices or hardware placement.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,100.0,100.0
+11247,latent_11247,1443,0.002886,0.0015853745,3.4756126,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe stability or unchanged conditions in medical imaging reports when compared to past studies, using phrases like 'stable appearance', 'unchanged', or 'little interval change'. This pattern highlights the focus on follow-up evaluations and emphasizes the lack of new or worsening findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5847995090016367,0.5858585858585859,0.5779816513761468,0.6363636363636364,99.0,99.0
+11248,latent_11248,986,0.001972,0.001677408,4.0920615,Changes in pulmonary findings when comparing current and prior images.,"Significant activation levels correspond to changes in pulmonary findings over time, such as new opacities, changes in effusion, or signs of resolution or progression of pulmonary conditions when comparing current and prior images. These reports often note differences or stability in lung conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4426229508196721,0.27,100.0,100.0
+11249,latent_11249,1558,0.003116,0.0021493777,4.102636,"Clear, well-expanded lungs without evidence of consolidation or effusion.","The model shows higher activation levels for examples that feature descriptions of the lungs being either well-expanded, clear, or similar comparative descriptors, in the context of having to be described based on visual analysis of chest image results. These descriptions focus particularly on the absence of abnormalities, crucially when stated explicitly in radiological descriptions of the images provided.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5880959736381424,0.6,0.6515151515151515,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11250,latent_11250,2116,0.004232,0.0023555465,5.527799,Presence of pleural effusions and compressive atelectasis.,Examples with high activation levels consistently describe conditions involving the presence of pleural effusions and compressive atelectasis concurrently. These examples focus on findings where effusions and atelectasis are either unchanged from prior exams or newly noted. The pattern shows clinical emphasis on these specific conditions rather than other general findings.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6838025295797634,0.69,0.7051282051282052,0.5851063829787234,94.0,106.0
+11251,latent_11251,11127,0.022254,0.009149029,2.6741238,Detailed longitudinal comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation typically involve a detailed comparison between current and previous radiological images, explicitly using phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'since prior', or providing substantial analysis of changes or lack of changes over time in medical findings gathered from imagery. These descriptions emphasize longitudinal assessment of a patient's condition through sequential imaging studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6286631874749097,0.63,0.6160714285714286,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11252,latent_11252,4407,0.008814,0.0038165005,2.081262,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern involves describing findings in relation to prior images, with emphasis on stability or lack of change over time, rather than acute changes. This is especially noted in references to stable or unchanged findings such as cardiac silhouette enlargement, lung opacities, and previously seen medical devices or anatomical structures.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.575,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11253,latent_11253,1099,0.002198,0.0017289268,3.7336266,References to changes or stability in medical devices or post-procedure states.,"High activation levels are associated with reports that involve comparisons of current imaging findings with those of prior examinations and mention specific changes, particularly relating to medical devices or post-operative states. This involves phrases like ""remains in place,"" ""malpositioned,"" or ""removal."", indicating a focus on monitoring changes over time related to interventions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11254,latent_11254,669,0.001338,0.001254966,3.74304,Descriptions highlight comparison to prior imaging with noted changes.,"Examples showing high activation levels involve explicit comparison between current and prior imaging, noting changes or lack thereof. These often discuss the presence or absence of pathological changes across time. This pattern is common in radiological evaluation for continuity of care and treatment validation.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5663985343371597,0.5668449197860963,0.5319148936170213,0.5747126436781609,87.0,100.0
+11255,latent_11255,1044,0.002088,0.0016607238,2.6739466,"Reference to findings compared to prior imaging, indicating stability or change.","The pattern shows higher activation when there is an emphasis on comparing current imaging findings with prior ones, or when findings are indicated as unchanged or stable compared to previous records. This could imply a focus on monitoring changes or stability over time, reflecting the regular use of retrospective comparison in diagnostic radiology.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11256,latent_11256,588,0.001176,0.0013795705,4.7033296,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,The discriminating pattern in these examples is the presence of a prior imaging study that is explicitly utilized to assess stability or change in observed findings. This involves either a direct reference to comparison or detailed follow-up on changes or stability noted relative to previous imaging.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5052825433750121,0.5056818181818182,0.4476190476190476,0.618421052631579,76.0,100.0
+11257,latent_11257,691,0.001382,0.0014095795,3.6348817,Reports emphasizing interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings of changes or differences observed in imaging studies as compared to previous examinations. They explicitly mention terms like 'interval change', 'as compared to', and 'impression' which are indicative of assessments of progression or regression of disease by comparing current and prior images.",0.4452830188679245,0.4489795918367347,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5461165048543689,0.5508021390374331,0.5185185185185185,0.4827586206896552,87.0,100.0
+11258,latent_11258,9434,0.018868,0.007097524,1.7859683,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples consistently make a comparison between current and prior radiological images, specifically documenting any changes in the status of abnormalities or the introduction of new findings. This comparison typically focuses on the presence or changes in opacities, effusions, or other pathologies relative to earlier images.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5925209542230818,0.605,0.5777777777777777,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11259,latent_11259,2068,0.004136,0.00213899,3.7168465,"Incremental changes or stability in findings, often referencing prior images or comparisons, involving tubes or persistent conditions.","The pattern lies in descriptions involving incremental changes or comparisons to prior imaging, particularly focusing on stability or slight changes in previous findings such as pleural effusions, lung opacities, or anatomical tubing positions. References to previous images or reports are commonly stated, alongside changes like tube removals or persistent but stable conditions, which seem to yield moderate activations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4790443512517474,0.4824120603015075,0.4827586206896552,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+11260,latent_11260,1307,0.002614,0.001754106,2.759896,Comparisons and observations of changes in lung opacity or pathology.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently referenced comparisons to prior imaging, particularly noting changes in pulmonary opacities or pathologies such as atelectasis or pleural effusions that were contextually significant, either stable or indicating clinical concern.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.5288461538461539,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11261,latent_11261,805,0.00161,0.0018781972,3.9718235,Normal findings with focus on comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve specific findings such as normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes and absence of acute pathologies while focusing on providing comparisons with previous images. This involves describe stable findings in follow-up examinations. Additionally, there is frequent mention of the lungs being clear and the heart size as normal, seen along with these comparisons.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.4347826086956521,0.3,100.0,100.0
+11262,latent_11262,1173,0.002346,0.0016189739,3.4808064,Evaluation of interval changes in cardiopulmonary findings.,"Reports that use comparative terms and descriptors to evaluate changes, particularly related to fluid retention or modification in pulmonary or pleural space findings, seem to have higher activations. Moderate presence of these comparative patterns seems linked with a focus specifically on changes or stability in the cardiopulmonary context.",0.510212950890917,0.5306122448979592,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11263,latent_11263,528,0.001056,0.0011998087,4.3619046,Description of findings emphasizing comparison between current and prior images without relying on prior reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently contain instructions to provide descriptions through comparison of current and prior images, while lacking a prior report or featuring ambiguous fields. These examples prioritize creating a comprehensive interpretation based on observable changes without definitive prior documented comparisons.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3753769803397595,0.3765432098765432,0.2903225806451613,0.4354838709677419,62.0,100.0
+11264,latent_11264,9862,0.019724,0.0071569253,1.4587452,"Explicit detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, with sequential updates.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on providing a clear and explicit comparison between current imaging findings and those from prior studies, emphasizing the stability or change in findings along with detailed descriptions of changes in positioning, devices, or pathologies over multiple sequential or dated comparisons.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11265,latent_11265,632,0.001264,0.0011609724,4.679368,"Comparison of current images with prior images, evaluating change or stability.","Examples with higher activations show comparisons between multiple images, including frontal and lateral views, and often reference prior images to evaluate changes. Presence of terms like 'comparison', 'prior', 'previous', and descriptions involving change or stability in condition tend to increase activation.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4732196111177383,0.4782608695652174,0.4491525423728814,0.6309523809523809,84.0,100.0
+11266,latent_11266,3489,0.006978,0.0040186853,3.1661062,Detailed findings based on changes compared to prior images.,"The high-activation examples provide detailed descriptions of radiological findings, focusing on changes or stability in imaging features over time, such as consolidation, effusion, or medical device placement. These findings typically require knowledge of previous states to appreciate their clinical relevance, showing explicit comparisons with prior reports or scans to assess these changes.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6393650793650794,0.645,0.616,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11267,latent_11267,561,0.001122,0.0013261788,3.2964032,Explicit comparison to prior imaging study findings.,"High activation levels consistently represent examples where a comparison to prior images is explicitly documented, often including detailed observations about changes or stability in conditions based on those comparisons. This context provides necessary depth and detail which appears vital to the pattern of interest.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.448132183908046,0.4491017964071856,0.3831775700934579,0.6119402985074627,67.0,100.0
+11268,latent_11268,14348,0.028696,0.010555965,2.0009825,Focus on interval changes in pleural effusions and pulmonary opacities.,"These examples show consistent patterns of comparison between current and prior images, especially highlighting changes in opacities and effusions as they relate to chronic and acute conditions. Patterns often mentioned include pleural effusions, atelectasis or pneumonia, and pulmonary congestion. Phrases like ""improvement"", ""interval increase"", and references to stability or change often focus on lung or cardio-mediastinal changes, indicating observed changes in chronic vs acute findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5822050290135397,0.595,0.6461538461538462,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11269,latent_11269,13818,0.027636,0.009956114,1.3830004,Reports emphasize comparison with prior imaging for change or stability in findings.,"The pattern involves descriptions of comparisons with previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability in findings. Often these include terms that imply change such as ""improved,"" ""increased,"" ""stable,"" or ""new,"" suggesting a direct evaluation against prior examination results to assess the progression or resolution of pathology.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.550157444894287,0.575,0.5510204081632653,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11270,latent_11270,775,0.00155,0.0014746012,4.329529,Reports with mildly enlarged heart size and otherwise normal findings.,"The high activation examples reference reports that primarily describe mildly enlarged heart sizes or mildly abnormal cardiac features, particularly in context with otherwise normal findings or minimal changes, such as normal mediastinal and hilar contours, normal pulmonary vasculature, and no large consolidative processes.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,100.0,100.0
+11271,latent_11271,966,0.001932,0.0015629337,5.443161,Low lung volumes causing crowding of bronchovascular markings and cardiac silhouette.,The pattern describes low lung volumes leading to secondary effects such as crowding or accentuation of bronchovascular markings and cardiac silhouette. This is a radiographic finding that impacts the visual assessment due to reduced inspiratory effort and is frequently noted in reports focusing on low lung volumes.,0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.8432075231922735,0.8442211055276382,0.9047619047619048,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+11272,latent_11272,9601,0.019202,0.0071259425,2.1934686,Comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with notable activation levels describe the comparison of current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability of medical devices, fluid levels, or anatomical structures. These patterns indicate a radiology report's focus on monitoring and documenting any interval changes regarding key clinical observations or interventions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11273,latent_11273,854,0.001708,0.0015452084,3.3917837,Explicit description of stability or change via comparison to prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels prominently involve comparing current imaging with prior imaging studies to discuss the stability or change in findings, using explicit references to 'comparison' and changes over time. These examples emphasize describing findings in comparison to previous images, much like radiology reports that track disease progression or resolution over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4603492409458397,0.4623115577889447,0.4597701149425287,0.4,100.0,99.0
+11274,latent_11274,1350,0.0027,0.0015620714,3.99351,No prior image available for comparison or explicit lack of comparison.,These examples consistently have notably low or zero activation levels when they contain no direct relational comparison to a known prior state of the patient's physical anatomy or condition ('COMPARISON: None' or similar notes indicating lack of prior imagery for reference). The absence of comparative analysis seems to be a key factor for low activation.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.53,0.53,0.53,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11275,latent_11275,662,0.001324,0.0014416311,5.0133796,Emphasis on tracking changes or stability through comparison with prior imaging.,The comparative aspect is frequently emphasized in radiological reports to track progression or stability of certain findings over time. This interpretative approach is vital to understanding changes in patient conditions where previous imaging serves as a baseline.,0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4755492558469171,0.4810810810810811,0.453781512605042,0.6352941176470588,85.0,100.0
+11276,latent_11276,1386,0.002772,0.0022950678,3.7841504,Reports emphasizing findings of subsegmental atelectasis.,"Many highly activated examples include the identification and description of subsegmental atelectasis across various lung regions. This pattern involves noting the presence of atelectasis as part of radiological findings, often while comparing with previous studies or clarifying there is no focal consolidation or pleural effusion. Subsegmental atelectasis appears to be the recurring radiological entity in these descriptions.",0.939783219590526,0.94,1.0,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7013333333333334,0.72,0.94,0.47,100.0,100.0
+11277,latent_11277,678,0.001356,0.0013588761,3.574917,Low lung volumes noted as a significant finding.,"Highly activated samples consistently report low lung volumes as a notable finding, regardless of the presence or absence of other pathologies such as effusion, consolidation, or cardiomegaly. This suggests that low lung volumes are a decisive factor in the observed activation pattern.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.7857142857142857,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7609151399143195,0.7650273224043715,0.7631578947368421,0.6987951807228916,83.0,100.0
+11278,latent_11278,1359,0.002718,0.002100327,2.7781742,Descriptions detailing interval changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation involve descriptions comparing findings between current images and prior studies, detailing the interval change in specific chest elements such as lung volumes, pneumothorax, or opacities. This comparison pattern is common in reports trying to assess changes over time.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3043478260869565,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3914373088685015,0.3969849246231156,0.3703703703703703,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+11279,latent_11279,320,0.00064,0.0010007117,4.667454,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting unchanged or stable findings.","Higher activation examples compare the current findings against a prior imaging study, noting changes or stability. They frequently identify new findings or subtle differences since the prior imaging which suggests the patient's status is stable or a detected anomaly is benign, using descriptors like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'similar'.",0.4941176470588235,0.5116279069767442,0.4117647058823529,0.3888888888888889,18.0,25.0,0.5290423861852434,0.5714285714285714,0.3275862068965517,0.475,40.0,100.0
+11280,latent_11280,652,0.001304,0.0012942831,3.3444583,Direct comparison to prior image findings stated.,"Examples with high activation consistently show a specific linguistic pattern: 'FINDINGS: As compared to the prior...' These phrases indicate a direct comparison to prior imaging in the 'FINDINGS' section, highlighting changes or stability in previously noted conditions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.53655468630158,0.5439560439560439,0.4959349593495935,0.7439024390243902,82.0,100.0
+11281,latent_11281,843,0.001686,0.0014340805,3.852527,Comparison of current imaging to prior imaging to assess changes.,"The high-activation examples consistently involve descriptive findings corresponding with a comparison to prior imaging, specifically featuring instructions or context for comparing a current image with a prior one to assess changes over time, often in scenarios of patient progress or regression.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5187795842766001,0.5276381909547738,0.5196850393700787,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+11282,latent_11282,1014,0.002028,0.0017364984,4.2774568,Detailed comparison with previous imaging to assess change.,"Reports with higher activation levels consistently involve cases where the description provides a comparison to previous imaging studies to evaluate changes in findings, such as resolution or progression of pathologies, albeit not available in most zero-activation examples or lacking detailed comparisons.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.424985624640616,0.425,0.4257425742574257,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11283,latent_11283,2519,0.005038,0.0021612255,1.7589295,Reports highlight heart enlargement or mediastinal changes with lung findings.,"Examples with high activation frequently include examination of chest images with explicit findings related to heart enlargement, mediastinal changes, or associated features such as vascular congestion or atelectasis. These samples tend to correlate the enlarged cardiac silhouette or mediastinal features with lung changes or device positioning.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5588235294117647,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11284,latent_11284,1011,0.002022,0.0018134632,2.8390281,Clear lungs with unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"Examples with higher activation have a consistent finding of clear lungs, absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion or pneumothorax, alongside normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, often described in a generic way as unremarkable.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6643271284711627,0.67,0.7297297297297297,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11285,latent_11285,9912,0.019824,0.0071872855,2.02759,"Detailed analysis with comparison to prior images, noting stability or changes.",Examples with higher activation typically mention the analysis of multiple image views for comparison and include detailed descriptions of findings as they relate to previous records. There is a focus on stability and small changes identified between the current and prior images.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5523645114040594,0.5678391959798995,0.5474452554744526,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+11286,latent_11286,1418,0.002836,0.0018681184,3.8045523,Focus on respiratory support device or tube position assessment.,"These examples highlight imaging studies where descriptions focus on interval changes or stability in respiratory support devices or tubes (e.g., ET tubes, central lines), using phrases like 'ET tube position', 'PICC position', and detailing specific centimeter measurements related to tube positions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5851573900354388,0.5979899497487438,0.65625,0.42,100.0,99.0
+11287,latent_11287,1236,0.002472,0.0018071275,3.854482,Direct comparison or stability check with prior imaging reports in descriptions.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons with prior imaging studies or serial assessments that explicitly identify interval changes or stability over time. This pattern is a linguistic feature in radiology reports where findings are contextualized with previous studies, often indicating a shift, persistence, or resolution of observed conditions or pathologies.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11288,latent_11288,1754,0.003508,0.0022650184,2.4952009,Instruction to provide findings compared to prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve instructions to compare current imaging to pre-existing imaging records. This includes detailed narratives that provide a description or suggest further evaluation in light of changes or stabilities observed relative to previous images, often indicating findings such as removal, placement, or stability of observed elements.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4774193548387097,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11289,latent_11289,451,0.000902,0.0012826807,3.478775,Normal lung and cardiac silhouette findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings where the lungs are clear without consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, and the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes are normal. These descriptions focus on unremarkable findings in chest images, indicating normal or stable conditions.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7437554827092664,0.7533333333333333,0.5915492957746479,0.84,50.0,100.0
+11290,latent_11290,1152,0.002304,0.00175507,3.3751767,Detailed comparative analysis despite lack of prior report access.,"The highly activated examples often refer to specific guidance provided by the assistant on how to articulate findings, usually with a lack of prior comparison or an emphasis on clear, structured review in relation to prior studies, indicating the presence of new, stable, or unchanged findings. This suggests a pattern of evaluating radiological changes meticulously through detailed comparison instructions, mainly without the influence of previous studies.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5272727272727272,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11291,latent_11291,917,0.001834,0.0013088507,4.2879004,"Comparison of tube, catheter, or device positioning in imaging reports.","Examples with mentions of phrases related to positioning or stability of medical devices (such as tubes, catheters, PICC lines) exhibit higher activation. The consistent descriptions of device positions and comparisons to prior radiographs are indicative of a pattern that focuses on the status and positioning of in-dwelling medical devices.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,100.0,100.0
+11292,latent_11292,822,0.001644,0.0016427152,5.923256,Notable change or stability in findings compared to previous images.,"Examples showing high activation levels consistently include a noticeable change or stability in imaging findings when compared to prior studies. Specific features like new or resolved opacities, unchanged pathological findings, or stable devices are common among these examples, reflecting the significance of change or stability assessment in radiology reports.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11293,latent_11293,2565,0.00513,0.002413104,2.3752527,Comparison with prior imaging or reports.,"Examples with higher activation consistently include comparisons between the current imaging and prior imaging or reports, indicating a temporal context or reference to past data. Phrases such as 'compared to', 'as seen on prior', or reference explicit prior imaging underscore this emphasis.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4635285973868651,0.535,0.5202312138728323,0.9,100.0,100.0
+11294,latent_11294,1528,0.003056,0.0018396091,4.1129036,Comparison with prior imaging indicating stability or unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activation levels either consistently reference specific prior examinations for comparison, or describe findings that have remained stable over time. The common theme is both the reference to past imaging for comparison and indication of stability or unchanged findings across time.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3918760882559318,0.415,0.360655737704918,0.22,100.0,100.0
+11295,latent_11295,2296,0.004592,0.0022450963,2.6271749,Evaluation of current images in relation to the same-type prior studies or detailed descriptors regardless of prior availability.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero all involve explicit instructions or contexts indicating a need for detailed comparison to prior imaging, or scenarios with consistency in image types regardless of prior availability, and usual indicators such as symptoms or conditions being evaluated, like chest pain or pneumonia assessment.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4494735945968954,0.515,0.5088757396449705,0.86,100.0,100.0
+11296,latent_11296,4688,0.009376,0.0043376456,3.6941798,Detailed comparison of cardiopulmonary changes to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels compare current imaging explicitly with prior studies and often note significant changes or stability, especially focusing on cardiopulmonary conditions like pulmonary effusions, edema, and pneumonia. These reports include specific findings regarding changes in lung opacities, effusions, or interstitial markings, suggesting either progression or improvement.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.559322033898305,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11297,latent_11297,2622,0.005244,0.0030112423,3.8967779,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes in medical devices or stability of pathology.,"The activation is high when the report describes changes or comparisons with prior studies, particularly when there's focus on specific changes in medical devices, such as tubes or catheter positions, or notable stability of findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6072368421052632,0.6080402010050251,0.5963302752293578,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+11298,latent_11298,12365,0.02473,0.00891425,1.4355882,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in findings.,These examples display discussions about comparing current images with prior imaging studies. This pattern includes interpretative statements about whether changes are observed or whether findings have remained stable over time.,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11299,latent_11299,701,0.001402,0.001209949,3.8136325,Objective description of stable or clear findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations commonly involve providing a description of radiologic findings that specify changes in parts of the lung or the presence of stable conditions, often without assuming nuances about pathologies. This includes objective descriptions about cardiac silhouette, lack of abnormalities in lung areas, and absence of conditions like effusion or consolidation compared to prior studies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4927133162754478,0.4947368421052631,0.4659090909090909,0.4555555555555555,90.0,100.0
+11300,latent_11300,1092,0.002184,0.0013824452,2.7198374,Description of unchanged or stable diagnostic imaging findings compared to prior study.,"The pattern across these image interpretation examples involves stable findings, unchanged condition or lack of interval change from previous imaging studies. The consistently high activations suggest a focus on stability in diagnostic findings, preventing potential over-interpretation when a condition remains stable post-treatment or understanding how imaging reveals non-evolution of observed conditions.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4393939393939394,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11301,latent_11301,955,0.00191,0.0014106776,2.7244954,Comparative description of radiological findings with prior imagings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current images with prior imaging, where specific findings related to differences in respiratory or cardiac structures between the images are noted. This includes assessments for changes in lung volumes, presence or stability of nodules, effusions, and pacemaker position, where the interpreter is prompted to identify changes or stability over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11302,latent_11302,10361,0.020722,0.0075813774,1.5332918,Descriptions of interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples that exhibit high activation describe specific radiology findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, explicitly noting changes (or absence of changes) in previously identified abnormalities such as nodules, densities, or effusions. The language emphasizes stability or changes in certain findings over time, which is a key aspect in interpreting results in sequential imaging studies.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5741376286981137,0.575,0.5688073394495413,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11303,latent_11303,1375,0.00275,0.0021169921,3.9183378,Changes or stability in pneumothorax size compared to prior imaging.,Examples with high activation levels include descriptions of pneumothorax findings that are specifically related to comparisons with prior imaging studies or situations where interval changes in its size or characteristics are mentioned. This indicates that the focus of the pattern is on understanding alterations in pneumothorax diameter or its stability through comparative imaging.,0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6483516483516483,0.68,0.95,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11304,latent_11304,4430,0.00886,0.0040800762,3.896591,Changes in position of support devices identified on comparison.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently mention changes or comparisons of support devices (e.g., tubes, catheters), identifying these changes as potentially significant compared to those with no activation or insignificant findings.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,100.0,100.0
+11305,latent_11305,1618,0.003236,0.0021110845,3.0328605,Description of findings in comparison to prior emphasizing stability or lack of significant changes.,"In these examples, the common pattern involves descriptions of radiological findings that emphasize lack of significant changes or stability when compared to previous images, often with particular attention to heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, and presence or absence of effusions. This stable feature context suggests a focus on ongoing assessment against a prior baseline rather than acute changes or new findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5555555555555556,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11306,latent_11306,2189,0.004378,0.0020573752,2.5543962,Comparative analysis involving both current and prior frontal and lateral chest images.,High activation levels are associated with examples where both current and prior lateral and frontal chest images are provided. The inclusion of multiple views suggests a more comprehensive analysis usually reflecting more complex or comprehensive evaluations compared to those with only frontal views or without additional image comparison.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4869565217391304,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11307,latent_11307,10152,0.020304,0.007530818,1.5857394,Comparative analysis of radiologic findings to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a description of findings from current radiologic images that explicitly compare and note stability or changes to prior images, known as a comparative analysis. The reports often include supporting devices or anatomical changes reviewed for interval change, while lower activation levels involve findings without or irrelevant previous comparisons.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5294117647058824,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11308,latent_11308,8660,0.01732,0.0063323206,1.706794,Comparison of medical device positioning over serial imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically compare the present findings to prior images and focus on the evaluation of medical devices or tubes, specifically assessing their positioning and any changes over time. This pattern is reflected in reports containing specific mentions of unchanged or adjusted positions of medical devices.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5184038527691779,0.545,0.5849056603773585,0.31,100.0,100.0
+11309,latent_11309,6748,0.013496,0.005117386,2.4020953,Comparison of current and prior images noting interval changes and device positions.,"The pattern appears in reports where there is a structured evaluation comparing current imaging to prior studies, often noting changes in pathologies or anatomical structures, including positions of medical devices or tubes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11310,latent_11310,1452,0.002904,0.0018891193,3.4290042,Evaluation of medical device placement or stability over time.,"In each representation, activations coincide when reports emphasize comparison outcomes that detail the continuity or alteration of specific medical devices (tubes, lines) positions or pulmonary conditions between images. Examples often specify elements like 'nasogastric tube', 'PICC line', or 'pleural effusion', highlighting corresponding positions/stability over intervals.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7046381817726715,0.705,0.7204301075268817,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11311,latent_11311,1457,0.002914,0.0018807087,4.2858124,"Explicit direct comparison to prior radiological findings, highlighting stability.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature direct comparisons to prior imaging, often describing unchanged or stable findings versus previous results while using terms like 'again', 'previous', 'similar', and 'as compared to'. This indicates that the pattern involves direct comparison to previous radiological findings, highlighting stability or consistency over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+11312,latent_11312,603,0.001206,0.001301311,3.4706542,Comparison to previous studies showing stability or minimal change.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize comparison to prior imaging studies with a focus on unchanged or minimally changed conditions. Descriptions often note minimal or no change from prior imaging, indicating stability rather than progressed or newly emerged findings. These elements are typical in follow-up assessments in radiological evaluations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3932208118287069,0.425287356321839,0.2833333333333333,0.2297297297297297,74.0,100.0
+11313,latent_11313,2118,0.004236,0.0028066984,3.7322235,Focus on positioning and changes of ETT and NG tubes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on the positioning and changes in medical support and monitoring devices, primarily the endotracheal tube (ETT) and nasogastric (NG) tubes. The descriptions frequently mention measurements from anatomical landmarks (such as the carina) and any adjustments or confirmation of position, illustrating the attention to precise positioning of these devices in clinical reports.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.9,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6491408120838925,0.6633165829145728,0.7666666666666667,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+11314,latent_11314,1772,0.003544,0.001968983,3.462886,Evaluation and positioning of tubes near the carina in chest imaging.,"The pattern concerns the evaluation of tube placements, particularly focusing on the positioning of endotracheal or similar tubes in relation to the carina, with recommendations for repositioning when necessary. High activations often include details about tube position or alteration suggestions, which are critical in managing intubated patients in radiology studies.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.628780434545256,0.66,0.8809523809523809,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11315,latent_11315,971,0.001942,0.0015438722,3.3711412,Enlarged cardiac silhouette with unchanged or increased size.,"These examples describe findings of enlarged cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly on chest radiographs, often noting whether the heart size remains unchanged or increased compared to prior studies. The pattern often comments on the lack of other acute findings like pneumonia or effusion, emphasizing the significance of heart-related findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.421152732986025,0.475,0.4358974358974359,0.17,100.0,100.0
+11316,latent_11316,746,0.001492,0.0013284648,3.9131699,Radiology comparison focusing on interval changes from prior reports or images.,"The examples with high activation levels reuse information from a prior report to establish comparison with current findings on radiological images. This reuse of previous information is reflective of structured reporting, which involves systematically comparing current radiological images to past ones to identify changes over time.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5129040136774403,0.5181347150259067,0.5,0.6451612903225806,93.0,100.0
+11317,latent_11317,1368,0.002736,0.0020140107,4.5601797,Comparisons with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The examples primarily describe findings with respect to comparisons to prior imaging studies and assess stability or changes in clinical findings like opacities, catheter placements, pneumothorax sizes, etc. The multiple comparisons with previous studies seem to be a recurring theme in high-activation samples.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11318,latent_11318,1347,0.002694,0.0018134088,4.546973,Reports contain comparative findings with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation universally involve descriptions that specifically mention findings in relation to a prior study, including explicit phrases like ""compared to the prior study"". These reports leverage the comparative analysis to determine the stability or change of abnormalities over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11319,latent_11319,1330,0.00266,0.0017364302,2.2893615,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies with interval changes noted.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in comparison to previous imaging studies, explicitly noting changes over time or radiographic stability, which is indicative of monitoring progression or treatment effects. This involves phrases like 'As compared to previous radiograph', 'compared to prior', or 'since prior', clearly focusing on interval changes as key points.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4404761904761904,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11320,latent_11320,2017,0.004034,0.0023118504,3.74259,Description of comparisons or interval changes from prior studies.,"The common pattern among these samples is the reference to prior studies for comparison, where interval changes in radiological findings are highlighted. This typically involves assessing differences in views or observable features from prior imaging, often indicating stability or change over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11321,latent_11321,883,0.001766,0.0017203173,3.3019178,Presence or suspicion of rib fracture or osseous abnormality.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention possible rib fractures or other acute osseous abnormalities, indicating these findings trigger significant activation in the model. The descriptions consistently raise the possibility of fractures or observe abnormalities in bone structures.",0.7028862478777589,0.72,0.9230769230769232,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6043956043956044,0.64,0.85,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11322,latent_11322,1146,0.002292,0.001398472,2.9881701,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples often emphasize the comparison of current findings against previous studies and lack dramatic changes or findings such as new pathologies, dramatic interval changes, or acute findings. This pattern describes stability in findings, often using terms like 'similar', 'unchanged', 'stable', and indicating no significant changes in structures or conditions, reflecting careful monitoring and documentation without new interventions.",0.4444444444444444,0.66,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5555555555555556,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11323,latent_11323,3694,0.007388,0.002753578,1.9696658,Lack of prior report comparison or minimal prior reference.,"The significant activation levels occur in examples where comparisons to prior reports are absent (e.g., PRIORS: N/A) or where the comparisons are minimally noted, which indicates the model is highly activated by direct descriptions without pre-existing comparative analysis complicating the understanding. Additionally, phrases emphasize the current observations directly without explicit previous report references.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4446529080675422,0.445,0.4421052631578947,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11324,latent_11324,12872,0.025744,0.00933116,1.3331563,Reported changes or stability relative to prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples chosen focus on the presence or absence of interval changes when comparing the current imaging with prior studies. This includes comments on whether findings such as pleural effusion, consolidation, or cardiac silhouette have changed since the prior examination, which is a common pattern in radiology reports for assessing progression or stability of findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5955284552845528,0.6080402010050251,0.582089552238806,0.78,100.0,99.0
+11325,latent_11325,959,0.001918,0.0016535555,2.859451,Comparison of severe or acute radiological findings with previous imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels typically have cross-references between an indication of acute or recent medical issue (such as pneumonia, lung opacity, chest pain) and explicit recommendations or findings that link these concerns directly to previous imaging studies, indicating what changes or differences are present.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4509803921568627,0.23,100.0,100.0
+11326,latent_11326,5035,0.01007,0.003892374,2.5710218,Comparison with prior imaging identifying changes related to pneumonia or opacities.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently feature recent changes or comparisons related to possible pneumonia, atelectasis, or opacities. There is a focus on interval evaluation against prior imaging to identify stability, resolution, or progression of findings like opacities, with specific phrasing around comparisons.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5021822439855227,0.5276381909547738,0.5555555555555556,0.3,100.0,99.0
+11327,latent_11327,7350,0.0147,0.0055186437,1.565665,Evaluation of changes in medical devices or pathologies compared to prior images.,"Samples with higher activation emphasize description changes between current and prior images regarding devices or pathologies, such as tube placements or changes in pulmonary conditions. These descriptions often use phrases like ‘compared to the previous radiograph’, indicating noted alterations since last observed.",0.656140350877193,0.673469387755102,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,24.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11328,latent_11328,899,0.001798,0.0015073714,4.0457997,Directives for radiological comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature radiology reports that explicitly compare the current findings to those found in prior images, often with a directive or question about changes or stability in the findings, such as changes in disease state or treatment effect. This linguistic pattern uses terms like 'comparison', 'compared to prior', and focuses on changes or stability.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11329,latent_11329,4017,0.008034,0.0036607808,2.4154649,Detailed findings with explicit comparison to prior images.,"The pattern shown in highly activated cases is the explicit description of findings in the context of comparison with a prior imaging study, often noting changes, stability, or progression in the findings over time. The results discuss interval changes, improvements, or worsening conditions, which is distinct from merely describing the findings in the current images.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6368917937545389,0.65,0.6086956521739131,0.84,100.0,100.0
+11330,latent_11330,871,0.001742,0.001557062,4.290562,Requests for comparative findings without providing current study details.,"These examples consistently request a comparative description (""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"") but often do not provide any concrete findings from the current study. This is a pattern where the task is to generate a comparative report based on available images without actual described findings from the current scans.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11331,latent_11331,1154,0.002308,0.001587522,2.3806515,Describes changes or interventions in successive imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels include descriptions of direct changes or interventions (like tube placement/removal, change in pathology) observed in sequential or comparative imaging studies. These descriptions include explicit commentary on the differences between images, often highlighting new findings or affirming stability.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5752212389380531,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11332,latent_11332,2073,0.004146,0.0031235951,4.2809143,Emphasis on the placement or adjustment of lines/tubes in radiology reports.,"Most instances with high activation levels describe the positioning and removal/replacement of lines or tubes, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, and central venous catheters. This focus on lines indicates a pattern where the radiology report emphasizes or predominantly discusses the positioning of medical apparatus.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4900173611111111,0.53,0.5681818181818182,0.25,100.0,100.0
+11333,latent_11333,377,0.000754,0.0010969221,4.3225927,Chest radiographs comparison with prior imaging highlighting changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings on chest radiographs with direct comparisons to prior imaging studies. This comparison often highlights changes or stability in lung and cardiac conditions, contributing to understanding of disease progression or treatment response. Descriptions often include lung conditions, heart size, and specific changes noted against previous exams.",0.5415282392026578,0.5434782608695652,0.5,0.6666666666666666,21.0,25.0,0.4539161123931043,0.4563758389261745,0.3222222222222222,0.5918367346938775,49.0,100.0
+11334,latent_11334,12988,0.025976,0.009486054,1.5993837,Interval radiographic comparison indicating change or stability.,"The pattern revolves around comparing current radiographic findings against prior imagines to identify interval changes or stability of pre-existing findings or conditions. The reports highlight whether there have been changes, improvements, or stabilities in the findings, consistent with assessing treatment efficacy or disease progression over time.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11335,latent_11335,744,0.001488,0.0013838154,3.3047655,Comparative analysis with prior images explicitly noted.,"The high activation levels are noted particularly when reports discuss findings specifically in relation to prior imaging exactly or suggest that the comparison is made using prior images despite insufficient information. The linguistic cue highlighting this pattern is the usage of comparison or review of previous images, especially the phrase 'comparison to the prior image,' even when those images might not cover all identical aspects of the present ones.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4446616037525128,0.4769230769230769,0.4761904761904761,0.7368421052631579,95.0,100.0
+11336,latent_11336,2419,0.004838,0.0027597055,3.0245485,Detection or comparison of interval changes in imagery.,"The examples with high activations all include explicit steps of comparing current images with prior images. Specifically, they provide updates or status on certain medical interventions or conditions (e.g., catheters, consolidation, effusions) since the last examination. This pattern focuses heavily on changes from prior imaging, precisely describing interval changes in a clinical context.",0.3555555555555555,0.4081632653061224,0.4358974358974359,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11337,latent_11337,2797,0.005594,0.0029415993,2.516778,Focus on stability from prior imaging comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on comparisons to prior imaging studies, specifically noting stable or unchanged findings, unchanged support and monitoring devices positions, or stability of pre-existing conditions. Stability or lack of significant change from previous imaging is highlighted.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.6081081081081081,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11338,latent_11338,4324,0.008648,0.0039231805,3.2043831,"Comparison across multiple imaging views, particularly with prior imaging.","Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions of imaging findings across multiple views (frontal and lateral) and comparisons to prior studies, despite many having no direct comparisons mentioned. These detailed observations using multiple views show comprehensive assessment that identifies subtle changes or consistent abnormalities, aligning with the expected pattern in radiological interpretations.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3490513614352623,0.385,0.4217687074829932,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11339,latent_11339,973,0.001946,0.0014905116,3.6258144,"Reports often reference conditions like heart failure or past surgeries, comparing stability or changes.","Examples with higher activation levels mention the patient's medical history or specific conditions that require monitoring, such as heart failure or surgical history, along with radiological findings that connect or evaluate these conditions consistently with previous comparisons. This structure forms a pattern of checking for changes or stability in specific, often serious, medical conditions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11340,latent_11340,524,0.001048,0.0011072768,3.968708,Focus on interval changes or stability in paired current and prior imaging studies.,"This set of examples focuses primarily on the comparison of current chest imaging against prior studies, particularly highlighting stability or interval changes in findings such as cardiomegaly and pulmonary opacities. The high activation is associated with explicit instructions to evaluate findings against previous reports or images, which is crucial in longitudinal monitoring of patient's conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5212121212121212,0.5212121212121212,0.43,0.6615384615384615,65.0,100.0
+11341,latent_11341,1066,0.002132,0.001496117,3.8908029,Mentions of medical devices or lines and their positions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include references to medical devices such as pacemakers or central venous lines in the body, often specifying their position or status. This likely indicates the model is tuned to react to the presence and assessment of such equipment in medical imaging reports.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6949923748093703,0.695,0.693069306930693,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11342,latent_11342,901,0.001802,0.0014539143,3.8685088,Comparison between current and prior image views in findings.,The samples with high activations consistently include instructions or completion prompts that emphasize the need for a report or description in light of a prior or current frontal image comparison. This indicates the model is recognizing and responding to different imaging viewpoints and comparisons as a primary difference in activations.,0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4763814616755793,0.53,0.5182926829268293,0.85,100.0,100.0
+11343,latent_11343,914,0.001828,0.0015147937,3.907753,Description of interval change in radiological findings.,"Scenarios with a reference to interval changes in radiological findings, such as whether certain features have increased or decreased in size, typically suggest active monitoring or significant modifications of clinical interest. This underscores the emphasis on progress or regression, which can be tied to pathological changes or medical interventions, especially when compared to previous results where changes could be more than minimal.",0.772093023255814,0.7755102040816326,0.7096774193548387,0.9166666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.64024220313648,0.645,0.6178861788617886,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11344,latent_11344,4780,0.00956,0.003968841,2.282469,Descriptions of changes or comparisons in the placement or status of medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe specific comparisons or changes related to medical devices (such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or nasogastric tubes) across current and prior images. The focus on procedural changes or placements seems to activate the model more.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.6172839506172839,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11345,latent_11345,7776,0.015552,0.0059520206,2.8673656,Comprehensive description involving frontal and lateral images.,The examples with higher activation levels emphasize descriptions derived from both frontal and lateral images or specific technical observations which might suggest comprehensive diagnostic reviews in the context of the model's training task.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4601769911504424,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11346,latent_11346,1895,0.00379,0.0021757707,2.6178873,Findings unchanged or persisted in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include radiology reports that explicitly state findings in relation to prior imaging using phrases like 'unchanged', 'again noted', 'persistent', or 'no new', particularly emphasizing stability in conditions across comparisons. This consistency in observation, indicating no change, is a key linguistic pattern in these reports.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11347,latent_11347,3818,0.007636,0.0032105418,2.6955142,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,The examples that exhibit a high activation level contain a comparison to prior imaging while noting new or unchanged findings. This pattern is indicative of radiological assessments that consider possible changes over time to evaluate the progression or stability of conditions.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11348,latent_11348,665,0.00133,0.0012756641,4.5379763,Detailed comparison to prior study with explicit integration of past findings.,"Examples with higher activation frequently describe both a description of current and past findings on the same structures, often integrating previous observations with current ones, providing a detailed comparison of observation changes over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4740560140035008,0.4748603351955307,0.4193548387096774,0.4936708860759494,79.0,100.0
+11349,latent_11349,556,0.001112,0.0012324363,3.8691275,Presence of an enlarged cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation often mention the presence of cardiac enlargement, moderately or severely enlarged cardiac silhouettes, or cardiomegaly. This suggests the pattern is focused on cases where there is an increase in heart size or change in the cardiac silhouette as a noted feature in the radiological study being described.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5781803542673107,0.6331360946745562,0.5897435897435898,0.3333333333333333,69.0,100.0
+11350,latent_11350,1697,0.003394,0.0019082382,3.3809578,Focus on interval changes comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels indicate a significant focus on comparisons made with prior radiographic studies, assessing change over time. This often involves noting stability, improvement, or changes in abnormalities, device placement, or effusions, suggesting the model is activated by historical comparative analysis between current and previous images in radiological assessments.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11351,latent_11351,5397,0.010794,0.004405907,2.6921277,New or changed medical devices and significant findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples show large activations when there are new or changed medical devices or significant findings compared to prior studies, emphasizing marked changes in medical intervention or pathologic findings, such as newly placed lines, tubes, or changing pathology like pneumothorax or increased effusions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11352,latent_11352,5071,0.010142,0.004186346,2.7331734,Detailed comparison of radiology findings across time with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations describe the interpretation of current radiology findings in direct comparison to prior images, providing detailed changes or stability across multiple reports. This involves interpretation over time and across different studies, emphasizing follow-up on identified abnormalities like lesions or infiltrates.",0.7083333333333333,0.7142857142857143,0.65625,0.875,24.0,25.0,0.596516764983784,0.605,0.5813953488372093,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11353,latent_11353,961,0.001922,0.001982211,3.9364612,Presence of subcutaneous emphysema in chest reports.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe the presence of subcutaneous emphysema or substantial air collections in the soft tissues, often related to surgical interventions or traumatic events. This specific finding is unusual and indicative of specific medical conditions or post-operative states, making it a distinct pattern.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6744791666666667,0.7,0.9545454545454546,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11354,latent_11354,661,0.001322,0.0012801731,4.3885045,Focus on medical device positioning and placement in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels often discuss the position and placement of medical devices such as tubes or catheters. These examples highlight various placements and the presence of other features like pleural effusions or hilar structures, with a consistent focus on ensuring proper positioning without complications. These aspects are critical in clinical radiographic interpretation for patient management, which likely triggers noticeable activations in the model.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6515508021390375,0.6519337016574586,0.5957446808510638,0.691358024691358,81.0,100.0
+11355,latent_11355,3344,0.006688,0.0026484684,3.727203,Less significant changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples with lower activation levels (
+ than 5.0) primarily involve instances of comparing imaging findings to previous studies or imaging the cardiac silhouette. A notable absence of clear findings, differences, or comparison information from prior imaging is less evident. However, general observations typically lack significant changes or acute processes and sometimes mention stable cardiac or mediastinal parameters.
+",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5572411003236246,0.5577889447236181,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,99.0
+11356,latent_11356,902,0.001804,0.0013970655,3.6910243,Focus on unchanged findings or stability compared to prior images.,"The distinctive pattern involves using radiological findings to compare current images with prior ones and then describing any stability or changes. Reports include mentions of unchanged or stable features, indicating no significant interval change or chronic conditions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4486215538847117,0.45,0.4444444444444444,0.4,100.0,100.0
+11357,latent_11357,1021,0.002042,0.0017636401,3.125091,Focus on stability or changes based on comparison with prior imaging.,"Most examples with high activation provide explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging, specifically indicating reevaluation based on changes or stability of radiological findings over time. This reflects a common clinical practice in radiology to assess for changes in patient condition or response to treatment.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.2857142857142857,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3997599039615846,0.4,0.4038461538461538,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11358,latent_11358,2139,0.004278,0.0023074178,4.1731644,Detailed comparison and analysis of images with prior studies focusing on interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation refer to comparisons between current and prior image findings, emphasizing interval changes and detailed analysis of progression or stability of conditions. Each example discusses comparisons explicitly, showing that the model is activated by the mention and use of comparative evaluation between imaging time points to assess changes in patient condition.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11359,latent_11359,704,0.001408,0.0014685954,3.865322,Mentions of 'prominence' in pulmonary or interstitial structures.,"The examples with higher activation feature descriptors like 'mild promin[ence]' or 'promin[ence]' related to structures such as the pulmonary vasculature, interstitial markings, or hila. This linguistic pattern points to descriptors of mild abnormality or change, often found in reports attempting to specify subtle but noteworthy findings in radiological images.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9583333333333334,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7949254068716094,0.8010471204188482,0.9090909090909092,0.6521739130434783,92.0,99.0
+11360,latent_11360,798,0.001596,0.0015889051,3.4421916,"Absence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or focal consolidation in comparison.","The radiology descriptions in the examples with higher activation levels commonly note a lack of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or focal consolidation, often framing this within the context of clear lungs or normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours. This suggests a pattern focused on the absence of these specific pathologies or conditions, indicating normal or stable findings in the chest imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5350467289719626,0.5376884422110553,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,99.0
+11361,latent_11361,1727,0.003454,0.0020810326,3.296875,Detailed interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation predominantly feature thorough descriptions of comparison with prior imaging studies, indicating interval changes or stability, along with reporting specific findings such as device placement or pneumothorax. These examples describe changes over time or confirm stability, which is crucial in radiological evaluations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3995812205151492,0.405,0.382716049382716,0.31,100.0,100.0
+11362,latent_11362,4063,0.008126,0.0033196993,2.0358472,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on stability or interval change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the comparison of current radiology findings to prior images, particularly focusing on intervals or stability of observations over time. They often report either stability or minor changes relative to previous studies, employing comparison phrases explicitly or noting no change.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5546218487394958,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11363,latent_11363,3246,0.006492,0.0027019035,2.3976922,Comparative evaluation of medical device placement or position.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings that involve position or presence of medical support devices, like endotracheal tubes or pacemaker leads, in relation to prior imaging. There's a focus on noting the placement and any alterations in positioning of these devices with respect to previous examinations.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5352112676056338,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11364,latent_11364,3998,0.007996,0.0032985024,2.8496392,Descriptions of relevant pulmonary conditions or lung opacities.,"The examples that show moderate or high activation consistently involve findings of pulmonary conditions, opacities, or changes directly in relation to specified indications or processes in the lungs. Often these involve conditions such as sarcoidosis or pneumonia, and descriptions of lung findings suggestive of significant pathology align with the instances of high model activation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.5508474576271186,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11365,latent_11365,1171,0.002342,0.001727436,4.3685484,Comparison of current and prior images with detailed change analysis.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature detailed descriptions of changes or stability in findings when comparing current and prior images using phrases like 'newly appeared', 'stable appearance', 'no relevant change', or 'compared to the previous radiograph', often in conjunction with specific details about techniques used and indications for the comparison.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4100294985250737,0.42,0.3918918918918919,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11366,latent_11366,2122,0.004244,0.0022956808,3.0395584,Low lung volumes accentuate bronchovascular markings.,The pattern appears to focus on descriptions involving low lung volumes which result in the accentuation of bronchovascular markings. This is a common radiological finding that can lead clinicians to note increased prominence of vascular markings.,0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3899308386940896,0.495,0.4705882352941176,0.08,100.0,100.0
+11367,latent_11367,1453,0.002906,0.001635525,3.0132065,Significant interval changes in cardiopulmonary conditions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with stronger activations tend to emphasize degradation of opacity, increased vascular congestion, and newly developed abnormalities like effusions or atelectasis since prior imaging studies. This indicates the pattern identifies significant interval changes suggesting worsening or new cardiopulmonary conditions.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4154048716260697,0.445,0.4,0.22,100.0,100.0
+11368,latent_11368,2349,0.004698,0.00243726,3.6932676,Emphasis on stable or improved findings in comparison with previous imaging.,"Many examples with high activation levels involve interpretation of the current image in the context of the prior image, particularly when there is a note on stability or improvement of certain findings (like consolidation, opacities, effusion). This reflects a pattern in radiological examinations where changes between current and prior states are of key interest.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4857142857142857,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11369,latent_11369,845,0.00169,0.0013343428,3.272627,Description of findings compared to prior images focusing on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations involve descriptions of current radiological findings compared to prior images, focusing particularly on whether changes or stability are observed in the findings. This pattern involves the language of comparison and interval change, which is consistent throughout highly activated examples.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4346466541588493,0.435,0.431578947368421,0.41,100.0,100.0
+11370,latent_11370,979,0.001958,0.0014056471,4.409119,Prompt mentions comparison but states 'no prior' or 'comparison none'.,"The highest activation levels are associated with prompts that ask for descriptions of findings in a radiology study and mention comparisons, but state 'no prior' or 'comparison none'.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11371,latent_11371,1052,0.002104,0.0017402214,3.9768703,"Description of stable findings with no acute abnormalities, compared to prior images.","The samples with high activation show a clear pattern of evaluating a patient's condition by comparing current imaging findings to prior images, while also negating the presence of acute abnormalities such as pneumonia, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion. These patterns emphasize stable or unchanged conditions without acute issues.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.4722222222222222,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11372,latent_11372,838,0.001676,0.0016358838,2.5737271,Comparison between a current and prior image with detailed observational changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve processing both a current and a prior image and performing comparative analysis between the two, especially by the assistant to note differences or similarities in findings.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.238095238095238,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3404045518748501,0.3686868686868687,0.2711864406779661,0.1632653061224489,98.0,100.0
+11373,latent_11373,2114,0.004228,0.0025893338,3.8521695,"Presence and assessment of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) compared to prior imaging.","Examples demonstrating high activation focus on imaging findings involving medical devices, such as tubes, catheters, and pacemakers, in comparison to past images. Reports often describe the positioning or changes in these devices and their implications for patient care.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6784242789669379,0.68,0.7093023255813954,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11374,latent_11374,1073,0.002146,0.0018794313,4.334009,Comparison with prior imaging and interval change analysis.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve interpretation of radiological findings with a comparison to previous imaging, focusing on changes or stability over time. This is evident from phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from prior', or 'interval change', which signifies a key aspect of the report.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+11375,latent_11375,11675,0.02335,0.008657803,2.4785707,Detailed descriptions of changes or stability compared to prior images.,"All examples with higher activations involve comparisons between the current and prior images, focusing on identifying changes or stability in the findings. This includes new procedures, changes in opacities, tube placements, and lung volume variations. Activation is higher when such comparisons explicitly include descriptions of findings in relation to previous imaging. Activation tends to be lower when there's no prior image available or the findings are nonspecific without comparison details.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5084745762711864,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11376,latent_11376,8506,0.017012,0.0062068854,1.6481999,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The samples show a pattern in which reports compare current imaging findings to prior exams, emphasizing stable or unchanged findings. This indicates an emphasis on continuity and lack of specific progression or improvement in conditions featured in the comparison reports.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11377,latent_11377,915,0.00183,0.0014440949,5.448965,Lack of comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern is reflected in the low activation scores of all samples involving comparisons to prior images, indicating that such comparative analysis is not the focus of the pattern we seek to understand. Instead, samples that lack attempts at prior image comparisons and provide straightforward descriptions of current images tend to have higher activations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6386993175431553,0.64,0.6590909090909091,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11378,latent_11378,633,0.001266,0.0012687518,3.648489,Interpretation of interval change with focus on cardiac/vascular findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention comparisons to prior radiographic findings, specifically noting stability, improvement, or changes, and frequently involve cardiac or vascular findings like cardiomegaly and pulmonary vascular congestion.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6598130841121495,0.6703296703296703,0.6617647058823529,0.5487804878048781,82.0,100.0
+11379,latent_11379,1146,0.002292,0.0019335677,3.1527023,References to moderate cardiomegaly and comparisons to prior images.,The highly activated examples consistently feature descriptions of cardiomyopathy or cardiac silhouette enlargement (cardiomegaly) alongside additional findings or stability in conditions when compared to prior images. Less activated examples either do not mention cardiomegaly or focus on findings unrelated to cardiac size.,0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.721964782205746,0.73,0.8484848484848485,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11380,latent_11380,12400,0.0248,0.0090821,1.3943827,Instructions to compare findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with activation clearly emphasize the practice of providing comparison to prior imaging implicitly or explicitly, as seen in phrases that request a description or include instructions to compare findings with the prior image. This prompts detailed evaluation of changes over time or stability in findings.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11381,latent_11381,3672,0.007344,0.0033429102,3.5655367,Detection of change or notable difference in radiographic findings from prior images.,"Examples with significant activation involve either a change or notable difference from prior image evaluations, indicating an emphasis on detection of new or resolved radiographic findings rather than stable conditions that remain unchanged.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11382,latent_11382,1153,0.002306,0.0017498645,3.6002045,Stable or changed acute pathology via comparison to prior radiographs.,"The highly activated examples describe processes such as pneumothorax or atelectasis, but always in comparison to prior radiographs. The key pattern is the use of comparison to evaluate stability or changes, particularly in acute conditions requiring close monitoring.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4046278924327705,0.405,0.4,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11383,latent_11383,596,0.001192,0.001179767,3.300377,Asymmetrical bilateral pulmonary findings.,"The examples highlight cases where bilateral but asymmetrical findings are observed in radiology images. This is a distinct pattern where findings are present on both sides but are more prominent or severe on one side, such as pulmonary edema, opacities, or effusions, which are commonly described using terms like 'asymmetric', 'greater than', or noting difference in severity between sides.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.592066585196684,0.6145251396648045,0.5862068965517241,0.430379746835443,79.0,100.0
+11384,latent_11384,611,0.001222,0.0013262834,4.3264503,Focus on tube or line placement positioning.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference the placement or position of medical tubes (e.g., endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes) and vascular lines (e.g., PICC lines) in the description of radiology studies. These details are a key part of the pattern, differentiating these from lower activated examples which don't include such references.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8571428571428571,0.8571428571428571,0.75,1.0,75.0,100.0
+11385,latent_11385,969,0.001938,0.0014713993,3.0336745,"Comparison of current and prior images evaluating medical devices, congestion, or effusions.","The highly activated examples involve assessments of radiological findings, often documented with comparisons to previous images, in scenarios where there's a clinical indication to evaluate for changes in implanted medical devices or vascular congestion, infection, or effusions. This pattern reflects the common practice of monitoring intervals and device placements through radiological comparisons in patients with complex conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5342897842897842,0.5376884422110553,0.5299145299145299,0.6262626262626263,99.0,100.0
+11386,latent_11386,655,0.00131,0.0013223008,4.002721,Repeated mentions of unchanged medical devices across imaging comparisons.,"The pattern involves the presence of unchanged medical devices, such as pacers, catheters, or tubes, which are repeatedly mentioned in the reports as 'again seen' or 'unchanged'. This linguistic pattern is highly representative in radiology reports when describing the positioning or absence of changes in medical hardware across imaging comparisons.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6390411595280127,0.6594594594594595,0.6964285714285714,0.4588235294117647,85.0,100.0
+11387,latent_11387,918,0.001836,0.0016641112,2.9622674,Complex interpretation involving both current frontal and lateral images with prior imaging comparison.,"The consistent attributes in highly activated examples pertain to comprehensive views involving both current and prior frontal images, and examination details that require interpretation across various imaging positions (frontal, lateral) or detailed comparisons for interval changes. This indicates the pattern responds to requests for in-depth comparative analysis based on varied imaging angles and previous records.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4903846153846153,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11388,latent_11388,1432,0.002864,0.0018574226,2.7397726,Use of comparison to evaluate stability or change over time.,Highly activated examples often discuss changes or stability seen when comparing two images. Language around unchanged positions of devices or consistent findings over time is a notable pattern when evaluating radiology images for comparative purposes.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5649405772495755,0.59,0.5608108108108109,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11389,latent_11389,703,0.001406,0.0012978264,3.767735,Atelectasis presence or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe 'atelectasis', specifically noting changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies. This pattern suggests the current study's focus on this type of lung collapse or incomplete expansion.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6778700795491237,0.6827956989247311,0.6753246753246753,0.6046511627906976,86.0,100.0
+11390,latent_11390,5364,0.010728,0.004015937,2.3161428,Detailed comparison of medical device positioning between current and prior images.,"Examples with activations of 2.0 or higher consistently contain a detailed comparison of medical devices, such as PICC lines or tubes, relative to prior imaging. Descriptions often note whether the devices are stable, have changed position, or have been newly noted. This pattern is significant as it marks attention to device positioning over other findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5416666666666666,0.26,100.0,100.0
+11391,latent_11391,876,0.001752,0.0015183559,2.613639,Emphasis on providing a comparison with previous images or reports.,"The examples that have high activation explicitly request to provide or compare findings to previous images or reports, even when prior studies are unavailable, highlighting the importance of comparison regardless of the availability of prior data.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.5,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11392,latent_11392,3753,0.007506,0.004841238,3.9562151,"Comparative analysis of current and previous images, noting changes.","The examples with a pattern of higher activation levels consistently include comparisons between current and prior images or reference to changes from prior images, particularly focusing on evaluative or interval changes in a medical context.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4646464646464646,0.47,0.475,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11393,latent_11393,4963,0.009926,0.0061596315,2.9156811,Focus on vascular tortuosity or calcification in radiology findings.,"The examples with high activation levels include a description of vascular features like tortuosity, calcification, or unfolding, particularly of the aorta, mediastinal, or hilar regions. This pattern highlights the attention to vascular abnormalities rather than purely pulmonary or cardiac findings and is common in radiology when assessing potential chronic vascular changes.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4857410004675082,0.56,0.75,0.18,100.0,100.0
+11394,latent_11394,10116,0.020232,0.007307491,1.4123439,Presence of a current lateral image for comparison or detailed findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve evaluation of images with a current lateral view or mention multiple details requiring comparison or interpretation beyond simple changes in medical apparatus placement. Examples with additional current images or complexity tend to show more activation, suggesting a pattern related to detailed comparisons and complex findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4500365801357249,0.455,0.4621848739495798,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11395,latent_11395,3470,0.00694,0.003553473,5.630193,Emphasis on detailed comparison to prior imaging followed by changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe the current radiology findings in detail in comparison to prior imaging studies, often noting changes or stability of findings over time. This suggests reports emphasizing continuity or stability over time, particularly with associated technical details or changes (e.g., placements or findings like 'in comparison to prior').",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4899378251490928,0.4924623115577889,0.4719101123595505,0.4375,96.0,103.0
+11396,latent_11396,862,0.001724,0.0016295977,2.499494,Comparison with prior imaging showing significant change.,"High activation samples typically include a comparison to a prior image with an explicit change in findings, whether improvement or worsening. The absence of comparison or unchanged findings correlate with low activations, emphasizing observed progression or regression as key.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5185185185185185,0.28,100.0,100.0
+11397,latent_11397,1389,0.002778,0.0014414332,3.267465,Stable or resolving findings compared to prior imaging.,"Activations are higher when there is a stable presentation or resolution of abnormalities compared to previous imaging, indicating the absence of new acute changes or worsening of existing conditions. Comparisons often highlight stability or minimal changes in findings which is characteristic of follow-up reports.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4545454545454545,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11398,latent_11398,931,0.001862,0.0017663777,3.7790868,Comparison to prior images assessing change or stability.,"The highly activated examples all involve findings from images that are directly compared to prior images, and often lead to conclusions or impressions regarding changes or stability in the patient's condition, addressing relevant clinical contexts. This pattern involves interpreting image findings in the context of a change (or lack thereof) compared to previous images, which are vital for tracking patient progress or diagnosing conditions.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4108455646917185,0.425,0.4427480916030534,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11399,latent_11399,1316,0.002632,0.0020534624,3.3824332,Changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions that compare changes over time or report stability in specific findings (such as catheter placements, opacities, or structural aspects like cardiomegaly) between current and previous images. These comparisons focus particularly on changes in appearance or positioning of known abnormalities.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.5692307692307692,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11400,latent_11400,775,0.00155,0.0012131848,4.3848114,Comparison with prior imaging studies for changes.,"In cases with higher activation levels, the model seems focused on detecting changes or stability in radiological findings by directly comparing current images to prior studies, emphasizing the importance of longitudinal monitoring in imaging reports.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4263959390862944,0.4263959390862944,0.42,0.4329896907216495,97.0,100.0
+11401,latent_11401,1064,0.002128,0.0016732948,3.80942,Radiological findings discussed in terms of interval changes or consistency.,"The examples with high activation focus on descriptions of radiological findings in the context of intervals or changes, indicating an emphasis on comparison over time. This includes expressions such as 'unchanged', 'increased', 'decreased', 'compare', 'interval', and references to prior studies.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11402,latent_11402,828,0.001656,0.0012936412,3.9623466,Mentions of hiatal hernia on imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention hiatal hernia, a condition where a part of the stomach pushes up through the diaphragm. This finding recurs across highly activated examples, including clarifications regarding its visibility in radiographic images, which seems to trigger the model's pattern recognition of this specific anatomical condition.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5428290121430916,0.6130653266331658,1.0,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+11403,latent_11403,563,0.001126,0.0010455783,4.088744,Stable imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"High activation levels are observed when the report compares findings to previous images and describes either a lack of significant change or stability over time, often emphasizing the unchanged state of current conditions, such as chronic conditions or post-procedural states. These stable or unchanged findings often reflect the focus of such reports on monitoring progressive conditions or post-treatment outcomes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5798824995549225,0.5964912280701754,0.5151515151515151,0.4788732394366197,71.0,100.0
+11404,latent_11404,613,0.001226,0.001220434,3.7485678,Detailed comparison of current vs. prior X-ray findings.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize descriptions that detail changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging, focusing specifically on intervals of spatial and structural alterations within the chest area like opacities, infiltrates, or changes in effusions and tubes. The specific mention of certain anatomical areas (e.g., mediastinum, costophrenic angle) and clinical status also tends to correlate with high activation levels.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.561164194116168,0.5642458100558659,0.5043478260869565,0.7341772151898734,79.0,100.0
+11405,latent_11405,5586,0.011172,0.0044076946,2.0286417,Focus on interval change in specific chest findings over time.,"The pattern of activation suggests a focus on changes or stability over time, specifically evaluating for changes in specific chest features, such as pneumothorax, effusions, or opacities. Reports with activation mention specific changes or reassessment of known findings, while low activation reports have unchanged or normal status reports.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5121192973587767,0.5125628140703518,0.5094339622641509,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+11406,latent_11406,1097,0.002194,0.0013763941,3.798369,Cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette noted in imaging findings.,"This dataset reflects activation patterns focusing on descriptions of cardiomegaly or heart enlargement throughout various types of imaging descriptors, often defined explicitly under findings or impressions. Conditions related to cardiomegaly are commonly addressed in medical imaging, especially in radiological assessments.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3764123687748505,0.455,0.3448275862068966,0.1,100.0,100.0
+11407,latent_11407,1633,0.003266,0.0020261558,3.1156182,Provide radiological findings compared to a prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently request a new description of radiological findings in direct comparison to a prior image, emphasizing a pattern where the assistant synthesizes both current and previous reports to generate insights. This involves re-drafting comparison-oriented observations, implying a focus on capturing changes or stability between the two.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5078125,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11408,latent_11408,648,0.001296,0.0015453963,3.338171,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability.,"These examples consistently include findings that relate current imaging to prior studies with a focus on evaluating changes or stability in conditions. The activation level indicates this is a desired focus, as these examples frequently discuss changes or stability in conditions across imaging done at different times.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.445,0.4486486486486487,0.4260869565217391,0.5764705882352941,85.0,100.0
+11409,latent_11409,10967,0.021934,0.007893222,1.3889052,Findings involving thoracostomy tubes and pleural effusion changes.,The high activation examples consistently discuss findings in relation to thoracostomy tubes and changes in pleural effusions or atelectasis. These elements are often noted in postoperative thoracic radiology reports or in chronic management plans of pleural diseases.,0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4679481678537716,0.535,0.6206896551724138,0.18,100.0,100.0
+11410,latent_11410,1590,0.00318,0.0016779052,3.4689412,Changes or stability in findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve direct references to comparison between the current imaging and prior images, specifically highlighting either an interval change or stability of specific radiological findings. These comparisons often imply a significant or new finding that merits attention in the clinical context described.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11411,latent_11411,781,0.001562,0.0013097147,4.20245,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and focus on stability or change in specific features.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently require evaluating and explicitly describing changes in specific features such as medical devices, pathological conditions, or anatomical structures in relation to prior studies. For instance, descriptions of tubes, lines, and parenchymal opacities exhibit change or stable status, pointing towards focusing on detailed comparisons, whereas other examples do not explicitly focus on such comparisons, resulting in lower activations.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6382802811078958,0.65,0.6102941176470589,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11412,latent_11412,1380,0.00276,0.0019662953,3.1221826,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral views or explicit comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve both frontal and lateral views or explicit comparisons to previous imaging, recognizing changes or stability over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.353689106339283,0.465,0.4808743169398907,0.88,100.0,100.0
+11413,latent_11413,909,0.001818,0.001604066,2.5673525,"Reports highlight stability or mild changes over time, often concluding no acute findings.","The radiology reports with high activation levels involve a direct comparative statement between current and prior images, indicating stability or slight changes in conditions like effusions or nodular opacities, usually with the conclusion of no acute abnormalities. These comparisons are highlighted with explicit phrases that reference the unchanged nature of certain findings, often emphasized through consistency in descriptions with prior reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.562416277012511,0.5628140703517588,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,99.0
+11414,latent_11414,2047,0.004094,0.0028341752,4.5348477,Medical device positioning in chest imaging.,"These examples highlight reports with findings related to the positioning or presence of medical devices within the chest region, such as catheters, tubes, or pacers. The activation level suggests a pattern involving changes or stability in these device positions as compared to previous studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4923076923076923,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11415,latent_11415,12424,0.024848,0.008913628,1.8376131,Reports of stable or evolving interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently report findings related to interval changes in cardiopulmonary status, often mentioning terms like 'unchanged', 'has improved', or 'increased opacity', indicating a focus on the evolution or stability of findings rather than those with no comparison.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11416,latent_11416,694,0.001388,0.0012675081,4.2094636,Comparison of new findings to prior imaging with focus on non-cardiopulmonary pathology.,"Highly activated examples describe the assessment or exclusion of non-cardiopulmonary pathologies, such as pneumonia or atelectasis, with specific comparison to prior examinations and changes in findings. These include terms outlining changes, repeats, or updates in findings from previous reports, highlighting significant or recurrent incidents.",0.3443419135502671,0.46,0.25,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3810827250608272,0.5243243243243243,0.3636363636363636,0.0470588235294117,85.0,100.0
+11417,latent_11417,3394,0.006788,0.0029642251,2.8376687,Findings unchanged compared to prior studies.,"The pattern appears in interpretations in which identified pathologies or changes are explicitly articulated as 'unchanged' compared to prior images, reflecting consistency or stability in detection or description across studies. This is evidenced by terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or asserting prior presence.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5151515151515151,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11418,latent_11418,1327,0.002654,0.0015444136,4.2212567,Comparison between current and prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"Examples with higher activations are descriptions comparing current and past imaging findings using pre-provided image references, emphasizing continuity or change over time. The comparison often features direct medical context or patient indication highlighting imaging stability or findings consistency.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11419,latent_11419,8114,0.016228,0.0059982943,1.4103961,Inclusion of detailed technical specifications for imaging.,"The pattern among these examples is the inclusion of technical details in the radiology reports. Although scattered across various indicators (like image views taken, patient position, film quality, etc.), these outputs consistently mention specifics about technique or setup that would likely impact interpretation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4684684684684684,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11420,latent_11420,1752,0.003504,0.002310737,3.2421963,"Radiological findings compared to prior images, often unchanged.","Examples with higher activation levels feature descriptions evaluating imaging findings in comparison to previous radiographs. This comparison can involve physical changes in medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or consistent/unremarkable imaging findings, highlighting 'comparison' or 'unchanged' as part of the description.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11421,latent_11421,3055,0.00611,0.0035052113,4.0222273,"Explicit comparison to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve explicit comparison to prior imaging. These descriptions often utilize terms like 'in comparison to the prior', 'unchanged', and specify changes or stability in the context of previous findings.",0.3662911973299958,0.3673469387755102,0.3703703703703703,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5520833333333334,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11422,latent_11422,1895,0.00379,0.0016771993,2.2803965,Emphasis on interval assessment or stability in imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference a clear change or interval assessment on follow-up imaging, often indicating 'unchanged', 'stable', or reports of interval changes compared to previous studies. Lower activated examples do not emphasize these comparative assessments with such clarity or specificity.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5213675213675214,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11423,latent_11423,1003,0.002006,0.0015758212,4.010728,Absence of comparison with prior imaging.,"The high activations correspond to examples with a clear statement on the absence of comparison to prior studies. The presence or absence of comparison, as indicated by phrases like 'No comparison' or 'Comparison: None', significantly affects the activation level, as it highlights a particular radiological evaluative context free from previous examination biases.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,100.0
+11424,latent_11424,14424,0.028848,0.010622995,1.679834,Requests for comparative analysis based on existing templates.,"The pattern identified in these examples is not evident in terms of imaging findings or the presence of equipment but rather in the command or request for a description, particularly highlighting the use of pre-existing templates for comparative analysis. The examples with non-zero activation seem to invoke a need for comparative description elements, which might not be as direct or common in the other examples.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4422994422994423,0.48,0.4868421052631579,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11425,latent_11425,1367,0.002734,0.0018277658,3.5497582,Comparison of current and prior images noting stability or no significant interval change.,"The activation pattern suggests a focus on the description of findings using both frontal and lateral chest images in comparison to prior images. The language often highlights changes in opacities, densities, or medical device positions in reference to previous reports. Notably, the explanations frequently describe findings without significant interval change or with mention of stability.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.5466666666666666,0.41,100.0,100.0
+11426,latent_11426,656,0.001312,0.0008562959,4.3487735,Significant new imaging findings without comparison context.,"High activation examples show either a lack of comparison available for imaging findings or indicate significant change from previous studies, suggesting focus on interpreting new findings without past imaging context. This distinguishes noteworthy new observations from stable or unchanged conditions noted in other examples.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4049840085287846,0.5052631578947369,0.4285714285714285,0.0989010989010989,91.0,99.0
+11427,latent_11427,3109,0.006218,0.003426071,4.291633,Evaluating interval changes post-removal of chest tubes or medical devices.,"These examples describe interval changes following the removal of chest tubes or other medical devices, focusing on the evaluation of pneumothorax or other associated complications post-removal. This pattern is typical in radiology reports examining the effects of device removal between imaging sessions.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9583333333333334,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8637705290244456,0.865,0.9506172839506172,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11428,latent_11428,602,0.001204,0.001145516,3.3583717,Description of normal chest radiograph without acute abnormalities.,"These examples describe an essentially normal chest radiograph without acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities. The core characteristic is the description of normal heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, pulmonary vasculature, clear lungs, with an absence of acute osseous abnormalities, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6583557951482479,0.6804733727810651,0.631578947368421,0.5217391304347826,69.0,100.0
+11429,latent_11429,6898,0.013796,0.0052288827,1.7835937,Emphasis on stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently emphasize the comparison and unchanged nature of significant features, particularly related to medical devices, fluid levels, or structural details. They typically highlight that there are no significant interval changes noted, while also detailing the presence or absence of new issues or persistence of previous findings. These reports often describe stable conditions or unchanged medical intervention statuses over time.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5441176470588235,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11430,latent_11430,1799,0.003598,0.0019798707,4.054811,"Pulmonary edema or vascular congestion findings, often compared with prior imaging, increase activation.","The pattern with higher activations is focused on the detection or progression of pulmonary edema or related findings such as pulmonary vascular congestion, often in comparison with prior imaging. This is evident in reports highlighting pulmonary edema, interstitial edema, or congestion, especially with comparisons to previous imagery, which consistently show higher activations. Reports without these findings exhibit low activation.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6932746700188561,0.695,0.7294117647058823,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11431,latent_11431,562,0.001124,0.0011846252,4.07455,Unchanged cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples predominantly highlight unchanged findings when current imaging is compared to prior radiographs. They often mention stability in various features such as cardiomediastinal silhouette, effusions, and pleural opacities, using terms like 'unchanged', 'no interval change', and 'stable'.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5356588307514534,0.5389221556886228,0.4418604651162791,0.5671641791044776,67.0,100.0
+11432,latent_11432,4358,0.008716,0.0037695132,2.274716,Identification of subtle changes in radiographic findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels, such as 44, 47, and 49, consistently involve identifying mild or moderate changes in existing pulmonary or cardiac findings, particularly variations in the cardiac silhouette, pleural conditions, or unusual chest structural annotation. These examples pay particular attention to non-severe but notable shifts, suggesting the pattern focus is on detecting nuanced or marginal anatomical changes over time.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5578947368421052,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11433,latent_11433,1396,0.002792,0.0023034387,3.5965142,Significant changes or lack thereof in findings from prior imaging studies.,"These examples focus on cases where there is a comparison to prior imaging specifically noting changes or stability in particular pathologies or interventions, such as medical devices or conditions. The pattern recognizes when previous image comparisons show stability or change in critical features like lung opacities, tube placements, or mediastinal contours.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11434,latent_11434,4901,0.009802,0.0039781174,2.5748649,Frequent description of interval change or stability in medical devices or opacities compared to prior images.,"Among highly activated examples, there is consistent mention of changes or stability in findings between current and prior images, often using expressions concerning position or resolution of medical devices or lung conditions over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6005965772643393,0.605,0.5867768595041323,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11435,latent_11435,13208,0.026416,0.009532352,1.483903,Evaluation or mention of interval change in radiology findings.,"The examples with positive activation levels frequently mention changes or lack of changes in medical devices, opacities, effusions, or other conditions when compared to prior imaging, highlighting a focus on evaluating interval change as a typical pattern in these reports.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6301081806896203,0.635,0.6097560975609756,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11436,latent_11436,1278,0.002556,0.0015147056,5.3332253,Comparative analysis using multiple current and prior views.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions that include multiple current views (frontal and lateral) and comparisons with prior views, suggesting a focus on detailed, comparative analysis across different views for interpretation of changes and stability.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11437,latent_11437,952,0.001904,0.00155172,4.355301,Low lung volumes observed in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence of low lung volumes in chest imaging findings. This pattern is significant and repeated in the findings across different reports, indicating it as a key factor for the activation.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5667945405673426,0.585,0.6440677966101694,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11438,latent_11438,713,0.001426,0.0012757349,2.7048144,Comparison-focused description of findings requested from current and prior images.,"Many examples feature DESCRIPTIONS OF FINDINGS in intricate detail with references to diagnosis, progression, stability, or comparison with a prior state, indicated by phrasing like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. The rest often lack this specific structure, focusing instead on general conditions or unrelated aspects such as 'evidence of pulmonary edema'.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4917862341443127,0.5159574468085106,0.4893617021276595,0.7840909090909091,88.0,100.0
+11439,latent_11439,706,0.001412,0.0017107237,4.136108,Recognition of stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The activation is generally high in cases where the text includes comparison to previous imaging and there is a mention of stability, improvement, or unchanged findings over time. This pattern indicates a focus on identifying stable or unchanging medical states in successive imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5215189873417722,0.5343915343915344,0.5072463768115942,0.3932584269662921,89.0,100.0
+11440,latent_11440,656,0.001312,0.0011230444,3.3718178,Reports assessing radiological findings in relation to shortness of breath.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of radiological findings tied closely to the evaluation of shortness of breath and interpretation in connection to prior imaging. These reports emphasize changes or stability in cardiopulmonary features, which are indicative of respiratory conditions like pneumonia or pulmonary edema that correlate with breathing difficulties.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6378292248570625,0.657608695652174,0.6842105263157895,0.4642857142857143,84.0,100.0
+11441,latent_11441,1400,0.0028,0.0019829026,4.4707313,Positional changes or stability of lines/tubes in comparison to previous imaging.,"These highly activated examples focus on changes or stability in clinical lines, tubes, and hardware placement compared to previous evaluations, which is a frequent element of radiology reports particularly in a portable or inpatient setting. The examples specifically reference elements like PICC lines, Port-A-Caths, ETT, and catheters, directing attention to their positional changes or status in relation to prior imaging studies.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5151515151515151,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11442,latent_11442,1582,0.003164,0.001992776,3.5005531,Integration of lateral and frontal image findings with prior studies.,"The highly activated examples involve analyzing both lateral and frontal images in conjunction with prior images or imagery data, which is essential for detailed and accurate tracking of changes or the stability of radiological findings. This allows for detailed feature differentiation necessary for a thorough evaluation when comparisons require multiple planes.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5202702702702703,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11443,latent_11443,4640,0.00928,0.003713244,2.383235,Changes in pleural effusions or mediastinal/hilar contours on comparison.,"The examples describe radiology studies that include comparison to prior images, with findings such as pneumothorax, pleural effusions, and changes in the mediastinal or hilar contours being noted. These are hallmark features often identified when comparing new and previous radiology images, where certain abnormalities are tracked for changes over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4466145833333333,0.49,0.4772727272727273,0.21,100.0,100.0
+11444,latent_11444,11700,0.0234,0.008556585,1.4665726,Unchanged or stable findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"This pattern involves the radiological description including both the current and prior images, where comparisons often note stable or unchanged findings. It seems examples with references to unchanged conditions compared to prior imaging are more activating, especially with stable or unchanged specific features such as lines, cardiomediastinal contours, or pulmonary conditions.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5760869565217391,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11445,latent_11445,1026,0.002052,0.0015437343,3.2428205,Descriptions emphasize interval changes or stability using prior images.,"Most examples with higher activation involve the comparison of current radiological findings to those in prior studies, indicating a focus on interval changes or stability. This reflects a common pattern of assessment in radiological reports where prior images provide context for interpreting current ones.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4019496426496957,0.4020100502512563,0.4059405940594059,0.41,100.0,99.0
+11446,latent_11446,781,0.001562,0.0012534355,3.317573,Use of comparative phrases regarding interval changes.,"Repeated references to changes, improvements, or stabilities in imaging findings following previous studies are paired with mentions of specific pathologies, treatments, or interventions. These connections demonstrate comparisons in findings across time or interventions.",0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5252012190357115,0.5255102040816326,0.5192307692307693,0.5567010309278351,97.0,99.0
+11447,latent_11447,8923,0.017846,0.0066347704,3.43771,Minor changes between current and prior radiology images.,"These examples contain explicit or implicit instructions or requests to provide a description of the findings in comparison to prior images, indicating the importance of evaluating changes over time which is a crucial aspect of radiological assessments. However, the pattern seems inconsistent overall, indicating either minimal or none to minor changes in observations on new imagery that could just be representational of baseline radiological assessments against longitudinal metrics.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5212765957446809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11448,latent_11448,520,0.00104,0.0013209525,3.5034204,No explicit mention of prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels do not reference prior imaging in their comparisons, while examples with lower activation levels often mention previous comparisons explicitly. This distinction appears to be a key indicator of their relevance to the observed pattern being investigated.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5878787878787879,0.6235294117647059,0.56,0.4,70.0,100.0
+11449,latent_11449,1525,0.00305,0.0019631376,2.7690525,Detailed anatomical descriptions and surgical history.,"Highly active examples describe the radiological findings with precise anatomical detail, such as cardiac silhouette changes, lung base opacities, and sternotomy status, often indicating surgical or procedural history and unchanged aspects in follow-up examinations.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5297756537899907,0.5527638190954773,0.6,0.33,100.0,99.0
+11450,latent_11450,9084,0.018168,0.0065662977,1.7261983,Emphasis on comparing current findings with prior images and noting stability or changes.,"High activations are seen in examples where conclusions about the findings are drawn through comparisons with previous imaging, especially noting stability, improvement, or specific changes. The presence of ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"" is a key connector in higher activation reports, indicating an anticipated comparison in interpretation.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5981105978757275,0.615,0.5815602836879432,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11451,latent_11451,386,0.000772,0.0009850942,4.6665115,Detailed evaluation of interval changes using prior imaging.,"The presence of a 'prior image' is common to all examples, but high activation is seen when the current and prior images are directly involved in evaluating changes, particularly when there is substantial detail on interval changes. Mentions of comparison without significant interval change, or solely for stability without detailed progression, are associated with low activation.",0.5265567765567765,0.5319148936170213,0.5,0.4545454545454545,22.0,25.0,0.5011157005174951,0.5202702702702703,0.3380281690140845,0.5,48.0,100.0
+11452,latent_11452,1654,0.003308,0.0022234526,3.8186212,Detailed reference to position and type of medical devices on X-ray.,"These examples frequently reference detailed descriptions of medical devices or objects visualized within chest X-rays. This includes both the position and type of the device or object, which is a significant aspect in monitoring patients with prior surgical interventions, treatments, or conditions requiring implanted devices.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5949367088607594,0.47,100.0,100.0
+11453,latent_11453,1688,0.003376,0.0020206552,2.977888,Comparison to prior images with assessment for changes.,"Examples with high activation feature prompts where images are compared to previous images, often looking for interval changes, stability, or progression in findings. This pattern involves the use of explicit textual mentions of comparisons to prior images, as well as stable or unchanged findings from earlier studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11454,latent_11454,1077,0.002154,0.0018707847,4.2226253,Comparison of present and past imaging highlighting changes over time.,"Examples with high activations often mention comparative improvement or worsening in pulmonary or pleural conditions over time, highlighted through phrases like 'since prior,' 'compared to previous,' and 'more confluent area.' The focus is on the dynamic changes between the current and past studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4958677685950413,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11455,latent_11455,806,0.001612,0.001458488,3.4068055,Explicit comparison with prior dated imaging studies.,"High-activation examples consistently specify when an imaging comparison is made with directly named or explicitly dated prior studies, demonstrating a focus on assessment of changes between current and previous images. This frequently appears in detailed assessments where medical devices or conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion are evaluated over time, suggesting an importance of explicitly noting longitudinal comparisons.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4846381545371032,0.4848484848484848,0.4791666666666667,0.4693877551020408,98.0,100.0
+11456,latent_11456,767,0.001534,0.0012331699,5.7331576,Provide comparative descriptions of heart and mediastinal contours in chest images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve providing a description of a radiology image set in comparison to prior images, particularly focusing on the heart size and mediastinal contours. The task frequently emphasizes highlighting stability or changes in these anatomical areas, which is a common practice when evaluating radiological progress over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.512677798392084,0.5126903553299492,0.504950495049505,0.5257731958762887,97.0,100.0
+11457,latent_11457,1104,0.002208,0.0016840085,2.532981,Emphasis on comparison with prior images and change detection.,"The highly activated examples use clear comparison phrases to indicate the focus is on detecting changes or stability relative to a prior image, particularly noting changes and position of medical devices or new pathologies, which signifies the pattern.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11458,latent_11458,1073,0.002146,0.0017956484,3.8705413,Reports emphasizing normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"The examples with higher activation often involve descriptions of findings that explicitly mention a normal heart size, mediastinal silhouette, and lung clarity, while those with lower activation do not focus on these specific normal findings. This suggests the pattern recognizes reports pointing out normal cardiac and mediastinal structures and clear lungs in the findings or impressions.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.8518518518518519,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7293233082706767,0.73,0.7090909090909091,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11459,latent_11459,1826,0.003652,0.002148738,3.3358839,Lung hyperinflation with diaphragm flattening.,"The pattern involves hyperinflation of the lungs, often with flattening of the diaphragm, a radiological feature typically associated with obstructive pulmonary diseases such as COPD or asthma. The examples use descriptive terms like 'hyperinflated lungs', 'flattening of the diaphragms', and 'diffuse pulmonary opacity', indicating increased lung volumes and difficulty in deflating the lungs.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4569031273836766,0.555,0.8666666666666667,0.13,100.0,100.0
+11460,latent_11460,912,0.001824,0.0013027319,4.9133883,Descriptions indicating notable interval changes compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve analyzing images in comparison to prior studies, with findings often linked to acute changes, insertions/removals of devices, or developments in conditions. Typical phrases often indicate worsening or improvement over time, integrating historical reports or showing comparisons suggesting some interval progression or stability.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3581078710039653,0.5527638190954773,0.5901639344262295,0.36,100.0,99.0
+11461,latent_11461,899,0.001798,0.0015880938,4.0589266,"Significant changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior studies, emphasizing lung opacities or volumes.","The occurrences with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of current and prior imaging techniques, focusing on relative changes or stability in findings. They typically emphasize changes in lung volumes or opacification patterns, referencing conditions like pneumonia or atelectasis, and highlight noticeable differences or continued stability compared to previous exams.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5223880597014925,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11462,latent_11462,1167,0.002334,0.0016107537,3.1518002,Focus on changes in medical device positioning across image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on detailed changes noted in medical devices, such as catheter positioning and the removal or addition of medical support devices, comparing these across sequential imaging studies. This includes detailed descriptions of changes in catheter positions or device placements between images, which is relevant in monitoring post-operative or critical care patients.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.6229508196721312,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11463,latent_11463,768,0.001536,0.0013559123,3.6331341,Specific interval changes or persistence in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation include descriptive comparison to previous imaging studies, highlighting substantial or specific changes, such as interval development, increased opacification, or changes in interventional devices. These reports focus on clearly identified changes or persistent findings between studies, which aid in assessing progression or status of observed conditions.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5309734513274337,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11464,latent_11464,3132,0.006264,0.0027233814,3.0064104,Aortic tortuosity in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe the presence of aortic tortuosity, which is an anatomical variation often associated with conditions like severe scoliosis or other chronic changes. These examples highlight unusual or increased curvature of the aorta, differentiating them from those that focus on other anatomical findings or pathologies.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3714721586575133,0.485,0.4,0.06,100.0,100.0
+11465,latent_11465,1950,0.0039,0.0020079066,3.366437,Findings or devices remain unchanged relative to prior studies.,"These examples consistently refer to the presence of comparison with previous studies and highlight findings or devices that are described as 'unchanged' or 'stable', indicating no significant change in the patient's radiologic findings, which often indicates clinical stability or benign nature of the condition.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4953337390951511,0.4974874371859296,0.4942528735632184,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+11466,latent_11466,3846,0.007692,0.0036668503,5.263975,Emphasis on changes in air or fluid accumulations like pneumothorax or pleural effusion.,"Higher activation levels correlate with the presence of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, or pleural effusion, even if the comparative aspect with prior imaging is emphasized. Lower activation levels focus on stable findings or those without these specific abnormal accumulations of air or fluid.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.40625,0.6419753086419753,81.0,119.0
+11467,latent_11467,542,0.001084,0.001114073,4.472904,References to atelectasis or bibasilar opacities in comparisons.,"The examples describe comparisons of findings across time, with the focal point on detailing changes specifically regarding bibasilar opacities and atelectasis, using terms like 'patchy opacities', 'streaky opacities', and references to low lung volumes. The activation is high when atelectasis or opacity descriptions are included.",0.8782467532467533,0.88,0.8064516129032258,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7752191785805231,0.7784431137724551,0.6875,0.8208955223880597,67.0,100.0
+11468,latent_11468,12199,0.024398,0.008995653,1.4394526,Detailed comparative analysis of findings against prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels include references requiring detailed analysis or remarks based on explicit comparison with prior images, indicating interval changes or findings in both the current and prior imaging. This linguistic pattern involves descriptive interpretation of image findings against historical contexts or data points.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11469,latent_11469,2139,0.004278,0.0029026952,3.1127322,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours; lungs clear.","The examples with activations consistently describe scenarios where no significant abnormalities or notable findings are present. This signifies that the comparison is intentionally noting a lack of acute or concerning changes relative to prior imaging. The cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours are often remarked as normal or stable, and the lungs are clear, reinforcing the benign status.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4177029196484449,0.465,0.4186046511627907,0.18,100.0,100.0
+11470,latent_11470,892,0.001784,0.0012901544,7.7176404,"Dynamic comparison of radiological images, highlighting changes over time or interventions.","Examples exhibiting activation have interpretive content where radiological findings between current and previous iterative images are expressed, typically reflecting changes in patient condition, interventions, or medical device placements, like changes in opacities, effusions, pneumothorax, and device placements. Non-activation examples often lack direct temporal changes or specific device-related observations.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11471,latent_11471,743,0.001486,0.0014108127,3.3491402,Instruction to compare current images with prior ones.,"The examples with high activation levels include a request or an instruction to describe findings in comparison to prior images. This pattern is common in radiology as it involves evaluating changes over time by comparing the current images to previous studies, helping to assess progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4840250821140639,0.484375,0.4666666666666667,0.532608695652174,92.0,100.0
+11472,latent_11472,1072,0.002144,0.0015710563,2.9554138,Analysis of stability or change in radiological findings over time.,"The examples show a pattern of comparing current and prior radiological images to evaluate changes, particularly for stability or presence of new developments. These examples specify changes or lack thereof, often post procedural placement or pathology stability, with emphasis on unchanged findings over time. Higher activations consistently involve stable findings or procedural placements that require temporal assessment with prior images.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11473,latent_11473,8908,0.017816,0.006831174,2.918549,Findings consistent with unchanged thoracic conditions compared to prior images.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation consistently involve the lack of significant change in thoracic conditions compared to previous imaging studies, while low activation examples often present changes or do not have a comparison. The key indicators in higher activation examples are phrases that communicate stability such as 'unchanged' or 'similar.'",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.2857142857142857,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5434782608695652,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11474,latent_11474,2526,0.005052,0.0024178317,3.1215394,Detailed evaluation of findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern is a description of changes or stability in appearance between current and prior radiological images, which is a standard component of comparative radiology studies. The examples highlight unchanged or stable findings, new additions or changes since the last image, and evaluative commentary as part of follow-ups or ongoing assessments.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11475,latent_11475,1992,0.003984,0.0023037582,4.2030835,Stable cardiomegaly or other conditions upon comparison with previous images.,"The highly activated examples focus on descriptions of minor or no change in conditions observed in sequential imaging. They include statements of comparison or stability in findings from previous images, particularly emphasizing stable cardiomegaly, unchanged device placements, or reduction in certain conditions like effusions or consolidations compared to prior images. This stability or absence of significant change is a key linguistic pattern in these reports.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6088888888888889,0.615,0.6533333333333333,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11476,latent_11476,5196,0.010392,0.004154669,2.247512,Finding or confirming interval change in medical device placement from prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels correspond to instances where changes in medical devices or their placement (such as catheters, pacemakers, tubes) are identified or confirmed through comparison with prior imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5565410199556541,0.58,0.6481481481481481,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11477,latent_11477,1437,0.002874,0.0018777698,2.6311336,Focus on interval change or stability of findings in follow-up imaging reports.,"The prominent pattern in the samples with high activation is the emphasis on changes or stability of findings when described by radiologists in follow-up imaging studies, particularly noting interval changes or the stability of conditions, which involves comparing the current findings with previous images. High activations are linked to reports explicitly discussing either interval changes or stability regardless of the specific findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11478,latent_11478,936,0.001872,0.0014696468,3.555135,"Detailed comparison of imaging findings to prior studies, indicating stability or change.","Examples with high activation levels consistently reference a systematic method of describing findings, often focused on interval changes, stability, or improvement in certain conditions, involving pleural effusions, opacities, or similar findings, and provide a detailed comparison against prior imaging.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.51995199519952,0.52,0.5196078431372549,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11479,latent_11479,9695,0.01939,0.007246345,2.2703865,Focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern emphasizes comparisons to prior images, particularly identifying interval changes or lack thereof, consistent with clinical and radiological practice of evaluating treatment response, disease progression, or stability by comparing new images to previous ones.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6022031823745411,0.61,0.5859375,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11480,latent_11480,2100,0.0042,0.002334157,6.117172,Substantial change detection relative to prior images.,This pattern often appears in radiology reports where the activation level becomes high either when specific findings are identified again after prior imaging is performed and corroborated or when they are directly associated with observed changes or confirmations of emission abnormalities. This indicates a structured evaluation of new findings relative to prior imaging to assess status or progress.,0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.5327635327635327,0.59,0.5217391304347826,0.2857142857142857,84.0,116.0
+11481,latent_11481,1592,0.003184,0.0026575034,4.798165,Use of both frontal and lateral images for comparison in radiology study.,"These examples consistently describe the use of both a frontal and a lateral image for part of the analysis. They also frequently note multiple imaging angles being compared to one or more previous frontal images, which implies a comprehensive assessment involving both dimensions and allowing for detailed comparisons in diagnoses.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4962025316455696,0.5175879396984925,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,99.0
+11482,latent_11482,6264,0.012528,0.007803035,3.0858371,Extensive comparison of current to prior imaging reports highlighting stability or change.,"The activation level is high when the reports extensively compare findings across current and prior images, emphasizing stability, change, or interval observation over time, particularly noting differences from previous reports. Examples emphasize detailed findings in relation to stable or changed conditions, suggesting this focus in report rationale elevates activation.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4814814814814814,0.39,100.0,100.0
+11483,latent_11483,3392,0.006784,0.0041658324,5.0765667,Complexity or significance in comparison to prior images.,"These examples involve detailed radiology reports where the findings include comparisons with a 'prior' image. Higher activations correlate with descriptions that potentially convey important clinical findings, complexities, or unusual details when compared to earlier images, even when specific comparisons are not made.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.3902439024390244,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11484,latent_11484,1152,0.002304,0.0014925011,3.8617008,High activation when prompted to compare current and prior images.,"Activation levels are high when both a current and a prior image are provided and the task explicitly includes generating a descriptive comparison between the current and prior images, despite the state of detailed findings or specific conditions described in the images themselves.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4241788958770091,0.485,0.4909090909090909,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11485,latent_11485,1237,0.002474,0.0016066184,4.1089,Stable imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, typically with explicit mention of specific radiographic findings that have remained stable or unchanged. This suggests that the model highly activates for patterns involving stability or lack of change in imaging findings over time compared to prior studies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4210917287840365,0.435,0.4057971014492754,0.28,100.0,100.0
+11486,latent_11486,1664,0.003328,0.0020971014,5.1231565,Comparison of imaging findings to prior images or reports.,"Examining the activations, it seems examples where descriptions are provided without any prior images available for comparison receive lower activations. Those with explicit directives to compare with a prior image, even when using placeholders where any comparison outcome is described, show higher activations. This indicates the pattern involves understanding how new radiology findings elucidate changes from previously existing conditions.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11487,latent_11487,831,0.001662,0.0015604391,4.744088,"Significant changes or stability in pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or lung volumes.","Examples with high activation levels describe thoracic findings, particularly focused on lung volumes, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, relative changes over time, and statuses like post-surgical or post-procedural situations. These descriptions emphasize comparison to past imaging, stability, or interval changes in conditions like effusions, atelectasis, or pneumothorax.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5818033455732354,0.59,0.625,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11488,latent_11488,1510,0.00302,0.00218366,5.7316422,Comparison of radiological images over time or against prior studies.,"These examples involve the interpretation of radiological findings in the context of comparison with earlier studies, specifically highlighting those where interpretation includes differences or stability in findings over time. This pattern reflects the importance of comparative analysis in radiological evaluations, particularly in tracking changes or stability of conditions over time.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11489,latent_11489,799,0.001598,0.0015390023,5.5967503,Comparison of catheter or tube positioning in sequential images.,"These examples emphasize the description of the findings in comparison to a prior frontal image. They specifically focus on any changes or lack thereof in key clinical indicators between sequential studies, often relating to catheter or tube positioning and comparing these across multiple viewpoints or specific time intervals.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5614035087719298,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11490,latent_11490,7197,0.014394,0.0055482103,1.9089152,Comparison between current and prior images indicating changes in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently discuss comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes in findings over time. This involves observing changes in tubes, opacities, or other clinical findings by referring to the prior images as a baseline, and many examples also mention the stability or change noted in findings explicitly.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.5671641791044776,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11491,latent_11491,9120,0.01824,0.0067397305,2.2716258,Explicit changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples exhibit higher activations when findings are explicitly stated in relation to a prior study with clear mentions of changes (or lack thereof) in condition, placement of medical devices, or emergent pathologies. These actively highlight stability, placement, and changes, key in patient management.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5290183165260341,0.5376884422110553,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,99.0
+11492,latent_11492,2796,0.005592,0.0034031596,2.9850798,"Comparison with previous images, highlighting stability or changes.","Higher activations are consistently associated with examples that feature a detailed comparison between a current and previous radiological image, often emphasizing changes or lack thereof. This pattern indicates focus on monitoring progress or stability over time, which is crucial in tracking patient conditions.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11493,latent_11493,7288,0.014576,0.005697567,2.2533154,Clinically relevant changes or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"Most examples with higher activation levels describe changes in imaging findings, including detail on stable or new features, suggesting an emphasis on the active process and change over time (e.g., progression of effusion, nodule appearance, or device positions). This reflects a thorough comparison to prior studies, highlighting any changes that are clinically relevant.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.633811412877632,0.64,0.6111111111111112,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11494,latent_11494,595,0.00119,0.0011754127,3.121343,Mentions of interval changes or stable positioning of devices between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels all mention some form of intervention or device positioning between the current and prior images, such as catheters, tubes, or other support devices, and note the interval change or stable position of these interventions.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4346309281199267,0.4715909090909091,0.3454545454545454,0.25,76.0,100.0
+11495,latent_11495,828,0.001656,0.0014911677,3.6360397,Detailed evaluation of interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation levels highlight instances where there is careful examination of radiographs in the context of prior imaging with specific attention to changes over time, such as interval changes in pulmonary findings, normal heart size despite prominent findings, and expected positions of medical devices or pathologies. The concept of comparing current images to prior ones, especially in relation to stability or changes in findings, is a strong pattern.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4081022574992269,0.4141414141414141,0.3875,0.3163265306122449,98.0,100.0
+11496,latent_11496,10252,0.020504,0.0074680233,1.531724,Details on positioning or stability of medical devices.,"The examples with higher activation frequently involve comparison of the current images with prior images or reports, and they specifically describe changes or stability of findings like positioning of medical devices. Many of these involve checking for placement or changes of tubes, catheter placements, and devices in addition to evaluating for changes in physiological conditions.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11497,latent_11497,3101,0.006202,0.0028626248,2.983031,Explicit comparison with findings from prior imaging.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation levels consistently provide detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, using explicit comparison phrases and often noting the stability or change in specific findings over time. This pattern suggests that a key element of the pattern is the presence of comparative analysis between sequential imaging studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4786324786324786,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11498,latent_11498,13403,0.026806,0.009610737,1.5208946,Detailed comparative findings excluding acute pathology.,"Examples with high activation provide detailed comparative findings between current and previous imaging, indicating changes or consistencies in pathologies, while excluding acute outcomes such as pneumonia or effusion. This coupling of comparison and detailed descriptions surrounding specific pathologies like pneumonia is a recurring theme.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5689655172413793,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11499,latent_11499,3902,0.007804,0.003154968,3.289228,Focus on positional changes of support/monitoring devices.,"The pattern consistently involves changes in the position or presence of supportive or monitoring devices as described in radiology reports. Examples with elevated activation levels discuss unchanged or adjusted positions of pacemakers, catheters, tubes, or other medical devices in relation to previous studies, indicating focus on device positional assessment.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5576923076923077,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11500,latent_11500,1709,0.003418,0.0015934453,2.4103756,Reference to stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"Highly activated samples refer to radiological findings with minimal significant change or resolution of previous abnormalities when compared to prior studies. This pattern implies stability in the condition of interest, such as unchanged positions of medical devices or no new pathologies developing when examined against prior images.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4782608695652174,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11501,latent_11501,1975,0.00395,0.001957376,3.2929065,Comparison with prior imaging studies to assess changes over time.,"Reports featuring references to comparison with prior imaging studies are more representative. These examples entail comparisons between current and prior images, emphasizing interval changes, stability, or evolution, alongside specific radiological findings.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4191873763203207,0.435,0.4511278195488721,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11502,latent_11502,2817,0.005634,0.0031036374,5.3644524,Significant change or resolution noted in comparison with prior imaging.,"High activation examples involve more complex or significant changes in clinical findings upon comparing current imaging with prior studies, such as worsened conditions or resolution of previous concerns. This pattern is common in cases where prior radiological results are compared to current images to assess changes in medical condition.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.59375,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11503,latent_11503,11086,0.022172,0.008241871,1.8406605,Monitoring device positioning and changes via imaging comparison.,"Many examples feature references to changes, positioning, or comparison to prior imaging. Though not always explicitly mentioned, activated samples often involve precise details about internal lines like NG tubes or other devices, which require contextual comparison of positions and changes over time, indicating close monitoring as a key aspect of the pattern.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11504,latent_11504,3310,0.00662,0.0042250035,4.233022,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in comparison.,"Examples with activations related to findings highlight stable or unchanged appearances over time. Descriptive language references both current and prior images, assessing stability or lack of significant change, with specific findings or medical devices being stable or unchanged across comparisons.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11505,latent_11505,5649,0.011298,0.005355909,4.4580674,Explicit comparison with prior images to assess interval changes.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently include language that refers to a direct comparison between the current and prior images, demonstrating specific changes or stability in conditions over time. Lower activation examples either lack this comparative context or do not detail specific changes observed between studies.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6189887756152817,0.63,0.5970149253731343,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11506,latent_11506,955,0.00191,0.0016618812,2.8375728,Focus on interval changes or positioning of medical devices in chest images.,"The examples showing high activation levels involve the assessment of findings in chest images notably focused on devices (tubes, catheters) and their positioning or changes, often in comparison to prior images. The language centers specifically on changes in tube positions or newly placed tubes, indicative of a potentially acute or procedural context that requires careful monitoring.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6328029375764994,0.64,0.609375,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11507,latent_11507,6575,0.01315,0.0047962517,1.4910305,Emphasis on assessing interval change by comparing current and prior images for specific findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently include a clear comparison to prior imaging studies with specific emphasis on evaluating interval change or stability. These examples emphasize providing an interpretation based on detailed, comparative analysis of specific findings over time.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5169000933706815,0.542713567839196,0.5273972602739726,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+11508,latent_11508,615,0.00123,0.0012007987,2.960708,Detailed comparison of current radiology findings with prior images.,"The activated examples emphasize the task of describing findings from the current radiology study, specifically in their comparison to prior images. This pattern focuses on the detailed evaluation and expression of changes or stability over time when comparing current imaging with prior examinations, including noting any shifts or persistences in conditions.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4233993902439024,0.4269662921348314,0.3604651162790697,0.3974358974358974,78.0,100.0
+11509,latent_11509,1123,0.002246,0.0017898707,3.9716673,Observations of rib fractures in chest imaging reports.,"The highly activated examples have in common an examination of chest imaging with observations of rib fractures, likely because this reflects a pattern of chronic findings where ribs are consistently noted for changes or anomalies.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.9523809523809524,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.8897243107769424,0.89,0.9333333333333332,0.84,100.0,100.0
+11510,latent_11510,1947,0.003894,0.001747727,2.9935944,Descriptive comparisons between current and prior images.,"The examples describe findings based on comparisons between current and prior images, detailing any changes or stability regarding specific structures or conditions such as nodules, cardiac silhouette, and pneumothorax, consistent with professional reporting in radiology.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11511,latent_11511,6272,0.012544,0.004737152,2.4990973,Assessment of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples displaying activations describe changes from previous imaging, using descriptors such as 'unchanged,' 'stable,' or explicitly noting changes like 'increased' or 'decreased.' These phrases signal a focus on assessing interval changes in imaging findings over time, which is a common clinical task in radiology when monitoring diseases or conditions.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4582815762349023,0.4824120603015075,0.4859154929577465,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+11512,latent_11512,1030,0.00206,0.001358782,3.7416143,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability.,"Examples consistently show high activation levels when reports describe radiological findings followed by a comparative evaluation with prior images, often mentioning ""comparison"" or evaluating changes over time, indicating the model activates on mentions of ongoing or unchanged findings through successive reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11513,latent_11513,1570,0.00314,0.0021086514,2.3031278,Comparative analysis of current and prior images for change or stability.,"The pattern observed is that instances that reference the comparison of findings to a prior image and include specific statements about stability, interval change, or detailed comparative analysis are highly representative. Instances lacking or with vague comparisons have low activation scores, likely because they don't emphasize comparative analysis. Vague language or lack of comparison impairs activation.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11514,latent_11514,2178,0.004356,0.0025026018,4.9483423,Reports involving Swan-Ganz catheter or indwelling line evaluation and comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention the use, adjustment, or monitoring of a Swan-Ganz catheter or other indwelling lines in conjunction with comparisons to prior images, emphasizing their continued placement or repositioning, and stating their unchanged status. This aligns with a pattern where high activation occurs when addressing the management or evaluation of these medical devices over multiple assessments.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8344993605657113,0.835,0.8764044943820225,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11515,latent_11515,516,0.001032,0.0010632571,4.306377,Stability of key radiological findings or devices compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples prominently feature the absence of change in critical findings or devices, such as unchanged lung opacities or stable positions of medical devices. Reports emphasize continuity over time, noting features that remain constant between imaging studies even if some nominal changes are mentioned.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4369063772048847,0.4578313253012048,0.3235294117647059,0.3333333333333333,66.0,100.0
+11516,latent_11516,932,0.001864,0.0017069265,5.701619,Detailed procedural or anatomical references in findings descriptions.,"These sentences consistently contain references to specific anatomical structures or technical details associated with a procedure or condition. This includes mentions of technical views (e.g., PA, lateral), specific clinical indications, and anatomical observations in radiographic assessments.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3566810344827586,0.3668341708542713,0.392,0.494949494949495,99.0,100.0
+11517,latent_11517,609,0.001218,0.0014507775,2.7367232,Findings compared to prior image indicating significant changes or confirmations.,"Highly active examples frequently conclude with a direct, concise description of findings as compared to the prior image, indicating a significant observation or change in conditions. They often identify changes or confirm previous conditions, explicitly assisting in updates or evaluations which imply a clear, actionable result.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4809451985922574,0.4885057471264368,0.4050632911392405,0.4324324324324324,74.0,100.0
+11518,latent_11518,1238,0.002476,0.0017267563,3.914938,Comparison using multiple views (frontal and lateral) along with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve the interpretation of multiple views (frontal and lateral) together with explicit requests to compare with previous images. This reflects a comprehensive analysis approach combining multiple angles and temporal comparisons for evaluating patient status, which likely triggers the pattern in the model.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11519,latent_11519,8867,0.017734,0.0065058717,1.4827657,Comparison with prior imaging to evaluate changes over time.,The pattern identified in these examples is a frequent mention of comparisons with prior examinations to determine changes in condition or stability of certain features. This approach is characteristic of follow-up imaging to monitor known conditions or suspect new developments.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11520,latent_11520,1840,0.00368,0.0021544637,3.6580534,Lung opacities suggestive of pneumonia.,"The examples with high activation levels often include findings concerning opacities in the lungs that are suggestive of pneumonia, particularly when these are described in relation to their change from a previous status or described as new or concerning opacities. 'Opacity' and 'concerning for pneumonia' are consistent terms across these samples.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.8846153846153846,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11521,latent_11521,2060,0.00412,0.0021695837,2.8072112,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current findings with prior imaging reports. This comparison is central to radiology, identifying stability, progression, or change over time and is frequently indicated in the reports of these examples.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11522,latent_11522,4808,0.009616,0.0035341396,2.0982633,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate descriptions where comparisons are made explicitly between current imaging and prior studies, highlighting changes or stability in findings. This pattern reflects the model's focus on comparative analysis across sequential studies to monitor changes or stability in medical imaging findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5806476663819212,0.595,0.5693430656934306,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11523,latent_11523,958,0.001916,0.0017345342,5.1498113,Suggested advancement or adjustment of medical devices.,"Many examples involve suggestions related to adjustment or advancement of medical devices like tubes or catheter tips when positioned suboptimally. These references highlight practical recommendations for device positioning in radiological studies, often involving measurements from anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina, GE junction) or should be advanced by a certain cm for improved positioning.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,1.0,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7245250656202085,0.735,0.8852459016393442,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11524,latent_11524,14568,0.029136,0.010525879,1.1256768,Comparison of current images with prior studies to assess changes.,"The pattern in these activations involves providing a comparison of current imaging findings against prior images combined with addressing specific clinical questions or conditions, typically marked by explicit requests or indications for evaluating changes over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11525,latent_11525,8831,0.017662,0.00632085,1.4082845,Detailed comparison with prior images for changes or stability.,"This set of samples highlights reports that actively compare current image findings to prior studies or descriptions of changes over intervals. The consistent focus in these examples is on describing the stability or change from previous results using terms like 'unchanged', 'comparison', 'interval', and date references, providing a comparative approach to radiology reporting.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.5581395348837209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11526,latent_11526,798,0.001596,0.0013206599,4.136743,Comparison findings with reference to changes over time in imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons made between current and prior imaging studies and the identification of changes or stability over time. This includes specific findings such as improvement or worsening of conditions or confirmation of stable conditions when compared to prior images, demonstrating a focus on longitudinal assessment.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11527,latent_11527,11589,0.023178,0.00835039,1.3159502,Explicit comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"The pattern in the data shows a focus on detailed comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, emphasizing intervals of change or stability. This often involves noting stability or change in identification of chest structures such as pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, hilar contours, or the cardiomediastinal silhouette. Increased activation levels occur when there is an explicit description of change or stability compared to past images, captured with words like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or 'improved' when comparing previous and current imaging results.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11528,latent_11528,1138,0.002276,0.0015877263,3.0239067,Comparison of current and prior images to assess change or stability.,"This pattern involves the presence and comparison of current and prior imaging studies, particularly highlighting observations of changes or stability in findings, often noting stable follow-up or resolution of prior abnormalities. Such comparisons are typical in many radiology assessments assessing the course of a pathology over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11529,latent_11529,1263,0.002526,0.0018747328,4.2765126,Presence and use of prior imaging in analysis and findings description.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention analysis performed by comparing current images to prior imaging. The presence of prior reports and comparisons plays a significant role in triggering higher activation levels, emphasizing the importance of tracking changes or stability in the patient's condition over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4104159842777596,0.46,0.4746835443037974,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11530,latent_11530,802,0.001604,0.0017252978,4.299635,Descriptions of radiological findings involving changes over time compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently present findings that directly compare current images with prior studies, frequently using explicit phrases like 'compared to the previous' or mentioning specific changes over time. These comparisons, including assessment for progress or stability of conditions, are the focus of these examples.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11531,latent_11531,1637,0.003274,0.0016505113,3.248156,Identification of low lung volumes limiting assessment.,"Upon review, the activation levels correlate with the identification of low lung volumes in radiographic findings, regardless of other associated indicators. Examples with low lung volumes often mention limited assessment ability or difficulty evaluating the complete field, which seems to trigger higher activation levels.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4188606145989257,0.505,0.5217391304347826,0.12,100.0,100.0
+11532,latent_11532,889,0.001778,0.0013722715,4.5146112,"Detailed comparison of current and prior findings, focusing on changes.","This set of examples heavily emphasizes the comparison between current and prior images, specifically highlighting interval changes or stability in specific findings. The examples that have high activation involve detailed observations regarding changes in patient status or medical devices when compared to previous images, often involving descriptions of inserted tubes or changes in pulmonary opacity.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4751470886589571,0.4773869346733668,0.4767441860465116,0.41,100.0,99.0
+11533,latent_11533,579,0.001158,0.0013334482,4.671634,Analysis of interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions comparing current medical imaging findings with previous images. The reports use specific phrases indicating changes or stability in observed conditions between the current and prior images, suggesting the key focus is on observing such interval changes and stable findings through comparisons.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4677635098983413,0.4682080924855491,0.4134615384615384,0.581081081081081,74.0,99.0
+11534,latent_11534,1114,0.002228,0.0017222217,3.826555,Normal heart size and hilar/mediastinal contours.,The examples often describe normal heart size and hilar/mediastinal contours during the report findings. These consistent descriptions suggest a report pattern where these anatomical structures are evaluated to be normal amidst other findings.,0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7794486215538847,0.78,0.7545454545454545,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11535,latent_11535,1695,0.00339,0.00206911,3.357607,Comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The activation pattern is associated with reports that include comparisons with prior images, often highlighting changes or stability in findings. This is evident from samples discussing earlier studies to assess for progress or changes.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11536,latent_11536,2157,0.004314,0.0022955362,3.846151,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to prior radiographic images.,"These examples consistently involve reference to a comparison between current and prior radiologic images, with specific notes indicating no significant or relevant change in findings. The reports often emphasize stability or lack of new changes, underscoring the stability of a clinical situation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5697674418604651,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11537,latent_11537,1590,0.00318,0.0026331295,4.2552967,Analysis for interval change using prior imaging comparisons.,"The pattern involves radiology studies explicitly comparing current findings to prior imaging results, using terminology such as 'compared to previous' or specifying an 'interval change'. This is a common feature in reports assessing for stability or changes over time, especially when dealing with evolving conditions or post-operative evaluations.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11538,latent_11538,1121,0.002242,0.001900427,3.4123135,Description of findings and changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on providing findings and comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. They consistently emphasize stability or changes in specific conditions, such as masses, effusions, or other notable chest pathology, in comparison to previous radiographs.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11539,latent_11539,1428,0.002856,0.0016592817,2.9535077,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in object placement.,"Reports with high activation levels tend to describe new or unchanged object or device placement and detailed direct comparisons of the current findings to prior imaging examinations, indicating an emphasis on interval changes or persistence of features like opacities or tubes in radiological assessments.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5802119777732044,0.5879396984924623,0.5669291338582677,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+11540,latent_11540,10560,0.02112,0.0077361553,1.864923,Stable findings when compared to prior imaging.,"These examples reference findings that remain unchanged or stable when compared to earlier imaging studies. This linguistic pattern is typical in radiology reports where stability often suggests a lack of acute changes or progression of disease, as indicated by phrases like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'no significant interval change'.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.4864864864864865,0.36,100.0,100.0
+11541,latent_11541,7184,0.014368,0.007764097,4.541752,Stable or unchanged findings in post-procedural or established conditions.,"The examples predominantly with higher activation refer to radiology findings associated with previous surgical or structural anomalies that have undergone modification or adjustment, such as removal of tubes or surgical site changes over time, as well as reports explicitly comparing and noting no significant change from prior evaluations which often indicate stable chronic conditions or procedural aftermaths.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11542,latent_11542,896,0.001792,0.0015005991,3.159371,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest images with a prior frontal image.,"These examples describe the use of frontal and lateral chest images, where the frontal view is often used for general structure assessment and the lateral view provides supplemental detail on opacities or specific pathologies. The pattern highlighted shows the analysis and comparison of these sequential images over time, serving a common practice in radiological studies for comprehensive assessments and change over time analysis.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4954954954954955,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11543,latent_11543,2825,0.00565,0.0026923658,2.523187,Prominent mention of specific surgical history or radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference specific previous radiological findings or procedures such as CABG, specific catheter placements, or specific surgeries (like sternotomy), which may indicate a pattern where previous detailed surgical history or specific radiological findings are prominently mentioned.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5842696629213483,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11544,latent_11544,8163,0.016326,0.0062121768,1.6812911,Analysis of findings compared to prior images.,"The core pattern is the explicit description of findings in said radiology study in comparison to a prior image, emphasizing changes or stability of specific features or conditions over time, often noted in follow-up examinations or when assessing treatment outcomes.",0.4942739349519011,0.5208333333333334,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,23.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11545,latent_11545,2510,0.00502,0.0021552905,3.359746,Stable or unchanged mediastinal and cardiac silhouette.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that describe changes or findings in the mediastinal and lung contours, often involving mediastinal silhouette evaluations, cardiomegaly, or cardiac silhouette details, implying a focus on central thoracic structures. Often comparisons involve phrases like 'mediastinal silhouette', 'mediastinal contour', or 'cardiac silhouette'.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4814467375442985,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.32,100.0,99.0
+11546,latent_11546,666,0.001332,0.0013313452,3.4763088,Involves frontal and lateral images with prior comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve both lateral and frontal views in conjunction with previous frontal images, with detailed comparisons and descriptions of findings based on these multiple perspectives. The involvement of both imaging angles suggests a pattern where the presence of multiple detailed and comparative imaging angles is crucial.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5008921330089213,0.5303867403314917,0.4861111111111111,0.8641975308641975,81.0,100.0
+11547,latent_11547,899,0.001798,0.0015901444,4.0665927,In-depth comparison with prior images or studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently request a comparison with prior images or studies, indicating a strong focus on examining changes against previous imagery. This is a critical aspect of radiology practice, particularly for monitoring disease progression or resolution.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11548,latent_11548,2980,0.00596,0.0033271615,6.6176567,Comparisons to prior studies with identification of anatomical changes or device positioning.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels consistently involve comparison to prior imaging studies along with notes of projecting anatomical structures or devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) or changes like pneumothorax or effusion. The use of clear comparative language underscores the pattern effectiveness in finding changes.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.4710743801652892,0.6951219512195121,82.0,118.0
+11549,latent_11549,7013,0.014026,0.0053819804,2.8444767,Descriptions of changes between current and prior imaging.,"These examples typically describe changes detected by radiology analysis between current and previous images or reports, explaining notable differences. They highlight findings that suggest pathology resolution, progression, or changes over time, often stating 'compared to prior', 'previously noted', 'unchanged', or 'resolved'.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5942915392456677,0.5979899497487438,0.5798319327731093,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+11550,latent_11550,12298,0.024596,0.008929599,2.176565,Comparative evaluation of current and prior images to monitor changes.,"The examples with high activation levels often emphasize the process of comparing current images to prior ones, providing detailed comparisons and evaluations of changes in findings over time. This reflects a clinical emphasis on monitoring stability or changes in medical conditions, which is a common practice in radiology monitoring.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11551,latent_11551,378,0.000756,0.0009706358,4.880898,Comprehensive findings description without explicit prior imaging reference.,"The examples with higher activation focus on describing findings but frequently lack explicit references to previous comparison studies or effectively highlight that no prior comparison is available. This implies a pattern of summarizing impressions without detailed prior comparison, while the non-activating examples delve more into stable findings from prior reports or include explicit comparison language.",0.4874348032242769,0.5106382978723404,0.4666666666666667,0.3181818181818182,22.0,25.0,0.5019493177387914,0.6164383561643836,0.3333333333333333,0.217391304347826,46.0,100.0
+11552,latent_11552,1500,0.003,0.0017398804,3.5225859,Description of findings noting stability or no significant change compared to prior images.,"These examples show instances where findings are compared to prior images without labeling them as significant changes, indicating no critical interval change. This leads to a more stable or unchanged evaluation compared to previous imaging. They often use the phrase 'no significant interval change' or similar wording to denote stability over time.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.1818181818181818,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3072784810126582,0.3366834170854271,0.2203389830508474,0.1313131313131313,99.0,100.0
+11553,latent_11553,6880,0.01376,0.0052257064,2.3175504,Reports of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight the comparison between current and prior imaging, specifically those mentioning unchanged findings or little change over time. This pattern shows a linguistic focus on stability or lack of progression in radiographic findings, often implying benign or non-urgent conditions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5783132530120482,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11554,latent_11554,1261,0.002522,0.001724425,3.8788807,Use of prior reports or imaging for comparison.,"These examples emphasize the presence of a prior report or imaging for comparison, implying an evaluation against previous findings. The activation levels suggest a pattern focused on comparison or continuity of findings over time, particularly when assessing changes or stability in the patient's condition.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4025887819449054,0.46,0.4753086419753086,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11555,latent_11555,401,0.000802,0.0011405953,4.5851827,Detection of calcified structures in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently identify calcified structures such as lymph nodes, granulomas, or plaques within the chest in radiological findings. The presence of calcifications is a notable point of interest that seems to trigger a higher activation level even when other findings are benign or unchanged.",0.914855072463768,0.9148936170212766,0.875,0.9545454545454546,22.0,25.0,0.9273199845976128,0.933774834437086,0.8727272727272727,0.9411764705882352,51.0,100.0
+11556,latent_11556,654,0.001308,0.001156203,3.9730062,"Comparison focusing on tube, catheter, or device positioning in radiology reports.","Highly activated samples involve comparisons between current and prior radiological imaging records, focusing on the evaluation of devices such as tubes or catheters (e.g., endotracheal tube, pacemaker, etc.) and their positions. The descriptions often mention intervals or stability of device placements, suggesting a common pattern of device management or adjustment over time documented in radiology.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5090143680790702,0.5297297297297298,0.4838709677419355,0.3529411764705882,85.0,100.0
+11557,latent_11557,4050,0.0081,0.003299825,2.346447,Reference to changes compared to prior images indicating stable or changed findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to radiological changes compared to prior images. This is a distinctive feature where specific findings are stated in contrast or comparison to past assessments of the same patient, indicating either stability or changes in the radiological appearance over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5002039983680131,0.51,0.5078125,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11558,latent_11558,1242,0.002484,0.0019057614,3.244509,Emphasis on interval change or stability between current and prior imaging.,"Throughout the examples, detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images is crucial, specifically noting any interval changes or stability in findings, regardless of the patient's condition or context. Comparisons are made to assess changes or stability in various anatomical and pathological aspects.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11559,latent_11559,873,0.001746,0.001607135,3.2072942,Reports frequently compared with prior imaging studies for changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently begin with an instruction to provide a description of the findings in radiology studies, prominently featuring terms like 'prior', 'comparison', and 'prior report'. These examples frequently include prior reports or historical context to facilitate longitudinal comparison. Such phrasing indicates a protocol of using prior imagery as a baseline for assessment, a common practice in radiological analysis.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11560,latent_11560,14842,0.029684,0.011191542,2.5673828,Evaluation of interval change or stability of existing findings.,"These examples consistently describe follow-up radiological evaluations intended to assess stability or change in documented findings. This pattern involves direct comparison to previous imaging reports to ascertain whether existing conditions have improved, persisted, or worsened, using language such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improved', or specifying changes like 'increased', 'resolved', or 'developing'.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.5594405594405595,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11561,latent_11561,842,0.001684,0.0011286705,4.179962,Descriptions of unchanged or stable findings compared to prior images.,Samples with high activation consistently refer to a stable or unchanged finding compared to a previous examination. This suggests that the key pattern being recognized involves stability or lack of significant change in the radiological findings over time.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11562,latent_11562,1033,0.002066,0.0016966442,4.674134,Changes in monitoring and support devices between radiographs.,The representative examples consistently mention the removal or changes of monitoring and support devices compared to prior studies. This focus on device changes or removal in radiographic interpretation is a recognizable pattern across radiological evaluations.,0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8249956248906223,0.825,0.8282828282828283,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11563,latent_11563,1103,0.002206,0.0016004457,3.2035377,Rapid documentation or notification timing of findings.,"The highly activated examples contain specific reference to rapid documentation or notification of findings. These details, such as 'minutes after discovery', suggest that the reporting or communication of findings immediately after they are identified is a critical pattern observed within successfully activated samples.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.545442098633588,0.585,0.7073170731707317,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11564,latent_11564,1017,0.002034,0.0018245827,2.3259223,Requests for description comparing current to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions or requests to compare current radiological findings to prior imaging results, suggesting this pattern focuses on the comparative analysis aspect, especially with missing words or placeholders indicating direct input prompts or commands tied to a task involving comparison with completions.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4900662251655629,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11565,latent_11565,12749,0.025498,0.009221373,1.609006,Comparison with prior imaging findings to note stability or change over time.,"The activated examples all involve findings that are compared to prior imaging studies indicating stability or change in conditions over time. The description includes phrases like 'as compared to', 'compared to prior', 'no significant change', highlighting stability or resolution over time. This pattern is essential for tracking patient progress and treatment impact in radiology.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11566,latent_11566,4942,0.009884,0.003724832,1.8381612,Presence of interval change compared to prior images.,"The patterns in the activated examples often include documentation of a change from a previous assessment or interval change. This frequently involves descriptions of stability or changes in the condition of certain features (e.g., pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette, infiltrates, opacities) across reports, indicating ongoing or resolved issues.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11567,latent_11567,2827,0.005654,0.0028389296,2.0666168,Comparison with prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"The pattern observed in the provided examples involves a comparison between current and previous imaging studies, described in terms of changes or lack of changes. High activation levels are associated with explicit reference to findings as compared to previous images, highlighting stability or change over time.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11568,latent_11568,4623,0.009246,0.0035625866,3.5495968,Description of changes or stability over time in comparison to prior images.,"The examples that have higher activation levels generally involve assessments of changes over time regarding specific findings, such as stability or alterations in opacities, nodules, or devices, as compared to prior imaging. Descriptions often include terms indicating changes or stability based on previous comparisons.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6013564235976288,0.615,0.583941605839416,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11569,latent_11569,836,0.001672,0.0016215122,4.371807,Comparison with prior imaging findings resulting in unchanged or stable conditions.,The examples that show high activation tend to involve evaluations that compare findings across various imaging techniques or study dates with references to unchanged results or specific updates from a prior state.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.5277777777777778,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11570,latent_11570,1568,0.003136,0.0020542224,4.2665997,Position changes of tubes or structures between current and prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activations share a pattern of direct comparisons of medical device or anatomical structures' positions (e.g. tubes) between current and previous imaging, reflecting how the model is activated starkly by anatomical changes over time.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.620572260193872,0.635,0.7213114754098361,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11571,latent_11571,820,0.00164,0.0015179716,3.97142,Enlargement of cardiac silhouette with pulmonary findings.,Many high-activation examples describe an enlarged cardiac silhouette often in conjunction with pulmonary findings such as edema or fluid accumulation. This indicates a pattern where reports focus on heart enlargement and associated changes in lung conditions or vascular structures.,0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6510673234811166,0.66,0.7352941176470589,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11572,latent_11572,610,0.00122,0.001348577,4.3517766,Interval change in radiology findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples that exhibit high activation involve descriptions of significant interval changes in the radiology findings when compared to previous images. Descriptive comparisons like 'unchanged', 'removed', or 'new finding' in references to previous imaging indicate the interval change pattern which contributes to high activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4992060971737059,0.5146198830409356,0.4142857142857143,0.4084507042253521,71.0,100.0
+11573,latent_11573,3024,0.006048,0.0033871296,4.6525846,Focus on medical device (line/tube) placement and condition.,"Highly representative examples involve the presence of various lines and catheters like PICC lines, nasogastric tubes, or ETT in the imaging, and their positioning and condition are described, with recommendations for repositioning if needed, indicating a focus on procedural medical devices in radiology reports.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.6375,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11574,latent_11574,2285,0.00457,0.002901406,3.729009,Observation of interval changes or new findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"Prominent activations in these examples are observed when the description involves progression or interval changes in pre-existing conditions or clearly novel findings compared to the previous or no significant change observed. There's an emphasis on describing newly observed pathology, worsening conditions or unchanged state post interventions as mentioned in findings.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6596937243519168,0.66,0.6509433962264151,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11575,latent_11575,2435,0.00487,0.002350893,3.9840143,Minimal interval change noted on serial imaging or reports.,"Examples with low activation lack a focus on cardiorespiratory status change over time, specifically mentioning unchanged conditions or findings despite the presence of other information such as history, technical details, or device positions. High activation highlights unique, evolving clinical conditions or requests for more extensive longitudinal evaluations.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.2142857142857142,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4629629629629629,0.25,100.0,100.0
+11576,latent_11576,660,0.00132,0.0014235263,4.4745693,"Noting changes in opacities, effusions, or device positioning from prior imaging.","These examples highlight the presence of specific changes, such as alterations in tube placement or the presence of new opacities or consolidations, compared against previous imaging findings. The language consistently notes no significant change in certain aspects while highlighting specific updates, such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or other radiological signs that have been marked for change.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5290750915750916,0.5294117647058824,0.4947368421052631,0.5402298850574713,87.0,100.0
+11577,latent_11577,935,0.00187,0.001505245,3.8229716,Use of detailed positional and diagnostic terminology in radiology.,"The presence of specific technical terms such as 'pleural effusion', 'atelectasis', 'consolidation', 'cardiomegaly', and 'pneumothorax', combined with detailed position descriptions from different imaging angles, consistently trigger higher activations. These technical descriptions are indicative of identifying specific conditions or statuses in radiology which are likely key to the activation pattern.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11578,latent_11578,668,0.001336,0.0012744031,3.5648422,"Contrast description of current vs. prior radiological findings, highlighting intervals and stability.","This pattern involves repeated guidance for the assistant to generate comparative radiological findings between current images and prior ones, using phrases that direct comparison or indicate interval changes. This structure highlights the comparative analysis often included in radiology reports.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5202734559170202,0.5243243243243243,0.4871794871794871,0.6705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+11579,latent_11579,919,0.001838,0.001728437,3.0685804,Discussion of medical equipment placement between imaging studies.,"Many examples with high activation levels involve references to medical devices or equipment (such as PICC lines, ET tubes, catheters, pacemakers) with descriptions of their placement, positions, changes or stability between sequential imaging studies. These references often highlight equipment adjustments made for patient care.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5818033455732354,0.59,0.625,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11580,latent_11580,771,0.001542,0.0013623979,7.6563945,References to comparison with prior imaging findings indicating change or stability.,"The pattern identified is the use of comparisons to prior imaging studies, specifically describing changes or suggesting stability in the findings. This pattern highlights how radiologists evaluate whether there is an interval change, which can be crucial in diagnosing or understanding the progression of a medical condition.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4722074042462392,0.4742268041237113,0.4642857142857143,0.5531914893617021,94.0,100.0
+11581,latent_11581,7155,0.01431,0.005472599,1.737689,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior radiographs.,"The most representative examples provide descriptions that compare current imaging findings with those of prior radiographs. This pattern involves evaluative phrases like 'compared to the previous radiograph', mentioning 'interval change', and making direct comparisons to previous imaging studies. These examples highlight a preference for evaluating changes over time.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11582,latent_11582,1177,0.002354,0.0016994029,3.694829,Description of current findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples feature radiology reports that explain the imaging study findings in direct comparison with prior images. Higher activation levels are seen when there's a specific mention of characteristics persisting, resolving, or changing since the last imaging, with emphasis on unchanged features or resolution of pathologies, utilizing phrases like 'no change compared to', 'as before', or 'compared to prior'.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4253452969049299,0.43,0.4406779661016949,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11583,latent_11583,1020,0.00204,0.0015464943,4.394969,Stability or changes in findings from comparison with prior images emphasized.,"These examples all emphasize explicit comparisons between current and previous images, focusing on stability and changes in findings such as lung volumes, opacities, and positioning of medical devices. The activation is higher when changes or stability between studies are detailed.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4455086198205464,0.45,0.4576271186440678,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11584,latent_11584,2738,0.005476,0.0028338796,3.207147,Focus on post-surgical or procedural changes and line placements.,"Examples with higher activations often include procedural details specific to chest procedures, mentioning tubes or lines (like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) and their positions/changes compared to prior studies. This operational focus on medical hardware suggests close monitoring of post-procedural changes or medical device placements within radiography studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11585,latent_11585,3690,0.00738,0.002775974,2.4304974,"Interval changes or stability in radiological comparisons, especially cardiopulmonary.","Examples with higher activations focus on the identification and documentation of changes or the stability of findings from one radiological study compared to prior images. The language and structure of the reports emphasize the comparison and assessment of interval changes in medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathological findings, especially concerning cardiopulmonary-related observations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11586,latent_11586,2116,0.004232,0.002425897,3.43371,Comparison with prior images highlighted.,"The examples with higher activation levels often specify a comparison to previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability in findings. This is a common practice in radiology reports to assess progression or status of a condition. Examples indicating an explicit time frame or comparison notes to prior imaging show higher activation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5298013245033113,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11587,latent_11587,6251,0.012502,0.0046668416,2.9922926,Focus on description of interval change or stability compared with previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels all involve language indicating a change or comparison to prior imaging studies. Specific phrases like 'interval improvement', 'unchanged', and 'as compared to the previous' highlight an emphasis on sequential imaging comparison to assess stability or progression of findings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11588,latent_11588,534,0.001068,0.0012274486,3.204749,Detailed multi-regional comparison using structured radiological language.,Highly representative examples all contain detailed descriptions across multiple anatomical regions and use a comprehensive technique comparison to assess for changes in findings. These reports frequently use structured language to compare the current findings with previous images.,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3845938375350139,0.3846153846153846,0.3267326732673267,0.4782608695652174,69.0,100.0
+11589,latent_11589,609,0.001218,0.0013246832,4.548062,Pulmonary opacities or effusions described or changing.,"The pattern focuses on details or changes in pulmonary opacities, consolidations, or effusions, which are notable findings in radiology reports indicating potential respiratory conditions. These reports often provide descriptions of existing or evolving opacities, consolidations, or effusions, as these findings are critical in diagnosing conditions such as pneumonia, atelectasis, or pleural effusions.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7319783197831978,0.7325581395348837,0.6413043478260869,0.8194444444444444,72.0,100.0
+11590,latent_11590,1183,0.002366,0.0020048767,3.253905,Task to evaluate current and prior image findings.,"The cases with high activation levels consistently describe a task where the user is asked to describe or evaluate findings in the current and prior images. This likely involves some form of image comparison to assess changes or stability in the observed features. The focus is on changes or stability detected across two time points in sequential radiographic evaluations, which is a common operation in medical imaging assessment.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3838638949793233,0.445,0.4662576687116564,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11591,latent_11591,3630,0.00726,0.0031074642,3.7212112,Comparison of current images with prior to assess changes.,"The common pattern here is the use of the prior image in conjunction with the current image to assess changes or stability in findings. In radiology, comparing current images with previous ones is often done to detect any progression or resolution of conditions, which is reflected in these examples.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4800509337860781,0.51,0.5067567567567568,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11592,latent_11592,836,0.001672,0.0013723841,3.824132,Detailed comparison of current and prior chest imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation involve detailed content about current and prior findings in different views of chest imaging, indicating a focus on comparative assessments for any changes. These examples specifically emphasize the direct comparison of findings from current imaging with previous imaging, whether changes are detected or not, often mentioned with terms like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', or 'improvement'.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11593,latent_11593,3297,0.006594,0.0030215636,2.9335148,Focus on comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"Higher activation examples focus on comparison between current and prior imaging findings. This pattern highlights the model's emphasis on detecting changes or stability over time, implying that the model intends to track clinical progress or support longitudinal assessment. Reports stating changes, consistency, or lack of acute findings compared to prior images receive higher activation.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4842767295597484,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11594,latent_11594,2387,0.004774,0.0022165559,3.9666088,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior images.,Examples with higher activation levels emphasize explicit directives to compare the current image findings to a prior image. Language that triggers activation often involves phrases like 'Provide a description of... in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This suggests a focus on identifying diffs or changes since prior studies are completed.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4869565217391304,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11595,latent_11595,3336,0.006672,0.0026233534,2.107238,"Comparison of current and prior image findings, focusing on changes in pathology or device positioning.","These examples reflect scenarios where radiology reports provide detailed observations comparing current and prior images, often noting differences in medical devices, lines, or tubes' positioning and presence of effusions or consolidations. The pattern notably includes either confirmed or suspected changes or lack thereof in pathology or device positioning over time in medical imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.56,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11596,latent_11596,941,0.001882,0.001552048,3.1000695,Presence of textual ambiguity and placeholder symbols in radiology reports.,"The highly activated examples contain specific text fragments often associated with unclear findings, historical context, or variations in radiological techniques represented by symbols, underscores, or placeholders (like '[[:]]', '_'). These fragments contribute to the distinction of the examples from more standard, straightforward reports.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3299663299663299,0.4924623115577889,0.494949494949495,0.98989898989899,99.0,100.0
+11597,latent_11597,2556,0.005112,0.0027265092,3.2061083,Immediate telephone notification of findings.,"The pattern observed is that findings discussed over the telephone immediately or shortly after discovery of results have higher activation levels. This prompt communication suggests urgency or significance to the findings, highlighted by phrases noting immediate notification, discussion timing, and physician engagement.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,1.0,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7643483066235099,0.7738693467336684,0.95,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+11598,latent_11598,2314,0.004628,0.0021779926,4.653075,"Describing findings in comparison to previous images, noting minor or no changes.","Examples with high activation levels often involve instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images, but without substantial differences or changes noted from these comparisons, suggesting likely stability or minor variances being the focal point, whereas low activations are broader in reasonings unrelated to changes or assessment relativity.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4680851063829787,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11599,latent_11599,634,0.001268,0.0010377112,3.4046075,Stable or unchanged medical device positioning in radiology findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention the stable placement or unchanged position of medical devices or lines such as endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, or pacemakers. These references to device stability are distinct and feature repeatedly.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.875,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5335252982311806,0.554945054945055,0.5081967213114754,0.3780487804878049,82.0,100.0
+11600,latent_11600,3501,0.007002,0.0033249608,2.57988,Assessment of medical device positioning in chest imaging.,"The pattern focuses on medical device placement or assessment. Highly activated examples frequently reference devices like catheters, lines, and tubes and discuss their positions in relation to specific anatomical landmarks, emphasizing stability or need for adjustment.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.515625,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11601,latent_11601,6230,0.01246,0.0048844316,3.2598658,Assessment of interval change compared to prior imaging findings.,"Patterns of interval change are emphasized by references indicating that findings are worsening, unchanged or slightly changed, often using comparative words like 'unchanged', 'slightly', or descriptive terms indicating progression or stabilization as compared to previous studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11602,latent_11602,908,0.001816,0.0015841279,3.0689294,Requests for detailed descriptions in comparison context with cut-off sentences or incomplete text.,"This pattern is identified by the mention of findings or conditions that are being described in relation to prior studies or comparisons, often using ambiguous, incomplete, or placeholder indications and often with requests for detailed descriptions of the findings compared to previous studies. The presence of partial sentences or trailing text indicates incomplete input or output of the model, likely due to an interruption or cut-off in the text.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4389901823281907,0.52,0.5113636363636364,0.9,100.0,100.0
+11603,latent_11603,902,0.001804,0.0014602615,3.8735452,Interpretation of findings compared to prior images.,"The model displays high activation levels when reports compare current radiological findings to prior images, particularly when there are no significant changes or specific features noted as normal variants. Examples with explicit phrases indicating absence of comparison ("") or normal findings show lower activation, highlighting an affinity towards reports requiring interpretive assessment.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4230185241421196,0.43,0.4426229508196721,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11604,latent_11604,3926,0.007852,0.0029813086,3.4165463,Noting unchanged or stable findings compared to prior reference images.,"The examples that showed higher activation levels contained specific references to the stability or change of findings across radiographic review, often mentioning 'unchanged' or similar terms, indicating consistency or alteration over time based on historical comparison.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.56,0.42,100.0,100.0
+11605,latent_11605,1056,0.002112,0.0015889959,4.2800674,Positional changes and assessment of medical tubes/devices in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the placement or positional changes of various medical tubes, such as endotracheal, nasogastric, or central venous catheters, in comparison to previous imaging. These reports focus on the precise position of these devices, using measurements from anatomical landmarks like the carina or diaphragm.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6899689968996899,0.69,0.6862745098039216,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11606,latent_11606,916,0.001832,0.0014099461,3.5859497,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in lung conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations focus on comparisons with prior imaging, highlighting significant interval changes, often regarding lung conditions like pneumonia, or stable findings with prior lung pathologies. Reports with these characteristics show the model's tendency to recognize the significance of interval changes or stability of lung conditions as key features.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4308881670066228,0.435,0.4216867469879518,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11607,latent_11607,1208,0.002416,0.0017636354,2.4841733,Stability of radiological features compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels indicate descriptions of current radiological findings and their significant comparison with prior images or reports using descriptors like 'unchanged', 'stably enlarged', or 'no relevant change'. Notably, low activation samples mention new or significant changes which are not referenced in existing reports, indicating a fixation on noted stability in sequential images or lack of change over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3962125967775685,0.4170854271356783,0.3709677419354839,0.23,100.0,99.0
+11608,latent_11608,4234,0.008468,0.0035543742,2.2617958,Focus on description of current imaging findings.,"Higher activation levels are seen in examples that provide a description or observation of the current images, indicating attentiveness to the particulars of these current images in relation to the previous ones. This includes focusing on details unique to the current study.",0.4086206896551724,0.4285714285714285,0.4411764705882353,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4087213599408721,0.44,0.4589041095890411,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11609,latent_11609,724,0.001448,0.0013126803,2.8346133,Endotracheal tube positioning and management.,"Reports with high activation reference endotracheal tube (ET tube) placement or monitoring, indicating that presence or specific details about ET tube positioning are notably recognized by the model. ET tube references often involve specific measurement of distance from the carina and suggestions regarding tube adjustments.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.8888888888888888,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6597215931394752,0.6910994764397905,0.8809523809523809,0.4065934065934066,91.0,100.0
+11610,latent_11610,3021,0.006042,0.0026775245,3.3283014,Findings emphasize lung opacities or consolidation compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples focus specifically on lung opacities or consolidation findings, most often indicative of potential pneumonia, even if stable or unchanged compared to prior images. These details often correlate with specific clinical questions directed towards pulmonary processes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.424107261383247,0.4522613065326633,0.4107142857142857,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+11611,latent_11611,1460,0.00292,0.0018824163,3.125897,Comparison to prior images highlighting interval changes.,The higher activation levels are consistently associated with requests for comparison with prior images that emphasize evaluation of changes or stability in pathologies or medical interventions over time. The examples emphasize 'comparison to prior'.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4818181818181818,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11612,latent_11612,976,0.001952,0.0017993678,3.0401561,Radiology report update or comparison to prior imaging leading to documented change.,"The examples show a pattern where radiology reports either cite or are implied to have earlier findings for comparison, emphasizing updates or unchanged statuses. Examples with higher activation levels show specific changes noted against prior imaging, demanding distinct referencing of earlier reports, which is crucial in monitoring the progress or stasis of identified conditions.",0.32,0.32,0.32,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5028997514498756,0.505,0.504424778761062,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11613,latent_11613,1335,0.00267,0.0018882841,2.7170885,Detection of variability or presence of pleural effusions.,"The highly activated examples consistently include findings that indicate a change, persistence, or variability in pleural effusions, either in size, presence, or bilateral status, which is a key clinical sign in many thoracic conditions. This pattern is seen in multiple studies with comparisons of prior imaging.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8036378668871434,0.81,0.7279411764705882,0.99,100.0,100.0
+11614,latent_11614,5797,0.011594,0.004452245,2.4648333,"Emphasis on image comparison, especially with frontal and lateral chest images.","The presence of multiple imaging techniques such as frontal and lateral views, coupled with the usage of phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image' indicates a focus on comparing multiple aspects of different types of imaging studies. This level of comparison often aims to detect changes in specific findings or abnormalities previously noted.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3928571428571428,0.49,0.4944444444444444,0.89,100.0,100.0
+11615,latent_11615,3187,0.006374,0.0029478113,3.0179293,Reports emphasize interval change or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently discuss findings in terms of changes since prior imaging. These reports emphasize comparing current findings such as opacities, effusions, or changes in disease state against previous imaging results.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6114937309215671,0.615,0.5966386554621849,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11616,latent_11616,1894,0.003788,0.0021607124,5.5431724,Reports indicating notable changes in disease or abnormalities compared to prior imaging.,"The key to these examples is the language indicating analysis and comparison between current and prior radiographic studies. In higher activation instances, the report notes significant changes such as worsened opacities or changes in pleural effusions compared to previous exams.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5999599959995999,0.6,0.5980392156862745,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11617,latent_11617,517,0.001034,0.001039406,4.2051997,Moderately enlarged heart or cardiomegaly.,"Examples with moderate to severe cardiomegaly consistently exhibit high activation levels. Cardiomegaly, or an enlarged heart, is a critical finding in radiology suggesting potential heart disease or failure. It appears consistently across these activated reports, even when other findings vary.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7236530060328688,0.7469135802469136,0.6981132075471698,0.5967741935483871,62.0,100.0
+11618,latent_11618,647,0.001294,0.001060698,4.1246266,"Presence of normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","Only sample 9 does not compare current images with prior ones directly, yet it has the highest activation level, indicating that the mention of 'comparison' is not driving the activation in these examples.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5752840909090908,0.5760869565217391,0.532608695652174,0.5833333333333334,84.0,100.0
+11619,latent_11619,891,0.001782,0.0014568543,3.5733957,Findings compared with prior imaging with emphasis on unchanged devices or conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently indicate scenarios where radiological findings are compared between current and prior imaging, particularly emphasizing unchanged medical devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) and existing conditions (e.g., pacemakers), or specific changes in the condition (e.g., pneumothorax increase or unchanged size). These comparison aspects are the primary pattern identified.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11620,latent_11620,8150,0.0163,0.0060854633,1.7542549,Interval assessment or change in findings between current and prior scans.,"These examples frequently describe the findings of radiology reports in the context of changes or intervals, specifically looking for differences between current and prior imaging. This is evident from explicit mentions of supporting devices, pleural effusions, atelectasis, or pneumothorax changes between images.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5213944023046224,0.542713567839196,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,99.0
+11621,latent_11621,1269,0.002538,0.0017946857,3.8272371,"Indication of normal heart, mediastinal, and hilar contours and absence of acute disease.","The high activation examples focus on identifying the presence or absence of acute disease while the heart size, mediastinal, and hilar contours are described as normal or unchanged. This represents a common pattern in routine comparison reports where the main interest is confirming stability and identifying acute changes.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7815873015873016,0.785,0.728,0.91,100.0,100.0
+11622,latent_11622,677,0.001354,0.0011970142,5.4009857,Comparative analysis with prior images indicating stability or minimal change.,"The higher activation level examples describe radiological findings in terms of comparison to past imaging, with an emphasis on stable conditions or subtle changes over time. This suggests that the observed pattern is the presence of comparative evaluation in context of previous imagery, without significant new pathologies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5686456400742115,0.5698924731182796,0.5333333333333333,0.5581395348837209,86.0,100.0
+11623,latent_11623,10059,0.020118,0.007355132,1.5831988,Focus on pleural effusion assessment or comparison in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve the presence of pleural effusion noted in the findings. Pleural effusions are mentioned as either stable, increased, or persistent in these examples and are central findings of the reports, indicating a pattern related to pleural fluid assessment or comparison in follow-ups.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5543478260869565,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11624,latent_11624,1128,0.002256,0.00179271,4.986401,Analysis and comparison of medical device positioning between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often include a detailed assessment of medical device placement, noting changes in position from prior imaging examinations. This pattern is distinct from other types of radiology reports where medical device positioning isn't a primary focus.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5512820512820513,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11625,latent_11625,7489,0.014978,0.0056954646,2.5265753,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging in reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions that explicitly compare current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, highlighting any changes or stability in key findings. This linguistic pattern focuses on comparative analysis rather than standalone descriptions, using phrases like 'As compared to the previous radiograph, ...' or 'In comparison with the earlier study, ...'.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11626,latent_11626,1874,0.003748,0.0021419195,2.4683983,Comparison with prior imaging studies for changes or stability.,"Across high activation examples, the common theme is the presence of both current and prior imaging studies being compared to detect changes or stability in observed findings. The description specifically focuses on differences or similarities with prior imaging to gauge progress, stability, or regression.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4695652173913043,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11627,latent_11627,1559,0.003118,0.002040325,3.2708263,Focus on pneumothorax presence or change in chest imaging.,"The consistent theme among high-activation examples is the evaluation of pneumothorax, its presence, absence or changes in size, often in the context of other issues like tube placements. Lower activation examples tend to focus on other pathologies without emphasizing pneumothorax.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7359633454997282,0.745,0.6788321167883211,0.93,100.0,100.0
+11628,latent_11628,1564,0.003128,0.0015967668,2.6986926,Focus on change or stability over time in radiology comparisons.,"The instances with high activation levels frequently request comparisons or improvements using prior reports or images, often involving specific changes or stability in findings across time points. This contrasts with examples merely calling for comparisons without specific focus on disease progression or stability.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11629,latent_11629,1748,0.003496,0.0024554501,2.8443327,Patterns of describing stability or change compared to prior imaging studies.,"Activation levels are highest in examples where findings are compared to prior imaging, indicating stability or change in conditions over time. Lower activations correspond to cases without such comparisons, focusing instead on single-time evaluations without referencing prior exams.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5505777310924369,0.5678391959798995,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,99.0
+11630,latent_11630,994,0.001988,0.0018671412,4.108487,Emphasis on detailed comparison of medical devices and opacities in image findings.,"High activation examples involve descriptions of image findings with explicit reference to image comparison and specific notations about medical devices positions such as NG tubes or pacemakers, associated with instructions or suggestions for repositioning, indicating the emphasis on precise detail and analysis in those activations.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.60984393757503,0.61,0.6057692307692307,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11631,latent_11631,7047,0.014094,0.0052632173,1.5670651,Detailed comparison of current and prior images for evaluation of changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions or analyses that include the language pattern of comparing current and prior imaging results, but with sufficient detail to describe changes, even if they are not significant changes, as part of a task that evaluates or compares findings for interval changes or stability.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.5739130434782609,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11632,latent_11632,1273,0.002546,0.0019473716,4.117661,Comparison of current and prior images focusing on device placement.,"These examples consistently include instructions to compare current radiological images with prior images, focusing particularly on changes in positioning or the presence of medical devices such as tubes or catheters. Many descriptions emphasize interval changes or stability of such placements when compared to past records, highlighting a pattern focused on assessing interventions or monitoring.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5555555555555556,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11633,latent_11633,1826,0.003652,0.0023425103,6.909678,Focus on confirmatory findings of stability or correct placement of devices.,"The examples with high activation focus on clear and unchanged observations of medical devices or anatomical features, often confirming correct placement or stability. These texts exemplify detailed acknowledgment of routine verification, a common focus in radiological review, more than pathology.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6049111049986247,0.605,0.6019417475728155,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11634,latent_11634,5695,0.01139,0.004301844,1.8938129,Resolution or improvement of radiological findings over time.,"These examples focus on the resolution or improvement of conditions over time, such as opacities, nodules, or emphysematous changes, in comparison with previous imaging. This resolution or improvement indicates a response to treatment or progression in recovery, highlighted specifically in the report findings.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5945945945945946,0.22,100.0,100.0
+11635,latent_11635,921,0.001842,0.0017476168,2.5490084,"Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging, with unremarkable results.","Examples with higher activations frequently describe situations where no significant new findings or changes are noted between current and prior images, often focusing on the unremarkable aspects of the radiological images. These reports typically mention findings like clear lungs, normal heart size, and absence of acute pathologies, suggesting a pattern of unchanged or stable conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.6060606060606061,0.4,100.0,100.0
+11636,latent_11636,1064,0.002128,0.0021834017,4.8063574,Descriptions emphasizing stability and absence of acute changes compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize repeated descriptions of findings across multiple images, phrasing like 'normal', 'unchanged', 'no significant change', indicating stability or absence of acute abnormalities compared to prior studies. They consistently describe stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes and clear lung fields without acute changes.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5920525798897031,0.595,0.5811965811965812,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11637,latent_11637,7289,0.014578,0.005197279,1.6437864,Involves detailed comparative analysis of radiographic findings.,"The samples with higher activations involve detailing descriptions of radiographic findings, often comparing them with previous images, but tend to involve somewhat more complex findings or instructions to analyze differences between images. Lower activation examples either lack clear indication of changes or deal with simpler, more easily understood findings without the need for detailed interpretation of previous images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11638,latent_11638,911,0.001822,0.0013858768,5.555803,Descriptions comparing current and prior images with noted changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve providing specific descriptions of imaging findings from current images and making detailed comparisons to prior images, identifying changes or noting stability in medical condition or abnormality. They highlight changes and clinical relevance based on historical data, often recommending further evaluation if changes are identified.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11639,latent_11639,577,0.001154,0.0010708829,3.1089408,"Presence of prior report, history, and structured format in radiological findings.","Examples with higher activation levels describe the presence of multiple images and a previous report, with often a more structured format indicating history, comparison, findings, and multiple image views, hinting at a predefined format for reporting in radiological studies.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3449131513647643,0.4545454545454545,0.4444444444444444,0.987012987012987,77.0,99.0
+11640,latent_11640,2770,0.00554,0.0027446076,2.9957273,Assessment of stability and lack of significant change from prior imaging.,"These examples describe radiological findings where a comparison is made between current and prior images, with emphasis on assessing stability or progression of findings. The pattern involves phrases highlighting unchanged findings from previous exams, often downplaying new significant changes.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5592076787942053,0.5628140703517588,0.5802469135802469,0.47,100.0,99.0
+11641,latent_11641,9273,0.018546,0.00958994,2.947514,Descriptors of stability or normality in thoracic imaging findings.,"The pattern across examples with higher activation involves descriptions that denote normal or unchanged findings in thoracic imaging, especially in the context of evaluating for acute or new processes. Terms like 'unchanged', 'normal', 'within normal limits', 'no focal consolidation', 'no pleural effusion' or 'moderate cardiomegaly', suggest stable conditions without acute aggravation, often leading to lower urgency or alteration in clinical management.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,100.0,100.0
+11642,latent_11642,3423,0.006846,0.0026575797,1.8891071,Reference to comparison and changes in findings from previous imaging studies.,"The pattern involves describing changes in findings from previous radiological examinations. There are multiple references to comparisons with prior imaging studies, making observations about changes in medical devices or pulmonary conditions, or changes in pathology, all of which are typical in radiology reports that compare current findings to past measurements.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4884910485933503,0.5,0.5,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11643,latent_11643,1153,0.002306,0.001534131,4.0465794,Descriptions of new findings or changes upon comparison with prior image.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels involve assessments or descriptions of new findings or changes since the last radiographic examination. Examples with changed elements such as positioning of tubes, presence of new masses, or pleural effusions have higher activation levels. The emphasis is on identifying recent changes when comparing current and prior images.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4561403508771929,0.26,100.0,100.0
+11644,latent_11644,3110,0.00622,0.004161731,2.5435224,Descriptive comparisons to previous radiological findings.,"These examples show descriptions of radiological findings that involve making comparisons between current and previous examinations. Specific linguistic cues indicate stability or progress of findings, such as 'unchanged', 'similar to the prior', or 'consistent with change'. This pattern is consistent with longitudinal monitoring or follow-up in radiology reports.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11645,latent_11645,4759,0.009518,0.0038714916,2.5493276,Description of changes in medical device positioning from prior images.,"Highly activated examples focus on identifying changes from previous imaging, particularly in terms of position and condition of medical devices such as enteric tubes, endotracheal tubes, or other inserted devices. Cases with low activation typically do not emphasize such comparisons and changes.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.517214120212621,0.5527638190954773,0.6222222222222222,0.28,100.0,99.0
+11646,latent_11646,733,0.001466,0.0012859831,3.1561513,Hilar region abnormalities or significant changes mentioned.,"High activation levels in these examples involve radiological findings that focus on abnormalities or significant changes involving the hilum or hilar region of the lungs. The hilum is mentioned either directly or in relation to specific part findings or conditions such as mass, enlargement, or associated pathologies.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,0.8620689655172413,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7041162227602906,0.723404255319149,0.8627450980392157,0.4943820224719101,89.0,99.0
+11647,latent_11647,441,0.000882,0.0012870843,3.119622,Comparison of current with prior radiological findings with clinical assessment.,"Examples with high activations focus on detailed description of findings in comparison to prior radiological images to assess changes over time. Comparison is central to the conclusions drawn, with specific attention to placement of tubes, devices, or diagnosable conditions like effusion or cardiomegaly, reflecting clinical significance of such evaluations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4660916624386944,0.4675324675324675,0.3478260869565217,0.5925925925925926,54.0,100.0
+11648,latent_11648,5326,0.010652,0.004088568,3.044691,Emphasis on comparative analysis of prior and current imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on detailed assessments of changes or stability of radiographic findings over time by comparing them explicitly with prior imaging studies. This involves tracking changes in lesions, opacities, effusions, catheter placements, etc., showing usage of comparative language to highlight before-and-after conditions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11649,latent_11649,1811,0.003622,0.0023573171,3.9336863,Satisfactory positioning of endotracheal and nasogastric tubes.,"This pattern is observed in scenarios containing confirmation of satisfactory positioning of tubes and lines. Radiology reports often contain these findings as they assess the placement of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes and nasogastric tubes, shown to be positioned correctly without complications. This is a frequent requirement in cases involving intubation.",0.898989898989899,0.9,1.0,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7291666666666667,0.74,0.9,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11650,latent_11650,810,0.00162,0.0013888889,2.199438,Comparison of current imaging findings with previous due to distinct pathological or treatment-related changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve comparing current imaging findings with prior reports or images using a systematic description of changes over time, often involving medical devices or physiological changes. The presence of detailed comparisons and historical consistency or slight changes seem relevant.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3949848746218655,0.395,0.3939393939393939,0.39,100.0,100.0
+11651,latent_11651,4527,0.009054,0.0036619818,2.7321293,Reports emphasize stability or no change in findings across imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe medical imaging findings by first indicating the current and prior images being reviewed and then noting specific observations, often suggesting a stable appearance or no interval change in findings from earlier studies. This pattern focuses on the continuity and comparative stability across multiple imaging points, which is central to evaluating ongoing medical conditions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.55,0.55,0.55,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11652,latent_11652,756,0.001512,0.0012471407,4.057537,Comparative analysis with prior images focusing on stability or changes.,"The high activation examples are characterized by descriptions or comparisons in relation to findings from prior reports, often focusing on stability, unchanged findings, or interval changes. The use of specific radiological terminology to describe findings against prior images in combination with possible changes is a consistent pattern.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5055900621118012,0.5175879396984925,0.5114503816793893,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+11653,latent_11653,1393,0.002786,0.0015829487,2.991168,Changes in placement or presence of medical devices between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention changes between the current and prior imaging studies. These changes specifically involve modifications, placements, or removals of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, and nasogastric tubes. This indicates the model is sensitive to interval changes in patient management or condition as depicted in the modifications of these medical apparatuses.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5686274509803921,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11654,latent_11654,2045,0.00409,0.0021908986,2.5157938,Detailing interval changes or stability using prior radiologic comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently request comparisons of current and prior radiological images, particularly those involving findings related to lung or mediastinal changes over time. The wording often emphasizes interval changes or lack thereof, and frequent mentions of prior radiographs or CT scans indicate a pattern of longitudinal image comparison.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11655,latent_11655,7165,0.01433,0.0053568487,1.8494942,Emphasis on findings or changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with activations showing a pattern explicitly emphasize the comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies, often noting changes in specific clinical findings. These examples use specific comparison language and dates, focusing on evaluated changes over time, such as 'in comparison with the study of' or 'compared to prior'. The presence of such comparative language and follow-up evaluation is crucial to understanding their significance in radiology reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5538956323270048,0.57,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11656,latent_11656,733,0.001466,0.0014139363,3.112849,Reports focus on changes seen in comparison to prior images.,"The majority of examples displaying activation contain requests to provide findings from current images in comparison to prior images, indicating an emphasis on analyzing changes or stability over time. This comparison often involves specific mention of certain findings or devices appearing unchanged versus new findings, like effusions or consolidated changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4547653604257378,0.4673913043478261,0.4453125,0.6785714285714286,84.0,100.0
+11657,latent_11657,12874,0.025748,0.009381486,1.8674978,Changes or consistency in imaging findings or devices over time.,"Examples with moderate activation levels frequently involve descriptions of changes over time or equipment, often compared to prior images. Details about changes or stability in medical devices or findings often indicate key developments significant in clinical assessments.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.443170651817884,0.49,0.4936708860759494,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11658,latent_11658,727,0.001454,0.0013432518,7.753954,Comparative analysis of chest imagery with focus on lung and mediastinal changes.,"These examples depict a pattern where the description emphasizes changes or findings in the lungs, mediastinum, or cardiac silhouette that are made in direct comparison to known previous studies, using phrases such as 'comparison to prior study' or detailed previous imagery data.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3892857142857142,0.40625,0.4135338345864661,0.6043956043956044,91.0,101.0
+11659,latent_11659,8535,0.01707,0.0061227013,1.2350882,Use of complex language and detailed analysis in radiology comparisons.,"Examples with high activation use sophisticated language involving detailed observations and nuanced assessments, often pointing out subtle changes or stability in clinical findings that require expertise to identify. These examples also tend to have references to technical aspects of radiographic analysis, like positioning, or include comparisons involving specific dates.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5211371803001479,0.5329949238578681,0.5230769230769231,0.6938775510204082,98.0,99.0
+11660,latent_11660,1139,0.002278,0.0019074887,4.3875117,Comparison of current image findings with previous images.,"The pattern in these examples is the report's emphasis on comparing current findings with previous imaging studies or exams. This comparison could be expressed explicitly with terms like 'focal opacity new from the prior study' or 'no significant interval change', indicating the examination of progression or stability of a condition through time.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11661,latent_11661,940,0.00188,0.0015563895,3.2712495,Emphasis on stability or changes in conditions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons with prior imaging that show changes or lack thereof in specific conditions, such as locations and nature of opacities, lung volumes, and presence or absence of new findings. They often emphasize comparisons leading to clinical impressions about stability or changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.49,0.49,0.49,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11662,latent_11662,2071,0.004142,0.002061788,3.5770133,Variation in medical tube positioning shown across images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes in the positioning of medical tubes within the body, such as enteric tubes, Dobbhoff tubes, or nasogastric tubes, often using sequential imaging to confirm or assess placement, alignments, and repositioning efficacy.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11663,latent_11663,1346,0.002692,0.0017754782,2.74743,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to previous imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on specific descriptions of changes or stability in findings when compared to previous images. These reports prioritize observing modifications or confirmations of stability between current and prior imaging evaluations, often using phrases like 'interval increase','unchanged','stable','resolved','improved','worsened', or indicating new development.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11664,latent_11664,4096,0.008192,0.0034449114,3.2824972,Emphasis on stability or change in findings from prior imaging comparisons.,"The instances of higher activations generally focus on changes in the patient's condition over time, specifically highlighting reported changes or lack thereof relative to previous studies, often prominently noting any progression or stability of certain conditions such as opacities, edema, or effusions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11665,latent_11665,475,0.00095,0.0011103743,5.049606,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"Examples consistently make comparisons between current imaging findings and prior studies. This is indicated by phrases like 'in comparison', 'compared to', 'comparison is made', and explicit references to previous images.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4366862957176621,0.4367088607594936,0.3434343434343434,0.5862068965517241,58.0,100.0
+11666,latent_11666,3169,0.006338,0.0028700181,3.3196886,Evaluation of medical device placement or related findings.,"These examples consistently focus on evaluating possible changes, position shifts, or complications related to medical devices, tubes, or surgical interventions, with specific comparison to previous imaging to assess interval changes or stability in device placement.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5350467289719626,0.5376884422110553,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,99.0
+11667,latent_11667,830,0.00166,0.0014186613,3.37592,Explicit instruction to compare with prior images alongside detailed findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently provide a text prompt structure that specifies the task of producing a description of the findings in the radiology study by comparing with previous images. This comparison includes specific changes or notable aspects of the images, such as the presence and position of devices or the changes in pathologies.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11668,latent_11668,6800,0.0136,0.005101755,2.0520794,Stability or change in specific conditions compared to prior imaging.,"There is a pattern where reports reference the stability or change in specific conditions, particularly lesions or abnormalities compared to prior imaging. Examples with higher activations commonly note conditions as stable or unchanged, which reflects the pattern of documenting the progression or stasis of medical conditions.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5630252100840336,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11669,latent_11669,842,0.001684,0.0014531014,2.7843275,Explicit comparison to prior images with minimal changes.,"The examples with higher activation primarily describe findings in which there's an explicit ""comparison"" or reference to a prior image, such as stating there are no changes or specific anatomical structures are unchanged compared to previous imaging. This reflects a pattern of interest in stable states or minimal interval changes between serial radiological reviews.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11670,latent_11670,4666,0.009332,0.00377299,2.1376169,Comparison with prior images showing temporal changes or stability in findings.,"The examples with higher activation mention direct comparison with prior imaging studies and also integrate references to changes over time in the findings such as resolution or persistence of certain medical conditions or features, which is a common practice in radiological interpretations to track the progress or status of a condition.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11671,latent_11671,556,0.001112,0.0013778134,3.6748087,Routine reports showing normal cardiopulmonary status without significant findings.,"Examples with high activation lack significant findings and consistently describe normal cardiopulmonary status, with repeated phrases such as 'clear lungs', 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette', and absence of consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. Reports that highlight significant findings or changes tend to have low activation levels.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7677777777777778,0.7696969696969697,0.6588235294117647,0.8615384615384616,65.0,100.0
+11672,latent_11672,1675,0.00335,0.0020963242,3.4792812,Comparison of current images with prior ones to assess fluctuations in lung or pleural pathology.,"Highly activated samples frequently involve imaging findings compared to prior studies to note changes in lung opacities, atelectasis, pneumonia, or pleural effusions with associated clinical context, highlighting unchanged or evolving pathology. References to previous images enable detection of subtle differences and consistency, indicating the model's focus on comparative diagnosis.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5714285714285714,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11673,latent_11673,1571,0.003142,0.0018253494,2.8236046,Evaluation of stability or change in recurrent conditions via prior image comparison.,"The examples with higher activation often show a focus on changes over time in specific recurrent conditions such as effusions or opacities, along with prior imaging comparisons to evaluate progress or stability. These typically involve descriptive terms like 'interval change', 'persistent', 'stable', or reference noted changes since prior frontal images, indicating attention to evolution in patient condition.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11674,latent_11674,1061,0.002122,0.0015885372,2.9457371,In-depth comparison with multiple prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels involve detailed comparisons, including descriptions of changes or new findings, made between current and multiple prior imaging studies or explicit statements guiding to make such comparisons. This pattern indicates an advanced interpretation of radiological changes over time, integrating multiple sources of prior data to detect interval changes or persistent features.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4555902812783546,0.46,0.4512195121951219,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11675,latent_11675,992,0.001984,0.0017040462,2.3403797,Reports requiring chest image comparisons and multiple views.,"High activation is associated with reports that involve descriptions requiring interpretation of multiple chest views (frontal, lateral) and include comparison with prior images. The repeated pattern here is comparing current and previous imaging studies to note interval changes or stability in findings.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,100.0,100.0
+11676,latent_11676,1537,0.003074,0.0017324036,2.7207544,Stable or changing positions of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly involve comparison between current and prior imaging studies, focussing on changes in placement or presence of medical devices, particularly endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and other indwelling devices. The pattern is identifying and comparing changes in device placement or stability between studies.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.6164383561643836,0.45,100.0,100.0
+11677,latent_11677,1780,0.00356,0.0022910093,2.7473497,Findings compared to prior imaging studies or exams.,"The pattern observed in highly activated samples is the inclusion of phrases indicating findings or evaluations based on a comparison with previous or prior imaging studies. This involves describing new radiology examination findings in relation to earlier images, showing stability, changes, or new developments over time.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11678,latent_11678,3379,0.006758,0.0030055905,4.315982,Focus on cardiac silhouette and aortic findings.,"The examples with higher activation frequently mention specific anatomical findings related to the cardiac silhouette and/or aorta, particularly when changes in size, contour, or tortuosity are noted. Reports highlighting these features often pertain to cardiovascular evaluations or conditions impacting these structures.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4545454545454545,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11679,latent_11679,12488,0.024976,0.009087364,1.4353975,Emphasis on observed changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation emphasize the use of comparison or observation of changes between current and prior imaging, specifically highlighting differences or stability in clinical conditions. This typically indicates a focus on the assessment of interval changes or progression in known conditions.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.584,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11680,latent_11680,8179,0.016358,0.006638268,2.204833,Comparison of current radiology findings with previous images to assess change.,"The pattern in these examples centers on the comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging studies, focusing on interval changes such as improvement, progression, or stability of previously noted conditions. This is a common approach in radiology to assess the evolution of a patient's condition.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11681,latent_11681,3435,0.00687,0.0037551527,4.153704,Comparative analysis with previous imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples selected have a recurring theme of evaluating the current radiology findings in comparison to previous images. The comparison often involves monitoring device placement, changes in opacities or consolidations, and adjusting clinical assessments based on these differences.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649405772495755,0.59,0.5608108108108109,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11682,latent_11682,7445,0.01489,0.005779415,1.8066727,Presence or absence of opacities suggesting pneumonia or consolidation.,"Examples with high activation levels seem to focus on the detection of new or unchanged opacities, abnormalities, or pathologies within the images, particularly those that might suggest pneumonia or similar conditions, against a backdrop of otherwise 'normal contour' structures. Low activation examples typically describe standard findings with no contrast.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4552673659105076,0.4924623115577889,0.4791666666666667,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+11683,latent_11683,661,0.001322,0.0012662088,5.883008,Detailed analysis with multiple views and comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain multiple references to images (like frontal and lateral views) along with comparisons to prior images, indicating a pattern of more detailed analysis comparing multiple views in context of past studies. Lower activation levels are associated with either single view analysis, lack of past image comparison, or simpler presentations.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4750977835723599,0.5191256830601093,0.4836601307189542,0.891566265060241,83.0,100.0
+11684,latent_11684,3000,0.006,0.0029555992,2.6881754,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette on comparison with prior radiographs.,"These examples highlight radiology observations where the heart or cardiomediastinal silhouette appear normal or unchanged in the context of comparing current images with prior examinations, often with no new findings detected in various aspects of the chest, such as the lungs, pleura, or vasculature.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4878676470588236,0.507537688442211,0.5081967213114754,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+11685,latent_11685,9431,0.018862,0.007159501,2.5949302,Comparison of invasive device positions in current and prior radiology studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently described previously documented invasive medical devices in radiological findings, such as catheters, endotracheal tubes, or chest tubes, and their positions relative to previous examinations. The focus is on identifying changes, removal, or new placements of these medical devices in comparison to prior studies.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.535838771391881,0.5527638190954773,0.5806451612903226,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+11686,latent_11686,1117,0.002234,0.0016020826,4.840694,Stable cardiomediastinal contours or normal heart size with clear lungs and no effusion.,"The examples exhibit a pattern of normal cardiomediastinal contours, cardiomediastinal stability, or normal heart sizes, alongside clear lungs and absence of pleural effusion or other acute pathology. This combination represents a common finding in routine radiological evaluations where the primary concern is evaluating cardiopulmonary status in various clinical contexts, and often leads to normal or unchanged findings noted in the reports.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.69,0.69,0.69,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11687,latent_11687,735,0.00147,0.0012186373,5.426385,Comparative evaluation of medical device positioning on imaging.,"The pattern is characterized by the presence of comparisons with prior studies, with emphasis on catheter or tube positioning or changes in various devices such as central venous catheters, ET tubes, pacemakers, or intra-aortic balloon pumps. These documents focus on changes or stability in the positioning of these devices as compared to previous examinations.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6178714599767232,0.6192893401015228,0.625,0.5670103092783505,97.0,100.0
+11688,latent_11688,695,0.00139,0.0012966936,4.703804,Interpretation of interval changes based on comparison with prior images.,"These examples focus on providing comparative analyses using past radiological studies. The assistive descriptions emphasize interpreting interval changes or lack thereof in chest imaging, often using words like 'no significant interval change,' 'compared to prior study,' and 'unchanged since'. These are consistent terminologies for comparing current imaging with past referenced results.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5777738764044944,0.5783783783783784,0.5327102803738317,0.6705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+11689,latent_11689,2288,0.004576,0.0027744053,3.6837132,Tracking interval changes and medical interventions observed in serial imaging.,"These examples all involve acting upon changing clinical findings or decisions, such as the removal or placement of medical devices, equipment, or tubes, alongside tracking interval changes between imaging studies. The pattern reflects the tracking of medical interventions and their spatial relation to thoracic anatomical regions or structures in successive imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5719070282793182,0.575,0.5641025641025641,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11690,latent_11690,1569,0.003138,0.0020768344,5.764453,Evaluation of stability or unchanged position of monitoring devices.,"Highly activated examples consistently contain references to indwelling monitoring and support devices that are repeatedly checked or documented with little change between imaging studies. Phrases like 'unchanged position' or 'devices remain in place' occur commonly, indicating evaluation of stability or proper placement of such devices.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6317135549872123,0.64,0.7,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11691,latent_11691,695,0.00139,0.0014610689,3.2151449,Explicit comparison of current and prior images integrated into prompt.,"Highly activated examples repeatedly indicate requests for radiological reviews which involve comparing current images to prior images, especially when prior images are explicitly integrated into the prompt format.",0.25,0.28,0.3428571428571428,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3566671599822406,0.3915343915343915,0.4097222222222222,0.6629213483146067,89.0,100.0
+11692,latent_11692,690,0.00138,0.0013489316,2.4730318,Images with normal lung and cardiomediastinal findings without prior comparison.,"Examples with higher activations describe the presence of normal lung and cardiomediastinal findings without descriptors of prior exams or significant abnormal findings, while examples with low activation typically involve more detailed comparisons with previous findings or are less clear with certain abnormalities or conditions present.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5986250661025913,0.6413043478260869,0.725,0.3452380952380952,84.0,100.0
+11693,latent_11693,6760,0.01352,0.005112898,1.9303629,Presence of multiple imaging views or modalities to assess notable findings or devices.,"The examples suggest the pattern that references multiple imaging modalities or views are associated with notable findings or pathologies, indicated by higher activation. These examples often describe the presence or stability of medical devices, invasive lines or tubes, or changes in disease states (e.g., stable versus evolving pathology), which are crucial observations in a clinical context and may require multiple views for thorough assessment.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4557253506384761,0.545,0.5248618784530387,0.95,100.0,100.0
+11694,latent_11694,2218,0.004436,0.002447198,2.3867776,References to post-surgical cardiac status and interventions.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings related to previous surgical interventions such as sternotomy, valve replacement, or bypass surgery (e.g., CABG), often accompanied by stable post-operative cardiac conditions like cardiomegaly or catheter placements. The consistent reference to past surgical history and the analysis of post-surgical chest condition drive the pattern.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.525,0.21,100.0,100.0
+11695,latent_11695,2646,0.005292,0.0030069072,3.3033967,Recognition of lung opacities or consolidations indicating pneumonia or atelectasis.,"Instances with higher activation levels consistently involve the identification of specific lung or airspace opacities or consolidations, which could suggest conditions like pneumonia or atelectasis. These examples often use phrases like 'focal consolidation,' 'opacity,' 'likely atelectasis,' or 'concerning for pneumonia,' indicating a focus on these types of pathologies.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7226094229160859,0.7236180904522613,0.6964285714285714,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+11696,latent_11696,1088,0.002176,0.0016318253,4.0665364,Comparison of current and prior images with detailed historical findings.,"Activation levels are higher when the examples include explicit comparisons between current and prior images, even more so when the findings are described in detail along with a historical context, indicating that the model is attuned to the pattern of recognizing image comparisons and their significance.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5242718446601942,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11697,latent_11697,7344,0.014688,0.0053526126,1.5974485,Comparison with prior imaging shows stable or slightly changed status of devices or chest pathology.,"In these examples, a common pattern is the focus on comparison with prior imaging which identifies changes in medical devices or chest pathology, often indicating stable conditions or small interval changes, such as in the size of effusions or cardiomegaly without significant acute findings. Reports emphasize 'unchanged', 'stable', or slightly changed status concerning devices or pathologies.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5794392523364486,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11698,latent_11698,7439,0.014878,0.005533461,1.8016827,Detailed radiological comparison description request following 'Provide a description of the findings'.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature the use of 'Provide a description of the findings' followed by detailed comparative analysis of chest images in a structured radiological report format. This suggests the model is tuned to recognize and highlight imaging descriptions requiring detailed examination, particularly those comparing current and prior images and noting changes or stabilities in conditions.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11699,latent_11699,2217,0.004434,0.0024867796,2.5196526,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with clear lung fields from PA and lateral views.,"Highly activated examples include 'PA and lateral' chest radiograph views for evaluation, typically indicating a thorough examination process. These examples consistently describe findings with stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, with clear lung fields despite varied clinical indications, suggesting normal or unchanged radiological appearances.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,100.0,100.0
+11700,latent_11700,1560,0.00312,0.0021105225,3.0817602,"Reports noting 'no', 'unchanged', or 'normal' findings compared to prior studies.","Low activation examples often have either a comparison element without any change or simply describe normal findings. High activation examples consistently use words like 'no', 'unchanged', or 'normal' to indicate findings in context of radiological comparison indicating stability or absence.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.54,0.54,0.54,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11701,latent_11701,4095,0.00819,0.004153088,2.4910846,Detailed description of changes or positions of medical devices on imaging.,"The higher activation examples all focus on the precise identification of changes, placements, and positioning of tubes, lines, or devices (like endotracheal tubes, PICC, or catheters) in radiological studies compared to previous imagery. This involves detailed comparisons and specific placement descriptions, which are essential in ensuring correct medical device positioning and related observation.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5849782366636299,0.59,0.6153846153846154,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11702,latent_11702,1901,0.003802,0.002366068,4.4492836,Requests for findings based on comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples all prompt the model to describe findings from current images in comparison to prior images. The pattern involves describing changes or confirming stability in the visual data provided, even when no comparison image data is actually available for reference.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11703,latent_11703,669,0.001338,0.001348588,3.8465707,Changes in medical device position relative to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples all involve some mention of changes or positioning related to medical/surgical devices, such as endotracheal tubes or catheters. This pattern focuses on the presence and positioning of these medical devices in comparison to prior imaging.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5053763440860215,0.5652173913043478,0.5555555555555556,0.238095238095238,84.0,100.0
+11704,latent_11704,932,0.001864,0.0014594347,4.7380304,Comparisons of current images with prior studies to show changes.,"The examples that are highly activated utilize radiology findings in comparison to a previous image, demonstrating changes or stability over two exam periods. These are typically used to assess the status and progress of a condition or placement of medical devices in relation to prior examinations, which is a key task in radiology.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,100.0,100.0
+11705,latent_11705,1424,0.002848,0.0019275523,2.167537,Provision of both frontal and lateral images with comparison to prior imaging.,Higher activation levels are associated with descriptions that involve both frontal and lateral images being provided for comparison and explicit references to prior imaging for evaluation. This suggests that the pattern focuses on combining multiple views of the chest compared to prior images for assessment.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4611064944222004,0.465,0.4700854700854701,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11706,latent_11706,1625,0.00325,0.0021646614,3.4982114,Comparison with prior imaging which indicate stability.,"Examples prompt for comparison between current and prior images, emphasizing stability or minor changes in findings like normal cardiac silhouettes and cardiomediastinal contours. While varied, these observations reflect trends consistent with monitoring or evaluating unchanged diagnoses.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.27,100.0,100.0
+11707,latent_11707,766,0.001532,0.001407957,2.96041,"Comparison with prior findings, noting stability or change.","Highly activated examples involve descriptions of imaging studies that include clear references to prior imaging findings for comparative purposes. This involves indicating the stability or change in the appearance from previous examinations, which is often important in monitoring disease progression or stability.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4333046807845588,0.4336734693877551,0.4210526315789473,0.4166666666666667,96.0,100.0
+11708,latent_11708,1603,0.003206,0.0023053384,5.4958534,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples frequently involve providing descriptions of findings in direct comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern involves evaluating changes or stability in patient conditions over time by contrasting current and previous findings, which is typical in radiology when tracking progress or diagnosis.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.6,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5550674438906255,0.605,0.562874251497006,0.94,100.0,100.0
+11709,latent_11709,2439,0.004878,0.002314455,2.3079355,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal contour comparison in frontal and lateral chest images.,"Examples with mid-to-high activation levels feature clear lungs on the current frontal and lateral views, without any pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation. These examples emphasize normalcy or stability in the lung fields and cardiomediastinal contours despite the presence of prior images for comparison, making it a recurring pattern for the model.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5357142857142857,0.3,100.0,100.0
+11710,latent_11710,8956,0.017912,0.006633359,1.4547031,Assessment of interval changes and stability in medical images.,"The examples with higher activation involve comparison between current and prior imaging, often focusing on changes in medical devices, pleural effusions, or specific lesions. The text also includes detailed evaluations of these features in the context of stability or worsening.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.5158730158730159,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11711,latent_11711,1035,0.00207,0.0016668974,2.8567412,Emphasis on detailed findings comparison with past images.,"The instances with high activation levels emphasize detailed comparisons with prior imaging to assess stability or change in medical findings. These comparisons often involve references to device positioning, unchanged or stable findings, and explicit recognition of comparison with earlier imaging.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4928571428571429,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11712,latent_11712,570,0.00114,0.0011913389,3.2365866,Interpretation focuses on current lateral image despite comparing to prior only frontal image.,"The pattern involves a reference to using a current ""lateral image"" despite also mentioning a ""prior frontal image"" or sparse prior comparison, with an explicit description following these cues (e.g., findings in lateral view, no prior full comparison, etc.). This combination aligns with the distinction between current imagery, without comprehensive prior direct comparison, leading to activation.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5057138258490262,0.5542168674698795,0.4166666666666667,0.303030303030303,66.0,100.0
+11713,latent_11713,837,0.001674,0.0014035035,5.6973057,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The common pattern in these examples is the explicit comparison of current findings to previous imaging, with an emphasis on unchanged or virtually unchanged conditions, such as unvarying effusions, effusions with atelectasis, or unchanged positions of catheters and chest tubes. The phrase 'unchanged appearance' or synonymous expressions frequently appear, indicating stability over time—a theme prevalent in radiology comparisons.",0.7947454844006567,0.8,0.7272727272727273,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7457023700539112,0.75,0.6984126984126984,0.88,100.0,100.0
+11714,latent_11714,791,0.001582,0.0014621223,2.4920907,Involves image comparison to prior studies for assessment.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe a protocol or task that involves comparing the current images to prior images. These are often structured with similar phrasing and indicate active evaluation based on comparison, which is typically a key feature in diagnostic processes when monitoring changes or stability of findings.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4203536239708462,0.4467005076142132,0.4577464788732394,0.6701030927835051,97.0,100.0
+11715,latent_11715,3848,0.007696,0.0047396077,6.004298,Reports on device or line placement with interval comparison.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve the usage or placement of medical devices, tubes, and lines like PAC pacers, endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, pigtail catheters, and imaging of sites post-procedure, with comparisons to prior images. These focus on assessing the position, changes, or complications associated with these devices.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5985547972701726,0.6,0.6136363636363636,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11716,latent_11716,9188,0.018376,0.0068550264,1.9156541,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging studies for evaluation.,"These examples focus heavily on the practice of comparing the current imaging findings to those from previous studies. The reports with high activation explicitly mention comparisons, identifying differences or confirming stability, which is a crucial element in monitoring disease progression or treatment response.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11717,latent_11717,1210,0.00242,0.0016774163,2.5038953,Comparison of current radiographs with specific findings from prior reports.,"The common thread among high activation samples is the mention of specific past radiology findings being included for comparison, along with instructions, often specific to patient history or previous interventions, like when multiple or specific prior imaging reports are included for comparison.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11718,latent_11718,2944,0.005888,0.0029333343,3.3540177,Tracking and comparison of medical device placement over time.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention the presence and placement of tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric, PICC) or other medical devices in comparison with previous imaging. The pattern focuses on tracking devices within the body across time, which is often significant in medical imaging assessments.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5068493150684932,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11719,latent_11719,1057,0.002114,0.0015631793,5.2917175,Detailed comparison with findings from prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples provide detailed comparisons with prior imaging and explicitly discuss changes or stability over time, using specific findings such as interval changes or newly developed conditions. Less activated examples lack such comparisons or detail.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6067315304272325,0.615,0.5891472868217055,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11720,latent_11720,13094,0.026188,0.009516853,1.9507601,Involves comparison of current to prior radiographic images.,"The examples that lead to higher activations consistently involve descriptions of the current image findings in comparison to prior radiographic images, which showcase changes or stability in conditions from older imaging studies. The pattern involves specifically calling out changes over time or stability compared to a previous date, indicating an emphasis on detecting interval changes.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11721,latent_11721,678,0.001356,0.0014000265,3.988725,Radiological comparison details focusing on catheter or tube status.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the presence and/or placement status of catheters or tubes (e.g., PICC lines, tracheostomy tubes, Dobbhoff tubes) compared to prior images. Descriptions specify positioning or changes, often ensuring accurate placement or assessing for complications.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7932584269662921,0.7934782608695652,0.7169811320754716,0.9047619047619048,84.0,100.0
+11722,latent_11722,1321,0.002642,0.001778684,3.4175322,Changes in medical device or catheter placement compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern here indicates that activation is associated with explicit reference or emphasis on detailed device positioning or equipment changes in relation to previous imaging or current status. This includes descriptions of catheter, tube, or other medical device positions and any interval changes since prior imaging.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5668333377897805,0.595,0.6938775510204082,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11723,latent_11723,1835,0.00367,0.001987121,2.3350396,Comparison between current and prior radiographic images for evaluation of changes.,The pattern identified in these examples involves explicit comparisons between current and prior radiographs to evaluate changes or stability in medical conditions or positions of medical devices.,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11724,latent_11724,3574,0.007148,0.0029441002,2.9445062,Documentation of lung opacities in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples that show significant activation levels often note the presence or change of lung opacities, particularly focusing on changes observed in comparison with prior imaging. This pattern emphasizes the documentation of discrepancies like increased or unchanged opacities, which are crucial for tracking respiratory conditions such as pneumonia or pulmonary edema.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,100.0,100.0
+11725,latent_11725,1534,0.003068,0.002310218,3.8812263,Emphasis on detecting interval changes in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently reference changes over time when sequential imaging is considered, as indicated by phrases like 'interval change', 'compared to prior', or stability over time, implying an emphasis on comparing current findings to prior imaging in determining the clinical significance.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11726,latent_11726,644,0.001288,0.0014075057,4.7780547,Clear or unremarkable lung findings without acute pathology.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the lungs being clear or unremarkable, particularly in the context of chest radiographs with limited findings of concern such as consolidation or effusion. The emphasis is on the absence of acute pathologies in the lungs despite other potential indicators for evaluation being present, like a history of symptoms or previous findings.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.7096774193548387,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.747722368736514,0.7486338797814208,0.6666666666666666,0.891566265060241,83.0,100.0
+11727,latent_11727,13188,0.026376,0.009548921,1.8366228,Mentions of interval change or comparison to prior imaging with unchanged or resolved findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels refer explicitly to findings described in comparison to previous imaging studies, despite the current findings not suggesting an acute process or significant deviation from normal. The presence of comparative language, especially regarding tubes or lines in medical devices, appears to trigger the pattern.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5828724398313003,0.5829145728643216,0.5841584158415841,0.59,100.0,99.0
+11728,latent_11728,402,0.000804,0.00094880775,4.9028044,Emphasis on changes over time in comparison to prior images.,"The focus is on radiological studies where the comparison with prior imaging is emphasized, specifically identifying changes over time such as interval increases, decreases, or stability of noted conditions. This is evident in descriptions detailing observations like changes in pneumothorax, opacities, or effusions compared to previous scans.",0.4480600750938673,0.4489795918367347,0.4444444444444444,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.3827618164967562,0.3918918918918919,0.2439024390243902,0.4166666666666667,48.0,100.0
+11729,latent_11729,1050,0.0021,0.0014044108,3.708405,Focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples that describe changes, especially improvements or deteriorations in condition compared to prior images, have higher activation. Specific phrases include 'as compared to the previous radiograph' and documentation of interval changes, highlighting the importance of evaluating progress or regression in patient conditions through serial imaging.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.576,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11730,latent_11730,2319,0.004638,0.0019945458,3.2205849,Comparison of medical device placement or status.,"These examples contain explicit mentions of changes in medical devices, particularly concerning tubes and catheters. They highlight intervals or status of placements, reaffirming positions or mentioning replacements, which are significant findings in many radiology reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5113288271183007,0.5125628140703518,0.5111111111111111,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+11731,latent_11731,1087,0.002174,0.0015102034,4.6044374,Emphasis on interval changes and comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern observed involves making descriptions or recommendations that specifically relate findings in the current exam with prior imaging. High activation examples heavily feature substantial radiological findings that change over time, warranting follow-up comparisons to prior studies. This highlights the importance of interval changes in radiological assessments.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11732,latent_11732,602,0.001204,0.0012053164,3.4551585,Assessment of tubing or device placement with reference to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe changes or assessment in the positioning of medical devices such as feeding tubes or central venous lines using radiography, which involves a comparison with prior imagery to confirm placement and adjustment. This reflects a frequent pattern in radiology where precise descriptions of device positions are critical.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5880952380952381,0.6069364161849711,0.5396825396825397,0.4657534246575342,73.0,100.0
+11733,latent_11733,14857,0.029714,0.010790851,1.9307138,Comparative assessment against prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological studies explicitly compared to prior images. This comparative evaluation is a typical approach in longitudinal patient management to assess or confirm stability or progression of findings over time, as evidenced by the consistent use of 'comparison to prior' in the activated examples.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.532051282051282,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11734,latent_11734,1015,0.00203,0.0017008671,3.4139721,Analysis includes detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings with medical insights.,"The examples with high activation levels feature the AI assistant providing a comparative analysis of current images with prior ones while including specific clinical observations or changes over time (or noting the stability of prior findings), thus making clear references to medical expertise in interpreting interval changes or stability in imaging.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11735,latent_11735,875,0.00175,0.0011757077,3.2209845,In-depth comparisons with prior imaging studies using multiple views.,The higher activation levels are associated with descriptions that involve identifying or describing changes in comparison to previous imaging studies using multiple views. This includes instances where subtle changes in lung or cardiac features are considered and detailed with a focus on transformations or confirmations of findings from prior images.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11736,latent_11736,3256,0.006512,0.0029477724,2.866889,Descriptions of imaging findings after surgical intervention.,The examples with higher activation levels focus on postoperative evaluations or descriptions that follow surgical interventions. The pattern includes indications such as 'status post surgery' and descriptions that refer to evaluating for specific complications post-intervention.,0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.5555555555555556,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11737,latent_11737,811,0.001622,0.0013538437,2.7899485,"Clear lungs and normal cardiac, mediastinal contours without acute abnormalities.","The highly representative examples consistently present findings as clear and well-expanded lungs with normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, devoid of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, consolidation, or acute abnormalities. They emphasize normalcy or benign imaging characteristics.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.6290322580645161,0.39,100.0,100.0
+11738,latent_11738,758,0.001516,0.0016678412,3.9892502,Detailed and contextual reports with emphasis on findings comparison.,"Examples with activations close to zero mostly lack clear, detailed findings or show unchanged findings on comparison with prior images. In contrast, examples with higher activations clearly describe changes, provide comprehensive details, or emphasize the presence of previously noted or sustained pathological features. This pattern indicates that the model is activated by detailed and comparative descriptions of findings in radiology reports.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4693576175239971,0.4948979591836734,0.4895104895104895,0.7291666666666666,96.0,100.0
+11739,latent_11739,776,0.001552,0.0015554768,4.230495,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,Activation levels are high when a clear comparison with prior imaging is made to highlight changes in the current findings. Examples often include explicit evaluations regarding whether new findings are present or whether previous findings remain unchanged.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3362644026682838,0.3366834170854271,0.3428571428571428,0.3636363636363636,99.0,100.0
+11740,latent_11740,1834,0.003668,0.002354684,6.236151,Reports detail interval changes or stability in specific pathologies.,"The examples with higher activation focus on changes in radiological findings over time, particularly involving infections, pulmonary edema, NG tube placement, or other procedural changes. These reports include detailed observations of interval changes or stability in the pathology from previous imaging, which seems to trigger stronger model activations compared to less detailed, stable, or non-specific findings.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6740138920233707,0.675,0.6576576576576577,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11741,latent_11741,2223,0.004446,0.0030527476,2.5269547,Comparison to prior images noting stability or unchanged findings.,"The high activation examples reference findings, especially comparing current with prior images, often with stable or unchanged conditions. These pattern descriptions focus on an unchanged clinical picture or restate normal conditions in more detail. They analyze subtle differences or confirm stability to affirm ongoing treatment efficacy or reassure no worsening of a condition.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11742,latent_11742,1145,0.00229,0.0015289411,2.848451,Identification of interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,Highly activated examples consistently mention findings that have changed or are new compared to previous imaging studies for different anatomical structures or pathologies. This emphasizes a pattern of detecting interval changes or new findings when describing radiology results.,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6242390841453944,0.625,0.6373626373626373,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11743,latent_11743,529,0.001058,0.0011546804,8.359182,Comparison of current imaging findings with a prior frontal image.,"The key pattern in these examples is the comparison of findings between given images and a prior frontal image. This focuses the analysis on identifying changes or stability regarding previous conditions, typical in clinical follow-ups or assessments for changes in health status.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3013880195869077,0.303030303030303,0.2685185185185185,0.4461538461538462,65.0,100.0
+11744,latent_11744,578,0.001156,0.0013425506,4.376099,Findings of unchanged tortuosity of the thoracic aorta on repeated imaging.,The examples with high activations consistently feature descriptions of unchanged or mildly changed mild to moderate tortuosity of the thoracic aorta over serial imaging comparisons. This is evident in the repeated references to aortic tortuosity and its stability across different radiological examinations.,0.6961805555555556,0.72,1.0,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6802168021680217,0.7288135593220338,0.967741935483871,0.3896103896103896,77.0,100.0
+11745,latent_11745,1419,0.002838,0.0017696357,2.4152408,Comparison of current radiological findings to prior images.,"The examples with high activation scores primarily focus on providing comparisons with previous imaging studies, explicitly indicating any changes from prior examinations. This pattern is prevalent in radiological evaluations, where comparative analysis with past images is often crucial for assessing stability or progression of findings.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11746,latent_11746,1428,0.002856,0.001869938,2.836453,Stable chronic findings in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples involve reference to both current and prior images, focusing on description of technical imaging details, comparison elements between images, and stable findings, rather than acute or significantly changed conditions. Phrases often include 'unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette' and 'chronic conditions,' implying stable, chronic findings over time.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4310916255643414,0.455,0.423728813559322,0.25,100.0,100.0
+11747,latent_11747,2450,0.0049,0.0023504861,4.1496606,Interval stability or change observed in pulmonary structures compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation consistently describe interval changes or stability observed in radiological findings, particularly focusing on pulmonary structures. Stability implies no new findings, often referenced as 'unchanged' or 'stable'. Interval changes or developments like improvements or new findings since prior imaging are distinctly outlined in reports.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,100.0
+11748,latent_11748,4380,0.00876,0.0048243245,3.0162437,Focus on tube/line positioning or changes compared to prior.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern describe changes or comparisons regarding lines, tubes, or medical devices, with specific measurements or recommendations, such as 'advancing the tube' or 'terminating at the lumbar junction', focusing on alignment or positioning based on previous imaging or expected anatomical landmarks. This technical detail highlights radiological vigilance in tube and catheter placement and potential associated complications.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6349908747718693,0.635,0.6363636363636364,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11749,latent_11749,772,0.001544,0.001384707,2.690765,"Comparative analysis with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with the highest activations consistently involve detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies, particularly focusing on changes in condition or resolution of previous findings. These reports utilize comparative language and specify either improvement or stability over time, which seems to capture the pattern of interest.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4942994812922931,0.51010101010101,0.5037037037037037,0.6938775510204082,98.0,100.0
+11750,latent_11750,685,0.00137,0.0013491444,3.69404,Attention on interval change or comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize interval changes, stability, or comparisons of specific findings from imaging reports against prior images. These reports often use language to note changes, assess positions, or compare current and prior images.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4297316384180791,0.4631578947368421,0.4589041095890411,0.7444444444444445,90.0,100.0
+11751,latent_11751,1991,0.003982,0.0029122028,3.390718,Complex evaluations involving both frontal and lateral views with comparisons to prior imaging.,"Examples that use the frontal and lateral views, with comparisons to prior imaging, have higher activations. This suggests that the pattern involves complex evaluations utilizing multiple imaging perspectives and comparing these to previous images to assess changes or stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4747474747474747,0.48,0.4833333333333333,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11752,latent_11752,2544,0.005088,0.0025503153,2.5842674,Slight positional changes or minor interval findings in radiology reports.,"The examples with highest activation often describe slight positional changes or small intervals of change in findings on the radiographic study. This could involve positions of medical devices like pacemakers, catheters, or general small positional changes in findings such as opacity or pneumothorax compared to prior studies.",0.6854942233632862,0.6938775510204082,0.6363636363636364,0.875,24.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11753,latent_11753,1110,0.00222,0.0016669664,3.225513,Stable or top-normal heart size in comparison to prior imaging.,Activated examples consistently describe findings where there is either a comparison with prior studies showing stability or changes noted in top-normal heart size or similar non-pathological descriptions of cardiac silhouette. These suggest an emphasis on reporting stable or non-alarming heart size or findings in comparison to prior studies.,0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5254081819849569,0.542713567839196,0.5645161290322581,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+11754,latent_11754,12991,0.025982,0.009636633,1.8186216,"Reports involving device placement, positioning, or adjustments.","The examples with higher activations typically involve specific mentions of medical devices (e.g., tubes, lines, stents) and their positions or movements in the context of the radiology study. These examples also include instructions or implications for further action, such as adjustments or follow-up studies, which are indicative of ongoing clinical management.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5832992849846783,0.5879396984924623,0.6153846153846154,0.48,100.0,99.0
+11755,latent_11755,1294,0.002588,0.0025512578,2.795739,Thorough image interpretation with assistant conclusions.,"Highly activated examples provide findings, detailed technical specifications, and clear impressions based on images. All contain assistant descriptions indicating evaluations or conclusions in response to prompts. The instruction appears consistent with providing comprehensively detailed interpretations or evaluations in radiological contexts.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4379767161782416,0.44,0.4464285714285714,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11756,latent_11756,996,0.001992,0.0015600547,3.1460981,"Normal cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes, clear lungs, no new acute findings.","The higher activation examples tend to have findings where the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes are described as either normal or unremarkable, and there are no acute changes or focal pathologies noted, such as consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. This pattern indicates stability or normalcy in key radiologic features.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.784865540963102,0.785,0.8,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11757,latent_11757,1243,0.002486,0.0014395933,3.4716847,Analysis of stability or change in radiographic features compared to prior images.,"Activation levels are higher in these examples when the description includes frontal imaging followed by comparisons with prior imaging studies or specific findings that require evaluation for interval changes or stability over time. The examination of consistency or change within images, often mentioned explicitly as ""comparison"" or ""as compared to"", is central to the radiological analysis, which is likely triggering these higher activation levels.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11758,latent_11758,1299,0.002598,0.0021784052,4.083374,Stable findings or no change in current images compared to prior studies.,"The key distinction for higher activation levels in these examples is the observation and description of a previously noted condition, device, or pathology shown as ""no change"" or ""stable"" compared to prior imaging, representing the focus on stability or expected findings rather than a progression or new detection.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11759,latent_11759,3279,0.006558,0.0029971404,3.7880242,Detailed observation of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with the highest activation describe detailed findings or specific procedural changes in the patient's condition over time, often mentioning unchanged or resolved findings compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern highlights close observation and documentation of changes or stability in radiological reports, which are essential for tracking patient progress.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5169491525423728,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11760,latent_11760,1107,0.002214,0.0012823294,4.116638,Directives for assistant to summarize interval changes or findings.,"The examples that showed high activation levels involve radiology studies with explicit directives to or comments by the assistant, who was asked to provide a description of findings compared to prior images, often mentioning an interval change, or summarizing specific changes in positioning of support devices or bodily features in the radiology images. In these assistant directives, they often concluded with a clinical recommendation or planned action based on findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11761,latent_11761,1187,0.002374,0.0016380501,2.7234323,Detailed comparisons using frontal and lateral images.,"The pattern revolves around reports giving detailed imaging comparisons, focusing on stability or changes in pathology, particularly when multiple views (frontal and lateral) are requested or included. The detailed descriptions suggest a strong emphasis on tracking the presence or stability of pathologies or medical devices using multiple images.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.474671669793621,0.475,0.4761904761904761,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11762,latent_11762,2056,0.004112,0.002137953,2.2559454,"Strong focus on direct comparisons with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation focus on explicit comparisons between current imaging findings and prior studies, demonstrating change or stability in conditions like cardiac silhouette or specific pathologies. These references often highlight investigation of interval changes necessitating comparative evaluation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4294865378840957,0.43,0.4339622641509434,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11763,latent_11763,3757,0.007514,0.0031446414,2.508552,Use of both frontal and lateral images for interval change assessments.,"Reports with higher activation levels mention descriptions based on multiple imaging views, such as both frontal and lateral images in conjunction with prior images. These assessments focus on interval changes or stability, utilizing multiple images for comprehensive evaluation, often including specific contextual findings like pneumothorax size or presence of pleural effusions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4517629217742954,0.4522613065326633,0.4528301886792453,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+11764,latent_11764,954,0.001908,0.0016691542,4.058645,References indicating interval change or stability with prior imaging.,"Several examples discuss findings with reference to interval changes from prior imaging. This emphasizes the presence of specific changes noted between longitudinal studies, noting advancements or stagnation in certain conditions evident from the images.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11765,latent_11765,824,0.001648,0.0015808654,4.5289526,Radiological findings compared with prior studies emphasize changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe findings that are compared with a prior study, emphasizing changes, stability, or interval resolutions. These comparisons are critical for determining the clinical relevance and progression of findings in radiological reports.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3494144730257231,0.35,0.3404255319148936,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11766,latent_11766,752,0.001504,0.0014785175,4.807974,Emphasis on detailed comparative findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature additional details about the radiological findings and descriptors, indicating importance on thorough explanation of observations. These examples include varied combinations of current and prior images, involved conditions for comparison, and additional observations alongside standard findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4660133444537114,0.4720812182741117,0.4710743801652892,0.5876288659793815,97.0,100.0
+11767,latent_11767,1937,0.003874,0.0020236077,3.0465124,Observation of interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior images or observe stability in pre-existing findings. This comparison often notes changes in pathology without the presence of new acute abnormalities, suggesting a focus on monitoring ongoing issues or treatments.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4899378251490928,0.4924623115577889,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,99.0
+11768,latent_11768,2525,0.00505,0.0026706988,3.0049965,Short-interval comparisons with noted changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve direct comparisons of radiographs or studies over short time intervals. These comparisons often highlight changes in devices, conditions like effusions or edema, or stability of findings on follow-up imaging, typically noting interval improvement, worsening, or stability of findings captured in recent studies.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5483741469289443,0.55,0.5446428571428571,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11769,latent_11769,856,0.001712,0.0012947601,4.7087464,Immediate changes or adjustments in clinical management based on imaging.,"The pattern focuses on reports containing descriptions of treatment or monitoring changes, such as repositioning of tubes or drainage adjustments, which relate to immediate clinical management rather than stable or unremarkable findings compared to previous results.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.6,0.21,100.0,100.0
+11770,latent_11770,1733,0.003466,0.0013796256,3.3538706,Direct request or notation for interval change or comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve direct requests for comparisons between current and prior radiology studies or include explicit observations about interval changes. These include instruction or expectation to assess changes over time from previous imagery, like 'compared to', 'interval change', or 'current vs. prior'.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.50625,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11771,latent_11771,9728,0.019456,0.007131924,2.4508803,Significant changes noted in comparison to prior studies.,"The activations that are not close to zero involve cases where a comparison is being made between current and previous imaging studies, but significant changes or findings are mentioned. Reports highlighting specific changes in pathology or device placement compared to previous exams exhibit higher activations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5729166666666666,0.59,0.65,0.39,100.0,100.0
+11772,latent_11772,930,0.00186,0.001698348,3.5440958,Phrases indicating evaluation for pneumonia.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve assessments for pneumonia using phrases like ""evaluate for pneumonia"" or ""r/o pneumonia"" in the indication or description. These examples are more likely describing findings relevant to pneumonia, which aligns with indications stated in the task list.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7282608695652174,0.73,0.6982758620689655,0.81,100.0,100.0
+11773,latent_11773,6903,0.013806,0.0049995156,1.9134543,Description of postoperative or post-procedural changes on imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve patients who have recent procedural history or show immediate postoperative changes, particularly the removal or presence of chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, vascular catheters, and the interval changes post-operatively, indicating adjustments or evolution following interventions. This focus on immediate postoperative or procedural changes is common in these activated reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.6049382716049383,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11774,latent_11774,1816,0.003632,0.002150786,4.0032907,Assessments based on comparison with prior imaging using specific language.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of evaluating radiology images in comparison with prior imaging. This pattern typically involves assessing changes over time or stability of observed conditions, often indicated by specific language referring to changes or comparisons, such as 'no change' or 'resolved' in subsequent imaging findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11775,latent_11775,2261,0.004522,0.002537736,3.0678039,Description of changes between current and prior radiological findings.,"Highly activated examples detail changes in radiological findings between current and prior imaging, highlighting changes in medical interventions, current condition, or potential improvements or deteriorations. This pattern represents frequent radiological practice of iterating on observable changes over time, critical in patient management.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5675793133420253,0.5728643216080402,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,99.0
+11776,latent_11776,1531,0.003062,0.002178509,2.5148356,Radiological findings indicating interval changes compared to previous scans.,"Examples with higher activations refer to radiological findings that note either change or stability compared to previous imaging studies. This pattern captures the importance of time-based comparisons in assessing for stability or progression of medical conditions, using specific descriptions of interval change or lack thereof.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5700934579439252,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11777,latent_11777,838,0.001676,0.0012926912,3.7420943,Describe findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently present comparison phrases or the task of providing comparison between current and previous medical imaging studies, which echoes the model's focus on recognizing and evaluating changes over time in medical conditions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11778,latent_11778,3314,0.006628,0.0029488774,3.3240292,Focus on interval changes and stability in findings when comparing images.,"The pattern here involves providing descriptions of radiographic images with emphasis on comparing current and prior images. Specifically, attention is dedicated to interval changes such as stable findings, unchanged cardiac silhouettes, or unchanged positions of various lines or tubes, which highlight the ongoing necessity for monitoring and following up on certain conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11779,latent_11779,4994,0.009988,0.003903096,2.8168058,Frontal and lateral images compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently show detailed images that include both frontal and lateral views as well as prior studies, allowing for comprehensive comparison. This pattern indicates that the model looks for mentions of multiple image perspectives or prior study comparisons to activate in chest imaging descriptions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11780,latent_11780,984,0.001968,0.0017276047,3.707161,Detailed comparison to prior images with emphasis on changes or stability.,"The common theme across examples with high activation levels is the detailed comparison of current radiological findings to prior images, sometimes emphasizing intervals, stable conditions, or changes in specific medical devices, lung conditions, or effusions. This indicates a focus on comparative analysis of imaging changes over time, documented in the reports (often with references to stability, progression, or resolution of specific conditions).",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6524892347208582,0.655,0.6324786324786325,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11781,latent_11781,915,0.00183,0.0014907881,2.407774,Comprehensive findings and impressions comparing current to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples commonly contain comprehensive findings and impression statements, encapsulating evaluation across multiple views and providing clear comparisons to prior images, even if minimal changes or lack of acute process are noted. This thoroughness in relating current findings to the patient's known history and previous imaging stands out.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+11782,latent_11782,1938,0.003876,0.0018968937,4.682782,Direct directive to compare current with prior images and describe changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize a directive for comparing current radiographic images with previous ones, often explicitly instructing to describe changes or lack thereof, which requires cognitive synthesis of image differences.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11783,latent_11783,3447,0.006894,0.0028554096,2.5652843,Explicit task to compare with prior image.,"High activation levels are associated with the direct instruction to provide a comparison with a prior image, even when details are sparse or absent in the prompt. This likely activates the model's learned pattern of focusing on comparative information, regardless of the content's complexity or completeness.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4649545211342964,0.525,0.5149700598802395,0.86,100.0,100.0
+11784,latent_11784,1348,0.002696,0.0016624071,2.9523332,References to radiographic technique or technical limitations in image evaluation.,"The pattern indicates a reference to technical aspects of imaging processes, including positioning, technique limitations, and references to specific radiographic methods like portable AP or PA and lateral views. This is common in professional medical imaging reports where specific techniques are compared or evaluated to ensure diagnostic accuracy.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11785,latent_11785,2258,0.004516,0.0023239153,3.1343858,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior images in findings.,"The highly activated examples describe explicit directions to provide a comparative description in the findings, often using the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This indicates an evaluation pattern focusing on comparisons, which is absent or less explicit in the low-activated examples.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4935923935510541,0.51,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11786,latent_11786,3005,0.00601,0.0042718397,3.679107,Presence or reference to changes in pleural effusions in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples all involve findings or comparisons of radiological studies that indicate the presence of pleural effusions, a common finding that can indicate various underlying pathologies like infections, congestive heart failure, or other pleural diseases. Examples with higher activation tend to reference this finding and its potential changes or stability in relation to previous imaging without specifying a large change or cause for increased clinical concern.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.565,0.6444444444444445,0.29,100.0,100.0
+11787,latent_11787,10709,0.021418,0.007880996,1.6134756,Short interval change or stability in findings emphasized.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently report or imply the stability or change of specific findings, emphasizing alterations in patient's condition over a short span by comparing with a radiological report from earlier the same day or very recent past. This interval change perspective, especially focusing on acute change, is typically significant in detecting critical developments or confirming stability post-procedure.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5825242718446602,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11788,latent_11788,10507,0.021014,0.008247897,2.9284155,"Focus on evaluation of lines, tubes, and catheters in imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels involve evaluations where there is detailed assessment of positions and states of various lines, tubes, and catheters, often related to the adequacy and positioning of medical devices in the context of existing conditions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6254681647940075,0.63,0.6666666666666666,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11789,latent_11789,971,0.001942,0.0015218273,2.4650087,Stable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes in imaging comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently include descriptions focusing on the stability of the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes as compared to prior images. Additionally, terms like 'normal', 'stable', and 'unchanged' with respect to these areas are consistently mentioned, showing a focus on the stability of these particular features in imaging comparisons.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,100.0
+11790,latent_11790,809,0.001618,0.0014162688,3.525344,Comparative assessment with focus on pulmonary or pleural changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on describing specific changes or stability in findings when compared to prior imaging, often highlighting the presence, progress, or uncertainty of pulmonary or pleural abnormalities, such as effusions, opacities, or changes due to atelectasis or edema. The lower activation examples often involve straightforward or stable findings with no abnormalities or no comparative aspect to prior images.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11791,latent_11791,10644,0.021288,0.007927917,1.9465778,Interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"These examples typically compare current radiological findings directly with prior images, with language indicating interval changes, stability, or specific alterations since last examination. This pattern is typical when determining if there are changes over time, using terms like 'unchanged', 'progression', or 'interval change'.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11792,latent_11792,8189,0.016378,0.0060835355,2.3143992,"Describing comparisons with prior images, focusing on stable or unchanged findings.","The samples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where a clear comparison to prior images is made, specifically highlighting no significant interval changes or improvements across various features mentioned in the findings like opacities, tube placements, and cardiomediastinal silhouette.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.6075949367088608,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11793,latent_11793,471,0.000942,0.00095851027,4.573266,Unchanged heart or mediastinal contours compared to prior imaging.,High activation levels appear in examples where findings such as heart size or mediastinal and hilar contours are explicitly noted as stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging. This recurrent theme of stability and lack of novel findings distinguishes highly activated samples.,0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3374254049445865,0.54375,0.3818181818181818,0.35,60.0,100.0
+11794,latent_11794,9557,0.019114,0.007008769,2.0317912,Comparison of current and prior imaging for interval changes.,"The pattern involves examples that compare the current imaging findings with prior images or reports while noting if there are any interval changes, stability, or improvements in medical conditions. This type of analysis often appears in radiological evaluations to assess the progress or change in detected conditions.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5584988962472406,0.585,0.5570469798657718,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11795,latent_11795,1618,0.003236,0.0020225511,3.4080791,Radiological comparison to previous imaging for assessing change.,"Activated examples consistently have descriptions comparing current findings with prior imaging, often noting specific changes or stability, including phrases like 'compared to previous', 'since prior study', and explicit dates. This pattern indicates the importance of longitudinal comparison in evaluating the patient's condition, a key task in radiological interpretation.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4181017535582291,0.445,0.4615384615384615,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11796,latent_11796,841,0.001682,0.0013694887,5.2782645,Focus on tube placement and its position relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the placement, adjustment, or presence of medical tubes (such as nasogastric, Dobbhoff, or gastrostomy tubes) in the body, particularly specifying their position relative to anatomical landmarks (like the stomach). This is indicative of the pattern being related to verifying and reporting the location of these tubes in radiological studies.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5125599332916406,0.5276381909547738,0.5384615384615384,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+11797,latent_11797,3439,0.006878,0.003799855,4.9264603,Focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activations consistently reference an interval change or progression in the findings between the current and prior imaging. They focus on differences noticed over time, indicating changes or stability of medical conditions documented in the images.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11798,latent_11798,912,0.001824,0.0015595284,3.026558,Frequent comparisons with prior images to assess stability or change.,"Highly activated examples often mention a 'comparison' to previous imaging, indicating an evaluation of changes over time or against a baseline, such as changes in volume or the presence of pleural effusions and airway placements. These comparisons provide dynamic assessments, consistent with the study's indication or history, describing what has changed, remained stable, or improved.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11799,latent_11799,2285,0.00457,0.002913585,3.4643288,Stable or improved state compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern includes comparisons between current and prior imaging studies and typically notes findings such as pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary edema. These comparisons often highlight unchanged conditions or gradual improvements in specific pulmonary or cardiac conditions as observed over successive imaging exams.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3831086879701146,0.575,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11800,latent_11800,664,0.001328,0.0015666123,4.557945,Combined analysis of current frontal and lateral chest images with prior frontal image.,Samples with higher activation levels consistently involve references to processing and describing findings from both frontal and lateral chest images compared to prior studies. This suggests a pattern where the model is focusing on instances where both frontal and lateral views are provided and evaluated together with prior images.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5492328138214329,0.5494505494505495,0.5,0.5853658536585366,82.0,100.0
+11801,latent_11801,844,0.001688,0.0013369172,2.5251398,Changes or stability in suspected abnormalities compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern of higher activation is linked to scenarios where there is a comparison of current imaging findings with prior imaging, especially when changes or stability regarding suspected or confirmed abnormalities such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or pneumonia are noted. These comparisons frequently involve describing progression, stability, or clearance of a condition.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4546591619762351,0.455,0.4526315789473684,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11802,latent_11802,1177,0.002354,0.0017290617,3.819847,Reports focus on placement and status of internal medical tubes/devices.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve details about the placement, adjustment, or status of tubes and other inserted medical devices within the thoracic cavity. These include descriptions about endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, and other catheters' positions relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina and stomach, often in a context of monitoring or changing medical conditions.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7186212440960708,0.72,0.6929824561403509,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11803,latent_11803,1674,0.003348,0.0019459531,2.8238997,Comparison of imaging findings indicating stability or slight interval changes.,"The pattern that stands out in the examples with significant activation levels is the comparison of imaging findings that indicate a change over time or stability with no acute abnormalities. Reports note specific time intervals or prior exams that define constancy or minor changes in pre-existing conditions, indicating stability or slight variations without acute pathology.",0.3663793103448276,0.3877551020408163,0.3125,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4114114114114114,0.413265306122449,0.3977272727272727,0.3608247422680412,97.0,99.0
+11804,latent_11804,918,0.001836,0.0016108324,4.0576878,Comparison to prior studies despite limited procedural data.,"The examples with high activation show a particular focus on describing image findings in chest radiography, especially any new or unchanged conditions, by strictly following a structured format. They often compare with prior studies even when some sections such as technique are marked 'N/A', highlighting the focus on comparison despite incomplete procedural data.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11805,latent_11805,5073,0.010146,0.0041170614,2.231403,Focus on interval changes or stability in findings when compared to prior images.,"Higher activations correspond to situations where a distinct change or progression in findings is identified when comparing the current images to prior ones. This emphasis on interval change or lack thereof is essential in monitoring conditions over time, which seems the focus of higher activations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4830508474576271,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11806,latent_11806,2135,0.00427,0.0020686798,3.2084463,"Comparison of current imaging with prior, focusing on chest pathologies.","These examples indicate that pulmonary findings and certain chest pathologies are observed in imaging studies that make use of PA and lateral views alongside previous comparisons where available. These reports often reference previous imaging in their conclusions or findings sections, showing a norm of comparative assessment for the stated indications or symptoms.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4937237401811112,0.515,0.5106382978723404,0.72,100.0,100.0
+11807,latent_11807,930,0.00186,0.0017602432,3.7151062,Frequent references to prior stable findings or unchanged imaging results.,"The pattern here involves a consistent prompt structure where multiple prior comparisons are mentioned, and specific references are made to stable features like device placements or unchanged findings. These examples often include stable radiographic findings and minimal changes noted compared to prior imaging.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4583333333333333,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11808,latent_11808,1584,0.003168,0.0018219027,2.8728886,Comparison focus between current and prior images.,Examples with high activation levels focus intensely on the comparison between current and prior images. Requests to provide descriptions specifically in the context of making these comparisons are frequently associated with highlighting sub-acute to minor changes or stability across imaging timelines.,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11809,latent_11809,1153,0.002306,0.0015821012,5.2891607,Changes in device placement or interventional procedures compared to previous images.,"Many examples with high activation levels feature language describing changes in medical device positioning or new/interventional procedures, often with contextual comparison to previous images or positions. This pattern indicates that the model activates more strongly in cases where there are updates or changes related to procedural steps and positioning.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7845637415766928,0.785,0.8131868131868132,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11810,latent_11810,1426,0.002852,0.0021097902,4.060151,Multifocal lung opacities compared with previous images.,"Highly activated examples all involve the detection of multifocal lung opacities across current and prior radiological studies, indicating either consistency or change in the presence of pneumonia or other lung afflictions over time.",0.9198717948717948,0.92,0.9565217391304348,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7286704853783539,0.73,0.7674418604651163,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11811,latent_11811,842,0.001684,0.0014457584,5.4367824,Difficulty in appreciation due to imaging limitations.,"The examples with high activation often mention findings that are difficult to appreciate due to certain limitations of the imaging technique, especially when comparing to prior imaging types like CT. The presence of terms like 'not appreciated', 'better appreciated', or 'not well appreciated' indicates these limitations, highlighting challenges in visibility or interpretation in radiographic images.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5842696629213483,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11812,latent_11812,3942,0.007884,0.003411201,2.861997,Detailed findings compared to prior images.,"In these examples, the activations are highest for those cases where specific observations and changes are described between current and prior images, using 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', whereas low activation is observed when such comparisons are missing or are less detailed.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11813,latent_11813,12506,0.025012,0.009082141,1.7655364,Comparison of current findings with specific interval changes from prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of findings in current images compared explicitly to those in prior images, highlighting interval changes. They utilize specific patterns of comparisons including phrases like 'as compared to' and 'previously described' to emphasize differences between the two examinations.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.54,0.54,0.54,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11814,latent_11814,592,0.001184,0.001225759,5.018721,Providing findings based on comparison to prior frontal images.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize instructions to provide descriptions based on comparisons with prior frontal images. High activation occurs when there is an explicit directive to describe differences or changes found in current imaging compared to prior examinations, highlighting the importance of cross-sectional analysis in radiology.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4173441734417344,0.4186046511627907,0.3703703703703703,0.5555555555555556,72.0,100.0
+11815,latent_11815,1509,0.003018,0.0018163641,3.45937,Multiple views and comparison to previous imaging studies.,"These examples consistently involve radiological studies that use multiple angles or views (either frontal and lateral) combined with prior imaging for comparison, indicating a focus on assessments that require complex, multi-angle comparisons.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,100.0,100.0
+11816,latent_11816,958,0.001916,0.001810523,4.050467,Normal cardiomediastinal contours and clear lungs.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, as well as clear lungs without any acute findings (such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation), indicating that these are key features of the pattern being observed.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7743173098623335,0.775,0.7477477477477478,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11817,latent_11817,8643,0.017286,0.007623968,4.712834,Direct comparison to prior imaging revealing changes or stability.,"Examples with moderate activation levels tend to explicitly mention performing a direct comparison to previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or verifying stability. This involves detailed description of findings compared to prior states, often around specific investigations prompted by clinical symptoms or existing conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11818,latent_11818,2630,0.00526,0.0027120912,2.7697732,Comparison of current and prior imaging for assessing changes.,"These examples exhibit the pattern of using comparison between a current and a prior image to identify changes or stability in radiological findings, which is a common clinical approach in radiological assessments to monitor progression or resolution of conditions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11819,latent_11819,3999,0.007998,0.0033068438,2.353069,Comparison of current findings against prior images for changes.,"The examples focus on analyzing and describing the change or stability of radiological findings between current and prior images. The pattern includes interpretative text describing comparisons between studies, highlighting stability or change of specific medical conditions such as effusions, consolidations, or medical device placements. The focus is on describing radiological change (or lack thereof) highlighted by terms like 'as compared to previous', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11820,latent_11820,3122,0.006244,0.0026557033,2.715847,Significant change or evaluation relative to prior imaging.,"The patterns of activations in these examples highlight descriptions that involve comparison to a 'prior' or 'previous' imaging exam, specifically when significant changes or evaluations are noted in such comparisons. This is evident where specific, significant findings are compared and described relative to prior images, often indicating changes or stability of medical conditions or interventions over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.562539283469516,0.565,0.5565217391304348,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11821,latent_11821,9384,0.018768,0.006798102,1.5437496,Focus on stability or improvement from prior imaging.,"The pattern here suggests that changes in the patient's condition compared to prior imaging are discussed, with language focusing on stability or improvement in previously identified findings such as opacities, lung volumes, or foreign body placements. This reflects the model's activation to reports emphasizing comparisons regarding stability or change (e.g., stable lung opacities, unchanged devices) rather than newly identified pathologies.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11822,latent_11822,1272,0.002544,0.0016455548,3.3342657,Comparative language used with current and prior images across multiple views.,"The highly activated examples include explicit instructions to compare current imaging with lateral views to prior images. This could involve assessments of lung clarity, atelectasis, cardiomediastinal silhouette evaluations, or other stability checks, often across multiple views.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11823,latent_11823,864,0.001728,0.0013934034,2.4812694,Comparison of findings to prior imaging with focus on changes or stability.,"The commonality in these samples is that they all describe findings in current imaging in relation to prior images, with phrases like 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change', or explicitly specifying areas of interval improvement, resolution, or lack of deterioration. This pattern is indicative of actively monitoring or tracking changes in medical conditions over time.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11824,latent_11824,5133,0.010266,0.0040332833,1.7428678,Explicit comparison of current and prior images for interval change.,"The activations highlight cases where current chest images are directly compared against prior images, with explicit analysis for changes or stability of previous findings. Sentences commonly use phrases like 'as compared to', 'in comparison with', indicating a focus on changes over time as a pivotal point for analysis.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11825,latent_11825,825,0.00165,0.0015538352,3.3123682,"Emphasis on monitoring and assessment of device placement, such as nasogastric or PICC lines, in comparison to prior images.","These examples predominantly focus on comparisons with prior imaging to identify changes in the position or presence of tubes, catheters, or lines (e.g., nasogastric tubes, PICC lines), ensuring the positional assessment of medical devices is a consistent pattern. This evaluation occurs alongside commentary on stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes and unchanged pathologies, emphasizing the importance of device placement in follow-up observations.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.6060606060606061,0.4,100.0,100.0
+11826,latent_11826,2218,0.004436,0.002254874,3.3961089,Direct comparison with prior images noting interval changes or stability.,"The samples with high activation levels are characterized by the clear description of radiologic findings in the current image that directly relate to observed changes from previous images. This involves direct comparison and noted changes, such as improvement, resolution, or new findings, often with other clues like reporting on medical devices or specific features.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+11827,latent_11827,2857,0.005714,0.0028430885,3.7664387,Focus on stability or lack of change compared to prior imaging.,The pattern is characterized by explicit descriptions of comparisons to prior imaging studies where the current findings are specified as being unchanged or stable since the previous imaging. This frequent mention of stability or lack of change is a specific reporting style in radiology to track progress over time.,0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5648148148148148,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11828,latent_11828,4205,0.00841,0.003429692,2.8871977,Explicit mention of 'no previous images' for comparison.,"The highly activated examples focus on the explicit mentioning of 'no previous images', highlighting the absence of prior studies for comparison in the findings. This emphasis is a common note in reports when historical imaging is not available, possibly influencing diagnostic confidence.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4740532959326788,0.55,0.7083333333333334,0.17,100.0,100.0
+11829,latent_11829,1147,0.002294,0.0017728958,3.395407,"Pleural effusion, atelectasis, or increased opacity compared to prior imaging.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the presence of pleural effusion, increased opacity suggesting volume loss or a fluid collection, and changes in the positioning or extent of atelectasis compared to prior imaging. This pattern, indicating changes or increased severity of fluid or opacities compared to prior images, reflects the primary concern being assessed without evidence of substantial improvement.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6147592245153221,0.615,0.6210526315789474,0.59,100.0,100.0
+11830,latent_11830,1995,0.00399,0.002450311,2.7371447,Complex pulmonary and cardiac findings described.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate descriptions involving a variety of pulmonary and cardiac findings, including pathologies like atelectasis, pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, and cardiomegaly, without exclusion of comparisons with prior imaging where abnormalities are highlighted or changed.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11831,latent_11831,554,0.001108,0.0015822558,6.053988,"Focus on interval changes, devices, and catheter positions between comparisons.","Comparative radiology reports are highly represented in samples with high activation levels, where changes between current and prior images, including the status of medical devices or lines, are highlighted. This usually involves noting placements or shifts of catheters, tubes, or other inserts, and comparing pathological developments or resolutions.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6235294117647059,0.6235294117647059,0.53,0.7571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+11832,latent_11832,829,0.001658,0.0013993805,3.4106348,Unambiguous instructions for image comparison interpretation.,"High activation examples explicitly include instructions for providing descriptions or interpretations of current findings in comparison with prior images in a clear, unambiguous manner. This involves elements like specific findings that differ or remain unchanged and distinct impressions from the comparison.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.6140350877192983,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11833,latent_11833,1080,0.00216,0.0019029452,2.979848,Emphasis on comparing current and previous imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include requests or instructions for providing a comparative analysis of current and prior imaging, often accompanied by descriptions of findings relative to previous images. This suggests that activated documents emphasize the task of drawing comparisons between current and prior images as part of the radiological assessment.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4170967138158774,0.455,0.4701986754966887,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11834,latent_11834,558,0.001116,0.0011346338,3.4109209,"Comparison reveals stability or changes in effusions, edema, or contours.","Examples demonstrate a pattern where multiple findings in the current image are compared with changes noted from prior images in the context of acute or chronic clinical conditions, with a specific focus on stability or changes in findings such as effusions, edema, and organ contour. These findings suggest attempts to identify consistency or progression from prior states, often with references to detailed clinical context.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6526821572002295,0.6526946107784432,0.5454545454545454,0.8059701492537313,67.0,100.0
+11835,latent_11835,7731,0.015462,0.0059960536,1.8848417,Comparative analysis with prior chest imaging for interval changes.,"These samples consistently describe findings in chest imaging that demonstrate stability, improvement, or new changes in comparison to prior imaging, typically referencing prior examinations directly. The observed comparison emphasizes evaluation of interval changes, with repeated use of terms related to prior comparisons.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11836,latent_11836,4243,0.008486,0.0033345865,2.2202685,Comparison and evaluation with prior imaging studies.,"These examples exhibit features of referring radiography studies to prior images under investigation for changes or stability, typically involving modality comparison where ""prior REPORT"" and evaluation or description of findings in contrast to prior examinations are mentioned. Reference to ""PRIOR_REPORT,"" and updates on prior findings like ""provide a description...comparison...prior"" indicate this pattern.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11837,latent_11837,15194,0.030388,0.010996793,1.4577852,Requests to compare current images to prior images.,"These examples are high in activation when there is a direct request to compare current radiographic images with prior images, either explicitly referenced or implied in the task, even if specific dates or prior comparisons are not available. This indicates a linguistic pattern targeting comparison analysis as key.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11838,latent_11838,1666,0.003332,0.002188819,3.6942444,Temporal change or persistence of findings in radiology reports.,"Higher activation levels are observed in examples which describe specific changes or notable persistence of findings, such as resolution or new developments in chest radiographs, often compared to prior examinations. Phrases like 'in comparison with' and 'interval improvement' indicate attention to detail in changes observed over time. Examples with low activation often lack such temporal changes or have stable findings.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11839,latent_11839,12569,0.025138,0.009219224,1.29176,Comparison with prior showing stability or slight change of pathological findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently identify a specific change or lack of change in imaging findings, particularly in relation to pathologies that have been previously noted, using direct comparisons to prior imaging studies. These reports focus on stability vs. change of abnormal findings in comparison to prior, which is essential in radiological evaluations.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11840,latent_11840,947,0.001894,0.0016896409,2.8579764,Changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation focus on abnormal findings on current imaging compared to prior images or radiographs. More specifically, these examples describe changes from the previous status, indicating improvement, exacerbation, or stability of specific findings like masses, effusions, or other concerning features.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4887218045112781,0.49,0.4888888888888889,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11841,latent_11841,1086,0.002172,0.0018008176,3.250131,Radiological comparison to assess interval changes.,"These examples commonly involve comparison to prior imaging studies rather than emphasizing acute findings. There is a high frequency of references such as 'as compared to prior', 'remains unchanged', or 'has been stable', highlighting the assessment of interval changes rather than emergent conditions.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11842,latent_11842,979,0.001958,0.0013221218,2.4716272,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs.,"In these examples, the descriptions of findings contain direct or specified mentions of the absence of new or notable pathological changes, a format that often involves highlighting stable structures like clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes, typically implying a normal study. The high activation levels are linked to explicit confirmations of these stable features without significant abnormality.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11843,latent_11843,8629,0.017258,0.006598132,2.7447484,"Emphasis on image comparisons to prior studies, even when absent.","Examples with higher activation levels often involve the evaluation of radiology images to identify changes or stability of findings compared to previous reports or images. These situations commonly describe stability or subtle changes, specifically mentioning comparisons to prior examinations, even when there are none.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4670374232418027,0.54,0.5229885057471264,0.91,100.0,100.0
+11844,latent_11844,1039,0.002078,0.0014113619,5.297161,Use of multiple views and comparison to prior images.,The significant pattern in the activation data shows that examples with both frontal and lateral images and comparison to prior images exhibit higher activation. This suggests that the detailed comparison between multiple view images and prior imaging studies is central to the model's interest in analyzing patterns of continuity and change across imaging.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11845,latent_11845,850,0.0017,0.0012621542,2.8062692,Task structured to provide radiology findings comparing current images against prior images.,"The commonality in examples with high activation levels is the structured request to compare current and prior images, often appearing along the lines 'Provide a description...in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This often includes explicit or implicit instruction to note changes or the stability of findings between current and prior imaging, indicating a specific format for describing changes or consistency in radiological findings.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11846,latent_11846,11076,0.022152,0.008068627,1.3560756,Detailed comparative description of imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations often involve comparative analysis and description of changes from previous tests. Reports showing no change, persistent conditions, or detailed descriptions of new observations between imaging tests explain specific findings and progressions. This pattern of detailed and structured reporting to discuss the change between new and prior states is why activated samples prominently feature it.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11847,latent_11847,18358,0.036716,0.01609459,6.870261,Presence of medical or surgical hardware in imaging findings.,"Examples that have an activation level of 1.0 include cases where there is specific medical hardware or status-post surgical hardware/treatment (e.g., pacemakers, nerve stimulators, sternotomy wires) present in the image. These elements likely trigger certain activation patterns, particularly when instructions involve descriptions in relation to prior images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.3928571428571428,0.8461538461538461,13.0,37.0,0.5833333333333334,0.65,0.352112676056338,0.5102040816326531,49.0,151.0
+11848,latent_11848,991,0.001982,0.0015515606,3.0575619,Interval changes in imaging compared to prior exams.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention specific findings that are 'interval' changes compared to previous images, implying these examples are routine checks for stability or progression, often post-surgical intervention or monitoring pathological changes.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11849,latent_11849,2129,0.004258,0.002319445,2.614326,Comparison of altered radiological findings relative to prior images.,"These examples emphasize changes in radiological findings in comparison to previous imaging where such changes indicate progression, regression, or stability of a condition. The pattern involves statements about alterations in radiological findings relative to priors, indicating an evolving pathologic or medical status.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5350877192982456,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11850,latent_11850,6596,0.013192,0.0052529597,2.3855598,Comparison between current and prior chest imaging results.,"The pattern detected in the examples likely involves making comparisons between current and prior chest imaging. A higher activation suggests descriptions indicating changes or stable findings compared to prior images. In examples with zero activation, either no comparisons are explicit or changes in image studies are absent.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.535031847133758,0.84,100.0,100.0
+11851,latent_11851,298,0.000596,0.0007827448,5.2366166,Comparison of medical devices or catheters in imaging results.,"Examples with high activation involve providing a structured finding description in comparison to prior imaging, specifically focusing on changes in medical devices or catheters' placement or confirmation of unchanged positions of these devices. This pattern involves explicit descriptions of device locations and their interval changes or confirmations.",0.6050032916392363,0.625,0.5,0.5333333333333333,15.0,25.0,0.459047619047619,0.5492957746478874,0.238095238095238,0.238095238095238,42.0,100.0
+11852,latent_11852,842,0.001684,0.0014585778,5.906255,Descriptions of findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples frequently describe findings in comparison to prior imaging, especially noting stability or changes in findings such as pulmonary opacities, cardiac silhouette, vascular congestion, or insertion of medical devices, indicating a focus on tracking progression or stability of conditions over time in radiology reports.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11853,latent_11853,2087,0.004174,0.00218907,2.8527849,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The examples that strongly activate involve radiological findings interpreted in direct comparison to prior imaging. These examples emphasize changes, stability, or subtle differences when observing same-location structures in sequential studies, often specifying device positions, effusions, or nodules. They frequently include phrases like 'as compared to prior' to indicate continuous evaluation or monitoring.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5321100917431193,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11854,latent_11854,1274,0.002548,0.0016781264,2.486464,Differential findings from prior radiographs indicating potential pathology.,"Examples showing activation often include findings of abnormal opacities or changes in lung appearance compared to prior images, indicating potential pathologies that require attention.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5897435897435898,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11855,latent_11855,1721,0.003442,0.0024044234,4.64431,Comparison to prior images with emphasis on changes or stability in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe imaging findings in comparison to prior imaging studies and explicitly reference significant changes or stability in conditions such as effusions, densities, or pathologies. The comparison to prior imaging is pivotal in these examples, marking them as key factors in elevated activation levels.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4208153912014303,0.425,0.4358974358974359,0.51,100.0,100.0
+11856,latent_11856,553,0.001106,0.0010419275,4.609257,No comparison imaging available.,"Highly activated examples consistently lack comparison imaging, as indicated by phrases like 'COMPARISON: None' or absence of comparison in the findings. There are references to current frontal and lateral images with no corresponding past image references or evaluations.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6363884342607746,0.6395348837209303,0.5595238095238095,0.6527777777777778,72.0,100.0
+11857,latent_11857,1095,0.00219,0.0013020696,2.3763711,Tasks involving explicit comparison with prior imaging.,"Higher activations occur when there is a specific request for describing current radiology findings in direct comparison to prior images. This includes explicit instructions for comparing frontal images, even when no prior comparison is available in the narrative, and assigns a task for comparative analysis.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11858,latent_11858,2587,0.005174,0.002594101,2.5238261,Reports comparing current findings to a specific prior examination.,"The examples with high activation consistently provide a comparison to prior studies despite offering a descriptive analysis from current images. They note intervals or differences, often explicitly referencing both current and prior findings, for understanding stability or change in medical conditions or interventions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5042735042735043,0.59,100.0,100.0
+11859,latent_11859,734,0.001468,0.0015808078,3.3131099,Observation and comparison of pleural effusions in radiology reports.,"The data examples with higher activation levels predominantly mention pleural effusions, either newly developed, enlarged, or stable, often in the context of changes observed in comparison with prior imaging studies. The presence or specific changes in pleural effusions, in conjunction with analysis against past imaging, appear to drive the pattern of interest in these examples.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7983206717313075,0.7989690721649485,0.7477477477477478,0.8829787234042553,94.0,100.0
+11860,latent_11860,775,0.00155,0.001332511,3.9414535,"Descriptions emphasizing normal cardiac, mediastinal, and pulmonary features in imaging.","The examples with high activation predominantly describe normal findings across various cardiac, mediastinal, and pulmonary contours, indicating a significantly unremarkable status in the chest radiographs. This is in contrast with reports presenting acute or unusual findings. The language pattern emphasizes the normalcy across multiple anatomical features in the presented imaging study.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6263742002872438,0.6275510204081632,0.6036036036036037,0.6979166666666666,96.0,100.0
+11861,latent_11861,4300,0.0086,0.004087222,3.945103,"Description of interval changes, especially intubation, based on comparison with prior images.","These examples discuss findings based on comparing an image to a prior one, with a common focus on interval changes, particularly in the positioning or presence of medical devices like tubes. Key phrases describing these changes are frequently observed in these examples, indicating that the pattern focuses on evaluating changes over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6639835502394744,0.665,0.6853932584269663,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11862,latent_11862,1102,0.002204,0.0016447682,3.6328034,Objective comparison of findings to prior imaging without emotional tone.,"Examples with higher activation levels discuss findings in terms of comparisons with prior imaging that evaluate a condition's usual stability or presence of specific abnormalities, but lack emotions or subjective assessment tones often found in medical imaging reports, focusing on factual comparisons without significant changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4800509337860781,0.51,0.5067567567567568,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11863,latent_11863,900,0.0018,0.001498604,4.300951,"Comparisons with previous imaging, noting changes or stability.","The highly activated examples prominently feature descriptions of comparisons made between the current and previous radiological images, highlighting changes or stability in findings. These comparisons are an essential aspect of radiology reports, indicating the radiologist's focus on tracking changes over time.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4881291547958215,0.5050505050505051,0.5037037037037037,0.6868686868686869,99.0,99.0
+11864,latent_11864,1586,0.003172,0.0019013397,3.5775666,Comparison of chest images post-treatment or for pneumonia assessment.,"This set of examples consistently asks for or involves comparison of current radiology findings with prior images, typically to evaluate changes over time. However, the distinguishing pattern here is the mention of specific medical history or indications related to respiratory conditions or post-treatment status, often involving pneumonia or other respiratory disorders.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,100.0
+11865,latent_11865,3981,0.007962,0.003341001,2.3532279,Stable or resolved findings compared to prior imaging.,"In these examples, higher activation levels correlate with reports of changes in previous radiological findings, often indicating stability, resolution, or specific stable medical conditions compared to prior evaluations. This pattern commonly involves detailed comparison with older imaging to assess changes over time, informing whether existing conditions remain unchanged.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11866,latent_11866,2547,0.005094,0.0036222588,3.6939955,Evaluation of interval changes in chest imaging related to complex clinical conditions.,"The examples frequently incorporate complex clinical histories and involve imaging comparisons or interpretations where changes over time are significant. The high activation examples often involve detailed analysis or assessment in relation to the clinical indications or prior imaging results, where resolution of pneumonia or stability/unexpected changes in complex conditions are highlighted.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11867,latent_11867,966,0.001932,0.0014712112,3.239986,Precise placement and measurements of medical lines or tubes in images.,"High activation levels are consistently seen in examples where there is a focus on the precise placement of endotracheal tubes and other lines/tubes, such as measuring distance from anatomical landmarks like the carina or clavicles. There is a repeated pattern of specifying exact measurements for these placements, which appears to be a key area of focus in the reported findings.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6471418489767113,0.65,0.6829268292682927,0.56,100.0,100.0
+11868,latent_11868,8853,0.017706,0.006692364,2.486436,Detailed comparison of current and prior image findings.,"These examples describe descriptions of findings with radiological comparison to previous images using detailed imagery comparison and reporting intervals, suggesting a high level of critical observation in stability or change of a patient's state.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5483741469289443,0.55,0.5446428571428571,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11869,latent_11869,5212,0.010424,0.0040457128,2.3469338,Description of interval change in medical devices or interventions.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve findings related to medical devices or interventions like feeding tubes, PICC lines, or placement of tubes, consistently showing interval changes relative to prior imaging (such as new placement or removal). These changes in medical devices are a specific pattern frequently detailed in radiology reports for monitoring purposes.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4531946111778044,0.4824120603015075,0.4716981132075472,0.25,100.0,99.0
+11870,latent_11870,604,0.001208,0.001354821,4.904007,Require descriptions of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently require the assistant to generate a description based on the current and prior imaging findings, emphasizing interval changes or new findings, even when incomplete data is initially provided. The task involves evaluating changes across consecutive studies via image comparisons, thus resonating more with prompts needing detailed comparative analysis.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.486531928765055,0.4941860465116279,0.4050632911392405,0.4444444444444444,72.0,100.0
+11871,latent_11871,827,0.001654,0.001559226,3.098893,Comparison highlighting changes in medical device positioning or pathology.,"Examples with high activation have references to changes in medical devices or pathologies between current and prior imaging, especially involving placement and adjustments of tubes or catheters.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6698412698412699,0.6717948717948717,0.6460176991150443,0.7525773195876289,97.0,98.0
+11872,latent_11872,1148,0.002296,0.0024394244,3.8222454,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed references to comparison with prior imaging. This pattern indicates that the model is sensitive to reports that emphasize changes or stability over time as captured through follow-up or previous examinations.,0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.2857142857142857,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3289437170463432,0.335,0.2962962962962963,0.24,100.0,100.0
+11873,latent_11873,953,0.001906,0.0015779439,4.342926,Tortuous thoracic aorta observed on chest imaging.,"These examples consistently describe a notable finding of tortuosity or elongation of the thoracic aorta in radiological reports, suggesting a vascular pattern where the thoracic aorta deviates from its expected course.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.875,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.8043455874781176,0.81,0.9696969696969696,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11874,latent_11874,2719,0.005438,0.003060292,2.7329628,Reports with complex findings needing comparison to prior studies.,"Activation is higher when there is a need to describe changes or continuity between the current and prior images, especially when identified abnormalities require detailed comparison, such as in cases of previous surgeries, ongoing infections, unresolved medical issues, or abnormal findings where follow-up is critical.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4018169112508735,0.465,0.4787878787878787,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11875,latent_11875,4337,0.008674,0.0036781854,2.789423,"Comparative pulmonary changes, effusion, or interstitial abnormalities.","The examples with higher activation involve identification or characterization of pulmonary findings such as pleural effusions, interstitial abnormalities, or atelectasis, often with comparison to prior imaging studies. These examples typically describe changes in the pulmonary structures, including effusions and interstitial patterns, which may reflect ongoing or resolving pathological processes.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5625,0.58,0.5571428571428572,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11876,latent_11876,3507,0.007014,0.0026051777,3.0569565,Detailed comparison of current and prior clinical findings or imaging.,"The examples with high activation have detailed step-by-step descriptions contrasting current findings with changes over time, highlighting specific alterations in medical conditions or procedures, such as changes in effusion size, presence of atelectasis, or stability in cardiac silhouette across like comparisons with previous images or tests.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5529525032092426,0.5778894472361809,0.5510204081632653,0.8181818181818182,99.0,100.0
+11877,latent_11877,1380,0.00276,0.0019016133,3.5730891,Multiple views comparison in a radiographic study.,"These examples involve the mention of multiple views (frontal and lateral) or a prior frontal image in the comparison of radiographic findings. This suggests an analysis that focuses on comparative imaging studies, often looking for changes in conditions noted in both current and prior images across multiple planes.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5302013422818792,0.79,100.0,100.0
+11878,latent_11878,8888,0.017776,0.006418914,1.867281,"Evaluations of lung infections, cardiopulmonary processes, or device placements with radiographic comparisons.","These examples involve observations of lung or mediastinal changes, notably evaluation of pneumonic or infectious processes, cardiopulmonary states, or comparison of current and prior radiographic observations. The descriptions focus on changes and specificity of findings to detect abnormalities, such as intubation status, tube placements, and mentions of pleural effusions and lung mass sizes. Other findings are described in relation to baseline measurements or prior images, making them suitable for evaluating acute changes.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4336222431991761,0.505,0.5029239766081871,0.86,100.0,100.0
+11879,latent_11879,882,0.001764,0.0013566583,4.7073555,Comparison of current image with prior for interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve explicit comparisons between a current image and a prior one to assess interval changes, often mentioning that the findings are unchanged, improved, or worsened compared to previous images. This includes explicit language about comparison, phrases like 'unchanged', 'since prior', or reference to 'previous radiograph'.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11880,latent_11880,1154,0.002308,0.0017126255,2.7358618,Detailed interval comparison of images over time.,"The higher activation examples focus on detailed and specific comparisons of intervals in radiology findings with prior images or reports, showcasing changes over time. They often describe stability or changes over a series of images, referencing specific intervals and technological details to highlight findings.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5333333333333333,0.48,100.0,100.0
+11881,latent_11881,3147,0.006294,0.0029048102,3.450503,Description of interval changes in findings from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention changes, stability, or continuity in radiological findings, whether in tubes, opacities, or other notable features. These descriptions often include specific comparisons with prior imagings, indicating the focus on tracking variations or confirming lack of change, which is crucial in medical image evaluations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11882,latent_11882,1171,0.002342,0.0016315676,3.258401,Comparisons indicating unchanged or stable findings across imaging studies.,"The samples with higher activation levels describe radiological comparisons involving prior and current images, focusing on findings that are unchanged, stable, or have minimal changes. This pattern across multiple samples suggests that the model is detecting the specific language used in assessing continuity or minimal change in medical imaging reports.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5285714285714286,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11883,latent_11883,1085,0.00217,0.0019908538,3.6145732,Detailed descriptive comparison of current vs. prior images.,Examples with high activation levels involve instructions to provide detailed descriptions of changes or findings in current images compared to prior images. The presence of a directive to compare and describe contrasts or continuities between current and past images is a consistent theme.,0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.287399850580931,0.3015075376884422,0.2222222222222222,0.1616161616161616,99.0,100.0
+11884,latent_11884,1893,0.003786,0.0024157502,3.7873924,Descriptions of changes or stability in findings compared to prior studies.,"The pattern emerging from the examples with higher activation levels (typically above 4.0) involves references to changes over time or specific alterations in the images. These examples tend to describe changes regarding pulmonary opacity, effusions, lines placement, or other medical device positioning compared to prior imaging, highlighting interval differences or stability.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4690265486725664,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11885,latent_11885,1583,0.003166,0.001824346,3.7664087,Clear lungs and unremarkable cardiac silhouette in spite of clinical concerns.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe imaging findings where the current study lacks significant pathological findings, particularly consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or cardiac abnormalities. This clean bill of health description contrasts with patients' concerning indications or symptoms.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7348342714196372,0.735,0.7238095238095238,0.76,100.0,100.0
+11886,latent_11886,930,0.00186,0.0013689233,3.271031,Presence of atelectasis or pleural effusion.,"Examples with high activation levels reference atelectasis or pleural effusion, often in combination with possibilities of infection or other changes, which indicates these are key features that trigger higher activation. These descriptions provide details of lung areas like bases that are consistent with mild or early pathologic processes potentially related to atelectasis or subtle pleural effusions.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6978744939271255,0.6984924623115578,0.6788990825688074,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+11887,latent_11887,746,0.001492,0.001342702,5.2326217,Positioning of medical devices in chest radiographs.,"These examples consistently refer to the positioning observations of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and central lines, particularly noting specified measurements like distance from anatomical landmarks or previous radiograph comparisons to ensure correct positioning and functionality.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4601889338731444,0.4791666666666667,0.4375,0.3043478260869565,92.0,100.0
+11888,latent_11888,2400,0.0048,0.002584532,3.7540903,Request for findings compared to prior image(s).,"Examples with notable activation levels often provide a clear, structured report format with a requirement to compare current findings against prior images, even when a direct description of the findings is required. This includes explicit requests for comparisons to be included between current and prior imaging, often outlined in the Examination or Comparison sections, showing a comparison-based descriptive reporting pattern.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11889,latent_11889,2055,0.00411,0.0023692793,4.735162,Incorporate prior image comparison to assess changes.,"Highly activated examples involve comparing current imaging observations with prior images, highlighting changes or stability over time, a key element of follow-up radiographic analysis.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4563951230876757,0.475,0.4817518248175182,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11890,latent_11890,922,0.001844,0.0012770923,3.29641,References to stable findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples feature the use of prior imaging reports explicitly to describe stability or changes in specific medical conditions over time, often with reference to unchanged findings or previous imaging studies, reinforcing the importance of continuity in observation within radiology reports.",0.510212950890917,0.5306122448979592,0.5333333333333333,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.55,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11891,latent_11891,1374,0.002748,0.00206415,6.000495,Normal imaging findings with emphasis on absence of acute pathology.,"The examples with higher activation often describe normal radiological findings with specific emphasis on the absence of acute pathology such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, and also frequently mention the cardiomediastinal silhouette being normal. This suggests that the pattern being recognized is the reiteration of standard, clear diagnostic observations without acute changes.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8730899721945868,0.8743718592964824,0.8151260504201681,0.97,100.0,99.0
+11892,latent_11892,1271,0.002542,0.0020759713,3.20275,Descriptions lacking emphasis on prior image comparison as input lead to low activation.,High activation levels in these examples arise from image descriptions that lack comparisons to prior findings and focus instead on definite descriptions or immediate findings. The activation level is affected by the comprehensiveness and specificity in detailing current findings without prior report comparisons as input.,0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11893,latent_11893,825,0.00165,0.0014743112,4.3186893,References to prior imaging with interval changes in medical device positioning or effusions.,"This pattern involves reports referencing prior imaging studies and noting interval changes or stability of findings, particularly regarding medical devices, effusions, or opacities. Details often include recommendations for positioning or advancement of tubes based on short-term change, a feature of comparative radiology language.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.875,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5692307692307692,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11894,latent_11894,12138,0.024276,0.008843924,1.4992956,Detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include detailed observations and comparisons between current and prior imaging that imply specific or themed clinical findings, often related to disease or injury progression, such as cardiomegaly or pulmonary changes. This suggests the model activates more with content and terminology around detailed observations and direct comparisons in imaging results, rather than generic descriptions or lack of comparison context.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5470085470085471,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11895,latent_11895,926,0.001852,0.0014974895,4.478903,Comparison of radiology findings indicating stability or minor changes.,"The examples with high activations focus on descriptions of radiological findings compared to previous images, specifically mentioning whether there has been 'no relevant change,' 'improvement,' or 'minimal changes.' This highlights the model's tuning to recognize patterns of stability or minor variability in ongoing assessments.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5471783980582524,0.5477386934673367,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,99.0
+11896,latent_11896,593,0.001186,0.0009648154,6.705485,Radiological descriptions without prior comparison available.,"This set of examples highlights scenarios where radiology findings are provided in relation to previous imaging, specifically where there is no mention or availability of prior images for direct comparison. This is noted through descriptors like 'comparison: none' or mentions of providing a description without referencing prior comparisons.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5686274509803921,0.5795454545454546,0.5138888888888888,0.4868421052631579,76.0,100.0
+11897,latent_11897,8922,0.017844,0.0066296263,1.5769372,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels explicitly reference a comparison with prior radiographs or imaging findings, often showing stability or changes in clinical features such as opacities, effusions, or device placements, while indicating new advancements or unchanged conditions. The explicit mention of prior comparisons is a key part of this pattern.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+11898,latent_11898,1350,0.0027,0.002006883,4.508193,Comparison to prior imaging and description of findings.,"The high activation level examples consistently describe findings on current imaging in relation to a prior study. These examples use phrases like 'in comparison to' or 'as compared to' previous images, emphasizing continuity with past assessments.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5388245388245388,0.57,0.5460526315789473,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11899,latent_11899,995,0.00199,0.0016591267,3.7046237,Correct placement of nasogastric (NG) or similar tubes.,"The pattern among the examples with higher activations is the presence of nasogastric (NG) or similar tube placement where the tip or side port is correctly positioned, often in the stomach or gastroesophageal junction. The reports emphasize confirming proper device placement, reflecting the model's pattern in detecting these features in radiological studies.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6181871958269474,0.645,0.8085106382978723,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11900,latent_11900,4146,0.008292,0.003556854,2.5328577,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on the evaluation of changes or consistencies in radiographic findings over time, using comparative analysis against prior images to determine stability or progression of the conditions. The pattern involves the presence of descriptors like 'no significant interval change', 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'new', showing assessments based on previous imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11901,latent_11901,2128,0.004256,0.0030484,4.2301445,Focus on placement of lines and tubes in radiographic images.,The examples with high activation levels consistently mention the positioning or adequacy of medical appliances (such as ET tubes or jugular lines) in relation to anatomical landmarks as key findings. This indicates a pattern where correct placement or identification of tubes and lines in juxtaposition to anatomy is the primary focus.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5949367088607594,0.47,100.0,100.0
+11902,latent_11902,690,0.00138,0.0012213052,4.133549,Comparison of current findings to prior frontal image for diagnostic purposes.,"Examples all prompt a description of radiological findings compared to a prior frontal image, emphasizing the diagnostic process based on changes or stability over time, which is prevalent in radiology reports where comparative analysis is crucial.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.3214285714285714,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3628013777267508,0.3675675675675676,0.3620689655172414,0.4941176470588235,85.0,100.0
+11903,latent_11903,7311,0.014622,0.005769924,3.2195241,Evaluation of tube placement in conjunction with pulmonary findings.,"The description of findings in these examples often involves the mention of tube placement, adjustments, or changes in medical devices alongside underlying pulmonary conditions observed in radiological images. This points to a pattern related to the evaluation and comparison of imaging studies that involve medical devices placement or adjustment, such as tubes and catheters, against the backdrop of pulmonary alterations or opacities.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5588235294117647,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11904,latent_11904,1083,0.002166,0.0017917299,3.3463507,Comparison showing stable findings from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently compare findings with prior imaging, noting unchanged or stable findings for specific conditions such as fluid levels, line placements, or cardiorespiratory status. Unchanged or stable status despite changes in clinical presentation suggests these elements define the pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4909433864758016,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+11905,latent_11905,3259,0.006518,0.0031208377,3.7158127,Stability or nature of pleural changes and acute intrathoracic processes.,"Examples that examine for the presence or absence of pleural effusion, consolidation, pneumothorax, or similar acute findings have consistent low or high activations based on the level of detail and focus on pathological changes or stability monitoring in the reports, mainly concerning acute cardiopulmonary processes.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5072266019809986,0.507537688442211,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,99.0
+11906,latent_11906,925,0.00185,0.0015124268,3.7456584,Evaluation or mention of an infectious process in imaging.,"This pattern involves the presence of keywords relating to an infectious process, commonly seen with dyspnea or pneumonia. Higher activation levels are associated with mentions of acute or infectious processes being considered or evaluated in the context of imaging, often marked with a question mark or partial reference to conditions like pneumonia.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,100.0,100.0
+11907,latent_11907,1046,0.002092,0.0017561065,3.317626,Assessment of interval changes/stability in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation consistently compare current imaging findings to previous studies, emphasizing the evaluation of interval changes or stability in conditions like pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or progress in pulmonary findings. The pattern is rooted in the task of assessing and reporting any significant temporal changes or lack thereof in medical imaging.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4867256637168141,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11908,latent_11908,6887,0.013774,0.0053529493,2.2872584,Stability of medical condition over time compared to past exams.,These examples frequently mention evaluating the radiological findings with respect to prior images or pre-existing conditions. This pattern is noticeable as it prioritizes stability or comparison to past abnormalities in the interpretation process. This suggests a general assessment related to determining the stability or change in medical conditions over time based on radiographic evidence.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5955056179775281,0.53,100.0,100.0
+11909,latent_11909,4821,0.009642,0.003985281,1.8654613,Comparison of current and prior imaging highlights changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention comparison to prior imaging alongside noted changes or stability in findings. This pattern of comparing intervals often highlights the presence of new findings, changes in pre-existing conditions, or no significant changes, allowing radiologists to track progression of findings over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+11910,latent_11910,1431,0.002862,0.0021271883,3.1141825,Comparison instructions inconsistently matched with detailed prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation frequently include language that directs the assistant to compare current images with prior studies, despite the explicit mention or availability of prior images being inconsistent, while low activation examples contain straightforward observations without instructions for detailed comparisons. The pattern seems to involve instances where despite instruction for comparison, the actual previous study comparison is not consistently detailed or available.",0.64349376114082,0.68,0.6097560975609756,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.5283018867924528,0.84,100.0,100.0
+11911,latent_11911,2299,0.004598,0.0020086707,3.3682885,Changes or positioning of medical devices in radiographs.,"Examples that have higher activation levels emphasize changes to or the placement of medical devices such as tubes (ET, OG, chest tubes) or catheter lines in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina. These reports often specifically reference their positions or tips in relation to other parts of the anatomy, and note when there have been changes in their placement.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+11912,latent_11912,1504,0.003008,0.0018662647,2.775209,Frequent comparison of current and previous radiology studies.,"The activation levels reflect reports that consistently involve comparing the current imaging study with prior studies, highlighting radiological practice of noting changes in image findings over time. The comparison often entails using language such as ""compared to previous"" or ""as before,"" indicating attention to interval changes or stability of conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11913,latent_11913,718,0.001436,0.0014309804,4.24744,Reports describing unremarkable findings without prior imaging comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels involve evaluations where imaging findings are described as unremarkable or normal, particularly in terms of cardiac and mediastinal contours, and do not include references to prior imaging for comparison. This reflects reports focusing on the absence of acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities, a consistent structure in diagnostic imaging.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.724130159177349,0.734375,0.8253968253968254,0.5652173913043478,92.0,100.0
+11914,latent_11914,2999,0.005998,0.0037374652,2.876551,Detailed descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation-level examples are all based on providing descriptions that reference prior imaging, even if their task includes comparative notation. Low activation levels often have a direct comparison noted but without indicated specific change contrast, which might be missing or vague.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5125135742606763,0.5125628140703518,0.5148514851485149,0.52,100.0,99.0
+11915,latent_11915,1714,0.003428,0.00203473,5.0469046,Focus on medical support device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with positive activation levels often describe chest radiographs or imaging comparisons focusing on medical support devices such as endotracheal tubes. These examples frequently mention placement of such devices relative to anatomical landmarks, a common reason for follow-up imaging.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5357142857142857,0.3,100.0,100.0
+11916,latent_11916,1457,0.002914,0.001870372,3.2295885,Detailed comparison to prior study with date-specific references.,"The pattern in these examples is a detailed comparison of the current radiological findings with previous imaging studies. Specifically, the examples contain direct phrases indicating comparison with previous imaging, such as stating new findings relating to prior date-specific studies.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5925925925925926,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11917,latent_11917,4061,0.008122,0.0034957794,2.7866776,Comparison to prior studies with focus on unchanged devices.,"This set of examples describe radiology findings in relation to prior imaging studies and often include specific reference to monitoring and support devices, such as tubes and catheters. It emphasizes the stability or changes in the location or function of these devices along with other findings related to the lung or heart.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5555555555555556,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11918,latent_11918,13488,0.026976,0.00968239,1.2933044,Evaluating interval change in radiology findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include reference to interval changes or comparisons with previous imaging studies, highlighting the significance of changes over time or unchanged conditions, which is a characteristic pattern in radiology analyses.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+11919,latent_11919,1083,0.002166,0.0015665643,4.8527265,Comparison of support device positioning across imaging studies.,"The primary pattern in the high activation examples is the focus on comparing current and prior imaging examinations, especially noting stability or positioning changes of support devices (e.g., lines, tubing) and assessing their implications. This suggests that the pattern relates to the assessment of medical devices in consecutive imaging studies.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,100.0
+11920,latent_11920,1077,0.002154,0.0015999705,4.000012,"Comparison of current findings with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation consistently involve references to changes, stability, or comparisons in the context of specific abnormal findings on imaging studies over time. This typically includes language that confirms progression, resolution, or persistence of findings, often tied to particular clinical conditions or concerns.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.518796992481203,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11921,latent_11921,8664,0.017328,0.006408934,2.348647,Detailed descriptions of medical device changes or placements compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature the presence of specific medical devices, like tubes or lines, noted in the findings or greater emphasis on detailed comparisons concerning their placement and changes between prior and current imaging.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.6029411764705882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+11922,latent_11922,4212,0.008424,0.0035482785,1.6636459,Comparative analysis with prior images for interval changes.,"The pattern observed here involves a descriptive comparison of findings with prior images often with a specified focus on their stability or change. The task from the examples frequently involves assessing changes in conditions or positions of medical apparatuses, pleural effusions, and lung opacities as seen in completion responses.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11923,latent_11923,2244,0.004488,0.002360379,2.4173284,Comparison of current findings with prior images in chest studies.,"The examples with high activation scores consistently involve direct comparisons of current chest imaging findings to prior images, going beyond simple provision of current observations to highlight changes or stability over time. This often includes references to specific clinical changes or imaging expectations based on previous findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4415840569686723,0.455,0.465648854961832,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11924,latent_11924,1041,0.002082,0.0017607597,3.7396038,"Evaluation of pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or cardiomegaly compared to prior imaging.","These examples often contain detailed descriptions of pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, cardiomegaly, atelectasis, or other abnormal findings that are unchanged, minimally changed, or newly appeared when compared to a prior image. The language consistently focuses on the presence, absence, or changes of these thoracic conditions.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5949088544922607,0.595,0.5922330097087378,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11925,latent_11925,2784,0.005568,0.0026131067,2.3865104,Clear lungs and absence of prior comparison in findings description.,Highly representative samples show the lungs are clear of significant abnormality when there is no indication of comparison to prior studies in the findings description. The lack of prior comparison leads to clearer and typically negative findings reports.,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,100.0,100.0
+11926,latent_11926,6070,0.01214,0.0048762644,2.6881552,Evaluation for interval change or specific conditions compared to prior imaging.,"Examples detailing changes from previous studies, such as comparison details indicating conditions like pneumothorax or interval changes, are likely to show an activation pattern. The pattern notices descriptions highlighting comparisons to previous imaging without a significant unifying reference, other than a recorded interval change or evaluation for a specific condition.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4857410004675082,0.56,0.5340909090909091,0.94,100.0,100.0
+11927,latent_11927,7355,0.01471,0.0055451947,2.3883786,Findings elaborated in context of a prior frontal image with historical comparison.,These examples demonstrate a pattern where radiology findings are assessed primarily through comparison with only a prior frontal image. Activation levels increase when findings are additionally contextualized with previous reports or historical comparisons.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5342465753424658,0.78,100.0,100.0
+11928,latent_11928,1108,0.002216,0.001881844,3.7558122,Stability or changes in cardiac or mediastinal contours across studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently referenced changes or stability in cardiomediastinal or cardiac silhouettes across different imaging studies. These comparisons describe stability or changes in the heart's size or its mediastinal relation across studies, often using phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant change'.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6242390841453944,0.625,0.6146788990825688,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11929,latent_11929,523,0.001046,0.0010802286,3.5802994,Use of both frontal and lateral chest views in imaging descriptions.,"Examples with high activations mention the use of both frontal and lateral chest views for examinations, indicating the model is sensitive to descriptions involving two-view imaging techniques specifically when both views are described in the context of chest radiograph studies rather than just a single view.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5628586704687222,0.5654761904761905,0.4778761061946903,0.7941176470588235,68.0,100.0
+11930,latent_11930,966,0.001932,0.0016862008,2.8153498,Comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Activation is high when there are specific references to findings compared to previous imaging, especially with some notable changes or evaluations versus prior findings. These high-activation examples usually describe specific changes or observations compared to previous imaging findings, and also include discussion on potential clinical implications or further recommendations.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5454429377665415,0.555,0.5426356589147286,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11931,latent_11931,1023,0.002046,0.0017275611,2.9834855,Comparison of current image findings with prior imaging studies.,"The examples showing the pattern consistently involve descriptions and comparisons of current imaging findings against those of a prior imaging study, typically highlighting changes in clinical conditions or stability of findings over time. This pattern is characterized in the reports by the use of language that relates findings to previous states or images, explicitly requiring an evaluation of consistency or change.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4181017535582291,0.445,0.4615384615384615,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11932,latent_11932,383,0.000766,0.000976263,5.7050967,Identification of new findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently note new findings compared to prior imaging. The pattern emphasizes the identification of new developments such as opacities, effusions, or other changes that are new relative to a prior study, which trigger an increased model activation due to their clinical significance in diagnostics.",0.8257575757575758,0.8260869565217391,0.7407407407407407,0.9523809523809524,21.0,25.0,0.7835497835497836,0.7866666666666666,0.6097560975609756,1.0,50.0,100.0
+11933,latent_11933,12272,0.024544,0.008745295,0.9079502,Monitoring and comparison of chest devices' positions or changes relative to prior imaging.,"The common attribute among examples with activation level near 5.0 involves references to chest devices (like tubes, lines, catheters) and their monitoring or positional changes relative to those devices, which may include comparisons to prior studies. Examples consistently highlight device-related changes within the chest resulting in a notable pattern.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11934,latent_11934,709,0.001418,0.0014141782,4.9959636,Findings compared to prior imaging for stability or change.,The examples with high activations focus on comparing current images with previous ones and noting changes in condition such as unresolved issues or consistent patterns. They often describe stable findings or resolution of previously noted conditions. This pattern reflects a radiological examination process keen on status update and comparison with historical data to assess progress or stability.,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3992406542056075,0.4117647058823529,0.4094488188976378,0.5977011494252874,87.0,100.0
+11935,latent_11935,843,0.001686,0.0014686957,3.813737,Identification or questioning of pneumonia in comparison to prior images.,"The highlighted examples consistently involve scenarios where there is a focus on identifying changes in comparison to prior imaging, specifically when there is a question of pneumonia or an acute process where identifiable change is being monitored or suspected. This involves assessments of pulmonary processes such as pneumonia, usually with recurrence or worsening of a suspected condition.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.31,100.0,100.0
+11936,latent_11936,2447,0.004894,0.0025722662,2.9481888,Detailed comparison of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation often have more detailed analysis of changes between current and prior imaging, and text fragments indicating substantial changes or stability. The pattern involves detailed comparison of changes over time between images or studies, particularly focusing on describing disease progression or stability.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4565079365079365,0.465,0.4533333333333333,0.34,100.0,100.0
+11937,latent_11937,670,0.00134,0.0012672814,4.318714,Asymmetry in radiographic findings.,"Examples with high activation levels center around the concept of asymmetry in imaging findings, often described in great detail. They mention asymmetric densities or structural abnormalities, which is a distinctive observation pattern in radiology, notable especially when examining bilateral structures like lungs, pleura, or the chest wall.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.724844089920232,0.7258064516129032,0.6966292134831461,0.7209302325581395,86.0,100.0
+11938,latent_11938,1300,0.0026,0.0018783419,4.4389467,Evaluation for trauma-related findings without past imaging comparison.,"Activation levels are high for examples involving fall, trauma, or injury assessments where the text asks to specifically evaluate for fractures, pneumothorax, or other traumatic injuries, especially when no comparison imaging is available. Lower activation levels are seen in non-traumatic contexts or when comparison is not central to trauma assessment.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5888597899242488,0.635,0.9090909090909092,0.3,100.0,100.0
+11939,latent_11939,1861,0.003722,0.0021854937,4.9608793,Thoracic imaging assessment with focus on lung and cardiovascular features.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involved the assessment of lung and cardiovascular features, such as opacities, pleural effusions, or cardiomegaly, and often included descriptions of additional structures or devices such as catheters within the thoracic region.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4532967032967033,0.5577889447236181,0.5294117647058824,1.0,99.0,100.0
+11940,latent_11940,6527,0.013054,0.0048520346,1.9291096,Emphasis on interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations specifically involve cases where findings are described and directly compared with prior imaging, emphasizing stability, change, or interpretation in context with history. There is consistent discussion about interval changes or reaffirmation of findings in relation to previous states, aligning with a pattern of ongoing monitoring or surveillance.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5896306676008407,0.59,0.5849056603773585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+11941,latent_11941,1070,0.00214,0.0016621321,3.787486,Focus on current imaging findings with/without immediate comparison.,"Highly activated examples focus on describing findings from current radiology images. Although some of these do not have comparison studies available immediately, they still emphasize obtaining information from images that either complements the existing findings or identifies new findings. This pattern shows the importance of using imaging to verify existing diagnoses and treatment assessments with recent data.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5030674846625767,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11942,latent_11942,1091,0.002182,0.0017155451,2.7100945,"Focus on negative findings in imaging, confirming no acute pathology.","These examples feature the description of current radiological imaging findings, specifically focused on no evidence of acute pathology, commonly presenting in routine radiology reads. They emphasize negative findings such as absence of consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, typical in reports where the focus is on confirming or ruling out expected pathologies, often appearing in stable or unchanged images compared to prior studies.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6394927536231885,0.6482412060301508,0.6153846153846154,0.8,100.0,99.0
+11943,latent_11943,1192,0.002384,0.0014448009,4.676609,Clear lungs and cardiac silhouette; no pleural abnormalities.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve a specific pattern of clear or normal evaluations of lungs and cardiac silhouettes, often accompanied by lack of pleural abnormality or clear descriptions of general stability. They typically avoid mentioning significant pathologies like effusions or consolidations, indicating a benign, unremarkable status of health. This matches a clarity, stability theme in radiological findings.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.425531914893617,0.2,100.0,100.0
+11944,latent_11944,1850,0.0037,0.0019778474,3.5253701,Reports with findings or instructions for follow-ups/comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve examinations or findings explicitly requested or described in the context of previous comparisons or clinical indications. These provide personalized comments or adjustments based on prior or standard expectations. This includes necessary comparisons or changes (e.g., ET tube placement) highlighted to guide follow-up actions or consult specific clinical needs.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.396011396011396,0.47,0.4823529411764706,0.82,100.0,100.0
+11945,latent_11945,791,0.001582,0.0015409061,3.6820984,Description of radiology findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings compared to prior images. These reports include current and previous imaging studies to assess changes over time, using language that notes comparisons to identify stability or detect changes.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.397832195905259,0.4,0.4107142857142857,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11946,latent_11946,920,0.00184,0.0016057242,4.2563562,"Updates on comparisons to prior studies/images, often involving follow-up or device placements.","Examples with higher activation levels involve reference to either a prior radiology report or image for comparison, especially when this involves updates on device placement, stable findings, or changes that justify the need for follow-up or continued observation.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+11947,latent_11947,527,0.001054,0.0011899102,3.9919035,Detailed interval comparisons in imaging findings.,"The examples demonstrate a pattern of comparing current radiological findings with those of prior imaging, and highlighting specific interval changes such as new developments, improvements, or stable findings over time. High activations emphasize examples discussing detailed interval comparisons.",0.4583333333333333,0.4693877551020408,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.4960299573523803,0.5029239766081871,0.4125,0.4647887323943662,71.0,100.0
+11948,latent_11948,979,0.001958,0.0017784925,6.1577096,Focus on identification of interval changes relative to available prior imaging.,"The high activation levels in the examples suggest a focus on identifying interval changes or commentary on findings in relation to prior imaging when both current and prior images are available. The examples emphasize description of specific findings (e.g., effusion, infiltrates) with comparison to prior studies, indicating the importance of longitudinal analysis in these radiology reports.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11949,latent_11949,644,0.001288,0.0012089869,4.1265116,Analysis of findings through comparison with prior images.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions derived from comparative studies of current and prior images, usually prompting a comparison of findings with any previous imaging to observe stability or progression of conditions. Multiple examples clearly note 'comparison to prior' or similar phrases, marking the central pattern.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4784764480504845,0.4887640449438202,0.448,0.717948717948718,78.0,100.0
+11950,latent_11950,8425,0.01685,0.006185815,1.7055118,Emphasis on comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations clearly emphasize comparing findings on current images to prior images and noticing changes or stability. This pattern is common in follow-up imaging to assess treatment response, stability of chronic conditions, or progression of disease. Activations increase when specific comparative language evaluates interval changes over time.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.5496688741721855,0.83,100.0,100.0
+11951,latent_11951,710,0.00142,0.001264092,4.463698,Descriptions focus on comparing current to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often emphasize the need to provide a description of findings in comparison to previous imaging, regardless of whether those comparisons result in changes or not. The task consistently requires describing findings concerning prior images, even when there are no differences noted.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4483331849081248,0.4510869565217391,0.4247787610619469,0.5714285714285714,84.0,100.0
+11952,latent_11952,881,0.001762,0.0013387179,4.2332616,Descriptions of changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference findings that have changed from a previous state, particularly focusing on new developments such as opacities, effusions, or changes in devices. This is indicative of radiological assessments that emphasize changes from a previous comparative study, identifying new abnormalities or changes requiring follow-up.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4487179487179487,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11953,latent_11953,1394,0.002788,0.0016712423,3.0886996,Characteristic emphasis on findings relative to prior images.,"The distinguishing pattern involves identifying changes or stability in findings when compared to previous examinations, generally around central medical devices, tubes, or specific lung or pleural findings. Descriptions emphasize comparison results, often noting no significant change, consistent with the importance of monitoring in a medical imaging context.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+11954,latent_11954,5309,0.010618,0.0040949765,2.1614437,No significant change compared to prior imaging.,"Example 12 has a high activation and explicitly states there is no relevant change compared to the previous radiograph, indicating a potential pattern of recognizing stability or no significant change between current and prior imaging. Additionally, other examples with similar descriptions have intermediate activations, further suggesting this pattern.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.6229508196721312,0.38,100.0,100.0
+11955,latent_11955,697,0.001394,0.001408784,4.6162014,Comparison of current device or tube placement with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples emphasize changes in medical devices or tubes in relation to prior imaging. These descriptions focus on placement, adjustment, or the impact of interventions, such as intubation or catheter insertion/removal, relative to the past study.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6786776178280196,0.6810810810810811,0.6547619047619048,0.6470588235294118,85.0,100.0
+11956,latent_11956,1229,0.002458,0.0012671421,2.9346285,Comparison indicating changes or stability in serial images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve imaging report comparisons highlighting notable findings with previous ones, such as unchanged features, stability, improvement, or deterioration. This pattern suggests the model is activated by the mention of changes or stability across images over time in a clinical context.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4864864864864865,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11957,latent_11957,653,0.001306,0.001269301,4.4221954,Stable or unchanged mediastinal or cardiac contours in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern here consistently involves descriptions of anatomical structures, particularly the mediastinal and cardiac contours, and the positioning or status of man-made objects (e.g., medical devices) within the thoracic region, indicating a stable or unchanged state as compared to prior imaging. Language like 'appear unchanged', 'again noted', 'stable', or similar suggests this comparison.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5288461538461539,0.5384615384615384,0.4864864864864865,0.4390243902439024,82.0,100.0
+11958,latent_11958,818,0.001636,0.0015301541,3.5700448,Radiology reports note normal heart and mediastinal contours.,"The examples with high activation consistently describe findings in radiological imaging where the heart size is normal and using specific phrases like 'normal cardiomediastinal silhouette'. This is frequently detailed in reports to indicate unchanged or stable cardiac features, regardless of other potential abnormalities in the imaging.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6451612903225806,0.6,100.0,100.0
+11959,latent_11959,4228,0.008456,0.0035633831,2.9052796,"Focus on positioning and changes of tubes, catheters, and devices in images.","The examples with higher activation mention the positioning, handling, or changes related to medical tubes, catheters, or lines such as endotracheal or gastric tubes, as well as specific devices and their positioning. This pattern suggests a focus on the documented changes or stability of these elements in radiological assessments.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,100.0
+11960,latent_11960,1257,0.002514,0.0018363141,3.720984,Stable findings compared to prior examination.,"Activated examples consistently involve descriptions that compare a current radiology finding with an unchanged or stable appearance from a prior examination. The pattern of using phrases like 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change', or 'similar to prior exam' when highlighting unchanged conditions is the common factor among highly activated samples.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5833333333333334,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11961,latent_11961,1659,0.003318,0.0019383961,3.3016346,Urgent findings or changes requiring immediate attention or intervention.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve time-sensitive comparisons, often presenting changes or needs for interventions based on these comparisons, such as tube placements, interval changes, or the need for increased monitoring due to developing conditions. These factors require urgent or immediate consideration in radiological assessments.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.578125,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11962,latent_11962,1154,0.002308,0.0018344984,4.055213,Comparison lacking or not highlighting significant change/findings.,"Examples indicating a pattern of comparisons made with prior imaging often do not involve explicit changes or findings related to techniques. Instead, they focus on identifying studies with no prior comparison available or cases where the comparison does not mention significant findings or changes in the radiological study over time.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3846153846153846,0.44,0.4625,0.74,100.0,100.0
+11963,latent_11963,5875,0.01175,0.00440445,2.0120409,Persistent or substantial interval change of clinical findings or devices from prior imaging.,"Examples with notable activations describe significant change or persistent findings related to clinical status or interventions (e.g., tubes, catheters) between current and prior imaging, indicating clinical relevance. This includes phrases explicitly noting unchanged or new positioning and results.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5070422535211268,0.36,100.0,100.0
+11964,latent_11964,6755,0.01351,0.0052291006,1.8631716,"Interval changes in findings related to opacity, consolidation, or effusion.","Examples with increased activation focus notably on the presence of interval changes in small areas of opacity, consolidation, or effusion when compared to previous studies. Terms like 'worsened', 'unchanged', and 'improved' reference the interval change. The pattern appears to highlight the importance of interval changes and minor variations in radiological findings.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5563613068545804,0.5628140703517588,0.5789473684210527,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+11965,latent_11965,13018,0.026036,0.009550434,1.7370359,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation describe ongoing or unchanged pulmonary conditions compared to previous studies, often with explicit mention of results that remain 'stable', 'unchanged', or involve minor changes over time. These descriptions often include explicit mentions of improvements or lack of new issues, which is a pattern in radiology follow-ups that track progression or stability of conditions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5749893747343684,0.575,0.5742574257425742,0.58,100.0,100.0
+11966,latent_11966,1109,0.002218,0.0014235574,4.3616633,Tortuous aorta or cardiac silhouette findings noted as unchanged or stable.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the tortuosity of the aorta or cardiac silhouette findings in the presence of phrases like 'unchanged', 'constant', 'stable', or 'similar' in comparison with prior imaging results. This indicates an emphasis on the tortuosity or enlargement of these anatomical structures in stable, chronic conditions noted over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,100.0,100.0
+11967,latent_11967,449,0.000898,0.0008951266,4.254533,Stability or lack of change in specific findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels include descriptions comparing current and prior imaging where specific findings remain unchanged. These scenarios highlight stability or lack of progression, indicating the controlled status of certain medical conditions despite new imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4193899782135076,0.4743589743589743,0.25,0.2321428571428571,56.0,100.0
+11968,latent_11968,740,0.00148,0.0014201951,3.5130608,Comparison-based evaluation using both frontal and lateral imaging views.,"Examples with activation levels indicating a pattern consistently involve radiographic findings described in terms of comparison between two time frames, noting changes or stability in specific areas such as nodules, pleural effusions, or opacities using lateral and frontal views for evaluation.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6112852664576802,0.6129032258064516,0.5625,0.7325581395348837,86.0,100.0
+11969,latent_11969,1112,0.002224,0.0018154196,3.364789,Detailed procedural and comparison-based assessment in radiology reports.,"The pattern evident in the examples with high activation levels focuses on comprehensive comparison techniques and the procedural explanation of findings, whereas low activation levels occur when reports lack such comparisons or thorough procedural detail. This is seen in the heavy emphasis on detailed procedural comparisons in the reports with high activation levels.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4968944099378882,0.8,100.0,100.0
+11970,latent_11970,1028,0.002056,0.0016403659,4.487426,Descriptions include comparisons to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently compare findings with prior imaging studies, utilizing phrases like 'compared to', 'with study of', or 'chest radiograph dated'. Such references to earlier images provide context for evaluation of changes or stability in the current findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+11971,latent_11971,5040,0.01008,0.0042766756,3.1223137,Mediastinal/airway position or integrity assessment without acute findings.,"The pattern captures examples that mention airway or mediastinal structures' positions in imaging reports, such as cardiac silhouette or vascular positions, under certain conditions or with specific conditions that pertain to functional or structural assessments, e.g. tubes, structures being blocked or displaced, potential masses. The attention seems to be on anatomical and structural integrity and changes or comparisons, drawing out interpretations around normality or bordering abnormalities without being explicitly marked by acute pathologies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4543315561562914,0.455,0.4579439252336448,0.49,100.0,100.0
+11972,latent_11972,980,0.00196,0.0015223678,2.8182957,Acute or critical changes in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples focus on findings often related to acute or critical changes, where detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images is crucial to patient management. Changes in effusion size, mediastinal widening, or opacification are commonly scrutinized in a comparative context to assess disease progression or therapeutic effect, especially when considering interventions or diagnosing emergent conditions.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5853658536585366,0.24,100.0,100.0
+11973,latent_11973,1353,0.002706,0.0020883773,3.312434,Detailed image comparison and stable cardiovascular findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently include detailed image comparison descriptions and findings, with consistent or unchanged mediastinal, hilar, and cardiac silhouettes, focusing on stability or minor changes, particularly in relation to prior reports or studies. This suggests an emphasis on comparative observations as a pattern for high activation, as seen with these stability-focused, comparative language patterns.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5670103092783505,0.55,100.0,100.0
+11974,latent_11974,16510,0.03302,0.011877486,1.0066133,Changes in medical devices or tubes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations often discuss changes to medical devices or tubes (e.g., NG tube, Port-A-Cath) as the central focus, particularly emphasizing updates or status, rather than the presence of pulmonary or cardiac conditions alone. This change or update related to devices appears in comparison with previous studies.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5423728813559322,0.32,100.0,100.0
+11975,latent_11975,905,0.00181,0.0019159113,4.5150666,"Unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours from prior imaging.","The samples with higher activation levels demonstrate unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours over time, indicated by phrases like 'are unchanged' or 'appears stable'. This is a common theme in radiological reviews, focusing on areas that are stable compared to prior imaging, and does not highlight acute changes.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3804624405354574,0.44,0.3421052631578947,0.13,100.0,100.0
+11976,latent_11976,4190,0.00838,0.0034221592,2.7194924,Emphasis on interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve comparisons to prior images or reports, often specifying interval changes or stability in imaging findings. The model detects a pattern of emphasizing continuity or change over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5500391819813444,0.555,0.5454545454545454,0.66,100.0,100.0
+11977,latent_11977,956,0.001912,0.0015566613,4.6614127,Description of interval changes or significant findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples where there is a notable change or status in the patient’s examinations, such as significant findings that require reporting, interval changes, or comparisons with prior studies that indicate disease progression or the stability of a condition. These findings necessitate clear communication with notable differences or continuities highlighted between past and current conditions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4536082474226804,0.44,100.0,100.0
+11978,latent_11978,552,0.001104,0.0011822828,3.8644369,Unchanged position of medical devices or tubes in radiographs.,"The examples with high activations frequently involve descriptions of medical devices or tubes like nasogastric tubes, ventilation tubes, catheters, or lines being unchanged in position compared to a prior examination. This pattern involves monitoring the position of devices in patients' radiological images, indicating a focus on stability or repositioning of these devices over time.",0.88,0.88,0.88,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7263041372630413,0.7325581395348837,0.6756756756756757,0.6944444444444444,72.0,100.0
+11979,latent_11979,17478,0.034956,0.01641022,3.1041498,"Evaluation of findings in context of stable or ongoing conditions, rather than new findings.","Given the presence of explicit phrases indicating comparison with prior images, such as 'compared to previous exam' or 'no interval development', examples with high activation levels suggest a pattern of radiological findings being evaluated against pre-existing conditions rather than new ones. They focus on ongoing clinical issues, which aligns with medical practices focusing on monitoring documented conditions over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4540890269151139,0.4673366834170854,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,99.0
+11980,latent_11980,8802,0.017604,0.0064198775,1.6125307,Explicit changes or stability noted in comparison to prior imaging studies.,The examples exhibit consistently high activation levels when the reports contain phrases explicitly comparing current image findings to prior studies and noting changes or stability. These phrases are particularly prevalent in follow-up reports to track changes in patient conditions or treatment effects.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.5702479338842975,0.69,100.0,100.0
+11981,latent_11981,927,0.001854,0.0016778818,4.074685,Descriptions of substantive interval changes in pathology.,"Highly activated examples generally describe findings or changes that develop in comparison with prior images, particularly significant interval changes. Reports often highlight progressive pathological features like increasing opacification, pleural effusion, or lung consolidation, indicating an ongoing process or substantive change from previous studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6022031823745411,0.61,0.6527777777777778,0.47,100.0,100.0
+11982,latent_11982,1152,0.002304,0.0016199924,3.4265924,Lung findings highlighting changes or opacities compared to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently describe findings in the lungs or thoracic area such as atelectasis, pneumonia, or other opacifications as compared to prior images. They emphasize changes in the lung tissues over time or between studies, often related to infection, scarring, or fluid levels. These findings are comparatively dynamic, showing progression or resolution, which is crucial in diagnosing and monitoring diseases.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6496847162446202,0.65,0.6415094339622641,0.68,100.0,100.0
+11983,latent_11983,1021,0.002042,0.0014878428,2.5786924,Assistant requested to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples reflect requests for assistance in assessing current findings in radiology studies with respect to specific comparisons to prior imaging, often with clear research questions or INDICATION, TECHNIQUE, and explicit IMAGING comparisons asked for, which are to be filled with inputs and outputs spanning the study.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3839144728326991,0.405,0.4306569343065693,0.59,100.0,100.0
+11984,latent_11984,1474,0.002948,0.0023740917,4.4503846,Focus on comparative imaging findings over time.,"The examples consistently mention findings from image comparisons, such as noting changes, improvements, or stability of specific opacities or pathologies across different time points or studies. This repeated observation signifies the pattern detected in radiology reporting that assesses change or status over time.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+11985,latent_11985,11195,0.02239,0.008179493,1.525687,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings in comparison to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation frequently mention comparisons with prior images, particularly emphasizing stable or unchanged appearance over time. This recurring element of referencing older imaging to ascertain stability or change is a key characteristic that explains the pattern observed.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+11986,latent_11986,1034,0.002068,0.0017301854,5.9193554,Notable change in imaging findings compared to prior exams.,"Examples with high activations often describe notable or significant changes in imaging findings compared to prior examinations, such as changes in effusions, cardiomegaly, pulmonary conditions, or chest tube positions. The discussion of specific comparative differences typically suggests the leverage of historical imaging for diagnosing acute changes or stability, highlighting change detection as a key element in these reports.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4397672735072526,0.4723618090452261,0.4423076923076923,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+11987,latent_11987,630,0.00126,0.0014010955,2.7871244,"Description of radiological findings compared to prior images, noting stability or change.","Examples with high activation involve direct descriptions of current radiological findings compared to prior images, usually noting stability, no change, or improvement. This suggests the model recognizes the format and content style of such radiographic comparative assessments.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4076959961639894,0.4098360655737705,0.3873873873873873,0.5180722891566265,83.0,100.0
+11988,latent_11988,4755,0.00951,0.0042723473,2.9801478,Assessment of interval change or status of devices/pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently describe descriptions of the findings that involve change or comparison to prior radiographs or state of monitoring/support devices, indicating interval change or stability of various medical devices or pathologies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11989,latent_11989,818,0.001636,0.0015014831,3.579978,Description of interval changes in findings compared to previous images.,"The highly activated examples demonstrate references to prior imaging studies and descriptions of interval changes, reflecting a pattern of continuity or resolution in the current findings. This suggests that activated responses relate strongly to the pattern of comparison over time, evaluating progression or stability.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4480128462464873,0.45,0.4431818181818182,0.39,100.0,100.0
+11990,latent_11990,17043,0.034086,0.012364294,1.1680957,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in radiology findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation mention comparing findings from current and previous radiographic images, emphasizing changes or stability over time. These instances involve interval changes in the patient's condition or confirmation of stability, which are common focal points in comparative radiology studies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+11991,latent_11991,5714,0.011428,0.0043671275,2.2758205,Interval changes in medical tube/device placements or removal.,"Highly activated examples frequently involve the removal or repositioning of various tubes or medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, chest tubes), suggesting monitoring changes over time, unlike cases with stable medical apparatus positioning. Reports often explicitly describe these interval changes compared to previous images.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5734035549703753,0.595,0.6727272727272727,0.37,100.0,100.0
+11992,latent_11992,357,0.000714,0.0009310523,6.7999415,Presence and unchanged position of cardiac devices or surgical remnants.,"These examples describe findings related to cardiac devices or surgical remnants like median sternotomy wires, mediastinal clips, or implanted cardiac generators and their unchanged positions. The examples feature terms such as ""sternotomy wires"", ""mediastinal clips"", or ""cardiac device"" which indicate prior cardiac surgeries or interventions and consistently relate to observations around those features.",0.8934240362811792,0.8936170212765957,0.8148148148148148,1.0,22.0,25.0,0.8275516130735519,0.8380281690140845,0.6461538461538462,1.0,42.0,100.0
+11993,latent_11993,849,0.001698,0.0014655327,3.618798,Comparative analysis with prior images to assess stability or change in findings.,"In these samples, the key pattern involves comparing current imaging studies to prior ones and detailing stability, improvement, or progression of specific conditions (e.g., effusions, opacities, or device placements). This pattern is evidenced by repeated references to prior reports, stability or changes over time, and terminology indicative of comparative analysis.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4172937093055661,0.425,0.4390243902439024,0.54,100.0,100.0
+11994,latent_11994,1209,0.002418,0.00166873,3.2159557,Details specific to positioning or placement of medical devices or tubes.,"The examples showing high activation have references to specific positioning or placement of medical devices, tubes, or catheters within the patient, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or mentions of portable upright views that give specific context to the radiological image and its interpretation. This positioning detail, particularly using measurement or precise positioning adjectives like 'low lying' or 'terminates', correlates with high activation levels.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4920396831662325,0.5125628140703518,0.5166666666666667,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+11995,latent_11995,1088,0.002176,0.0014558232,4.6422577,Comparison-related changes or stabilities in imaging findings.,"These examples involve findings based on comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, particularly with a focus on describing changes or stability in pathological findings. This pattern involves the descriptive text that specifically references how findings have changed, improved, or remained stable relative to past images, consistent with typical radiology report comparisons.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3794414973476128,0.38,0.3723404255319149,0.35,100.0,100.0
+11996,latent_11996,1415,0.00283,0.0018155513,2.7101157,Presence of both current frontal/lateral images and explicit comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels typically include both image modalities (current frontal and lateral views) and explicit comparisons to prior studies, aligning with a detailed discussion about interval changes or stability between the current and prior studies. Furthermore, explicit localization or comparison of devices' or pathologies' positions as related to previous imaging seem present in examples with higher activation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+11997,latent_11997,958,0.001916,0.0017867272,2.638766,Detailed descriptions of tube or catheter placement in imaging.,"The examples frequently highlight the position and manipulation of tubes or catheters within the patient's body, particularly endotracheal and nasogastric tubes, and note any changes or stability in their placement. These findings are explicitly mentioned in examples with high activation levels, reflecting the emphasis on fixture locations in radiology reports.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4590163934426229,0.28,100.0,100.0
+11998,latent_11998,1033,0.002066,0.0014514693,3.9009635,Descriptive language indicating minimal or no change from prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern consistently describe radiological findings using explicit comparative language, indicating minimal or no interval change compared to prior imaging studies. The description of unchanged or stable findings is emphasized, which is critical in longitudinal assessments of patient conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.44,0.33,100.0,100.0
+11999,latent_11999,511,0.001022,0.0012463888,4.65038,Reference to comparison with preceding study for interval change.,The examples with high activation consistently reference 'comparison' with another 'preceding' or 'previous' study and indicate checking for 'interval change'. This language pattern frequently occurs in follow-up radiological evaluations where the radiologist examines changes over time.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5148955773955773,0.5185185185185185,0.4298245614035088,0.7903225806451613,62.0,100.0
+12000,latent_12000,3746,0.007492,0.002814336,2.321286,Active respiratory complications like hypoxia and pneumothorax.,"The examples with higher activation discuss conditions related to hypoxia, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion, frequently referencing active respiratory complications. Terms like 'hypoxia', 'pneumothorax detected', 'pleural effusion', and 'interval change' are commonly seen in activated reports.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.12,100.0,100.0
+12001,latent_12001,873,0.001746,0.0015697974,4.8084936,Stable calcified granulomas noted and unchanged.,"These examples largely describe findings of calcified granulomas, which are stable and often used as reference points in radiology reports. Calcified granulomas appear frequently in these examples as normal variants that are compared against prior images or described as unchanged, indicating benignity or past infection with no current clinical significance.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5362625106395469,0.605,0.9565217391304348,0.22,100.0,100.0
+12002,latent_12002,4594,0.009188,0.003706423,3.0342774,Use of comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or changes.,"High activation examples consistently involve the description of changes in or stability of conditions compared to prior imaging. This includes terms like 'no significant change', 'comparison', 'compared to prior'. Low activation examples either lack such comparisons or mention the absence of previous studies for comparison.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12003,latent_12003,2885,0.00577,0.0030541853,4.4295287,Identification and description of interval changes or stability in medical imaging.,"These samples with high activation describe updates, interval changes, or stability in the condition indicated by the images. They typically compare current findings with prior images and indicate whether there has been any change, providing context for ongoing monitoring or treatment decisions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4923076923076923,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12004,latent_12004,2197,0.004394,0.0022559036,3.6872537,Significant interval change in imaging findings.,"The activation is high for examples where there is a significant interval change noticed between the current and the prior imaging. The reports that highlight changes, such as new findings, increased opacities, or altered structures compared to a prior study, tend to have higher activation scores.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5777983729790959,0.59,0.6363636363636364,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12005,latent_12005,725,0.00145,0.0014120394,4.8373756,Focus on status or positioning of medical devices and anatomical changes observed.,"Most of the examples contain analysis or tracking of medical devices, tubes or anatomical changes like intubation status or pneumothorax resolution, involving specific techniques and visual assessment. Reports often compare current images to previous ones to note changes.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4746543778801843,0.489247311827957,0.4347826086956521,0.3488372093023256,86.0,100.0
+12006,latent_12006,1060,0.00212,0.001691341,3.345134,"Findings of normal heart size, mediastinal contours, and clear lungs without pleural effusion or pneumothorax.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include the presence of a normal heart size, normal mediastinal and hilar contours, and the absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. These are typical radiographic findings indicating no acute cardiopulmonary process, which aligns with the high activations seen in these examples.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6462312068264933,0.6482412060301508,0.6785714285714286,0.57,100.0,99.0
+12007,latent_12007,1211,0.002422,0.002101379,4.160139,"Reports indicate 'No focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax' compared to prior imaging.","Multiple examples reference comparisons to prior imaging. Instances of high activation levels relate to the specific pattern of ""No focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax"" seen across these sample reports.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5093580308167259,0.555,0.6410256410256411,0.25,100.0,100.0
+12008,latent_12008,735,0.00147,0.0016487116,2.4757376,Detailed comparison with prior frontal images for changes or positioning.,"The emphasis is on combined interpretation of frontal and lateral chest images along with explicit comparison to previous imaging. The high activation occurs when there is a detailed comparison between the current images and prior frontal images, particularly focusing on recurrent use of 'comparison' and 'findings' terminology when describing changes, stability, or procedures related phenome.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5369908775536426,0.5404040404040404,0.5299145299145299,0.6326530612244898,98.0,100.0
+12009,latent_12009,9214,0.018428,0.0068369866,2.7640824,Higher activation reflects explicit comparison against prior images for evaluating changes.,"Samples with higher activation levels recurrently mention findings explicitly compared to previous imagery to assess interval changes, stability, or specific developments. Phrases like 'compared to prior', 'significant interval change', and 'remained stable' in the context of findings are consistent among these examples.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5861629881154499,0.61,0.5743243243243243,0.85,100.0,100.0
+12010,latent_12010,3080,0.00616,0.0027887912,2.578522,Emphasis on detailed descriptive comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activations focus on providing specific instructions to compare findings with prior images, explicitly requesting detailed descriptions of changes or stability in the findings. They show distinct instructions that emphasize analysis of interval changes for better or worse, which is not present in examples with lower activations.",0.4863731656184486,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12011,latent_12011,1920,0.00384,0.0017721357,2.3406644,Comparisons to prior images for medical device placement and changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently utilize explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies and provide detailed descriptions of changes or consistencies in medical device placement or other internal features, often referring to specific medical devices like catheters or tubes. This emphasis on medical device status/change from previous evaluations is prevalent in radiological assessments where such devices are critical for treatment tracking.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5104166666666666,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12012,latent_12012,1884,0.003768,0.002365025,3.0451198,Explicit comparisons in imaging reports indicating interval changes over time.,"Examples with high activation highlight clear instructions or indications for comparison between current and prior imaging, often focusing on identifying interval changes, line or tube placements, and stability or resolution of findings. These specifics align with the task of tracking patient condition changes over time using imaging evidence.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12013,latent_12013,1339,0.002678,0.0018424431,3.8591866,New or increased findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the presence of new or increased conditions such as opacities, effusions, or pneumothoraxes. This suggests that notable changes from prior findings or acute developments are of interest for the pattern.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5584415584415584,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12014,latent_12014,1397,0.002794,0.0016770042,3.3590684,No prior comparison imaging available for current evaluations.,"The pattern emphasizes an absence of prior available radiographic examinations to compare current findings. This lack of prior comparison data signals a less detailed differential interpretation due to the absence of historical imaging context, which is crucial for assessing changes over time.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4958111583611316,0.505,0.5068493150684932,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12015,latent_12015,5171,0.010342,0.004020934,1.9160362,Comparison with prior imaging findings to assess changes in condition.,"The examples with higher activation levels in this set consistently reference previous imaging studies or describe changes or stability in findings compared to those prior exams. These radiology reports use comparison as a key method to assess changes or stability, aiding diagnosticians in understanding the progression or resolution of conditions over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12016,latent_12016,6089,0.012178,0.0050470335,2.3448424,Detailed assessment of tubes or catheters and their placements or changes from prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels contain detailed descriptions of interventions or medical aids, such as tubes and catheters, and their adjustments or placements compared to prior images.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6363636363636364,0.64,0.675,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12017,latent_12017,1387,0.002774,0.0014922444,3.3643277,Descriptions compare current to prior images focusing on stable conditions or minimal changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions that request a comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images, however, the emphasis in this pattern is on providing a detailed narrative of stability or minimal changes in medical devices, structures, or abnormalities, without identifying any acute changes.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4928644240570846,0.4974874371859296,0.4938271604938271,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+12018,latent_12018,10434,0.020868,0.007744034,1.4435102,Explicit comparison with prior scans showing interval changes or new findings.,"Most high activation examples involve newer interval changes (new findings or changes in existing ones) being explicitly compared or assessed relative to prior imaging results. These changes are highlighted in interpretations, often in contrast with stability or subtle shifts, warranting closer attention or further examination.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5701754385964912,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12019,latent_12019,2137,0.004274,0.002106955,3.2881799,Comparative evaluation of device or tube placement between images.,"Although the inclusion of prior images is present, the pattern is more concerned with the comparative evaluation, specifically changes linked to radiological devices or tubes such as NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, or other medical apparatus. These reports emphasize changes in device positioning or introduction between current and prior images.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5813321018062397,0.5879396984924623,0.6216216216216216,0.46,100.0,99.0
+12020,latent_12020,1811,0.003622,0.0025656312,4.160511,Emphasis on stable or normal cardiac features amidst potential abnormalities.,"Patterns with higher activation levels consistently make reference to cardiac or mediastinal conditions as being 'unremarkable', 'normal', or 'top normal in size', indicating a stability in cardiac features in combination with new findings. This specific mention and stability amidst other potential abnormalities is the distinguishing structure present in the higher activation examples.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6211669067709406,0.628140703517588,0.6031746031746031,0.76,100.0,99.0
+12021,latent_12021,2403,0.004806,0.0023403196,3.3868396,Comparison-focused description with emphasis on unchanged findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain explicit references to the comparison with a prior imaging study, despite the absence of findings indicating a significant clinical change. The task asks for a description in comparison, which implies a focus on identifying stability in the patient's condition.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4047619047619047,0.42,0.3823529411764705,0.26,100.0,100.0
+12022,latent_12022,7899,0.015798,0.0057958984,1.2831227,"Descriptions of findings related to medical devices, interventions, or post-surgical changes.","Examples with higher activation levels describe changes or findings related to medical devices, surgeries, or interventions, particularly focusing on their position or associated changes. The text often includes detailed descriptions about placement, interval changes, or outcomes associated with medical devices or surgical interventions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5684210526315789,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12023,latent_12023,1924,0.003848,0.001785468,3.7639136,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation focus on findings from frontal and lateral image comparisons that describe consistent, unchanged, or stabilized findings from prior imaging. The descriptions make detailed comparisons with previous images, noting unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette, stable opacities, effusions, or other lungs findings. This stability or lack of new findings is the common thread among examples with higher activations.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5174782784400889,0.5175879396984925,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,99.0
+12024,latent_12024,727,0.001454,0.0014680625,3.2127032,Instructions for describing findings in comparison to prior images.,Samples with higher activations consistently provide specific instructions or prompts for generating a text description of physical findings by explicitly referring to comparisons to prior images. This emphasizes the comparison process in radiological assessments.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5247844827586207,0.5408163265306123,0.5220588235294118,0.7395833333333334,96.0,100.0
+12025,latent_12025,857,0.001714,0.0017180515,3.8156567,Focus on subtle changes in findings and frequent use of 'mildly' in descriptions.,"The examples that demonstrate high activation levels focus on the findings from two main perspectives: namely heart size, which consistently appeared 'normal' or 'mildly enlarged', and the comparisons made with prior imaging. These focus on differences or interval changes in findings that are often subtle, with some examples using certain frequent language constructs such as 'mildly enlarged heart', 'unchanged', or 'mild' next to descriptions.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.2960837555636424,0.3585858585858585,0.15,0.0606060606060606,99.0,99.0
+12026,latent_12026,4182,0.008364,0.0031808466,2.4642003,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior images for findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe providing a detailed comparison of current and prior imaging, often critiquing similarities or changes found. Such instructions include phrases like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image' or provide guidance for detailed description across multiple images. High activation focuses on comparing changes or noting stability over time.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6091171143593275,0.6130653266331658,0.5916666666666667,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+12027,latent_12027,11257,0.022514,0.010486253,3.9045672,Comparison with priors lacking acute changes or significant findings.,"These examples show instances where the radiology findings description involves direct comparison with prior imaging but lack consistent indicators of acute pathologic changes, focusing instead on stability or unchanged conditions, sometimes with minor variations like subtle improvements or changes, without specifying another diagnosis or significant interval findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4719101123595505,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12028,latent_12028,1696,0.003392,0.0019004648,3.3606353,"Lung opacification, collapse, or mediastinal/tracheal shift.","The high activation examples feature findings of lung opacification, collapse, mediastinal/tracheal shift, or significant pleural effusions, which often require immediate attention or intervention due to their potential impact on respiratory function and relevancy in critical diagnoses.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12029,latent_12029,8888,0.017776,0.006562409,2.1088464,Minimal interval change from prior imaging.,"Examples with activation levels greater than zero consistently refer to analysis or interpretation based on prior comparisons within the report, indicating minimal interval change or stability. This suggests that stability or minor changes identified through comparison with prior images lead to higher activations.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,100.0,100.0
+12030,latent_12030,1894,0.003788,0.0022585662,3.010135,Comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often include references to prior reports or images, along with a task to compare these to the current images. This suggests the model is activated when engaging with comparative analysis between current and previous imaging data.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12031,latent_12031,1175,0.00235,0.0015902835,2.8114777,Persistent findings or unchanged conditions in imaging.,"These examples all include references to sustained or ongoing states or conditions reflected in imaging findings, particularly phrases such as 'unchanged', 'persistent', or 'remains'. This suggests that these radiology reports emphasize findings stability over time rather than detecting new changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12032,latent_12032,12854,0.025708,0.009180759,1.2190477,Analysis and comparison of current imaging findings with prior reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current imaging findings with previous imaging reports, often detailing changes or the stability of certain findings over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5064935064935064,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12033,latent_12033,2136,0.004272,0.002191039,3.4047532,Comparative analysis involving both frontal and lateral images.,"The activation is higher for examples that explicitly reference the presence of both a frontal and lateral image comparison in the analysis. The emphasis is on comparing the current radiograph, including lateral views, with prior imaging to assess for changes, which is a defining feature in highly activated examples.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5039955910719206,0.505,0.5045871559633027,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12034,latent_12034,2264,0.004528,0.0024987487,4.487519,Comparison of tube positioning in serial radiographs.,"Most examples with high activation describe tube repositioning and positions between serial radiographs, highlighting the interval change in tube positioning or path (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric, or Dobbhoff tube). This reflects a focus on correct placement or detection of malposition over time using comparative imaging.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6539532084555781,0.655,0.6741573033707865,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12035,latent_12035,923,0.001846,0.0014705987,5.092486,Normal cardiovascular structures with current vs prior image comparisons.,"Samples with moderate to high activation levels reference current radiological findings in juxtaposition with prior images, specifically comparing and often noting stasis or normal findings. This pattern is indicative of a reporting style where a comparison implies verification of clinical stasis.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5753424657534246,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12036,latent_12036,5176,0.010352,0.0040022517,2.8991418,Evaluation of interval changes by comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation scores explicitly refer to evaluations based on comparing two images, with an emphasis on assessing changes or stability ('unchanged', 'stable', 'compared to', 'unchanged since'). The task involved describing findings in relation to previous reports, which suggests this kind of evaluative comparison activates the pattern more strongly.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5478052963954365,0.565,0.5467625899280576,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12037,latent_12037,758,0.001516,0.0015508428,3.4152784,Comparison with prior images when prior reports are absent.,"The high activation examples focus on directly comparing current images with prior ones when prior reports are mentioned as 'N/A' or absent. These prompt descriptions involve comparing noted changes or stability in terms of medical apparatus, heart size, or lung conditions, even without explicit prior reports.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4874363561304528,0.4947916666666667,0.4796747967479675,0.6413043478260869,92.0,100.0
+12038,latent_12038,904,0.001808,0.001748609,4.9178796,Comparison of tube and line placements between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on specifying the position of medical tubes, catheters, or line placements in relation to the carina, the sternum, or other anatomical landmarks on successive imaging examinations, indicating a strong pattern detection for correct placement or changes between images.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.54,0.27,100.0,100.0
+12039,latent_12039,3759,0.007518,0.0042770864,3.3467844,Emphasis on interval change in findings compared to prior examination.,"These examples show instances where radiological descriptions involve direct comparisons (either specified as ""compared to"" or with dates) to highlight changes or stability over time, often indicating slight progression or resolution of various conditions. These comparisons typically signify interval changes or stability in findings between serial exams.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12040,latent_12040,1279,0.002558,0.0019503308,2.8242302,Detailed description comparing current findings to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently contain explicit instructions to compare current findings with prior imaging, using linguistic cues like 'describe the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image' or explicit mention of a ""PRIOR_REPORT"" section to describe the findings.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4497799119647859,0.45,0.4479166666666667,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12041,latent_12041,1156,0.002312,0.0018363268,3.8490946,Detailed comparison and evaluation of changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples all discuss changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging, commonly highlighting stability, progression, or regression of specific findings, including placement of medical devices. These examples detail interval changes, a core component of radiology reports which these examples encapsulate.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12042,latent_12042,7104,0.014208,0.0052552344,2.093036,Focus on interval changes relative to prior image.,"Examples with increased activation levels mention interval changes, either improvement, new findings, or stability in relation to the prior image, reflecting specific aspects of disease monitoring. These examples emphasize the importance of stability, improvement, or new developments over time, highlighting significant changes or lack thereof in health status.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.5785123966942148,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12043,latent_12043,812,0.001624,0.001495495,3.009039,Mention of findings compared to prior images with detailed descriptions.,"The highly active examples repeatedly note the necessity for a comparison between current and prior images, with an emphasis on providing detailed descriptions of findings and changes, or stability compared to previous studies. The instruction 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' is a recurring theme in these high-activation examples.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5263157894736842,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12044,latent_12044,614,0.001228,0.001337873,3.270243,Explicit comparison to prior images assessing change or stability.,"Among the examples with high activation levels, the commonality is the requirement to compare current imaging findings explicitly with prior images to evaluate changes or stability. These examples include explicit reference to such comparison, often involving recognizing changes or confirming stability in certain radiographic findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4782964782964783,0.48,0.4272727272727272,0.6266666666666667,75.0,100.0
+12045,latent_12045,6134,0.012268,0.00471397,2.3813488,Focus on noticeable changes compared to prior imaging.,"Although many examples mention comparing current findings to prior imaging, only examples with actual content or changes being evaluated show activation. The pattern is reports emphasizing changes detected in findings when compared to previous images.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5829518868884143,0.59,0.5714285714285714,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12046,latent_12046,1130,0.00226,0.0018732899,2.9171789,Comparative analysis of pulmonary findings with prior images.,"The pattern is observed in reports that specifically reference and compare detailed radiological findings, especially the presence or absence of pulmonary findings such as lung volumes, consolidations, or atelectasis, with prior imaging studies. The activation is high in reports that compare these elements in new and prior films, indicating thorough comparative analysis.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12047,latent_12047,1667,0.003334,0.0019492902,2.6992767,Detailed image analysis compared to prior images.,"These examples focus on providing detailed descriptions of findings based on current images and comparisons to prior images, despite whether previous images or reports are available. The emphasis is on description and analysis of findings in current versus prior studies, which is crucial in the radiological process for tracking progress or changes.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4661654135338345,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12048,latent_12048,716,0.001432,0.0012874549,3.6945765,Significant interval change in findings compared to prior studies.,"Highly activated examples all depict interval changes in the radiographic findings compared to prior studies, emphasizing the evaluation of change over time related to medical interventions like surgery or tube placement/removal. This pattern is distinct from other examples which lack significant interval change or comparison details.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5901319563970167,0.5957446808510638,0.5769230769230769,0.5113636363636364,88.0,100.0
+12049,latent_12049,2916,0.005832,0.0023964855,2.8253546,Comparison between current and prior images highlighting notable changes.,"Activation appears related to the presence and analysis of multiple radiological images, emphasizing comparison or significant change between current and prior exams, usually involving various anatomical areas or specific conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4482758620689655,0.39,100.0,100.0
+12050,latent_12050,1161,0.002322,0.0015627044,2.45002,Requests for comparison with a prior frontal image.,"The pattern in these examples is related to the need to provide descriptions or findings based on image comparisons, with a specific emphasis on doing so with current and prior images in context. High activation levels indicate a focus on descriptions that require interpretation in context of previous imaging, whereas low activation levels involve scenarios where comparison is not available or not explicitly required by the prompt.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.5474452554744526,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12051,latent_12051,2831,0.005662,0.0025791207,2.5687575,Discussion of thoracic region comparisons with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe changes or stable findings in the thoracic region, especially related to the heart size, pleural effusions, or mediastinal contours. These examples include detailed comparisons with prior imaging to note interval changes or stability, which is a common pattern in radiology when examining consistent areas like the cardiomediastinal region, pleura, or pulmonary vasculature.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5060949978982766,0.53,0.5208333333333334,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12052,latent_12052,7553,0.015106,0.0056768414,1.8015441,Assessment of interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior images. They utilize specific prompts that require assessing changes in the radiographic findings over time, often with a mention of 'prior' or 'previous' imaging for interval changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.5581395348837209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12053,latent_12053,9258,0.018516,0.0068342267,1.8847181,Descriptions of change or stability relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations generally reference findings compared to previous imaging, often showing changes in pathology. The terminology includes phrases like 'new since prior', 'no significant change', or 'improved from prior', indicating a pattern of assessment based on temporal changes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6134676024819449,0.62,0.5952380952380952,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12054,latent_12054,9558,0.019116,0.0069800094,2.6033545,Focus on medical device positioning and stability in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings or processes that involve either changes in positioning of medical devices like tubes, or stable appearances without new pathologies, often through explicit comparison to prior radiographs. This indicates that these descriptions focus on mechanical changes rather than new pathological findings, thus resulting in higher activations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.6285714285714286,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12055,latent_12055,18853,0.037706,0.01366157,1.6831247,Use of both frontal and lateral chest views with comparison to prior frontal image.,"Examples that have higher activation levels often describe studies using multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) and comparisons with previous images. This pattern suggests attention to detailed imaging comparisons where different perspectives help identify subtle changes, which are significant for assessing progress or stability in disease.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12056,latent_12056,753,0.001506,0.0012640029,4.092185,Well-expanded lungs or clear lungs without pathology.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently involve well-expanded lungs or clear lungs without any significant pathological findings such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. This pattern is reflected in the descriptors like 'well-expanded lungs' or 'clear lungs' throughout the examples.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6440191387559808,0.6559139784946236,0.6666666666666666,0.5116279069767442,86.0,100.0
+12057,latent_12057,1055,0.00211,0.0015734793,5.16596,"Detailed comparison of current and prior images, focusing on medical device positioning or condition changes.","Examples that have significantly higher activations make explicit comparisons between the current and prior images, detailing positional changes or stability of medical devices, such as tubes, or changes in patient condition (e.g., ET tube placement). Lower activation examples lack detailed comparison or describe no or irrelevant changes.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4788732394366197,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12058,latent_12058,1492,0.002984,0.002021568,4.0812426,The pattern involves discussing findings that have not changed since prior imaging.,Many examples explicitly discuss radiological findings that are unchanged from or comparable to prior studies. This repetitive pattern of comparing current findings with prior imaging overlays the examples with noticeable unchanged intervals or resolution without new complications.,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4611064944222004,0.465,0.4578313253012048,0.38,100.0,100.0
+12059,latent_12059,698,0.001396,0.0014658255,5.493359,Diaphragmatic flattening and hyperinflation indicative of emphysema or COPD.,"Reports with significantly high activations feature mentions of diaphragmatic flattening, hyperinflation, and frequently emphysematous changes, indicative of certain pulmonary conditions like COPD. These terms profile specific lung appearances and are distinct from reports where these findings are absent.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5462179160292367,0.6223404255319149,0.8695652173913043,0.2272727272727272,88.0,100.0
+12060,latent_12060,3428,0.006856,0.002904076,1.9841138,Instruction to provide a comparative description between current and prior images.,"The common thread among these examples is the presence of explicit instructions or prompts to provide a comparative description between current and prior images. The comparison itself is not the pattern, but rather the instructional format asking for this comparison, which is consistently high in activation.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5197013920071846,0.5678391959798995,0.5398773006134969,0.8888888888888888,99.0,100.0
+12061,latent_12061,1029,0.002058,0.0016980007,2.623027,Findings are described in detail with explicit comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation values consistently incorporate the presence of detailed descriptions, such as changes in lung conditions or alterations due to anatomical structures, within a comparison framework with prior radiographs. This pattern emphasizes the practice of reporting findings in relation to historical images to assess stability, progression, or changes in medical conditions.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4071596868587064,0.415,0.3896103896103896,0.3,100.0,100.0
+12062,latent_12062,1028,0.002056,0.0017115005,4.4540067,Presence or repositioning of pigtail catheters in chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve the presence or modification of pigtail catheters, which are drainage tubes used for effusions or pneumothorax. These cases often describe positional changes, removal, or evaluation of interval change regarding the catheters, which appears to trigger higher activation.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,1.0,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.9499799919967988,0.95,0.96875,0.93,100.0,100.0
+12063,latent_12063,900,0.0018,0.0014173253,2.6586823,Necessity for detailed analysis when prior reports are limited or absent.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the need for detailed comparative analysis with prior images without providing explicit previous reports. This often occurs when there are significant findings or changes that require a detailed description based on observation alone, as opposed to referencing known prior findings. The absence or limited detailing of prior reports seems critical.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12064,latent_12064,3986,0.007972,0.0030456134,1.9853183,"Description of findings with comparison to prior images, emphasizing stability or change.","Examples with activation levels above 0 consistently focus on providing explicit descriptions of findings in current images and relate them to past images, looking for changes in abnormalities that might need action, highlighting stability or notable changes from prior reports.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6355906468266019,0.64,0.6147540983606558,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12065,latent_12065,1498,0.002996,0.0019514823,2.36658,Notable or stable changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention changes or comparisons in radiological findings between current and prior images, focusing on specific observed changes such as improvements, progression, or stability of conditions like cardiomegaly or atelectasis. Terminology like 'comparison', 'as compared to prior', and 'interval change' consistently appears in these examples.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5819798040845106,0.585,0.5726495726495726,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12066,latent_12066,1228,0.002456,0.0018007655,3.3425953,Detailed evaluation of medical device positioning relative to prior imaging.,"The highly activating examples describe detailed findings of positioning and changes in medical devices or tubes (such as endotracheal, nasogastric, or central venous catheters) and their comparative assessment to prior images, often indicating stability or subtle changes over time. This common radiological pattern highlights ongoing monitoring and verification of device placement or changes in patient condition.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,100.0
+12067,latent_12067,8618,0.017236,0.0064438893,1.7357122,Radiology findings that indicate stability or change compared to previous studies.,"The pattern focuses on reports that describe changes or the lack thereof in the patient’s condition as mentioned in the radiological findings, often using language that indicates stability or change compared to prior imaging. These reports frequently evaluate the position of medical devices or the presence of pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or other similar features.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12068,latent_12068,719,0.001438,0.0016408479,2.731688,Mention of status post median sternotomy and CABG.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently mention the patient as being status post median sternotomy and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), which are indicative of prior cardiac surgery. Such references indicate a pattern relating to the history of cardiac intervention as significant.",0.8999599839935974,0.9,0.9166666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6314791606414087,0.675531914893617,0.8857142857142857,0.3522727272727273,88.0,100.0
+12069,latent_12069,632,0.001264,0.0012037446,4.5998507,Explicit comparison of current images to prior findings.,"The examples with high activations consistently involve the comparison of current findings to prior images, highlighting similarities, differences, or unchanged findings. This pattern is characterized by explicit references to changes or stability in specific medical conditions or features, often culminating in diagnostic conclusions based on past imaging data.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4162156969483493,0.4180790960451977,0.3818181818181818,0.5454545454545454,77.0,100.0
+12070,latent_12070,9409,0.018818,0.006881446,1.3797246,Emphasis on detailed interval changes in radiologic findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently have information regarding changes noted in comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing detailed interval changes in radiologic findings, whether improvements or worsening are observed. These changes are pivotal for assessing the developments in a patient's condition over time, which differentiate them from the descriptions that simply restate existing findings without such comparative evaluations.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12071,latent_12071,354,0.000708,0.00095133705,3.032171,Deriving findings from current multi-view images without prior comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve generating descriptions of findings across multiple views without available past comparisons. This pattern suggests the focus is on deriving interpretations in scenarios where cross-referencing with historical images is not possible, emphasizing direct assessment based on current multi-view imaging data.",0.5325314379442319,0.5777777777777777,0.5454545454545454,0.3,20.0,25.0,0.4814814814814814,0.6111111111111112,0.2857142857142857,0.1818181818181818,44.0,100.0
+12072,latent_12072,467,0.000934,0.0011343524,3.8965979,AI-assisted description of radiology findings with comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels incorporate elements of AI interaction or the evaluation of findings in studies being compared to prior images, often with an emphasis on understanding or interpreting findings from a dual-perspective, augmented by detailed AI involvement in interpreting the novel details in relation to what is observed in prior studies.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.45522141440846,0.464968152866242,0.3884297520661157,0.8245614035087719,57.0,100.0
+12073,latent_12073,760,0.00152,0.0016494459,5.998645,Directive to compare image findings with prior for tube or catheter positioning.,"Highly activated examples involve a directive for comparison with a prior image, specifically focusing on the evaluation and positioning of tubes or catheters and any changes or updates communicated to physicians, suggesting urgency or importance in follow-up or continued care.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6365596985838639,0.6395939086294417,0.6585365853658537,0.5567010309278351,97.0,100.0
+12074,latent_12074,1519,0.003038,0.002010094,3.9588664,"Comparison of current with previous images, noting interval changes.","These examples all describe the comparison of current radiological findings with prior images and specify changes or stability in conditions, such as cardiothoracic structures or lung opacities, emphasizing any interval changes since previous studies. This pattern captures flow and alignment of diagnostic processes in ongoing patient management.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12075,latent_12075,1069,0.002138,0.0013634956,3.4833324,Evaluation of interval change or positioning in diagnostic follow-ups.,"The highly activating examples involve descriptions of radiological changes based on comparisons with prior imaging, specifically noting changes, stability, or improvement in conditions (e.g., opacities, effusions, tubes) that are significant for clinical assessment, such as effusions resolving or changing positioning of medical devices like endotracheal tubes.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12076,latent_12076,899,0.001798,0.0017896708,3.9283152,Differential diagnosis provided despite stable findings.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize the need for differential diagnosis considerations in the impression section, comparing current findings with possible conditions like pneumonia vs. atelectasis, or pneumonitis vs. edema. This reflects a specific pattern of producing differential diagnoses even with stable or unchanged findings, which some examples exhibit.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6031746031746033,0.63,0.7708333333333334,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12077,latent_12077,6236,0.012472,0.0047701923,1.8880029,Describes interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The common pattern in these examples is the description of radiological findings in the context of comparison to prior imaging. There is a consistent presence of changes or stable states in terms of findings such as opacities, tube placements, or effusions, where any changes are clearly delineated against previous images.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6208195353775374,0.625,0.6033057851239669,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12078,latent_12078,700,0.0014,0.0013939647,5.6302853,Thoracic aorta condition and comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention thoracic aorta tortuosity or calcification, comparisons to previous imaging studies even without a specified date, and descriptions of changes or stability of findings between current and prior images. This reflects a focus on describing vascular details and changes over time, which are key in these examples.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.8,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3459668547499911,0.4894736842105263,0.1818181818181818,0.0222222222222222,90.0,100.0
+12079,latent_12079,9465,0.01893,0.008393727,1.8798742,Detection of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed with high activation levels involves references to comparisons with prior imaging, specifically focusing on interval changes or confirmations. The reports compare the current findings with the previous imaging, frequently using terms like ""compared to,"" ""as compared to,"" and expressions indicating stability or changes since the last exam, which aids in evaluating the progression or stability of a condition.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12080,latent_12080,5995,0.01199,0.0049379286,2.6893504,Description of intra-thoracic medical tube positioning.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include the analysis and detection of endotracheal or other medical tubes and devices placement in the thoracic region, such as measuring from the carina or assessing the tube's position relative to anatomical landmarks, with overt recommendations for adjustments if needed.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.6029411764705882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+12081,latent_12081,3600,0.0072,0.0029092266,3.1277382,Specific mentions of interval change or new findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves comparison to prior images with specific statements indicating significant or new changes between the current and previous images. The examples with high activation levels demonstrate clearer indications of observed changes, typically using words like 'new', 'interval', or 'not present on previous examination'.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6196576919227305,0.62,0.6276595744680851,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12082,latent_12082,1251,0.002502,0.0018277321,3.538783,Detailed comparison with prior imaging in the findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve an analysis that requires comparison to a prior image or study, using explicit phrases ""compared to"" or ""as compared to"" a previous examination or image to note changes in the patient's condition or imaging features over time, especially when referencing medical devices or structural changes.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5523809523809524,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12083,latent_12083,3702,0.007404,0.0028005708,1.5677997,Persistent findings in comparison with previous imaging.,"The examples consistently refer to findings based on comparisons with previous images, with particular emphasis on unchanged or persistent conditions such as unchanged effusions, atelectasis, or similar findings across different examinations or histories. This comparison-based assessment is significant in identifying the stability or changes in medical imaging findings.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5121192973587767,0.5125628140703518,0.5142857142857142,0.54,100.0,99.0
+12084,latent_12084,757,0.001514,0.0015950546,2.9904897,Detailed comparison with prior imaging across multiple views.,"These examples describe detailed radiographic comparisons with prior imaging, noting specific changes or stability in findings, often including unusual technical adjustments in view positioning or method of acquisition, as applied to multiple imaging views such as PA and lateral.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5232905982905983,0.5257731958762887,0.5087719298245614,0.6170212765957447,94.0,100.0
+12085,latent_12085,9355,0.01871,0.0069117774,1.7678064,"Pathologies affecting lung structures, like atelectasis or interstitial changes.","Higher activation examples consistently involve addressing lung structures and any pathologies or anomalies, with particular focus on pathologies affecting lungs like atelectasis or opacities, often with explicit mention of interstitial or bronchovascular patterns.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6049901247531189,0.605,0.6039603960396039,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12086,latent_12086,731,0.001462,0.0012116306,3.5167341,"Provide findings in direct comparison to prior images, focusing on interval changes.","The examples with high activation levels consistently mention providing descriptions based on images compared to prior images, indicating a focus on interval change evaluations or comparisons to prior studies. These examples specifically request radiological findings be contextualized against earlier imaging.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5063131313131313,0.5080213903743316,0.4719101123595505,0.4827586206896552,87.0,100.0
+12087,latent_12087,5878,0.011756,0.0069048707,6.542236,Identification of significant interval changes on radiological comparisons.,"This dataset demonstrates that examples with higher activation levels typically provide detailed descriptions of findings with reference to changes across multiple studies or highlight specific changes over time, especially in pathological conditions such as newly documented opacities, change in size/position of tubes or devices, or identification of new effusions. These changes or comparisons to prior images appear to contribute significantly to the activation level, suggesting the importance of tracking and documenting changes in clinical conditions.",0.4444444444444444,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.2,25.0,24.0,0.5543293718166383,0.58,0.5862068965517241,0.3617021276595745,94.0,106.0
+12088,latent_12088,590,0.00118,0.00093945727,7.82263,Explicit comparison with prior images for interval changes.,The common factor among these high-activation examples is the explicit requirement to compare or evaluate radiological findings with prior images for detecting changes or stability. This type of comparative evaluation is crucial for identifying interval changes in disease processes or treatment effects.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.461715367965368,0.4682080924855491,0.3333333333333333,0.5081967213114754,61.0,112.0
+12089,latent_12089,4166,0.008332,0.0036340957,3.718573,Noting interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"This set of data includes references to the comparison with prior imaging evaluations, often highlighting interval changes such as improvements or worsening of specific conditions. The pattern specifically focuses on interval changes observed on radiological comparisons, portraying them as significant or specifying them as stable or unchanged over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5752212389380531,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12090,latent_12090,1739,0.003478,0.0019472865,2.6723244,Inclusion of current lateral and frontal images for comparison with prior frontal images.,The model shows higher activation for examples describing imaging studies that use both current frontal and lateral images to compare with previous frontal images. This pattern indicates a more comprehensive assessment as lateral views provide additional anatomical details that frontal views alone may not capture.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12091,latent_12091,6996,0.013992,0.0053659207,2.439909,Instruction to 'provide a description of findings' in the study.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve direct instructions to 'provide a description of findings' in a way that mimics radiological reporting or evaluation, pointing towards the presence of detailed observational notes meant to guide further analysis or instruction writing.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12092,latent_12092,3824,0.007648,0.003118175,2.4703107,Evaluations of interval changes in imaging findings.,"The prominent pattern involves comparing current imaging findings to prior ones, especially noting changes in pathologies like effusions, opacities, and device positioning. Descriptions frequently highlight diseases or changes that are interval from previous evaluations, emphasizing the pattern of monitoring stability or progression related to the radiological findings involved.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4769230769230769,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12093,latent_12093,8969,0.017938,0.009230434,2.2647696,Emphasis on interval changes in pathology in chest radiography.,"The examples with higher activation focus on radiographic findings in the chest that have been compared for changes over time, particularly emphasizing phrases reporting 'interval worsening' or 'improvement' of specific conditions like pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or atelectasis. This indicates a pattern where the comparison of change or stability in pathological findings over time triggers higher activation.",0.75,0.7551020408163265,0.6875,0.9166666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.7221566931404158,0.735,0.6643356643356644,0.95,100.0,100.0
+12094,latent_12094,1160,0.00232,0.0014385469,3.706095,Explicit mention of changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize providing a comparison of the current imaging study with a prior one. Even the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' is present in higher activation samples, indicating the importance of highlighting differences between past and current imaging findings.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12095,latent_12095,825,0.00165,0.0015756137,3.5603282,Descriptions of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples exhibiting activation describe interval changes in radiological findings. These reports use language indicating comparison with prior studies, noting changes such as increase, decrease, or stability in specific pathological findings. This pattern highlights the attention to subtle progression or regression of abnormalities over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12096,latent_12096,1973,0.003946,0.0020614997,4.18177,Report of medical tube placement or position.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings regarding medical tubing, such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, often focusing on position and any changes from prior imaging. This pattern is observed due to the frequent clinical necessity to confirm the placement of tubes for effective patient management.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4959169271095877,0.5,0.5,0.41,100.0,100.0
+12097,latent_12097,710,0.00142,0.0013967755,4.7714577,Unchanged mediastinal or cardiac contours with generalized clinical history.,"The examples that have high activation levels consistently include both a non-specific history or indication and an explicit statement that mediastinal, hilar, and/or cardiac contours remain unchanged in comparison to prior images. These findings appear to be consistently represented in activated examples, suggesting the focus is on reviewing imaging for unchanged mediastinal or cardiac features within the context of a vague or generalized clinical scenario.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5227319587628866,0.5228426395939086,0.5145631067961165,0.5463917525773195,97.0,100.0
+12098,latent_12098,5542,0.011084,0.0042549125,2.5763755,Use of current and prior frontal and lateral imaging for comparison.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern reference the use of multiple view types in their analysis, typically with both current and prior frontal or lateral images, while determining changes or stability in findings. This setup reflects thorough radiographic examinations designed to track changes over time, particularly where lateral views are expressly stated.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4725274725274725,0.52,0.5125,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12099,latent_12099,7267,0.014534,0.0054512164,1.638712,Changes in medical device placement or pulmonary features across comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels often include changes or stability in specific findings across image comparisons, particularly involving device placements, pulmonary features like pneumothorax, or mediastinal shifts. This pattern highlights a focus on modifications in medical devices or pulmonary conditions over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12100,latent_12100,2807,0.005614,0.0022593231,2.2914748,"Observed interval changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, or masses on comparison imaging.","The active examples consistently feature references to changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, or masses when compared to previous images. In contrast, inactive examples frequently note stability or insignificant changes, normal findings, or minimal abnormalities, often without a focus on these specific features.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5307748597446946,0.5628140703517588,0.625,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+12101,latent_12101,972,0.001944,0.0016924416,3.3293781,Detailed pulmonary comparisons with previous imaging studies.,"In these examples, there are detailed comparisons with previous imaging studies, noting changes or stability in pulmonary findings such as infiltrates, opacities, or atelectasis. The comparisons often highlight specific changes, such as resolving opacities, stable atelectasis, or unchanged pathological findings, to assess patient progress or stability.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4952380952380952,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12102,latent_12102,1276,0.002552,0.001549926,5.0148697,Hyperexpansion or hyperinflation of the lungs.,"Samples with high activation levels refer to hyperexpansion or hyperinflation of the lungs. Reports mentioning these findings consistently show elevated activation, suggesting this pattern is recognized by the model.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5208041140719962,0.59,0.875,0.21,100.0,100.0
+12103,latent_12103,3873,0.007746,0.0034427678,2.511991,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies for interval changes.,"Highly activated examples showcase consistent language regarding the comparison of current imaging with prior imaging when assessing for interval changes in pathology. This involves explicit referencing of previous imaging, often using phrases such as 'compared to the prior study', 'no significant interval change', or mentioning conditions as unchanged or improved.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12104,latent_12104,647,0.001294,0.0011457643,3.3960085,Descriptions of unchanged findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve the mention of unchanged aspects, stability, or no interval change compared to prior studies, often used to suggest that there are no new or acute findings. Radiology reports often document stability of certain findings to emphasize lack of progression or emergence of new pathologies, frequently using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no relevant change'.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6877478191911182,0.6914285714285714,0.6296296296296297,0.68,75.0,100.0
+12105,latent_12105,4498,0.008996,0.0036135484,2.2240005,Stable findings and unchanged comparison details.,"When images are described using patterns of detailed radiological examination with a focus on unchanged findings or direct stability comparison to previous studies, they have higher activation levels. This indicates that the focus is on repeated assessment showing no progression or change, denoting a stable diagnostic situation.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4571428571428571,0.32,100.0,100.0
+12106,latent_12106,660,0.00132,0.0012944449,3.6526737,Use of 'however' in clinical findings indicating possible issues needing further investigation.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain descriptive phrases indicating observed changes or stable conditions, often introduced by the word 'however' in the context of discussing findings that could be suggestive of a problem but need clinical correlation.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,0.9615384615384616,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8845433742458915,0.8864864864864865,0.9333333333333332,0.813953488372093,86.0,99.0
+12107,latent_12107,10971,0.021942,0.0081020435,1.8500994,Discussion of findings in comparison to prior imaging and interval change evaluation.,"The examples that have higher activation levels are those that involve direct comparison to a prior imaging study where the task is to identify changes, improvements, or lack thereof in the current study versus the prior one. This comparison is framed as part of the task itself, leading to a more detailed focus on interval changes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12108,latent_12108,1147,0.002294,0.0016256585,2.7545495,Focus on heart size and mediastinal contour evaluation in radiology comparisons.,"The highly activated examples frequently involve evaluations of the cardiac and mediastinal contours, heart size (noting enlargement or normalcy), and comparison to previous radiographic images, while the less activated examples either lack this detail or involve different pathology focus.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5245901639344263,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12109,latent_12109,832,0.001664,0.0013784447,5.3961506,Describes interval change or stability of tube/catheter position in comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern involves descriptions of medical imaging studies that provide interval changes or stability, particularly focusing on tubes (like endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, etc.) and catheters in the review of findings compared to prior studies, often noting their position and any changes in placement or removal.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4074074074074074,0.48,0.4333333333333333,0.13,100.0,100.0
+12110,latent_12110,6125,0.01225,0.0048737535,3.5479617,Significant findings or changes compared to prior images.,"The highlighted examples involve significant descriptive changes in the findings when compared to prior radiological acquisitions. This includes changes in opacity, effusion, cardiac silhouette, or device positions. However, these updates may not be substantively diagnostically relevant, and the technical or preparatory narrative context is often incomplete or unstated.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5928003031451308,0.592964824120603,0.59375,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+12111,latent_12111,1010,0.00202,0.0017179033,3.7289376,Findings specifying exact anatomical positions or distances without reliance on prior image comparisons.,"Highly activated examples contain findings with specific spatial positions and comparisons to standard anatomical landmarks (e.g., device position relative to carina or SVC) without reliance on additional previous studies. Less activated examples do not include these specific anatomical positioning details or rely heavily on comparison descriptive language without reference to distinct landmarks.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.508679986898133,0.55,0.6190476190476191,0.26,100.0,100.0
+12112,latent_12112,15698,0.031396,0.011474796,1.6136566,Changes in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The pattern described is common in radiological assessments, especially for chest evaluations where interval changes between current and previous images are critical in monitoring patient progression or response to therapy, indicating ongoing or resolved conditions.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12113,latent_12113,2029,0.004058,0.0025960521,4.473054,Change in position of medical lines or tubes from prior study.,"The examples show cases where devices or tubes, such as PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, or feeding tubes, have been repositioned or have changed positions, often in comparison to prior images. The description often includes specific measurements or indicators suggesting retraction or advancement to correct positioning. This pattern highlights the importance of monitoring precise positioning of medical devices in radiological assessments.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.8461538461538461,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.83998399839984,0.84,0.8469387755102041,0.83,100.0,100.0
+12114,latent_12114,3187,0.006374,0.002624535,2.1001334,Comparison of current images to prior studies.,"Examples with activation levels close to the pattern frequently include the need for a radiological interpretation that explicitly compares current findings to a prior image. There is a focus on identifying changes or stability over time related to thoracic conditions, devices, and features, often utilizing language of direct comparison with prior referenced images or reports.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12115,latent_12115,7688,0.015376,0.0058613042,2.4597888,Comparisons to prior imaging showing stability or change in findings.,"Most examples with high activation involve making comparisons to previous imaging studies, primarily focusing on stability or changes over time to evaluate conditions such as lesions, fractures, opacities, effusions, devices, etc. The format often includes repeating structural highlights like 'compared to prior'.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5327868852459017,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12116,latent_12116,657,0.001314,0.0012108171,4.827527,Absence of prior images for comparison in the report.,"The examples that show higher activation levels involve the lack of historical image data for comparison, indicated by phrases such as 'no previous images' or 'N/A' under 'COMPARISON'. These examples consistently state normal findings without historical context, which suggests the pattern is reports without comparative data.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6281377002151566,0.6284153005464481,0.5789473684210527,0.6626506024096386,83.0,100.0
+12117,latent_12117,899,0.001798,0.0012221708,3.5034652,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to 'comparison' of images from prior studies to current ones, indicating that such comparative language triggers the model's significant pattern of interest. The focus is on recognizing changes or the stability of medical conditions over time through imaging comparisons, conceptually connecting historical insights to present analysis.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4024362215582624,0.415,0.4341085271317829,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12118,latent_12118,1561,0.003122,0.0019697035,4.555126,Description of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The highest activations are found in examples that detail changes observed between current and prior radiological images, specifically discussing mechanical devices like tubes, catheters, or consolidated opacities. The transitional description emphasizes evaluating interval changes or stability in patient scans, specifically mentioning procedural outcomes or maintaining condition. This pattern is frequently found in follow-up radiological studies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.57,0.57,0.57,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12119,latent_12119,2923,0.005846,0.0025334319,2.0529287,Explicit comparison and reference to previous radiographic findings.,"The highly activated examples reference a direct comparison to prior radiographs and explicitly state specific changes (or lack thereof) in findings upon comparison. These patterns occur when comparing recent images to earlier ones, noting changes or stability in the conditions observed.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5189873417721519,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12120,latent_12120,1917,0.003834,0.0017541902,2.8477707,Stable or unchanged conditions compared to previous imaging.,"There is a consistent reference to unchanged conditions or stability in comparison to previous imaging. This pattern emphasizes findings that are unchanged, stable, or similar to prior examinations, highlighting the lack of new or acute changes.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6390977443609023,0.64,0.6555555555555556,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12121,latent_12121,1083,0.002166,0.0014408394,3.4644878,Description of findings comparing current frontal image to prior study based on clinical indication.,"Most examples reference the frontal and lateral chest images, descriptions of the findings, and potential comparisons to prior studies. The pattern revolves around comparisons of the new frontal image and the prior study in relation to certain indications or clinical concerns, focusing on changes or stability in conditions such as pneumonia or edema.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12122,latent_12122,973,0.001946,0.0017159379,4.0727525,"Findings better appreciated or visualized on one view over another, typically the lateral.",The higher activation levels correspond to examples where a specific finding is mentioned as being better appreciated or visualized on one view (usually lateral) compared to the other. This pattern indicates a particular aspect of the radiological assessment focusing on the difference in image angles and how certain findings are more visible from specific viewpoints.,0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6504530666021349,0.675,0.8723404255319149,0.41,100.0,100.0
+12123,latent_12123,2314,0.004628,0.003480387,3.8392262,Stable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes with no significant changes.,"The pattern of high activation involves reports describing the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes as stable or unremarkable, with no new significant findings or changes compared to prior imaging. These details highlight the consistency of anatomical features amidst other varying factors such as pulmonary or pleural findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4848484848484848,0.32,100.0,100.0
+12124,latent_12124,2703,0.005406,0.0025791358,2.1318777,Complex anatomical descriptions with historical clinical context.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include complex or multiple anatomical descriptions, observations indicating changes or stability, and detailed historical context such as patient history, interventions, or previous conditions. These specific elements, like references to interstitial markings (which could indicate chronic pulmonary conditions), details about findings (i.e., tortuosity, effusions, opacities), and precise anatomical positioning or changes document comprehensive observations typical of detailed radiological assessments. This results in higher activations as these references present elaborate imagery description.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5424350175032387,0.585,0.5527950310559007,0.89,100.0,100.0
+12125,latent_12125,1403,0.002806,0.0018459767,3.255447,Thoracic aortic tortuosity and vascular anatomical abnormalities.,"The examples with high activation levels refer to aortic tortuosity with calcifications and other vascular contours that are considered abnormal such as a prominent pulmonary artery or patchy opacities, indicating possible association with vascular pathologies.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4233836339099497,0.53,0.7142857142857143,0.1,100.0,100.0
+12126,latent_12126,518,0.001036,0.00092802197,6.30466,Explicit mention of comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with statements like 'comparison to prior frontal image' or 'comparison made to previous exam from' indicate a descriptive pattern that compares current radiographic findings with prior studies, highlighting changes or lack thereof. The explicit mention of such comparisons aligns with increased activation.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4276900743966612,0.4277108433734939,0.3564356435643564,0.5454545454545454,66.0,100.0
+12127,latent_12127,1301,0.002602,0.0019225304,5.190794,Comparison to prior images highlighting progression or unchanged findings.,"Prompts with comparisons to prior imaging and descriptions of radiographic progression or stability show high activation, indicating that dynamic assessment of imaging findings, particularly changes over time, are critical to the model's recognition of important patterns. This is especially true when findings such as pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or opacities are described.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6046511627906976,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12128,latent_12128,1736,0.003472,0.0023242594,3.7491193,Evaluation of surgical hardware or medical device position compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the presence of medical devices or hardware, such as surgical anchors, screws, or spinal fixation hardware, and their comparison with previous imaging to evaluate whether their positioning is unchanged or stable.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.64,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5931237920862578,0.6,0.6351351351351351,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12129,latent_12129,9711,0.019422,0.007164752,2.2464862,Explicit comparisons to specific prior examination times.,"Many examples include phrases that reference 'comparison' to specific prior examination times, such as 'as compared to previous radiograph', or state there is 'no interval change'. The pattern involves both making explicit comparisons to a defined prior exam and noting stability or change in that context.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5174782784400889,0.5175879396984925,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,99.0
+12130,latent_12130,1320,0.00264,0.0015851054,3.073772,Changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"These examples describe changes or stability in imaging findings upon comparison with prior studies, especially concerning pathological findings such as lung opacities, pleural effusions, and device positioning, indicating an analysis of progression or resolution over time.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12131,latent_12131,899,0.001798,0.0014985619,2.8467426,Comprehensive comparisons between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels demonstrate detailed descriptions of the current and prior radiological findings and actively compare them, indicating changes or stability of certain features, even if no acute process is noted. They often contain phrases indicating thorough comparison, such as 'compared to previous', 'similar to prior', or 'unchanged'.",0.3466666666666667,0.3469387755102041,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12132,latent_12132,608,0.001216,0.0012261085,3.4187627,Calcified and tortuous aorta.,"The examples often mention abnormal findings related to the aorta, such as being 'calcified' and 'tortuous', alongside various other thoracic findings. The pattern of referring to these specific characteristics of the aorta, regardless of the presence of comparison, is typical for these activation levels.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5481655218629586,0.6436781609195402,0.8,0.2162162162162162,74.0,100.0
+12133,latent_12133,2072,0.004144,0.0018433158,2.6172178,Significant changes or stability in cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that show higher activation levels contain comparisons indicating a notable progression or significant stabilization of a cardiopulmonary condition, often highlighted in the findings. Specifically, these comparisons draw attention to changes or stability in pulmonary, pleural, or cardiac observations, which suggests that the model is particularly sensitive to descriptive analysis of change over time across different parameters in the thoracic cavity.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12134,latent_12134,1196,0.002392,0.0014715531,3.077309,Explicit comparison of current imaging findings to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often included a structure where multiple imaging modalities or views are referenced, and they provide detailed descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images. Specifically, they ensure the findings are evaluated relative to what was previously observed, using explicit comparison terms and referencing changes or stability.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5302013422818792,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12135,latent_12135,717,0.001434,0.0012819497,4.017388,Explicit prior comparisons of radiological findings.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels consistently describe radiological comparisons involving specific changes or stability of identifiable features over time. They notably mention updates such as 'unchanged from prior', 'interval change', or specific terms like 'redemonstration', indicating a prior comparison even when past imaging explicit mention is not there.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5344950213371266,0.5508021390374331,0.5111111111111111,0.7931034482758621,87.0,100.0
+12136,latent_12136,4812,0.009624,0.004426429,2.369145,Explicit mention of interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior.,"The pattern exhibited by this data involves using the previous imaging as a reference to describe changes over time. However, the variation in activation levels indicates specific emphasis on findings that particularly use reference points to highlight interval changes in state, positioning, or pathology substantial enough to mention explicitly. These examples include both direct and indirect comparison even in cases with minimal interval change. They do not emphasize absolute new findings without historical context.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12137,latent_12137,10015,0.02003,0.0072825323,1.5172113,Use of comparison with previous imaging to evaluate stability or change.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the usage of comparative analysis with prior imaging studies, targeting changes or lack thereof, highlighting stability or progression in imaging findings. This pattern is iterated through reporting findings in the backdrop of a 'past imaging reference' and changes are either distinctly noted or a point of no significant change is emphasized.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12138,latent_12138,978,0.001956,0.0015228187,3.8515058,Analysis of current and prior imaging for changes.,"The pattern is associated with comparing new imaging tests to prior images. The examples with high activation levels involve assessments or image analyses against prior imaging, suggesting a focus on longitudinal changes.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3811440619951258,0.435,0.4591194968553459,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12139,latent_12139,5022,0.010044,0.0038484938,2.4637482,Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation consistently involve the usage of direct comparisons with prior imaging studies to assess changes in the patient's medical condition over time. They often include specific information about differences between the current and previous findings such as interval changes, stability, or new findings, indicative of monitoring progress or response to treatment, which seems to be the focus of the pattern.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5121192973587767,0.5125628140703518,0.5142857142857142,0.54,100.0,99.0
+12140,latent_12140,1026,0.002052,0.0015076265,3.2013521,Attention to the positioning of medical devices and tube placements.,"The examples with high activation levels include specific findings regarding the position and associated conditions of medical tubes and devices, such as feeding tubes, endotracheal tubes, and central lines, in radiological images. The pattern involves attention to device placement, often requiring updates based on earlier images and adjusting for changes in tube/course or unresolved pathologies. This can be noted in comments about endotracheal tubes near the carina, feeding tubes, or central lines as key focus points.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.62996299629963,0.63,0.6326530612244898,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12141,latent_12141,876,0.001752,0.0015470755,3.312961,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes.,"The highly activated examples depict a consistent pattern of comparison between the current and prior radiological images. The focus is on the linguistic use of 'comparison' showing how sometimes interval change over prior images is explicitly commented on, especially when there is minimal change.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12142,latent_12142,1210,0.00242,0.0015099776,3.476146,Reports emphasize interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention interval changes, usually with quantitative descriptions like 'increase' or 'decrease' in pathologies when comparing current images to prior ones. It shows a focus on tracking changes in conditions over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5617072985494038,0.5628140703517588,0.5596330275229358,0.61,100.0,99.0
+12143,latent_12143,1141,0.002282,0.0017633355,3.5165954,Descriptive focus on unchanged or stable findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations focus on stability, presentation consistency, or resolution of findings relative to previous imaging studies. Phrases indicating stability or unchanged findings are used repeatedly across descriptions, such as 'unchanged since prior', 'stable compared to previous', or references to prior images for comparison.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4882755811289049,0.4924623115577889,0.4878048780487805,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+12144,latent_12144,472,0.000944,0.0013109217,5.353013,Descriptions centering on cardiac silhouette size.,"Many of these examples describe findings where the cardiac silhouette or heart size is given context, indicating mild enlargement or being within normal limits without associating abnormalities in the mediastinum or hilar contours. The pattern focuses on cardiac silhouette context without significant relation to current symptoms or severe mediastinum issues, indicating a stable cardiac condition despite other imaging findings.",0.7916666666666666,0.7959183673469388,0.71875,0.9583333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6286958242628142,0.6289308176100629,0.5,0.8813559322033898,59.0,100.0
+12145,latent_12145,3113,0.006226,0.0033910081,4.732239,Focus on new developments or changes in radiological findings.,"Examples with activation values greater than zero explicitly mention potential acute or interval changes in radiological findings, suggesting a focus on assessing new developments or deterioration in conditions. This pattern is contrasted with examples that refer to stable or unchanged states, which have activation values closer to zero.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6049111049986247,0.605,0.6082474226804123,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12146,latent_12146,702,0.001404,0.0012588535,3.5932164,Analysis of multiple images and reference to prior studies for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels instruct to analyze sequences of multiple images (frontal, lateral), often compared to prior images, suggesting a focus on using multiple images for diagnosis and the utility of priors for comparative assessment.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3561507936507936,0.3785310734463277,0.3759398496240601,0.6493506493506493,77.0,100.0
+12147,latent_12147,3491,0.006982,0.003006647,2.301437,Descriptions of interval improvement or stability of findings over time.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of 'interval changes' or 'stability' of certain conditions in relation to previous images, often mentioning terms like 'improved', 'unchanged', 'resolution', or specific comparisons to prior studies. This suggests that high activation is related to descriptions that explicitly discuss how the current findings have changed or remained stable over time when compared to past imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4543754003843689,0.4623115577889447,0.4473684210526316,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+12148,latent_12148,2162,0.004324,0.002035987,3.50413,Unchanged position of medical tubes and devices in imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation specifically describe unchanged positions of monitoring and therapeutic tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric, PICC lines) or devices over multiple radiographic studies, indicating the stability of these significant medical elements across examinations.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5002621629825869,0.542713567839196,0.5952380952380952,0.2525252525252525,99.0,100.0
+12149,latent_12149,1096,0.002192,0.0015328575,4.010244,Descriptions involving changes or interventions compared to prior imaging.,"High activation levels correlate with radiology studies that describe changes or interventions between the current and prior imaging, such as significant alterations in existing conditions, procedures, or device placements. These examples involve narrative elements emphasizing dynamic changes rather than static findings.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12150,latent_12150,1040,0.00208,0.0016644531,4.0635486,Presence of surgical clips in imaging unrelated to main findings.,"Highly activating samples often mention specific obstructions or pathologies unrelated to the primary indication, frequently noting surgical clips seen in various locations as background findings. The clips are often unrelated to primary abnormal findings and serve as additional markers in imaging reports.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,1.0,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.9545454545454546,0.84,100.0,100.0
+12151,latent_12151,4313,0.008626,0.0037789927,2.9820647,"Stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging, particularly in device placement or structural changes.","The examples with higher activation tend to focus on recognizing structural changes or device placements that are evaluating new adjustments or stable findings based on comparison with prior images. There is a clear pattern where device placements or changes in cardiopulmonary features remain stable across images, indicating proper monitoring or ongoing management of conditions like pneumonia or cardiovascular interventions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.6363636363636364,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12152,latent_12152,1632,0.003264,0.001989734,2.5462017,Focused descriptions of tube and line placement in chest radiographs.,"Examples with significant activation levels consistently include radiographic descriptions with specific findings on the positioning and conditions of tubes and lines, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and central lines. These findings are often conveyed in structured formats as part of templated radiology reports and addressed with rapid assessments of changes over time based on imaging comparisons.",0.8964059196617336,0.8979591836734694,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,24.0,0.8008120738527542,0.805,0.7364341085271318,0.95,100.0,100.0
+12153,latent_12153,9128,0.018256,0.0067758416,2.2847953,Comparison with previous imaging and description of changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include references to a prior report or express findings in relation to previous examinations, indicating a significant focus on evaluating changes or stability over time. The lower-activated examples lack this comparative focus or have minimal findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12154,latent_12154,4165,0.00833,0.003525625,2.0146396,Comparison focusing on interval changes relevant to clinical context.,"These examples involve the comparison of current and prior imaging but focus on intervals or changes that are evident or explained in relation to specific clinical details, often specific intervals or changes noted from a patient’s history or prior medical context, including slight changes that are relevant to the patient's management.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12155,latent_12155,1133,0.002266,0.0015976477,2.7408278,Emphasis on interval changes and comparisons to prior studies.,The radiology study descriptions often highlight changes or comparisons to previous findings rather than presenting new positive or negative findings. These emphasize temporal or developmental changes over fixed conditions without comparison.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12156,latent_12156,968,0.001936,0.0016567473,3.9998472,Comparison of findings over time using prior imaging for interval change or resolution.,"Highly activated examples consistently include prior imaging studies for direct comparison, with specific indications to assess changes or stability over time. This is a consistent pattern in radiology reports where temporal change or lack thereof is of interest both for surgical patients and disease progression monitoring.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12157,latent_12157,2422,0.004844,0.0025833948,5.1861534,Comparison with prior images highlighting stability or change in findings.,"The examples reflect a pattern of radiological descriptions focusing on the comparison between current and prior images, particularly noting stability or new findings in lung and cardiac features, or presence of deformities, effusions, or pulmonary opacities.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12158,latent_12158,1069,0.002138,0.0017619662,3.6695511,Description of tubing/line/device positioning and termination.,"The key pattern here is the focus on the positioning and termination locations of various medical tubes, catheter lines, or devices, often checked for correct placement or interval change compared to prior imaging studies. Examples frequently mention different causes and correct termination points of pacemaker leads, PICC lines, catheters, etc.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,0.7352941176470589,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,100.0,100.0
+12159,latent_12159,3604,0.007208,0.003368709,3.3608284,Consistent use of prior comparison and detailed changes in radiographic findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention the combination of a ""prior frontal image"" along with a description of findings that includes an impression or assessment compared with previous imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability in radiographic findings such as devices, opacities, and cardiomegaly, especially those related to interstitial or consolidation processes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5257731958762887,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12160,latent_12160,1715,0.00343,0.0020930774,3.3169637,Provide interval changes by comparing current to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern involves providing a radiological evaluation based on imaging comparisons to prior studies. Descriptions of current images are explicitly required to account for interval changes, which are a central focus in these examples.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4705882352941176,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12161,latent_12161,721,0.001442,0.000991968,4.0227795,Detailed comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"The highest activation levels occur in descriptions that include a detailed comparison referring to specific findings or changes observed between the current and prior imaging studies. These examples often use structures like “as compared to prior…” or provide specific measurements or changes noted between the examinations. This indicates a focus on direct, specific changes or consistencies over time as a critical pattern.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5797579757975797,0.581151832460733,0.5495495495495496,0.6703296703296703,91.0,100.0
+12162,latent_12162,689,0.001378,0.001370403,5.695957,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours compared to prior imaging.,Highly activated examples all include language emphasizing stability or consistent findings specifically in the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours upon comparison with prior imaging. Stable or unchanged cardiovascular descriptors are a common radiological observation when evaluating changes from previous chest images.,0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5694444444444444,0.5913978494623656,0.5862068965517241,0.3953488372093023,86.0,100.0
+12163,latent_12163,1090,0.00218,0.0016947942,2.3975525,Explicit request for image comparison without significant new findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve requests for comparative analysis with a prior frontal image where no new significant findings are noted alongside the instructions given to the assistant. Their clear tasking to compare images aligns closely with how radiologists interpret and evaluate stability or change over time, resulting in congruent activation levels.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5849896247406186,0.585,0.5858585858585859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12164,latent_12164,610,0.00122,0.0009717347,6.2319655,Normal heart and mediastinal-hilar contours in paired image comparisons.,Examples with higher activations often highlight prominent observations of normal heart size or normal mediastinal and hilar contours despite investigating different abnormal findings. These norms provide important reference points in the analysis of chest imaging studies even when abnormalities in other structures are present.,0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6408529741863076,0.6444444444444445,0.5975609756097561,0.6125,80.0,100.0
+12165,latent_12165,1695,0.00339,0.0025926705,3.2995765,"Focus on cardiomediastinal silhouette, heart size, and lung clarity.","Higher activations occur in examples that describe the cardiomediastinal silhouette, heart size, or lung clarity, providing detailed visual analysis of these structures or comparing them to prior studies. Explicit attention to standard aspects of chest radiographs, such as these, seems to trigger higher activations.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6196146531051021,0.655,0.5962732919254659,0.96,100.0,100.0
+12166,latent_12166,965,0.00193,0.0014992907,2.8062367,Comparison of interval changes or findings against prior imaging.,"Radiology examples with higher activation often involve description of interval changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. This highlights a focus on documenting differences in anatomical or pathological findings over time, which indicates the radiologist's attention to dynamic changes. The examples often include detailed observations on changes in size, position, or severity of any abnormality compared to previous studies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12167,latent_12167,688,0.001376,0.0013623496,3.8858042,Elevation of hemidiaphragm with associated changes.,"The highlighted examples consistently describe findings of 'mild or moderate elevation of the hemidiaphragm,' either in the right or left lung, often accompanied by additional lung changes like basilar opacities or atelectasis. This suggests a focus on elevation in the diaphragm height as an indicator of certain lung conditions, such as atelectasis or prior surgical intervention.",0.898989898989899,0.9,1.0,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6474025974025974,0.7016574585635359,0.9655172413793104,0.345679012345679,81.0,100.0
+12168,latent_12168,973,0.001946,0.0016152143,3.1363976,Focus on specific interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of direct findings or changes (e.g., stabilization, worsening or new formation of lesions and conditions) based on comparison to prior imaging studies, alongside clinical indications. This suggests an emphasis on interval changes or stability of specific observed conditions rather than on broader clinical findings or absence of change.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12169,latent_12169,677,0.001354,0.0010828227,6.4882946,Absence of prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels often lack previous examination for comparison, which seems paradoxical, but it emphasizes a focus on a current situation without relying on past data.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5067385444743935,0.5191256830601093,0.4647887323943662,0.3975903614457831,83.0,100.0
+12170,latent_12170,997,0.001994,0.0016512056,4.196985,Stable cardiomediastinal and lung findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples commonly describe the findings as comparisons with description of unchanged conditions relative to the previous imaging, usually indicating consistency or stability in specific aspects, such as cardiac size or presence of lung abnormalities. Common terms include 'clear', 'stable', 'unchanged', and 'normal limits'. These terms suggest that the report describes an expected, unchanged status without new concerning developments.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5342465753424658,0.39,100.0,100.0
+12171,latent_12171,4245,0.00849,0.0045574023,3.0388274,Descriptions of interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize findings compared to previous imaging studies, especially when a notable interval change or stability is observed and described. This pattern helps track disease progression or response to treatment over time, such as the resolution or progression of opacities, effusion changes, or stable placements of tubes and catheters.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12172,latent_12172,4179,0.008358,0.0035078314,2.683892,Comparison of current and prior images emphasizing unchanged findings.,"Examples with higher activations often mention radiological patterns using precise terminology, focusing on detailed observations of cardiac, pulmonary, or system devices and comparing them with previous images, emphasizing stable conditions or slight changes in complex cases.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4578005115089514,0.47,0.4571428571428571,0.32,100.0,100.0
+12173,latent_12173,1212,0.002424,0.0016382118,2.9053793,Detailed comparison and description of sequential imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation involve a thorough review of image findings and comparing the current study to a prior study in detail. They often involve discussions of any changes or stability across multiple image studies, often incorporating historical context.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12174,latent_12174,5143,0.010286,0.0041002035,2.8469162,Changes in lung or pleural conditions between current and prior imaging.,"The description reveals a pattern that involves changes or stability in findings when compared to previous imaging studies. However, given a comparison is made in both high and low activation samples, high-activation examples additionally exhibit specific findings like interval improvement, worsening or stability in specific lung or pleural conditions, which reinforce the significance of documented changes in these specific areas.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12175,latent_12175,890,0.00178,0.0015732314,3.8122437,Comparative descriptions between current and prior radiology images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of findings in a new radiology image by comparing it to a prior image, specifically noting changes or interval findings such as new placements, appearances, or resolutions. This comparative language is a central characteristic prompting higher activations.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4356863658719681,0.455,0.4671532846715328,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12176,latent_12176,508,0.001016,0.0010803688,4.4717484,Assessment of medical device placement in the radiographic findings.,"Examples with high activation mention the placement and assessment of medical devices such as tubes, lines, or catheters, even though images show frontal and lateral views for comparison. This pattern indicates the focus is on device positioning and any impact on the imaging report findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4540461826503016,0.5,0.3269230769230769,0.2698412698412698,63.0,99.0
+12177,latent_12177,1078,0.002156,0.001808592,2.5689375,Explicit request for assistant's description of findings in comparison with prior imaging.,The examples with higher activations (6.0 or 7.0) tend to include language where the assistant is explicitly requested to 'Provide a description of the findings' based on current and prior imaging. This pattern is characterized by clarity in role-based instruction and evidence of integrated analysis or interpretation by the assistant.,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4736842105263157,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12178,latent_12178,959,0.001918,0.0012608928,3.6543486,"Focus on detailed findings: low lung volumes, atelectasis, device placements.","Examples with high activation level often cite specific pathologies such as low lung volumes, atelectasis, and device placements like endotracheal tubes or central venous catheters. These detailed findings seem to trigger high relevance from the model, as they indicate acute changes or precise radiological findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5578947368421052,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12179,latent_12179,1660,0.00332,0.0021618386,2.7879686,Emphasis on findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or findings in the current imaging in relation to prior imaging results, emphasizing any new developments or stability in radiographic features across time. This pattern involves highlighting alterations such as new opacities, effusions, or consolidation compared to previous studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12180,latent_12180,4875,0.00975,0.0039102123,2.7826507,Stable findings or unchanged device status on follow-up imaging.,"The examples with high activations detail situations involving imaging findings stable or unchanged since prior examinations. Specifically, there is an emphasis on stability or lack of significant change in device positioning or patient's clinical radiological status over two or more imaging assessments, indicating follow-up or comparative analysis rather than a description of new findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12181,latent_12181,2018,0.004036,0.001876739,2.4784508,Comparison findings between current lateral/frontal and prior frontal images.,"The examples indicate a pattern where descriptions include both lateral and frontal imaging views, and observations involve comparison to a prior frontal image. This type of comparison is a radiologic technique to track changes over time, ensuring pathologies can persist or resolve.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12182,latent_12182,1191,0.002382,0.0016480023,4.5846796,Comparison with prior image and noted stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve a comparison to prior imaging studies and describe changes in findings, such as new findings or stable conditions, using specific comparative language or structure like 'unchanged', 'remains', 'new', or explicit time references. The combination of explicit comparison and description of status (new, unchanged) appears to constitute a key pattern.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4646464646464646,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12183,latent_12183,5542,0.011084,0.0041736593,1.9933373,Explicit comparison to prior findings with focus on pulmonary or device changes.,"The highly activated examples describe changes in pulmonary opacities, effusions, or devices between imaging studies. They often use explicit comparisons to prior images to note changes like increased opacification, tube placement changes, or unchanged features amidst other alterations. These changes indicate a focus on the comparison of specific pulmonary or device-related findings that could suggest progression or resolution of conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12184,latent_12184,1240,0.00248,0.0016918879,2.5617523,Utilization of both current and prior images in comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels require both current and prior images, indicating the pattern involves comparing new imaging with prior imaging data. This pattern is important for assessing changes over time in medical imaging studies.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.458262580523436,0.4924623115577889,0.4933333333333333,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+12185,latent_12185,926,0.001852,0.0017962398,4.5928974,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,"The pattern observed in examples with high activation is the presence of both current frontal and lateral images being available, with a direct comparison to a prior frontal image being explicitly requested or noted. This setup is consistent for assessing changes over time in radiology studies and is emphasized in these high-activation examples.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12186,latent_12186,558,0.001116,0.0011986952,4.1021185,Impact of technique differences on image comparison.,"High activation levels frequently occur in samples where differences in radiographic or imaging technique are mentioned as affecting the comparison of findings with prior images. The reports emphasize how technique variances impact clinical interpretation or comparative assessment, often linking this to unchanged or stable findings.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5139466789952227,0.5421686746987951,0.4166666666666667,0.3787878787878788,66.0,100.0
+12187,latent_12187,1306,0.002612,0.001806687,2.3956952,Significant changes noted between current and prior images.,"The highest activations are derived from descriptions where there are changes noted between current and prior imaging, especially where findings such as pneumothorax, effusions, or other fluid collections change significantly. This indicates that the model activation is higher when new pathological or notable changes are apparent relative to prior images, emphasizing difference or progression between studies.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.25,100.0,100.0
+12188,latent_12188,646,0.001292,0.0014893835,3.434607,Detailed comparison of current and previous imaging findings.,"The instances with higher activation levels often include detailed descriptions and comparisons between the current and prior imaging in terms of specific findings or changes. These ensure a thorough assessment of stability or change in patient condition. Conversely, lower activations lack such detailed comparative discussions.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5198588973085968,0.52,0.4563106796116505,0.6266666666666667,75.0,100.0
+12189,latent_12189,705,0.00141,0.0012869405,4.8038745,Request to compare findings with prior images.,"These examples contain specific requests to describe findings in current radiological images compared to prior images, often with reference to the presence and resolution of existing conditions. High activation is associated with language that explicitly calls for comparisons using specific phrases or sections titled for this purpose.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4391279403327596,0.4468085106382978,0.4344262295081967,0.6022727272727273,88.0,100.0
+12190,latent_12190,767,0.001534,0.0014407005,2.5972497,Comparison of current and prior imaging for change in lung or pleural conditions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve discussions about radiographic findings comparing current and previous images, specifically noting changes or stability in features such as effusions, tubes/lines positions, and lung opacities, linking them to past examinations, conditions, or interventions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4373107840066813,0.4387755102040816,0.4363636363636363,0.5,96.0,100.0
+12191,latent_12191,1151,0.002302,0.0015589301,3.5616794,Description emphasizing comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize findings described as 'compared to prior' images or state comparisons with previous reports. They specifically mention the stability, improvement, or change of findings when evaluated against past imaging studies, focusing on identifying nodules, opacities, or other chest structures in relation to earlier observations.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12192,latent_12192,3210,0.00642,0.0037591064,2.7150996,Comparison and description of interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples describe radiology findings in comparison to reference images, followed by detailed observations and conclusions. Higher activation occurs when different findings are noted even when no acute condition is present, suggesting emphasis is on descriptions of changes or stabilities compared to prior imaging.",0.4888888888888889,0.5306122448979592,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.4271099744245524,0.44,0.4538461538461538,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12193,latent_12193,619,0.001238,0.0011019191,4.6841316,Presence of 'PRE [[AM]] BLE: CHEST RADIOGRAPH' in the report formatting.,"Examples with higher activation levels include a preamble phrase 'PRE [[AM]] BLE: CHEST RADIOGRAPH', which appears to be indicative of specific report formatting or context that relates to the pattern the model is detecting. The consistent use of this specific structured phrase distinguishes these examples from those with lower activation.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6685175771321314,0.7167630057803468,0.8787878787878788,0.3918918918918919,74.0,99.0
+12194,latent_12194,12601,0.025202,0.00942677,1.3344433,Comparison of current findings to previous imaging shows changes or stability.,"The strongly activated examples focus on describing findings in current imaging with specific attention to changes or stability in comparison to previous imaging studies, often reflecting on progression (e.g., growth, resolution, or absence of change) of specific conditions.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12195,latent_12195,1156,0.002312,0.002120379,6.733494,Persistent or stable radiological findings when compared with prior imaging.,"Various examples include findings of stabilization or persistence of certain radiological features when compared to previous imaging, indicating the clinical significance of changes related to specific conditions such as pneumonia or the results of treatment. These findings are explicitly mentioned in the context of unchanged conditions or continued presence despite prior evaluations, indicating stability or persistent of pathologies.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5028997514498756,0.505,0.5057471264367817,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12196,latent_12196,1311,0.002622,0.0020437199,4.0162206,Descriptive findings comparing current and prior images for change analysis.,"Higher activation examples commonly include specific directions to assess changes between current and previous images to understand patient progress or status. These directions often mention 'previous' or 'prior', indicating a focus on assessing image-to-image changes over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4649122807017544,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12197,latent_12197,812,0.001624,0.0015289912,2.4909894,Explicit present vs prior image comparison analysis.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions generated by an Assistant that include terms like 'comparison', 'compared to', and 'since prior', indicating reference to findings consistent with an earlier report or analysis. The examples with lower activation omit detailed comparison statements or lack explicit reference to past imagery for comparative assessment.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5053952991452991,0.5228426395939086,0.5109489051094891,0.7216494845360825,97.0,100.0
+12198,latent_12198,3064,0.006128,0.0027310303,2.183784,Description based on comparison between current and prior images.,"The pattern here involves requests to provide descriptions deriving from radiological studies which directly compare the current images with prior images. This is seen in highly representative examples which explicitly detail observations and findings in terms of what's visible in current images against prior reports, highlighting changes or stability of conditions.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12199,latent_12199,1529,0.003058,0.0021051746,3.2779226,Evaluation or placement of medical devices in imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation frequently involve monitoring and repositioning of medical devices such as pacemakers, catheters, NG tubes, and imaging for evaluation of device placement or potential complications related to these devices. Terms related to device evaluation, positioning, and associated findings are often present in highly activated examples.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7142857142857143,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6849336057201225,0.6884422110552764,0.6583333333333333,0.79,100.0,99.0
+12200,latent_12200,1641,0.003282,0.0016635297,2.9031367,Detailed comparison of pulmonary conditions or devices to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on comparisons of current and prior imaging with a detailed emphasis on specific pulmonary changes and fluctuations in conditions like effusion, opacification, or consolidation. These involve assessments of resolution or increase in pathologies like pneumonia or changes in devices.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12201,latent_12201,723,0.001446,0.0012770084,4.2468295,Moderate or mild enlargement of cardiac silhouette.,"The examples consistently describe 'moderate enlargement of the cardiac silhouette' or similar phrases indicating cardiomegaly. These reports highlight the finding of an enlarged heart, often using terms like 'moderate', 'mild', or 'severely enlarged' to quantify the enlargement, which is frequently stable or unchanged upon comparison with previous imaging.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.75,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.731643147572351,0.7433155080213903,0.819672131147541,0.5747126436781609,87.0,100.0
+12202,latent_12202,7406,0.014812,0.005590049,1.7240179,Reports emphasizing changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples describe a process of evaluating radiographic images by explicitly comparing current findings to previous studies and noting changes or stability in specific observations such as device placement, effusions, and other clinical indicators. The examples consistently emphasize the continuity or change of specific findings over time, often using words like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'compare'.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.5704225352112676,0.81,100.0,100.0
+12203,latent_12203,1046,0.002092,0.0015637389,3.6662254,Analysis of changes relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently found notable changes compared to prior images, with comments indicating differences in findings (e.g., increased, unchanged, or resolved issues). This suggests a focus on interpreting changes over time rather than static findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12204,latent_12204,1593,0.003186,0.0019898412,3.4774914,Use of comparative analysis with prior image findings.,"The examples with higher activations consistently refer to the presence of a comparison with prior imaging, whether or not the current and prior images show changes. This comparison often discusses changes such as opacification, effusions, atelectasis, or device positions, while lower activations lack detailed comparison despite noting current images. This indicates activation correlates with explicitly stated comparisons and identified changes between images.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12205,latent_12205,5718,0.011436,0.0042464286,2.619828,Detailed comparison with prior images focusing on specific changes or stability.,"The samples with higher activation levels focus on changes in imaging findings over time, providing specific comparisons to previous images to detail evolution, improvement, or stability of conditions. Patterns include emphasis on specific comparisons and clear narrative on progression, reflecting on guidance to ongoing patient management and treatment decisions.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.542713567839196,0.542713567839196,0.54,0.5454545454545454,99.0,100.0
+12206,latent_12206,433,0.000866,0.0008475378,5.66963,Stability or absence of change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples indicate increased activations when reports involve comparison of current images to prior ones, with special focus on stable or unchanged findings. Such reports emphasize stability, lack of significant change, and absence of acute pathology.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.6350715033135681,0.6516129032258065,0.5074626865671642,0.6181818181818182,55.0,100.0
+12207,latent_12207,894,0.001788,0.001568292,3.3192255,Changes in placement or status of medical devices compared to priors.,"These examples show high activation when there's a comparison to prior imaging studies revealing specific improvements or worsening of medical interventions, such as placement or removal of medical devices or catheters. This pattern indicates a focus on documentation of changes in medical hardware placement or status, which prompts a higher level of attention in radiology reports.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.6491228070175439,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12208,latent_12208,3107,0.006214,0.002733286,3.5382593,Detailed comparative analysis of radiological changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels demonstrate detailed descriptions of findings compared to prior images, specifically noting changes or stability in conditions such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, pulmonary opacities, or amendments in clinical setups. The pattern focuses on explicit articulations of changes or stability as assessed through comparison.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6279058014958561,0.628140703517588,0.6382978723404256,0.6,100.0,99.0
+12209,latent_12209,1061,0.002122,0.0016551354,5.3105392,Interval removal of a medical device.,"This pattern specifically highlights the interval removal of medical devices (e.g., lines, tubes) as noted in radiology comparisons with prior images. The removal or absence of such devices is a salient observation, often noted due to its clinical significance.",0.9599358974358976,0.96,0.925925925925926,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8380402874784898,0.84,0.935897435897436,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12210,latent_12210,17748,0.035496,0.012889182,1.2435864,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging studies in radiology reports.,"The data shows high activation levels for radiology reports that involve the comparison of current imaging findings against prior imaging, specifically emphasizing changes in certain conditions or pathologies. This pattern is consistent with radiology practices where changes over time are assessed through comparative imaging.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.5416666666666666,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12211,latent_12211,1406,0.002812,0.001698418,2.640843,Use of comparison analysis in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently incorporate descriptions that highlight modified findings when compared to previous images. This includes terms like 'interval increase', 're-demonstrated', 'redemonstrates', or any acknowledgement of an interval change since a prior study, indicating comparison analysis as a focal characteristic.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5238095238095238,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12212,latent_12212,1036,0.002072,0.0016223611,2.550519,"Presence of multiple image views for comparison, especially frontal and lateral images.","Examples with high activation level often include multiple image views for investigation or comparison, particularly frontal and lateral views, as well as prior frontal images. This pattern indicates that the presence of multiple image views significantly contributes to activating the pattern.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12213,latent_12213,1684,0.003368,0.0016364463,3.760162,Evaluation of interval changes in lung and pleural findings compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples show descriptions of current and prior radiology images focusing on changes or stability of specific findings, especially lung opacities, pleural fluid, effusions, atelectasis, or medical devices. The reports evaluate whether these findings have changed or remained unchanged compared to previous studies, indicating the importance of change over time in the assessment.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4548773474031657,0.455,0.4563106796116505,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12214,latent_12214,896,0.001792,0.0014238628,4.0361238,Comparison to prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve lining up descriptions of a current image with a prior image to identify changes such as stability, progress, or new findings. This pattern is common in follow-up radiology studies that assess changes or stability in medical conditions over time.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12215,latent_12215,572,0.001144,0.0011529278,4.3670406,Detailed comparisons of current images to prior imaging with explicit changes noted.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed comparisons of current images to prior imaging, usually mentioning specific changes or stability (e.g., position of medical devices, size of noted structures or lesions, changes in lung condition) explicitly, rather than simply noting the presence of a comparison.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4277134277134277,0.4712643678160919,0.3269230769230769,0.2297297297297297,74.0,100.0
+12216,latent_12216,5555,0.01111,0.0042573917,2.2447047,Assessment emphasizes stability or absence of change compared to prior exams.,"Examples with activations closer to higher numbers consistently include a discussion of findings in comparison with a prior exam or emphasize the unchanged, resolved, or stable nature of pathologies, suggesting stability or monitoring of progression is key. The pattern emphasizes stability or absence of change rather than new findings.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12217,latent_12217,880,0.00176,0.0011336718,3.6376219,"Presence and unchanged positioning of pacemaker, AICD, or other medical devices in imaging comparison.","The examples with higher activation levels focus heavily on the presence and status of pacemaker or AICD devices, tubes, or catheters, noting their placement and any changes or stasis across sequential imaging studies. The findings consistently describe the location and integrity of these devices.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5174632352941176,0.58,0.7857142857142857,0.22,100.0,100.0
+12218,latent_12218,1080,0.00216,0.0018861187,4.2947,Normal cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours without acute findings.,"Given examples frequently note a normal cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours while mentioning the absence of acute pathology such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax. These phrases are common in radiology reports that describe normal imaging findings, highlighting the unremarkable nature of these structures and the absence of acute abnormalities.",0.7312939231087227,0.74,0.6764705882352942,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7435575109993715,0.745,0.7130434782608696,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12219,latent_12219,1251,0.002502,0.0018164245,2.6844583,Description of findings compared to prior images with interval changes or stability.,"The consistent feature in most of these examples with higher activation is the description of the radiological findings in comparison with previous studies, specifically focusing on changes or stability. These reports highlight alterations in clinical findings, positioning of medical devices, or evolving pathologies over time, often marked by descriptors of interval changes.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.474671669793621,0.475,0.4761904761904761,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12220,latent_12220,12255,0.02451,0.009065667,1.679565,Radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These samples consistently highlight changes or stability in findings when compared with previous imaging studies or prior reports explicitly mentioned in the context of radiographic comparison, using specific phrases like 'compared to' and 'comparison with'. This suggests the pattern involves description of differences or unchanged aspects of imaging findings over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12221,latent_12221,1033,0.002066,0.0016227484,2.8255305,Focus on ETT or NG tube placement in chest imaging.,"The highly activated examples often involve the evaluation of endotracheal tube (ETT) or nasogastric (NG) tube placement in relation to other findings, indicating a focus on the clinical task of tube management alongside other assessment tasks in chest radiography.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.8888888888888888,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6651785714285714,0.67,0.7236842105263158,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12222,latent_12222,14843,0.029686,0.010767929,1.5233964,Descriptive comparison of current imaging with prior studies emphasizing interval changes.,"The pattern involves comparison with prior imaging studies and describing any interval changes, or noting stability across examinations. Activation is higher for reports where significant comparison or description of changes in condition is made, often indicating interval improvements, resolution, or new findings compared to prior studies.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12223,latent_12223,6060,0.01212,0.0044256733,1.674162,Reports highlight unchanged or normal findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Most examples mention the presence of comparison with prior imaging, yet the communication of non-significant findings or normalcy despite historical data comparisons or clinical expectations is prominent. These often include phrases such as 'unchanged' or 'normal', indicative of a focus on identifying lack of change.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.5904761904761905,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12224,latent_12224,2293,0.004586,0.0027990295,3.9356236,Stability or lack of change compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation primarily highlight unchanged findings when compared to prior examinations. These reports emphasize stability or lack of interval change in the findings, specifically stating that conspicuous pathological findings have not progressed in subsequent imaging.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12225,latent_12225,870,0.00174,0.0016594823,3.7303705,Reports with explicit comparison to prior imaging or findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the findings within the context of a prior report or previous image with clear evidence of comparisons to detect changes. Reports often mention devices, medical procedures, or monitoring changes and improvements, suggesting high activation correlates with explicit medical history references and interval assessments among serial imaging assessments.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12226,latent_12226,597,0.001194,0.0012752771,3.8327758,Detailed comparative analysis of changes in imaging findings over time.,"Examples with high activation emphasize providing detailed descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to a prior image. These examples often include specific changes in anatomy or pathology over time, such as resolving, worsening, or unchanged opacities or deformities. Lower activation examples either lack this comparative detail or involve non-comparative description requests.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4741311732427489,0.4742857142857143,0.4123711340206185,0.5333333333333333,75.0,100.0
+12227,latent_12227,742,0.001484,0.0009832615,4.315684,Comparison with prior imaging for changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples contain specific requests to describe findings in the current radiology study by comparing them with prior imaging findings. These refer to cases where a comparison was explicitly made, and the difference or resolution of specific medical conditions was noted.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5268018018018018,0.5392670157068062,0.5114503816793893,0.7362637362637363,91.0,100.0
+12228,latent_12228,15162,0.030324,0.011181061,1.2581233,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies to assess changes over time.,"The examples consistently involve comparisons between current radiology findings and one or more prior studies. The described pattern focuses on changes, stability, or absence of acute processes in the findings over time, often involving multiple imaging modalities or dates for comparison.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12229,latent_12229,1230,0.00246,0.0018853884,3.2343993,Request to describe current findings in comparison with prior images.,"High activation levels correspond to instances where there's an explicit request to describe current findings in comparison with prior images, particularly when there's direction to provide this description systematically within the input (e.g., by the ""ASSISTANT""), fostering analysis of change over time. In contrast, examples with existing detailed prior comparisons have lower activations.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4600183823529412,0.53,0.5174418604651163,0.89,100.0,100.0
+12230,latent_12230,8354,0.016708,0.0062531712,3.1326296,"Evaluation of changes or stability in findings against previous images, especially in medical device positioning or pleural conditions.","The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions comparing the current radiological findings against prior images, specifically highlighting any changes or stability in conditions such as pleural effusion, edema, or opacity. Additionally, monitoring and positioning of medical equipment like catheters or tubes are discussed, showing that evaluation of continuity or changes against previous images is key to high activation.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12231,latent_12231,2793,0.005586,0.0028405602,2.9956994,Reports that describe significant changes or stability over time in imaging findings.,"The reports have higher activations when they describe findings specifically related to changes or stability across multiple imaging studies. This includes descriptions of changes over time, stability despite new findings, or variations since a previous report.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4731182795698925,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12232,latent_12232,888,0.001776,0.0014087119,3.8713572,Detailed comparison of radiological findings from multiple views or prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed descriptions of changes in the patient's condition or abnormalities by interpreting radiological findings across multiple views or prior examinations. They assess stability, progression, or resolution of findings over time or different imaging modalities. Common phrases indicating this pattern include 'increased from prior', 'no significant interval change', 'compared to previous', and 'changes since prior'.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4552030200858765,0.5226130653266332,0.514792899408284,0.87,100.0,99.0
+12233,latent_12233,8480,0.01696,0.006422133,1.509111,Provision of comparative descriptions between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve requests to provide comparative radiologic descriptions referencing both current and prior imaging studies. These examples emphasize assessing changes, stability, or improvements against previous findings, particularly involving thoracic images or descriptions of thoracic structures.",0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12234,latent_12234,1279,0.002558,0.0018514659,2.931377,Comparison of current findings to prior studies with reference to changes over time.,"Examples with activations at or near 0.0 often lack comparisons to prior radiological findings. High activation examples frequently compare current findings with previous images to assess changes over time, highlight ongoing pathologies, or reaffirm stability of prior findings. These comparisons are a recurrent theme in radiology reports.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12235,latent_12235,2167,0.004334,0.0035357636,3.323346,"Comparison of current and prior radiological findings, assessing stability or changes.","Activation values are higher when prompts are concerned with findings that compare current with prior chest images, more so when there are discussions of stability or change in specific findings, such as cardiomediastinal silhouette or lung opacities. These examples reflect a pattern of structured radiological comparisons focusing on stability or changes in specific cardiac or pulmonary features over time.",0.2694805194805195,0.28,0.3225806451612903,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3636363636363636,0.37,0.3916666666666666,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12236,latent_12236,656,0.001312,0.0014721663,5.150272,Presence of aortic arch calcifications or related cardiac calcifications.,"The high activation examples consistently involve the detection of calcifications, specifically atherosclerotic or other types, particularly around the aortic arch, aortic knob, or similar cardiac structures which suggest existing chronic changes in patient anatomy observable in chest imaging.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,0.9615384615384616,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8851250548486178,0.8877005347593583,0.9583333333333334,0.7931034482758621,87.0,100.0
+12237,latent_12237,714,0.001428,0.0015558699,4.5996957,Changes or consistency in imaging findings over time compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in findings over time by leveraging comparison with prior imaging studies. They often highlight changes in pulmonary opacities, cardiac silhouette size, pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis and emphasize keeping an eye on pneumonia in the clinical scenario, using comparison to earlier examinations.",0.6961805555555556,0.72,0.6410256410256411,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4999378109452737,0.5401069518716578,0.5032679738562091,0.8850574712643678,87.0,100.0
+12238,latent_12238,1230,0.00246,0.0015268215,3.2305908,Low lung volumes with associated diagnostic findings.,The examples with higher activation levels highlight a specific finding of low lung volumes combined with the presence of other diagnostic indicators such as bronchovascular crowding or atelectasis. This pattern indicates how low lung volumes often reveal or correlate with underlying issues.,0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6355906468266019,0.64,0.6794871794871795,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12239,latent_12239,2577,0.005154,0.0027657105,3.2024412,Low lung volumes and their impact on radiographic interpretation.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe findings in the context of low lung volumes, which affect radiographic interpretation, such as causing bronchovascular crowding or obscuring certain features. These observations are common in chest X-ray reports and can impact the diagnosis of conditions like atelectasis or effusions.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6487641215171294,0.665,0.7894736842105263,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12240,latent_12240,795,0.00159,0.0013270066,2.7307959,Unchanged comparison findings likely indicating stability or benign condition.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight unchanged or stable findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, stating that these unchanged observations might suggest benign or non-acute scenarios.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4885855747357152,0.5076142131979695,0.5,0.3195876288659793,97.0,100.0
+12241,latent_12241,728,0.001456,0.0012846759,3.2457502,Reports focusing on interval changes between current and prior images.,"These examples offer an explicit instruction to provide a comparison between current and prior imaging findings, highlighted by repeated phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This specific pattern is indicative of radiology reports that focus on detecting interval changes over time, often found in follow-up assessments.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4827927432655304,0.4895833333333333,0.4754098360655737,0.6304347826086957,92.0,100.0
+12242,latent_12242,1297,0.002594,0.0018711721,3.5440218,Presence of detailed findings and comparisons with prior studies in reports.,"The prompt involves identifying whether detailed descriptions and/or clinical backgrounds are provided in comparison to prior imaging studies, influencing the activation level. High activation examples include comprehensive findings and comparisons, while low activation examples do not include comparisons or detailed findings.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4676258992805755,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12243,latent_12243,1427,0.002854,0.0014378539,2.0061097,Comparison and description involving frontal and lateral views with prior images.,"Examples with high activation often outline the process of making radiological observations using both frontal and lateral views along with comparisons to prior images. These include direct instructions to describe findings based on these images, suggesting the importance of utilizing multiple views in combination with historical comparisons to provide comprehensive findings.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5207373271889401,0.545,0.5310344827586206,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12244,latent_12244,1138,0.002276,0.0019040139,3.6102483,Detailed findings comparison between current and prior images.,"The consistent pattern in activated examples involves explicit instructions and prompts for providing findings comparison between current and prior imaging, often using a focus on specific terminologies or structures (e.g., 'cardiomediastinal silhouette', 'lungs'). These require a detailed examination from a radiologist assistant perspective, focusing on any changes or stability in observed radiological findings.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3536912247300784,0.355,0.3406593406593406,0.31,100.0,100.0
+12245,latent_12245,4458,0.008916,0.003695351,2.9525843,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"Examples without comparison described lack of change or detailed differences in pathology compared to previous imaging studies. The pattern is marked by explicit references to changes or stability (e.g., ""provide a description compared to prior"").",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4786510590858416,0.5276381909547738,0.515527950310559,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+12246,latent_12246,1065,0.00213,0.0014881737,3.4279127,Evaluation of medical device placement compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels involve descriptions of medical device placements, including tubes, catheters, and pacemakers in relation to anatomical structures, often compared with prior imaging to evaluate stability or changes in position. The linguistic pattern focuses on device placement and evaluation post-procedure.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5904507100226384,0.5979899497487438,0.6388888888888888,0.46,100.0,99.0
+12247,latent_12247,1435,0.00287,0.0017007465,2.7875237,Comparative analysis of stability or change with prior imaging.,"The samples with high activations emphasize identification and evaluation of changes or stability in observations between the current images and prior imaging studies. Descriptions often include comparative terms that indicate evaluation over time, such as 'unchanged', 'interval change', or specific changes in medical devices or physiological features.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12248,latent_12248,5207,0.010414,0.0042241993,2.762286,Simultaneous provision of frontal and lateral images for comparison.,"The analysis shows examples where front and lateral radiographic images are provided for comparison to prior images, yielding activation levels 2.0 or higher. This indicates a pattern related to simultaneous presentation of those views for analysis. These concurrent comparisons facilitate a more comprehensive assessment of changes in image features across time.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12249,latent_12249,483,0.000966,0.001315373,4.4248104,Comparison between current and prior frontal images.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a frontal image compared directly with a prior frontal image and a request for description based on this comparison. This pattern is likely the model's key activation trigger.,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5131270799950696,0.5253164556962026,0.432,0.9310344827586208,58.0,100.0
+12250,latent_12250,881,0.001762,0.0014944403,3.302084,Comparison to prior imaging for pulmonary abnormalities.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight aspects of pulmonary analysis, where comparative imaging is used to identify or rule out pulmonary processes or abnormalities, notably focusing on distinctions such as pulmonary edema, consolidation, or atelectasis. This pattern of referencing pulmonary evaluation against prior imaging stands out in the examples with higher activations.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5217953024469653,0.5326633165829145,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,99.0
+12251,latent_12251,958,0.001916,0.001951086,4.2955604,Comparative analysis involving current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels typically include both current and prior images, with a request for comparative analysis focusing on a reported issue, such as pneumonia or nodules. These reports typically contain explicit mentions of the findings from the prior images for direct comparison. Patterns with low activation often do not include explicit prior image analysis or comparative language.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12252,latent_12252,929,0.001858,0.0015633542,3.047576,Comparison with prior imaging in the context of acute or critical conditions.,"Samples with high activation values consistently specify a comparison with a prior imaging study and also involve some indication or language that connects to monitoring conditions such as pneumothorax or pneumonia, typically in the presence of significant conditions like hypoxia or hypotension. These cases contain a urgency to monitor changes due to known critical conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4665861513687601,0.47,0.4741379310344827,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12253,latent_12253,6803,0.013606,0.0050389627,2.1319788,"Compare findings with prior imaging, noting specific changes.","A significant number of examples with zero activation (such as Example 1, 2, 3, etc.) are instructions to compare current radiological images with prior images, using varied descriptions, but not focusing on substantial change or new findings. Higher-activation examples (like Example 34 and 13) demonstrate specific mentions of changes or concerning findings when directly compared with previous exams, which triggers the activation pattern. The focus seems to be on detailed comparisons that highlight changes since prior imaging.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12254,latent_12254,2055,0.00411,0.0022444008,5.6976194,Presence and evaluation of imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently present findings or descriptions comparing current imaging with prior imaging, signifying changes or stability in condition, especially concerning pre-operative or post-operative evaluations. These include specific text asking for a comparison, indicating the presence of comparative images or prior reports. Lower activations lack such comparative language or context.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12255,latent_12255,908,0.001816,0.001515444,4.3457904,"Unchanged position of medical devices (Port-A-Cath, PICC line, etc.) in chest imaging.","The observed pattern is that medical devices in the chest (such as Port-A-Cath, PICC line, pacemaker, or catheters) are described as unchanged in position over time across the examples with higher activations, indicating a consistent finding across serial comparisons of diagnostic images.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7402663543072496,0.745,0.8356164383561644,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12256,latent_12256,8469,0.016938,0.006250096,1.6404214,Descriptive changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the analysis of imaging where a new finding or change is described upon comparison with a prior frontal or previous imaging study. This includes new developments such as pneumothorax, alterations in fluid levels, or changes in cardiomediastinal structures, as opposed to unchanged or stable findings.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5175757575757576,0.5175879396984925,0.5151515151515151,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+12257,latent_12257,3497,0.006994,0.0029665502,3.4175115,Comparison focusing on changes in monitoring and support devices.,"These examples often describe changes in monitoring and support devices between current and prior imaging studies. Changes in device positioning or removal is a critical aspect of radiological assessments when comparing prior images in patients with intensive care needs, surgical interventions, or significant respiratory conditions.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6457131288591963,0.65,0.6923076923076923,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12258,latent_12258,452,0.000904,0.0009899639,3.741514,References to cardiac evaluation in radiology reports.,"These examples focus on findings related to the heart, often in the context of evaluating conditions like congestive heart failure, arrhythmias, or vascular changes. They frequently detail situations concerning cardiopulmonary complications and devices, using language related to heart size, cardiac silhouette, and mediastinal contours. This pattern aligns with examples that have high activation levels, reflecting a focus on cardiac issues.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4833559782608695,0.5,0.3472222222222222,0.4464285714285714,56.0,100.0
+12259,latent_12259,1313,0.002626,0.0019827292,2.7701485,Findings presented in context of clinical stability or improvement.,"The higher activation examples frequently describe cases where the radiological findings are presented in the context of a stable or improved clinical situation, often referring to the lack of significant change or improvement when compared with prior imaging. This suggests a focus on the stability or resolution of clinical conditions as observed in radiological studies.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12260,latent_12260,1066,0.002132,0.0014905015,3.2380042,Comparison to prior imaging indicating indeterminate or stable findings.,"Highly activated examples include direct mentions of comparison findings with prior imaging to assess changes, stability, or progression with phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from', or 'no significant interval change'. Indeterminate or unchanged findings often suggest the activation of this pattern.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6142187930559382,0.615,0.6263736263736264,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12261,latent_12261,907,0.001814,0.0012081956,3.4043107,Emphasis on comparing current images to prior ones to assess changes.,"The examples with high activations emphasize the description of current imaging studies in explicit terms of compared 'current' and 'prior' images, both of which are mentioned in the prompt. Key phrases include 'given the current' and 'compared to prior,' with a focus on providing comparative descriptions of imaging findings. This pattern aligns with radiology reports that prioritize detailing changes over time by comparing different imaging occurrences, often used in managing ongoing conditions such as pneumonia or fractures.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3850102943928982,0.425,0.4503311258278146,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12262,latent_12262,644,0.001288,0.0011985142,4.233453,Identification of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation levels correlate with examples that provide explicit changes or comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, especially indicating improvements, resolutions, or stability of previously noted findings. Common linguistic elements include phrases like 'as compared to previous', 'unchanged from prior', 'resolved', and specific observations of change in medical conditions or device placements.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4883603398717584,0.4887640449438202,0.431578947368421,0.5256410256410257,78.0,100.0
+12263,latent_12263,842,0.001684,0.0015195179,4.7450747,Detailed comparison of current findings to prior radiographic images.,"High activation examples emphasize the differences or lack of significant changes in comparisons between current and prior imaging, utilizing descriptive phrases like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'interval change', or 'no new findings' to evaluate treatment progress or stability of findings. This pattern indicates the model's focus on assessing the stability or change in clinical context over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6282243894986123,0.635,0.6062992125984252,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12264,latent_12264,972,0.001944,0.001658241,2.7215405,Descriptions necessitating multi-view and detailed comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe complex scenarios where changes or comparability are analyzed across multiple image views or with reference to a previous report, indicating an emphasis on careful temporal or spatial comparison. Examples often contain specific evidence of detailed comparisons or require multi-report evaluations to identify nuances, such as progression or stability of conditions against a backdrop of the patient's clinical history or a previous reference point.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3708155198838428,0.415,0.4444444444444444,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12265,latent_12265,1050,0.0021,0.0017042493,4.1378765,The radiological reports compare current images with previous ones to assess changes or stability.,"Most examples with high activation levels contain reports indicating a comparison to prior imaging studies in determining stability or changes in findings, with explicit mentions of intervals, timeframes, or unchanged conditions over time, suggesting a clear, consistent pattern in the evaluated reports.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12266,latent_12266,828,0.001656,0.001561628,3.3566992,Low lung volumes accentuating bronchovascular markings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the presence of low lung volumes, which can accentuate the bronchovascular markings or the cardiac silhouette, often leading to misinterpretation of these features on radiological exams. This pattern signifies a focus on the impact of low lung volumes in the radiological assessment.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.9,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7830419536315245,0.785,0.8518518518518519,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12267,latent_12267,1061,0.002122,0.0019413569,3.297962,Borderline or top normal cardiac silhouette with stable or specific lung/vascular conditions.,"The observed pattern consistently reports a 'borderline size' or 'top normal' cardiac silhouette, often accompanied by changes in lung or vascular condition such as pulmonary vascular congestion or stabilization. This terminology reflects a clinical subtlety where the heart is at the higher end of normal, indicating close monitoring or interpretation in the context of accompanying findings.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.609375,0.61,0.6195652173913043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12268,latent_12268,954,0.001908,0.0015063499,2.9963336,Description of findings compared with prior imaging indicating stability or improvement.,"Highly activated examples specifically mention the comparison of findings with prior images or evaluations, often identifying that a certain condition is unchanged or has improved. This pattern is common in follow-up radiological assessments.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3457743457743458,0.39,0.2708333333333333,0.13,100.0,100.0
+12269,latent_12269,874,0.001748,0.0013466657,3.4213114,Stable or unchanged findings in pathology from prior imaging.,"The examples with high activations emphasize comparison between the current imaging findings and previous ones, specifically highlighting stability or minor changes in the condition of pathological features.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4067796610169492,0.24,100.0,100.0
+12270,latent_12270,10882,0.021764,0.008129465,2.0608857,Detailed changes or comparisons to prior radiographic findings.,"The representative examples all highlight specific changes or comparisons to prior radiographic studies, often detailing improvements, stable conditions, or specific anatomical descriptions like positions of medical devices or sizes of effusions, by referencing previous imaging statuses. This pattern aligns with radiology practices of monitoring progression or stability of conditions over time.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12271,latent_12271,669,0.001338,0.0012018392,3.6211665,Stable cardiac contour with no acute cardiopulmonary changes.,"Examples with high activation levels describe conditions where there is no new focal consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or other acute cardiopulmonary issues, while emphasizing stable findings over time or absent new significant radiological changes. This pattern reflects the emphasis on stability in radiological reports compared to prior images.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.536353181702019,0.536723163841808,0.4736842105263157,0.5844155844155844,77.0,100.0
+12272,latent_12272,3079,0.006158,0.0030423177,3.9266589,Tube placement evaluation and adjustment in imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically involve evaluations or repositioning of tubes, such as nasogastric, endotracheal, or central venous catheters. These examples frequently recommend adjusting positioning based on observed measurements compared to anatomical landmarks, emphasizing accurate positioning to prevent complications. Other examples with a focus on tube placement or movement, but without detailed numerical positioning, have lower activations.",0.8599439775910365,0.86,0.875,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7237851662404092,0.73,0.8285714285714286,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12273,latent_12273,634,0.001268,0.0014746102,3.552259,Description of findings compared to prior images with specific stability or unchanged pathology noted.,"These examples illustrate a detailed examination of images where descriptions often include references to prior images for comparison. Notably, activation levels are high when specific stability or unchanged findings are noted, including reports of consistent internal devices (like tubes or catheters), unchanged fluid accumulation, or unchanged pathologies over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4662622939583976,0.4914285714285714,0.3870967741935484,0.32,75.0,100.0
+12274,latent_12274,14456,0.028912,0.010664446,1.6402605,"Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette without detailed diagnostic insight, regardless of comparison availability.","High activation examples tend to describe findings of normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes without additional diagnostic assessment, despite containing signals suggesting interval changes or device placements, with comparison as an essential element.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12275,latent_12275,891,0.001782,0.0014174372,3.6564646,Comparison language noting changes from prior imaging.,"These examples consistently involve comparison between current and prior studies, with specific details on changes observed. Comparison language, such as 'compared to previous', 'in comparison', and documentation of specific changes, especially related to heart size or other anatomical observations, is present.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4603492409458397,0.4623115577889447,0.4642857142857143,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+12276,latent_12276,1554,0.003108,0.001806266,2.7483275,Continued low lung volumes or volume changes in radiology findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels commonly describe findings related to the lungs, specifically referencing conditions or changes that involve lung expansion or volumes. Terms like 'lung volumes remain low', 'continued low lung volumes', and 'low lung volumes with bibasilar atelectasis' appear frequently, indicating that the pattern focuses on descriptions of restricted lung volumes or related changes over time compared to prior images.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+12277,latent_12277,806,0.001612,0.0015019106,3.6337872,References to prior cardiac procedures affecting cardiac or mediastinal silhouette.,"These examples all include references to previous medical procedures, particularly cardiac surgeries, such as coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG), valve replacements, or sternotomies. These references are significant in discussions of changes in heart size, mediastinal silhouette, and stable bony contours, even in the presence of other pathologies.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4390243902439024,0.18,100.0,100.0
+12278,latent_12278,833,0.001666,0.0013451327,3.528172,Emphasis on detailed comparison to prior radiographic findings.,"The examples showing higher activation levels frequently focus on providing detailed descriptions of findings compared to prior radiographic images or reports. These analyses assess interval changes, stability, or progression of medical conditions, often specifically mentioning 'interval changes', 'stable', or 'resolved' findings. Descriptions of changes in medical devices or positioning are also included but do not affect the core pattern of focus on changes relative to prior imagery.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12279,latent_12279,6231,0.012462,0.0049137427,1.999676,Heart size at upper limits of normal or mild cardiomegaly.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of cardiac features such as heart size that are at the upper limits of normal or show mild cardiomegaly, often alongside other findings in the radiological assessment where the heart or its configuration is specifically noted.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.4909090909090909,0.27,100.0,100.0
+12280,latent_12280,16505,0.03301,0.012054965,1.3720794,Changes in pulmonary opacities or fluid collections.,"The examples with higher activation consistently include changes in opacities such as atelectasis, pneumonia, effusions, or similar pulmonary findings. These changes often reflect responses to acute treatments or interventions, indicating dynamic pulmonary pathology rather than stable or normal findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6249156060113525,0.625,0.6213592233009708,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12281,latent_12281,1695,0.00339,0.0019360443,3.4603038,Stable or changed findings in comparison to prior images.,"This pattern is evident when the findings are compared to prior imaging studies, which is common in radiological evaluations. The comparison aspect is vital in recognizing stability, new findings, or progression/regression of previously noted abnormalities.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12282,latent_12282,3084,0.006168,0.002511524,1.994093,Focus on changes or stability in medical devices as observed in comparison with prior images.,"Highly activated examples include descriptions of medical devices or anatomical changes with a comparison between current and prior imaging, particularly emphasizing interval changes or stability that imply clinical action or significance. This suggests that findings related to the positioning or function of medical devices, and their changes over time, are likely triggers for higher activation.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4170967138158774,0.455,0.4081632653061224,0.2,100.0,100.0
+12283,latent_12283,1327,0.002654,0.0015870236,3.5519395,Comparison of current images to prior frontal images.,This set of examples involves multiple references to frontal and lateral chest images along with explicit instructions to provide descriptions comparing findings to prior images. The context here suggests a structured setting where evaluations often involve detailed comparisons to previous imaging.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12284,latent_12284,751,0.001502,0.0013445948,2.639555,Comparison of current imaging with specific prior studies focusing on device positions or stability over time.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions requiring comparisons between current and specific prior images while assessing changes in medical devices or findings on follow-up studies. These examples emphasize technical descriptions of positioning and stability of devices or anatomy over time, commonly with instructions or rationales.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5123281175912755,0.5294117647058824,0.4923076923076923,0.367816091954023,87.0,100.0
+12285,latent_12285,1328,0.002656,0.00215293,4.512093,Normal cardiomediastinal and pulmonary findings without acute abnormalities.,"The pattern is identified by the absence of critical findings or abnormalities in the chest radiograph, with normals stated for cardiomediastinal silhouette, pulmonary vasculature, and lungs clear without consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. There is specific linguistic framing around normal findings and a lack of acute findings repeatedly observed.",0.7756017951856384,0.78,0.71875,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8076728413807066,0.81,0.7540983606557377,0.92,100.0,100.0
+12286,latent_12286,4040,0.00808,0.0032783689,1.8423705,Comparison showing stability or no significant change from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize comparisons to prior images where there is either no significant change or some stable finding. This is a typical approach in radiology to highlight stability or slight changes over time, specifically using phrases like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or similar expressions regarding lack of new findings. This matches the observed pattern.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.2916666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4963570825983587,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+12287,latent_12287,517,0.001034,0.0013110789,4.7885666,Comparison of current frontal and lateral chest images with prior frontal only.,"The examples with higher activation levels prominently feature a repeated pattern of requesting a description of radiographic findings using both current frontal and lateral images in comparison to a prior frontal image. This consistency across examples highlights a focus on comparing current and prior imaging findings, particularly doing so with PA and lateral views for chest examinations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5743471582181259,0.5828220858895705,0.4675324675324675,0.5714285714285714,63.0,100.0
+12288,latent_12288,1335,0.00267,0.0017167829,3.2960968,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging revealing change or stability.,"The radiology reports that elicited higher activation levels consistently mention findings in the form of comparisons between the current and prior imaging results. These descriptions focus on changes, absence of new issues, or stability of findings. This pattern reflects a focus on temporal changes in imaging, which is key in tracking patient progress or response to treatment.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3703703703703703,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.37,0.37,0.37,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12289,latent_12289,3133,0.006266,0.0025229633,2.4190814,Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on radiology reports that involve detailed comparison with prior imaging, often highlighting changes or the stability of findings over time. They often mention words like 'comparison', 'prior', 'unchanged', 'stable', and refer to specific previous dates or images to examine progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12290,latent_12290,2933,0.005866,0.0022253345,2.2724674,Comparison of current and prior findings for interval changes.,"The examples exhibit descriptions of unchanged or interval changes in radiological findings between current and prior imaging studies, indicating a focus on comparative analysis related to conditions like pleural effusion, pneumonia, or cardiopulmonary devices.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6408045977011494,0.65,0.6136363636363636,0.81,100.0,100.0
+12291,latent_12291,1386,0.002772,0.0012664245,1.8532655,Systematic and comparative evaluation of radiographs and cardiac silhouette.,"These examples notably describe a systematic processing of presenting images with a focus on the chest and cardiac silhouette, reinforced by a comparison narrative that emphasizes changes from prior views, even if none is available. Key aspects usually reported include silhouettes and vessel structures, with emphasis on any notable invention or procedural presence.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4412481457936004,0.4673366834170854,0.4755244755244755,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+12292,latent_12292,453,0.000906,0.00073119986,3.112198,"Multiple images compared to prior, explaining changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels consistently compare current imaging findings to those of prior images. This comparison often involves multiple prompt views, descriptions, history, and indications to reflect changes or stability over time, driving a higher level of diagnostic attention.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4181681681681681,0.4193548387096774,0.3118279569892473,0.5272727272727272,55.0,100.0
+12293,latent_12293,5023,0.010046,0.0036019068,1.2593378,"Comparison to prior images, noting changes or stability.","These examples describe using current and prior imaging to compare and detect changes across a timeframe. Examples with higher activations focus on specific findings such as interval changes, improvements, or stability of conditions across sequential imaging, showing that the model patterns detect changes or stability over time by explicitly referencing previous reports or imaging comparisons.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12294,latent_12294,1119,0.002238,0.0010289024,2.522699,Comparisons and interval changes in serial imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation involve descriptions that compare current radiology findings against prior images. They frequently mention subtle changes in conditions like cardiomegaly, atelectasis, and lung conditions, or significant updates like interval changes in atelectasis or edema. These detailed changes observed over time from sequential images reflect the pattern.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4758064516129032,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12295,latent_12295,2349,0.004698,0.0018310787,1.9991733,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"The activation pattern focuses on descriptions where cardiac silhouette, cardoimmediastinal, and hilar contours are mentioned as clear or unremarkable, often alongside normal lung findings, cropped conclusions, or normal other findings.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5714285714285714,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12296,latent_12296,1021,0.002042,0.0010404348,2.267144,Changes in radiological findings from prior studies indicating progression or intervention.,"The examples show consistent themes of comparisons with prior imaging to assess changes in certain conditions, with specific references to changes or stability in pathologies like pneumothorax, effusions, and cardiomegaly. High activation instances mention increases in cardiomegaly, development of opacities, or introduction of devices, which are relevant changes flagged from prior studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,100.0
+12297,latent_12297,4792,0.009584,0.0034964262,1.2820199,Reports indicating interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations tend to describe changes or confirmed stability in comparison to prior imaging. This involves specific observations of interval changes like worsening, improvement, or stable appearances, often linked with clinical implications in terms of conditions such as pneumonia, pleural effusions, or other notable changes.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12298,latent_12298,3787,0.007574,0.0027473173,1.4334753,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with specific descriptors or complex findings.,"The high activation examples consistently involve references to comparison with prior imaging studies using specific language or detailed descriptions, even when multiple views (frontal/lateral) or complex indications (such as nodules or pleural effusions) are present. This suggests that such detailed comparisons in imaging reports are a prominent pattern.",0.5274633123689727,0.5306122448979592,0.5238095238095238,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5444444444444444,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12299,latent_12299,826,0.001652,0.0011424512,2.263432,Comparative descriptions showing lung pathology changes or tube placements.,"The higher activation examples consistently refer to lung pathology changes or tube placements identified in comparisons with previous chest radiographs. These are specific findings of interest often in acute or post-surgical monitoring scenarios. Low activation samples do not involve such changes upon comparison with prior images, focusing instead on stability or unrelated conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12300,latent_12300,449,0.000898,0.00081112864,3.125802,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging findings for changes.,"Many of these examples focus on comparing the current imaging findings to the previous imaging findings, specifically assessing whether findings are unchanged, stable, or show interval change. The comparisons focus on evaluating changes over time in medical imaging findings.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4414642375168691,0.4415584415584415,0.336734693877551,0.6111111111111112,54.0,100.0
+12301,latent_12301,3445,0.00689,0.002583885,3.044328,N/A in PRIOR_REPORT or COMPARISON fields.,"Reports with high activation specifically mention ""N/A"" for either PRIOR_REPORT or COMPARISON sections, indicating that there is no available past report or comparison, contrasting these with prior imaging references in the other examples.",0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.5263157894736842,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12302,latent_12302,1525,0.00305,0.0012464409,1.8071922,"Evaluations of stability, changes, and improvements across multiple imaging views.","This model is focused on extracting findings that show stability, improvement, or notable changes in the context of multiple imaging views, often in follow-up or comparative studies. Such a pattern is indicative of comparative radiological analysis where explicit differences or confirmations from prior imaging are highlighted, which may not always include critical or acute changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4806201550387597,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12303,latent_12303,741,0.001482,0.0010128263,3.5949178,Changes in medical devices between current and prior images.,"The pattern of high activation is associated with descriptions of changes in medical devices, lines, or tubes (like ET or NG tubes) between the current and prior images. Phrases such as removal, repositioning, or changes in placement often appear in high activation examples.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4947711614173228,0.5497382198952879,0.5675675675675675,0.2307692307692307,91.0,100.0
+12304,latent_12304,6251,0.012502,0.0043255636,1.2713932,Description of interval changes or stability from prior imaging.,"Many examples refer to a change from a prior examination, either noting a stable finding or an interval change, often specifying actions like removal or persistence of devices, unchanged opacities, effusions, or cardiac silhouette. This inclusion of a comparison with prior imaging highlights the pattern of assessing interval changes related to the patient’s clinical progress.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12305,latent_12305,2071,0.004142,0.0017342627,2.3063405,Comparison with prior imaging shows significant changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to prior images or observations indicating changes or stability in certain medical findings. This demonstrates that the model activates more strongly when comparisons highlighting differences, stability, or follow-ups based on previous imaging are present, particularly when they are significant or clinically relevant.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12306,latent_12306,1150,0.0023,0.001116171,3.1605844,Instructions to compare current with prior frontal images.,"Higher activation levels are associated with the pattern of instructing to compare current radiological images with prior frontal images, specifically including instructions to provide a description of findings based on this comparison. This pattern indicates a focus on comparative analysis across time points in the imaging.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12307,latent_12307,708,0.001416,0.0009739675,2.78046,Utilization of both frontal and lateral chest views in image comparisons.,"Highly activated examples typically involve descriptions from both frontal and lateral chest views, suggesting a pattern in reports that include these comprehensive imaging perspectives. High activations also align with reports that describe consistent, normal findings across these two views in contrast to prior studies, ensuring thorough evaluation.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.554667300662724,0.5621621621621622,0.5161290322580645,0.7529411764705882,85.0,100.0
+12308,latent_12308,4582,0.009164,0.003385078,1.5996037,Comparison and confirmation of findings in prior imaging.,"The pattern is evident in examples where analysis involves reevaluation or confirmation of findings in comparison to prior examinations, often described alongside specific changes or stability in particular findings such as opacities, effusions, or atelectasis. These examples highlight a comparison of distinct areas like the cardiomediastinal silhouette or lung bases with previous findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4669778832172648,0.4723618090452261,0.475,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+12309,latent_12309,577,0.001154,0.0008949486,2.0597706,"Unchanged findings compared to previous imaging, indicating stable condition.","These examples frequently mention findings that are noted to have 'no significant interval change' or remain 'unchanged' when compared to prior imaging. This indicates a pattern of stable or chronic conditions on radiological comparison, where findings do not reflect acute or progressive changes.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.8333333333333334,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5443956602198918,0.5755813953488372,0.4909090909090909,0.375,72.0,100.0
+12310,latent_12310,5368,0.010736,0.003875387,1.6426928,Comparative evaluation using current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal image.,"Examples with activations greater than zero consistently involve descriptions using frontal images, often in tandem with lateral images, along with comparisons to prior images. This pattern signifies the occurrence of pathologies primarily identified in the frontal view, corroborated by lateral imaging, forming a detailed comparative assessment of interval changes noted since a previous study.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12311,latent_12311,2555,0.00511,0.0020770887,1.8192942,Utilization of frontal and lateral image views in comparison descriptions.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings in the current imaging that are assessed in context with the prior images, specifically involving the utilization of both frontal and lateral views. The higher activation level indicates the significance of comparisons in terms of these specific imaging views rather than just having a prior comparison option.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4560100428915158,0.48,0.4859154929577465,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12312,latent_12312,418,0.000836,0.0007571356,3.5341809,Findings described as unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize findings described as 'unchanged' or 'stable' when compared to previous imaging. Radiology reports often indicate this stability to suggest that abnormalities are not worsening or new, which helps in evaluating disease progression or management efficacy.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4370212765957447,0.5102040816326531,0.2391304347826087,0.2291666666666666,48.0,99.0
+12313,latent_12313,398,0.000796,0.00082272623,2.2416005,Instructions to compare current findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently instruct to provide a comparison of the current radiology findings with prior imaging studies. These high-activation instructions imply the need for comparative analysis in determining changes or stability in patient conditions over time, which is often critical in medical diagnoses involving radiology.",0.4891304347826087,0.4893617021276595,0.4583333333333333,0.5,22.0,25.0,0.3852745160266582,0.3892617449664429,0.2613636363636363,0.4693877551020408,49.0,100.0
+12314,latent_12314,2009,0.004018,0.0022115076,2.0207345,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours without acute changes.,"The highly activated examples often involve detailed descriptions of clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, indicating a focus on normal baseline chest findings across multiple studies. These reviews highlight the normality in diverse conditions without acute changes, consistently suggesting no significant pathologies.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.75997599759976,0.76,0.7653061224489796,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12315,latent_12315,495,0.00099,0.0007353577,3.5826192,Focus on describing or comparing mild interstitial pulmonary edema.,"The examples with high activation levels highlight discussions of mild interstitial pulmonary edema that is often stable, unchanged, or requires further description, as noted through careful comparison. 'Interstitial pulmonary edema' is consistently mentioned across the highly activated examples as a finding needing attention or clarification within the context of the radiological study.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6437875988820994,0.70625,0.696969696969697,0.3833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+12316,latent_12316,1212,0.002424,0.0012659922,3.0078819,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior chest images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include detailed comparisons between current chest images and prior exams, focusing on changes or stability in pulmonary, cardiac, and skeletal findings. Lower activation levels seem to lack or provide minimal or irrelevant comparative details.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12317,latent_12317,709,0.001418,0.00085991435,2.1308289,Explicit description of interval change based on comparison to prior imaging.,"The activation levels suggest a pattern focused on ""comparison to prior"" studies where changes are noted in pathology, such as opacities, effusions, or hardware positions. High activation pairs situations where new developments, stability, or worsening in prior conditions are explicitly compared and described, indicating emphasis on interval changes.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.6666666666666666,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6084001782531194,0.6105263157894737,0.5930232558139535,0.5666666666666667,90.0,100.0
+12318,latent_12318,1469,0.002938,0.0013306089,2.64569,Focus on imaging changes related to prior surgical or medical history.,"Examples with higher activation levels often have findings discussed in relation to pre-existing conditions or post-surgical changes. Descriptions of changes or stability in conditions like pleural effusion, atelectasis, and pneumothorax associated with prior surgical intervention or clinical history are indicative of this pattern.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12319,latent_12319,840,0.00168,0.0011576692,4.0724545,Enlargement or prominence of pulmonary arteries.,"The examples that have high activation levels consistently describe enlargement or prominence of the pulmonary arteries, often associated with known or suggested pulmonary arterial hypertension. This observation, combined with findings of cardiomegaly or heart size, is a recurrent pattern in the high activation examples.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,1.0,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8266013871889024,0.83,0.9583333333333334,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12320,latent_12320,2120,0.00424,0.001880258,2.8600736,Analysis of interval change compared to prior radiograph.,"Examples with similar descriptions compare current imaging findings with prior radiographs, where terms like 'previously noted', 'unchanged', 'stable', 'resolved', or showing improvement of certain conditions are present. This comparison focuses on changes or stability over time, often regarding specific tubes, catheters, opacities, or other previously noted abnormalities.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12321,latent_12321,5901,0.011802,0.0041740574,2.2213335,"Temporal changes in imaging, often involving pneumothorax or devices.","The pattern observed in these examples points to sequential descriptions that mention changes or stability in imaging findings over time, especially focusing on aspects like pneumothorax, pulmonary opacities, and cardiomediastinal silhouette shifts, often involving medical devices. These sequential descriptions highlight an emphasis on temporal changes in patient condition as observed through radiological studies.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.5904761904761905,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12322,latent_12322,582,0.001164,0.0007860272,3.0729268,Describing changes by comparison with prior images.,"Higher activations are associated with reports that mention comparison to prior radiographs, typically identifying changes or stability in findings over time. This focus on interval change is integral to follow-up evaluations in radiology.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3626311844077961,0.3631284916201117,0.3157894736842105,0.379746835443038,79.0,100.0
+12323,latent_12323,484,0.000968,0.0007830727,2.583648,Presence of both frontal and lateral images in comparison context.,"The common factor across these examples with high activation is that the reports not only involve a frontal image for comparison but also a lateral image. This consistency in image pairing typically provides a more comprehensive evaluation, which the model likely uses as an indicative pattern.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4399350649350649,0.4409937888198758,0.3644859813084112,0.639344262295082,61.0,100.0
+12324,latent_12324,1693,0.003386,0.0014421932,2.155031,Descriptions of internal structures and devices compared to prior imaging findings.,"The pattern observed in these examples is the focus on providing descriptions of radiographic findings with respect to previous comparison studies. This typically includes specifics of change, or lack thereof, over time regarding radiological features.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12325,latent_12325,2209,0.004418,0.0016426439,1.6504802,Focus on current findings without comparison to prior image.,"Examples with higher activation contain instructions to provide a description of findings based on only the current images without any comparison with the prior image. This suggests that the task is to evaluate the current state alone rather than comparing with previous states, which might focus the examination on the immediate, visible details rather than changes over time.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.44,0.22,100.0,100.0
+12326,latent_12326,4044,0.008088,0.0030052743,1.5610685,Evaluation and comparison of medical devices and support equipment.,"These examples consistently reference the presence and condition of medical devices such as tubes, catheters, sternotomy wires, and other monitoring/support devices in the images. Phrases like 'unchanged', 'in correct location', 'interval placement', 'retraction', and specifics of tracheostomy or feeding tube placement indicate ongoing focus on device status.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5899589958995899,0.59,0.5918367346938775,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12327,latent_12327,753,0.001506,0.0009902619,2.5217767,Adjustment recommendations for medical device placements in imaging comparisons.,"In these examples, activation levels are higher when descriptions of imaging findings include adjustments to medical devices such as pulling back a lead, tube, or catheter. Such detailed notes on the positioning of medical apparatus and subsequent comparative changes likely trigger this pattern.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,1.0,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.403584229390681,0.5260416666666666,0.5384615384615384,0.0760869565217391,92.0,100.0
+12328,latent_12328,361,0.000722,0.00069055246,4.331005,Stable clear lungs with no acute findings in comparison reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the description of lung fields without acute findings—such as no focal consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary edema—in the context of their stability or comparison with prior imaging. These descriptions reflect typical reporting language for normal or stable findings in radiology reports.",0.6493506493506493,0.6666666666666666,0.6666666666666666,0.5,20.0,25.0,0.6043758043758044,0.6344827586206897,0.4333333333333333,0.5777777777777777,45.0,100.0
+12329,latent_12329,6513,0.013026,0.00461066,1.353694,Consistent comparison with prior imaging in findings descriptions.,"Examples show analysis reports where findings are systematically compared with prior images of patients. Terms like 'compared to the previous radiograph', 'as compared to the prior', and indication of previous examinations support this consistent pattern of comparison.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12330,latent_12330,3064,0.006128,0.0021588886,1.7391636,Emphasis on interval changes in imaging compared to previous studies.,"These examples frequently include a ""comparison"" clause, focusing on differences in clinical conditions or findings between current and prior imaging. They often denote a specific change in the patient's condition or imaging result.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12331,latent_12331,2475,0.00495,0.0018554432,1.2944074,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, noting interval changes.","These examples involve descriptions of radiological findings, particularly noting comparisons between current and prior imaging. Many examples focus on differences or stability between studies, such as tube positions, changes in lung conditions, or other specific changes after medical interventions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12332,latent_12332,414,0.000828,0.0006645823,4.640374,Evaluating tube placements or pneumothorax on chest imaging.,"The common pattern in examples with higher activation levels is the focus on evaluating and describing complications or significant findings related to tubes (e.g., Dobhoff, Pleurx catheter), pneumothorax, or other medical interventions (catheters, drains) visible in the images provided.",0.4508620689655172,0.4693877551020408,0.4375,0.2916666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.449673790776153,0.4635761589403973,0.3026315789473684,0.4509803921568627,51.0,100.0
+12333,latent_12333,2136,0.004272,0.0017972171,2.0702696,Detailed comparison with prior images in radiology reports.,"Samples with high activation contain explicit instructions to compare findings between current and prior images, and to describe those comparisons in detail. This focus on comparing and describing changes or stabilities between radiographs is key to understanding the recognized pattern associated with high activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12334,latent_12334,3191,0.006382,0.0024214445,2.2780166,Explicit mention of changes or updates since prior imaging.,"Activation levels are higher in examples that mention specific changes compared to previous reports or images, such as removal or insertion of medical devices or tubes, or specific alterations in findings relative to prior imaging studies, such as post-operative changes or intervals of improvement/worsening.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4778761061946903,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12335,latent_12335,842,0.001684,0.001211583,3.3079262,Comparative analysis of current imaging with prior studies.,"High activation examples focus on observations made by comparing the current study's images with prior ones, particularly noting changes or stability in lung conditions or pathologies. The pattern involves discussing differences, stability, or progression of findings based on such comparative assessments.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5209447415329769,0.57,0.5426829268292683,0.89,100.0,100.0
+12336,latent_12336,1206,0.002412,0.0009704919,2.9606032,Focus on changes in pathology when comparing current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently discuss findings in the current images against prior radiographs with a particular focus on identifying changes in pathologic findings, like improvement or progression in lung conditions or other abnormalities, while lower activations lack this detailed emphasis on changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4699469946994699,0.47,0.4693877551020408,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12337,latent_12337,624,0.001248,0.0008585887,2.208755,Focused description of findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons with prior imaging studies focusing on changes in findings between the current and previous images. These comparisons are noted in the findings and impressions sections of reports, indicating evaluation of interval change or stability of findings.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4555242245578057,0.4576271186440678,0.4144144144144144,0.5974025974025974,77.0,100.0
+12338,latent_12338,969,0.001938,0.0010347062,1.8329183,Detailed comparisons between current and prior images with significant changes.,The pattern across cases with high activation levels involves a detailed description of changes or comparisons between the current and prior radiograph when significant differences or changes are observed. Examples with extensive elaboration of interval changes in the context of specific conditions exhibit higher activation.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5178571428571429,0.29,100.0,100.0
+12339,latent_12339,4651,0.009302,0.003326841,1.6477158,Comparison with prior images evaluating changes in radiographic findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently reference comparisons with prior images, focusing on changes in findings like those related to clarity or consolidation in lungs, positions of tubes, or cardiac silhouette and aortic anatomy. These comparisons are pivotal in assessing the progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6022031823745411,0.61,0.5859375,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12340,latent_12340,4757,0.009514,0.00339518,2.1133645,Radiographic findings compared to previous studies.,"The pattern in highly activating examples is that the findings or impressions often identify specific changes or stability in radiographic features relative to a prior examination, involving soft conclusions based on previous data rather than isolated new findings. Patterns such as 'improved', 'increased', and 'unchanged' indicate this style of reporting which requires understanding trends over multiple examinations.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12341,latent_12341,3569,0.007138,0.0027143625,1.4780169,Detailed comparison with previous or different types of studies.,"All examples depict situations where the comparison is emphasized either with another type of imaging, a prior study at a precise time, or cross-modality comparisons to understand changes, stability, or technical adjustments in interpretation. This pattern highlights detailed temporal changes in clinical status relative to previous radiological findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12342,latent_12342,333,0.000666,0.00062293344,3.7384286,Use of multiple current and prior images for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on cases where multiple comparative images (frontal and lateral views) are provided, often in the context of evaluating interval changes or findings in relation to prior examinations. This scenario requires an assessment across different perspectives which aligns with detailed comparison-focused analysis in radiology.",0.3939393939393939,0.4318181818181818,0.4166666666666667,0.7894736842105263,19.0,25.0,0.4925550923168553,0.4929577464788732,0.34375,0.7857142857142857,42.0,100.0
+12343,latent_12343,838,0.001676,0.0008512904,1.8256596,"Description of interval changes or status evaluation regarding pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or respiratory findings.","Examples showing a high activation level emphasize findings of radiological changes, particularly in respiratory and cardiovascular systems. This pattern involves either new or stable findings compared to prior imaging, marked interval changes with health implications, or examination for evolving conditions indicated in the narrative.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5523809523809524,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12344,latent_12344,5818,0.011636,0.0040548667,1.1278987,Comparison with prior imaging studies showing interval change or stability.,"The consistent factor across examples with a higher activation level is the presence of comparison with prior imaging to show changes such as interval improvement, worsening, or unchanged findings. These entries include terms associated with change or stability over time, demonstrated through direct comparison to previous imaging.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12345,latent_12345,2573,0.005146,0.0019495221,2.0355675,Detailed image comparisons indicating specific analysis of radiological changes.,"Examples with high activations involve descriptions of changes or comparisons in radiographic observations, often with specific references to previous studies, indicating an analysis of subtle or detailed radiological findings in relation to known conditions or treatments.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12346,latent_12346,3402,0.006804,0.0024802044,1.2844586,Comparison of current image findings to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention providing descriptions that involve an explicit comparison between current and prior images using phrases like ""comparison to the prior frontal image."" This suggests a focus on detecting changes over time by comparing successive studies and identifying updates in the condition depicted on the images.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12347,latent_12347,768,0.001536,0.0009037821,2.3999534,Comparison with prior images focusing on stability or change.,"The distinguishing feature of these examples is the inclusion of comparisons between the current radiological findings and previous studies. The examples show descriptions explicitly stating comparison to earlier images or unchanged findings, emphasizing longitudinal assessment of patient's condition.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5805909200096084,0.5824742268041238,0.5575221238938053,0.6702127659574468,94.0,100.0
+12348,latent_12348,4891,0.009782,0.003430689,1.2103794,Comparison of current findings with previous radiological images.,"The high activation patterns are associated with explicit requests to compare the current findings to previous radiological images. This includes mentions of other specific imaging like CT, or references to intervals since the last imaging, indicating a pattern of continual assessment over time for any changes or consistency in presentation.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.51171875,0.55,0.532051282051282,0.83,100.0,100.0
+12349,latent_12349,901,0.001802,0.00102316,2.565661,Comparison of lung consolidation or effusion with past images.,"These examples involve descriptions of changes or a lack thereof in radiological findings between current and past images or identified consolidation and/or effusions. Reports often describe consolidation as new, unchanged, or improved, referencing specific lobes of the lungs.",0.6312709030100334,0.6326530612244898,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5584415584415584,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12350,latent_12350,3647,0.007294,0.0027275314,1.7458483,Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours on image comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention a systematic approach to evaluate the observations from multiple image types against prior studies, often highlighting heart size, mediastinal contours, or vascular structures as unremarkable or normal. In these cases, there is a focus on comparative evaluation but without new notable cardiopulmonary findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12351,latent_12351,3142,0.006284,0.0023103915,1.7141032,Detailed comparison of imaging findings with specified changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations involve detailed descriptions of imaging changes or stability of findings over time, typically marked by specific phrases or detailed analysis of radiological studies. The model exhibits high activation when the text involves technical comparison language and explicit structural or pathological descriptions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5945032665014642,0.595,0.5887850467289719,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12352,latent_12352,1409,0.002818,0.0012735866,2.370062,Task includes comparing current with prior images plus additional tasks.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature instructions to assess current imaging findings in comparison to prior images, alongside additional tasks unrelated to the prior comparison, such as image analysis steps or comprehensive report assembly, suggesting a distinct workflow activation. This contrasts with low activation examples that focus solely on the comparison aspect and do not involve generating complete findings reports.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4685314685314685,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12353,latent_12353,384,0.000768,0.00073845166,3.9271026,"Marked change, stability, or resolution in findings upon comparison with prior images.","This pattern refers to examples focusing on changes detected in sequential comparisons of imaging, often involving interval changes, resolution of previously seen issues, or stability of findings between comparisons, which is key in radiological pattern tracking rather than consistent description.",0.5804195804195804,0.5833333333333334,0.5517241379310345,0.6956521739130435,23.0,25.0,0.571344107213244,0.5862068965517241,0.3972602739726027,0.6444444444444445,45.0,100.0
+12354,latent_12354,3614,0.007228,0.0028028057,2.3936698,Interval asymmetric changes in lung aeration or opacities.,"Higher activated examples feature descriptions of asymmetric or differential changes in multiple regions of the lungs, including intervals where one area shows improvement while another shows deterioration. This pattern highlights complex combined findings rather than uniform observations across the lungs.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5012733446519525,0.53,0.5576923076923077,0.29,100.0,100.0
+12355,latent_12355,4912,0.009824,0.004658375,2.7531474,Focus on endotracheal tube position and monitoring devices.,"The examples displaying higher activation levels are focused on detecting and evaluating the position of monitoring and support devices, particularly endotracheal (ET) tubes, in comparison with prior images. This includes descriptions of changes in placement or additional detail on their positioning relative to anatomical landmarks, using phrases such as 'tip approximately x cm above the carina' or 'positioning of endotracheal tube'. These indicators suggest a pattern of interest in assessing ET tube placement.",0.88,0.88,0.88,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8746207277012964,0.875,0.9213483146067416,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12356,latent_12356,1541,0.003082,0.0014537489,2.300606,Detailed comparative description of chest x-ray findings.,"These examples often discuss and describe the chest x-ray findings in the current image in comparison to the prior image. The task often entails evaluating the cardiovascular or pulmonary status, with varied emphases such as heart size, presence of effusions, or new infiltrates, paired with providing interval changes if any.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12357,latent_12357,5045,0.01009,0.003690414,1.9668014,Comparison indicating stable or unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"The samples show activation mostly when findings in the radiology study are compared directly to prior imaging, using language such as 'unchanged', 'no relevant change', or indicating stability from the previous examination. This pattern reflects the importance of highlighting stability or lack of change in radiological features across sequential studies.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.56,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12358,latent_12358,715,0.00143,0.00085514545,2.6275291,Focus on interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves providing a description of radiological findings with a focus on identifying interval changes compared with prior radiographs, often stated with explicit comparison to prior state or study results. Examples with higher activation often include terms describing changes over time such as 'interval change', 'as compared to previous', or indicating the presence of prior studies for comparison.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5233511586452764,0.5235602094240838,0.5,0.5274725274725275,91.0,100.0
+12359,latent_12359,1214,0.002428,0.0011296264,3.2748249,Pattern relates to comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference comparison to prior images or studies, indicating that the pattern recognized by the model is related to making comparisons with previous medical imaging to assess changes, stability, or progression in the findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12360,latent_12360,982,0.001964,0.0010449903,2.2137084,Evaluation of device/tube position or pathology changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels exhibit a pattern of evaluating changes related to the placement and positioning of medical devices or tubes (PICC lines, NG tubes, endotracheal tubes) as well as interval changes in pathologies (e.g., pleural effusions) through comparisons with prior imaging studies. This often involves detailed descriptions of movements, improvements, or deteriorations noted from one study to the next.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5194805194805194,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12361,latent_12361,5485,0.01097,0.0039366107,1.1727501,Evaluation of imaging findings with reference to prior images for stability or changes.,"These examples all involve a comparison between current and prior imaging findings where specific findings are either unchanged or have progressed over time. This pattern involves the process of evaluating medical images with regard to changes or stability using comparative language, dates of examinations, and noting stability, progression, or resolution of findings.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12362,latent_12362,445,0.00089,0.00071964,5.170841,Comparative analysis of chronic conditions or procedural changes over time.,"These examples all describe findings in chest radiographic studies, but the activation levels are higher particularly when specific conditions or diseases are compared between current and prior imaging. Updated identification of chronic conditions or procedures in the text enhances the likelihood of activation, as seen in phrases related to changes over time, or to postoperative states.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4311594202898551,0.4394904458598726,0.3697478991596639,0.7719298245614035,57.0,100.0
+12363,latent_12363,1535,0.00307,0.001463635,2.0021272,Lung hypoinflation and associated vascular crowding.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe changes or features of the cardiac silhouette, lung volumes, or vasculature that manifest as a response to pulmonary conditions, especially hypoinflation, which is associated with vascular crowding and other related phenomena. Hypoinflation leads to accentuated cardiomediastinal representation or vascular changes being highlighted in the findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5320855614973261,0.58,0.7222222222222222,0.26,100.0,100.0
+12364,latent_12364,5431,0.010862,0.003797074,1.406096,Detailed comparison of changes in radiological findings over time.,"Examples showing activation include comparison between current and prior images in the context of notable findings like tube placement changes, pneumothorax, atelectasis, or cardiac silhouette enlargement. These reports emphasize detailed evaluation of changes over time as seen in radiographs.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.6153846153846154,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12365,latent_12365,774,0.001548,0.0010737571,2.5317895,Comparison of current and prior imaging for interval changes.,"The highest activation levels correspond to cases where there's a comparison of current and prior imaging studies. These often include changes or stability in specific findings, suggesting the task is focused on interpreting differences between sequential imaging, which aligns with the pattern of assessing interval changes over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5565589998101592,0.5786802030456852,0.5486111111111112,0.8144329896907216,97.0,100.0
+12366,latent_12366,1237,0.002474,0.0011817456,2.2877011,Comparative analysis involving frontal and lateral images in radiology reports.,"This pattern primarily focuses on the evaluation of radiological findings through a comparative lens, particularly emphasizing the consistency or change across temporal radiological studies specifically concerning views from different angles such as frontal or lateral. The activation is higher when there is a mention of comparing findings with both current and prior frontal or lateral images, reflecting a deeper comparative diagnostic process in radiology.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4806594144854138,0.4924623115577889,0.4923076923076923,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+12367,latent_12367,1636,0.003272,0.0014282262,2.0258818,Detailed comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"The consistently high activations are associated with comprehensive analysis and comparisons of the findings with prior imaging. This includes changes or the stability of observed medical conditions over time (e.g., unchanged pneumothorax, stable vasculature changes). Lower activations correspond to the lack of detailed comparisons or when no comparison or historical context is available or warranted.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5793269230769231,0.58,0.5869565217391305,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12368,latent_12368,5538,0.011076,0.0038932746,1.1599998,Comparison of medical device positioning between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels describe specific interval changes or stability in medical devices and tube placements in radiological findings, such as Dobbhoff tube positioning or PICC line placements. This pattern involves assessing the positioning and condition of medical devices between current and prior examinations.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12369,latent_12369,1855,0.00371,0.0015071181,1.9478607,Integration of multiple image perspectives with diagnostic context.,These examples involve the integration of multiple image perspectives (frontal and lateral) with references to patient history or prior reports indicative of an acute or chronic condition that is being monitored via imaging changes over time. The integration of multi-view images or previous reports within a diagnostic framework enables a more comprehensive understanding of progression or stability in patient conditions.,0.2989597467209407,0.38,0.4285714285714285,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3906359189378057,0.455,0.4727272727272727,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12370,latent_12370,2356,0.004712,0.0019190365,2.6332946,Stable or improved findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples showing moderate activation levels often include conditions where findings are mildly stable, improved, or unchanged with relevance and detailed comparisons with prior imaging, but no significant acute or life-threatening changes. Activation may represent the confirmed stability of existing conditions or minor improvements, hence they do not require urgent action.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.5189873417721519,0.41,100.0,100.0
+12371,latent_12371,779,0.001558,0.0009117674,2.4894457,Descriptions comparing current findings to multiple prior radiographs.,"The high-activation examples feature descriptions of radiology studies where explicit comparisons were made to multiple prior studies spanning a timeline, often noting how current findings align with or differ from previous observations across time. This indicates a focus on progressive changes or stabilities documented over multiple examinations.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5169227574750831,0.5252525252525253,0.527027027027027,0.3979591836734694,98.0,100.0
+12372,latent_12372,4701,0.009402,0.0033213336,1.5528011,Emphasis on stability or lack of significant interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation involve direct or nuanced reference to changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging. Often, stability implies a non-progressive, potentially benign condition. This tends to be conveyed via wording like 'unchanged', 'stable', or noting lack of interval change.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5842696629213483,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12373,latent_12373,1713,0.003426,0.001598817,3.1438594,Comparison highlights change or significance in findings.,"The pattern in the samples with higher activation is due to comparisons with prior images that reveal significant or subtle changes in the medical condition being observed. The radiology reports highlight findings such as changes in opacity, vessel dilation, or the status of medical devices, which are critical for assessing progression or stability of conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4839550088930083,0.485,0.4835164835164835,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12374,latent_12374,5039,0.010078,0.0035939463,1.1528604,Comparison to prior chest imaging showing changes or stability in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on comparative analysis between current and prior imaging, demonstrating changes such as new opacities, consolidation, or improvement or stability in pathology, often concluding with recommendations based on these comparisons. Common phrases used include 'in comparison with', 'new since', and 'unchanged from'.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12375,latent_12375,607,0.001214,0.0008125912,2.3424597,Findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples involve the mention of prior imaging studies for direct comparison, particularly focusing on describing changes or stability over time. The pattern highlights a common diagnostic approach in radiology reports where imaging studies are compared in context to their prior instances to note progression or stability of clinical features.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5217611336032388,0.5333333333333333,0.484375,0.775,80.0,100.0
+12376,latent_12376,3499,0.006998,0.0026079766,1.7786881,Focus on device placement and positioning in radiographic analysis.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to medical devices or interventions observed in the images and their placements, like tubes, lines, or implants. This pattern suggests a focus on evaluating these elements during radiographic interpretation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4868421052631579,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12377,latent_12377,3502,0.007004,0.0034729615,4.9470377,Esophageal post-operative changes and status monitoring.,"The examples with high activation levels mention specific post-operative changes or conditions related to the esophagus, such as esophagectomy. They often indicate monitoring changes over time due to complex procedures. Lower activation examples focus on general lung or cardiac findings without such specific esophageal references.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.64349376114082,0.68,1.0,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12378,latent_12378,1332,0.002664,0.0012922542,2.82612,Requests for assessing interval change due to ongoing conditions.,"Examples with activation levels above zero consistently involve either direct or indirect requests to evaluate for changes compared to previous imaging studies, often due to ongoing clinical conditions or interventions. This pattern involves a direct request or a clear indication for monitoring changes in existing conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5242718446601942,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12379,latent_12379,659,0.001318,0.0009490577,3.8416688,"Lungs appear clear without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","The examples with the highest activations describe findings where the lungs are clear of any focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax. This pattern in radiology reports suggests a stable and unremarkable observation in the lungs, often indicated by terms like 'clear', which signify no acute or unexpected pathology in lung evaluations.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7482022632860621,0.7486631016042781,0.717391304347826,0.7586206896551724,87.0,100.0
+12380,latent_12380,1767,0.003534,0.0016669087,2.3437736,Focus on unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples primarily reference the use of prior imaging for comparison, often focusing on unchanged findings. Stability or lack of change in particular areas such as cardiac silhouettes or certain pathologies is highlighted, using phrases like 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change', or specific indications that findings are constant over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5058823529411764,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12381,latent_12381,376,0.000752,0.0007692218,3.581137,Comparisons involving liver-related conditions or procedures.,"Examples describe comparing new imaging findings with prior studies, especially in patients with liver-related conditions indicated by mentions of 'liver transplant', 'liver disease', or 'liver failure'. These examples focus on stabilization or changes in liver-related patients’ medical imaging over time, suggesting hepatic issues are central to the pattern.",0.7696078431372549,0.7872340425531915,1.0,0.5454545454545454,22.0,25.0,0.7051597051597052,0.7916666666666666,0.8571428571428571,0.4,45.0,99.0
+12382,latent_12382,580,0.00116,0.0008048124,1.9153874,Comparisons showing clear interval changes or procedural updates.,"Highly activated examples frequently involve the explicit presence of 'comparison' sections containing specific prior imaging references indicating recent procedural updates, intervention changes, or treatment effects. This pattern highlights the relevance of tracking procedural or treatment-induced anatomical changes over short intervals.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5748083483108976,0.5892857142857143,0.4927536231884058,0.5,68.0,100.0
+12383,latent_12383,3531,0.007062,0.0026342457,1.7650281,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette with specific other findings noted.,"The examples with high activation demonstrate a pattern of specific imaging findings being discussed alongside a normal or stable cardiomediastinal silhouette. This suggests that as long as the heart and mediastinal structures appear normal, other findings can be highlighted. This matches the pattern in radiology of identifying specific problems while reporting unremarkable mediastinal conditions.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4677419354838709,0.29,100.0,100.0
+12384,latent_12384,4194,0.008388,0.0030935577,1.453077,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette with additional findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on cardiomediastinal silhouette changes, specifically highlighting stability or absence of significant change compared to previous imaging studies in combination with other pathological findings. They commonly describe stable cardiac silhouette or contours amid various other radiological details.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5339333175442751,0.5527638190954773,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,99.0
+12385,latent_12385,948,0.001896,0.000973723,2.0772223,Simultaneous comparison of current frontal and lateral chest images with prior images.,"The pattern that stands out in high activation examples involves explicit descriptions of medical devices or conditions, imaged in both frontal and lateral views, with status or changes evaluated in the context of previous or current radiographs. This is consistent with detailed assessments of complex clinical scenarios where multiple views and comparisons are critical.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4893071000855432,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+12386,latent_12386,487,0.000974,0.0008098378,2.995708,Description of minimal or no change in findings.,"The frequent use of the term 'little change' or 'unchanged', especially in relation to the heart, lungs, or devices, is a key indicator of stable conditions or minimal progression of findings in medical imaging reports. This phrase pattern is consistently found in examples with higher activations.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6644797777091696,0.6645962732919255,0.5339805825242718,0.9016393442622952,61.0,100.0
+12387,latent_12387,922,0.001844,0.0010411744,2.170484,"Comparison of current chest images to prior, evaluating changes in cardiopulmonary findings.","The pattern in these examples involve comparison to prior imaging studies, focusing on changes to the cardiomediastinal silhouette, heart size, or presence of pleural effusions or opacities. Reports highlight observations such as no change, interval development, or improvement of pre-existing conditions, often in acute or chronic conditions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4796747967479675,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12388,latent_12388,2481,0.004962,0.0019242552,1.998985,"Observations and changes in portable chest radiographs, often regarding medical devices.","The examples with higher activation levels reference specific changes or observations in portable or bedside chest radiographs, particularly in the context of monitoring medical devices or lines such as catheters and tubes, common in critical care settings. The task seems to focus on comparing these findings with previous images or noting changes in portable imaging situations often related to patient positioning, acute events, or device status.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4897959183673469,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12389,latent_12389,5785,0.01157,0.0040816055,1.4681671,Notable interval changes and comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of comparison with prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability in findings over time. This pattern indicates the model is sensitive to situations where ongoing changes are noted between sequential radiological assessments, such as the insertion/removal of tubes or other interval changes well described due to reference of prior imaging changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12390,latent_12390,650,0.0013,0.00082833885,2.1759956,Descriptions of findings when no prior study comparison exists.,"These examples involve providing descriptions comparing findings from current radiology studies with prior imaging, but with explicit mention when no comparable studies exist. The high activation is tied to the ability to offer findings without previous study comparisons, using words like 'None' or 'No prior'. This pattern indicates an emphasis on standalone assessments despite requests for comparative analysis.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6476060191518468,0.657608695652174,0.6521739130434783,0.5357142857142857,84.0,100.0
+12391,latent_12391,2867,0.005734,0.0021897675,1.8216382,Evaluation compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples demonstrate that the pattern typically involves references to previous imaging studies for comparison, where findings are evaluated relative to prior examinations across various contexts including follow-up for medical procedures, disease monitoring, or progression evaluations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.565,0.5419354838709678,0.84,100.0,100.0
+12392,latent_12392,3473,0.006946,0.0024889496,1.9709724,Comparisons focusing on interval changes in tube or device positions.,"These examples typically involve comparisons with prior imaging studies, especially to evaluate for interval changes such as tube placements or disease progression, and often describe positioning or shift observed in support or monitoring devices such as tubes, catheters, or lines. Transitions or actions on devices like 'placement', 'removal', or 'advancement' frequently appear in reports with positive activations.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.58,0.66,0.33,100.0,100.0
+12393,latent_12393,2066,0.004132,0.0018621978,2.8452637,Procedural or follow-up assessment with imaging comparison.,"Examples with high activation involve instances where radiological findings are compared to previous studies, many of which also describe patient indicators suggesting complex, multi-system evaluations. Additionally, these examples involve procedural or follow-up assessments where specific findings are unchanged or progressively assessed, often involving medical imaging discussed intra-procedure or post-procedure, such as tube placements or surgery evaluations. These reports entail detailed clinical procedural contexts or consecutive clinical imaging, not just static observation.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12394,latent_12394,2130,0.00426,0.0017613708,1.9306717,"Detailed comparison with prior images, emphasizing interval changes or stability.","Higher activation levels are associated with detailed comparisons with previous images, including references to specific changes or stability in findings over time. This correlates to thorough evaluations which directly address interval changes or confirmations in medical conditions based on prior imaging, reflecting the model's preference for comprehensive temporal analysis.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12395,latent_12395,394,0.000788,0.000781027,2.9535735,Detailed assessments and comparisons of imaging findings to prior procedures or studies.,"Examples with high activation levels reference a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior frontal images, use specific imaging descriptions, and compare with prior procedures or studies, indicating a focus on detailed assessment and changes over time. This pattern is consistent with comprehensive radiological reviews tracking patient progress or changes.",0.4170040485829959,0.4375,0.4411764705882353,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.4256494544126376,0.4256756756756756,0.3168316831683168,0.6666666666666666,48.0,100.0
+12396,latent_12396,4278,0.008556,0.0031544534,1.5767202,Frequent and direct comparison of current findings to prior images.,"The provided examples with high activation levels describe radiological findings primarily using explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies through direct linguistic patterns like 'compared to previous', 'stable since prior', or specific previous images/dates, making comparisons the focus of the report.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6233915681556648,0.64,0.5985915492957746,0.85,100.0,100.0
+12397,latent_12397,506,0.001012,0.00075122033,2.9626281,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The radiology reports with higher activation levels detail specific changes in the appearance or positioning of medical devices, consolidation, or other pathologies, as compared to prior images. These examples tend to focus on detailing interval changes or stability in medical interventions or findings, which is less often seen in lower activation reports.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5900462962962962,0.5900621118012422,0.4752475247524752,0.7868852459016393,61.0,100.0
+12398,latent_12398,4892,0.009784,0.0034156933,1.5102992,Comparison of findings against prior images for stability or change.,"The observed pattern is comments comparing the current radiological findings with prior imaging, explicitly looking for stability or changes, which is common in tracking progression or resolution of diseases or conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5753715498938429,0.595,0.5664335664335665,0.81,100.0,100.0
+12399,latent_12399,3768,0.007536,0.0027985678,1.7857656,"Comparison with previous studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels often contain a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability in findings which could be indicative of a disease's progression or resolution. They frequently reference previous reports or findings and the context of any changes or stability noted.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.5572519083969466,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12400,latent_12400,323,0.000646,0.00057121983,2.857785,"Tasks involving detailed comparison with prior imaging, indicated by 'PRIOR_REPORT' text.","The high activation levels correspond to examples where the task involves comparing current and prior radiological images and providing explicit changes or states, particularly when the 'PRIOR_REPORT' text is included and significant changes or stability are noted in findings. This is indicative of a pattern where comparison tasks are more emphasized.",0.4604473540643753,0.4651162790697674,0.4137931034482758,0.6666666666666666,18.0,25.0,0.4372294372294372,0.4428571428571428,0.2790697674418604,0.6,40.0,100.0
+12401,latent_12401,5525,0.01105,0.0040780413,1.5268624,Descriptions of stable or improving features compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often highlight specific findings and then compare these with prior imaging, focusing on stability, changes, or improvements of particular features like opacities, nodules, or potential consolidations. This pattern indicates the model likely focuses on how these specific findings appear stable or improved when compared to past images, which is a typical radiological commentary.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5172413793103449,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12402,latent_12402,3314,0.006628,0.0024873288,2.0008445,Descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior images focusing on stability or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to focus on providing descriptions of findings in the radiology study in comparison with prior imaging studies, particularly highlighting stability or changes in findings such as pneumothorax, consolidation, atelectasis, and other conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5675675675675675,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12403,latent_12403,1992,0.003984,0.0016662456,1.7604946,Detailed evaluation of interval changes or consistency between current and prior images.,"The condition of portable imaging compared to prior studies is key. More specifically, the pattern among examples with high activation presents consistent examination of changes, notably using phrases like ""remove"",""interval changes"", or ""stable from prior,"" indicating close analysis of progression over time. This suggests high activation examples engage in close scrutiny for observing consistency or changes in serial imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.5725190839694656,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12404,latent_12404,441,0.000882,0.0007566643,2.579397,Imaging findings described as stable compared to previous studies.,"In these examples, radiological findings are described as stable or unchanged upon comparison with prior studies, especially in relation to findings like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or pulmonary congestion. This pattern indicates standard report wording when noting stability of observed pathologies over time.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5345701399544335,0.577922077922078,0.3962264150943396,0.3888888888888889,54.0,100.0
+12405,latent_12405,3353,0.006706,0.0024729606,1.6984062,Explicit comparison to prior imaging in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation values focus on radiological assessments that involve a direct comparison between current and prior imaging, while those with low values typically lack such a comparison. Phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'compared to the prior frontal image', and 'since the prior' indicate explicit comparative language in the reports.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4941164137641848,0.5125628140703518,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,99.0
+12406,latent_12406,4825,0.00965,0.0034466526,1.588048,Description of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation predominantly focus on radiological comparisons over time, specifically descriptions of findings that have changed or remained stable in comparison to previous examinations. This involves explicit mentions of interval changes or stability of diagnostic imaging findings.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12407,latent_12407,3475,0.00695,0.0025840055,1.4174862,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern is that the assistant is required to provide a description of current imaging findings compared to prior imaging studies. This pattern emerges clearly from the activation levels, where examples with a requirement to compare current and prior imaging consistently have higher activations.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12408,latent_12408,499,0.000998,0.00078789407,3.299007,Unchanged cardiomediastinal findings compared to prior images.,"High activation levels are associated with unchanged cardiac and mediastinal findings when compared to prior reports. Many examples explicitly state 'unchanged heart size' or 'unaltered mediastinal contours' compared to previous images, which is a key aspect of the reports that lead to higher activation.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4066515495086923,0.4904458598726114,0.2195121951219512,0.1578947368421052,57.0,100.0
+12409,latent_12409,1048,0.002096,0.0010104654,2.926216,Comparison of image findings with prior device position or status.,"These examples often include specifications of previous studies for comparison, especially regarding the position and status of monitoring devices like lines or tubes, or stable/unfolding thoracic anatomical features. Relevant correlations are often about maintaining devices' stable positions or other notation of monitoring equipment.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4727272727272727,0.26,100.0,100.0
+12410,latent_12410,1599,0.003198,0.0014772061,2.499137,"Descriptions comparing current radiology studies to prior images, especially including lateral views.","The examples with higher activation levels involve references to findings, descriptions, or changes in the chest radiograph when compared to prior images, especially when a lateral view is included. Phrases like 'compared to previous radiograph', 'provide a description in comparison', and specific descriptions of findings or changes indicate this pattern.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4999499949995,0.5,0.5,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12411,latent_12411,1379,0.002758,0.0013831569,1.9186054,Direction to compare current and prior images.,The presence of phrases such as 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image' indicates that these samples are structured to evaluate and describe findings with or without prior comparison imaging. This structure seems to be a distinct representation pattern for the model's activation.,0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4519170333123822,0.455,0.4608695652173913,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12412,latent_12412,1486,0.002972,0.001295268,2.0964925,Normal or moderate heart size with stable mediastinal and hilar contours.,"The highly activated samples focus on the mention of heart size, particularly when described as 'moderate' or 'normal'. They also emphasize stable or unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours, suggesting that the pattern involves the description of cardiac and mediastinal stability or normality despite other changes or findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5125135742606763,0.5125628140703518,0.5102040816326531,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+12413,latent_12413,538,0.001076,0.00079657143,2.9999483,Reference to calcified aortic arch in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation often reference findings specific to the calcification in the aortic arch along with descriptions of cardiac and mediastinal contours, despite some radiographs appearing normal otherwise. This consistent observation pattern emphasizes calcified aortic arch as an indicative feature across various scenarios.",0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.578046511627907,0.6785714285714286,0.8888888888888888,0.2352941176470588,68.0,100.0
+12414,latent_12414,2726,0.005452,0.0019706213,1.7996447,Identification of changes in medical device placement or tube positions on radiographs.,"These examples consistently highlight changes, insertions, or improvements in medical devices or tubes such as NG tubes, chest tubes, pacemakers, etc., when compared to previous radiographs. Phrases like 'as compared to previous' along with details about placement or adjustment of such devices are common.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5078193220608082,0.535,0.5660377358490566,0.3,100.0,100.0
+12415,latent_12415,789,0.001578,0.0010016356,4.0763397,Comparisons between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently compare current and prior radiology images, suggesting a pattern focused on evaluating changes over time between different imaging studies. These comparisons highlight changes or confirm stability in the findings of interest, frequently involving references like 'prior image', 'comparison', or dates of previous studies.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3837072018890201,0.4141414141414141,0.4375,0.6428571428571429,98.0,100.0
+12416,latent_12416,491,0.000982,0.00079293957,3.3646748,Detailed comparison to prior images with changes or stability noted.,"Examples with high activation levels often provide a description of the findings in the radiology study while explicitly indicating comparison to prior frontal image(s), and it includes noted changes or stability in findings from previous imaging (e.g., 'stable mild cardiomegaly', 'unchanged from prior', 'interval improvement'). This differs from lower activation examples where comparison details are vaguer or missing.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4377777777777777,0.4424242424242424,0.3411764705882353,0.4461538461538462,65.0,100.0
+12417,latent_12417,482,0.000964,0.00075410237,3.1304817,Comparison of current imaging study to prior to assess acute changes.,"These examples consistently show comparison of a current imaging study to a prior one, detailing changes or stability in findings with emphasis on acute conditions or unchanged status indicated in the comparisons. This approach is common in radiology for tracking the progression or resolution of conditions over time.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4220034742327736,0.422360248447205,0.3461538461538461,0.5901639344262295,61.0,100.0
+12418,latent_12418,2380,0.00476,0.0018583597,1.5671281,Radiology findings involve comparison with prior indicating stability or change.,"The high-activation examples consistently describe a radiology finding comparison involving pre-existing conditions or devices. They compare current chest radiographs with prior ones, noting stability or changes, or the presence of devices like pacemakers. This pattern highlights the focus on observing continuity or alterations over time through established markers.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12419,latent_12419,822,0.001644,0.0010686567,2.2620165,Reports emphasize 'no significant interval change' on comparison with prior studies.,"The pattern identified relates to comparison of current and prior imaging studies to assess for changes or stability. It's evident in examples with high activation levels that explicitly describe and conclude with 'no interval change' or comparable phrases, highlighting stable conditions as a focal point of the assessment.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,1.0,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.6289424860853432,0.655,0.8297872340425532,0.39,100.0,100.0
+12420,latent_12420,6915,0.01383,0.004926456,1.0804757,References to comparison with previous radiographs or studies.,"These samples consistently refer to previous radiographic studies or images for comparison. This is a common pattern in radiological assessments to establish stability, improvement, or progression of findings, using terms like 'as compared to', 'interval change', or explicit mention of prior images.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4425770308123249,0.4723618090452261,0.4794520547945205,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+12421,latent_12421,418,0.000836,0.00067280175,3.696307,Adjustment and placement of medical tubes or lines.,"These examples highlight the positioning and adjustment needed for various medical tubes and lines, such as endotracheal, nasogastric, enteric tubes, or PICC lines. This pattern is common in radiological exams involving ICU or post-operative patients, emphasizing the importance of line and tube placement in imaging interpretations.",0.6466165413533835,0.6595744680851063,0.6875,0.5,22.0,25.0,0.6808986752595775,0.7032258064516129,0.576271186440678,0.6181818181818182,55.0,100.0
+12422,latent_12422,698,0.001396,0.00084444374,2.619299,Comparison with prior images highlighting changes.,"The pattern found in these examples involves cases where comparison with prior imaging is explicitly requested or included in the assessment, usually indicated by terms like 'compared to', 'prior', or 'previous'. Additionally, the observations of change, stability, or worsening of conditions between current and prior images are what receive high activation.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4617510221344988,0.4656084656084656,0.4285714285714285,0.4044943820224719,89.0,100.0
+12423,latent_12423,1542,0.003084,0.0013180391,2.2679791,Evaluation of stable position of tubes or catheters.,"Activation levels are high in examples where stable structures or findings are evaluated, specifically those showing consistent positioning or unchanged status of tubes, catheters, or other chest devices relative to prior images. This reflects a pattern concerned with the evaluation of stability and positional accuracy of medical devices in radiology imaging.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.532258064516129,0.33,100.0,100.0
+12424,latent_12424,2689,0.005378,0.0021111218,3.062886,Changes due to medical interventions or interventions related findings.,"The activation levels suggest the importance of explicit, noticeable changes due to medical interventions like extubation, thoracentesis, or changes in conditions like pneumothorax. Reports detailing specific alterations related to medical procedures, including tube placements, pleural effusion resolutions, or changes in lung opacification due to interventions, are more representative of the pattern observed.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.6,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12425,latent_12425,5243,0.010486,0.003794421,1.4405957,"Assessment of image in context with prior studies, noting stable or unchanged findings.","Examples with higher activation consistently describe findings in relation to a prior radiograph, usually involving stable or known changes. This is evident in reports discussing comparisons such as 'stable', 'no new', 'compared to previous', and descriptions of interval change on a previous study. The pattern relates to recognizing ongoing or stable conditions rather than acute changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12426,latent_12426,780,0.00156,0.0010033277,2.5614944,Multiple view (frontal and lateral) image comparisons leading to detailed evaluations.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently request or include descriptions based on both frontal and lateral images. They emphasize the comprehensive evaluations enabled by multiple view comparisons, while low activation examples often restrict the comparison to a single view and contain vague or incomplete indications, possibly leading to limited evaluations.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5899347623485555,0.5959595959595959,0.5725806451612904,0.7244897959183674,98.0,100.0
+12427,latent_12427,6530,0.01306,0.0046259407,1.4299328,Persisting or unchanged findings when comparing current and prior radiographic studies.,"Most examples with higher activation levels describe significant findings when comparing current radiographs to prior studies, using language that indicates either unchanged or resolved findings compared to previous examinations. Indications often focus on unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes or ongoing pulmonary conditions like atelectasis or effusions that persist while excluding acute changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3974861739567621,0.595,0.5961538461538461,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12428,latent_12428,3583,0.007166,0.0026991805,1.969839,Comparison with prior imaging highlights change or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize clear comparison with prior studies, noting changes, or stability, such as unchanged or new findings in the current imaging when directly compared to the prior imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12429,latent_12429,694,0.001388,0.0008982504,2.7313602,Stability or change in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The pattern involves describing the stability or change of findings compared to previous imaging. Reports typically have explicit comparisons indicating stability or change, often assessed with standard terminology and image date references. Representative examples include unchanged findings or improvements noted in follow-up examinations.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5340022935779817,0.544973544973545,0.5116279069767442,0.7415730337078652,89.0,100.0
+12430,latent_12430,1837,0.003674,0.0016435065,2.1670651,Instructions for comparative description of current vs prior imaging.,"These examples consistently involve instructions to describe or compare imaging findings relative to a prior image, focusing on details such as catheter placements, lung changes, effusions, or changes in opacities. Such focused comparisons between current and prior images, followed by a detailed discussion of the differences, is characteristic of these samples with high activation levels.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4910941475826972,0.54,0.5246913580246914,0.85,100.0,100.0
+12431,latent_12431,406,0.000812,0.00071953057,3.8247201,Comparison with previous images noting stability or changes.,"High activation levels occur when reports reference comparison with prior imaging and note specific changes, or describe unchanged conditions, indicating stability. Reports detailing unchanged findings or lack of notable progression align with high activation.",0.5006645990252547,0.5306122448979592,0.5135135135135135,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5471112126056177,0.5472972972972973,0.4077669902912621,0.875,48.0,100.0
+12432,latent_12432,1209,0.002418,0.0010857711,2.2190056,Stability in anatomical or device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation generally emphasize the stable appearance of cardiomediastinal silhouettes or other structures such as tubes, lines, or opacities when compared to prior imaging. This stability in anatomical appearance, particularly when explicitly noted in the findings after comparing with earlier images, correlates with the observed pattern behind the activations.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4472917294744247,0.45,0.4418604651162791,0.38,100.0,100.0
+12433,latent_12433,4336,0.008672,0.003139607,1.8355219,Report on changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels (3 or above) mention changes in findings when comparing the current imaging study to a prior examination, such as changes in the position of medical devices (e.g., NG tubes) or increases in opacification. These specific changes in findings between the current and prior imaging are significant indicators that the model is looking for when determining activation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12434,latent_12434,1119,0.002238,0.00137367,4.3476214,Reference to interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,The more representative examples reference changes or intervals in imaging studies when compared to previous scans. This pattern highlights the importance of tracking interval changes or consistency over time in patient condition or pathology.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4495045540986888,0.45,0.4528301886792453,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12435,latent_12435,1250,0.0025,0.0011905468,2.267148,Stable or improved findings compared to prior imaging.,"Analysis of the examples with high activation levels indicates a pattern of descriptions that provide continuity of findings, changes, or improvements compared to previous medical imaging reports. Changes such as improvement in conditions (e.g., resolved pneumonias or reduced pleural effusions) or stability in certain medical indicators in comparison to past studies are noted as significant.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5172413793103449,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12436,latent_12436,893,0.001786,0.0011869398,2.8800974,Comparison for findings related to medical device placement.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, specifically focusing on the stability or change in medical devices, such as tubes, lines, or catheters, and their positioning or placement. These examples mention evaluation of device status or changes in condition that could impact device-associated care.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12437,latent_12437,3464,0.006928,0.0026682573,1.8577213,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on thoracic stability or change.,"The examples with higher activations focus on the comparison of current radiological findings with prior studies, specifically evaluating changes or consistencies in thoracic regions. These often include discussions about consolidation, cardiomediastinal silhouette, and other thoracic structures. These reports frequently include some level of comparisons regarding certain conditions or findings being unchanged, which is a typical aspect of distinguishing stability or progression in a patient's health condition.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12438,latent_12438,1482,0.002964,0.0013199131,1.803253,Changes or stability in patient condition through comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe procedures or situations where findings are contrasted with prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability over time. They describe comparisons within a context, such as specific medical indications, but still emphasize comparison to prior states, in contrast to examples with lower activation which don't highlight interval change.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4390044879640963,0.45,0.4609375,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12439,latent_12439,2440,0.00488,0.0020030828,3.6594822,Explicit comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies or baseline.,"Higher activations are associated with clear comparisons made to prior imaging, as indicated by phrases like 'compared to the previous radiograph' or 'in comparison with study of', which are used to assess change over time. The lower activation examples lack these expressions or focus on new findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12440,latent_12440,2842,0.005684,0.002215637,1.3218989,Emphasis on interval changes based on comparisons to previous imaging.,"The examples highlighted display a common focus on comparisons to prior imaging studies, particularly to detect changes, like the resolution of effusions or interval changes in lung opacities, indicating a sensitivity to detecting temporal changes in medical imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4873949579831932,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12441,latent_12441,1524,0.003048,0.0014391489,1.8057075,Explicit observation of interval changes in comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation contain observations of interval changes when comparing current and prior images, using explicit language to note changes such as 'interval progression', 'unchanged', or 'similar to previous'. They often involve a specific focus on temporal differences between imaging studies regarding anatomical or disease progression.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.55,0.55,0.55,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12442,latent_12442,997,0.001994,0.0011157844,2.0634937,References to medical devices or tubes and their positions.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the reference or discussion of inserted medical devices such as feeding tubes, PICC lines or other placement details, suggesting that the pattern may involve the presence and description of these devices.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12443,latent_12443,402,0.000804,0.00076347444,4.2944818,Assessment for rib fracture or pneumothorax with focus on stable mediastinal contours.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings from imaging in the context of evaluating for rib fracture or pneumothorax, often mentioning stability or absence of these conditions despite the relevant clinical presentation or trauma history. The examples focus on stable or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, with consistent evaluations for rib fractures or pneumothorax, usually seen in trauma assessments.",0.8571428571428571,0.8571428571428571,0.84,0.875,24.0,25.0,0.7448275862068966,0.7567567567567568,0.5882352941176471,0.8333333333333334,48.0,100.0
+12444,latent_12444,1786,0.003572,0.0016244047,2.621585,Interval removal or reassessment of medical devices.,"Examples with high activation consistently mention significant interval changes specifically related to the removal or reassessment of medical devices like ET tubes, catheters, or PICC lines, using phrases like 'interval removal' or 'repositioned'. This suggests the pattern focuses on changes in medical device placement or status in sequential imaging studies.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4600183823529412,0.53,0.6071428571428571,0.17,100.0,100.0
+12445,latent_12445,357,0.000714,0.00067956623,3.0720725,Continued normal cardiothoracic findings without abnormal pathology.,"Highly activated examples include descriptions of stable findings and unchanged status, but emphasize a focus on normal cardiomediastinal, hilar, and other thoracic contours without presence of abnormal pathology such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or consolidation. This reflects a pattern of concluding normal findings despite comparisons.",0.725,0.7272727272727273,0.6206896551724138,0.9473684210526316,19.0,25.0,0.6496212121212122,0.6621621621621622,0.4861111111111111,0.7291666666666666,48.0,100.0
+12446,latent_12446,3439,0.006878,0.002607768,1.947925,Recommendations or flags for adjusting tube/catheter positions.,"Examples with higher activation demonstrate the correct use of the ""'"" placeholder, denoting recommendations and cautions to adjust the placement of tubes, catheters, and other lines within the body based on the examination. This marks portions of text that advise or provide provisional measurements, often seen in reports needing adjustments in positioning to optimize patient safety or confirmatory diagnosis.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4845818892739714,0.565,0.8095238095238095,0.17,100.0,100.0
+12447,latent_12447,1541,0.003082,0.001441691,2.8453636,Frontal and lateral imaging views for comparison with prior studies.,"The pattern includes using multiple imaging techniques or views, specifically frontal and lateral views, for comparison with prior studies. This pattern allows for comprehensive assessment and consistency in findings across different angles.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12448,latent_12448,1225,0.00245,0.0012220959,2.2007358,Interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe changes in findings between current and prior images, with a focus on new developments or stability in comparison to past results. The reports consistently include terms like 'interval increase', 'unchanged', or 'stable appearance', highlighting the importance of change over time.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5023114816218265,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+12449,latent_12449,2116,0.004232,0.0017675963,2.291341,Direct comparison with a prior image is provided.,"The examples with high activation often involve a direct mention of comparison between the current radiological images and prior images. This linguistically aligns with the need to periodically assess changes or stability of findings in imaging, which is a hallmark of tracking medical conditions over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12450,latent_12450,5789,0.011578,0.004085868,1.7038333,Discussion of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The pattern is composed of mentions about comparison checks against prior imaging, and then notes the results of these comparisons, focusing on changes or constancies in findings. This theme of examining and interpreting interval changes against previous states is central to the activation pattern.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.5882352941176471,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12451,latent_12451,673,0.001346,0.0008882315,2.2627683,Positional assessment of medical devices relative to anatomical landmarks.,"The high activation examples prominently highlight descriptions that involve evaluations or comparisons of the positions of medical devices or tubes from one imaging study to another. This often involves measurement changes or positional checks relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina. The precise mention of positions, intervals, and device orientations are common across these examples.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5706413592530231,0.5989304812834224,0.6153846153846154,0.367816091954023,87.0,100.0
+12452,latent_12452,1840,0.00368,0.0016480752,2.0227554,Examination of tube and line placement in chest images.,"The most highly activated examples consistently involve changes or observations about placement and positioning of tubes or lines, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and pleural catheters. There is a consistent pattern of reporting on the position of these medical devices relative to standard reference points in the body (such as the carina or the SVC), often with recommendations for adjustment.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.5362318840579711,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12453,latent_12453,2311,0.004622,0.0019638082,2.7957032,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette over time in comparisons.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions that refer to stability or changes in the cardiomediastinal silhouette, often alongside normal lung findings, in comparison to prior imaging. The pattern highlights consistent observations regarding heart or mediastinal contours over time, even when not the primary focus.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5915492957746479,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12454,latent_12454,5438,0.010876,0.0038961475,1.5117922,Non-zero activation with procedural updates or device changes in imaging.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels usually mention changes such as insertions, removals, or repositioning of medical devices or anatomical structures as compared to prior imaging, suggesting this pattern may capture updates in patient status, particularly focusing on procedural aspects or changes in internals or devices.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.6049382716049383,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12455,latent_12455,4328,0.008656,0.0032315454,1.6722636,Comparison to previous imaging findings highlighting stability or known changes.,"Most examples involved references to previously known conditions, treatment procedures, or interventions through direct comparisons within the imaging findings. Prominent features for this pattern include phrases like 'unchanged', 'as before', 'stable', or reference dates indicating ongoing evaluation against prior findings, emphasizing consistency or stability in medical imaging reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.5655737704918032,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12456,latent_12456,577,0.001154,0.00064817676,2.8577769,Notable changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation often describe specific notable changes or stable findings in the current image when compared to a prior image. They emphasize specific updates, such as newly identified tubes, modifications in pathology, or unchanged positions of devices, making a marked change or precise lack thereof compared to past images.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4174656467411997,0.4176470588235294,0.3505154639175257,0.4857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+12457,latent_12457,5011,0.010022,0.0035878131,1.481833,Reports emphasizing comparison with prior imaging and noting changes or stability.,"The examples with greater activation include textual inputs that describe radiological findings with indications and findings based on comparison with prior imaging. These examples emphasize the investigative nature of comparison and stability or changes over time, which is a significant aspect in radiology reporting, providing context or follow-up for various medical conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5071207430340557,0.5175879396984925,0.515625,0.66,100.0,99.0
+12458,latent_12458,518,0.001036,0.00080938847,2.9017859,Provide a comparison of current findings to prior imaging.,The examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize phrases instructing the model to compare the current imaging study to a prior imaging study. This consistent instruction to make a comparison and observational statement in reference to previous images is what triggers high activation.,0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4101960784313725,0.4125,0.3454545454545454,0.6333333333333333,60.0,100.0
+12459,latent_12459,495,0.00099,0.00071835925,3.1522245,"Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation involve findings explicitly compared to prior imaging. They emphasize changes or stability in specific abnormalities, often noted with modifiers like 'unchanged', 'decreased', or 'increased'. This comparison element, alongside describing findings as 'pre-existing', is crucial for understanding temporal stability or progression in radiological anomalies, particularly when changes are noted or lack thereof.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5808406647116324,0.58125,0.4631578947368421,0.7333333333333333,60.0,100.0
+12460,latent_12460,1998,0.003996,0.0016606456,2.0998986,Identification of subtle or potential findings in images.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe findings of subtle or contentious differentiations in radiologic images, typically characterized by phrases like 'likely', 'possible', 'subtle', or 'may represent'. These terms indicate an observed nuance that might not be definitive but warrants attention or further investigation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4943806162549122,0.495,0.4946236559139785,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12461,latent_12461,428,0.000856,0.00075604994,3.0396423,Cardiac silhouette enlargement without acute pulmonary pathology.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention changes in cardiac silhouette size, particularly focusing on enlargement, often without acute pulmonary pathology like pleural effusion or pneumothorax. This suggests an emphasis on cardiomegaly or increased cardiac size as a key finding, contributing to the model's focus.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.8947368421052632,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7228874106922887,0.756578947368421,0.6595744680851063,0.5961538461538461,52.0,100.0
+12462,latent_12462,2172,0.004344,0.0018159872,1.9626888,Findings compared to prior image indicating stability or change.,"Examples with higher activation consistently mention findings being comparable to prior studies or examinations. This pattern of comparison with previous images is indicative of assessing progress or stability in findings, commonly seen in follow-up imaging.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12463,latent_12463,717,0.001434,0.0009559461,2.3318431,Stable findings with reference to prior imaging.,"The examples demonstrate consistent patterns where the findings specifically refer to stability or minimal change compared to prior images, often denoting no significant new findings even when conditions like effusions or devices are present, which contrasts typical radiological descriptions noting notable new changes or findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5478136200716845,0.5631578947368421,0.5538461538461539,0.4,90.0,100.0
+12464,latent_12464,4027,0.008054,0.0029367006,1.8897531,Involvement of interventional or device placement details from imaging.,"Higher activations correspond to scenarios where radiographic findings are described in the context of an intervention or device placement, such as PICC line, NG tube, or endotracheal tube placement and positioning. These findings often include device-related trajectories and comparisons to prior images to assess changes or verify positions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12465,latent_12465,756,0.001512,0.0010806246,2.2801778,Tracking of interval changes or stability using prior imaging for comparison.,"Highly representative samples often include specific comparisons with prior imaging to note changes or stability over time, such as the interval development, interval increase, or stability of findings like pleural effusions and atelectasis. This pattern highlights the significance of comparing current studies with previous ones in radiology to track progression or regression of medical conditions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4617486338797814,0.4923857868020304,0.4897959183673469,0.7422680412371134,97.0,100.0
+12466,latent_12466,4301,0.008602,0.0031728668,1.7636194,Detailed comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with non-zero activations prominently feature detailed observation of changes or stability over time in the radiological findings, often in comparison to the 'prior frontal image', indicating temporal analysis is key to activation. This suggests the model activates more when changes between current and prior imaging are explicitly noted or described, rather than just noting new imaging findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6149133555049886,0.615,0.6116504854368932,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12467,latent_12467,314,0.000628,0.00051612273,4.7315245,Comparison to prior imaging with stable or unchanged findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently include references to comparison with prior imaging studies and often mention changes since the prior. This pattern is common where differences between current and prior results indicate stability or progression of findings, such as in cardiomegaly or changes in pulmonary opacities.",0.4424242424242424,0.4772727272727273,0.3571428571428571,0.2631578947368421,19.0,25.0,0.4810606060606061,0.5474452554744526,0.2549019607843137,0.3513513513513513,37.0,100.0
+12468,latent_12468,4123,0.008246,0.0029289816,1.4050187,Utilization of both current and prior frontal images in creating radiology reports.,"Examples with notable activation describe a 'frontal image and the prior frontal image,' framing that suggests these instances pertain to follow-up comparisons of imaging studies to prior reports, specifically highlighting changes between new and old images.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12469,latent_12469,1662,0.003324,0.0018844629,3.178653,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging in detailed findings.,"The examples with high activation tend to specify imaging findings or clinical impressions in reports that use terms like 'comparison', 'prior', or explicitly mention the previous imaging work. However, examples with low activation often lack detailed mentions of changed findings between current and prior images, primarily due to either non-comparability or absence of prior reference in findings/impressions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12470,latent_12470,2795,0.00559,0.0021818753,1.2837191,Description of interval changes or stability compared to past radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve the identification of changes or stability in radiological findings when compared to past imaging studies, specifically focusing on interval changes such as stabilization or new findings in conditions like effusions or repositioning of medical devices. The assessment of these interval changes is a critical component described in radiology reports.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4838709677419355,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12471,latent_12471,1814,0.003628,0.0015404227,2.2362647,Detailed deviations in thoracic anatomy or visible medical devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels often entail lung or chest findings with detailed descriptions of anatomical asymmetry or tube placements. These findings are indicative of conditions or procedures that involve distinct deviations from normative anatomy, such as non-trivial changes in cardiomediastinal silhouettes or surgical artifacts like pneumonectomy impacts.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4526876051316814,0.455,0.4601769911504424,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12472,latent_12472,2742,0.005484,0.0022152117,1.4256386,Comparison with prior images to assess interval changes or stability.,These examples highlight detailed comparisons between the current imaging findings and prior studies to detect any interval changes or stability. Several reports also note specific stable medical devices or post-surgical changes indicative of follow-up evaluations.,0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4133333333333333,0.45,0.4666666666666667,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12473,latent_12473,4127,0.008254,0.0032319992,2.972742,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The given examples generally discuss findings in radiology images and make a point about findings remaining stable or unchanged when compared to prior imaging. This stability or lack of change is consistently highlighted when the description includes references to previous imaging results. Only one example explicitly requires a comparison with a prior image, which was inaccurately labeled with a higher activation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5483870967741935,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12474,latent_12474,798,0.001596,0.0008845952,3.133039,Detailed description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels distinctly mention ""comparison to prior image"" and focus on providing a detailed assessment between current and prior findings, highlighting if there is any change, or reaffirming stability in the condition.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4032292106373997,0.4051282051282051,0.3820224719101123,0.3578947368421052,95.0,100.0
+12475,latent_12475,1824,0.003648,0.0016192461,2.068208,Findings described from frontal and lateral chest image views.,"These examples describe radiological findings on different imaging views, specifically frontal (AP, PA) and lateral views of the chest. The activation levels highlight content examples that describe the findings using images taken from multiple angles, indicating higher activations for reports that use both frontal and lateral views than those using frontal views exclusively or comparisons to prior.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12476,latent_12476,264,0.000528,0.0005750329,3.3881516,No comparison available yet prompts ask for comparison.,Examples with high activation levels consistently feature radiology prompts that ask for descriptions of findings in relation to prior frontal images when specifically noting there is 'no comparison' available. This unusual request stands out as a significant factor.,0.4325396825396825,0.4358974358974359,0.3181818181818182,0.5,14.0,25.0,0.5675130517323208,0.6,0.3492063492063492,0.6285714285714286,35.0,100.0
+12477,latent_12477,3002,0.006004,0.0024471038,2.0629447,Descriptions are based on comparisons with prior imaging.,"The pattern involves reports providing details of findings by specifically comparing them to prior images. This includes descriptions of changes over time or stating no change, using terms like 'increased', 'unchanged', 'as compared to prior', or explicit time phrases indicating comparison with prior imaging.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12478,latent_12478,6182,0.012364,0.005822968,4.2834134,Emphasis on stability or minimal change over time in imaging findings.,"The pattern in these examples includes detailed description of the comparison with prior imaging findings, typically focusing on stable or unchanged findings over time. These are common in radiology reports that monitor the progress of specific medical conditions across different imaging sessions.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.2142857142857142,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4129487012139407,0.4321608040201005,0.3968253968253968,0.25,100.0,99.0
+12479,latent_12479,4067,0.008134,0.002957992,1.6835957,Comparison of current findings with previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve comparisons to previous studies and provide detailed descriptions of changes or stable findings between the current and prior images, making the specific clinical indications secondary to this pattern. This pattern is specific to assessing interval changes in radiological findings, often essential for diagnosing the progression or stability of a condition.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5008361204013378,0.5477386934673367,0.53125,0.85,100.0,99.0
+12480,latent_12480,5014,0.010028,0.0035521537,1.5608708,Interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples show comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on interval changes or stability. Descriptive phrases such as 'unchanged', 'as on prior', or 'compared to', refer to these comparisons which inherently indicate whether changes or no changes have occurred between exams.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6214833759590792,0.63,0.6,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12481,latent_12481,2249,0.004498,0.0018016797,2.1257317,Unchanged positioning or stability of devices/contours in follow-up imaging.,"Example 25 has the highest activation because it explicitly and clearly states that all support and monitoring devices are unchanged in position and outlines the stability of the cardiomediastinal contours. Examples with similar descriptions of unchanged positioning or stability tend to have higher activation, indicating this consistency is a key part of the pattern.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.5853658536585366,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12482,latent_12482,2551,0.005102,0.0027889265,2.968727,Explicit comparison of findings against prior imaging results.,"The examples with higher activations contain explicit comparisons between current images and prior studies, focusing on changes such as stabilization, improvement, or progression of findings. These often include descriptive changes of findings over time, suggesting meticulous follow-up and monitoring of conditions based on prior imaging available.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12483,latent_12483,472,0.000944,0.00094082224,4.1557875,Changes or stability in medical device positioning compared to prior scans.,"Examples with higher activations reference changes or lack of changes in medical devices or tubes when compared to prior images. These references often mention the positioning of devices like catheters, endotracheal tubes, or pacemaker leads. Such details appear consistently in higher activation examples.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.7931034482758621,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7489981785063753,0.7547169811320755,0.631578947368421,0.8135593220338984,59.0,100.0
+12484,latent_12484,3009,0.006018,0.0022481745,1.5475738,Mentions of aortic tortuosity or elongation in chest image description.,"Highly activated examples repeatedly showcase specific mentions of the condition of the aorta, particularly its tortuosity, without significant cardiopulmonary issues. This distinguishes them from zero activation examples where aortic or vascular characteristics are either not discussed or mentioned alongside other major findings.",0.4761904761904761,0.56,0.8,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3714721586575133,0.485,0.4,0.06,100.0,100.0
+12485,latent_12485,4787,0.009574,0.0034236338,1.753092,"Findings described in comparison to prior images, highlighting stability or changes.","The examples yielding higher activations contain descriptions of how current radiographic findings compare to those on prior images. Often, specifics regarding stable changes or resolved anomalies from previous images are included, showing attention to changes over time, which might indicate effective treatment or a stable condition.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12486,latent_12486,2140,0.00428,0.0016087013,1.9754573,No comparison with previous imaging studies.,The most representative examples consistently lack a comparison to previous radiography studies. This implies the pattern identifies situations where there are no prior studies available which contrasts with examples mentioning previous studies or comparisons.,0.5,0.5102040816326531,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12487,latent_12487,4815,0.00963,0.0034894156,1.3618606,Review of medical device placements and their stability over time.,These examples involve radiological findings with specific attention to the position or placement of medical devices like catheters or tubes. They focus on stability or changes related to these devices when comparing current images with prior ones.,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12488,latent_12488,420,0.00084,0.0007324432,4.8179426,Precise anatomical positioning of medical devices.,"These examples often describe specific locations or measurements for tubes (e.g., endotracheal or nasogastric) extending from the carina or other anatomical landmarks. This pattern involves precisely reporting the position of medical devices relative to distinct anatomical reference points, which helps in accurate device positioning and monitoring.",0.6223776223776224,0.625,0.6190476190476191,0.5652173913043478,23.0,25.0,0.6275694194013703,0.6470588235294118,0.5079365079365079,0.5818181818181818,55.0,98.0
+12489,latent_12489,851,0.001702,0.0012640553,4.5462337,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently refer to findings on chest imaging that appear unchanged in stability over comparison to prior imaging studies, with no significant changes detected (e.g., stable cardiac silhouette, stable mediastinal contours, etc.). This pattern is common for radiological assessments aiming to monitor the stability of existing conditions or devices in serial imaging.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3801070724147647,0.395,0.3478260869565217,0.24,100.0,100.0
+12490,latent_12490,1303,0.002606,0.001274499,2.762594,Analysis of detailed changes between current and prior imaging findings in the thoracic region.,"The examples consistently reference a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies while highlighting the presence and changes in pulmonary and thoracic features. The activation level is high when these comparisons detail specific changes or stability of findings, indicating a focus on comparative analysis rather than isolated observations.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4094685216695025,0.41,0.4150943396226415,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12491,latent_12491,414,0.000828,0.0007831093,3.8771043,"Normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with no acute thoracic pathology.","Examples with higher activation levels show descriptions of chest radiographs with normal heart size and unremarkable mediastinal and hilar contours, but there are no acute pathologies like pneumothorax or effusion. The focus is on describing normal findings and ruling out acute issues, consistent with standard follow-up radiology reports.",0.7525252525252526,0.7551020408163265,0.8,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.6462931522354273,0.6666666666666666,0.5,0.64,50.0,100.0
+12492,latent_12492,603,0.001206,0.00080230896,4.647249,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples all discuss findings in radiology reports that are compared to prior images or reports, emphasizing stability and noting any changes. These examples involve interpretations where the key element is unchanged findings noted relative to previous imaging studies, sometimes including quantitative comparisons.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.517113783533765,0.5344827586206896,0.4477611940298507,0.4054054054054054,74.0,100.0
+12493,latent_12493,6207,0.012414,0.004479098,1.7977986,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Across the examples with higher activation levels, there is a common emphasis on comparing current imaging studies with prior images to assess for changes, often exploring interval changes, device placements, or stability of conditions over time. Comparisons, even when none are available, are stated explicitly and frequent reference to past imaging findings are consistently noted in these examples.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12494,latent_12494,2554,0.005108,0.002051342,1.9286433,Interval changes or comparisons emphasizing progression or stability.,"The examples with significant activations describe interval changes or comparisons of findings between current and previous images, focusing on stable, unchanged, or new findings. This pattern of detailing progression or resolution is typical in radiology to assess clinical stability or development of new issues.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12495,latent_12495,3468,0.006936,0.0025963015,1.6281396,Descriptions in comparison to prior imaging findings.,"The examples chosen demonstrate that when a prior radiology examination is available, descriptions are often provided in comparison to prior images. This includes phrases like 'compared to prior', 'no significant interval change', or discussing changes related to specific findings in previous images.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12496,latent_12496,4840,0.00968,0.003488624,1.9448894,Comparison with prior studies and noting changes in findings.,"Almost all of the examples involve a comparison to a prior imaging study, with notes on changes or stability in the condition being evaluated. The model seems to be focusing on cases that involve interpreting changes or consistency over time, regardless of the specific findings, which might explain why some samples with less notable changes still show activations greater than zero.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12497,latent_12497,457,0.000914,0.00068520824,3.2738085,Assessment and adjustment of tube/device positioning relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve assessment and adjustment recommendations for the positioning of medical tubes and devices like endotracheal, nasogastric, and central lines. These descriptions typically involve specifying distances from anatomical landmarks such as the carina, and suggestions for advancing or retracting the tubes for optimal placement.",0.8792270531400965,0.88,0.8275862068965517,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7631975867269984,0.7770700636942676,0.6774193548387096,0.7368421052631579,57.0,100.0
+12498,latent_12498,6573,0.013146,0.004681252,1.2363211,Findings compared to prior frontal image with mention of interval changes or improvements.,"The key pattern is the focus on the findings relative to the prior frontal image, such as interval improvement or changes (e.g., atelectasis, opacity, effusion) correlated across multiple reported examples. These findings are indicative of changes in imaging over time, often reflective of improvements, new developments, or stability of conditions previously noted.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12499,latent_12499,2452,0.004904,0.0020806522,1.7721043,Comparison with prior imaging indicating normal cardiac and mediastinal contours with evaluated pathological changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain references to detailed comparisons between current and prior images, especially emphasizing changes or stability in certain medical conditions or radiographic findings. They are often accompanied by phrases indicating stability, resolution, or improvement of certain pathological findings, e.g., consolidation, effusion, pulmonary edema, but highlight the normalcy of cardial and mediastinal structures.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5957446808510638,0.28,100.0,100.0
+12500,latent_12500,860,0.00172,0.0009613457,4.2389884,Focus on medical tube and catheter positioning in radiology images.,"The commonality among these examples is the reference to and analysis of medical tubes and catheter positions in radiology images. These examples describe the positioning of endotracheal, nasogastric, gastric, or central lines relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or stomach, indicating a focus on the positioning of these hardware elements in the imaging studies.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7549448625940837,0.755,0.7475728155339806,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12501,latent_12501,463,0.000926,0.00072657864,2.605691,Use of both frontal and lateral chest X-ray views.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings from both frontal and lateral chest X-ray views, which indicates a complete diagnostic evaluation involving multiple perspectives of the chest imaging. This provides more comprehensive information, allowing for better recognition of the observed pattern.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.547783251231527,0.5490196078431373,0.4130434782608695,0.7169811320754716,53.0,100.0
+12502,latent_12502,1891,0.003782,0.0015279441,1.598677,Emphasis on interval changes and positioning of medical devices.,"These examples involve the assessment of interval changes linked with the placement or monitoring of medical equipment, such as tubes, catheters, etc., and the comparison of the radiological findings with prior imaging concerning the presence or stability of these devices. Reports often focus on the presence/changes of medical devices and their relation to surrounding anatomy.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12503,latent_12503,354,0.000708,0.0007430983,3.5611348,"Features consistent with COPD: hyperinflation, flattened hemidiaphragms.","Most examples with high activation focus on features of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) such as lung hyperinflation, flattened hemidiaphragms, and chronic changes (e.g., vascular congestion, fibrosis, or scarring) that are consistent with or indicative of chronic lung pathologies, particularly COPD, in contrast to non-acute processes found in low activation examples.",0.7575431034482758,0.7777777777777778,0.9166666666666666,0.55,20.0,25.0,0.7169069462647444,0.7916666666666666,0.7692307692307693,0.4545454545454545,44.0,100.0
+12504,latent_12504,672,0.001344,0.0008256873,4.3681116,Precise tube positioning and references to adjustments or issues.,"High activation levels are associated with references to the precise positioning of tubes, especially nasogastric and endotracheal tubes. These examples describe repositioning, advancements, or issues with the positioning of tubes, which is a critical aspect in radiological evaluations post-surgeries or procedures.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6898654653550305,0.7010869565217391,0.7230769230769231,0.5595238095238095,84.0,100.0
+12505,latent_12505,971,0.001942,0.0010156397,3.4150312,"Detailed comparison of current and previous images, emphasizing technical findings.","Examples with high activation involve analyzing and comparing findings from current radiology studies to prior examinations, focusing on identifying changes or evaluating abnormalities, especially those with complex indications or requiring nuanced comparison (e.g., evaluating devices like pacemaker leads or assessing for infiltrates). These examples emphasize technical detail and use 'comparison' to highlight significant changes.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12506,latent_12506,5443,0.010886,0.0038652513,1.3964417,Significant interval changes or findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels are observed when there is identification of a significant change or anomaly in the findings compared to prior images. This contrasts with descriptions typically noting unremarkable, stable, or unchanged conditions relative to previous studies.",0.6325000000000001,0.6326530612244898,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5732151623989045,0.5829145728643216,0.6231884057971014,0.43,100.0,99.0
+12507,latent_12507,2976,0.005952,0.0021924183,2.4385672,Evaluation of medical device positioning or changes over time.,"Examples with activations over 2 often describe the need for evaluating changes or differences in medical devices or interventions, such as endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, or central lines. The reports show a focus on change or positioning of such devices relative to prior imaging.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12508,latent_12508,1748,0.003496,0.0014188981,2.248299,Interval change of findings compared to prior frontal chest images.,"The pattern involves the comparison of findings with previous frontal images. It identifies interval changes in specific anatomical structures, particularly lungs and pleural effusions, as well as device placements. These comparisons frequently assess modifications over time or confirm stability across interval studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5641173376086576,0.565,0.5714285714285714,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12509,latent_12509,854,0.001708,0.0008818975,2.9558673,Comparison of multiple current views with prior images despite missing details.,"The high activation examples consistently focus on the presence of multiple views (e.g., current frontal and lateral images) and their comparison with prior frontal images, often with missing or redacted comparison or history details. This reflects a pattern where detailed analysis relies on multiple current and prior image comparisons while also recording comparison details and history.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12510,latent_12510,669,0.001338,0.00079679996,2.6169465,Description highlights stability or lack of interval change compared to prior study.,"The examples with high activation consistently include comparisons indicating little or no significant interval change between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability and lack of acute findings, which is often part of radiology reports.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4319904268049461,0.4606741573033708,0.35,0.2692307692307692,78.0,100.0
+12511,latent_12511,723,0.001446,0.0008927021,2.5225682,Explicit description of interval changes or comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels often discuss new findings or changes in the context of a current image directly compared with a prior image, specifically noting interval changes using language or terminology that emphasizes comparison results, but not necessarily providing a prior study for direct analysis, thus underscoring a focus on change detection.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4204545454545454,0.4224598930481283,0.4090909090909091,0.5113636363636364,88.0,99.0
+12512,latent_12512,1092,0.002184,0.0010638324,2.4748425,"Findings evaluated through comparison with prior images, noting stability or minor changes.","The pattern observed involves changes identified through comparison with prior imaging studies. Reports include descriptors like 'unchanged', 'minimally improved', 'stable', and references to interval changes, indicating findings were evaluated against previous imaging.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12513,latent_12513,1323,0.002646,0.0013121505,3.3685067,Utilization of both frontal and lateral views in radiograph descriptions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings using both frontal and lateral views of the chest radiographs. This comprehensive approach could provide a more detailed and holistic view of chest conditions, making the descriptions highly valued for thorough evaluations in clinical settings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.4583333333333333,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12514,latent_12514,4808,0.009616,0.0035823327,1.7570055,Reports emphasizing unchanged device positions or stable cardiopulmonary findings.,"This set of examples shows that radiology reports involving patients with unchanged device positions, no significant technical abnormalities, and stable cardiopulmonary findings are activating. The pattern seems to focus on descriptions where stability in device position or cardiopulmonary status is the main feature reported.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12515,latent_12515,3725,0.00745,0.002670435,1.6614449,"Comparison of findings using multiple imaging types or prior reports, noting condition changes.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve multiple types of imaging, such as frontal and lateral views, or changes compared to prior reports. These reports emphasize the presence of recent or significant changes in patient condition as compared to previous imaging, often noting stability or improvement, which is a common theme for effectiveness monitoring or follow-up.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12516,latent_12516,2665,0.00533,0.002112645,1.9627029,Interpretations detail interval changes compared to prior images.,"The high-activation examples prominently feature changes or consistency across imaging studies, explicitly mentioning interval changes over time or comparison to prior studies. Either improvement, stability, or specific changes in particular features, such as opacities and heart size, are described. ",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12517,latent_12517,356,0.000712,0.00059503526,4.3457913,Mention of improved inspiration since prior study.,"The highly activated examples describe situations where the patient has taken an improved inspiration compared to the prior study. This enhanced inspiration changes the radiological findings, which is explicitly noted and compared against previous images.",0.7201808931599774,0.7555555555555555,1.0,0.45,20.0,25.0,0.7248157248157248,0.8055555555555556,0.8636363636363636,0.4318181818181818,44.0,100.0
+12518,latent_12518,465,0.00093,0.00084940664,2.7763395,"No consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or acute findings.","Highly activated examples consistently describe a lack of acute findings such as consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary edema, often alongside normal cardiac or mediastinal silhouettes. Radiological texts frequently emphasize the absence of these common acute issues to confirm normalcy.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5869420386409061,0.5870967741935483,0.4583333333333333,0.7857142857142857,56.0,99.0
+12519,latent_12519,5038,0.010076,0.0036121267,1.4600658,Monitoring and assessment of medical devices in chest imaging.,"The samples that exhibit the pattern include references to the positioning, presence, or changes in various tubes, lines, and other medical devices as assessed through chest imaging. This is a common focus in radiological exams post-surgery or for monitoring acute care, which explains the activations in these examples.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6228786926461345,0.625,0.6470588235294118,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12520,latent_12520,1585,0.00317,0.001361105,2.9092772,Low lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding or linear opacities suggesting atelectasis.,"Many examples where lung volumes are noted as low also describe crowding of bronchovascular structures, interstitial prominence, or linear opacities consistent with atelectasis. Low lung volumes lead to closer approximation of lung markings and bronchovascular structures, which can manifest as linear opacities on imaging, and are suggestive of atelectasis. This pattern appears when patient positioning, pain, or respiratory distress lead to shallow lung inspiration causing decreased lung volumes.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.6,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.5373134328358209,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12521,latent_12521,333,0.000666,0.0006562855,3.583861,Use of comparison to prior imaging in the radiological assessment.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently use comparison to a prior examination to highlight changes or stabilities in medical findings, often specifying the date of previous images. This linguistic pattern is typical in radiology findings where interval changes or stability must be assessed.",0.583673469387755,0.5952380952380952,0.5,0.9411764705882352,17.0,25.0,0.4756376094404263,0.4758620689655172,0.3495145631067961,0.8,45.0,100.0
+12522,latent_12522,1992,0.003984,0.001649724,2.5161204,AI tasked to generate findings from current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activations frequently involve direct requests or prompts for the AI assistant to generate text descriptions based on provided images and prior reports. These examples reflect a task pattern where the model uses data and prompts to produce a response involving multiple references, making them highly activable.",0.4731182795698925,0.5102040816326531,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12523,latent_12523,1500,0.003,0.0014527101,2.332042,Descriptions using frontal and lateral views with detailed comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently contain multiple views (e.g., frontal and lateral) and discuss changes or stability between these views compared to prior studies, emphasizing differences in findings. This pattern reflects a tendency to provide comprehensive assessments using different view angles and detail the radiological findings extensively in relation to previous exams.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12524,latent_12524,6524,0.013048,0.0046000276,1.1265647,Stable or unchanged findings on comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples highlight imaging results that are stable or unchanged upon comparison with prior studies, or show improvements indicating stability or healing. The focus is on unchanged or stable findings in context of a patient's history, reflecting monitoring without new acute findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.609375,0.61,0.6195652173913043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12525,latent_12525,3473,0.006946,0.0025114252,1.2761819,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently refer to findings that are compared to prior imaging, indicating interval changes, stability, or removal of certain medical devices, emphasizing dynamic aspects of the patient's condition. This implies a pattern where the focus is on notable changes or steady states in the patient's condition over time as related to prior studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12526,latent_12526,4641,0.009282,0.003384753,1.9182783,Lack of significant change or new findings compared to prior images.,"These examples commonly lack significant interval changes on comparison with prior studies, which may elicit activation due to the redundant nature of findings that repeat or confirm previously stable conditions rather than revealing new conditions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4597701149425287,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12527,latent_12527,2702,0.005404,0.0021849994,1.8046479,Assessment of tube positioning in radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently feature the evaluation of the positioning of tubes (e.g., ET tubes) in radiographs. These reports often comment on the exact location of such tubes, indicating a focus on verifying and comparing tube placements across imaging exams.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6276167471819646,0.63,0.6547619047619048,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12528,latent_12528,435,0.00087,0.0007451292,3.1536126,Structured findings describing changes from prior imaging over time.,The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of findings from recent images as they relate to prior images or explicit examples of changes or stability over time. This is a recognized pattern in reports emphasizing comparison and temporal changes which are fundamental in diagnostic radiology.,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5254803675856308,0.5328947368421053,0.382716049382716,0.5961538461538461,52.0,100.0
+12529,latent_12529,7482,0.014964,0.0052543394,0.9549922,Comparison over intervals to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently included specific comparisons to prior imaging studies to assess changes over time, indicating a focus on identifying interval changes in medical conditions. The presence of intervals of time (""as compared to previous radiograph"", ""since prior"") and expression of changes or stability in findings are common threads in these examples, highlighting the importance of temporal analysis in radiological interpretation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12530,latent_12530,2652,0.005304,0.0020242676,1.7519257,"Presence of frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images.",High activation examples consistently include the presence of both frontal and lateral images provided along with the prior frontal image in the report. This is a specific pattern of obtaining multiple views for comprehensive evaluation in chest imaging.,0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,100.0,100.0
+12531,latent_12531,4581,0.009162,0.0033164993,1.6706748,Focus on description of interval changes or stability compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain specific information about the comparison of findings with a subject's prior imaging. These examples often discuss interval changes or stability of noted conditions such as atelectasis, effusion, or catheter position against previous reports. This highlights the importance of monitoring the progress or stability of patient's conditions over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5615262980532442,0.5728643216080402,0.553030303030303,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+12532,latent_12532,1261,0.002522,0.0012148934,2.531418,"Findings about interval changes or stability, often involving interventional devices.","Activated examples describe either interval change or stability compared to prior imaging, along with describing the use of interventional devices or findings related to these devices, such as catheter tip placement.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12533,latent_12533,5946,0.011892,0.0042572524,1.0610672,Considerations of technique or visibility limitations in radiology interpretation.,"The examples that exhibit the activation pattern involve cases where radiological findings are interpreted and described with consideration of factors that could obscure or affect the visibility of certain anatomical features, such as low lung volumes or technique limitations. The reports consistently mention adjustments or considerations relating to the technique or patient positioning, impacting the interpretation of the image findings.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5244174113288779,0.525,0.5268817204301075,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12534,latent_12534,2409,0.004818,0.0019600498,1.9666928,Comparison to previous imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"High activation examples often involve a detailed comparison with prior imaging studies and describe any changes in findings or stability of certain medical devices or anatomical features. This pattern is bolstered when there are minimal changes or stability in the identified findings over time, showing a consistent follow-up approach to patient care in radiology reports.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12535,latent_12535,1920,0.00384,0.0014623775,1.5964893,Contextual interval changes in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies and convey findings related to identified pathologies or procedural changes (e.g., pleural effusion changes, pulmonary masses, effusion resolution) that have altered states requiring follow-up or indication of stability.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12536,latent_12536,3546,0.007092,0.0026445836,2.2033055,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies with specified changes.,"In examples with higher activation levels, the findings are directly compared to previous imaging examinations, with explicit mention of prior reports or studies. The task focuses on identifying changes or consistencies between the current and prior images. This comparison to existing records is more prominent in the examples with higher activation, emphasizing tracking changes over time.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5679012345679012,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12537,latent_12537,337,0.000674,0.0006917824,2.7648802,Mild or moderate heart enlargement is consistently noted.,This pattern consistently highlights reports where there is a note of mild or moderate enlargement of heart size across multiple imaging examples. This includes different techniques and contexts where heart size assessment is relevant to patient management.,0.8880039820806371,0.8888888888888888,0.8571428571428571,0.9,20.0,25.0,0.7075736325385694,0.7410071942446043,0.5283018867924528,0.717948717948718,39.0,100.0
+12538,latent_12538,3693,0.007386,0.002753082,1.5325398,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples involve describing changes in imaging findings over time, specifically highlighting stable or unchanged conditions, use of phrases like 'no significant interval change', 'unchanged', or 'stable' in the context of prior comparison. This pattern is prevalent in follow-up radiology reports where monitoring for changes is crucial.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3592919754966663,0.5376884422110553,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,99.0
+12539,latent_12539,1259,0.002518,0.0017456352,3.7356482,References to prior imaging with explicit comparison indicating stability or improvement.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently reference comparisons with prior images to denote diagnostic stability or change. Words like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improved', or explicit mentions of prior dates are used to describe findings against previous results.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4423076923076923,0.23,100.0,100.0
+12540,latent_12540,858,0.001716,0.0009293482,2.0328965,Descriptions indicating unchanged or stable findings across current and prior images.,"The examples consistently reference prior and current images explicitly in their descriptions and indicate findings that are either stable, unchanged, or improved relative to past imaging. This indicates a pattern related to the stability or resolution of identified medical issues across multiple imaging instances.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.2857142857142857,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.2941176470588235,0.2,100.0,100.0
+12541,latent_12541,4064,0.008128,0.0029465836,1.6381922,Focus on interval change by comparing current frontal images to previous radiographs.,"These examples often mention a frontal image to be compared with a prior image, focusing on interval changes in the findings. Attention to 'comparison to prior', 'changed from previous', 'remains unchanged' or 'stable' are key patterns in these examples and signal a focus on temporal comparison to gauge clinical stability or progression.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12542,latent_12542,1132,0.002264,0.001244782,3.4944096,Focus on tube/device placement and positional changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on cases involving assessment and documentation of tube placements or other devices (like Dobhoff tubes or chest tubes), especially their positions relative to anatomical landmarks. They often highlight the interval observation, such as positional changes, in the medical setting across imaging studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5840097402597402,0.59,0.618421052631579,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12543,latent_12543,6588,0.013176,0.0046864618,1.4030991,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging for monitoring changes.,"All examples with positive activation levels make specific comparisons between current images and previous images, highlighting changes or lack of changes in specific findings over time. This pattern is indicative of monitoring progress or changes in a patient’s condition through comparative imaging analysis.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5418038183015141,0.565,0.5448275862068965,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12544,latent_12544,705,0.00141,0.0009786687,2.6513348,Hyperexpansion of lungs and flattened diaphragms indicative of COPD/emphysema.,"The pattern shows radiology reports frequently mention lung hyperexpansion and flattened diaphragm as indicators of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or emphysema. These specific findings are described using terms like 'hyperexpanded', 'flattening of the hemidiaphragms', often in patients with respiratory complaints or prior diagnosis of COPD.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.8571428571428571,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5820934144132488,0.6421052631578947,0.8928571428571429,0.2777777777777778,90.0,100.0
+12545,latent_12545,554,0.001108,0.00082463253,2.297256,Stable cardiac silhouette or lack of acute cardiopulmonary changes.,"Higher activation examples frequently describe no acute changes or stabilization in the patient's condition, highlighted by phrases like ""mildly enlarged but unchanged"" or ""no acute cardiopulmonary process"". This indicates the model's pattern of interest is reports signaling overall stability in patients' imaging findings, particularly of the cardiac silhouette and lungs.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5239409010055542,0.5240963855421686,0.4329896907216495,0.6363636363636364,66.0,100.0
+12546,latent_12546,689,0.001378,0.00080204057,2.6418498,Detailed comparison of pulmonary findings over time.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve detailed analyses of chest imaging that include comparison to previous images or specified conditions in the context of directives like 'provide a description'. Specifically, these comparisons involve detailed descriptions of changes in pulmonary opacities, effusions, or other lung-related findings, often indicating either disease progression or stability, which are acute observations requiring thorough interpretation.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4265851612129929,0.4347826086956521,0.3717948717948718,0.3452380952380952,84.0,100.0
+12547,latent_12547,5213,0.010426,0.0038800626,1.7668831,Descriptions involve stability or changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The pattern identified in these examples pertains to the presence of comparisons with previous imaging studies. Examples exhibiting the pattern often describe findings in the context of stability or changes from prior examinations, indicating a focus on tracking changes over time in radiological assessments.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12548,latent_12548,831,0.001662,0.0009367096,3.6670425,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,"Many examples with a higher activation level include the comparison of findings from the current assessment with prior imaging, regardless of whether changes are significant or not. This comparison is explicitly stated or described, indicating the model associates the term 'comparison' and its implications as an important feature in the activation pattern.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.568536342515765,0.61,0.5679012345679012,0.92,100.0,100.0
+12549,latent_12549,638,0.001276,0.000798913,3.1932957,Interval assessment with focus on stability or minimal change in pathology.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve recognizing changes or non-changes in medical images compared with previous imaging studies, often focusing on the presence and status of lung, heart, or mediastinal conditions. This indicates a pattern where activation is tied to intervals or comparisons that show stability or minor changes, especially in lung settings.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4304802181974196,0.4510869565217391,0.3692307692307692,0.2857142857142857,84.0,100.0
+12550,latent_12550,349,0.000698,0.0007742542,3.2329197,Analysis and comparison with prior images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize radiological assessments and comparisons of current images with prior studies. This is a pattern commonly found in radiology reports where the focus is on identifying any changes or stability in conditions over time based on previous imaging results.,0.4829059829059828,0.5,0.4545454545454545,0.7894736842105263,19.0,25.0,0.4251217137293087,0.4305555555555556,0.3333333333333333,0.8636363636363636,44.0,100.0
+12551,latent_12551,1311,0.002622,0.0013217054,2.1561067,Provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern identified includes evaluation of radiological findings in comparison to previous or concurrent imaging, with a focus on present and past observations. The descriptions often reference any changes or stabilities in specific findings in relation to prior studies. This pattern fits with the typical practice in radiology where prior images provide a baseline for assessing current conditions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5482003010127292,0.5527638190954773,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,99.0
+12552,latent_12552,438,0.000876,0.00062114,3.8638213,Reports lack prior image for comparison.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently lack a prior comparison image or explicitly state that no prior images are available for comparison. This suggests that the absence of comparison is a key indicator in determining high activation for this pattern.,0.6892177589852009,0.6938775510204082,0.6451612903225806,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.498978102189781,0.5064102564102564,0.3703703703703703,0.5357142857142857,56.0,100.0
+12553,latent_12553,849,0.001698,0.001176832,3.7222023,Emphasis on interval changes noted between current and prior imaging.,"The common factor among examples with high activation levels is the presence of explicit notes and descriptions of interval changes indicating disease progression, improvement, or intervention impacts over a previous state or image. The linguistic emphasis on change aligns with medical diagnostics where identifying temporal changes is crucial.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12554,latent_12554,729,0.001458,0.0009203002,2.6148787,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly involve a detailed description of current imaging findings alongside explicit comparisons to previous imaging. Additionally, there is emphasis on changes or stability in imaging findings such as tube placements or changes in anatomical or pathological features between current and previous images.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.544302756067462,0.5445026178010471,0.5192307692307693,0.5934065934065934,91.0,100.0
+12555,latent_12555,3373,0.006746,0.0025645418,2.8081033,"Mentions of specific comparison with prior imaging, focusing on interval changes.","The pattern of slightly higher activation appears in instances where there is mention of previous imaging being explicitly compared with current imaging. Lower activation levels correspond to scenarios lacking clear or explicit use of prior imaging comparisons. As the prompt likely emphasizes examination of progress or changes over time, examples carrying an explicit comparison statement or relative phrase tend to exhibit higher activation levels, demonstrating that prior imaging comparison is important to the pattern.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12556,latent_12556,1678,0.003356,0.0014873759,1.5774589,Instructions for comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"These examples reveal a consistent pattern: explicit instructions to provide a description or findings in the radiology study while comparing to prior imaging results. The prompts tend to request an assessment in the context of known prior images, emphasizing comparison even if prior images are not available.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12557,latent_12557,4173,0.008346,0.0029737744,1.829122,Tasks with generalized image description without specific comparison requests.,"The pattern with relative high activation levels involved samples that expect specific tasks in radiology reports, typically lacking direct requests for comparison or detailed instructions for cross-analysis with previous images, and instead focused on generic description of images without explicit contextual comparison cues.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,100.0
+12558,latent_12558,6953,0.013906,0.004909397,1.0205706,Descriptions of interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve language that describes interval changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging, such as catheter placements, tube positions, or changes in pleural effusion and other conditions. This pattern is indicative of radiology reports focusing on assessing progression or stability of conditions over time.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12559,latent_12559,5521,0.011042,0.003958029,1.3404669,Emphasis on interval changes or specific comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention specific comparisons or interval changes with descriptions related to prior imaging, which are often integral to assessing the evolution of a patient's condition over time. In particular, the focus is on interval changes or comparisons regarding conditions such as atelectasis, pneumothorax, or small pleural effusions.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12560,latent_12560,618,0.001236,0.00083776965,2.5718029,"Analysis of imaging findings with direct comparisons to prior images, noting changes or stability.","High activation examples predominantly include analysis of current findings with comparisons to prior imaging, often showing changes or notable findings since the last exam. They include key words like ""previously"", ""prior exam"" or ""compared to"" indicating a pattern of radiology report style that focuses on changes or stability in findings over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4886363636363636,0.4886363636363636,0.43,0.5657894736842105,76.0,100.0
+12561,latent_12561,558,0.001116,0.00079512846,2.8570206,Comparison to prior imaging to assess for change or stability of findings.,"These examples consistently refer to a comparison between current imaging findings and prior images, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'interval change', or explicit date references. This pattern is specifically focused on identifying changes or the stability of findings over time as interpreted from radiological images.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5244862342842896,0.5325443786982249,0.4590163934426229,0.8115942028985508,69.0,100.0
+12562,latent_12562,534,0.001068,0.0008026401,2.719111,Descriptions of findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels include descriptions of findings that follow instructions to describe radiology images in comparison to prior images. Phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or similar terms are frequently used to indicate systematic comparison, which leads to high activation levels.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5138544474393532,0.5149700598802395,0.4351851851851852,0.7014925373134329,67.0,100.0
+12563,latent_12563,7982,0.015964,0.0056483424,1.0638154,Focus on interval changes and their implications in imaging findings.,"These examples frequently reference interval change in imaging findings, particularly focusing on changes in medical device positions, tube placements, and observed structures when compared to prior images.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12564,latent_12564,5004,0.010008,0.0045293067,4.152835,Explicit comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently provide explicit comparisons of radiological findings to prior studies. This involves a structured format for referencing previous imaging studies, indicating interval changes, or stability, which is instrumental in assessing potential changes over time.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,100.0,100.0
+12565,latent_12565,491,0.000982,0.0008303814,2.486295,Increased central vascular congestion or prominence in chest radiographs.,"The examples consistently describe findings related to increased central vascular congestion or engorgement in the chest radiographs. This specific finding is frequently mentioned across highly activated examples with varying terms like 'central pulmonary vascular congestion', 'bronchovascular crowding', or 'increased vascular prominence'.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.8095238095238095,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6708333333333334,0.7215189873417721,0.6842105263157895,0.4482758620689655,58.0,100.0
+12566,latent_12566,1762,0.003524,0.0015041766,3.3891735,"Detailed comparison of current and prior images, emphasizing specific clinical indications.","The highly activated examples focus on comparing findings in different radiological views (e.g., frontal and lateral images) to evaluate changes relative to prior images, especially considering subtle clinical indications such as improvement, worsening, or stability of certain pathological findings. This reflects a pattern where detailed comparison and evaluation across multiple imaging angles are emphasized, often in cases with complex or chronic conditions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12567,latent_12567,272,0.000544,0.0004477307,4.307483,Placement or adjustment of enteric/nasogastric tubes with detailed positional confirmation.,"The examples describe the placement or adjustment of nasogastric or enteric tubes or similar devices within the body, often in the context of checking or confirming the position in comparison to prior examinations. High activation levels coincide with explicit confirmation of the device position in specific anatomical landmarks.",0.6925227113906359,0.725,0.6666666666666666,0.5333333333333333,15.0,25.0,0.5820183486238533,0.746268656716418,0.5333333333333333,0.2285714285714285,35.0,99.0
+12568,latent_12568,2105,0.00421,0.0016996705,2.4494233,"Focus on cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, and pulmonary edema in comparisons.","Examples with higher activation scores involve descriptions that discuss cardiopulmonary findings, specifically noting cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, and pulmonary edema. The pattern indicates an interest in detailed examination of changes or observations related to the heart size, presence of pleural effusion, and potential pulmonary edema during radiology comparisons.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5151515151515151,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12569,latent_12569,630,0.00126,0.0008760207,2.9721444,Stable enlargement of cardiac silhouette with prior imaging comparison.,Examples with higher activation frequently discuss the enlargement of the cardiac silhouette alongside descriptions of unchanged or previously stable findings when comparing current and prior imaging. This indicates a pattern of emphasizing cardiac enlargement in stable conditions.,0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5102162862553573,0.554945054945055,0.5111111111111111,0.2804878048780488,82.0,100.0
+12570,latent_12570,927,0.001854,0.0010500157,3.280489,Focus on changes from prior imaging studies in descriptions.,"Examples with higher activations consistently describe radiological findings in comparison to prior images, while examples with lower activations outline detailed findings but do not specifically focus on comparing changes over time. Using prior imaging as a reference point for describing stability or change in findings appears to be a key factor in the pattern.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5776581142434801,0.6,0.5684931506849316,0.83,100.0,100.0
+12571,latent_12571,1899,0.003798,0.0015582494,1.7411742,Comparison to prior imaging studies mentioned.,"The examples in this set showing higher activation mostly involve mentioning findings in relation to prior imaging reports, just like the earlier set. This indicates the model activation is capturing the pattern of reports where current radiological findings are being directly compared with prior studies, emphasizing stability or changes.",0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5655373170534487,0.592964824120603,0.5637583892617449,0.84,100.0,99.0
+12572,latent_12572,1475,0.00295,0.0013806928,1.6938847,Comparison of current and prior images in radiology reports.,"The highly activated samples contain phrases indicating comparisons between current and prior images, a common practice in radiological analysis to monitor changes or stability in imaging findings over time. This pattern includes references to prior reports and findings, encouraging evaluation in context of previous images.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12573,latent_12573,528,0.001056,0.0008912462,2.3775487,"Comparison of findings to prior imaging, often indicating unchanged or stable conditions.","Examples with high activations include phrases comparing findings to prior studies, referencing largely unchanged or stable conditions juxtaposed with specific imaging techniques like PA and lateral views, or suggest minor or typical findings for radiographic descriptions, often correlating with unchanged impressions across compared exams.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4870396626313302,0.4879518072289157,0.3978494623655914,0.5606060606060606,66.0,100.0
+12574,latent_12574,569,0.001138,0.0009436965,4.638094,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral imaging view without prior comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels mostly involve scenarios where multiple images (current frontal and lateral) are being compared with previous images, as indicated by keywords like 'frontal and lateral views' and the absence of comparison in some cases ('Comparison: None'). This suggests a pattern of concern for thorough examination which multiple view imaging aids in clarifying.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5189664650907091,0.5428571428571428,0.4666666666666667,0.3684210526315789,76.0,99.0
+12575,latent_12575,5158,0.010316,0.0036831188,1.7352762,Direct comparison findings with prior imaging studies emphasized.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings that are described in direct comparison to prior imaging studies, often with specific reference to stability or changes over time. Phrases like 'as compared to previous', 'since prior', and 'unchanged since' are frequently used, indicating the model's sensitivity to temporal comparison in imaging reports.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5555555555555556,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12576,latent_12576,229,0.000458,0.0006583936,3.4182136,Significant interval change in a medical device or patient's condition from prior imaging.,"High activation levels are associated with examples where medical devices or anatomical changes are explicitly compared to previous imaging, denoting a significant interval change in the device or the patient's condition. Terms indicating change include 'intubated', 'extubated', 'removal', and description of changes in pathological states. This contrasts with low activation examples which describe stable conditions or lack of significant findings.",0.711111111111111,0.717948717948718,0.5789473684210527,0.7857142857142857,14.0,25.0,0.6646685220866339,0.7086614173228346,0.4074074074074074,0.8148148148148148,27.0,100.0
+12577,latent_12577,558,0.001116,0.0007764366,3.9229758,Pleural effusion or volume loss in the left lower lobe.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe pleural effusions or volume loss associated with the left lower lobe. These findings are often placed alongside observations of retrocardiac opacification or obscured hemidiaphragms, consistent with pathological changes such as atelectasis.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6578947368421053,0.695906432748538,0.7209302325581395,0.4366197183098591,71.0,100.0
+12578,latent_12578,5594,0.011188,0.0039741993,1.2798631,"Detailed descriptions of changes over time, referencing prior imaging.","The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of changes in radiological findings over time or stability of findings with explicit reference to prior imaging. These descriptions often contain detailed observations about specific changes or assurances of stability regarding pathologies, devices, or anatomical features, illustrating a pattern of comparative analysis in radiology reports.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.552482715273413,0.555,0.5478260869565217,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12579,latent_12579,6082,0.012164,0.004316585,1.6549679,"Descriptions include comparison to previous imaging findings, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions where the radiological findings are explicitly compared to prior images, noting changes or stability over time. This indicates that the pattern involves referencing change or stability based on previous imaging results, which is a typical feature in follow-up or monitoring imaging reports.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.5725190839694656,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12580,latent_12580,5488,0.010976,0.0039890963,1.7480376,Focused on procedural changes or interventions as compared to baseline.,"Activation levels indicate attention to processes or treatments described including catheter placement, thoracocentesis, and chest tubes as compared to baseline health or diagnostic concerns. Descriptions involving distinct procedural changes or interventions over time, such as stent placement or post-procedure status, appear to influence higher activation.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12581,latent_12581,4495,0.00899,0.0032295475,1.8601997,Comparison of interval changes in imaging findings.,"Higher activations are noted in examples with specific language indicating comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess for interval changes, resolution, or stability in pathologic features, rather than comparison of image positioning or technical aspects. These details include terms like 'as compared to the prior', 'interval change', 'no significant interval change', or specific observations of resolving or worsening conditions between studies.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12582,latent_12582,621,0.001242,0.0009874356,3.3356397,Descriptive comparison with prior studies indicating stable or unchanged findings.,"Examples with notable activation levels lack the term ""No prior study available for comparison"" and instead describe findings in comparison to prior studies, using specific phrases and details about changes relative to previous exams. This comparison often involves noting stable, unchanged conditions or mild progressions.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4380471727263363,0.4715909090909091,0.3508771929824561,0.2631578947368421,76.0,100.0
+12583,latent_12583,3140,0.00628,0.002417406,2.06474,Comparison with prior imaging noting changes or stability.,"The examples provided with higher activation levels contain references to both current and previous imaging for comparison, specifically describing changes or stability over time such as 'comparison to previous study' or 'unchanged since'. This aligns with typical reporting practices where historical imaging is used to evaluate the progression or resolution of findings.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.56,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12584,latent_12584,945,0.00189,0.0010151204,2.3214538,Mentions of medical devices like catheters or tubes in image reports.,"The high activation levels in these examples correlate to mentions of medical devices such as catheters, ports, and endotracheal tubes present or evaluated in the images. The pattern seems to be models focusing on and activating for the presence or likely evaluation of medical devices in chest images.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3845500848896434,0.42,0.3461538461538461,0.18,100.0,100.0
+12585,latent_12585,322,0.000644,0.0007763127,4.1702547,Unfolded or tortuous thoracic aorta in radiology reports.,"The activated examples frequently mention an 'unfolded', 'tortuous', or ectatic thoracic aorta, a notable radiologic finding distinct from cases with other pathologies or normal mediastinal findings. This structural observation suggests a pattern-related vascular anomaly or chronic condition rather than acute changes.",0.9513888888888888,0.9523809523809524,0.8947368421052632,1.0,17.0,25.0,0.9290713695232846,0.9370629370629372,0.8269230769230769,1.0,43.0,100.0
+12586,latent_12586,1895,0.00379,0.0015887591,2.7918568,Comparison findings requested for current and prior radiographs.,"These examples involve specific instructions to provide a description of findings by comparing current radiological images to prior images, regardless of details on the comparison itself. This is also reflected in moderate activation where comparison specificity is explicitly requested.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12587,latent_12587,668,0.001336,0.0008186849,3.114932,Focus on interval changes based on prior image comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention detailed findings from prior image comparisons and highlight changes over time in the observations, demonstrating an analytic emphasis on dynamic changes from prior to current states, which is a specific focus of the model.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.478199220134704,0.4782608695652174,0.4411764705882353,0.5357142857142857,84.0,100.0
+12588,latent_12588,635,0.00127,0.0008350481,2.3040335,Stable or adjusted positions of tubes/devices in chest compared to prior.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels are those which describe changes in the positioning or status of tubes, catheters, and devices in the chest compared to previous images. These examples often specify diagnostic devices like endotracheal, nasogastric, or tracheostomy tubes, providing details about their unchanged or adjusted positions.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7692307692307693,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6696454589606605,0.6815642458100558,0.6666666666666666,0.5569620253164557,79.0,100.0
+12589,latent_12589,5888,0.011776,0.0042321063,1.7944336,Descriptions explicitly comparing current with prior images.,"Highly activated examples include updated findings or stable conditions in comparison to previous imaging, indicating clinical significance in tracking changes over time. This includes explicit language about comparisons to previous images or prior reports.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12590,latent_12590,4247,0.008494,0.0030750032,1.3577625,Minimal or no significant interval change in image comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in comparison to prior images, noting minimal or no interval change, or changes observed, which is a characteristic pattern for follow-up imaging evaluations. This is common for tracking known conditions or changes in treatment or symptoms over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5747126436781609,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12591,latent_12591,587,0.001174,0.0007584907,3.3716795,References to placement or change of medical devices in radiological findings.,"This set of examples specifically includes references to handling or examination of radiographic or medical devices, focusing on their placement, removal, or examination as a primary point of comparison or finding. Examples refer to specifics like 'PICC line', 'endotracheal tube', and 'catheters'.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5121657754010696,0.5393258426966292,0.4655172413793103,0.3461538461538461,78.0,100.0
+12592,latent_12592,5237,0.010474,0.0037653637,1.4589742,Provide a comparative assessment with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve generating descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging, especially when evaluating interval changes or potential acute issues. Despite variations in image references or examination techniques, this comparative evaluation consistently triggers higher activation.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12593,latent_12593,4491,0.008982,0.0033217468,1.7433639,Interval change or stability in pathologies/devices in comparison to prior radiographs.,"More activation is observed for examples mentioning descriptions of findings in the radiology study and comparisons to the prior image, while maintaining some change or stability in medical devices or pathologies. The pattern relates to describing interval changes, stability, or improvement observed in sequential imaging and their correlation with prior reports.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5263157894736842,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12594,latent_12594,1726,0.003452,0.0014643766,1.712782,Instructions to compare with prior images despite lack of prior comparison data.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently use a directive to compare current findings with prior images, even though no prior comparison is available. This pattern highlights an instruction to perform comparison in the face of data unavailability.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5567010309278351,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12595,latent_12595,1440,0.00288,0.0014326278,1.9194525,Evaluation of medical devices or conditions in follow-up imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions and interpretations of imaging findings, often noting changes or stable conditions in medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathologies when compared with prior studies. These examples mention treatments, conditions, or interventions (e.g., pacemaker, NG tube, thoracostomy tube) and their subsequent evaluation in follow-up imaging.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.550561797752809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12596,latent_12596,632,0.001264,0.00082135055,2.4523392,Notes presence and position of indwelling medical devices.,"Examples with high activation often reference indwelling medical devices like PICC lines or catheters in their findings, which is likely what triggers the pattern, particularly when those devices are stable or consistent with prior imaging. These references confirm that certain aspects of the radiology report are the major factor in driving activation levels.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4896430583634374,0.5084745762711864,0.4307692307692308,0.358974358974359,78.0,99.0
+12597,latent_12597,2316,0.004632,0.0018504723,1.8663124,Analysis involving interval changes via comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples all describe the presence of a prior radiological study for comparison, which is a hallmark feature in radiology reports aiming to detect interval changes or stability in the findings. Most of the examples use explicit wording to note comparison to previous studies as part of the assessment.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12598,latent_12598,576,0.001152,0.00091024477,2.8041017,Comparison of current and prior images showing changes.,"High activations are observed in reports that involve both current and prior images, where there's a stated comparison of changes between images. This reveals the model is responsive to image-based analysis that explicitly notes comparisons and changes, facilitated by 'compared with previous', 'since prior' or 'from earlier today'.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4561135067464181,0.4588235294117647,0.375,0.4714285714285714,70.0,100.0
+12599,latent_12599,2914,0.005828,0.0021558632,1.7963539,Exclusion of reviews focusing solely on device placements or their consistent status.,"The examples with noticeable activation levels focus on providing detailed descriptions for observed changes or notable findings that do not include typical discussions of intubation, catheter or monitoring device placements or removals. Instead, they provide more clinical observations or interpretations beyond the mere confirmation of tube or line placements, such as identifying changes in pathology or clinically relevant updates.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12600,latent_12600,3226,0.006452,0.0023679144,1.7832893,"Comparison of current and prior imaging findings, noting stability or changes.","Higher activation levels are observed in cases where the description requests a comparison between the current and prior images, specifically dealing with potentially different or stable findings, including devices or pathological changes. The examples of stable findings or noting any changes when compared to prior images trigger higher activations.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12601,latent_12601,709,0.001418,0.0009239909,3.1184192,Explicit interval changes noted relative to prior images.,"The highest activation levels occur when there is a direct and detailed comparison between current and prior images, leading to descriptions of changes or stability in radiologic findings. This pattern highlights descriptions where current findings are contextualized with explicit changes from or comparisons to previous imaging studies.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5666550643926209,0.5743589743589743,0.581081081081081,0.4526315789473684,95.0,100.0
+12602,latent_12602,1133,0.002266,0.0011500022,3.297881,Detailed anatomical observations with clinical correlation.,"Examples with higher activation levels commonly include detailed anatomical observations and comparisons, often specifying findings in relation to known conditions or previous imagery. This suggests the model identifies stronger activation with comprehensively described anatomical changes and their clinical correlation, whereas reports emphasizing stable findings or absence of notable changes result in lower activation.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.5353535353535354,0.5353535353535354,0.5353535353535354,99.0,99.0
+12603,latent_12603,2607,0.005214,0.0020118852,1.6962466,Requests for detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently involve providing radiological interpretations that explicitly compare current imaging to prior imaging, particularly noting specific changes or stability. These are requests for detailed analysis of progression or stability in patient condition based on imaging comparisons.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12604,latent_12604,1511,0.003022,0.0014294457,2.5281677,Description of interval medical device placement or removal.,"The pattern is associated with cases where a prior report or image is provided, and the interpretation discusses a notable change or intervention, such as newly added catheters, ports, or other medical devices. This differs from cases with stable reports or no intervention noted.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4910941475826972,0.54,0.6052631578947368,0.23,100.0,100.0
+12605,latent_12605,773,0.001546,0.0008638247,2.2142513,Description involves comparison to prior imaging.,"In these examples, activation is high when there is a direct request or provision to compare current imaging findings to a prior study or explicitly indicate that an observation is being made through such a comparative lens. The pattern emphasizes the importance of serial comparisons in radiographic interpretation.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.40625,0.43,0.45,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12606,latent_12606,3595,0.00719,0.0026822074,1.6107122,Comparison of current and prior images using both frontal and lateral views.,"Higher activations are observed in examples mentioning multiple views (frontal and lateral) being compared with prior imaging, indicating a comprehensive evaluation is a key feature in these representative samples.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5295766189570613,0.53,0.5319148936170213,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12607,latent_12607,1092,0.002184,0.0011632817,3.0389235,Persistence of findings across multiple imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples involve persistent findings observed in successive imaging studies. These examples indicate stable or continuous conditions such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or other opacities, rather than new or resolved changes.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5754716981132075,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12608,latent_12608,480,0.00096,0.00078199443,2.546001,Mention of bilateral findings in radiological exams.,"The pattern described involves references to bilateral findings which can be pathologies like pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or other bilaterally symmetric abnormalities. These summaries consistently mention ""bilateral"" findings in the context of the discussed radiological assessments, indicating a focus on symmetric thoracic pathologies.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7345217634597706,0.7469135802469136,0.6615384615384615,0.6935483870967742,62.0,100.0
+12609,latent_12609,580,0.00116,0.0008477602,2.9676826,Detailed comparison with prior images emphasizing minimal changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on radiographic studies that include a detailed comparison with prior studies, emphasizing minimal changes or stability over time. This pattern is common in follow-up examinations for monitoring known conditions or equipment placement, accentuated by phrases like 'as compared to the prior' or 'no significant change.'",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5659990651181187,0.5823529411764706,0.4925373134328358,0.4714285714285714,70.0,100.0
+12610,latent_12610,338,0.000676,0.00059890136,2.712616,"Emphasis on comparisons in reports, noting changes or stability.",The high activation examples consistently use positional terms or observations related to changes or stability of medical devices or anatomical features when comparing current and prior imaging studies. This repetitive pattern highlights significant attention to what has changed or stayed the same through imaging comparisons.,0.537037037037037,0.5555555555555556,0.5,0.85,20.0,25.0,0.3427230046948356,0.3428571428571428,0.2450980392156862,0.625,40.0,100.0
+12611,latent_12611,619,0.001238,0.00093189435,3.5509844,Detailed interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation discuss changes, improvements, or notable findings from the prior image in comparison to the current one, especially when indicating new or resolved issues.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4403815580286169,0.4545454545454545,0.3661971830985915,0.3376623376623376,77.0,99.0
+12612,latent_12612,543,0.001086,0.0008840069,3.9006505,Detailed comparative analysis of imaging findings over time.,"Examples with high activation levels indicate a strong emphasis on comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. The reports often include a detailed description of how findings have changed or remained stable over time, focusing on intervals of time or specific details from past reports, emphasizing the importance of comparative evaluation in radiological assessments.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5139826422372227,0.5178571428571429,0.4235294117647059,0.5294117647058824,68.0,100.0
+12613,latent_12613,409,0.000818,0.0006877758,2.8949368,Mentions of comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Images analyzed for this pattern have references to prior imaging studies for comparison. This common practice in radiology provides context by evaluating current results against previous findings, often using the word 'comparison' or references to prior dates.",0.4444444444444444,0.4897959183673469,0.4871794871794871,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.416289592760181,0.4266666666666667,0.35,0.84,50.0,100.0
+12614,latent_12614,323,0.000646,0.0005532879,3.1508572,Detailed comparison of current and prior findings and their changes.,"The examples with high activation consistently highlight multiple simultaneous observations about changes or stability in imaging findings compared with prior exams. This frequent mention of comparative analysis indicates a primary focus on assessing change over time or stability within the context of follow-up observations, embodying detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior states.",0.5180952380952382,0.5217391304347826,0.4827586206896552,0.6666666666666666,21.0,25.0,0.3824884792626728,0.4402985074626865,0.1525423728813559,0.2647058823529412,34.0,100.0
+12615,latent_12615,5038,0.010076,0.0036479773,1.9332318,Description of medical tubes or devices and their positions.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve descriptions of radiological findings, particularly the position of medical tubes or devices, along with notation of any changes from previous imaging. Common phrases include 'has been removed', 'unchanged', or specifications of device positioning, highlighting the precise documentation of equipment or anatomical changes over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4521103896103896,0.46,0.4473684210526316,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12616,latent_12616,521,0.001042,0.0007591505,2.4581096,References to interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern that emerges from the activated examples involves explicit recognition of changes or stability in findings over time when compared to prior studies. These reports frequently reference 'as compared to previous' or 'interval change' to emphasize progression, resolution, or stability of conditions, indicating a focus on temporal change analysis.",0.6743464776251662,0.6938775510204082,0.6216216216216216,0.9583333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5541521486643438,0.5542168674698795,0.4591836734693877,0.6818181818181818,66.0,100.0
+12617,latent_12617,400,0.0008,0.0006324596,4.241035,Multiple image views (frontal and lateral) with no prior image for comparison.,"High activation examples involve explicit mentions of multiple image views (e.g., both frontal and lateral), indicating that the model is highly activated when provided with comprehensive data, even when previous comparison is noted as 'None'. This suggests that the model's activation is driven by structured input with multiple imaging perspectives rather than the presence of a prior image for comparison.",0.5820181731229077,0.5869565217391305,0.55,0.5238095238095238,21.0,25.0,0.485061875420701,0.5751633986928104,0.3333333333333333,0.2264150943396226,53.0,100.0
+12618,latent_12618,1775,0.00355,0.0015023901,2.6112576,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation often compare findings against previous radiological images or examinations, specifically noting changes or the lack thereof in cardiac silhouette, lung condition, or effusions. There are both direct size comparisons and mentions of unchanged states from previous reports, emphasizing interval change evaluation.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12619,latent_12619,227,0.000454,0.00049877964,3.8486702,Presence of detailed comparison comments in radiology reports.,"The high activation examples all involve descriptions of findings in radiological studies that emphasize comparison with prior images, with clear indications that the initial description involves a normal current examination. They match this description to a prior study with an additional directive to provide a description that explicitly includes the comparison.",0.4145658263305322,0.4210526315789473,0.2857142857142857,0.4615384615384615,13.0,25.0,0.3939868462261196,0.4186046511627907,0.1891891891891892,0.4827586206896552,29.0,100.0
+12620,latent_12620,4788,0.009576,0.0033742131,1.3967056,Evaluation of changes or stability through comparison with prior images.,"The highly representative examples repeatedly discuss comparisons to previous imaging studies, using explicit temporal references or descriptive phrases indicating stability, change, or lack of change in specific clinical findings. This type of analysis is common in tracking longitudinal changes or confirming stability in medical imaging.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5063291139240507,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12621,latent_12621,1056,0.002112,0.0010144458,1.7474161,Focus on documented interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels focus on detailed observations involving interval changes, comparisons of current to prior imaging, or stability of known findings. They mention specifics like persistent or resolving conditions from previous imaging reports and demonstrate attention to variations or stability over time.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12622,latent_12622,1406,0.002812,0.0012654797,2.3619876,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, indicating change or stability.","The commonality in high activation examples is the description of radiology study findings in relation to prior images, with observations on changes or stability. This often involves similar phrasing about intervals or comparisons to previous exams, which shows a heightened interest in monitoring progression or stability of conditions.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5365853658536586,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12623,latent_12623,4553,0.009106,0.003266018,1.5315764,Describes interval changes or stability in image comparison.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve comparisons of current imaging findings against prior examinations and describe specific interval changes or stability. This often includes technical details, patient condition updates, and the current status of ongoing pathologies or medical interventions as seen on the radiographic study.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12624,latent_12624,3586,0.007172,0.0026233164,1.3513768,"Interval changes in pleural effusion, pneumothorax, and atelectasis compared with prior imaging.","The examples with high activation often discuss the presence or changes related to pleural effusions, pneumothorax, atelectasis, and their interval changes when compared to prior imaging. These represent common significant findings in radiological evaluations that can impact patient management, especially when considering the evolution of the condition over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5344888961910239,0.575,0.6829268292682927,0.28,100.0,100.0
+12625,latent_12625,3252,0.006504,0.002446224,1.5093536,Explicit description of change from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation highlight new or changing pathologies compared to a previous exam, especially when this change is explicitly described with specific findings that have evolved, improved, worsened, or remained stable over time.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5789473684210527,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12626,latent_12626,530,0.00106,0.00088923395,3.975336,Comparison of stable medical device positions in radiology imaging.,"Highly activated examples primarily involve stable findings over time, comparing current imaging results with previous studies, often referencing medical devices (especially pacemakers) or procedures (such as implants) that demonstrate consistent positioning or status.",0.779205138498595,0.78,0.8181818181818182,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5805920375478612,0.6347305389221557,0.575,0.3432835820895522,67.0,100.0
+12627,latent_12627,463,0.000926,0.0007428457,3.8807793,Calcified granulomas noted as unchanged or stable in comparison views.,The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention calcified granulomas as either unchanged or providing specific context. This finding is not uncommon in chest radiographs and often suggests a stable or chronic granulomatous process within the lungs. The inclusion and unchanged status of calcified granulomas appear to activate the pattern recognition strongly.,0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.7719298245614035,0.8205128205128205,1.0,0.5,56.0,100.0
+12628,latent_12628,1106,0.002212,0.0011679145,2.6441689,"Stable findings compared to prior imaging, often despite device placement or minor changes.",The activation levels indicate that the pattern involves stability or minimal changes in certain findings between the current and prior images even when there are minor changes or additions like medical devices or minor effusions.,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5227272727272727,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12629,latent_12629,1667,0.003334,0.0014621501,3.57705,Descriptions comparing current and prior images.,The higher activation levels are linked to findings that compare the current state to a previous state. This involves using phrases that reference a baseline or changes from a previous image. Such a pattern is indicative of monitoring for stability or progression of medical conditions.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12630,latent_12630,927,0.001854,0.0010986043,2.5686839,Use of 'interval' to describe changes from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activations are characterized by the usage of the term 'interval' alongside descriptions of changes or stability in medical device placement, anatomic features, or pathological findings. The use of 'interval' indicates observed changes (or the lack thereof) from a prior study, suggesting its salience in identifying significant findings.",0.75,0.7551020408163265,0.8333333333333334,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6487641215171294,0.665,0.7894736842105263,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12631,latent_12631,480,0.00096,0.0007477301,4.068154,Evaluation for changes in medical intervention or tube placement between current and prior images.,"The pattern is based on the examination and comparison of current and prior radiological images with a focus on evaluating changes over time, particularly for line or tube placement (like ET tubes or Dobbhoff), and assessing for interval changes associated with medical interventions or condition monitoring (e.g., resolution of pneumothorax, positioning of tubes). Reports often specify indications and findings related to these interventions, which activate higher due to their critical and recurrent nature in clinical settings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6247139588100686,0.6341463414634146,0.527027027027027,0.609375,64.0,100.0
+12632,latent_12632,437,0.000874,0.00079585804,3.5077858,Comparison with prior radiographs indicating unchanged or stable findings.,"These examples focus on comparing the current radiographic findings with those from prior images, indicating whether any changes have been observed or asserting the stability of findings over time (such as unchanged size of mediastinal features or heart silhouette). The pattern involves repeatedly mentioning comparative evaluation against prior images.",0.5493311036789297,0.5510204081632653,0.5454545454545454,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5543497920057876,0.5844155844155844,0.423728813559322,0.4545454545454545,55.0,99.0
+12633,latent_12633,6353,0.012706,0.004654525,2.1522775,Comparative descriptions of current radiological findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels commonly involve specific comparisons between current and previous radiological findings, explicitly highlighting changes or stability over time. This includes phrases like 'improved since', 'new compared with', or 'unchanged compared with'. These comparisons are a distinctive feature of radiology reports, especially when looking for interval changes or stability in chronic conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12634,latent_12634,450,0.0009,0.00066419895,2.6385202,Reports focus on placement and characteristics of medical devices.,"These examples consistently discuss the placement and positioning of medical devices such as pacemakers, PICC lines, chest tubes, and surgical hardware. They often note changes in device positioning, stability, or other characteristics, making these the key elements of the pattern. This focus on device-related findings separates these from other examples.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5949776548201745,0.6089743589743589,0.4647887323943662,0.5892857142857143,56.0,100.0
+12635,latent_12635,4104,0.008208,0.0028928968,1.1766505,Emphasis on stability or lack of change compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels describe detailed findings of the chest or other anatomical sites in comparison to prior imaging, where stability or lack of significant change is noted. This suggests the model is detecting a pattern of chronic or stable conditions, often using structured radiological descriptions and terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'improvement' compared to a baseline, focusing on observed consistency over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.525,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12636,latent_12636,714,0.001428,0.0009240863,2.4863508,Notable changes in radiological findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of changes in radiological findings between current and prior images, particularly emphasizing the presence of pulmonary or mediastinal conditions and tracking their progression over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.553941672362725,0.5706806282722513,0.5714285714285714,0.3956043956043956,91.0,100.0
+12637,latent_12637,873,0.001746,0.0009553975,1.954877,Comparison of current and prior chest radiographs.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve descriptions of findings based on consistent terminology with special attention given to details of prior and current imaging comparison specifically for lung findings, mediastinum, cardiac silhouette, and presence of opacities or effusions. They all mention the same imaging type: chest radiograph.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12638,latent_12638,3088,0.006176,0.0023656015,2.5286396,Assessment of unchanged or stable findings by comparison with prior image.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the evaluation of findings in the image in comparison to a prior image, specifically noting changes. This pattern suggests the importance of assessing stability or changes over time based on prior imaging, especially looking for unchanged conditions or previous findings that are not deteriorating.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5052631578947369,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12639,latent_12639,576,0.001152,0.0006961533,3.631536,Presence of pulmonary findings such as pneumothorax or emphysema.,"High activation examples involve the presence of specific pleural or pulmonary findings such as pneumothorax, emphysema, and opacities in the frontal radiograph images. These findings significantly impact radiological assessments and are commonly highlighted in reports, whereas low activation cases do not prominently feature these findings.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4707068444046152,0.5371428571428571,0.4210526315789473,0.2133333333333333,75.0,100.0
+12640,latent_12640,4092,0.008184,0.0030290084,1.5805521,Detection of foreign bodies or medical devices on imaging.,"Highly activated samples consistently feature the detection and description of foreign bodies or invasive medical devices within the body, such as safety pins or catheters, identified on the images. This pattern is distinctive and unambiguous in the radiology context.",0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.65,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5194805194805194,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12641,latent_12641,269,0.000538,0.00047667336,3.3822095,Findings related to low lung volumes or emphysematous changes.,"The samples with higher activation levels describe observations of low lung volumes or features associated with emphysematous changes. This pattern involves associated effects like accentuation of mediastinal structures and obscuring of physiological structures, commonly noted in patients with COPD or other conditions leading to decreased lung expansion.",0.6047058823529412,0.6190476190476191,0.5294117647058824,0.5294117647058824,17.0,25.0,0.5754750175932442,0.7007874015748031,0.3225806451612903,0.3703703703703703,27.0,100.0
+12642,latent_12642,2655,0.00531,0.0020246087,2.2308302,Descriptions of interval change or stability assessment in imaging.,"The pattern shows the model is activated by cases where changes or stability are assessed in imaging studies, especially when there's an ongoing medical condition being monitored. High activation aligns with examples involving dynamic elements like interval changes, comparison claims, or stability claims over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12643,latent_12643,521,0.001042,0.0007090332,2.4776607,Detection and description of significant changes or new findings in comparison to prior images.,"Analyzing the most representative examples, the pattern captures scenarios where there is a significant change or new finding noted in comparison to prior images, especially involving dynamic conditions like pneumothorax, effusions, or notable interval change in findings like aortic repair or catheter placement. The pattern involves identifying and explicitly describing changes between current and prior images, as evidently noted in the high-activation examples.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5462628277036853,0.588957055214724,0.46,0.365079365079365,63.0,100.0
+12644,latent_12644,2149,0.004298,0.0015818459,1.2703066,Comparison of current imaging findings to previous studies or reports.,"Samples with high activation include descriptions compared to previous imaging findings or past studies, even when the current findings appear stable or unchanged. This aligns with the core pattern identified earlier where the emphasis is placed on comparative radiology analysis.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5194805194805194,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12645,latent_12645,597,0.001194,0.0008792025,3.5251894,Comparison of current to prior imaging for stability or change.,"The examples with high activation focus on comparing current and prior imaging to assess stability, interval change, or persistence of findings. The indication of 'Comparison' is a significant factor, even when specifically noting any changes or stability, which is a prevalent pattern in radiology report language to judge the progression or stability of any observed condition.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4634301126447723,0.4662921348314606,0.4247787610619469,0.6153846153846154,78.0,100.0
+12646,latent_12646,2017,0.004034,0.0016558301,2.5131164,Documentation of interval changes in monitoring/support devices in imaging reports.,"This pattern identifies scenarios where the current and prior images are compared to assess changes or stability over time. Many examples describe intervals and technique or tube placements, which are recurrent elements, even when not significantly changed, in complex medical imaging assessments, such as with endotracheal tubes or catheter placements.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,100.0,100.0
+12647,latent_12647,944,0.001888,0.0009342322,3.30332,Mentions of lung volumes impacting radiographic evaluation.,"The pattern identified here is the mention of lung volumes, often in the context of radiographic quality (e.g., 'suboptimal inspiration', 'low lung volumes'), and its impacts on interpreting radiographic findings. These descriptions evaluate the adequate inflation of the lungs, which is critical for proper visualization and assessment of thoracic structures in radiological imaging.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4076171004691882,0.435,0.3859649122807017,0.22,100.0,100.0
+12648,latent_12648,884,0.001768,0.0009832248,4.243997,Detailed comparison with prior images focusing on stability or change.,"The pattern among the examples with higher activations is detailed comparison to prior imaging, highlighting specific changes or lack thereof, focusing on stability or changes in conditions such as positioning of medical devices or anatomical alterations due to various reasons. The examples with higher activation specifically mention comparisons and intervals, indicating a focus on documenting change over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12649,latent_12649,463,0.000926,0.0007734461,4.0983777,Focus on comparison findings with prior images.,"The high activation examples focus on providing findings or impressions based on comparisons with prior imaging studies, suggesting that this pattern is about identifying changes or lack thereof in radiological findings compared to earlier images. Phrases like 'as compared to', 'stable', or 'unchanged' are used in this context.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4711030449687436,0.4746835443037974,0.3893805309734513,0.7586206896551724,58.0,100.0
+12650,latent_12650,1431,0.002862,0.0011873118,2.369876,Descriptive comparisons of changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels detail findings of comparison between images and usually mention alterations, removals, or procedural changes (e.g., removal of tubes, presence of pneumothorax) that are clearly identifiable between current and prior images. Such comparisons are often used to summarize significant interval changes or stability in a condition indicating updates or maintenance in patient care.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+12651,latent_12651,2735,0.00547,0.0021840776,2.931919,Reports emphasizing stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The instances with higher activation levels frequently mention the comparison of current imaging findings to previous images and emphasize stability or subtle changes in observed conditions, often involving lung opacities, effusions, or device placements. These descriptors are tied to stable conditions without noteworthy progressions needing immediate attention, hence their relevance in this pattern.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5177418943394301,0.5226130653266332,0.525,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+12652,latent_12652,5409,0.010818,0.0038082656,1.1812919,Description of interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of radiological findings where a direct comparison is made with prior imaging, highlighting interval changes. This common practice is essential for tracking the development or resolution of medical conditions over time, suggesting a focus on continuity of care and detailed follow-ups.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12653,latent_12653,814,0.001628,0.00091821695,2.7363744,Improvements in lung condition post-intervention or unchanged status.,"In these examples, maintained or improved lung status is reported following specific interventions, such as chest tube placements. Descriptions of re-expansion of the lung or resolution of pneumothorax, as well as unchanged findings (e.g., catheter placements) are common. These observations align with interval improvements, indicating such interventions lead to improved radiographic findings over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.683218101822753,0.685,0.7176470588235294,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12654,latent_12654,448,0.000896,0.0007406833,3.1298213,Frequent observation of lung hyperexpansion suggesting chronic pulmonary disease.,"The highly activated examples frequently reference the findings of 'hyperexpansion of the lungs', often associated with chronic pulmonary disease, along with detailed specific descriptions of lung, cardiac, or diaphragmatic states. This pattern denotes an emphasis on detecting and describing features indicative of chronic, non-acute pulmonary conditions on chest imaging.",0.7536945812807883,0.76,0.8823529411764706,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6231032794909447,0.7077922077922078,0.6666666666666666,0.3333333333333333,54.0,100.0
+12655,latent_12655,5232,0.010464,0.0038553905,2.7907894,Combination of descriptive findings and comparisons to prior images.,"Prompts with non-zero activation levels often feature a combination of description and comparison based on prior imaging, along with specific medical interventions or conditions indicated (like tube placements, pneumonia evaluation, etc.). They include detailed technical assessments often involving line placements or comparisons with previous studies, indicating stability or change.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12656,latent_12656,1250,0.0025,0.0015653434,2.3754363,Comparative radiological findings indicating changes or stability.,The examples with high activation levels predominantly include comparisons with prior imaging which reveal changes or establish stability in findings. Patterns or phrases indicating such comparative analysis against previous images are key triggers for the pattern observed.,0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.5862068965517241,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12657,latent_12657,1026,0.002052,0.0011067571,2.2905817,"Reports comparing findings to prior imaging studies, noting stability or intervals.","The examples with high activation are characterized by descriptions that refer to prior imaging for comparison, showing stability or intervals, and often involve specific evaluation requests like placement checks, cardiomegaly, or interval changes. They typically involve terms such as 'comparison to', 'unchanged', or explicit mention of study dates for relative evaluation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4299429942994299,0.43,0.4313725490196078,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12658,latent_12658,530,0.00106,0.00070329796,3.4154718,Comparison to prior imaging with indication of improvement or stability in findings.,"Samples with high activations consistently provide a comparison with a prior image and report a positive or stable outcome indicating improvement or no worsening of findings compared to previous imaging, often focusing on lung or pleural conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4405658414811733,0.4876543209876543,0.3076923076923077,0.2539682539682539,63.0,99.0
+12659,latent_12659,4563,0.009126,0.003277039,2.2360983,Emphasis on interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The activations highlight when current imaging findings identify clear, specific changes from prior imaging reports, often indicating a clinical intervention or new development. These cases often emphasize details like 'interval placement', 'decreased size', or 'new since prior', distinguishing them from other examples that are more general or stable without explicit change statements.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12660,latent_12660,1222,0.002444,0.0010877977,2.4632404,Utilization of multiple current and prior images for comprehensive assessment.,Several examples indicate the examination of multiple images (current frontal and lateral views along with prior frontal images) suggesting thorough evaluation and eventual detection of pertinent findings based on this comprehensive assessment. The higher activation is associated with the integration of multiple perspectives for interpretation.,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.442866801893171,0.485,0.4903225806451612,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12661,latent_12661,357,0.000714,0.00071258127,3.801576,Evaluation of pneumonia using frontal and lateral chest views.,"The pattern involves cases in which examinations are conducted using frontal and lateral views of the chest in patients with symptoms suggesting pneumonia (indicated by terms like 'eval pneumonia', 'r/o pna', 'eval for PNA'). This context is indicative of a clinical investigation of potential chest infections.",0.7088103534096566,0.7111111111111111,0.6666666666666666,0.7,20.0,25.0,0.6447677616119194,0.6620689655172414,0.4705882352941176,0.7111111111111111,45.0,100.0
+12662,latent_12662,877,0.001754,0.0008951034,3.0493543,Comparison between current frontal & lateral views vs prior frontal.,"The examples with significant activations detail patterns where descriptions are typically given in the context of different projections or comparisons with multiple images (i.e., frontal and lateral views compared to prior frontal only). This suggests the model is sensitive to responses that require multi-view image analysis.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.4842105263157895,0.46,100.0,100.0
+12663,latent_12663,2205,0.00441,0.0017174341,1.7637385,Emphasis on comparison to prior images with minimal or vague documented changes.,"Examples with higher activations consistently highlight comparisons to prior radiographs without specifying exact changes. They request assessments of current radiological findings in relation to previous imaging using vague or minimal specifics, relying on imprecise comparative statements such as 'similar', 'same', or lacking definitive differences documented explicitly.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12664,latent_12664,501,0.001002,0.0008043985,2.8803396,Use of frontal and lateral views with no acute findings in comparison analysis.,The examples with high activation levels include frontal and lateral chest views and involve providing comparison analysis with prior imaging. These examples systematically include comprehensive anatomical descriptions without acute findings.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5339834515366431,0.5421686746987951,0.4358974358974359,0.5151515151515151,66.0,100.0
+12665,latent_12665,1528,0.003056,0.0013346623,2.2517607,"Radiology findings in comparison to prior studies, focusing on device positions or pathology progress.","The pattern involves actively comparing findings with previous images, often with specified observations such as changes in devices' positions or progression of conditions. This particular comparison-driven reporting style frequently involves noting changes in medical device placement or specific pathology evaluations over time, such as line tip locations or pulmonary changes.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12666,latent_12666,739,0.001478,0.0009876769,2.7282016,Describing findings by comparison with prior images.,"The examples indicate radiological examinations where findings are described by comparing current images to prior studies. This pattern is evident by the continuous emphasis on changes, stability, or comparisons with previous examinations.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4708110516934046,0.4736842105263157,0.4561403508771929,0.5777777777777777,90.0,100.0
+12667,latent_12667,460,0.00092,0.0007895893,2.9754357,Comparison with prior imaging studies and explicit changes noted in conditions.,"High activation levels coincide with the consistent linguistic structure of reference to a prior imaging study and the description of the current findings in comparison with specific orientation or changes. This typically involves detailing alterations in condition, equipment position, or the presence/absence of additional symptoms or features.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5407557184380134,0.5632911392405063,0.4153846153846154,0.4655172413793103,58.0,100.0
+12668,latent_12668,2021,0.004042,0.0015353627,2.105571,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels include comparison with prior imaging, evaluation of specific changes over time, and a detailed progression or stability of earlier findings, which is a common aspect of radiological assessments.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.559322033898305,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12669,latent_12669,3589,0.007178,0.002727336,1.4932418,Task involves describing findings as compared to prior images.,"High activation levels occur when the task explicitly involves describing current findings in comparison to prior images, especially when changes or stability are mentioned. This pattern is evident across most high-activation examples.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5880959736381424,0.6,0.5746268656716418,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12670,latent_12670,1699,0.003398,0.0015147595,2.3900456,Focus on differences in image findings compared to prior studies.,"High activation examples consistently describe changes or stability in findings by comparing the current images with prior imaging studies, especially focusing on specific features (lung volumes, pleural effusions, tubes, etc.) as opposed to the nature of findings themselves. The style emphasizes precise language about imaging comparisons without detailed impressions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5045045045045045,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12671,latent_12671,5042,0.010084,0.003626198,1.1914128,Focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe comparisons between current and prior radiographs, making specific note of changes in medical devices, lung conditions, or other pathologies over time. This frequent referencing of interval changes in structures or medical interventions is a key pattern in these reports.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.614448051948052,0.62,0.5967741935483871,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12672,latent_12672,3380,0.00676,0.0024647037,1.4958162,Reports mentioning medical equipment placement or changes.,"Higher activations are associated with reports that specifically describe equipment positioning, such as chest tubes or endotracheal tubes, often mentioning the specific location or changes in their position compared to prior examinations. This pattern helps to identify adjustments or findings related to procedural or post-surgical details.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5913115870733369,0.595,0.6172839506172839,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12673,latent_12673,5589,0.011178,0.0040385677,1.5151297,Emphasis on comparing current image findings with prior images and noting interval changes.,"Examples with high activations focus heavily on the description of findings in comparison with previous images, specifically referring to 'comparison' or describing an 'interval change' or lack thereof. This comparison-oriented language is crucial in these examples.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5863019995403356,0.595,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12674,latent_12674,923,0.001846,0.00096305873,1.8492552,Presence of noted or emphasized anatomical changes without reference to prior studies.,"Responses emphasize findings such as enlargement or notable conditions (e.g., cardiac silhouette enlarged, tortuous aorta, specific opacities) often highlighted directly in assistant's report. Despite not mentioning previous imaging explicitly, descriptions give particular attention to abnormal findings or anatomical characteristics.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5793334052421529,0.61,0.7391304347826086,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12675,latent_12675,5118,0.010236,0.0036905736,1.4577363,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size irrespective of other pathologies.,"The pattern exhibited in the high activation examples frequently involves stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes or heart contour stability despite presence of other pathologies. This includes examples where cardiomediastinal contours or heart size are specifically mentioned to be unchanged even when other findings like pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, or atelectasis are present.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12676,latent_12676,7181,0.014362,0.005077356,1.2654765,Assessment of interval change in radiological findings.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently discuss interval changes or lack thereof in imaging findings when compared to prior studies. These include stability of findings, changes in effusion or atelectasis, and placement of medical devices, indicating a pattern focusing on tracking progression or stability over time.",0.6063424947145877,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5665598975016015,0.5728643216080402,0.5609756097560976,0.69,100.0,99.0
+12677,latent_12677,2617,0.005234,0.0029826153,3.6317933,Unchanged cardiac and thoracic anatomy between imaging studies.,"The pattern observed is a consistently unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette in chest imaging reports. Activations indicate focus on the presence of certain anatomical features (e.g., tortuosity), while cardiac and mediastinal evaluations that don't raise concerns also contribute. Additionally, comparative language indicating consistent features between scans and finding no significant new pathology in these areas match high activations. Examples with high activations often mention unchanged cardiac, mediastinal or thoracic characteristics, including calcifications or tortuosity, also supporting comparison.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.5526315789473685,0.42,100.0,100.0
+12678,latent_12678,576,0.001152,0.0006700586,2.9718766,Analysis using both current lateral and prior frontal images.,"The reports that activate suggest detailed instruction regarding the evaluation of comparative chest imaging data, distinctively incorporating multiple image perspectives (including lateral views), and often reference multiple prior studies to ascertain longitudinal changes indicating a more thorough temporal analysis process.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4746637531552575,0.5059523809523809,0.3728813559322034,0.3235294117647059,68.0,100.0
+12679,latent_12679,2296,0.004592,0.0019368662,2.9072657,New or changed findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples where activation levels are above 3.0 often pertain to chest imaging findings that are ""new"" or ""changed"" from prior imaging studies, suggesting change or progression in pathological features like opacities, effusions, or structure positioning. This pattern identifies significant updates in the patient's condition.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5121552604698671,0.5175879396984925,0.5256410256410257,0.41,100.0,99.0
+12680,latent_12680,431,0.000862,0.00068451324,1.9730325,"Comparison of current findings with prior images, involving both frontal and lateral views.","The high activation examples consistently involve providing findings from current images, including both frontal and lateral views, and comparing these findings directly with those from prior images.",0.5070679434564523,0.5106382978723404,0.4761904761904761,0.4545454545454545,22.0,25.0,0.4984126984126984,0.5189873417721519,0.3676470588235294,0.4310344827586206,58.0,100.0
+12681,latent_12681,823,0.001646,0.0009882206,2.106759,Descriptive changes identified from comparisons with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve the use of comparative language in radiology reports to describe changes in imaging findings against prior reports. These usually emphasize interval changes or confirmations of stability with the use of phrases like 'As compared to the previous radiograph', 'unchanged from', or 'stable since prior'.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12682,latent_12682,1688,0.003376,0.001370281,2.1862245,Emphasis on subtle cardiac/pulmonary changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparison with prior imaging where the findings highlight changes or stability in conditions, often reflecting on cardiomegaly, cardiac silhouette size, or pulmonary edema. The examples focus on subtle variations like ""mild to moderate enlargement"" or ""mild pulmonary edema.""",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4455086198205464,0.45,0.4390243902439024,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12683,latent_12683,4469,0.008938,0.0032730862,1.5023035,Evaluation of interval change based on comparison with previous images.,"The examples with higher activations describe the findings on the radiological images in comparison with prior imaging. The pattern involves explicit comparisons or evaluations of changes over time, emphasizing the identification of incremental changes, improvements, or stability in radiological findings across different or serial examinations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12684,latent_12684,1089,0.002178,0.001100004,2.3188183,Comparison with prior imaging and assessment of changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently analyze current images in conjunction with prior images. These reports emphasize the importance of incorporating information from previous imaging to assess stability or changes over time. This comparison allows for a more thorough evaluation, frequently mentioning stability, interval changes, and consistent findings across studies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4634146341463415,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12685,latent_12685,3852,0.007704,0.0027596124,1.3975165,Monitoring and assessment of tubes or catheters compared to prior image.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve the presence and monitoring of tubes, catheters, and interventional lines, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, in comparison to the prior frontal image. They focus on assessments of these placed devices often alongside assessments of intrathoracic changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5691467002942412,0.59,0.6607142857142857,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12686,latent_12686,479,0.000958,0.0007517514,3.9638174,Consistency or change in support and monitoring device placement.,"The examples with high activation levels notably focus on tracking the consistency of medical devices' placement, particularly endotracheal and nasogastric tubes, across current and previous imaging studies. This pattern is consistently highlighted in radiology reports where any change or stability in the position of support and monitoring devices is crucial.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4454716658106489,0.4810126582278481,0.3,0.3103448275862069,58.0,100.0
+12687,latent_12687,633,0.001266,0.00093282387,2.4544244,Comparison of imaging findings with prior images.,"The highly activated examples focus on instructions to describe current imaging findings in the context of prior images. This involves linguistic cues like 'comparison', 'compare', and describing features seen in both current and previous images, often using explicit images provided with the text.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4078325898714248,0.423728813559322,0.4031007751937984,0.6753246753246753,77.0,100.0
+12688,latent_12688,716,0.001432,0.0009993226,2.8740845,Recognition of changes or new findings from prior imagery.,"In the examples provided, high activation levels correspond with descriptions indicating changes or developments in the findings when compared to previous imaging. This implies that the model is particularly attuned to recognizing descriptions where changes have been identified, notably those indicating worsening or new findings, from previous imaging studies.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5594405594405594,0.5625,0.5476190476190477,0.5,92.0,100.0
+12689,latent_12689,4338,0.008676,0.0030792342,1.4546815,Descriptions involve comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"These examples reference a comparison between current and prior imaging, noting interval changes, and apply specific medical terminology that reflects radiological comparisons such as 'no change', 'increased', or 'improved' regarding findings. The consistent theme is identification of changes over time using direct imaging comparisons.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12690,latent_12690,599,0.001198,0.0006855209,2.7803526,Current findings emphasized over comparative or non-substantive details.,"Examples with high activation levels involve detailed findings or conditions in current images without direct comparison or significant progression remarks to prior imaging unless specifically included. The pattern observed is the requirement of current abnormal findings or detailed pathology without explicit comparison, merely recorded as narrative details or unrelated impressions in the prior report.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4936819172113289,0.4939759036144578,0.4134615384615384,0.6515151515151515,66.0,100.0
+12691,latent_12691,1449,0.002898,0.0012803035,2.1241758,Description of temporal changes compared to prior chest images.,"Samples with higher activation levels feature descriptions that change over time, noting interval improvements or deteriorations, and describe comparisons with prior chest radiographs. This pattern indicates attention on temporal changes or assessments of stability/variations in radiological findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12692,latent_12692,879,0.001758,0.001026224,2.0585349,Focus on changes in medical device placement or extubation status.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of interval changes, particularly noting the positioning and stability of medical devices like tubes or catheters, extubation status, and details around intervention outcomes. Apparent changes related to intubation/extubation or medical devices often signal important updates in patient management and correlate with significant clinical events or interventions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5283018867924528,0.28,100.0,100.0
+12693,latent_12693,773,0.001546,0.0009777469,3.4763997,Focus on Dobbhoff tube positioning or placement in imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to the confirmation and evaluation of positioning for Dobbhoff tubes or similar enteric feeding tubes. This pattern is distinct due to the focus on changes or confirmation of placement relative to prior imaging studies or expected positions, typically involving a detailed discussion of tube paths and their terminations in the gastrointestinal structure.",0.6155585707824514,0.66,1.0,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.6012271820831415,0.654639175257732,0.9655172413793104,0.2978723404255319,94.0,100.0
+12694,latent_12694,2332,0.004664,0.0018598392,1.7269527,Patterns focus on comparing current and prior images and evaluating changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve providing a description and interpretation of a current image in direct comparison to a prior image, with notable change or stability in specific findings. These examples indicate that the requirement for comparison and evaluation against prior data is central to the pattern.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+12695,latent_12695,647,0.001294,0.000804744,2.8404217,Bilateral pleural effusions or atelectasis-related changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples reveal a pattern of descriptions related to the presence of pleural effusions, atelectasis, or opacities, often accompanied by references to bilateral changes or improvement/resolution compared to prior studies. These patterns are indicative of common thoracic findings, particularly in contexts of evaluating effusions or aeration changes.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5660559305689489,0.6111111111111112,0.6190476190476191,0.325,80.0,100.0
+12696,latent_12696,4313,0.008626,0.003093072,1.2409754,Discussion of radiological findings relative to earlier images.,"These examples consistently describe an analysis comparing radiological findings to previous images. This pattern indicates assessing for changes or stability over time. Descriptions usually note new or stable findings, referencing prior studies with terms like 'compared to prior', 'since previous', and date comparisons.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4381225346916768,0.505,0.5029585798816568,0.85,100.0,100.0
+12697,latent_12697,1379,0.002758,0.0012070895,2.0335317,Comparative analysis with noted unusual thoracic findings.,"Most examples with higher activation levels explicitly include descriptions of unusual or abnormal findings in the thoracic region, analyzed in the context of prior imaging or historical data, thus illustrating patterns of change or stability over time. This points towards the importance attributed not just to comparative analysis but also unusual findings when compared to a standard reference.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12698,latent_12698,361,0.000722,0.0004978929,3.026911,"Presence of medical devices or interventions, noted in comparison to prior imaging.","Examples with high activation levels consistently reference specific medical devices or interventions seen on imaging, such as tubes, lines, or devices, along with a comparison to prior studies. This suggests the pattern is specifically about noting medical and procedural items on radiological images alongside comparative analysis.",0.5820181731229077,0.5869565217391305,0.55,0.5238095238095238,21.0,25.0,0.5266750948166877,0.5486111111111112,0.3478260869565217,0.5454545454545454,44.0,100.0
+12699,latent_12699,4909,0.009818,0.0035079774,1.48412,Patient rotation affecting radiological interpretation.,"These examples illustrate situations in radiology reports where patient rotation is present, potentially impacting the interpretation. The rotated position can skew the appearance of structures, such as heart size or pleural effusion detection, which may lead to comments on stability or notable imaging difficulties.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,1.0,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3311036789297659,0.495,0.0,0.0,100.0,100.0
+12700,latent_12700,3375,0.00675,0.0024423518,1.1261603,Focus on comparison across views and modifications in medical devices or interventions.,"Examples with higher activations involve comparing current imaging studies with previous ones, mentioning changes or stabilities across different views (frontal and lateral). There are often references to specific medical devices, procedures, or catheter placements, and adjustments or removals of tubes typically highlight ongoing treatment or monitoring, indicating careful attention to changes and interventions in the medical context.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4198980597561318,0.485,0.4910179640718562,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12701,latent_12701,984,0.001968,0.0011146466,3.1982346,Comparative description of findings based on prior images.,"This data consistently involves prompting for an analysis that compares current imaging findings with those of prior imaging studies. The focus on interpreting interval changes using detailed previous records is central across these examples, indicating a pattern of examination within a comparative framework.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4869565217391304,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12702,latent_12702,329,0.000658,0.00056912826,4.654501,Assessing and reporting the position of tubes in relation to anatomical landmarks like the carina.,"The pattern involves the evaluation or placement of tubes such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, etc., in relation to their specific placement above anatomical reference points, such as the carina. These examples frequently note distances from the carina to describe tube positions, which is a critical aspect when ensuring proper tube placement in medical imaging.",0.9528508771929824,0.9534883720930232,0.9,1.0,18.0,25.0,0.8628350639942044,0.8873239436619719,0.825,0.7857142857142857,42.0,100.0
+12703,latent_12703,2214,0.004428,0.0018451567,1.5129503,Positioning and stability of medical devices in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the positioning or stability of medical devices like pacemakers, PICC lines, chest tubes, or catheters in radiology reports. This is a specific pattern where the presence, positioning, and stability of such devices are explicitly described, often emphasized when they are unchanged over sequential images.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.6,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12704,latent_12704,981,0.001962,0.001043122,2.1603017,"Detailed analysis or description of findings, often in terms of previous imaging.","The examples with high activation feature scenarios that involve documenting findings of images (frontal, lateral) with explicit mention of what was seen or expected from a prior imaging, even when historical details like a specific comparison aren't available, indicating a focus on thorough direct analysis or description.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3672243672243672,0.41,0.4407894736842105,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12705,latent_12705,2450,0.0049,0.001908079,1.8571651,Interpreting changes over time in serial radiologic images.,"The representative examples consistently mention comparing current radiologic findings to those in prior images, with explicit instructions to describe changes or confirm stability. This pattern indicates a focus on evaluating changes over time in serial imaging studies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12706,latent_12706,1206,0.002412,0.0011743766,2.224527,Focus on comparison with prior images in radiology reports.,"The pattern consistently involves providing an analysis of radiology findings with an emphasis on comparative evaluation to prior images. These reports frequently highlight changes or stability in conditions relative to previous images, utilizing comparative language.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12707,latent_12707,1065,0.00213,0.0012303957,2.9066148,Attention to tube placement and positioning in reports.,"Analysis reveals that these examples highlight descriptions concerning tubes, such as PICC lines, Dobbhoff tubes, or ET tubes. These reports frequently mention the correct or altered positioning of these devices in comparison to previous examinations. This consistent focus on tube placements correlates to the activation levels.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.45,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.6393650793650794,0.645,0.6933333333333334,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12708,latent_12708,818,0.001636,0.00091933826,1.994739,Comparison to prior imaging with mention of interval changes.,"These examples consistently involve the presence of an explicit mention of comparison to prior imaging reports alongside findings that have likely or possible changes. They describe specific medical conditions or interventions, often with language like 'unchanged', 'interval', or 'compared to prior' and highlight detected progressions, stabilizations or device placements.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5094819159335289,0.5284974093264249,0.5161290322580645,0.3440860215053763,93.0,100.0
+12709,latent_12709,463,0.000926,0.0007327698,3.9654553,Descriptions focusing solely on current findings without comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on providing a precise, clear description of current findings without comparison. These reports typically follow a structured approach, including ordered descriptions of the chest images reviewed without reference to external or prior information.",0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6846096929337773,0.7161290322580646,0.62,0.5535714285714286,56.0,99.0
+12710,latent_12710,449,0.000898,0.0009918417,3.5230544,Comparison of frontal and lateral chest images with prior studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve detailed findings and comparisons between both frontal and lateral chest images, often correlating them with prior imaging studies. This comprehensive approach to interpretation underscores thoroughness in reporting changes and assessing current conditions, indicative of a nuanced examination pattern.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5059026778001727,0.5064102564102564,0.3894736842105263,0.6607142857142857,56.0,100.0
+12711,latent_12711,3531,0.007062,0.0025678873,1.6891769,Comparison hindered by positioning or other non-uniform factors.,"The pattern highlighted by the data is characterized by changes or effects that are not directly comparable with a prior image. The examples with higher activation often describe discrepancies due to changes in patient positioning or differences between images that aren't straightforward comparisons, leading to difficulty in evaluating and comparing conditions. In contrast, zero activation examples do not highlight such challenges.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5899589958995899,0.59,0.5918367346938775,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12712,latent_12712,674,0.001348,0.0008920195,2.4035602,Explicit instructions for comparison with prior image.,"These examples highlight the cases where direct comparison of a current image to a prior image is explicitly required, even when there are no additional findings reported. The presence of explicit instructions to compare with the prior, even in the absence of new findings, distinguishes these examples.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5333598206430741,0.5396825396825397,0.5081967213114754,0.6966292134831461,89.0,100.0
+12713,latent_12713,399,0.000798,0.0006772038,3.8241324,Little or no change compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation levels correspond to examples where there is an explicit comparison to prior imaging studies and findings conclude with statements of 'little change', 'no appreciable change', or 'unchanged'. This language indicates a focus on stability or lack of progression in radiological findings, a pattern emphasized by the activation levels.",0.8071135430916552,0.8085106382978723,0.7241379310344828,0.9545454545454546,22.0,25.0,0.7006739791198626,0.7019867549668874,0.5333333333333333,0.9411764705882352,51.0,100.0
+12714,latent_12714,507,0.001014,0.0008522455,3.333882,Enlarged cardiac silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that have high activation levels consistently highlight changes in the cardiac silhouette size, indicating enlargement compared to prior imaging. This is a significant pattern in radiological assessments as it helps distinguish ongoing, unchanged, or progressing conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.513395830131653,0.6335403726708074,0.55,0.180327868852459,61.0,100.0
+12715,latent_12715,623,0.001246,0.00092282135,3.3440673,Presence of recurring observation terms like 'again' in findings.,"These examples reflect a common pattern in radiology reports where findings are compared to previous examinations, especially those that note recurrent or unchanged conditions. The use of words like 'again' suggests repetition or persistence of certain findings over time, indicating no significant change.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5481413461211442,0.5989010989010989,0.6153846153846154,0.2926829268292683,82.0,100.0
+12716,latent_12716,510,0.00102,0.00083317835,2.671955,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples rated with higher activations mention descriptions of imaging findings that are compared to prior images and include mentions of changes or stability in features or structures between the images such as lungs, heart, tubes, or effusions. These explicitly compare the current state with a previous one, noting changes or the absence thereof, which is the distinguishing feature of these examples.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4605267991624113,0.4606060606060606,0.3775510204081632,0.5692307692307692,65.0,100.0
+12717,latent_12717,409,0.000818,0.0006964453,2.8667648,Prompts with explicit instructions to compare current findings to prior images.,"High activation levels correspond to examples containing requests to describe findings by actively comparing current images with prior studies. The prompts include direct instructions to compare, often formatted as a request to 'provide a description of the findings...in comparison to the prior image,' implying analytical comparison of image changes over time.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.4864864864864865,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.3137767984207869,0.3175675675675675,0.2612612612612612,0.6041666666666666,48.0,100.0
+12718,latent_12718,618,0.001236,0.00077234895,2.580088,High activation with specific findings in complex medical contexts.,"All highly activated examples include descriptive comparisons between current and prior imaging, often in complex medical scenarios or with specific historical or clinical indications. They tend to involve evaluations or changes over time that could impact the diagnosis, without explicit template mentions of 'comparison: none', even when prior images might not be available. The use of complex medical contexts involving comparison, noted through exact repetition or near repetition of findings across different examples - such as vessel placement, tube status, atelectasis assessment, or continued lung issues - adds to the complexity and aligns with the highest activation.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5425925925925925,0.543859649122807,0.4678899082568807,0.7183098591549296,71.0,100.0
+12719,latent_12719,809,0.001618,0.00094106625,2.3232162,In-depth comparison to prior images to note changes or stability.,Activated examples frequently involve detailed analysis of radiographic findings based on visible images (frontal with or without lateral) paired with comparisons to previous imagery. This may indicate a focus concerning interval changes or stability in pathologies with listed prior conditions/tests.,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12720,latent_12720,6322,0.012644,0.004481758,1.4230368,Comparison showing stability or improvement from prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently reference changes or reassessment of findings in comparison to prior imaging, particularly focusing on stable or improved findings after indicating a concern or notable history.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5487804878048781,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12721,latent_12721,1636,0.003272,0.0013296321,2.4305105,Discussion of interval changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation discuss the findings in terms of 'compared to' or reference a 'prior' radiograph when noting changes, specifically focusing on newly appearing or resolving conditions. This suggests that the pattern captures the tracking of changes or continuity across serial imaging studies to suggest stability, improvement, or new developments.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12722,latent_12722,748,0.001496,0.0008656189,2.2162428,Explicit comparison between current and prior radiographs indicating interval changes or stability.,"Examples that show activations exhibit a pattern of direct comparison to a prior radiology study which results in the identification of interval changes or stability. This involves phrases like 'Compared to the prior radiograph' and explicit descriptions of changes or stability, which are emphasized in the impression or findings.",0.3189102564102564,0.32,0.3333333333333333,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5185185185185185,0.5833333333333334,96.0,100.0
+12723,latent_12723,1956,0.003912,0.0014955779,2.170843,Instructions emphasize comparing current images to prior ones for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on providing explicit instructions to describe findings in current images compared to prior images, with a clear request to evaluate changes between current and prior imaging, based on descriptions involving explicit comparison language and context.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12724,latent_12724,1306,0.002612,0.0013730383,3.7101038,Descriptive evolution between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation values emphasize the existence of serial comparisons that highlight changes over time which are clinically relevant or indicative of progression or improvement of a condition. They describe specific changes observed between current and prior imaging, providing a narrative on the evolution of the patient's condition such as resolution or emergence of findings.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5364906832298137,0.5477386934673367,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,99.0
+12725,latent_12725,692,0.001384,0.00092416536,3.9228354,Hyperexpansion of lungs indicating chronic pulmonary disease.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference chronic pulmonary disease characterized by hyperexpansion of the lungs, with descriptive terms such as 'hyperexpansion', 'flattened diaphragms', or 'barrel chest'. This pattern is indicative of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease findings on imaging reports.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7729480330257407,0.786096256684492,0.9272727272727272,0.5862068965517241,87.0,100.0
+12726,latent_12726,4855,0.00971,0.0035378311,2.519367,Detection of interval changes in findings compared to previous studies.,"High activation level examples consistently feature direct comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting specific changes such as improvements or worsening of previously noted conditions. This pattern reflects the model's focus on identifying explicit interval changes between studies rather than static findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5447154471544715,0.545,0.5473684210526316,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12727,latent_12727,7346,0.014692,0.0052175494,1.3957392,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,Most highly activated examples feature a clear and direct comparison to prior imaging through phrases indicating findings have changed or remained stable since a specific prior study. This implies emphasis on comparison with past images rather than just a presence of particular findings.,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12728,latent_12728,5201,0.010402,0.003732236,1.6151962,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in chest imaging findings.,"The pattern consistently emphasizes stable cardiomediastinal contours or silhouette in the context of radiographic examinations, even when other changes are noted, such as lung fields or pleural effusions. This reflects a common reporting style that assures readers about constant cardiovascular structures despite other variable findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4705882352941176,0.24,100.0,100.0
+12729,latent_12729,679,0.001358,0.0009091098,2.934555,Comparison of position or status of medical devices between current and prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve the presence of or changes to medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or ports noted in comparison to prior images. When these devices are unchanged or adjusted slightly between comparative studies, this pattern emerges, as often seen in follow-up checks after procedures involving such devices.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6090592334494773,0.6149732620320856,0.6052631578947368,0.5227272727272727,88.0,99.0
+12730,latent_12730,515,0.00103,0.0008263168,3.0505962,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"The representative examples indicate a pattern of comparing current imaging findings to a prior study for noticeable interval changes or stability, explicitly detailing whether there are changes or stability of particular findings. This includes phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'when compared', and 'since prior' to denote examinations over time.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4107359817385221,0.4121212121212121,0.3518518518518518,0.5846153846153846,65.0,100.0
+12731,latent_12731,872,0.001744,0.0011509577,3.1317146,Description of pleural effusion or hemidiaphragm elevation over time.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the presence of pleural effusions or elevated hemidiaphragms, often in the context of chronic conditions or comparisons to prior images that show consistent findings across time, such as 'elevated hemidiaphragm' or 'unchanged pleural effusion'.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6814884097171314,0.685,0.7341772151898734,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12732,latent_12732,3479,0.006958,0.0025932526,1.851109,Thoracic aortic tortuosity or dilation in comparison studies.,"Many examples highlight imaging studies involving a comparison to prior imaging to assess interval changes, yet focus specifically on findings related to the thoracic aorta. This pattern often entails tracking changes such as tortuosity, dilation, or calcification relative to previous images.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.04,100.0,100.0
+12733,latent_12733,2979,0.005958,0.0022963234,1.5659001,Updates on lung conditions or device positions compared to prior images.,"In this set, the reports with high activation levels frequently note changes or stability in lung conditions, device placements, or effusions compared to prior images. The comparison to prior results and ongoing state changes such as drainage, atelectasis improvement, or effusion increase are explicitly highlighted.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12734,latent_12734,669,0.001338,0.0008263878,3.11931,"Detailed comparison of findings with prior images, noting changes or stability.","Samples with higher activation levels involve providing a description of findings in comparison to a prior image, especially focusing on any mentioned detailed comparisons or supposed changes between the images (e.g., resolution, stability, or changes in specific findings). This pattern is significant in diagnosing progress or stability.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4640797880629577,0.4751381215469613,0.4054054054054054,0.3703703703703703,81.0,100.0
+12735,latent_12735,675,0.00135,0.0010339757,4.018367,Comparison between current frontal/lateral and prior frontal images.,"The examples exhibit a pattern where both current frontal and lateral images are compared to prior frontal images, often using phrases like 'Given the current frontal image', 'prior frontal image', and 'Provide a description of the findings'. This pattern suggests that comparisons across multiple views are conducted to evaluate changes or stability in radiological findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4828720109823452,0.4887640449438202,0.4453781512605042,0.6794871794871795,78.0,100.0
+12736,latent_12736,618,0.001236,0.0009573681,2.708899,Evaluation of findings in both frontal and lateral images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings related to both frontal and lateral imaging views, which appear to influence the model's activation. These examples use language reflecting consideration of multiple imaging angles, which provides comprehensive information on various aspects like cardiac silhouette, lung volumes, or other anatomical details.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4957264957264957,0.5028248587570622,0.4545454545454545,0.7142857142857143,77.0,100.0
+12737,latent_12737,435,0.00087,0.00068546657,2.953638,Unchanged or stable cardiac device positioning.,"The high activation examples all involve reference to the condition of cardiac devices, such as pacemakers or defibrillator leads. These detailed assessments of the unchanged or stable position of cardiac devices, possibly in combination with unchanged heart size or silhouette, appear prominently in high activation examples.",0.4745920745920746,0.5306122448979592,0.5555555555555556,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4729948163424559,0.6064516129032258,0.3636363636363636,0.1454545454545454,55.0,100.0
+12738,latent_12738,480,0.00096,0.000775278,3.4959002,No prior imaging study used for comparison.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently have no prior imaging study used for comparison, whereas those with low activation often compare current findings to previous images, indicating that the presence or absence of prior comparisons is key to the observed activation levels.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5232887124699126,0.5534591194968553,0.4,0.4067796610169492,59.0,100.0
+12739,latent_12739,1907,0.003814,0.0016382473,2.2328262,Comparison shows interval change or stability without new pathology.,"These examples describe changes observed in the radiology study compared to a prior image. Such comparisons often assess interval changes and stability of symptoms or medical devices. Reports highlighting unchanged or stable findings despite past concerns are given higher activations, as they focus on the resolution or persistence of previously noted anomalies.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12740,latent_12740,1652,0.003304,0.00137908,1.807528,Comparison with prior images to assess interval changes.,"These examples describe changes in radiological findings over time, often comparing current findings to prior exams, and highlight stability, improvement, or resolution of findings. Such descriptions are common in radiology reports to assess progress or stability of a condition over serial imaging.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12741,latent_12741,1907,0.003814,0.0015497062,2.4456081,Reports involving change or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The model seems to activate more strongly for reports that include intervals of change, either improvement or stability, when comparing current image findings to prior images. This reflects common radiological practice of assessing ongoing issues or treatments through sequential imaging assessments.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12742,latent_12742,667,0.001334,0.00078302243,3.3381193,Comparison to prior imaging with specific clinical concerns.,"Examples exhibit high activations when they include both a mention of comparing findings to prior images and the presence of some kind of clinical concern or indication, such as the assessment of pneumonia, pleural effusion, fractures, or similar concerns, evaluated through new and compared imaging findings.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4543236413280274,0.4569892473118279,0.4137931034482758,0.4186046511627907,86.0,100.0
+12743,latent_12743,1917,0.003834,0.0016486511,2.05944,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images to prior frontal image.,"These examples utilize a pattern requesting analysis of current frontal and lateral images compared to prior frontal image, indicating a focus on comparison tasks using multiple modalities and attention to interval changes across varied pathologies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5392156862745098,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12744,latent_12744,3407,0.006814,0.0025840187,2.4864295,Acute findings without prior comparison.,"The prominent examples (37, 45) that show activation involve abnormal findings, like pneumomediastinum or shrapnel causing acute conditions, showing no prior comparisons available or incidental findings. This suggests the pattern involves absence of prior comparisons due to acute processes requiring immediate attention.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4166666666666667,0.51,0.55,0.11,100.0,100.0
+12745,latent_12745,1887,0.003774,0.0014454023,2.024777,Changes or stability over time in radiological findings from comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations describe changes in the radiological findings over time, emphasizing intervals or stability comparing current images with prior imaging studies. Where changes or stability over time are noted, they demonstrate the pattern, such as 'interval placement,' 'resolved opacity,' or 'stable nodular density.'",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12746,latent_12746,538,0.001076,0.00087508996,2.6580966,Explicit detailed comparison of current and prior images.,"The highly activated examples describe the findings from current and prior images, emphasizing comparison and evaluating changes or stability over time. They detail changes or stability in observed findings specifically by comparing with previous images, even if prior reports are unavailable, enhancing diagnostic decision-making.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5549895115373089,0.5636363636363636,0.4545454545454545,0.5384615384615384,65.0,100.0
+12747,latent_12747,2794,0.005588,0.00213,2.239929,"Documentation of positioning/changes of lines and tubes, with unchanged radiological findings.","The examples show a pattern where a change in the position or status of lines and tubes, such as a nasogastric tube or venous catheter, is documented without additional major changes in the radiological findings. The examples mention unchanged statuses of pre-existing conditions or highlight positions of lines and tubes explicitly.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5555555555555556,0.25,100.0,100.0
+12748,latent_12748,588,0.001176,0.0007872434,2.4573402,Reports comparing current chest x-ray findings to prior images.,"Examples with high activation describe findings in current chest x-ray images in comparison to prior images, often highlighting stability or changes in pathological conditions. They frequently reference previous imaging, which aids in monitoring disease progression or treatment response.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4227994227994228,0.4318181818181818,0.4016393442622951,0.6447368421052632,76.0,100.0
+12749,latent_12749,830,0.00166,0.0012327022,2.6928403,Emphasis on unchanged findings in comparison to prior scans.,"The pattern is focused on specifying what is evident from current scans in comparison to previous images, even highlighting absence of notable changes. Non-zero activations often emphasize stability or unchanged conditions relative to past images and specifically call out routine checks or consistent findings over time.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5173890608875129,0.5276381909547738,0.5428571428571428,0.38,100.0,99.0
+12750,latent_12750,571,0.001142,0.0007532376,2.8260057,Lateral chest X-ray views emphasized for mediastinal evaluation.,"High activation samples describe findings from the lateral chest X-ray view, a more uncommon view compared to frontal X-rays, emphasizing detailed mediastinal evaluations and comparisons with prior frontal images. This contrasts with lower activation samples which focus more on straightforward frontal images without lateral descriptions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5739348370927317,0.5941176470588235,0.5079365079365079,0.4571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+12751,latent_12751,1663,0.003326,0.0015856286,1.850884,Multiple perspectives provided for radiological evaluation.,"The model activates higher in examples where multiple image perspectives (frontal and lateral) are provided, often alongside additional comparisons or complex clinical histories. This suggests the model is geared towards more comprehensive and in-depth evaluations of radiological findings when multiple views are available.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,100.0,100.0
+12752,latent_12752,4974,0.009948,0.0035163288,1.4292557,Consideration for clinical correlation or further evaluation.,"The pattern here is examples highlighting clinical correlations, recommendations for further testing, or interpretations often found in radiology reports. Specifically, when findings are less definitive, radiologists might recommend further clinical correlation or additional imaging. Terms like 'if clinically warrant', 'consider CT', 'recommend correlation', 'clinical correlation', are commonly used when findings aren't conclusively diagnostic and need further investigation or consideration.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4120307553143374,0.48,0.4375,0.14,100.0,100.0
+12753,latent_12753,3957,0.007914,0.0029719824,1.5459818,Directive to compare images without available prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve explicit instructions to provide additional comparative analysis between current and prior images, even in the absence of prior images. This suggests the model is tasked to prioritize reports requiring comparisons, reflecting a distinctive pattern of analysis across available and noted images despite the comparison being physically unavailable.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4533463727776524,0.455,0.449438202247191,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12754,latent_12754,471,0.000942,0.00080773927,2.6639688,Chin or arms obscuring radiographic view.,"Examples with high activation feature situations where view obstruction affects the interpretability of radiographic images, making specific observations difficult due to factors like patient positioning, overlying objects, or insufficient technique.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,1.0,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6262053649699024,0.7371794871794872,1.0,0.2678571428571428,56.0,100.0
+12755,latent_12755,287,0.000574,0.0006409528,3.4957762,"Clear lungs, no consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, with normal cardiomediastinal silhouette.","The examples with high activation levels consistently describe clear lungs without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax alongside normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes. This combination of observations suggests a pattern focusing on the normalcy of these specific attributes in radiological assessments.",0.8541666666666667,0.8571428571428571,0.7894736842105263,0.8823529411764706,17.0,25.0,0.7952477249747218,0.8222222222222222,0.6078431372549019,0.8857142857142857,35.0,100.0
+12756,latent_12756,2519,0.005038,0.0019467124,1.8867157,Focus on changes/stability in comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activations typically emphasize comparisons and changes between the current study and prior images, often noting minor variations or stability in certain clinical contexts, which appears to be informative for the model's task.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5099411566477435,0.5226130653266332,0.5190839694656488,0.68,100.0,99.0
+12757,latent_12757,623,0.001246,0.00087764324,3.9047854,Instructions to compare current with previous image findings.,"The examples with higher activation emphasize the comparison between current and prior studies, explicitly asking for an analysis based on previous imaging results, shown by their structured format surrounding images and consistent language indicating prior comparisons.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4234155781325592,0.4293785310734463,0.3983050847457627,0.6103896103896104,77.0,100.0
+12758,latent_12758,890,0.00178,0.0010287724,1.8682766,Focus on interval changes in pathology or device placement.,"The highly activated examples feature comparisons between current and prior images, indicating changes or stability in conditions such as effusions, infiltrates, pneumothorax, and placement of medical devices. This pattern is about monitoring for interval changes, often in patients with critical conditions or following surgical interventions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5447154471544715,0.545,0.5428571428571428,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12759,latent_12759,603,0.001206,0.0009554095,3.3107557,Detailed description of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Many samples relate to radiological comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. High activations are strongly linked to detailed comparison reflections, concentrating on stability or changes over time, which reflects the structure and purpose of such reports relying on progressive imaging analysis.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5251561018666842,0.5257142857142857,0.4622641509433962,0.6533333333333333,75.0,100.0
+12760,latent_12760,3417,0.006834,0.0026764758,1.9105625,Placement and position of tubes or catheters in radiographic studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings about the presence or positioning of tubes, catheters, or other support instruments, with a focus on describing the placement of endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or other devices in relation to prior studies. The use of terms describing precise placement such as 'terminates 2.5 cm above carina' or 'position in the SVC' highlights this pattern.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4927536231884058,0.34,100.0,100.0
+12761,latent_12761,854,0.001708,0.0013837661,3.6559832,"Changes between current and prior radiographs, often involving procedures or devices.","The examples with high activation levels consistently discuss changes or updates between the current radiograph and the prior one, especially related to procedures or device placement such as endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes. Phrasing like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' highlights changes or procedural updates, showcasing direct comparisons between images.",0.75,0.76,0.6857142857142857,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6998025016458196,0.715,0.6482758620689655,0.94,100.0,100.0
+12762,latent_12762,1052,0.002104,0.0011589389,3.0872018,Presence of both frontal and lateral images for examination.,Text prompts with available latitudinal or lateral images for comparison alongside frontal images tend to receive higher activations. Examples with both frontal and lateral images but lacking explicit comparison statements have low activations. This suggests the pattern is more related to the inclusion of frontal images compared to latitudinal and lateral images.,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3942688514405529,0.415,0.437956204379562,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12763,latent_12763,414,0.000828,0.00061459217,2.9435802,Lack of detailed comparison to prior imaging where 'comparison' is noted as 'N/A' or absent.,"The high-activation examples lack specific details in the 'comparison' section, typically marked as 'N/A' or 'none.' These prompts focus on describing current findings without established prior comparisons, thus highlighting an interest in current states rather than changes over time.",0.5955654101995566,0.6041666666666666,0.5625,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.5323887516790156,0.5328947368421053,0.4,0.7307692307692307,52.0,100.0
+12764,latent_12764,1392,0.002784,0.0013784411,3.5638363,Presence of atelectasis in lung imaging studies.,"These examples frequently describe the presence of atelectasis, which is a common finding in radiologic reports, especially in patients with conditions such as COPD or previous thoracic surgeries. The examples note bibasilar or focal atelectasis explicitly, often in combination with mild cardiomegaly or demineralization, which are not as prevalent across the data set.",0.67003367003367,0.673469387755102,0.7,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12765,latent_12765,876,0.001752,0.0010442678,2.2360146,Comparison for stability or change in tube or device placement.,"Examples with high activation involve identifying consistent changes or monitoring specific placement and positions of tubes or medical devices, often with emphasis on comparable stability or noticeable changes since the prior examination. This involves recurrence of stable readings or recognition of unchanged or new placements of devices and tubes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3938025210084033,0.4170854271356783,0.360655737704918,0.2222222222222222,99.0,100.0
+12766,latent_12766,979,0.001958,0.0011213335,2.480071,Descriptions of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels are present when there is emphasis on comparison between current and prior images that highlight consistency or stability without new or acute changes, despite any noted abnormalities. These descriptions often provide reassurance by indicating the absence of significant progression, which is clinically significant.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3717919252279169,0.385,0.3380281690140845,0.24,100.0,100.0
+12767,latent_12767,1223,0.002446,0.0011989755,2.1327894,Findings described in comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation examples frequently describe findings in reference to prior imaging for comparison, emphasizing changes or stability over time. This aligns well with a radiological approach to assess new imaging in the context of previous results.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12768,latent_12768,441,0.000882,0.0006399513,2.693449,Comparison of changes with prior radiographic findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging, incorporating specific changes or confirmations of stability over time. Even subtle language indicating an assessment against previous images is not present in examples with lower activation levels.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.455105814670228,0.4551282051282051,0.3564356435643564,0.6428571428571429,56.0,100.0
+12769,latent_12769,343,0.000686,0.0005924637,3.1573777,"Cardiomegaly or cardiac silhouette enlargement, often indicating pericardial effusion.","These examples center around findings of cardiomegaly or enlargement of the cardiac silhouette, typically associated with possibilities of pericardial effusion, as consistent thematic medical conditions across the examples, leading to higher activation levels.",0.7254901960784313,0.7380952380952381,0.6875,0.6470588235294118,17.0,25.0,0.5750583354939072,0.6308724832214765,0.4347826086956521,0.4081632653061224,49.0,100.0
+12770,latent_12770,398,0.000796,0.0006926051,2.7131472,Changes in positioning of medical tubes on radiographs.,"These examples repeatedly involve the evaluation of tube positioning in the chest radiograph, noting changes such as insertion, removal, or coiling positions in relation to prior images. This pattern is essential for tracking the management of patient care involving internal medical devices.",0.7388888888888889,0.7446808510638298,0.7777777777777778,0.6363636363636364,22.0,25.0,0.5893850309868107,0.6644736842105263,0.5142857142857142,0.3461538461538461,52.0,100.0
+12771,latent_12771,5055,0.01011,0.0036756634,1.5939553,Positioning or stability of implanted medical devices in chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels typically describe changes or lack thereof in positioning related to medical devices like pacemakers and central lines. The reports highlight specific findings regarding device positioning and its correlation with potential abnormalities or stable conditions, usually examining interval changes or confirming stability in comparison to prior images.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.573170731707317,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12772,latent_12772,695,0.00139,0.0010830574,3.9833379,Radiology report describes current findings as stable or unchanged from previous imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to contain detailed descriptions of current findings correlated with previous imaging, sometimes mentioning improvements or deteriorations but often focusing on stable conditions or unchanged findings. They also note technical or imaging details such as the presence or absence of specific conditions, like aortic tortuosity or pleural effusion, stressing stability over change.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5756410618868565,0.5842105263157895,0.5753424657534246,0.4666666666666667,90.0,100.0
+12773,latent_12773,694,0.001388,0.0009788923,3.714779,Unchanged findings in comparison to previous images.,"Examples with high activation focus on unchanged or stable findings upon comparison with prior images. Terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'similar', and specific reference to comparison with past studies highlight the consistent status of certain features or identified pathologies over time.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5161781268072931,0.5454545454545454,0.5283018867924528,0.3181818181818182,88.0,99.0
+12774,latent_12774,1914,0.003828,0.0016643235,2.7646701,Detailed description of specific radiographic changes compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe comparisons between current images and prior studies, focusing particularly on the resolution or persistence of specific pathologies like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or tube placements. Accurate tracking of changes or stability in these specific findings appears to be the key activating factor.",0.650733752620545,0.6530612244897959,0.6206896551724138,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.5724756729432579,0.5728643216080402,0.5660377358490566,0.6060606060606061,99.0,100.0
+12775,latent_12775,5536,0.011072,0.0039572925,1.3278509,Description of interval changes or stability in lung abnormalities.,"These examples primarily focus on the evaluation of lung abnormalities, consolidation, pleural effusion, atelectasis or other pulmonary conditions, highlighting how they may vary from previous imaging sessions. They often describe interval changes or stability in these pulmonary findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.494949494949495,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12776,latent_12776,594,0.001188,0.0009489952,4.2517066,Alveolar infiltrates with pulmonary vascular redistribution.,"The exemplary samples often describe the presence of alveolar infiltrates and pulmonary vascular redistribution. These descriptors are commonly associated with imaging findings suggestive of fluid accumulation in the lungs, including pulmonary edema or pneumonia, and act as strong indicators for pulmonary vascular concerns, heart issues, or systemic fluid imbalances.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7095543345543345,0.7456647398843931,0.8717948717948718,0.4657534246575342,73.0,100.0
+12777,latent_12777,1087,0.002174,0.0010887786,2.8314843,Discussion of interval change or placement change relating to medical devices or pathology.,"The examples with higher activation levels feature discussions of findings that have changed from previous reports, specifically involving alterations like placements of medical devices or changes in pathology. Such reports often aim to highlight or compare changes over time as determined through repeated imaging examinations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12778,latent_12778,3601,0.007202,0.0026578347,1.855892,Description of stable or changed findings compared to prior study.,"The high-activation examples describe an explicit comparison between current imaging findings and a prior radiological study, focusing on stability or change from previous images. This pattern is emphasized through repeated phrases indicating stability or interval change in the context of the patient's ongoing condition.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5371156957928802,0.5376884422110553,0.5327102803738317,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+12779,latent_12779,674,0.001348,0.00090408156,2.2158,Change or removal of monitoring/support devices compared to prior.,"These examples involve comparisons to prior imaging with emphasis on changes in monitoring and support devices like chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, and central lines. The pattern focuses on changes in these devices as well as reductions or removals of medical equipment such as tubes or catheters.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4227929373996789,0.532258064516129,0.4736842105263157,0.1046511627906976,86.0,100.0
+12780,latent_12780,564,0.001128,0.0008664037,3.5117297,"Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours, no pneumothorax or pleural effusion.","Most high activation examples involve an assessment of the heart, mediastinal, and hilar contours, determining them to be normal with no additional complications such as pneumothorax or pleural effusion. These reports typically aim to provide confirmation of normal cardiac function based on clear images and comparisons with previous studies, effectively ruling out acute issues.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5677083333333333,0.5783132530120482,0.4729729729729729,0.5303030303030303,66.0,100.0
+12781,latent_12781,5577,0.011154,0.0039140773,1.0941905,Detailed comparison to prior imaging revealing change or stability.,"Examples with high activations are characterized by detailed descriptions of specific radiographic findings and actionable changes or stable observations in comparison to prior studies, often involving terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'remains', 'as compared', and specific intervals denoted by times or dates since prior images.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5606395127521888,0.5628140703517588,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,99.0
+12782,latent_12782,1410,0.00282,0.0012755153,2.7789063,Changes or adjustments to medical tubes/catheters in image comparison.,"Highly activated examples describe new findings or changes made to medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or lines based on new images compared to prior ones, often including small adjustments or positional shifts. Such details require specific focus in radiology to ensure correct placement and function of these medical interventions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5381352541016406,0.5628140703517588,0.6111111111111112,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+12783,latent_12783,944,0.001888,0.0010021422,2.8916702,Detailed assessments involving comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"Reports with higher activations consistently involve detailed imaging findings where comparisons to prior images are made to assess changes in medical conditions or interventions. The language often includes terms indicating stability, change, or comparison over time with explicit mentions of positions or conditions specific to previous imagery.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.489903745553463,0.507537688442211,0.5073529411764706,0.69,100.0,99.0
+12784,latent_12784,668,0.001336,0.00093327893,2.8641381,Frequent or explicit comparisons to multiple prior imaging studies.,"Despite some mentions of findings not explicitly linked to prior studies, this activity is most strongly associated with all instances that involve explicit or frequent comparisons to previous imaging. Examples with high activation levels consistently mention comparisons to multiple prior examinations, suggesting a high degree of attention to changes over time or stability in imaging findings in comparison to past radiological reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5805342915169505,0.5810055865921788,0.5188679245283019,0.6962025316455697,79.0,100.0
+12785,latent_12785,632,0.001264,0.00088291423,3.2461517,Detailed reporting of changes or stabilities in findings compared to prior images.,"Most examples with higher activation levels contain detailed and specific comparative studies of current radiographs with prior images, identifying changes or stabilities in medical conditions or device placements. This pattern emphasizes the mentioning of changes or consistency in observations with previous imaging for longitudinal assessment.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.502017608217168,0.5027624309392266,0.4579439252336448,0.6049382716049383,81.0,100.0
+12786,latent_12786,4645,0.00929,0.0032998533,1.3793019,Focus on comparison or interval change with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve descriptions that detail changes, improvements, or stability in patient conditions by comparing them with prior imaging studies. This pattern shows attention to interval changes or evaluative comparisons using phrases such as 'in comparison with', 'unchanged since', or 'compared with the prior frontal image'.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.5,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12787,latent_12787,578,0.001156,0.00083315227,4.218252,Comparisons highlighting stable or changed conditions against prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently entail a comparison between the current imaging findings and prior images, specifically noting interval changes or the stability of prior abnormalities. The focus is on evaluating changes over time by comparing to prior images, as indicated by words like 'comparison', 'unchanged', 'better demonstrated', or phrases describing new findings relative to older images.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5650206175198632,0.5664739884393064,0.4909090909090909,0.7397260273972602,73.0,100.0
+12788,latent_12788,734,0.001468,0.0009990116,4.198387,Low lung volumes mentioned in assessment.,The examples consistently mention the presence of low lung volumes and their related implications. This pattern is common in radiological evaluations where low lung volumes may limit the assessment or correlate with findings like atelectasis or accentuated cardiac silhouettes.,0.8979591836734694,0.8979591836734694,0.88,0.9166666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.7925358585155271,0.7958115183246073,0.8421052631578947,0.7032967032967034,91.0,100.0
+12789,latent_12789,3712,0.007424,0.0027788393,2.0162997,Reports emphasize comparison with prior imaging and changes in findings.,"The pattern is identified based on multiple mentions of 'comparison' to prior imaging in the reports alongside a focus on identifying changes in anatomical or pathological conditions exhibited across the examples. These mentions include details of findings relative to previous studies, highlighting stability, changes, or additional findings upon comparison.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12790,latent_12790,762,0.001524,0.0009496418,2.1547165,Emphasis on interval changes via comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation focus on a detailed description of findings specifically in context of comparing with prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability over time. This pattern is critical in radiology for monitoring disease progression or resolution. The deactivation pertains to lack of context-comparative analysis or stable presentation without significant reference to previous imagery.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3587045173511536,0.358974358974359,0.3557692307692308,0.3894736842105263,95.0,100.0
+12791,latent_12791,689,0.001378,0.00093628094,4.222282,Comparison of current images to prior imaging reports.,"Activation increases when current radiology images are compared with prior imaging reports or explicit references to previous imaging studies exist. The structure, intent, and format emphasize tracking changes over time, enhancing diagnostic accuracy through historical imaging data.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4755492558469171,0.4810810810810811,0.453781512605042,0.6352941176470588,85.0,100.0
+12792,latent_12792,3312,0.006624,0.002505042,1.5627767,Comparison to prior radiological images.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparison to previous imaging studies. This comparison is either explicit or implied with phrases like 'as compared to the prior' or listing changes seen with respect to past imaging. This pattern of referencing past images is typical in radiology reports to track changes in a patient's condition.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4068188620717803,0.455,0.4713375796178344,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12793,latent_12793,1505,0.00301,0.0014190095,2.0711553,Direct request to describe findings compared to prior images.,"The common pattern in the examples with high activation is the presence of explicit guidance to provide a comparison of current radiology findings to prior images. These examples emphasize 'provide a description' comparing the current and prior imaging results, highlighting changes or stability.",0.2621527777777778,0.32,0.3846153846153846,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5173745173745175,0.55,0.5328947368421053,0.81,100.0,100.0
+12794,latent_12794,2519,0.005038,0.0019497675,2.1152062,Comparison with prior images showing stability or lack of new findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention specific findings of change or stability over time when compared to prior images, such as unchanged appearances and absence of new findings. They effectively incorporate language about evaluation of findings in the context of previously noted conditions, with clear mention of the clinical condition and evaluation of previous and current status.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5730337078651685,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12795,latent_12795,595,0.00119,0.00089568284,4.074709,Emphasis on interval findings where no significant change is detected.,"The examples consistently involve radiological comparisons with prior imaging, emphasizing findings where no significant interval changes are noted, often in the context of patients with stable conditions or ongoing monitoring for interval changes. This pattern involves descriptions like 'no relevant change' in the findings as compared to previous radiographs.",0.7584541062801933,0.76,0.7241379310344828,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5960234002081614,0.6011904761904762,0.5125,0.5942028985507246,69.0,99.0
+12796,latent_12796,4163,0.008326,0.002965288,1.9058232,Stable conditions with reference to prior imaging studies.,"Activation is highest for examples where findings are compared to prior imaging results and no significant change is noted, emphasizing stability or mild changes in conditions over time. This implies the pattern highlights stability across imaging studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+12797,latent_12797,1010,0.00202,0.0010780481,3.464808,Focus on interval changes in radiological findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference changes in measurement or positioning over time, focusing on interval changes observed in radiology images such as tube placements, effusions, lung volumes, or opacities.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12798,latent_12798,1360,0.00272,0.0012990356,3.5224524,Presence and positioning of a nasogastric or Dobbhoff tube in radiology reports.,"Reports with a nasogastric or Dobbhoff tube, where its positioning is described and evaluated for placement in the duodenum or stomach, tend to have high activation levels. This pattern is identifiable when tubes are tracked through the gastrointestinal tract with specific terms like 'Dobbhoff' and 'nasogastric'.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5174503422735944,0.57,0.7058823529411765,0.24,100.0,100.0
+12799,latent_12799,3872,0.007744,0.002827531,2.0169458,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging findings.,"High activation examples consistently focus on changes in the patient's condition or treatment as reflected in radiological findings, implied by phrases like 'compared to previous', 'interval change', or 'has been updated'. In contrast, low activation examples may mention stability or lack of prior comparison.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.5474452554744526,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12800,latent_12800,2136,0.004272,0.0016154948,1.4619201,"Comparison with prior imaging to note changes, stability, or resolution.","Examples with higher activation levels involve comparison of current findings against previous or prior imaging to describe changes, stability, or resolution of findings, specifically in medical contexts. The continuous reference to previous imaging establishes temporal links to track progression, stability, or emergence of pathologies.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12801,latent_12801,4277,0.008554,0.0031539302,1.7624395,Comparison with prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference radiological findings related to interval changes or stability over time, typically indicated by direct comparison with prior imaging, signaling the presence of change or the lack thereof which is essential in follow-up evaluations.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12802,latent_12802,2984,0.005968,0.002231624,1.8502704,Structured image comparison focusing on device positioning.,"These examples highlight changes over time in radiological findings with a particular focus on annotations provided for direct image comparison, rather than description-based diagnoses. This pattern is characterized by noting adjustments in positioning and configurations of medical devices, tubes, or existing conditions that are succinctly compared against prior states, often using structured radiological report templates.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.5373134328358209,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12803,latent_12803,468,0.000936,0.00082480285,2.856691,Focus on stable/unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on stable or unchanged findings when comparing current and previous images. Key phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'similar to prior' are indicative of this pattern. It is a common feature in follow-up radiological studies to assess whether there has been progression or regression of a condition over time, which is often clearly expressed in radiology reports.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5654175928866307,0.577639751552795,0.4520547945205479,0.5409836065573771,61.0,100.0
+12804,latent_12804,3108,0.006216,0.0023542745,1.5436854,Detailed comparison of findings with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve scenarios where the findings in current imaging studies are described with direct comparisons to previous images, especially detailed changes or stability over time, indicating a focus on longitudinal assessment in radiology reporting patterns.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5349883747093678,0.535,0.5346534653465347,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12805,latent_12805,471,0.000942,0.0008226804,3.0584059,Progression or changes in condition compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently show an increase or progression of respiratory or cardiac conditions in comparison to prior imaging. These include changes in lung opacities, cardiac silhouette size, or other thoracic anomalies. The comparisons highlight changes over time, serving as key information in monitoring disease progression.",0.2668854252119223,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5239325704441984,0.5408805031446541,0.4,0.4745762711864407,59.0,100.0
+12806,latent_12806,2761,0.005522,0.0021923129,1.927664,Findings based solely on visual comparison with prior images without prior report data.,"The examples with higher activation involve current imaging interpreted in comparison to prior images without explicit prior reports available during this analysis. The instructions explicitly require the assistant to provide descriptions based on visual findings, indicating a shift in analytical responsibility to current observations compared to prior images.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12807,latent_12807,4736,0.009472,0.0033738131,1.7243416,"Comparison of findings to prior imaging studies, noting changes or stability.","Instances with higher activation typically describe changes in imaging findings when compared to prior studies. These changes often entail persistent, unchanged, or new findings detailed clearly alongside previous imaging results. This highlights the importance of describing the interval change or stability in medical evaluations, particularly in radiology.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6199741582427605,0.625,0.6016260162601627,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12808,latent_12808,391,0.000782,0.00065592583,3.3591099,Image analysis lacks specified prior image comparison.,"The triggers for high activation primarily involve image analyses with missing or unspecified comparisons, suggesting that the model is particularly triggered by the absence of direct prior visual references despite the presence of comparisons in text format.",0.6643356643356644,0.6666666666666666,0.6206896551724138,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.5600448933782267,0.564625850340136,0.4,0.723404255319149,47.0,100.0
+12809,latent_12809,5533,0.011066,0.0039379736,1.479428,Direct instructions to provide comparative image analysis.,"The samples with higher activation levels incorporate direct instructions for providing comparative descriptions between current and prior images, using explicit prompts and directions within the text. This is distinct from examples with zero activation, which lack such specific directives.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12810,latent_12810,519,0.001038,0.0007742516,3.1244335,"Normal heart, mediastinal, and hilar contours without acute pathologies.","The samples consistently show descriptions where the cardiac silhouette, hilar, and mediastinal contours are reported as normal or within normal limits, alongside assessments of no acute pathologies such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or focal consolidation. These are standard check points in chest radiology evaluations indicating an absence of acute or urgent findings, emphasizing normal cardiac silhouette.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4940061332589908,0.5333333333333333,0.3888888888888889,0.3230769230769231,65.0,100.0
+12811,latent_12811,396,0.000792,0.00071387395,2.999351,Detailed analysis with comparison of findings across current and prior images.,"Examples with activation levels show detailed descriptions of findings in current and prior images using comparison, even when indicating no change or similarity. The pattern highlights use of detailed radiological assessment across multiple camera angles (frontal and lateral), as well as direct comparisons with older studies for assessment of progressive conditions.",0.515577007459412,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.4344319287998887,0.4353741496598639,0.3085106382978723,0.6170212765957447,47.0,100.0
+12812,latent_12812,675,0.00135,0.0008192652,2.7064104,Comparison of findings with prior images on chest radiography.,"The samples reflected through their activation levels consistently indicate references to descriptions of chest imaging findings by comparison with prior images using consistent terminology, such as 'interval change', 'compared with', 'since prior', and explicit image date references. It highlights changes over time rather than standalone findings.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4095238095238095,0.4193548387096774,0.4112903225806452,0.5930232558139535,86.0,100.0
+12813,latent_12813,2784,0.005568,0.002084801,1.3515221,Direct comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention direct comparisons with prior imaging studies to note changes or the lack thereof. This comparison element appears crucial and is indicative of re-assessing for changes in patient's condition, which aligns with follow-up evaluations or monitoring of disease progression.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4983193277310924,0.5175879396984925,0.5107913669064749,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+12814,latent_12814,3707,0.007414,0.0026347754,1.0819031,"Thorough comparative analysis with prior images, noting changes or stability.","Examples with significant activation levels often include detailed interpretations comparing current and previous radiological findings, specifically noting changes, lack of significant change, or stability in pathology, tubes, or devices. This comparison using phrases like 'unchanged', 'improvement', 'increased', or 'unchanged' is a frequent pattern in clinical radiology reporting.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12815,latent_12815,6423,0.012846,0.00458113,1.2771641,Comparison of interval cardiopulmonary changes or device positions from prior imaging.,"The pattern involves radiological assessments that highlight changes in or comparisons of cardiopulmonary conditions or device placements from prior imaging. These comparisons are detailed with respect to devices, effusions, pneumothorax, lung volume changes, or emphysema as per interval findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12816,latent_12816,3679,0.007358,0.0027546957,1.7282189,Results or findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include not just mentioning that there's a comparison with a prior report, but they also provide specific results or changes noted from this comparison such as the presence of tubes, consistent stable findings, or alterations observed over time, e.g., 'unchanged since the prior study'.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5454423915077943,0.575,0.5496688741721855,0.83,100.0,100.0
+12817,latent_12817,1901,0.003802,0.0016045909,1.8696368,Descriptions focus on comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"The reports focus on descriptions of findings with a specific emphasis on comparing current imaging with prior imaging, especially in terms of changes or stability of certain conditions like cardiac silhouette size, effusion, tube placement, and lung opacities. This pattern is identifiable by mentions of specific comparisons, such as 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', and 'interval change'.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12818,latent_12818,1397,0.002794,0.0013286484,2.1606295,Use of multiple image views and comparison to prior images for detailed assessment.,Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the use of multiple image views (frontal and lateral) and compare findings to prior images. This pattern involves providing detailed descriptions by comparing current findings with previous studies using specific language that indicates follow-up and disease assessment over time.,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3973698290670496,0.465,0.4790419161676646,0.8,100.0,100.0
+12819,latent_12819,816,0.001632,0.0011104976,4.101176,Significant changes or stability in radiological findings over time.,"The activation pattern indicates attention to specific, notable radiological findings in comparison to prior images, especially those findings that suggest or confirm persistent or new abnormalities related to patient management. These examples emphasize the importance of change (or lack thereof) across imaging in patient care.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5585585585585585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+12820,latent_12820,552,0.001104,0.00091164466,2.372999,"Comparisons to prior imaging reports, assessing changes.","These examples contain references to prior imaging studies, emphasizing comparisons between current and previous images. Such comparisons are a standard practice in radiology to evaluate changes or stability over time, indicating relative change or stability of findings. Examples use language suggesting both prior images and stable or persistent findings.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.338366718027735,0.3391812865497076,0.3018867924528302,0.4507042253521127,71.0,100.0
+12821,latent_12821,759,0.001518,0.00090788986,2.3626337,Comparison with prior imaging without explicit prior report details.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve instructions or queries regarding comparison between current imaging and one or more prior imaging studies without an explicit prior report provided, distinguishing these from those with explicit prior details or no comparison instruction.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5068703156938451,0.533678756476684,0.5103448275862069,0.7956989247311828,93.0,100.0
+12822,latent_12822,2559,0.005118,0.0020221064,1.5352519,Comparative status changes in pathology over serial imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples reference a noticeable change or notable stability in radiologic findings over time, often with specific mention of what has worsened, remained stable, or improved compared to previous images. This underscores the model's attention to changes in pathology representation between serial imaging studies.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12823,latent_12823,5123,0.010246,0.0036112294,1.2290076,Focus on serial or interval radiological findings.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently document descriptions of findings and changes in consecutive or follow-up imaging studies, emphasizing the differences in detailed observations over time for monitoring progress of medical conditions or interventions such as tube or catheter repositioning.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+12824,latent_12824,3796,0.007592,0.00275026,1.5620613,Comparative analysis of current and prior image findings with focus on changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples frequently feature detailed, comparative analysis between current and prior imaging findings, with specific emphasis on reporting changes or stability in identified pathologies or structural aspects of the images.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5347719974309569,0.542713567839196,0.536,0.67,100.0,99.0
+12825,latent_12825,746,0.001492,0.00094705616,3.0108654,Comparison findings from both frontal and lateral views.,The pattern indicates that samples with references to findings observed in both the frontal and lateral images tend to have higher activation levels. These samples often note specific details or changes from previous images or emphasize findings detected in different views (frontal versus lateral).,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5481767813426104,0.5482233502538071,0.5408163265306123,0.5463917525773195,97.0,100.0
+12826,latent_12826,609,0.001218,0.0008943709,4.409854,References to interval change or comparison between current and prior radiological studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically incorporate explicit references to current and prior images, suggesting a focus on changes or comparisons. This is consistent across examples with high activation, as they document changes or lack thereof over time, which is emphasized in these cases.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.430226636108989,0.441340782122905,0.416,0.6582278481012658,79.0,100.0
+12827,latent_12827,4986,0.009972,0.0035013654,1.2445662,Notable interval change or stability in comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples describe scenarios where specific imaging findings are compared with prior studies and demonstrate notable changes. Phrases indicating interval changes, progression, resolution, or stability are crucial for radiologists to evaluate conditions over time.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6261682242990654,0.67,100.0,100.0
+12828,latent_12828,511,0.001022,0.0007325574,4.5254893,Comparison to prior imaging for change evaluation.,"Many examples reference previous imaging studies and compare current findings to those. Radiology reports often include comparison to prior studies to assess changes over time, using language like 'little overall change' or describing stability of opacities or positions of medical devices.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4723727792833483,0.4723926380368098,0.39,0.609375,64.0,99.0
+12829,latent_12829,2417,0.004834,0.0018562713,2.3892064,Focus on interval improvements or changes from prior findings.,The examples with high activations emphasize findings that describe interval changes or improvements in conditions from a previous state. Such language typically highlights the progression or regression of certain conditions which is crucial in follow-up reports.,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5775288109307735,0.605,0.7142857142857143,0.35,100.0,100.0
+12830,latent_12830,2568,0.005136,0.0019877716,2.3,"Presence of pleural or interstitial findings, e.g., atelectasis, calcified plaques.","Several examples include descriptions of findings associated with pleural or interstitial conditions, such as calcified pleural plaques and signifiers of atelectasis (e.g., ""rounded atelectasis""). These characteristics are often reported in chest radiographs and prominently noted due to their implications for patient management and potential underlying conditions such as extrapleural fat pads or chronic diseases.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.574468085106383,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12831,latent_12831,2606,0.005212,0.0020474421,1.7991024,Provide detailed comparison descriptions with emphasis on changes since previous images.,"The highly activated examples involve providing descriptions in comparison with prior images and explicitly mentioning changes or their absence since prior examinations. The assistant is asked to provide these comparative descriptions, focusing on interval findings and noting stability or change. Examples with lower activation lack the required comparison or specific request for comparison analysis by the assistant.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4795918367346938,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12832,latent_12832,4002,0.008004,0.0029669555,1.5214906,Comparison of current and previous radiology images for interval changes.,"The examples consistently involve a structured comparison between images, often employing terms from the reports for comparison. These comparisons employ phrases such as 'compared to the previous', 'compared to prior', and reference dates of previous studies. These kinds of description are indicative of change analysis in radiology.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5850191928623301,0.6,0.572463768115942,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12833,latent_12833,1138,0.002276,0.001165285,4.5088873,Evaluation of medical device positions or interventions.,"The examples with higher activations frequently mention the presence of medical devices or interventions (like chest tubes or catheters) and focus on describing their positions and statuses, especially in comparison to previous imaging. This may be indicative of a pattern where our analysis focuses on monitoring support and intervention placements rather than direct pathological findings.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6247654784240151,0.625,0.631578947368421,0.6,100.0,100.0
+12834,latent_12834,3052,0.006104,0.0023513443,1.8703763,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging without acute changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels showed minimal or no acute findings but included comparisons to previous imaging studies with descriptions of unchanged chronic conditions or stable features, often with no new acute processes. The findings emphasize stability over time rather than changes.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4430379746835443,0.35,100.0,100.0
+12835,latent_12835,5261,0.010522,0.0038062648,2.3842967,Analysis of current images compared to prior images.,Examples with higher activation levels frequently contain instructions involving both current and prior images (frontal and/or lateral) along with descriptive comparison statements. This highlights that the model is activated by prompts that demand comparative analysis between multiple images to identify and describe changes or consistencies.,0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12836,latent_12836,4979,0.009958,0.003680011,1.7793545,Comparisons involving positioning of tubes or devices between images.,"The examples with higher activations frequently mention specific radiological findings or changes in findings, particularly involving tubes, lines, or medical devices, in relation to their positions and comparisons between current and previous images. This pattern suggests the model prioritizes instances where the positioning of these elements is compared to previous imaging, often with specific measurements.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5306122448979592,0.26,100.0,100.0
+12837,latent_12837,355,0.00071,0.00056548405,4.061642,"Calcified pleural plaques, often related to asbestos exposure.","The examples consistently describe the presence of pleural plaques, which are often linked to prior asbestos exposure. These plaques are typically noted as calcified and are a distinctive radiological finding, even when other details of the lung parenchyma or cardiomediastinal silhouette might vary.",0.7658802177858439,0.7906976744186046,0.9090909090909092,0.5555555555555556,18.0,25.0,0.5382231404958677,0.7181208053691275,1.0,0.1428571428571428,49.0,100.0
+12838,latent_12838,515,0.00103,0.0008223535,2.4555147,Normal or top normal size of cardiac silhouette and mediastinal/hilar contours.,The majority of the examples containing activations highlight 'normal size or top normal size of the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal and hilar contours.' This pattern indicates an assessment in radiology reports where the heart size and lung area around the heart appear normal which is reassuring despite any other findings present in the report.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.482736324841588,0.53125,0.3529411764705882,0.3,60.0,100.0
+12839,latent_12839,522,0.001044,0.0008665439,2.979247,Medical device placement and positioning changes between scans.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the placement, adjustment, or condition of medical devices (e.g., tubes, lines) along with their positions relative to anatomical landmarks. They also often mention changes in placement or the intervals at which these devices are observed across different scans.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.8260869565217391,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6170432595121513,0.6451612903225806,0.5,0.5272727272727272,55.0,100.0
+12840,latent_12840,1118,0.002236,0.001189806,2.7514975,Descriptive comparison of findings with prior radiological studies.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently include references to specific findings that are compared with prior radiological studies. These reports frequently identify the changes or stability in findings over time. Lower activation examples often lack direct comparative analysis or descriptions of findings relative to prior images.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4869565217391304,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12841,latent_12841,788,0.001576,0.0010020185,3.1882331,Detail of tube positions and their proximity to the carina.,"Reports with high activation levels focus on the positions of endotracheal (ET) or other tubes and their proximity to the carina, often noting if they need adjustment. These are critical findings as tube malposition can have serious clinical implications.",0.75,0.76,0.9333333333333332,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6753460777851021,0.6954314720812182,0.8627450980392157,0.4536082474226804,97.0,100.0
+12842,latent_12842,2511,0.005022,0.0020990055,2.1444154,Repositioning or adjustment of tubes or devices and their comparison to prior image placements.,"The examples with higher activations describe the insertion or adjustment of tubes or devices, such as ETT or NG tubes, along with details of their position within the body, which seems to be the pattern of interest in these examples. These elements are mentioned alongside comparisons to prior images, indicating a focus on placement or configuration changes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5714285714285714,0.28,100.0,100.0
+12843,latent_12843,472,0.000944,0.0007232003,3.1124833,Radiology reports with detailed comparisons to prior images or studies.,"These examples are less complete in terms of findings, impressions, indications, or technique documented when compared to prior images or reports. The correlated examples show a pattern of references to or comparisons with previous studies, indicating ongoing monitoring or change over time, versus cases with no comparison available to a prior image, which focus solely on isolated current findings.",0.4489795918367347,0.4489795918367347,0.44,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4633685663433947,0.463855421686747,0.3904761904761905,0.6212121212121212,66.0,100.0
+12844,latent_12844,6042,0.012084,0.004309218,1.2749003,Comparison of radiological findings with prior images to assess stability or change.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention a comparison of radiological findings with previous images using phrases like 'compared to prior', emphasizing changes or similarities in patient imaging over time. This focus on comparative analysis, looking for stability or change in the condition, embodies the pattern recognized by the model.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12845,latent_12845,3817,0.007634,0.0027609856,1.5094887,Detailed description of interval changes compared to prior images.,"Highly activated samples consistently feature detailed documentation of comparison between current and prior imaging studies, specifically noting interval changes or stability of various observed conditions, often related to pathological changes or medical device placement.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+12846,latent_12846,2907,0.005814,0.002219,1.759617,Comparison of current images to prior images for evaluation of changes.,The examples with higher activation levels all involve a description of radiological findings compared to prior images. This pattern of comparing current and previous findings is common in radiological reports to assess changes over time.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,100.0,100.0
+12847,latent_12847,680,0.00136,0.00085876515,3.19038,Description of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples show radiology findings that provide detailed observations without significant new pathologies or changes from previous imaging. This reflects typical radiology reports where stability or absence of worsening in a condition might indicate a benign state, aligning with medical precautions to monitor but not over-treat unchanged findings.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5099286033020973,0.518324607329843,0.4933333333333333,0.4065934065934066,91.0,100.0
+12848,latent_12848,4471,0.008942,0.004226423,3.216494,"Absence of prior imaging comparison, emphasizing present findings.","In these examples, high activation levels are associated with cases where no comparison of prior imaging is available, and findings emphasize the present assessment without contextualizing changes over time. This pattern highlights uncertainty or the lack of longitudinal data for assessing stability or progression of findings.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.29,100.0,100.0
+12849,latent_12849,635,0.00127,0.0007636748,3.5921352,Low lung volumes or atelectasis noted in findings.,"High activation levels are associated with findings of atelectasis, low lung volumes, and descriptions of lung opacities or changes which could imply subtle pathologies or underlying conditions. This suggests these reports focus on detailed lung volume changes or small atelectatic changes relevant in diagnostic reporting.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5411408906038169,0.5738636363636364,0.5094339622641509,0.3552631578947368,76.0,100.0
+12850,latent_12850,369,0.000738,0.00061698427,4.485619,Presence of surgical clips or devices influencing anatomical interpretation.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe the presence of surgical clips or ortificial devices, often using the verb 'project', in combination with further anatomical aspects, such as the location of these clips or devices in relation to recognizable anatomical structures. This focus on devices like surgical clips influencing interpretation together with anatomical context seems to reflect the observed pattern.",0.733201581027668,0.7333333333333333,0.6666666666666666,0.8,20.0,25.0,0.705894423639255,0.7346938775510204,0.5740740740740741,0.6595744680851063,47.0,100.0
+12851,latent_12851,1392,0.002784,0.0012551454,1.9153627,Presence of low lung volumes in radiology reports.,"The notable pattern in examples with higher activation is the presence or commentary on low lung volumes. These reports often mention low lung volumes explicitly, possibly followed by findings associated with this condition, such as crowding of bronchiovascular structures or related changes like atelectasis. Consistent reference to this specific characteristic seems to drive higher activation in reports, indicating its distinctiveness from other examples.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5523370638578011,0.575,0.6363636363636364,0.35,100.0,100.0
+12852,latent_12852,554,0.001108,0.0008162066,2.3406944,Emphasis on stability or unchanged conditions in follow-up imaging.,"The high activation examples often include phrases or indications suggesting a follow-up or a reassessment based on previous imaging for stable or unchanged conditions. They typically involve direct comparison over time indicating no significant change in size or appearance, implying this stability is relevant to the report context.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4239797760924521,0.4727272727272727,0.2884615384615384,0.2307692307692307,65.0,100.0
+12853,latent_12853,6208,0.012416,0.0044498504,1.7367176,Evaluation and comparison of medical device placement on radiology studies.,"Examples with moderate to high activation involve the detection and evaluation of medical devices, such as tubes and catheters, emphasizing changes or placements linked to comparison with prior images.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5967335416876701,0.6,0.6219512195121951,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12854,latent_12854,852,0.001704,0.0010622129,1.9076353,Focus on comparison with prior for device placement and anatomical changes.,These examples provide descriptions that note changes or stability in specific medical devices or anatomical features when compared to prior images. This indicates a focus on identifying differences or continuity in a patient's current condition relative to the past.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4803921568627451,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12855,latent_12855,1523,0.003046,0.0012782059,2.8878229,Mentions comparison to prior radiology studies.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently included a reference to comparison with previous images. This illustrates that the presence of a direct comparison with past radiological studies is a key element in these examples.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5030674846625767,0.82,100.0,100.0
+12856,latent_12856,5825,0.01165,0.0041822046,1.2914385,Consistent use of comparative assessment with prior imaging reports.,"The consistent presence of comparative language in narrating findings in the context of existing or prior radiology reports is typical in environments where clinical follow-up is required. These examples highlight how historical context impacts current interpretations using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'improvement', and 'compared with CT exam'.",0.5440850686752325,0.5714285714285714,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12857,latent_12857,587,0.001174,0.0008515957,3.1155114,Mentions of removal or change in medical tubes or catheters.,"The examples with high activation consistently mention the removal or change in the position of medical tubes or catheters. This pattern suggests that the presence of such details, specifically about the change in intervention or equipment, is what triggers notable activation levels.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8105066340656575,0.8176470588235294,0.7910447761194029,0.7571428571428571,70.0,100.0
+12858,latent_12858,568,0.001136,0.00076418335,4.7290606,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The pattern involves describing the comparison between current and prior imaging, particularly highlighting changes, stability, or new findings. Examples manifest this pattern by explicitly mentioning prior images for comparison and focusing on comparisons indicating change or no change over time.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4621402065991375,0.4624277456647399,0.4038461538461538,0.5753424657534246,73.0,100.0
+12859,latent_12859,340,0.00068,0.00056631275,3.9009235,Mild pulmonary vascular congestion in radiology findings.,"These examples highlight reports that detail mild pulmonary vascular congestion, often identified in the presence of cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or other cardiac-related conditions. This pattern is a radiological observation reflecting mild fluid overload or pulmonary venous return abnormalities.",0.7758284600389863,0.782608695652174,0.8235294117647058,0.6666666666666666,21.0,25.0,0.8054397458804844,0.85,0.7878787878787878,0.65,40.0,100.0
+12860,latent_12860,882,0.001764,0.0009888269,2.2463639,"Low lung volumes causing crowding or interpretational challenges, described in relation to prior imaging studies.","Highly activated examples involve descriptions of low lung volumes, which are stated to cause crowding or positioning issues of bronchovascular structures and are compared against previous imaging, highlighting potential volume interpretation challenges.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4249568717653824,0.475,0.4390243902439024,0.18,100.0,100.0
+12861,latent_12861,6437,0.012874,0.0045358324,1.1168894,Detailed cardiopulmonary findings and interval changes with instrumental assessment.,The examples with high activation levels focus more on specific cardiopulmonary findings and their changes over time or in the presence of specific medical instruments like tubes and catheters. These findings are closely tied to direct observations and instructions following specific clinical purposes or changes from previous conditions.,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5806476663819212,0.595,0.5693430656934306,0.78,100.0,100.0
+12862,latent_12862,736,0.001472,0.0010717687,3.1570165,"Reports indicate clear lungs, normal cardiac and mediastinal contours with no acute findings.","Activated samples describe clear and normal findings in the lungs, heart, pulmonary vasculature, pleura, and bones, with no acute disease or abnormalities specified. This pattern is indicative of radiology reports highlighting the absence of abnormalities across multiple examined areas, using repeated reassurance of normalcy.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7978723404255319,0.7978723404255319,0.75,0.8522727272727273,88.0,100.0
+12863,latent_12863,1570,0.00314,0.0014165519,2.1669064,Description of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize the ability to describe changes between current and prior radiographs, with particular focus on ensuring descriptions pertain to interval changes or stability over time. Specific comparisons are highlighted regardless of explicit findings, reflecting capability to determine change.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4533463727776524,0.455,0.449438202247191,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12864,latent_12864,738,0.001476,0.00086802273,4.7283587,Specific comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Higher activation levels are associated with specific references to previous imaging findings and explicit descriptions of changes or lack thereof, from the prior report. Examples with the highest activations consistently compare current findings with prior images and include phrases indicating changes over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5245919016323934,0.5282051282051282,0.5128205128205128,0.631578947368421,95.0,100.0
+12865,latent_12865,1854,0.003708,0.0018061901,2.3914173,Focus on equipment placement changes between current and prior images.,"The prominent feature in these examples is the focus on deviations, changes, or updates in medical devices and equipment placement between the current and prior imaging studies. This includes updates on PICC lines, tracheostomy cuffs, and other catheters or tubes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6042250263421655,0.615,0.6716417910447762,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12866,latent_12866,464,0.000928,0.00076559617,2.2817733,Radiological comparison showing stability or no significant change.,"These examples indicate findings from radiology reports where the patient's current condition is compared with prior imaging studies, often highlighting stability or lack of significant change. This pattern is frequently observed in medical reports and relates to ongoing monitoring of chronic conditions or post-treatment evaluations.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4854211892904269,0.5095541401273885,0.3484848484848485,0.4035087719298245,57.0,100.0
+12867,latent_12867,554,0.001108,0.00085247,3.752395,"Comparative analysis to prior radiographic studies, emphasizing stability or changes.","The highly activated examples consistently include references to comparison with prior radiographic images, with specific focus on noting the unchanged or stable nature ('unchanged', 'interval', 'compared to prior') of devices, conditions, or findings over time. This implies an alignment with the reference text explicitly seeking comparative analysis.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4892219543723579,0.5058139534883721,0.4503816793893129,0.8194444444444444,72.0,100.0
+12868,latent_12868,2074,0.004148,0.0016862388,2.3242114,Findings noted despite absence or minimal prior comparison availability.,The representative examples mostly refer to images where significant findings are noted despite prior comparisons being unavailable or minimal. Examples with non-zero activation levels involve descriptions with no or unspecified prior comparison.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4673232323232323,0.4673366834170854,0.47,0.47,100.0,99.0
+12869,latent_12869,3172,0.006344,0.0024618055,2.3216789,Comparison to prior imaging findings indicating stability or minimal change.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve explicit mentions of comparing current radiologic findings to previous imaging studies. This pattern reflects a common practice in radiology where stable states or changes are assessed against prior images. Such comparisons typically include phrases like 'compared to', 'from prior', 'stable', or indicate a lack of change over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.6049382716049383,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12870,latent_12870,759,0.001518,0.0010846811,2.1834645,"Detailed positioning of chest tubes relative to anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina).","Examples with higher activations involve descriptions of positioning or advancement of tubes (such as endotracheal or enteric) within the chest relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina, specifically mentioning measurements in centimeters.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5978213507625272,0.6358974358974359,0.8,0.3368421052631579,95.0,100.0
+12871,latent_12871,293,0.000586,0.00068014994,3.3426368,Verification or adjustment of medical line/tube position in radiographic exams.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on changes or checks in the positioning of medical lines or tubes like nasogastric, endotracheal, or central venous lines, often involving comparison to a previous radiograph to verify correct placement or changes made.",0.9027777777777776,0.9047619047619048,0.8421052631578947,0.9411764705882352,17.0,25.0,0.6845673505798394,0.7132352941176471,0.4745762711864407,0.7777777777777778,36.0,100.0
+12872,latent_12872,6295,0.01259,0.004470945,1.2804506,Position and adjustments of medical devices indicated.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss specific placements or adjustments needed for medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or central lines, often mentioning their current position with respect to anatomical landmarks or suggesting positional adjustments.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+12873,latent_12873,460,0.00092,0.00074062677,3.3936203,No relevant change in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"In these examples, there is a consistent description of findings across multiple views of an image and comparison to prior studies, specifically focusing on unchanged or stable findings despite the presence of medical conditions or devices. This pattern highlights stability in medical imaging findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5423641069887835,0.5641025641025641,0.4090909090909091,0.4821428571428571,56.0,100.0
+12874,latent_12874,1909,0.003818,0.0015423889,1.9297994,Comparison of current imaging to prior studies emphasizing interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels include descriptions of findings by comparing the current images to previous images specifically when a previous image is available to establish changes, such as worsening edema or atelectasis. This highlights interval changes or stability over time, which is a key focus in these reports.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+12875,latent_12875,2216,0.004432,0.0016830029,2.0838747,"Descriptions related to heart size, mediastinal contours or aortic tortuosity.","These examples frequently describe observations related to the heart size, mediastinal or aortic tortuosity, or notable cardiovascular findings such as stable cardiomegaly or unchanged mediastinal silhouette amidst other radiological observations against prior imaging studies. Such descriptions of the cardiovascular structures themselves, or their position, or contours in relation to previous studies seem to consistently activate the pattern being tracked.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5064612974807466,0.5226130653266332,0.5147058823529411,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+12876,latent_12876,776,0.001552,0.0010183624,3.0503957,Limited assessment or interpretation due to low lung volumes or image positioning issues.,"These examples involve a common problem in radiological interpretations where the position or quality of radiological images, such as low lung volumes, incorrect positioning, or patient rotation, limits the ability to assess findings thoroughly. This pattern highlights the inherent challenges and caution exercised in interpreting suboptimal imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5937059142702116,0.59375,0.5773195876288659,0.6021505376344086,93.0,99.0
+12877,latent_12877,2499,0.004998,0.001891408,1.9192994,Emphasis on changes or suspected procedural/condition shifts from prior images.,"The higher activation levels are associated with examples that either explicitly mention instability or changes between the current and prior imaging studies, particularly with regard to each patient's condition or the procedure involved, such as surgeries or treatments. These reports emphasize changes or suspected changes rather than stable findings, comparisons are part of recommendations or evaluations about procedures and conditions like surgeries or significant shift, hinting at the need for further consideration or actions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12878,latent_12878,648,0.001296,0.0008532254,3.4367,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with lower activation focus on new observations without explicit comparison, or lack explicit comparison to prior exams. Higher activation occurs when there's a comparison and specific stable or unchanged findings, suggesting stability or non-change from prior reports is the key.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4762462198809872,0.4858757062146893,0.4133333333333333,0.3974358974358974,78.0,99.0
+12879,latent_12879,1268,0.002536,0.0011701175,2.6338856,Observation of minimal or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe reports with phrases indicating observation of minimal or no changes in previously noted conditions or structures compared to prior imaging, such as 'unchanged', 'minimal change', or 'stable'. Such descriptions are frequently used in radiology to convey stability in patient's condition.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4715077016465589,0.4723618090452261,0.4722222222222222,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+12880,latent_12880,1284,0.002568,0.0012382142,2.5223358,"Evaluation or positioning of tubes, catheters, or medical devices.","The examples with higher activation levels all involve assessments or measurements of tubes, catheters, or devices within the thoracic cavity, often focusing on their positions or stability in comparison to prior studies. This pattern is common in critical care settings where such devices must be closely monitored.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.463768115942029,0.32,100.0,100.0
+12881,latent_12881,3172,0.006344,0.0024086763,1.4718544,Findings with structured metadata fields in radiology report format.,"Examples with activation greater than zero explicitly mention 'Prior_report', 'INDICATION', 'TECHNIQUE', 'COMPARISON' and 'ASSISTANT', indicating a pattern of structured format for radiology reports where specific metadata fields are present.",0.4367816091954022,0.5306122448979592,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,24.0,0.348066628786746,0.455,0.4751381215469613,0.86,100.0,100.0
+12882,latent_12882,1308,0.002616,0.001251451,1.792968,Absent or insufficient prior imaging for comparison or altered device positioning.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to either lack previous images to compare or have significant changes in medical devices, such as nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, between current and prior images. These changes make it challenging to perform direct comparisons with past images, thus focusing the findings more on the current images or recent alterations in device positions or configurations.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4996408045977011,0.507537688442211,0.504,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+12883,latent_12883,597,0.001194,0.0008123347,2.6303978,Presence or change in medical devices/interventions in imaging.,"The consistent pattern across these examples is the explicit mention of a medical device or intervention, such as ports, catheters, or changes from prior interventions during imaging. This is highlighted in the findings by terms like 'Port-A-Cath', 'catheter', and changes compared to previous positioning or presence.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5367112362186254,0.5485714285714286,0.4722222222222222,0.4533333333333333,75.0,100.0
+12884,latent_12884,814,0.001628,0.0010633597,3.492207,Descriptions emphasizing stability or minimal interval change compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on finding changes or offering comparisons with nearby reference points, such as past exam dates, while describing findings that show minimal change or clinical stability since prior evaluations. These descriptions indicate the presence of explicit evidence for comparison or stability over periods.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+12885,latent_12885,6391,0.012782,0.004530035,1.4666485,Detailed comparison to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with activations largely involve the explicit mention of a prior imaging for comparison or a reference to lack of change in findings when compared to a prior exam. High activations occur in cases with such detailed comparisons to previous exams, reflecting the emphasis on observing continuity or stability in imaging findings over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+12886,latent_12886,354,0.000708,0.0006563841,3.402927,Assistant requested to describe findings in comparison with prior images.,Examples with high activations consistently involve comparison with prior images where an explicit assistant description is requested. Detailed descriptions of findings focusing on interval changes or specific abnormalities compared to prior studies are provided alongside images.,0.5150862068965517,0.5555555555555556,0.5,0.95,20.0,25.0,0.3884169884169884,0.3888888888888889,0.2884615384615384,0.6818181818181818,44.0,100.0
+12887,latent_12887,328,0.000656,0.0006372584,4.287428,Comparison of current imaging to prior studies with detailed description of changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the provision of a description of radiological findings with specific attention to comparisons against prior images, particularly when these comparisons are made against known past medical histories or indications. This pattern is important for monitoring changes over time in a patient's condition.",0.4544474393530997,0.4772727272727273,0.375,0.3157894736842105,19.0,25.0,0.437039764359352,0.5251798561151079,0.2,0.2307692307692307,39.0,100.0
+12888,latent_12888,989,0.001978,0.0011118827,2.0511656,Detailed comparison with prior images identifying changes.,"The pattern with higher activation levels involves scenarios where there are clear prior and current imaging comparisons made, often with detailed descriptions of interval changes (or lack thereof). This includes changes in size or state of noted medical conditions, and often descriptions of findings specific to the patient’s clinical history, indicated to assess any change since the prior imaging study.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4623655913978494,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12889,latent_12889,2599,0.005198,0.0019519092,1.6667533,Stability or improvement of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The activation pattern is most closely associated with the instances where detailed comparisons to prior imaging are used to highlight the status of pathologies, especially when noting either ""improvement"" or ""unchanged"" conditions of specific findings like opacities or effusions, or where stability is emphasized, rather than new findings.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+12890,latent_12890,5359,0.010718,0.0039386908,1.2771255,"Imaging findings described in comparison to prior exams, noting changes or stability.","These examples involve radiographic evaluations where findings are described in comparison to prior studies and involve changes or stability in conditions such as heart size, pleural effusions, pneumothorax, and other notable pulmonary or mediastinal features. These reports typically highlight changes over time or the stability of unresolved conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5555555555555556,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12891,latent_12891,212,0.000424,0.00062024844,3.598659,Complex medical history with emphasis on interval changes in imaging.,"Example 5 and 9 show changes in pulmonary conditions in patients with complex medical histories or interventions, such as PAC or PICC line placements, some history of cardiopulmonary disease, and ongoing evaluations for edema or pneumonia. These conditions are often compared with previous imaging to check for interval changes, commonly using language that reflects complex medical histories, monitoring devices, or post-operative status, which are frequently assessed in follow-up imaging reports.",0.3714285714285714,0.3888888888888889,0.3225806451612903,0.9090909090909092,11.0,25.0,0.403921568627451,0.40625,0.2391304347826087,0.7857142857142857,28.0,100.0
+12892,latent_12892,5255,0.01051,0.0038287432,1.4858582,"Normal heart size, mediastinal, hilar contours, and clear lungs/pulmonary vascularity.","Example 46 exhibits a significantly higher activation level than others, indicating a strong pattern. The pattern involves the clear normalcy of cardiopulmonary findings — normal heart, lungs, hilum, and pulmonary vascularity — suggesting confidence and assurance to a radiologist regarding a stable or unchanged clinical state compared to prior imaging. The use of descriptors like 'normal', 'clear', and 'unremarkable' emphasizes this pattern of no acute findings or changes.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5072463768115942,0.35,100.0,100.0
+12893,latent_12893,2390,0.00478,0.0018877717,2.0940533,Mention of mild-to-moderate cardiomegaly or cardiac enlargement.,"Examples with a range of activation levels involve descriptions of the heart, with those of higher activation levels specifically mentioning mild-to-moderate cardiomegaly or an enlarged cardiac silhouette. Lower activation levels do not focus on such cardiac enlargements or are focused on other features.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4871794871794871,0.19,100.0,100.0
+12894,latent_12894,642,0.001284,0.0008454409,2.2230854,"Alterations in lung aeration, pleural effusion, or opacity between comparative images.","The pattern revolves around findings related to the lungs, pleura, or mediastinum often described with changes in volume, effusion, aeration, or opacity shifts. Examples with mid-to-high activation levels frequently mention changes in pleural effusion, atelectasis, or aeration patterns between frontal and lateral views compared to prior images, indicating the focus on pleural, volume, or opacity alterations in serial imaging.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6007146186111543,0.6077348066298343,0.5657894736842105,0.5308641975308642,81.0,100.0
+12895,latent_12895,5725,0.01145,0.004063699,1.2915078,Descriptions of new or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"Reports with higher activations consistently describe new or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging studies. The examples provide specific changes in findings, as well as usage of terms like 'as compared to', 'unchanged', 'new', or reference prior dates or events. These elements are emphasizing the importance of interval changes in activation patterns.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5564516129032258,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12896,latent_12896,374,0.000748,0.00076512905,3.4345512,Placeholder or incomplete prior data information in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation focus on reports with unspecified prior comparisons or missing data, often with placeholders or incomplete fields. This suggests the model is identifying the lack of specific comparative information or unfilled templates as significant in these datasets.",0.3325892857142857,0.4347826086956521,0.4418604651162791,0.9047619047619048,21.0,25.0,0.2814814814814814,0.3401360544217687,0.323943661971831,0.9787234042553192,47.0,100.0
+12897,latent_12897,4611,0.009222,0.0033515806,1.6962898,Comparative evaluation of clinical device positioning or lung changes.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe the evaluation of changes in tube positioning or lung opacities using comparative language. They focus on assessing clinical devices' placement or respiratory status using current and prior imaging for context.,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+12898,latent_12898,1619,0.003238,0.0015049623,3.2032242,Explicit instructions to compare current image to prior.,"Samples with higher activation levels frequently explicitly instruct to provide a comparison to a prior image. These prompt structures consistently emphasize comparison, highlighting the model's focus on comparative analysis between current observations and previous studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4887218045112781,0.49,0.4909090909090909,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12899,latent_12899,6136,0.012272,0.004321317,1.1767431,Prompt requests comparison with prior frontal images for change documentation.,"The examples with higher activations predominantly feature a structured format prompting to provide a description of the current findings in comparison to prior frontal images. This consistent format focuses on documenting changes or stability in disease progression or imaging findings over time, a key task in radiological evaluations.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12900,latent_12900,2665,0.00533,0.001977158,1.9701447,Comparison to prior imaging showing specific changes or stability in findings.,"High activation levels correspond to references to specific changes, conditions, or diagnoses based on comparison to prior reports. These comparisons include assessments of stability, improvement, worsening, or new developments across radiological studies over time, and often involve detailed descriptions of findings relative to previous states.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5244174113288779,0.525,0.5233644859813084,0.56,100.0,100.0
+12901,latent_12901,508,0.001016,0.000773704,3.0485213,Reports noting 'normal' or 'unremarkable' in radiological findings.,"In these examples, descriptions of radiology findings often return a 'normal' or 'within normal limits' for various structures (e.g., ""normal cardiomediastinal silhouette""). When there is mention of ""normal"" or ""no significant findings"" in such contexts, these are deemed more representative of typical findings rather than pathologies, as seen in radiologic comparisons.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5598568640208197,0.5975609756097561,0.4807692307692308,0.390625,64.0,100.0
+12902,latent_12902,6351,0.012702,0.004461044,1.1469849,Focus on change detection across serial imaging studies.,"The activation pattern shows higher values for detailed comparative descriptions in radiology findings, indicating a focus on change detection across timepoints or prior imaging references. This is consistent with updates or notes on interval changes between serial imaging studies.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5544022437157611,0.575,0.5524475524475524,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12903,latent_12903,7251,0.014502,0.005148867,1.364389,Comparison of current and prior radiology images for evaluation.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve comparing current radiology studies to prior images to assess stability or change in conditions like pleural effusions, opacities, and cardiopulmonary structures. This pattern involves explicit investigation for changes over time, a common diagnostic technique in radiology.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12904,latent_12904,670,0.00134,0.00088631705,2.7678375,Comparison with prior images focusing on medical device positioning or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels include explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, often involving medical devices or changes in the position of medical equipment like tubes or catheters. These reports emphasize the interval changes or stability of the findings in relation to prior images, which is a critical aspect in radiological assessments and documentation of patient progress or procedural outcomes.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4573467598052556,0.4756756756756757,0.4090909090909091,0.3176470588235294,85.0,100.0
+12905,latent_12905,5431,0.010862,0.0038629817,1.7386904,Contextual changes in thoracic region with comparison to prior images.,"Examples with activation indicate a comparison with prior imaging or association with thoracic context, often describing changes in context or patient positioning (e.g., catheter movement, lungs ventilation). Activations likely reflect models response to chest context-specific data, focused on comparing current imagery to existing records.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12906,latent_12906,270,0.00054,0.0005473339,4.286948,Independent assessment without prior comparison.,"Examples with high activation involve assessments provided without prior external studies for comparison, indicating the focus is on the new findings or current study results only, as opposed to other examples having explicit comparisons.",0.6153846153846154,0.65,0.5384615384615384,0.4666666666666667,15.0,25.0,0.5171007003467736,0.6044776119402985,0.2790697674418604,0.3529411764705882,34.0,100.0
+12907,latent_12907,3167,0.006334,0.0024156938,2.3643813,Confirmation of medical device placement or position related to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions that confirm tube placements or medical devices in specific positions (e.g., endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, catheters) accompanied by documentation of changes or stability in various conditions (such as pulmonary edema or pleural effusions). They often mention newly inserted or consistent positioning/focus of medical apparatuses, especially the distal tip location relative to anatomical landmarks.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.6164383561643836,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12908,latent_12908,563,0.001126,0.00086880324,3.0688214,Direct comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"The pattern is the explicit comparison of current imaging findings to those in previous examinations, focusing on stability or changes in lesions, abnormalities, or anatomical features over time. This is shown by using phrases like 'similar compared to prior', 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'improved', indicating repeated observations over multiple evaluations.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5472049689440994,0.5555555555555556,0.4590163934426229,0.9032258064516128,62.0,100.0
+12909,latent_12909,3195,0.00639,0.002278014,1.794108,Emphasis on interval stability or changes compared to prior imaging.,"The reports highlight descriptions based on current and prior imagery, emphasizing interval changes or stability. The presence of comparative assessments indicates a consistent aspect of these reports, focusing on changes in the condition over time or their stability, often indicating stability or interval progression.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12910,latent_12910,854,0.001708,0.0010013967,2.3146775,Evaluative description comparing current and prior images.,"Data indicates high activation for requests of descriptions comparing current radiological findings to prior images, often demonstrated with annotations like 'in comparison' or similar markers indicating differential analysis over time. These requests emphasize evaluative radiology practices.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4485837438423645,0.457286432160804,0.464,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+12911,latent_12911,1091,0.002182,0.0010986621,3.4404688,Detection of changes or new pathology on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation consistently mention comparisons to prior imaging, while others lack the aspect of showing new pathologies or changes relevant to the patient's condition. The pattern suggests focusing on any detected changes or new concerns found from the images compared to previous studies, highlighting intervals where changes were identified.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5454545454545454,0.3,100.0,100.0
+12912,latent_12912,6597,0.013194,0.004629211,0.928026,Reports emphasize unchanged medical devices or tubes on comparison images.,"The examples demonstrate reports where comparison to prior imaging is a major focus, but with explicit mention of existing or unchanged medical devices or tubes (such as lines, tubes, or catheters), alongside stable cardiopulmonary findings. These details are often pivotal in serial radiology interpretations, assisting in clinical decision-making about device placement and stability of conditions.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4615747550720213,0.515,0.5405405405405406,0.2,100.0,100.0
+12913,latent_12913,3633,0.007266,0.002704071,1.7921481,Describing changes or stability in radiographic opacities or effusions compared to prior images.,"The pattern with the highest activation involves descriptions of changes or stability in imaging findings, specifically in areas of pulmonary opacities, atelectasis, pleural effusions, or vascular congestion, in comparison with prior images. These descriptions highlight interval changes or lack thereof.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+12914,latent_12914,521,0.001042,0.0007514582,3.0370898,Prompt to compare current image with prior image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a prompt to compare the current imaging with a prior image. Low activation examples lack explicit instructions or a focus on a specific finding like 'comparison to prior' whereas higher activations stress the instruction to evaluate changes over time, specifically comparing present and past images.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3452941176470588,0.369047619047619,0.3560606060606061,0.6911764705882353,68.0,100.0
+12915,latent_12915,1134,0.002268,0.0011236968,2.4079537,Comparison of current image findings to prior imaging to assess condition changes.,"Most examples with high activation levels clearly include the task of comparing the current image with previous images to assess changes or stability in medical conditions, particularly in the context of chronic diseases or post-operative status.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+12916,latent_12916,1823,0.003646,0.0014872068,1.8078465,Evaluating interval changes using comparison with prior studies.,"The highly activated examples mention either interval changes or provide a comparison of findings between current and prior studies. These examples use language to assess changes over time, which is crucial for evaluating the progression or stability of medical conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.518796992481203,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12917,latent_12917,2730,0.00546,0.0021125567,2.168243,Reports with detailed narrative descriptions and synthesis of findings.,"Examples with activation levels greater than 2.0 contain detailed narrative descriptions, which include a synthesis of findings, assessment of changes, and clear rationale, compared with less descriptive, more procedural or indication-focused reports. This detailed narrative often includes complex language, explanations or reasoning.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12918,latent_12918,656,0.001312,0.0009546006,3.7050896,Minor atelectasis or scarring in chest imaging.,"This pattern involves identifying minor atelectasis or scarring as the primary finding in the analysis of chest images. Examples consistently highlight atelectasis or scarring, noting their presence, stability, or decrease, indicating the model's focus on these particular lung abnormalities.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.7333333333333333,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7130382049727106,0.7142857142857143,0.6704545454545454,0.7195121951219512,82.0,100.0
+12919,latent_12919,494,0.000988,0.0008035374,3.0269232,Comparison findings in imaging studies highlight changes/stability.,"These examples focus on the detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies, particularly emphasizing changes or stability in findings. Instances that mention specific changes (or lack thereof) to conditions like pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or procedural outcomes between examinations are crucial.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4272727272727272,0.4285714285714285,0.3478260869565217,0.4705882352941176,68.0,100.0
+12920,latent_12920,1898,0.003796,0.0015873059,1.9728147,Focus on stability or no significant interval change from prior imaging.,"In the samples with high activation levels, description of findings often includes statements about interval change or stability using specific language indicating a lack of significant interval change from prior imaging. This suggests a pattern of focusing on evaluating and articulating stability or lack of new developments compared to previous studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5098522167487685,0.5175879396984925,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,99.0
+12921,latent_12921,2547,0.005094,0.0019514093,1.9658548,Detailed comparisons and changes noted relative to prior images.,"This dataset features comparisons with prior imaging as a common element. Those with low activation often explicitly state 'No prior radiographs for comparison' or detail comparisons without specific findings, while higher activations involve specific descriptions of stable findings or changes over time explicitly described relative to prior images, typically concerning lung or cardiac changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5377358490566038,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12922,latent_12922,2055,0.00411,0.0016968362,2.1376355,Comparison of findings with prior frontal chest images.,"Examples with references to the prior frontal image in chest radiographs show a consistent pattern where the findings are evaluated by direct comparison against previous imaging. This involves looking for changes or consistencies such as opacities, effusions, or structural deformities across exams, which indicates the activation of pattern recognition specific to image comparison and clinical progression over time.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4192799070847851,0.45,0.4657534246575342,0.68,100.0,100.0
+12923,latent_12923,369,0.000738,0.0006728525,4.222766,Provision of current and prior images for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve the task of comparing findings from current and prior images and explicitly prompt this comparison. In situations where no prior image is available, the activation levels are lower, indicating the essential role of having both current and prior images for comparison in these prompts.",0.3148433487416538,0.3695652173913043,0.3947368421052631,0.7142857142857143,21.0,25.0,0.3660124368441507,0.3793103448275862,0.3140495867768595,0.8444444444444444,45.0,100.0
+12924,latent_12924,528,0.001056,0.00081113924,2.4553254,"Comparison of current and prior images for changes, often involving multiple views.","The highly activated examples frequently request the assistant to provide a description of findings within the context of multiple images (current frontal, lateral, and previous frontal)."", ""These examples highlight the significance of comparing current and prior images in assessing changes over time, often focusing on multiple views for more comprehensive analysis.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4440186544231951,0.4615384615384615,0.4153846153846154,0.782608695652174,69.0,100.0
+12925,latent_12925,4422,0.008844,0.0031573058,1.5186391,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies noting changes.,"Examples with significant activation levels all involve descriptions of current imaging findings compared to previous studies, often noting changes such as improvements, stable appearances, or specific enlargements, using phrases like 'as compared to', 'stable appearance', 'unchanged', or 'has improved'.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12926,latent_12926,829,0.001658,0.00095316744,2.5556166,Describes stability or minimal change since prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels describe a lack of significant new or acute findings and focus on comparative stability or unchanged conditions from previous imaging, often involving reports of consolidation, effusions, or devices in similar positions as prior. These indicate a pattern where the reports highlight consistent or stable conditions over time, emphasizing stability in consecutive imaging studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4871794871794871,0.38,100.0,100.0
+12927,latent_12927,759,0.001518,0.00078679016,2.4189172,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging in the report.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently involve comparing current imaging findings to prior studies, employing terms like 'compared with prior', 'since prior exam', or mentioning specific changes or unchanged conditions based on previous examinations. This linguistic pattern of comparative analysis is distinctively emphasized in these samples.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4212713144830563,0.4358974358974359,0.4427480916030534,0.6105263157894737,95.0,100.0
+12928,latent_12928,4611,0.009222,0.003373605,2.133273,Focus on interval changes or stability with prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples with high activation often document explicit analysis and interpretation of current imaging findings in juxtaposition with prior or previous images, focusing on interval changes, stability, or comparison of medical devices and conditions over time. The language specifically focuses on these aspects, such as ""comparison with previous"", ""interval change"", ""unchanged from prior"", and mentions of prior studies or images.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+12929,latent_12929,353,0.000706,0.000629391,2.1911552,Provide findings with direct comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation examples feature a pattern where a description of the radiology findings explicitly includes a comparative element to a prior imaging study, denoted by phrases like 'comparison to prior frontal image'. This structure is used to track changes or stability in imaging findings over time, and is common in medical imaging where temporal changes are important.",0.4348894348894349,0.4565217391304347,0.4411764705882353,0.7142857142857143,21.0,25.0,0.3794871794871794,0.3846153846153846,0.2413793103448276,0.4883720930232558,43.0,100.0
+12930,latent_12930,2609,0.005218,0.0020396218,1.6869924,Description of interval changes or comparisons to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention changes, improvements, or comparisons in findings from previous imaging studies, highlighting alterations or developments in the patient's condition. This repeated mention of comparison and change suggests a focus on monitoring disease progression or response to treatment, indicating the model is sensitive to reported changes over time in imaging findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+12931,latent_12931,3149,0.006298,0.0023718986,2.5533986,Explicit indication of interval change or comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples in the dataset with higher activation levels all specifically describe differences or new findings in comparison to previous imaging studies, with explicit indications of change in clinical status or imaging findings, such as worsening, improvement, or stability of certain conditions, particularly in reference to pneumothorax or pulmonary opacities after medical interventions or conditions like pneumonia or atelectasis. This pattern indicates that the focus is on assessing interval change or response to treatment.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+12932,latent_12932,2987,0.005974,0.0023828726,1.730984,Emphasis on comparison to prior studies to assess interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation describe the radiological findings based on comparisons between current and prior imaging studies with a focus on assessing changes. This reflects the importance of evaluating interval changes in clinical radiology practice, highlighting stability or improvement in findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,100.0,100.0
+12933,latent_12933,7291,0.014582,0.005152725,1.0943168,Comparison to prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels specifically mention a comparison to prior imaging studies and note changes or stability in findings. The pattern revolves around documenting differences or similarities relative to past images, a common practice in radiology to track progress or changes in patient conditions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+12934,latent_12934,470,0.00094,0.00073009834,4.0017915,Multi-view imaging comparisons highlighting prior examinations.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) in conjunction with prior images for comparison, forming a clear pattern where comprehensive comparison using different views is emphasized.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4468327633935841,0.4556962025316455,0.3833333333333333,0.7931034482758621,58.0,100.0
+12935,latent_12935,686,0.001372,0.0007386113,2.4382389,AP portable chest views focusing on tube or line positioning.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly involve AP portable chest views with tube positioning evaluations for intubated patients or those requiring line assessments, emphasizing the technical positioning element.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5100965759438104,0.5483870967741935,0.5208333333333334,0.2906976744186046,86.0,100.0
+12936,latent_12936,261,0.000522,0.00050544646,2.8984268,"Unchanged medical device, such as a pacemaker, on chest imaging.","The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence of unchanged pacemakers or other medical devices, such as catheters, on chest images. Radiological findings are described in relation to these unchanged devices, using terms like 'unchanged', 'unchanged position', or 'stable', indicating their consistent placement across studies, which matches the pattern.",0.7515151515151515,0.7804878048780488,0.8181818181818182,0.5625,16.0,25.0,0.6713130749930304,0.7938931297709924,0.6,0.3870967741935484,31.0,100.0
+12937,latent_12937,441,0.000882,0.00069503026,3.047551,Comparative analysis of radiologic findings against prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the notion of comparing current image findings with prior images, specifically noting changes or stability in certain conditions over time, such as atelectasis, opacities, or device placements. This type of temporal reference pattern is common in radiology reports.",0.5701754385964912,0.5918367346938775,0.5555555555555556,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4125874125874126,0.4166666666666667,0.3451327433628318,0.6964285714285714,56.0,100.0
+12938,latent_12938,1076,0.002152,0.0011738972,2.5785148,Comparison to prior imaging for interval change assessment.,"The examples with high activation consistently include a description comparing current findings to previous imaging studies, assessing interval change or stability following a medical procedure. This suggests the pattern is tied to the comparison to prior images which helps evaluate progression or resolution of a condition.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+12939,latent_12939,315,0.00063,0.000574483,5.515034,Notes on changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels are consistently associated with cases where the main focus is on significant changes or stability compared to previous images, especially when terms like 'changed', 'no new', 'improvement', or 'similar' are used. Such comparative notes highlight the pattern seen here involving changes over time.",0.4770025839793281,0.4772727272727273,0.4166666666666667,0.5263157894736842,19.0,25.0,0.4171539961013645,0.4347826086956521,0.2368421052631578,0.4736842105263157,38.0,100.0
+12940,latent_12940,1559,0.003118,0.0014561435,2.3613734,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess changes or stability.,"The data indicates a pattern where higher activation levels correspond with the mention of comparison between current imaging findings and previous studies, including explicit references to changes or stability in findings. This is consistent because the task involves noting differences or consistencies over time in radiological evaluations, a common clinical requirement.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12941,latent_12941,646,0.001292,0.00093044655,2.7798092,Findings superimposed on pre-existing conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve findings which are described to be ""superimposed"" on pre-existing conditions, whether pulmonary edema superimposed on emphysema or opacities superimposed on fibrosis. This language pattern indicates the identification of new or potentially concerning findings layered on top of chronic or stable conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5762962962962963,0.5769230769230769,0.5268817204301075,0.5975609756097561,82.0,100.0
+12942,latent_12942,255,0.00051,0.0005537354,3.986302,Comparison to prior imaging emphasized.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve scenarios where there is a 'comparison' being made explicitly to a prior image, regardless of whether actual differences or unchanged findings are noted. They highlight changes or confirm stability in observed features by referring to previous imaging, which is central to assessing interval change.",0.4722222222222222,0.4736842105263157,0.3703703703703703,0.7692307692307693,13.0,25.0,0.3966896551724138,0.4,0.2909090909090909,0.9142857142857144,35.0,100.0
+12943,latent_12943,435,0.00087,0.0006749349,3.5752063,Description provision task for current and prior image comparison.,Activation levels are higher when there is a directive to provide a description based on current and comparative imaging scenarios. These examples emphasize the task of generating detailed radiologic descriptions under specified conditions.,0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3846616541353383,0.3961038961038961,0.3388429752066115,0.7592592592592593,54.0,100.0
+12944,latent_12944,1874,0.003748,0.001653189,2.3022394,Results described in comparison to prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions based on both frontal and lateral chest images. The examples also involve comparison with a previous frontal image, examining interval changes or stability in findings such as effusions, device placements, or opacities, which is typical in serial imaging evaluation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5104895104895105,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12945,latent_12945,747,0.001494,0.0011072906,2.4684684,Focus on interval changes or stability in findings over time.,"Examples with high activation describe changes over time or stability in the patient's condition, focusing on interval changes or comparison to previous states, especially regarding pulmonary opacities, effusions, or other changes. This indicates a particular focus on longitudinal assessment rather than a focus on the findings themselves.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.654339317046835,0.6700507614213198,0.6126760563380281,0.8969072164948454,97.0,100.0
+12946,latent_12946,7664,0.015328,0.0054044286,1.1882387,Comparison of medical device placement in radiological findings.,"The high activation levels are associated with radiological findings related to medical devices such as tubes or catheters (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube) and their comparison to previous studies. These observations often include descriptions of the device's position or condition over time. This characteristic recurs in the samples with higher activation levels.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5797101449275363,0.4,100.0,100.0
+12947,latent_12947,686,0.001372,0.00083425746,2.3291583,"Stable or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging, significant pathology or interventions present.","Examples with higher activation levels focus on descriptions where findings are stable or unchanged when compared to prior imaging studies, while also depicting significant pathologies or interventions, such as intubation or pneumothorax/pleural effusion changes. These all indicate that slight to moderate changes or confirmations are noted upon comparison to prior images.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5548768246866844,0.5561497326203209,0.5222222222222223,0.5402298850574713,87.0,100.0
+12948,latent_12948,839,0.001678,0.0008513767,2.6868312,Emphasis on changes from prior imaging studies.,"Reports demonstrating low activation levels contain minimal comparison or reference to prior studies, and contrast sharply with reports where findings are analyzed in relation to previous images, which manifest higher activation levels.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12949,latent_12949,466,0.000932,0.00084986305,3.076082,Stable or unchanged findings across imaging studies.,"This set of examples involves a detailed examination of the radiology images where the findings remain stable or unchanged compared to prior studies, often particularly mentioning specific placements or structures such as tubes, lines, or observed pathologies. Stability from one report to another suggests continuous monitoring rather than acute changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4874570446735394,0.5159235668789809,0.3492063492063492,0.3859649122807017,57.0,100.0
+12950,latent_12950,1609,0.003218,0.0012386387,2.2081828,Detailed comparison with prior imaging focusing on stability or specific changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels reference comparison between current and prior imaging and emphasize specific changes or stability between them, focusing on patient management, intervention, or diagnostic clarification (e.g., tube placements, catheter positions, stability of lesions, resolution or worsening of effusions or opacities). In contrast, lower activation often includes normal findings or lacks specifics on changes from prior imaging.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4834373981293412,0.485,0.4831460674157303,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12951,latent_12951,664,0.001328,0.0009427139,2.5406303,Inappropriate or irrelevant image comparison prompts.,"The pattern exhibited by these examples primarily involves prompts where the comparison to a prior image is not contextually significant or meaningful, yet the prompt explicitly directs an assistant to provide findings in comparison to the prior image, despite a 'no comparison available' notation or a lack of substantive prior context.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4376068376068376,0.4835164835164835,0.4605263157894737,0.8536585365853658,82.0,100.0
+12952,latent_12952,2744,0.005488,0.002135924,1.9532601,"Use of frontal, lateral, and prior images for stability or changes.","These examples include instructions containing frontal and lateral views of radiological studies alongside a prior frontal image for comparative evaluation, focusing on detecting changes or stability in the patient's condition over time. Unique elements include directives for assistants to describe findings, highlighting changes or stability.",0.3106617647058823,0.4,0.4418604651162791,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3928571428571428,0.49,0.4944444444444444,0.89,100.0,100.0
+12953,latent_12953,341,0.000682,0.00067355233,2.9517324,"Emphasis on imaging quality, device positioning, or body habitus impacting assessment.","Examples with higher activation levels focus on the interpretation of images where there is an emphasis on the effects of image quality, device positioning, or body habitus issues during imaging. These factors heavily influence radiological assessment and reporting when compared to prior instances, making them relevant indicators.",0.3623481781376518,0.3777777777777777,0.2777777777777778,0.25,20.0,25.0,0.6081233994401762,0.6642857142857143,0.425531914893617,0.5,40.0,100.0
+12954,latent_12954,696,0.001392,0.00090123026,2.8408046,Mentions of low lung volumes.,"The examples exhibit higher activation when there is reference to lung volumes, particularly in descriptions involving low lung volumes. This is often a pertinent detail in radiological assessments as it influences interpretation of other findings, such as cardiomegaly or opacities.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6032520325203252,0.6502732240437158,0.7567567567567568,0.3373493975903614,83.0,100.0
+12955,latent_12955,1960,0.00392,0.0015519601,2.5879922,Stability or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging.,The higher activation levels are associated with cases where there is a reference to minimal change or lack of acute pathology compared to previous imaging. This pattern involves emphasizing stability or absence of new findings despite some evident abnormalities in the imagery.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4936708860759494,0.39,100.0,100.0
+12956,latent_12956,872,0.001744,0.0010889244,2.3894048,Comparison of current and prior images emphasizing interval changes.,"The examples activate strongly when there is an explicit comparison between current and prior imaging that highlights interval changes, especially in the presence of clinical indications for monitoring progressive conditions or confirming the stability of certain pathologies like pneumonia, pneumothorax, or medical devices. The comparison allows for assessment of disease progression or resolution, which is crucial in patient management.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4838709677419355,0.45,100.0,100.0
+12957,latent_12957,2070,0.00414,0.0016338984,2.468542,Explicit mention of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include findings with specific changes compared to previous images, such as interval changes or stability in certain conditions (e.g., nodules, effusions). This pattern is highlighted by 'interval change', 'unchanged', or 'compared to prior'.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+12958,latent_12958,348,0.000696,0.0006446439,3.2075946,Interval change in specific radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These samples involve comparisons with previous imaging studies and identify specific changes or developments in conditions like cardiac enlargement, pulmonary edema, pleural effusion, or atelectasis. The key pattern is the description of interval change in radiological findings, indicating a progression or improvement of certain conditions between imaging studies.",0.6428571428571428,0.6444444444444445,0.5909090909090909,0.65,20.0,25.0,0.5089119446661345,0.5422535211267606,0.3174603174603174,0.4761904761904761,42.0,100.0
+12959,latent_12959,4383,0.008766,0.0031509504,2.0074925,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and description of specific changes or findings.,"The examples with higher activations often reference the presence or absence of specific conditions or changes in multiple views, including comparisons with prior or other imaging types like CT scans, with an emphasis on describing specific findings, such as opacities, effusions, or changes in device positions, and using certain types of language patterns relating to radiological changes.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5625,0.54,100.0,100.0
+12960,latent_12960,412,0.000824,0.00080114044,2.770123,Cirrhosis or liver-related history in radiological context.,"Examples with high activations often involve patients with cirrhosis or liver-related complications. These cases highlight a pattern where cirrhosis or related history is a key focus in the interpretation of radiological findings. This suggests the model is highly activated by contexts involving liver disease, particularly cirrhosis, due to its potential complications visible in chest imaging.",0.8084257206208425,0.8125,0.8888888888888888,0.6956521739130435,23.0,25.0,0.7495056031641398,0.8026315789473685,0.8666666666666667,0.5,52.0,100.0
+12961,latent_12961,901,0.001802,0.0009998063,2.6407154,"Focus on lung base changes or opacities, often compared to prior imaging.","The examples with higher activation focus on changes or abnormalities in lung bases, either atelectasis or opacities, which are often compared to prior images to track progression. These findings are diagnostic points commonly emphasized when examining lung health through X-rays or CT scans, reflecting the pattern being studied.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5606395127521888,0.5628140703517588,0.5764705882352941,0.49,100.0,99.0
+12962,latent_12962,1120,0.00224,0.0010465528,1.7443802,High activation with multiple image perspectives provided for comparison.,"The pattern is identified by explicit mentions of multiple image types provided simultaneously (frontal and lateral, prior and current), suggesting a focus on comprehensive analysis of radiological findings in comparison with prior images. This reflects a thorough approach that increases activation when multiple perspectives are provided.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4140036693228183,0.465,0.4779874213836478,0.76,100.0,100.0
+12963,latent_12963,3532,0.007064,0.0026480304,1.9302433,"Changes or status of intrathoracic medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters).","This set of examples highlights reports which refer specifically to changes or observations of intrathoracic medical devices such as tubes or catheters, often detailing their position changes, status, or need for adjustment. This pattern is specific because it focuses on the anatomy of devices rather than intrinsic anatomical features or pathologies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5512820512820513,0.43,100.0,100.0
+12964,latent_12964,1277,0.002554,0.0012550929,2.2297976,"Detailed description of changes compared to prior images, including device placements and condition stabilities.","Highly representative examples consistently provide explicit comparison to previous imaging studies, utilizing detailed evaluations of changes or stabilities in specific findings like tube positions, effusion presence, or other identified abnormalities as compared to prior studies. These examples describe changes in medical devices, pulmonary conditions, and other aspects in follow-up scenarios.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12965,latent_12965,766,0.001532,0.0009875562,2.8462973,Patterns or changes noted between current and prior imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels notably involve the presence of changes or emphasis on comparisons between new and previous radiographic findings, especially regarding lung conditions such as pleural effusion, opacities, or structural changes. Such comparisons are likely integral to the detected pattern.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5261555715773452,0.5333333333333333,0.5161290322580645,0.6736842105263158,95.0,100.0
+12966,latent_12966,5014,0.010028,0.0035461385,1.3497971,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting interval changes.,"High activation examples consistently describe findings in the current study in direct comparison to a prior study, emphasizing any changes since the previous imaging, such as improvement, resolution, or stabilization of conditions. This highlights the importance of interval change in radiological assessment.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12967,latent_12967,5748,0.011496,0.0040916163,1.3675251,Explicit instruction to evaluate changes compared to prior images.,"The higher activation levels in the examples signify instances where explicit instructions are given to compare current findings with those from prior images and describe interval changes. Instructions are often explicit about changes expected due to surgeries or known conditions, and the structure of these reports focuses on comparison and assessment of changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4690265486725664,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12968,latent_12968,1551,0.003102,0.0014097629,1.9436877,Describe findings by comparing current and prior images.,"Examples consistently compare current image findings with prior images, especially highlighting differences in subtle or ongoing conditions. This is characteristic of reports evaluating progress or stability of known conditions, using baseline or prior images for reference even with new presentations.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.494369110549299,0.505,0.5038759689922481,0.65,100.0,100.0
+12969,latent_12969,345,0.00069,0.00052562606,2.8064866,Comparison to prior imaging with focus on line or tube placement.,"Examples with high activation involve comparison with prior imaging which highlights interval changes or stability in conditions, particularly emphasizing the placement of lines or tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, central lines, or Port-A-Caths, consistent with inclusion of comparison as a frequent radiological analysis task. Low activation examples either do not make such specific comparisons or lack mention of medical devices.",0.6546310832025117,0.6590909090909091,0.6,0.631578947368421,19.0,25.0,0.6717101993483903,0.7172413793103448,0.5434782608695652,0.5555555555555556,45.0,100.0
+12970,latent_12970,2457,0.004914,0.0019772025,1.4608952,Detailed comparison of findings with prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention a detailed comparison between current imaging and prior reports, focusing on changes in opacities, devices, or effusions from the previous examination. This pattern highlights findings with interval changes and updates on previous conditions or anomalies, suggesting a focus on continuity and monitoring of conditions over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.554899852466805,0.555,0.5533980582524272,0.57,100.0,100.0
+12971,latent_12971,2164,0.004328,0.0017498959,2.005782,Cardiomediastinal silhouette/contours and other structures unchanged/stable compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on descriptions of radiological findings using terminology indicating recurrent patterns, such as 'cardiomediastinal silhouette', 'atelectasis', 'effusions', 'opacities', 'consolidation', and assessments of devices or tubes, often described in terms of stability or change compared to prior imaging. The pattern highlights the mention of cardiomegaly or enlarged cardiac silhouette, stable or consistent findings, and the observation of various lung fields and mediastinal contours.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,100.0,100.0
+12972,latent_12972,1011,0.002022,0.0011986152,2.9633799,Comparison of changes in medical devices or procedures between images.,"The examples with high activation typically focus on comparing current imaging findings with previous ones, particularly looking for changes in conditions such as tube placements, structural changes, or adjustments in medical devices. This pattern indicates detailed tracking of serial imaging comparisons.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.604301948051948,0.61,0.6447368421052632,0.49,100.0,100.0
+12973,latent_12973,406,0.000812,0.00080799084,4.662198,Reports describe unchanged findings in current vs. prior imaging.,"The examples consistently involve reports that discuss findings in current images described in comparison with prior images despite relatively non-acute indications or unchanged findings. The reports note stability or comparisons to previous data, emphasizing unchanged conditions without new acute findings.",0.5516569200779727,0.5652173913043478,0.5294117647058824,0.4285714285714285,21.0,25.0,0.483545574877904,0.5290322580645161,0.3333333333333333,0.3272727272727272,55.0,100.0
+12974,latent_12974,3819,0.007638,0.0027843283,1.5152396,Emphasis on unchanged monitoring/support devices in comparison reports.,"The patterns indicate that when describing findings and comparing with previous studies, the presence of detailed descriptions of unchanged monitoring devices or equipment (e.g., tubes, catheters) in the interpretation are consistent triggers for higher activation levels. This suggests that the model might be identifying cases where equipment status and stability are key diagnostic elements included in radiologist reports.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4192799070847851,0.45,0.4074074074074074,0.22,100.0,100.0
+12975,latent_12975,4951,0.009902,0.003534634,1.495936,Significant interval change or progression noted compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern is illustrated by the examples that indicate a substantial change or progression in certain findings when compared with a prior imaging study. Examples often involve updates on medical devices (e.g., line placement or tube positioning) or notable progression of medical conditions visible on imaging (e.g., worsened opacification, development of pulmonary edema).",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5454545454545454,0.3,100.0,100.0
+12976,latent_12976,543,0.001086,0.000898626,3.8689928,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples consistently using comparison with prior imaging show unchanged, stable, or improved findings rather than worsening or acute abnormalities. The pattern focuses on reassessment indicating no new concerning changes relative to previous images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5099756320438623,0.5272727272727272,0.4057971014492754,0.4307692307692308,65.0,100.0
+12977,latent_12977,3587,0.007174,0.0027438602,1.838452,Comparison of current and prior imaging for changes or stability.,"The pattern indicates radiology studies that directly compare current images with prior images, with a specific focus on interval changes or stability over time, marked by phrases like 'in comparison to the prior', 'no significant interval change', or specific areas that are 'unchanged'. This is common in longitudinal monitoring of a patient's condition.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5536554542765723,0.585,0.5555555555555556,0.85,100.0,100.0
+12978,latent_12978,4957,0.009914,0.0035407206,1.8840233,No significant change or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated samples discuss changes observed in radiographic images over time, emphasizing the interval description of conditions that were stable or evolved, such as ""no significant change,"" ""unchanged,"" or ""stable"" when referring to prior imaging exams.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+12979,latent_12979,5893,0.011786,0.0041705756,1.2162743,Vague or incomplete descriptions when comparing current to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve radiological reports where findings are made about images, and the description compares or references prior imaging, yet often fail to provide specific evidence of current findings in direct comparison to previous ones, leaving some uncertainty in the exact changes over time. Reports that do not consistently compare against prior imagery, showing clear differences over time, exhibit lower activation levels.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.5217391304347826,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4018069131386636,0.515,0.5080213903743316,0.95,100.0,100.0
+12980,latent_12980,818,0.001636,0.00086968066,2.990391,Reports focusing on interval changes or comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern identified among the examples with higher activation levels is the presence of language related to ""interval change"" or explicit comparison of changes over time. These reports typically involve noting changes such as reductions in effusion, progression of disease, or improvement in specific conditions following treatment, often indicating an interval change since a prior study.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+12981,latent_12981,1909,0.003818,0.0016323477,2.0879865,Comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on stability or changes in pathological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involved reporting changes or potential disease markers such as opacities or abnormalities in comparison to prior imaging, indicating updating or reassessment based on previous studies. This pattern often involves specific mentions of previous reports, certain medical conditions, or disease progression.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4903846153846153,0.51,100.0,100.0
+12982,latent_12982,1901,0.003802,0.0016099332,2.4191625,Comparison of current and prior radiographic images to assess changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where changes in medical conditions or device positions are assessed by comparing current and prior radiographic images. This pattern often includes updating the positioning of medical devices, evaluating persistent or changing medical conditions, and assessing stability or changes in lung conditions.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+12983,latent_12983,691,0.001382,0.0007987114,2.711859,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The samples frequently involve reference to an image comparison, description of techniques used, and indications related to a patient's history or symptoms. Each sample also tends to involve referencing prior imaging findings and correlating them with changes or stability in current medical imaging studies.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4709302325581395,0.4725274725274725,0.4363636363636363,0.5853658536585366,82.0,100.0
+12984,latent_12984,4402,0.008804,0.003193569,1.4728956,Interval changes compared to prior images noted on radiology reports.,"Examples with activation levels aligned exhibit references to prior imaging and notable changes in certain features such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pneumonic consolidation over time. This suggests the pattern involves tracking interval changes from prior imaging.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5578947368421052,0.53,100.0,100.0
+12985,latent_12985,430,0.00086,0.00074305554,3.314244,Interval change in radiology study compared to prior image.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes or stability in findings when compared to prior radiographs, emphasizing interval findings. These intervals typically introduce slight changes or stability in lung opacities, pneumonia, heart size, pleural effusions, or other standard chest findings.",0.3955709943551889,0.3958333333333333,0.3846153846153846,0.4347826086956521,23.0,25.0,0.5347586844205485,0.5448717948717948,0.4025974025974026,0.5535714285714286,56.0,100.0
+12986,latent_12986,450,0.0009,0.00072160776,2.2362883,Focus on comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The activation level is high in examples where the prompt involves interpreting and comparing current frontal and lateral images with prior images, indicating focus on longitudinal analysis of radiological findings in the context of serial evaluations or follow-ups.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.429384203480589,0.432258064516129,0.3513513513513513,0.7090909090909091,55.0,100.0
+12987,latent_12987,753,0.001506,0.0007617151,2.9712014,"Findings compared to prior imaging, noting interval changes or stability.","Examining the highly activated examples, we see a consistent pattern of findings being narrated in comparison to prior imaging studies. These reports often describe interval changes or stability relative to previous images, focusing on changes or stability in specific features like effusions, placements of lines, and consolidation resolution.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5202083333333334,0.5204081632653061,0.5104166666666666,0.5104166666666666,96.0,100.0
+12988,latent_12988,457,0.000914,0.0006841746,3.688283,"Focus on stable, normal cardiopulmonary findings and lack of new pathology.","Examples with high activations focus on detailed, stable descriptions and comparisons of normal structures, especially highlighting the normalcy or improvement of cardiac and pulmonary features without highlighting changes or abnormalities such as effusions or enlargements. The focus is on the normality and unremarkable findings in the chest, which contrast with other scenarios where clear pathology or changes are described.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.590157433477416,0.5911949685534591,0.4673913043478261,0.7288135593220338,59.0,100.0
+12989,latent_12989,726,0.001452,0.00095211045,2.6153889,Ongoing monitoring of recurrent conditions via radiology.,"The high activation examples consistently emphasize the monitoring of recurrent or persistent medical conditions through radiological evaluation. They commonly involve repeated references or monitoring language. The term 'recurrent' or similar terms repeatedly appear in the context, indicating ongoing assessment of conditions like pneumonia, effusion, pneumothorax, and similar issues.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5452618189527242,0.5487179487179488,0.5299145299145299,0.6526315789473685,95.0,100.0
+12990,latent_12990,568,0.001136,0.0008401321,2.2814221,Comparison with prior images showing persistent cardiopulmonary features.,"Examples with high activation levels involve comparisons to prior imaging and emphasize findings related to persistent or recurring pulmonary or cardiac features, such as cardiomegaly or tortuosity of the aorta. Mentioning these unchanged features along with the evaluation of interval changes forms the basis of the observed pattern.",0.4691666666666666,0.4693877551020408,0.48,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.4587486157253599,0.4588235294117647,0.3877551020408163,0.5428571428571428,70.0,100.0
+12991,latent_12991,1012,0.002024,0.0012603537,4.8275433,Medical equipment or intervention change compared with prior imaging.,"The examples exhibit texts that mention specific medical equipment or interventions in terms of their positioning or change between images. This is a frequent clinical pattern where the inclusion or alteration of medical tubes, devices, or post-surgical changes is significant.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5211267605633803,0.37,100.0,100.0
+12992,latent_12992,677,0.001354,0.000873306,4.578995,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings for consistent or unchanged conditions.,"Most examples with higher activation levels emphasize changes or the lack of changes in findings when compared to prior studies. The presence of unchanged conditions like effusions, atelectasis, or cardiomegaly are highlighted. This requires careful comparison to ensure that noted conditions are consistent or evolving, which is pivotal in monitoring chronic conditions or treatment effects.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4815636105188344,0.4840425531914893,0.4482758620689655,0.4431818181818182,88.0,100.0
+12993,latent_12993,458,0.000916,0.0008065391,3.9454427,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images indicating change or stability.,"Activation is high when there is a clear description of changes or stability in findings when current images are compared to prior studies, innately requiring that prior imaging exists for reference and a comparison clause is present in the report. Lower activations occur when such comparative analysis is not substantiated with detailed changes or stability notes.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4165019962092188,0.4276729559748428,0.2948717948717949,0.3898305084745763,59.0,100.0
+12994,latent_12994,1373,0.002746,0.0013563866,1.7088796,Narrative comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples show manual comparison of current and prior images with evaluation made based on present findings against previous images. Radiological interpretations in the examples often lack data regarding historical comparisons, marked by words like comparison, same day, previous radiograph, etc.",0.2753623188405797,0.28,0.3103448275862069,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3615771597844684,0.375,0.4031007751937984,0.52,100.0,100.0
+12995,latent_12995,6332,0.012664,0.0044304533,1.0921317,Comparison of interval changes related to medical devices or lung conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention a direct comparison with a prior image or set of images and describe changes in medical devices or lung conditions. The pattern suggests a focus on evaluating interval changes or stability over time, especially regarding medical devices like catheters or tubes, and overall lung condition.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.637060187518903,0.64,0.6186440677966102,0.73,100.0,100.0
+12996,latent_12996,1104,0.002208,0.0011603312,2.0700767,Detailed image comparison with diagnostic insights.,"The examples with high activation levels contain detailed analyses of lung and cardiac conditions, often including potential findings such as atelectasis, pleural effusion, or edema, usually focusing on changes or comparisons to previous images. These examples tend to elaborate on differential diagnoses or potential underlying causes based on image analysis.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4710260499734183,0.4723618090452261,0.4727272727272727,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+12997,latent_12997,3218,0.006436,0.0024358993,1.7657584,Detailed comparison to prior chest radiographs emphasizing anatomical changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels involve comprehensive descriptions of chest findings in comparison to prior images. These examples often mention changes or stability in medical devices, tubes, or specific anatomical features such as the cardiac silhouette and lung opacities compared to earlier radiographs.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5471698113207547,0.58,100.0,100.0
+12998,latent_12998,2696,0.005392,0.0021183258,2.3055031,Complex radiological comparisons or detailed findings in imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to contain detailed descriptions and findings based on comparison with prior imaging or depict complex clinical scenarios requiring detailed radiological evaluation. The assistant explanations demonstrate a comprehensive and nuanced analysis of current images relative to previous ones, highlighting any changes or stability in conditions.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4708808645681448,0.5326633165829145,0.5178571428571429,0.8787878787878788,99.0,100.0
+12999,latent_12999,3554,0.007108,0.0027130174,2.1068528,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging for interval changes.,"These examples consistently highlight findings that are compared to prior imaging studies, specifically noting changes or the absence of changes. This comparison aspect is emphasized, indicating a focus on interval change or absence thereof in the radiographic findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13000,latent_13000,189,0.000378,0.00042530533,4.0051455,Descriptions include multiple views and technical comparisons in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels typically reference the presence of multiple views (frontal and lateral), comparison to prior imaging, and specific technical descriptions. Phrases like 'portable AP chest', 'upright view', and 'comparison' are common in these examples.",0.3452380952380952,0.3714285714285714,0.3125,1.0,10.0,25.0,0.2351926394479586,0.246031746031746,0.2,0.8846153846153846,26.0,100.0
+13001,latent_13001,2783,0.005566,0.0021212024,1.8110384,Comparison with prior imaging indicating changes or stability in pathologies.,The examples showing high activation involve references to previous reports indicating possible changes or stability in pathologies. This pattern is frequent in clinical assessments where ongoing conditions are contrasted against prior findings to ascertain any therapeutic effects or disease progression.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13002,latent_13002,632,0.001264,0.0009565302,3.4453044,Significant findings or changes in radiology compared to prior reports.,"The examples that demonstrated higher activation levels provided specific comparisons to previous or different radiological findings, emphasizing the importance of interval changes or stability in findings. Reports without detailed comparison to prior findings, or cases where prior comparison was not available, tended to have lower activations. This pattern emphasizes that significant context or findings based on previous comparisons are relevant and increase activation.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4784986490445652,0.5055555555555555,0.423728813559322,0.3125,80.0,100.0
+13003,latent_13003,486,0.000972,0.0007776515,4.2732625,Descriptions emphasizing stability or no interval change in findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on retrospective evaluations about the stability or change of apparent features in chest imaging. They describe comparisons with prior images, specifically mentioning stability, lack of interval change, or slight improvements, often in a context where possible progression of known conditions is being surveyed.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4804627552827293,0.5030674846625767,0.3636363636363636,0.3809523809523809,63.0,100.0
+13004,latent_13004,3189,0.006378,0.0023576322,1.6923594,Stable or unchanged findings on follow-up imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve an absence of relevant changes or stable findings over time from comparison radiographs, indicating these observations are less concerning or non-urgent. This is contrasted by more complex, evolving findings or descriptions without previous imaging for reference, which are less activated.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5528089887640449,0.5577889447236181,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,99.0
+13005,latent_13005,665,0.00133,0.0009089161,2.4708076,Description of device placement and positioning with interval changes compared to prior images.,"The shared pattern among the highly activated examples is the description of devices such as tubes or catheters and their positioning in relation to organs or anatomical landmarks like the carina or stomach, along with interval changes compared to prior images. This pattern is common in reports concerning follow-up examinations to ensure device placement stability and to assess any changes in condition or findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6011830635118306,0.6174863387978142,0.6031746031746031,0.4578313253012048,83.0,100.0
+13006,latent_13006,1105,0.00221,0.001209883,2.2654157,Evaluation or findings explicitly related to pneumothorax or right-sided chest pain.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently incorporate phrasing around evaluating for pneumothorax or indications of right-sided chest pain, suggesting concern for pneumothorax or lung-related issues. This concern appears consistently across examples with higher activation levels, indicating a focused pattern around chest imaging concerning pneumothorax or related findings.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5670103092783505,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13007,latent_13007,3229,0.006458,0.0024319964,1.720123,Comparison to previous imaging for progression or resolution.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently refer to explicit evaluations of changes in radiological findings over time, using statements like 'as compared to the prior study' or 'compared to previous radiograph'. This pattern is identifiable by its emphasis on monitoring disease progression or resolution by comparing current imaging to prior images, which is a key feature in radiological interpretation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5102040816326531,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13008,latent_13008,521,0.001042,0.0011393476,2.6621206,Lack of detailed clinical indication context in report requests.,"Examples with high activation predominantly include findings marked as 'N/A' in the indication section, with no detailed context or clinical history, leading to generic descriptions devoid of patient-specific conditions influencing the assessment. This lack of context focuses the assistant's response on objective reading without bias from pre-existing conditions.",0.5528031290743155,0.5714285714285714,0.5428571428571428,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.505988455988456,0.5089820359281437,0.4336283185840708,0.7313432835820896,67.0,100.0
+13009,latent_13009,2477,0.004954,0.0018372695,1.8504326,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"This set of examples involves references to direct, often interval-based changes in findings compared to previous imaging, with a focus on significant updates or progression of conditions. These reports use language that highlights notable interval changes or stability in conditions over time, such as progression of a disease, new findings, or stabilization, as shown with phrases like 'interval increase', 'unchanged', and 'resolved'.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13010,latent_13010,323,0.000646,0.00058045104,2.532494,Stability or minor changes in medical interventions or conditions across comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations feature continuity or change in medical interventions or conditions, like catheter or pacemaker stability, consistent findings across multiple prior exams, or resolution/improvement of conditions. They emphasize evaluation against prior data and the state of existing medical conditions or interventions, using language that denotes stability or minor changes over time.",0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.3333333333333333,0.5333333333333333,15.0,25.0,0.4540229885057471,0.4758620689655172,0.2816901408450704,0.4444444444444444,45.0,100.0
+13011,latent_13011,1873,0.003746,0.0014496961,2.3030407,Reports of interval changes or specific qualitative changes from prior imaging.,"The model appears to activate on examples where there is a comparison of current imaging findings to previous studies with a detailed qualitative change indication (e.g., changes in opacity, placement of devices such as catheters), particularly where there is a specification of 'interval change' or 'interval removal/adjustment.' Examples with high activation report exact comparisons, indicating stability or specific qualitative changes (e.g., opacification or device position), while low activation lacks these comparative details or simply states with little to no change observed beyond simple descriptions.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13012,latent_13012,1429,0.002858,0.0013415777,2.503508,Presence of comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"The higher activation levels are associated with the use of comparative language in radiological examination descriptions, specifically when the same examination or image is evaluated for changes over time. This comparison highlights any interval changes or lack thereof, often describing findings as unchanged or noting specific alterations since the prior study.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13013,latent_13013,6445,0.01289,0.0045757215,1.468849,Reports describing interval changes or significant findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples highlighting an activation pattern correspond to reports where significant changes are noted over time or there are major new findings compared to previous reports. This is particularly the case when specific pathologic findings are transitioning, such as atelectasis, infiltrates, or effusions, and when explicit references to prior images indicate a marked interval change. This emphasizes the model's attention to identifiable and clinically relevant changes in sequential imaging.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5365853658536586,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13014,latent_13014,1188,0.002376,0.0010817207,2.3188424,Evaluation of radiological changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation highlight certain key words or formats describing radiological findings in relation to current and prior images, even in limited information. This may reflect a pattern of comparing significant changes explicitly noted or specific questioning of changes which is an integral aspect of radiological assessments.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13015,latent_13015,485,0.00097,0.000787935,3.8737772,Descriptive analysis of current imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples describe evaluating radiology findings by comparing them to previous imaging, often indicating changes or stability between studies. Phrases like 'comparison to', 'compared to prior', or providing specific indications and findings related to prior studies are indicative of the pattern.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.441381388167062,0.4417177914110429,0.3653846153846153,0.6031746031746031,63.0,100.0
+13016,latent_13016,4586,0.009172,0.0032416282,1.0601563,Explicit and detailed comparisons to prior imaging.,Variability in activation levels is attributed to explicit comparisons made between current and prior imaging. High activation corresponds to detailed descriptions that explicitly reference changes or stability noted in comparison with prior images. Examples without clear or detailed comparative notes display lower activation levels.,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.576,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13017,latent_13017,714,0.001428,0.00095702434,3.0432968,Comparative analysis with prior imaging emphasizing changes in pleural effusions or cardiomegaly.,"The examples with high activations consistently compare current findings with previous images, highlighting changes such as pleural effusions or cardiomegaly. This comparison element is crucial for assessing the stability or progression of specific conditions, leading to high activation when such detailed temporal comparisons are involved.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5907225894688853,0.5978835978835979,0.5866666666666667,0.4943820224719101,89.0,100.0
+13018,latent_13018,4779,0.009558,0.0034961451,1.6430451,Reports include detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"The high activation level examples consistently emphasize the importance of comparing current imaging with prior studies to evaluate for changes. Phrases indicating comparative analysis such as 'compared to previous radiograph', 'compared to prior study', or 'unchanged from prior' are critical in these examples.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13019,latent_13019,2340,0.00468,0.0017195424,2.1195939,Referenced interval changes or stability from prior imaging studies.,"The examples highlight the presence of explicit comparisons with previous imaging studies to assess stability, change, or resolution of specific findings such as effusions, opacities, tube placements, etc. The activation is higher for instances where such comparisons lead to conclusions on change in pathology or positioning of support devices.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5731358529111338,0.5778894472361809,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,99.0
+13020,latent_13020,2075,0.00415,0.001834429,2.2841759,Comparison with prior imaging for assessment of interval change.,"The majority of examples with high activation levels emphasize the inclusion of previous imaging reports or comparisons to outline changes in the current findings. This likely shows the model is tailored to recognize patterns indicative of changes over time, which are central to assessing patient progress or identifying stability.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13021,latent_13021,465,0.00093,0.00077042426,2.8223019,Explicit comparison of current and prior images with structured guidance.,"Highly activated examples feature explicit instructions to compare current imaging to prior studies, often specifying image views (frontal, lateral) or dates. This indicates that providing a structured comparison, possibly with visual references to determine interval changes, encourages high activation levels. These instructions align with tasks requiring precise visual data comparison, characteristic of radiological analysis workflows.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4094763493147932,0.4113924050632911,0.3425925925925926,0.6271186440677966,59.0,99.0
+13022,latent_13022,800,0.0016,0.0009874577,2.9410381,"Comparison of current findings to prior studies, with stability or change noted.","The examples with higher activation levels all describe radiological findings in comparison to prior studies, focusing on stability or change over time. They often mention calcifications, cardiomegaly, or unchanged heart size, with specific imaging details remaining stable or evolving.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4571488294314381,0.4591836734693877,0.4553571428571428,0.53125,96.0,100.0
+13023,latent_13023,1266,0.002532,0.0013367373,3.2536805,Reports noting changes in findings or interventions from prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels predominantly focus on descriptions where there are changes or reassessments based on new interventions or findings, such as tube placements or discovery of effusions, especially when comparing current imaging to prior imaging. These examples involve assessments where modifications in clinical management or observations of change are highlighted.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13024,latent_13024,1738,0.003476,0.0014779218,2.7168977,Descriptions of acute pathology or specific changes in comparison studies.,"Examples with notable activation levels often involve the presence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, consolidation, or other explicit pathologic findings, while a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size is less emphasized. In contrast, low activation examples often describe no acute findings, stability, or unchanged conditions with normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal contours.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4274277317524258,0.435,0.4155844155844156,0.32,100.0,100.0
+13025,latent_13025,630,0.00126,0.000813039,2.491722,Explicit comparison with prior imaging emphasizing temporal stability or change.,"Activator levels are high when reports feature an explicit 'prior report' or 'comparison with previous' imaging studies, delineating specific changes or stable states in the current study compared to past ones. This comparison indicates the focus on temporal stability or change, a recurring theme in radiology, reflecting the interest in assessing chronicity or progression in findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3786519230188223,0.3791208791208791,0.3368421052631579,0.3902439024390244,82.0,100.0
+13026,latent_13026,2990,0.00598,0.002155333,1.7949132,Comparison with prior imaging shows change in thoracic pathology over time.,"The highly activated examples indicate reports where findings from previous imaging studies are compared to current images. Specifically, the focus is on identifying changes in conditions like pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or other thoracic pathology, over time. The pattern is recognized by phrases describing how certain features have worsened or improved upon comparison.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13027,latent_13027,427,0.000854,0.00073351304,4.200323,Unremarkable findings with normal cardiomediastinal contours and clear lungs.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological findings where the heart size, cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours appear normal while the lungs are clear and there are no pleural effusions or pneumothorax. This suggests the pattern is identifying texts describing routine, unremarkable radiological findings in cases where no acute cardiopulmonary abnormalities are present.",0.8321678321678322,0.8333333333333334,0.8571428571428571,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.7584341767510084,0.7806451612903226,0.6981132075471698,0.6727272727272727,55.0,100.0
+13028,latent_13028,1662,0.003324,0.0012096517,2.0652738,Focus on stable or unchanged findings between prior and current images in reports.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly refer to findings when the comparison statement about prior images explicitly notes minimal or no interval changes in radiological findings. This suggests the model is highly sensitive to unchanged or stable findings between comparisons of prior and current imaging, a common reporting style in radiological assessments.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4606741573033708,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13029,latent_13029,5843,0.011686,0.0040799975,1.2471935,Descriptions involve detailed comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently require the radiological interpretation to explicitly mention the comparison with a prior image. High activation levels correspond to examples where the findings include changes or stability assessments against prior examinations, highlighting the importance of comparative analysis in radiology for monitoring patients.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5419883040935672,0.5505050505050505,0.5396825396825397,0.6868686868686869,99.0,99.0
+13030,latent_13030,4889,0.009778,0.0035993988,1.9800925,Comparison with prior images emphasizing changes in medical devices or intervention outcomes.,"Prompts with higher activation consistently refer to comparing current images with prior images, with an emphasis on changes related to intervention outcomes or disease progression, particularly focusing on devices such as nasogastric or endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and explicit mentions of intervention-related changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13031,latent_13031,1290,0.00258,0.0010297162,1.9300284,Evaluates changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples show instances where radiological findings are provided with detailed comparative descriptions to prior images, which include evaluation of changes over time. The activation levels are higher when the report emphasizes describing changes between current and previous imaging studies.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4959244959244959,0.53,0.5197368421052632,0.79,100.0,100.0
+13032,latent_13032,5066,0.010132,0.003552839,0.99899423,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the findings with a direct comparison or mention of specific changes between the current imaging and prior studies. This includes previous findings, alterations, and stability or progression of certain features. It often uses explicit phrasing like 'compared to' or 'as compared to previous' when discussing imaging results.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13033,latent_13033,405,0.00081,0.00067986955,3.1846457,Requests for assistant-completed comparison of findings without explicit prior reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on providing descriptions of findings in a radiology study in relation to prior images, with specific instructions or queries for the assistant to address changes or comparisons over time. These prompts ask for a detailed comparison without an explicit prior report, requiring active assistant input to discern interval changes.",0.3624288425047438,0.4166666666666667,0.4358974358974359,0.7391304347826086,23.0,25.0,0.3808189755801466,0.4026845637583892,0.34375,0.8979591836734694,49.0,100.0
+13034,latent_13034,295,0.00059,0.00070599496,3.9379458,Impactful significance of comparison to prior imaging in disease management.,"High activations generally involve situations where the comparison to prior imaging significantly influences the interpretation or decision-making process, particularly in the context of managing pulmonary lesions, metastases, and significant changes in pathology or intervention outcomes. Comparison with previous imaging enables tracking of disease progression or intervention effects, which can critically impact patient management.",0.3552546744036106,0.375,0.2222222222222222,0.2666666666666666,15.0,25.0,0.525041688229544,0.5785714285714286,0.320754716981132,0.425,40.0,100.0
+13035,latent_13035,418,0.000836,0.0006719661,4.1258545,"Emphasis on cardiomediastinal findings, often enlarged silhouette or significant change.","The pattern seen in high activation examples is the presence of findings that involve the cardiomediastinal silhouette, such as cardiomegaly, enlarged cardiac silhouette, or changes in lung bases possibly related to effusion, with an emphasis on notable changes relative to prior images. Cardiothoracic changes often require careful monitoring and comparison across time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5016722408026756,0.5771812080536913,0.3333333333333333,0.2857142857142857,49.0,100.0
+13036,latent_13036,8881,0.017762,0.006236242,1.1181417,Explicit use of phrasing for comparison with prior images.,"The examples reveal a specific phraseology pattern where comparison with prior images is explicitly included with phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph', 'in comparison with the study of', or other related forms. These phrases often indicate changes or comparisons made in post-processing reports where assistants provide or summarize findings based on given data.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13037,latent_13037,604,0.001208,0.00084253185,3.000268,Comparison of current with prior imaging for interval change.,"High activation levels correlate with examples that involve multiple data points being compared, specifically involving both current and prior images along the timeline of chest radiographs, to assess for changes or stability in findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4353329664281783,0.4385964912280701,0.3893805309734513,0.6197183098591549,71.0,100.0
+13038,latent_13038,415,0.00083,0.00079657446,3.9919107,Comparison to prior images or studies requested.,"The pattern seen in these examples is the explicit need for comparison between the current imaging with prior studies. Phrases like 'in comparison', 'compared to prior', and explicit instructions to provide findings relative to past images highlight this pattern.",0.5025310630464795,0.5106382978723404,0.4838709677419355,0.6818181818181818,22.0,25.0,0.4423527443105756,0.4451612903225806,0.3603603603603603,0.7272727272727273,55.0,100.0
+13039,latent_13039,3361,0.006722,0.0025472327,2.7456362,Comparison to prior studies with focus on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activations discuss findings in comparison to prior studies, indicating a pattern of focusing on changes or stability relative to previous conditions. This provides deeper insight into patient progress or stability over time, aligning with the task of describing comparative findings between studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13040,latent_13040,1610,0.00322,0.0013522959,2.4283695,Comparison of current images to prior images for noting changes.,"This set of examples includes references to both current imaging and prior reports, with the aim of assessing for changes. The consistent pattern is the evaluation of new findings with comparison to previous images or descriptions to identify changes, stability, or resolution, using terms such as 'compared to', 'new', 'unchanged', and 'improved'.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+13041,latent_13041,2265,0.00453,0.001833183,1.9861234,Comparative imaging findings with device or condition changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, including changes in therapeutic devices or substantial alterations in medical conditions.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5444139194139195,0.5477386934673367,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,99.0
+13042,latent_13042,3467,0.006934,0.0025374442,1.7641788,Changes in pulmonary edema or opacities indicating worsening conditions.,"Certain examples make reference to changes in pulmonary edema or opacities specifically in relation to worsening conditions, such as edema or infiltrates, indicating a focus on the interval change of lung conditions over time. These changes are noted even when devices or other factors remain stable or unchanged.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4267695835780407,0.4824120603015075,0.4473684210526316,0.1717171717171717,99.0,100.0
+13043,latent_13043,678,0.001356,0.0008471857,2.596956,"Focus on comparison with prior images, often lacking explicit indication or technique details.","The high activation examples prominently feature explicit comparisons with prior radiological images, an expectation for providing a detailed comparison between current images and previously recorded ones. Reports in these examples often lack detailed indication or technique information, focusing instead on comparative analysis.",0.5170250896057348,0.5510204081632653,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.3798820928518791,0.4224598930481283,0.4295302013422818,0.735632183908046,87.0,100.0
+13044,latent_13044,666,0.001332,0.0008831238,2.2719834,Presence or absence of prior image comparisons impacting report detail.,"The examples with high activation emphasize comparisons to the 'prior frontal image', demonstrating changes or stability in structure or pathology, often highlighting normal findings like cardiac and mediastinal contours when no previous point of reference is available. This consistent referencing or lack of reference to prior images appears to be driving the pattern activation.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.481981981981982,0.5027027027027027,0.4779411764705882,0.7558139534883721,86.0,99.0
+13045,latent_13045,418,0.000836,0.0007358171,4.0744195,Identification of changes or new pathologies in the chest findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve changes or conditions such as new opacities, consolidations, or pleural effusions that could imply a new or worsening pathology, which is often of greater clinical interest. These are contrasted with scenarios where there is no noteworthy change, no acute abnormality, or the findings imply stable chronic conditions.",0.3727565577542567,0.3829787234042553,0.3157894736842105,0.2727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.4360091640088046,0.4774193548387097,0.2758620689655172,0.2909090909090909,55.0,100.0
+13046,latent_13046,433,0.000866,0.00072378106,3.0956967,"Comparison with prior imaging, using current frontal and lateral images.","The pattern shown in examples with high activation levels is the presence of a given current frontal and lateral image and a prior frontal image, prompting a comparison with previous findings. These examples are likely focused on analyzing changes across different imaging studies and explicitly state 'comparison' with a prior image, often identifying stability or change in specific findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.424812030075188,0.4248366013071895,0.3232323232323232,0.6037735849056604,53.0,100.0
+13047,latent_13047,1477,0.002954,0.0013391391,3.2566195,Presence of 'prior frontal image' and 'current lateral image'.,The highly activated examples consistently include both the phrase 'prior frontal image' and reference to a 'current lateral image'. This pattern suggests that the model activates strongly with current lateral imaging paired with comparative observation to prior frontal images.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13048,latent_13048,1110,0.00222,0.0010965235,2.2352228,Current vs prior imaging comparison with noted change or stability.,"These examples show reference to both current and prior imaging studies, with explicit changes or stability of particular features being noted. Examples with increased activation involve detailed comparisons, such as evaluating differences in lung or cardiac conditions, modifications in medical device positioning, or the stability of pathological findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13049,latent_13049,1590,0.00318,0.0013383263,2.811086,Explicit comparison of findings between current and prior images showing interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels are characterized by explicit mentions of comparative findings between images, particularly those that note specific differences or resolutions in pathology, often involving the lungs or important anatomical structures. The contrast between past and present states of the patient’s condition as depicted in the images is a central theme, such as improvement or worsening of findings.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5222222222222223,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13050,latent_13050,4218,0.008436,0.0030324988,1.19082,Stable or unchanged findings compared to previous studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently use phrases indicating stable conditions when comparing current radiological findings to prior studies, such as 'no significant interval change', 'the appearance ... is unchanged', 'stable', and reference to relative comparison with past imaging results. Reflecting unchanged conditions between exams is a recurring reporting pattern.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.35,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.6,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13051,latent_13051,3080,0.00616,0.002341247,1.6341399,Analysis of current imaging compared to prior studies focuses on interval changes.,"Many examples involve image descriptions with references to both current and prior images, focusing on changes or findings in comparison to previous studies. This pattern emphasizes evaluating changes over time, a frequent practice in radiological assessments.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13052,latent_13052,709,0.001418,0.0009088833,2.4261127,Emphasis on comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"Prompted inputs often state 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' and contrasting findings with a previous examination. The activation levels suggest that these prompts stress the comparison aspect more heavily, likely influencing the model's activation towards examining changes or similarities with the prior imaging study.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4276051031766418,0.450261780104712,0.4492753623188406,0.6813186813186813,91.0,100.0
+13053,latent_13053,365,0.00073,0.0006451982,3.3112106,Emphasis on changes or stability over multiple imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a direct comparison of the current findings with previous imaging, explicitly identifying changes or stability over time. This pattern indicates the importance of highlighting progression or stability in clinical interpretations.",0.6154545454545455,0.6170212765957447,0.5714285714285714,0.7272727272727273,22.0,25.0,0.56655900621118,0.5734265734265734,0.3902439024390244,0.7441860465116279,43.0,100.0
+13054,latent_13054,4367,0.008734,0.0031575148,1.5191232,Comparison of medical device positions across multiple radiographic views or studies.,"The examples indicate that the pattern is the mention of multiple specific imaging techniques or views used in the examination, paired with the specific analysis of the location and outcome of medical devices like tubes or catheters often checked for correct placement or position.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4776119402985074,0.32,100.0,100.0
+13055,latent_13055,3095,0.00619,0.0023636958,1.6170107,Descriptive comparison to prior studies without listing specific prior dates.,"Examples with high activation frequently do not provide prior dates for comparison but focus on qualitative descriptions and extensive findings, such as 'lungs are clear' or 'no pleural effusion'. Activation correlates with an assistant's descriptive comparison of findings without the precise prior exam date, focusing more on qualitative assessments despite missing prior exam specifics.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13056,latent_13056,965,0.00193,0.001127421,2.373811,Detailed comparison to prior images noting specific changes or stability.,"The pattern focuses on the linguistic structure used for radiological comparison: a description of findings relative to a prior image, emphasizing changes, stability, or new developments. High activation examples frequently mention specific differences or consistencies between current and prior images.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13057,latent_13057,676,0.001352,0.0009179145,2.3985717,Detailed evaluation of interval changes compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples contain descriptions where findings on radiologic images are explicitly compared to prior images to assess interval changes, particularly noting new or omitted pathologies like effusions, edema, or device positioning. The activation levels are most pronounced in cases with noted interval changes and detailed comparisons.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5047179578193866,0.5054347826086957,0.4673913043478261,0.5058823529411764,85.0,99.0
+13058,latent_13058,3272,0.006544,0.0023496505,1.545103,Comparison of findings with prior imaging studies.,"All these examples require the description of radiological findings by comparing with prior examinations, emphasizing changes or stability over time. This pattern reflects the standard practice in radiology to compare current images with prior ones to assess interval changes.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+13059,latent_13059,384,0.000768,0.000675859,3.4671443,Stable calcified granulomas referenced in findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently reference stable or unchanged calcified granulomas, indicating that this observation is significant to the pattern. The presence of calcification is emphasized in descriptions and comparison to previous imaging findings, suggesting calcification stability is key to the pattern.",0.7951573849878935,0.8085106382978723,1.0,0.5909090909090909,22.0,25.0,0.6289217454020917,0.7619047619047619,1.0,0.2553191489361702,47.0,100.0
+13060,latent_13060,493,0.000986,0.0007705095,2.481808,"Stable positioning of medical devices (e.g., lines, tubes) in comparison.","The examples consistently reference positioning and termination of tubes or lines like PICC lines or NG tubes, particularly when unchanged from previous placements. The pattern focuses on devices within the body as part of comparative radiology studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5914786967418546,0.656441717791411,0.6,0.3333333333333333,63.0,100.0
+13061,latent_13061,574,0.001148,0.0009819155,2.963208,Explicit interval change comparison to prior images with clinical context.,"The cases with high activation involve reports where there's a direct comparison between the current imaging findings and prior images, evaluating interval changes or stability. Each description includes a consideration of patient's history or clinical context, typically to reassess known conditions or look for changes related to a previously identified issue.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5647358282883874,0.5672514619883041,0.4827586206896552,0.5915492957746479,71.0,100.0
+13062,latent_13062,684,0.001368,0.000902569,3.1331902,Comparison with prior imaging for medical device placement or change.,Examples with high activations consistently mention a change or careful placement of a catheter or tube after comparison to prior images. This suggests the pattern of interest involves the careful description and positioning of medical devices as referenced through previous imaging studies.,0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5915242165242165,0.6021505376344086,0.5857142857142857,0.4767441860465116,86.0,100.0
+13063,latent_13063,2818,0.005636,0.0022522435,1.8286657,Description of findings with limited or absent comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels require analysis of imaging in the absence of contrasting comparison information or mention limited or absent comparison. This indicates a demand for analyzing findings solely from current images without prior ones for reference, often seen in urgent or preparatory evaluations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4811320754716981,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13064,latent_13064,565,0.00113,0.00077836035,3.159335,Tasks involving detailed comparison to prior radiological studies.,"Higher activation levels correlate with tasks requiring comparison of radiological images to prior studies, often involving identification of intervals or changes (improvement, stability, or progression) in the findings, such as resolving atelectasis, unchanged devices, or changes in vascular impressions. These tasks emphasize pattern recognition over time through comparative imaging analysis.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4452119309262167,0.4561403508771929,0.4112903225806452,0.7183098591549296,71.0,100.0
+13065,latent_13065,431,0.000862,0.00068586273,3.0763183,Findings compared to prior imaging and evaluated for changes.,Most samples with high activation levels demonstrate a pattern where findings from current radiology images are directly compared to prior images to assess changes or stability in the patient's condition. The pattern includes explicit mention of 'comparison' and specific findings related to changes between the current and prior imaging.,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4466420729810214,0.4466666666666666,0.3366336633663366,0.68,50.0,100.0
+13066,latent_13066,4303,0.008606,0.0031065561,2.1286852,Worsening or stable pathology in image comparisons.,"Examples with higher activation involve linguistic cues indicating abnormal changes or findings in comparison to previous radiological exams. These comparisons typically emphasize changes or stability in pathologies, like pneumonia, consolidation, or other abnormalities, rather than noting normals, which are more likely associated with lower activations.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5816326530612245,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13067,latent_13067,7388,0.014776,0.0051560723,1.0067137,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"Most examples with high activation scores involve situations where a prior radiology report is explicitly compared to a new imaging study, observing changes such as stability, increase, or decrease in identified features. The examples consistently perform diagnoses by looking for interval change, stability, or progression from prior images, making this pattern distinct in the dataset.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+13068,latent_13068,1368,0.002736,0.0013607878,2.3777907,Comparison involving both frontal and lateral chest images.,"These examples each contain explicit references to findings in lateral chest radiographs and their comparisons to prior studies, despite the primary focus being on frontal images. Such references clarify the anatomical context and assist in detailed assessments of chest pathologies over time.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5238095238095238,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13069,latent_13069,2950,0.0059,0.002213129,2.1771145,The presence of an 'ASSISTANT' providing detailed interpretation instructions.,"The examples with higher activation often include instructions to assist in interpreting and comparing imaging studies alongside previous reports or images, focusing on identifying changes or stability over time. While the examples document radiology findings in a structured manner, the primary pattern is not about findings but assisting in interpretation by providing detailed, concise descriptions that involve the explicit role of an 'ASSISTANT' providing these.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13070,latent_13070,660,0.00132,0.00096826354,2.366224,Emphasis on interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on describing changes and interval progressions in imaging studies compared to prior images explicitly, often including details about clinical indications or new discoveries. Phrasing like 'no prior available' or 'compared to prior' is common. Lower activation levels generally lack this direct comparison or focus on descriptions without significant change.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4623376623376623,0.4888888888888889,0.460431654676259,0.7901234567901234,81.0,99.0
+13071,latent_13071,2852,0.005704,0.002163847,1.4727213,Comparison highlighting unchanged or consistent findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe the process of comparing current imaging findings with prior images, often using explicit comparisons or outlining changes from previous examinations. The descriptions tend to highlight comparisons of normal or unchanged findings, rather than detailing new findings or acute changes which seem more relevant in reports with lower activations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6096486838154338,0.61,0.6170212765957447,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13072,latent_13072,410,0.00082,0.0006860447,4.35256,Comparison with prior images without explicit prior data.,"Examples with high activation involve the task of creating a description by comparing current imaging with prior images, but lack explicit prior comparison information, leading to speculation on changes. This highlights the focus on comparison as a task but points out the absence of or incomplete prior image data, which forces reliance on current observations and assumptions about prior states.",0.5398601398601399,0.5531914893617021,0.5151515151515151,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.4088665794912894,0.4090909090909091,0.3203883495145631,0.6111111111111112,54.0,100.0
+13073,latent_13073,3159,0.006318,0.0023363489,1.6166353,Description of interval change using prior frontal chest images.,"Highly activated examples refer to comparison with a prior frontal image, where interval changes are described. This involves reviewing sequential imaging to identify changes in the patient's condition, such as interval increase in effusion or changes post-procedure.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13074,latent_13074,2493,0.004986,0.0018856069,2.1510272,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies with focus on stability or changes.,"The examples that are activated often provide a clinical history or context which mentions medical procedures or prior conditions, and they include comparative findings that highlight stability or changes in radiological appearance over time, with a focus on describing devices, effusions, lung opacity changes, or impacts on surrounding anatomical structures.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4845083299471759,0.4874371859296482,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,99.0
+13075,latent_13075,480,0.00096,0.00068547094,3.3756204,Comparison of current and prior images for interval changes in pathology or device placement.,Highly activated examples reference prior imaging studies to detect stability or interval changes involving various devices or lung pathologies. This is a frequent approach in radiology to track progress or identify abnormalities over time.,0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4320169524176459,0.4382716049382716,0.376068376068376,0.7096774193548387,62.0,100.0
+13076,latent_13076,2002,0.004004,0.0016000752,2.6654088,Findings relative to prior imaging with emphasis on changes or stability.,"Examples that are activated often include discussions of findings in direct comparison to prior studies, focusing on identifying changes (e.g., an increase or stability in a medical condition) that can indicate disease progression or stability. Such descriptions typically include specific measurements or details of medical devices and conditions as they relate to previous observations.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4895833333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13077,latent_13077,2895,0.00579,0.002323632,1.9170285,Procedural changes or placements alongside cardiac stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels generally involve descriptions of interventions (like tube placements) or changes in findings which suggest procedural actions. These interventions are often described alongside consistent heart sizes or stable lung conditions, suggesting a focus on procedural changes or confirmations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13078,latent_13078,570,0.00114,0.00082656916,3.557167,Description of imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions or instructions to provide findings in comparison to prior imaging or include changes from the previous imaging study, integrating direct analysis from prior reports. These items emphasize the difference or lack of change over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4278407014979904,0.4310344827586206,0.3893805309734513,0.5945945945945946,74.0,100.0
+13079,latent_13079,999,0.001998,0.001000003,1.9396806,Details about medical device placement or adjustment and specific radiograph findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often include details about diagnostic interventions such as placement, assessment, or adjustment of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) relative to anatomical landmarks or proper positions. Additionally, references to specific chest radiograph findings, such as retrocardiac opacification, atelectasis, or opacities, are common.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13080,latent_13080,4323,0.008646,0.0030860547,1.5778937,Position and description of medical devices in the imaging.,"The examples with higher activation typically involve detailed descriptions of medical devices, their positioning, and associated structures like catheters, tubes, or leads within the radiograph, observing changes or persistence of device positioning as compared to previous reports. This suggests that the pattern is focused on the presence and position of lines and tubes in diagnostic imaging.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5714285714285714,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13081,latent_13081,2272,0.004544,0.0017759497,3.0623834,Lung or pleural findings with reference to stable cardiac or mediastinal contours.,"Examples with higher activations frequently mention both a detailed evaluation of lung or pleural conditions and describe the state of the cardiac or aortic structures. Typically, these examples note effusions, opacities, atelectasis, or similar lung-related findings while also remarking on stable or unchanged mediastinal, cardiac, or aortic features.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5789473684210527,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13082,latent_13082,1332,0.002664,0.0013049209,2.7439303,Emphasis on interval change assessments in radiology.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing current imaging to prior studies to evaluate for changes, especially in clinical contexts highlighting specific interventions or their absence (e.g., post-procedure checks, stability without intervention). This is important for radiologists to note progress or detect abnormalities over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5721744471744472,0.5778894472361809,0.5609756097560976,0.696969696969697,99.0,100.0
+13083,latent_13083,653,0.001306,0.0010377794,3.5064502,"Detailed modulation or change in pulmonary, cardiac, or catheter findings compared to prior images.","When there is a low activation level, the examples tend to lack specific counts or comparisons to prior imaging studies. Conversely, examples with high activation levels frequently contain detailed mentions of radiological findings such as measurements, adjustments, or changes over time like increased or decreased fluid in specific areas, or notable changes in tubes and catheter placements. These reports also compare current findings meticulously with previous studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.594224924012158,0.5955056179775281,0.5321100917431193,0.7341772151898734,79.0,99.0
+13084,latent_13084,1376,0.002752,0.0012750756,1.71476,"Explicit comparison to prior imaging results, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels frequently include the comparison of new imaging findings with prior radiographs or reports. This pattern indicates the importance of comparing current and previous results using explicit terms like 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', or mentioning specific differences or consistencies from prior examinations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4495045540986888,0.45,0.4528301886792453,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13085,latent_13085,4069,0.008138,0.0029972654,2.0430489,Use of interval/change language in findings.,"Highly activated examples include findings with descriptions of interval changes compared to previous studies. This indicates sensitivity to changes in imaging characteristics when comparing current images to prior ones, highlighting differences like improvement, worsening, or stability of conditions like atelectasis, pleural effusion, or opacifications.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5619834710743802,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13086,latent_13086,665,0.00133,0.0011186464,4.4814506,"Reported precise distances for tubes from anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina).","High activation examples involve placement of tubes like ET, NG, or PICC lines, identified by their ended distances from anatomical landmarks such as the carina or SVC. Reports detailing distances often indicate precision in placement and indicate changes between examinations, but primarily focus on post-procedural assessments rather than new acute pathologies.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9583333333333334,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8998899889988998,0.9010989010989012,0.9,0.8780487804878049,82.0,100.0
+13087,latent_13087,570,0.00114,0.00078127335,2.344448,Instructions emphasize comparing current to previous imaging with minimal prior comparison details in text.,"Examples with higher activations consistently entail a structured comparison starting with a command to evaluate specific findings in current versus prior imaging using images provided within the directive. They often lack previous imaging for comparison in the text provided, relying instead on the examiner's instructions and implied need for image-based comparison analysis.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3845283707352672,0.3952095808383233,0.360655737704918,0.6567164179104478,67.0,100.0
+13088,latent_13088,5428,0.010856,0.0039206576,1.6308169,Comparison reveals interval change in lung opacities or effusions.,"The examples indicate high activation levels when the findings include comparisons specifically mentioning changes in parenchymal opacities, effusions, or atelectasis, often with descriptions of intervals or directional changes (increases or decreases), which are key features detailed in follow-up imaging reports.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5283018867924528,0.28,100.0,100.0
+13089,latent_13089,3405,0.00681,0.0024922306,1.6540318,Frequent observation of low lung volumes.,"The pattern in the examples is related to the observation of low lung volumes, which is a repeated finding noted across different patients and scenarios. This descriptor 'low lung volumes' is used repeatedly in the examples with high activation levels, suggesting its importance in the assessment of lung conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4787494719053654,0.5326633165829145,0.6,0.21,100.0,99.0
+13090,latent_13090,452,0.000904,0.0007940966,2.3674517,Findings compared against prior images to assess stability or change.,Examples with high activation focus on radiological findings compared against prior imaging which are indicative of stability or changes relevant to the patient's clinical condition. The reference to prior imaging as a baseline to assess current radiological findings is central to understanding these examples.,0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4994987770159188,0.5,0.3894736842105263,0.6379310344827587,58.0,100.0
+13091,latent_13091,1025,0.00205,0.0011758264,2.4306455,Presence of chest pathologies noted in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence of specific chest pathologies such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, atelectasis, or cardiac silhouette changes, in reference to prior images. The emphasis is on identifying these particular pathological conditions in comparison to previous findings, which is a common practice in radiological assessments for determining change and progression.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13092,latent_13092,800,0.0016,0.0009853743,2.8749545,Comparisons between current and prior imaging studies showing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies highlighting changes or the stability of findings. The line ""comparison to the prior frontal image"" is repeated across examples, indicating a focus on the progression or consistency of patient conditions over time. Other lower activation examples lack significant changes or specific mention of 'comparison'.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13093,latent_13093,337,0.000674,0.00062181224,3.3278904,Comparison of current chest radiographs to prior studies emphasizing unchanged findings or hyperinflation.,"The pattern involves using portable frontal or PA and lateral chest radiographs compared to prior studies, with descriptions often noting normal structures and ruling out acute findings, like pneumonia or pneumothorax. Several examples highlight findings in relation to hyperinflation of lungs and flattening of diaphragms, suggestive of COPD, matching the pattern observed in higher activation values.",0.5164835164835164,0.5227272727272727,0.45,0.4736842105263157,19.0,25.0,0.535105230137455,0.6013986013986014,0.3478260869565217,0.3720930232558139,43.0,100.0
+13094,latent_13094,1027,0.002054,0.0010546618,2.7144847,Descriptive comparison with prior imaging findings or reports.,"The activation pattern highlights descriptions involving comparisons between current imaging findings and prior reports or images, indicating an emphasis on observing changes or stability of conditions over time. This is consistent with examples marked by a reference to a previous study despite the presence of some missing data in certain examples.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5268808957742158,0.5326633165829145,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,99.0
+13095,latent_13095,1337,0.002674,0.0017508698,2.9282918,"Presence or position of cardiac devices (e.g., pacemaker, catheter) in comparison to prior imaging.","The high-activation examples report the presence, stability, or position of a pacemaker, central venous catheter, or other cardiac device along with a comparison to a prior image. These cases focus on confirming the position or mention of these objects against previous examinations.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.844965117151359,0.845,0.8556701030927835,0.83,100.0,100.0
+13096,latent_13096,697,0.001394,0.0009836477,4.4535437,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The high activation examples consistently involve the description of findings based on comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, explicitly mentioning prior reports/images and changes or stability in structure or conditions across these images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4359966744072704,0.4607329842931937,0.460431654676259,0.6956521739130435,92.0,99.0
+13097,latent_13097,2139,0.004278,0.0018671684,1.5810678,Unchanged or stable findings in comparison to previous image.,"Examples with higher activation levels often indicate unchanged or stable findings compared to prior imaging, particularly regarding the heart, mediastinum, or existing conditions whereas lower activation examples highlight new findings or significant changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13098,latent_13098,851,0.001702,0.0013166287,3.6036234,Incidental mild abnormalities without acute pathology.,"High-activation examples consistently describe the presence of mild abnormalities such as slightly unfolded aorta, mild cardiomegaly, mild pleural thickening, or mild degenerative changes without acute pathology. These findings are incidental and not indicative of acute abnormalities, often requiring close monitoring or comparison with previous imaging to ensure stability.",0.6666666666666666,0.6938775510204082,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,24.0,0.6680362439117302,0.695,0.6242038216560509,0.98,100.0,100.0
+13099,latent_13099,1259,0.002518,0.0011932078,2.4901464,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The high-activation examples consistently indicate descriptions of imaging that highlight interval changes, improvements, or stability of findings compared to prior studies. Reports frequently reference differences or similarities with previous images, keen on pointing out any detectable change or stability in the patient's condition. This comparison focuses on interpreting the progression, regression, or static nature of observed pathologies.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13100,latent_13100,330,0.00066,0.0006295023,5.2278757,Positioning and change evaluation of tubes or catheters in chest x-rays.,"The pattern in high activation examples is primarily centered around positioning and evaluation of medical devices present in chest radiographs. Reports frequently mention comparison in terms of chest tubes, Dobbhoff tubes, and NG (nasogastric) tube positions, and the presence or adjustment of these is a key feature linked to high activation.",0.7722567287784678,0.7727272727272727,0.6666666666666666,0.9473684210526316,19.0,25.0,0.7323317242501493,0.75177304964539,0.5483870967741935,0.8292682926829268,41.0,100.0
+13101,latent_13101,6204,0.012408,0.0044646696,1.4703959,Detailed comparison to prior imaging study results in higher activation.,"The presence of comparative analysis with a prior image is shared across the examples, and the activation levels reveal a higher level in explanations of changes or updates since prior examinations. This pattern indicates that reports focusing on noteworthy changes or detailed evolution of findings in comparison to prior images are more pertinent to the pattern.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13102,latent_13102,2295,0.00459,0.0019187302,2.6506612,Lung opacities or significant changes in radiographic findings.,"These examples with higher activation levels describe findings in radiology reports involving opacities, consolidation, effusions, or nodules indicating changes in lung conditions such as pneumonia or significant findings compared to prior imaging. This pattern often requires monitoring or indicates disease progression.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5408163265306123,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13103,latent_13103,1678,0.003356,0.0014341107,1.786691,Detailed comparative descriptions with prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels include precise descriptions of the images referred to alongside a detailed comparison to prior imaging. This suggests the model activates more when there's specific instruction to contrast findings between current and previous studies.,0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4554455445544554,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13104,latent_13104,1965,0.00393,0.0016678701,3.0441196,Comparison highlights consistency or changes in pathology over time.,"Examples that show a high activation level often involve a structured detailed comparison between current and prior radiology images, highlighting changes or stability in findings. This suggests that changes, especially stable or progressively worsening pathologies in follow-up imaging, activate a pattern recognition related to comparative analysis in imaging reports.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5987301587301588,0.605,0.584,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13105,latent_13105,5621,0.011242,0.004072425,1.8480405,Changes in imaging findings when current studies are compared to prior ones.,"High activation levels occur when reports include descriptions of changes in specific structures or conditions (e.g., lung volumes, opacities, effusions) when comparing current and prior imaging. These descriptions denote specific findings and changes that the model associates with higher activation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5137614678899083,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13106,latent_13106,7159,0.014318,0.0050818976,1.1367168,Evaluation or description of medical device positioning.,"These examples consistently refer to the insertion of medical devices, such as tubes, catheters, and surgical wires, and their positioning as seen in radiographic images. There is a focus on monitoring and describing the placement of these devices in relation to anatomical landmarks or changes in status from prior images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5974025974025974,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13107,latent_13107,770,0.00154,0.00093396177,3.403087,Comparison of current and prior images highlighting changes.,"Examples with high activation focus on comparisons with previous radiographs and highlight either a progression or stability in imaging findings, often noting changes in pulmonary conditions such as opacities or edema, contrasting these with unchanged areas or devices.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5670995670995671,0.59,0.5616438356164384,0.82,100.0,100.0
+13108,latent_13108,4870,0.00974,0.0034835185,1.8874031,Limited comparison with prior imaging or no significant change noted.,"The pattern of partial activation appears in examples where there is a lack of prior imaging for direct comparison, or when the comparison does not yield changes significant enough to indicate an acute process. Some examples might still mention previous findings but the comparison is limited by technique or positioning, among other reasons.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5055900621118012,0.5175879396984925,0.5114503816793893,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+13109,latent_13109,443,0.000886,0.00067528785,3.5877275,Direct comparison with previous images highlighting interval change or stability.,"Prompted examples with high activation levels often include a direct and explicit comparison to a prior study while addressing a change or stability in findings from historical radiographs. They focus on describing whether there is a new finding or unchanged conditions since the last radiology report. These examples highlight changes over time, especially identifying stability or stability outcome, which is a key pattern in evaluating radiological findings for longitudinal assessment.",0.5833333333333334,0.5918367346938775,0.5625,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.4904854215294536,0.490566037735849,0.3877551020408163,0.6440677966101694,59.0,100.0
+13110,latent_13110,579,0.001158,0.0009050439,2.1992383,Directed description of findings in comparison to prior image.,The highly activated examples involve direct instructions to provide a detailed description of current radiological findings in comparison to a specified prior image. These cases emphasize the analysis and changes between current and prior images without general contextual details.,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4761904761904762,0.4792899408284023,0.415929203539823,0.6811594202898551,69.0,100.0
+13111,latent_13111,2914,0.005828,0.0023885863,2.1096573,Comparisons highlighting changes in medical devices or interventions.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions and comparisons between current and prior radiological images, often specifically noting differences in medical devices, placements, or interventions such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, or surgical clips. These are specific technical elements consistently documented when comparing radiological studies over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4514054054054054,0.4874371859296482,0.4693877551020408,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+13112,latent_13112,1306,0.002612,0.001276771,2.2405179,Analysis and comparison of changes between current and prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently describe evaluations and comparisons between current and prior imaging results, focusing on changes or stability of certain findings such as cardiac silhouette, nodules, opacities, effusions, etc. The emphasis is on monitoring changes over time or confirming stability, indicating a pattern of comparative analysis in diagnostics.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13113,latent_13113,478,0.000956,0.0008526894,3.685503,Unfolding or tortuosity of the thoracic aorta.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention unfolding or tortuosity of the thoracic aorta. This finding is commonly reported in chest radiographs and is often noted in conjunction with aging, hypertension, or aortic anomalies, making it a distinctive pattern in radiology reports.",0.9799919967987194,0.98,0.9615384615384616,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8695877401251888,0.8805031446540881,0.8703703703703703,0.7966101694915254,59.0,100.0
+13114,latent_13114,777,0.001554,0.00090747676,2.3469527,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"Highly activated examples focus on comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability or changes in findings. The consistent element across these examples is the pattern of describing findings in the context of previous imaging results.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5203252032520326,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13115,latent_13115,1169,0.002338,0.0013380684,4.428538,Stable findings or unchanged conditions from comparison to prior radiographs.,"These examples focus on providing findings from radiological images with emphasis on stability or comparison to previous studies, particularly in the context of measurements or characteristics being consistent with prior exams. Mention of findings that demonstrate stable cardiopulmonary or other thoracic conditions indicates the use of comparison for monitoring.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5285714285714286,0.37,100.0,100.0
+13116,latent_13116,1440,0.00288,0.0013595042,2.3930283,Direct comparison of current and prior images with specific findings or interventions.,"Examples with high activation contain specific instructions or details about image analysis in comparison to prior images, often focusing on changes over time or in response to interventions, such as repositioning of support devices. These examples involve direct image assessments or monitoring for changes, which are distinct from generic interpretations or lack of available comparisons.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13117,latent_13117,582,0.001164,0.00084044517,3.0341597,Analysis of changes in radiological features compared to prior studies.,"Highly activated examples focus mainly on changes in pulmonary, cardiac, or pleural features in comparison to prior studies, with a clear emphasis on interpreting these changes in a comparative context. Examples that strictly describe findings related to comparison, especially where precise intervals or specific changes are highlighted, receive high activation scores.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4126471432672983,0.4131736526946107,0.3523809523809524,0.5522388059701493,67.0,100.0
+13118,latent_13118,4189,0.008378,0.0030640003,1.6735415,"Assessments of pathology changes versus prior images, explaining resolution, stability, or exacerbation.","Samples with specified changes in pathology descriptions between current and prior images, especially when mentioning resolution, persistence, or worsening of conditions, tend to show higher activation. They often include assessments of interval changes, highlighting an acute clinical focus depending on the indication.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13119,latent_13119,4954,0.009908,0.0035928618,1.4448626,Comparison focusing on medical device position or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes or confirmation of position for medical devices in the chest area, such as tubes or catheters. This pattern of reporting is critical in radiology, especially when tracking interventions and ensuring devices are correctly placed. High activation examples emphasize device assessment or changes noted in comparison studies.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5151515151515151,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13120,latent_13120,960,0.00192,0.0010526826,2.6359563,Radiological findings unchanged from prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels predominantly focus on an ""unchanged"" status in the radiographs as compared to previous imaging, emphasizing stability of findings such as cardiac silhouette, lung volumes, or pre-existing conditions.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5217391304347826,0.36,100.0,100.0
+13121,latent_13121,531,0.001062,0.0008945934,3.499882,Explicit comparison to prior frontal image.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically include the phrase 'comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating that the pattern of interest is related to comparing current and prior images, even when there is no specified previous image for comparison (indicated by 'none' or '_'). This demonstrates consistency in referring to prior imaging, regardless of its existence or specifics.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3490196078431372,0.3493975903614458,0.2980769230769231,0.4696969696969697,66.0,100.0
+13122,latent_13122,1499,0.002998,0.0012087133,3.2722185,Focus on comparing current findings with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples primarily focus on the comparison of serial imaging findings with previous reports or studies. The pattern involves evaluating current findings in relation to prior data, which is commonly used to track changes in patient conditions.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+13123,latent_13123,3523,0.007046,0.0026585069,1.8164473,New interventions or acute changes in interval imaging comparisons.,"These examples often involve comparing current imaging with prior images, but with an emphasis on new interventions or acute findings rather than stable chronic conditions. There is specific focus on acute, interval changes or new interventions such as tube placements, which the lower activation cases lack.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5616438356164384,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13124,latent_13124,897,0.001794,0.0010594825,2.4333262,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing stability or improvement.","The examples with high activation levels are consistently providing detailed comparisons with prior imaging, specifically focusing on describing stable or unchanged findings, improvements, or subtle changes in pathologies. This pattern typically appears in follow-up or monitoring situations where prior data provides a basis for assessing progress or stability.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.484375,0.31,100.0,100.0
+13125,latent_13125,579,0.001158,0.00079817383,2.409069,Focus on the position and status of medical devices or tubes in images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve the identification and positioning of medical devices such as catheters, tubes, and pacemakers or tracking changes or stabilities in device positions over time, indicating a focus on the interpretation of medical devices in radiographic images.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4894183045463569,0.5389221556886228,0.3958333333333333,0.2835820895522388,67.0,100.0
+13126,latent_13126,373,0.000746,0.00064236927,3.2915964,Unchanged imaging findings include stable surgical artifacts and cardiopulmonary features.,"Highly activated examples include a detailed comparison of current images with prior images, highlighting changes in medical devices or stable cardiopulmonary features. Specific reference is made to surgical artifacts like sternotomy wires or prosthetic valves being unchanged in position, which suggests a focus on stability or lack of progression in such elements.",0.8247619047619048,0.8260869565217391,0.7241379310344828,1.0,21.0,25.0,0.5528846153846154,0.5782312925170068,0.3846153846153846,0.5319148936170213,47.0,100.0
+13127,latent_13127,403,0.000806,0.0006413265,2.3854175,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior images.,"The examples showing activation describe examination of at least two images for direct comparison (often also including a prior image as a benchmark) while providing detailed descriptions, findings, and impressions about changes in the patient's condition over time. This pattern highlights a focus on comparative analysis over multiple views, which helps identify and assess any new developments or consistent findings.",0.50682261208577,0.5217391304347826,0.4848484848484848,0.7619047619047619,21.0,25.0,0.4181681681681681,0.4193548387096774,0.3118279569892473,0.5272727272727272,55.0,100.0
+13128,latent_13128,429,0.000858,0.0007988287,2.5859978,Mediastinal or hilar contours and heart size descriptions.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently note the observation of heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, or pulmonary vasculature as part of their assessments. These descriptions are essential in analyzing radiological studies and their potential changes from prior images to assess for relative stability in these anatomical features.",0.6703296703296704,0.7,0.625,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5519334142535114,0.5526315789473685,0.4245283018867924,0.8653846153846154,52.0,100.0
+13129,latent_13129,1660,0.00332,0.0014662013,2.3677847,Detection or assessment of medical devices/interventions in images.,"These examples with high activation levels typically involve medical devices or procedures observed in the radiographs, such as pleural effusions, intubations, insertions of tubes and catheters, and notable changes or evaluations related to these devices or interventions. Essentially, phrases indicating the presence of new or changed medical equipment or related interventions activate the model strongly.",0.4965034965034964,0.5,0.5,0.4166666666666667,24.0,24.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5222222222222223,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13130,latent_13130,294,0.000588,0.00052676746,3.7836504,Comparative assessment of radiological findings relative to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve two distinct aspects: (1) the presence of a comparison with prior imaging and (2) specific evaluation for change in presentation over time or concerning new pathological findings. These aspects are formally presented in the visual radiography reports, often using terminology regarding 'no interval change' or 'new findings' compared to past studies, indicating a strong reliance on comparative assessment.",0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.3793103448275862,0.7333333333333333,15.0,25.0,0.4856093080220453,0.4857142857142857,0.3431372549019608,0.875,40.0,100.0
+13131,latent_13131,2354,0.004708,0.0019405646,2.3540027,Explicit comparisons or interval changes with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate both interpretations of current images and explicit comparisons to prior chest imaging findings, using distinct comparison or interval change terminology. Examples focus on stability or change in radiological features over time, which clearly incorporates the element of comparison in radiological assessment.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13132,latent_13132,2184,0.004368,0.0016947393,1.5663764,Stable appearance or minimal change compared to prior study.,"The pattern in stable appearance across comparisons is common in radiology reports when findings show little to no change from prior studies, indicating no progression or resolution of pathology. Descriptions such as 'unchanged', 'similar to', or reference no new acute changes highlight this stable or minimal-change phenomenon.",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.4705882352941176,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.575,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13133,latent_13133,2744,0.005488,0.002147966,1.6419507,Findings discussed explicitly in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss clear communication about comparing current images to prior ones, emphasizing the importance of continuity in evaluations and indicating findings are in consideration of historical data. Use of phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged since prior', and 'as compared to previous radiograph' signal this pattern and reflect a thorough ongoing analysis across temporal data.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5155669442664959,0.5226130653266332,0.5161290322580645,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+13134,latent_13134,2034,0.004068,0.0017249578,2.3881972,Focus on the placement and adjustment of medical devices in imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels are those where device placement or key changes in support devices or tubes are described between two image comparisons. These examples often highlight the positions or changes in medical devices (ETT, catheter, tube) across the current and prior images, pointing towards a pattern focusing on clinical image monitoring and management decisions based on such comparisons.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13135,latent_13135,543,0.001086,0.00074195466,2.682506,Analyzing current images against prior frontal images for stability or changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention comparisons to previous imaging studies, detailing changes or stability of conditions over time. The task in these examples is to provide comparisons between current and prior images, indicating the clinical relevance of these comparisons in identifying changes in patient condition.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4142857142857142,0.4268292682926829,0.3790322580645161,0.734375,64.0,100.0
+13136,latent_13136,538,0.001076,0.00071507116,3.1211948,Reference to borderline or 'upper limits of normal' findings.,"The entries with higher activations consistently include references to 'upper limits of normal' or describe elements that are prominent but not conclusively pathological, such as mild tortuosity or accumulated opacities without definitive evidence of an abnormality. These suggest a pattern of emphasis on findings that are borderline or within normal ranges but note potential for abnormality or significant findings.",0.6379834854411126,0.6530612244897959,0.7333333333333333,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.561518019488088,0.6545454545454545,0.6666666666666666,0.2461538461538461,65.0,100.0
+13137,latent_13137,669,0.001338,0.00092701375,3.8978367,Evaluations of normal cardiac size and mediastinal/hilar contours with absent major abnormalities.,"The examples with higher activation tend to describe assessments of heart size and normality of cardiac silhouette separate from findings related to lung, mediastinal, or vascular contours, often without focusing on more detailed abnormalities. This pattern is emphasized in contexts assessing for normalcy in common radiological evaluations.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.6896551724137931,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6865766337351582,0.6868131868131868,0.631578947368421,0.7317073170731707,82.0,100.0
+13138,latent_13138,604,0.001208,0.0008836136,2.8829389,Detailed comparison analysis of findings in context of specific historical medical context.,"Examples with high activation levels involve requests to provide detailed descriptions of findings in the context of comparative imaging analysis, and show a varied, advanced context like specific historical health context or procedure (e.g., radiotherapy, chemotherapy indications, surgical history) associated with the examination, implying a need for thorough comparative analysis and narrative construction.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4393063583815029,0.4393063583815029,0.38,0.5205479452054794,73.0,100.0
+13139,latent_13139,5564,0.011128,0.0039363964,1.4481205,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging assessments.,"Instances show stable findings across examinations compared to prior radiographs, with emphasis on no significant interval changes or unchanged pathologies from previous studies. These help in contextually assessing patient conditions over time for diagnosis, prognosis, or monitoring purposes.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.6164383561643836,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13140,latent_13140,817,0.001634,0.000825688,2.5884695,Comparison to prior imaging under acute or concerning indications.,These examples include specific references to the comparison of the current study with prior imaging in the context of a clinical indication for an acute or significant health condition evaluation. The activation levels suggest that explicit comparison to prior imaging under acute indications or concerning findings is significant.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+13141,latent_13141,4954,0.009908,0.003625223,1.9981612,Detailed comparison of findings or device positions to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve scenarios where findings or device positions are compared in detail to a prior image or a sequence of images, indicating some form of interval change or stability.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5714285714285714,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5370555001661682,0.542713567839196,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,99.0
+13142,latent_13142,633,0.001266,0.00093191984,3.166669,"Stable lung findings without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","The examples with high activation levels often include language that highlights minimal changes or stability in lung conditions such as clear lungs, absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. There's also frequent mention of comparison to prior images, with emphasis on stability or no acute interval changes in cardiac and mediastinal contours, along with descriptive clarity about the findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5361665813278716,0.5406976744186046,0.4700854700854701,0.7638888888888888,72.0,100.0
+13143,latent_13143,3195,0.00639,0.002404685,2.121648,Focus on interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation mention 'comparison' either with prior imaging or within the assistant's description, even if not explicitly conducted, suggesting that the exercise of comparing and assessing interval changes in findings, such as stability or changes in lesions or opacities, is key to the pattern. Lower activation examples either lack meaningful comparison or detail change irrelevant to key findings, such as emphysema or post-surgical changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.565446371226718,0.5728643216080402,0.5555555555555556,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+13144,latent_13144,1595,0.00319,0.0013964645,3.9279404,Presence of moderate pleural effusions and mild pulmonary edema.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently highlight moderate pleural effusion on one or both sides, often accompanied by other indications of fluid overload, such as mild pulmonary edema. This pattern typically signifies conditions like congestive heart failure where fluid accumulation in pleural spaces is prevalent.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.8,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4810708810001179,0.56,0.7727272727272727,0.17,100.0,100.0
+13145,latent_13145,759,0.001518,0.0010501912,3.35912,Comparisons with prior imaging showing post-operative changes or stability.,"The examples highlight a comparison between current images and prior or pre-existing medical imaging studies. When there is a notation of such comparison, the examples with higher activation levels generally provide observed changes, improvements, stability, or monitoring state indicating post-surgical conditions or clinical interventions, with descriptors focused on alteration assessment or stability in comparison to the prior state.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7395833333333333,0.7448979591836735,0.6796875,0.90625,96.0,100.0
+13146,latent_13146,2918,0.005836,0.0022474057,2.156696,Enlargement of the cardiac silhouette.,"These examples consistently reference the enlargement of the cardiac silhouette in the radiological findings. This enlargement can relate to various cardiovascular concerns, such as cardiomegaly or heart failure. The examples are often connected with indications like history of heart disease or prior reports of cardiac-related conditions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.576271186440678,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13147,latent_13147,1917,0.003834,0.001611177,3.00907,Comparison to prior imaging without significant acute abnormalities.,The examples with higher activations often involve a comparison to prior imaging and involve detailed descriptions of cardiopulmonary features without indicating the presence of significant acute abnormalities or require no further intervention. Phrases indicating a 'comparison to prior' along with an assessment of 'normal' or 'upper limits' structures dominate these reports.,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13148,latent_13148,775,0.00155,0.0009563802,4.184656,Unchanged positioning of support devices or hardware.,"Examples with higher activation levels share the presence of unchanged positioning of lines, tubes, or support devices, indicating these are salient features for the observed pattern. They include multiple specific references to such non-changing elements, suggesting stability of the hardware as a key characteristic.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5292682926829269,0.5647668393782384,0.5957446808510638,0.3010752688172043,93.0,100.0
+13149,latent_13149,508,0.001016,0.0007936704,2.8648403,Instructions to compare current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature instructions to provide findings based on comparing current imaging studies to prior images. This pattern is crucial as it emphasizes the process of evaluating changes over time in medical imaging, which is a key aspect in diagnostic radiology to track progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4880952380952381,0.4911242603550296,0.4247787610619469,0.6956521739130435,69.0,100.0
+13150,latent_13150,3124,0.006248,0.0022411,1.8304955,Reports focusing on stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"These examples tend to provide detailed evaluations of radiology findings and almost universally incorporate analysis of those findings in direct comparison to past imaging studies. Reports highlight nuanced differences or similarities with prior results, often emphasizing stability or change over time, which is a distinctive radiological evaluative technique.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4788732394366197,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13151,latent_13151,528,0.001056,0.00073566823,2.3213415,Image comparison to prior study to assess changes.,"The activation levels are highest when the task explicitly involves a comparison of current images with previous studies using phrases like 'compared to prior', and additional information is derived from changes or stability observed between exams. This pattern highlights the model's focus on previous imaging for assessing progression or stability in clinical findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4907894736842105,0.4970760233918128,0.4369747899159664,0.7323943661971831,71.0,100.0
+13152,latent_13152,2367,0.004734,0.0019295447,2.116584,Task of comparing current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation involve providing descriptions of findings from radiological studies, particularly focusing on comparison with previous images and noted changes. The task involves examining current and prior frontal and lateral views of images, summarizing findings, and providing impressions based on changes or stability.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3851795922769928,0.43,0.4545454545454545,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13153,latent_13153,5359,0.010718,0.0038605966,1.4839472,Comparison of device positioning or changes in sequential imaging.,"Examples with higher activations consistently involve CK findings related to the evaluation of devices like catheters or tubes in comparison to prior imaging, highlighting the presence, positioning, and changes of these medical devices.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13154,latent_13154,524,0.001048,0.00084960996,4.7720237,Providing findings without prior image comparison.,Examples with high activation levels primarily feature situations where a descriptive comparison is asked but no prior images or comparison studies are available for actual analysis. The AI still provides a general report despite lacking required historical or comparative imaging information.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4345822480464837,0.4879518072289157,0.3061224489795918,0.2272727272727272,66.0,100.0
+13155,latent_13155,456,0.000912,0.000745679,3.685964,"Use of ""None"" or ""_"" in comparison section instead of an actual prior study.","The pattern is the usage of ""None"" or ""_"" as placeholders in the comparison section, suggesting the reports establish a standard for cases where no true prior image is available for comparison or where comparison details were omitted.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.5454545454545454,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3521723122238586,0.3986928104575163,0.3617021276595745,0.9622641509433962,53.0,100.0
+13156,latent_13156,740,0.00148,0.00088153535,2.5567946,Identifying absence or disappearance in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern identified is related to discrepancies in comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often indicating ambiguities or absences in observations. Sentences often include language that highlights the removal or disappearance of previously recorded observations such as a line, a device, or a pathology, indicated by terms like 'no longer visualized' or 'disappearance'. Exemplars emphasize the importance of documentation analysis shifts in radiological progressions or regressions.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6665569724393254,0.6735751295336787,0.7083333333333334,0.5483870967741935,93.0,100.0
+13157,latent_13157,445,0.00089,0.00081324065,3.8644845,Requires comparison description with minimal pre-context.,The activated samples tend to include prompts with '[Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'] without additional prompts or details about the prior report. This structure highlights direct comparison requests without specific predefined comparison data context.,0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4070657922572456,0.4090909090909091,0.2967032967032967,0.5,54.0,100.0
+13158,latent_13158,2510,0.00502,0.0018505323,1.2880545,Comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern indicates an explicit reference to radiology findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, which is a key aspect in identifying changes over time or stability of findings. Phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph' or 'since prior exam' connect the current findings with those in prior examinations.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13159,latent_13159,2993,0.005986,0.0021696535,1.3271973,Description of changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation tend to describe radiological findings that have changed compared to a prior study. This focuses on interval changes, which are critical for determining the evolution or resolution of conditions and are typically highlighted in radiology reports. The pattern involves identifying differences in findings between current and previous radiological exams, indicating either improvement, worsening, or new developments.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.559322033898305,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13160,latent_13160,482,0.000964,0.0006696165,2.7226834,Focus on lung conditions in relation to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently evaluate the condition of the patient's lungs, such as their expansion, volume, or presence of lesions or effusions, in the context of prior imaging. These reports frequently mention lung findings, changes, or lack of changes in conditions like atelectasis, effusions, or opacities compared to previous images.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4748369058713886,0.4782608695652174,0.3982300884955752,0.7377049180327869,61.0,100.0
+13161,latent_13161,697,0.001394,0.00081661774,2.7496622,"Detailed comparison against previous imaging, even if unchanged or none available.","These examples demonstrate descriptions that clearly provide a detailed comparative analysis against previous imaging studies even when there are no significant changes or comparisons available. They make specific note of comparisons, either explicitly stating 'no comparison' or when relaying unchanged findings",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4455278680630793,0.4787234042553192,0.4657534246575342,0.7727272727272727,88.0,100.0
+13162,latent_13162,902,0.001804,0.001018319,3.3075516,Stable findings compared to multiple prior imaging studies.,"These examples describe a radiological pattern involving stable findings over multiple prior imaging studies, often emphasizing unchanged conditions or monitoring post-surgical or placement-related statuses. This reflects a focus on consistency or confirmation of existing conditions rather than acute changes.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4379002712755544,0.4924623115577889,0.4736842105263157,0.1818181818181818,99.0,100.0
+13163,latent_13163,289,0.000578,0.00058825896,3.5447404,Mild to moderate cardiomegaly or heart enlargement.,"These examples describe an increase in cardiac silhouette or heart size. This finding often appears in radiology reports when assessing cardiac conditions or changes like cardiomegaly or heart enlargement, which are key indications of certain clinical conditions.",0.8465473145780051,0.85,0.7368421052631579,0.9333333333333332,15.0,25.0,0.7259080211182495,0.7769784172661871,0.6,0.6153846153846154,39.0,100.0
+13164,latent_13164,818,0.001636,0.0008662224,2.3628104,Direct comparison to prior imaging emphasized in reports.,"Examples with low activation often include images and references to prior studies but lack explicit reference phrases like ""compared to previous radiographs"" or don't perform direct comparisons between current and previous imagery. High activation correlates with direct comparative assessments.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.382528596011742,0.39,0.4098360655737705,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13165,latent_13165,1355,0.00271,0.0013059804,2.320283,Emphasis on 'direct comparison' with prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples specifically note 'direct comparison' with prior imaging studies, suggesting a focus on explicit comparative language to emphasize the analysis in these reports. This emphasis on direct comparison indicates a pattern of detailed assessment against previous images, which likely influences the activation levels.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6666666666666666,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5713054717794054,0.5728643216080402,0.5795454545454546,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+13166,latent_13166,506,0.001012,0.0007392582,2.641778,Interpretation of chest images using both frontal and lateral views.,"Examples with higher activation provide a detailed interpretation of radiology findings requiring both current frontal and lateral images, usually emphasizing areas of interest in chest images through methodical comparison with prior established findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.451233163615354,0.4550898203592814,0.3947368421052631,0.6716417910447762,67.0,100.0
+13167,latent_13167,3621,0.007242,0.0026982492,1.4873173,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images or studies, noting changes or stability.","These examples provide descriptions of findings with an explicit comparison to prior images, commonly indicating stability or change of the radiographic findings. This pattern highlights comparisons over time using prior studies or earlier images, often noting interval changes, persistence, or resolution of findings, though sometimes only noting descriptive text of devices or changes (like tube placements).",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5615262980532442,0.5728643216080402,0.553030303030303,0.7373737373737373,99.0,100.0
+13168,latent_13168,465,0.00093,0.0007142567,2.959283,Marked clinical changes on current imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize the comparison with prior imaging which indicates interval and often positive clinical changes, such as decreases in conditions like pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or atelectasis. These findings indicate improvements or monitoring of stable conditions from previous imagery.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5290423861852434,0.5733333333333334,0.3703703703703703,0.4,50.0,100.0
+13169,latent_13169,591,0.001182,0.00078026974,2.5637593,Interval changes or findings emphasized compared to previous imaging.,"Low activation examples contain typical or unremarkable examination results or incidental findings without significant changes compared to prior examinations. High activation examples emphasize evidence of interval changes or continued pathologies that manifest distinctly from prior examinations, thus prompting the need for follow-up or continued assessment using language like 'there has been change', 'compared to', and 'prior study'.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5699792125593373,0.5722222222222222,0.5132743362831859,0.725,80.0,100.0
+13170,latent_13170,525,0.00105,0.0007306229,3.0330148,Reports emphasizing stability or change based on prior radiograph comparisons.,"The activation pattern is strongly associated with reports that include detailed comparative evaluations with previous imaging studies. Many examples specifically use language elements that reference multiple-prior comparatives or describe unchanged hardware placement, demonstrating stability or change in pathologies such as pulmonary opacities or line placements.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4524836730655056,0.4528301886792453,0.3541666666666667,0.576271186440678,59.0,100.0
+13171,latent_13171,1439,0.002878,0.001321389,2.2961037,Emphasis on comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize a detailed, comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images. These findings demonstrate changes and interpretations that rely substantially on observing differences from previous studies. Specific terms like ""as compared to the previous radiograph"" frequently appear where activation is high. Lower activation examples lack this comparative emphasis or focus more on findings from a singular study without historical context.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13172,latent_13172,365,0.00073,0.000621355,2.136532,Stable positioning of tubes or catheters compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the proper placement and unchanged status of tubes or catheters, such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, often specifying their position above the carina or their unchanged position compared to prior examinations, indicating stable positioning over time.",0.6080200501253132,0.6304347826086957,0.6428571428571429,0.4285714285714285,21.0,25.0,0.5451713395638629,0.6438356164383562,0.40625,0.2826086956521739,46.0,100.0
+13173,latent_13173,569,0.001138,0.00084315997,2.6404173,Descriptions of indwelling medical device placement and changes.,"These examples primarily focus on describing indwelling medical devices, such as feeding tubes, tracheostomy tubes, and endotracheal tubes, particularly in terms of their placement and any changes in positioning over time. The reports also evaluate potential complications related to these devices.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5632746863579852,0.5892857142857143,0.4915254237288136,0.4264705882352941,68.0,100.0
+13174,latent_13174,2667,0.005334,0.0020586767,2.6321766,Detailed comparison findings with prior radiological exams.,"The examples with above-zero activation frequently mention detailed descriptions or findings from prior radiological exams, showcasing explicit comparison between the current and prior images. This pattern emphasizes comparison and correlation to historical data.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4822028546166477,0.4824120603015075,0.4807692307692308,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+13175,latent_13175,2710,0.00542,0.0021355299,2.1491125,Cardiac enlargement or noted calcification/tortuosity of the aorta.,"A pattern emerges in examples with moderate activations describing changes or findings related to the heart size and the aorta, specifically noting calcifications or tortuosity in the context of the cardiomediastinal structures. This pattern reflects assessments related to cardiac and aortic changes.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.490566037735849,0.26,100.0,100.0
+13176,latent_13176,570,0.00114,0.00080828066,2.9759023,Comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The consistent feature across high-activation examples is the presence of a specific process which involves comparing the current imaging findings with prior images, regardless of whether the comparison yields significant changes or not. This directly associates with radiology's emphasis on changes over time to assess the progression or stability of findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3893635571054926,0.3941176470588235,0.3565217391304348,0.5857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+13177,latent_13177,525,0.00105,0.0008016634,2.7343588,Comparison emphasizing stable interval change or minor differences.,"The pattern involves the interval change in imaging findings, emphasizing stability or minor differences between current and prior studies. These examples indicate comparisons that highlight unchanged status or minor variations in findings such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or device placements.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5181572452697144,0.5426829268292683,0.4126984126984127,0.40625,64.0,100.0
+13178,latent_13178,577,0.001154,0.0007209463,3.4845254,Comparison of current and prior images to evaluate findings.,"In the activation-positive examples, there is a consistent reference to both current images and prior images for comparison. The task involves examining the findings of current imaging in relation to prior studies, prominently featured within the provided context.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4170654997948858,0.4367816091954023,0.4122137404580153,0.72,75.0,99.0
+13179,latent_13179,1354,0.002708,0.0022098543,3.2100115,Absence of prior imaging for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention the absence of prior imaging available for comparison. This is a linguistic pattern indicating that evaluations or interpretations are made without a historical reference, often highlighted by the model with a higher activation signal.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5522388059701493,0.37,100.0,100.0
+13180,latent_13180,775,0.00155,0.0009451063,3.5336082,Radiological findings explicitly compared to a prior image.,"High activation levels are associated with findings described in relation to a provided or considered previous image, especially when changes are identified or a direct comparison is made, indicating potential clinical significance of the interval change.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4499385749385749,0.457286432160804,0.4634146341463415,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+13181,latent_13181,4442,0.008884,0.0032079455,1.3515433,Findings described in terms of comparison with prior images.,"These examples use comparative analysis between current images and previous studies to identify changes such as stability or progression of medical findings. The linguistic pattern includes the use of descriptive comparisons like 'compared to previous','unchanged', or 'increase/decrease'. This linguistic structure is essential in radiology reports when interpreting changes over time.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13182,latent_13182,349,0.000698,0.00071230606,3.581717,Analyzing current images against prior ones for changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate comparison of current images to prior ones to detect changes or stability in findings. These patterns focus on changes like size variation or unchanged appearance, indicating the importance of temporal assessment in radiology interpretation.",0.4722080571137175,0.4888888888888889,0.4545454545454545,0.75,20.0,25.0,0.3650635930047695,0.3661971830985915,0.2735849056603773,0.6904761904761905,42.0,100.0
+13183,latent_13183,1184,0.002368,0.0011892052,2.8296812,Detailed findings with specific emphasis on comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on providing descriptions of radiological findings that compare current images with prior images, identifying findings such as enlargements, intubation placements, or unchanged conditions. They rely on identifying and describing clinical significance of unchanged or persistently monitored conditions, emphasizing comparisons with prior images to confirm or deny progression.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4881889763779528,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13184,latent_13184,930,0.00186,0.0011007,2.4066033,Presence and positioning of medical tubes and devices in radiological findings.,"The provided examples consistently mention the presence of various tubes, catheters, or other medical devices inserted in patients, with specific details about their position, such as endotracheal tubes, central lines, or NG tubes. This is a key observation point in radiology reports, particularly relevant for monitoring and ensuring correct placement post-procedures or transfers.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13185,latent_13185,932,0.001864,0.0012081498,2.2996583,"Reports stating findings of normal heart, lungs, and mediastinal contours.","The pattern in these examples involves reports that explicitly state that the findings indicate normal or unremarkable heart size, lungs, and mediastinal contours, often highlighting the term 'normal'. These are common phrases in radiology reports to affirm that no abnormalities were detected in specific areas of the chest.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13186,latent_13186,833,0.001666,0.0009665725,3.3615434,Changes in radiology findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention specific details in the radiology findings that note alterations based on past comparisons, such as interval changes or stability of identified features like tube placements, effusions, or specific anatomical changes like pleural effusion increase or decrease.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5563613068545804,0.5628140703517588,0.5483870967741935,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+13187,latent_13187,251,0.000502,0.0005508103,3.2625465,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Activation patterns suggest examples where explicit comparison with prior imaging studies leads to a focus on identifying interval changes and stability or progression of observed conditions. Notably, situations where specific modifications in clinical status, equipment adjustment, or identified conditions are correlated with such comparisons exhibit higher activations.",0.6350267379679144,0.6410256410256411,0.5,0.7142857142857143,14.0,25.0,0.5623699968484085,0.5954198473282443,0.328125,0.6774193548387096,31.0,100.0
+13188,latent_13188,430,0.00086,0.00064819463,3.2785666,Multiple view comparison (frontal and lateral) of current vs. prior imaging.,"These examples mention direct visual use or comparison of multiple imaging views (frontal/lateral), often referring to prior images, enabling comprehensive assessment of changes. High activation indicates reliance on such comparisons in clinical assessment.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5190854209250368,0.5562913907284768,0.3620689655172414,0.4117647058823529,51.0,100.0
+13189,latent_13189,1137,0.002274,0.0011040433,2.6011329,Use of multiple image comparison to note interval changes or stability.,"Examples with prominent activation levels include those that describe direct comparisons between multiple current and prior radiographic images, highlighting interval changes or stability between these studies. This involves reviews of previous findings for historical context and comparison of significant intervals, indicating stable or changing conditions with 'no significant interval change' or 'improved' findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13190,latent_13190,2986,0.005972,0.0021994677,1.214281,Presence and positioning of medical devices in chest images.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the presence and positioning of medical devices or equipment captured in the radiography images. Terms like ""ET tube"", ""central venous catheter"", and ""PICC line"" frequently appear in these examples, indicating a pattern focused on supplementary interventions in the patient's chest area.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.575,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13191,latent_13191,1490,0.00298,0.0014138884,2.433374,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to previous images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve scenarios where multiple aspects of pathologies or procedural changes are described in the context of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging. The focus is on stability or lack of progression of findings, which is common in radiological descriptions comparing current to prior images, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'appears similar', or 'no significant interval change'.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4849896480331263,0.4974874371859296,0.4927536231884058,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+13192,latent_13192,3644,0.007288,0.0026526214,1.4614009,Comparative imaging assessments highlight changes or stability.,"Samples with higher activation involve descriptions that include both current imaging assessments and explicit comparisons to prior imaging, while those with zero activation may lack this direct comparative component.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13193,latent_13193,548,0.001096,0.00076369895,3.5624123,"Normal cardiomediastinal, hilar, and pleural contours emphasized despite lack of prior comparison.","Higher activation levels correspond to descriptions where the heart, mediastinal, hilar, and pleural contours are explicitly noted as normal or clear, even in the absence of prior study comparisons. This suggests that the pattern the model identifies focuses on describing these features in a standard or unremarkable state.",0.88,0.88,0.88,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6916712630998345,0.6976744186046512,0.631578947368421,0.6666666666666666,72.0,100.0
+13194,latent_13194,1790,0.00358,0.0015343159,2.4533405,Complex findings following prior report or comparative analysis.,"Examples with high activation frequently involve detailed findings regarding alterations in the cardiomediastinal silhouette, lung fields, atelectasis, or presence of consolidation or effusion, following a prior report or comparison study. These examples involve intricate descriptions and complexities beyond simple comparison to prior findings, often detailing diagnostic impressions or indications for further study.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4950061721467849,0.55,0.5301204819277109,0.88,100.0,100.0
+13195,latent_13195,1941,0.003882,0.0016177103,1.6940184,"Complex analysis and comparison of images with prior imaging, focusing on detailed descriptions of findings.","The examples that demonstrate high activation involve detailed analysis and comparison with prior imaging to assess changes, notably emphasizing radiological features like the detailed descriptions and position of medical devices, interstitial opacities, effusions, or cardiomegaly. These assessments are thorough and incorporate comparison, suggesting complex analysis of static and dynamic changes in the imaging results.",0.3552631578947368,0.3877551020408163,0.4166666666666667,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4816649642492339,0.4874371859296482,0.4876033057851239,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+13196,latent_13196,897,0.001794,0.0011706989,2.9810243,Instruction to provide findings description in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels mention 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This indicates instructions or the act of providing findings in comparison to previous imaging, which is a consistent task requested in these examples.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,100.0,100.0
+13197,latent_13197,5341,0.010682,0.003836032,1.7495031,Evaluation of interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations reveal findings described in comparison with previous images and particularly highlight intervals or changes over time, indicating an ongoing assessment or progression of the condition or effect of interventions. This pattern involves temporal or situational phrases, suggesting an evaluation of change or stability, often using explicit terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'improvement', or 'prior study'.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13198,latent_13198,334,0.000668,0.0007406774,3.5700343,Discussion of tube and line placement in chest imaging.,"Many examples discuss the placement and status of various medical tubes and lines seen in chest imaging, such as endotracheal tubes, subclavian lines, nasogastric tubes, etc. The presence, correct positioning, or unchanged status of these lines, along with their specific terminations, is a distinguishing pattern in these examples, as these are critical in post-procedural chest radiographs.",0.6493506493506493,0.6666666666666666,0.5714285714285714,1.0,20.0,25.0,0.7563113604488079,0.7841726618705036,0.5849056603773585,0.7948717948717948,39.0,100.0
+13199,latent_13199,302,0.000604,0.0006676634,4.089341,Emphysema-related findings or descriptors.,"The high activation examples consistently mention emphysema or findings related to its effects such as hyperinflation and lack of acute findings. Emphysema, as a chronic condition, often appears in radiology descriptions and may not change rapidly, which could be seen as a consistent feature across images.",0.9755102040816326,0.9761904761904762,0.9444444444444444,1.0,17.0,25.0,0.9211283822682784,0.9343065693430656,0.8181818181818182,0.972972972972973,37.0,100.0
+13200,latent_13200,1138,0.002276,0.0012000159,2.0749483,Challenges in assessing cardiac silhouette due to technical or pathological interferences.,"The pattern revolves around chest radiograph evaluations that explicitly mention interferences or factors complicating the assessment of the cardiac silhouette size or contours. These factors include the presence of pleural effusions or technical challenges like patient positioning, which are noted in each represented sample as impacting the ability to accurately assess heart size or related mediastinal structures.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.4565217391304347,0.21,100.0,100.0
+13201,latent_13201,1103,0.002206,0.0014009314,3.5351055,High activations for prompts with HIV-related indications.,"Examples with HIV-related indications, such as evaluating for pneumonia or associated pulmonary complications, consistently show high activations, indicating a specific focus or prioritization of these cases in the model's activations.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7333333333333334,0.75,1.0,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13202,latent_13202,4006,0.008012,0.0029487298,1.2009902,Comparisons to prior images showing interval change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation involve descriptions where changes or stability in medical conditions are compared to prior imaging. Specific references to comparisons with prior radiographs or CT scans are a key feature, indicating a pattern in radiology reports related to follow-up or evaluation over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13203,latent_13203,3114,0.006228,0.0022993467,1.7794647,Radiological evaluation for interval changes or stability.,"These examples often include phrases suggesting reevaluation for interval changes or comparing findings between images, using terms like 'evaluate for interval change', 'no interval change', 'compared to prior study', or 'interval increase'. Such phrasing indicates ongoing assessment of progression or stability of symptoms or treatment outcomes.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4640605296343001,0.49,0.4930555555555556,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13204,latent_13204,1475,0.00295,0.0013460211,2.0469368,Stability of findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples strongly activated typically feature comparisons of current and prior imaging studies, especially where the comparison highlights no or minor changes in findings. These often involve stable conditions or findings such as unchanged opacities, effusions, or aortic calcifications and emphasize the stability and lack of acute changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13205,latent_13205,2697,0.005394,0.001991825,1.407996,Description of findings compared to prior images to assess changes.,"The highly activated examples typically reference the comparison between current and prior imaging studies to evaluate changes or stability in radiological findings. This includes noting resolution, interval change, or stability of conditions between the studies.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5211267605633803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13206,latent_13206,268,0.000536,0.00064170203,3.9285884,Reports highlighting hyperexpansion or hyperinflation findings.,"Higher activations are associated with reports highlighting hyperexpansion findings, which are terms linked to conditions like COPD or emphysema. These examples consistently mention 'hyperinflation' or 'hyperexpanded', indicating increased lung volume characteristic of certain pulmonary diseases.",0.9746444032158318,0.975609756097561,0.9411764705882352,1.0,16.0,25.0,0.7840659340659341,0.8625954198473282,0.8095238095238095,0.5483870967741935,31.0,100.0
+13207,latent_13207,445,0.00089,0.0006515051,3.0525613,Reports mention normal or unchanged cardiac silhouette size.,"The examples that have high activation levels consistently include references to the cardiac silhouette, which is often found to be normal in these reports. This indicates a pattern where the presence of a non-enlarged or normal cardiac silhouette is a significant feature.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7302517818733921,0.7371794871794872,0.6,0.8035714285714286,56.0,100.0
+13208,latent_13208,215,0.00043,0.000676055,4.0515103,Prompt instructions focus on comparing current and prior images.,"The output with the highest activation levels consistently includes requests to describe the findings in the radiology study by comparing the current image to the prior image, succinctly referencing to imaging comparisons even if not available, suggesting the presence and importance of comparison.",0.3833333333333333,0.4054054054054054,0.34375,0.9166666666666666,12.0,25.0,0.3224565756823822,0.3228346456692913,0.2135922330097087,0.8148148148148148,27.0,100.0
+13209,latent_13209,594,0.001188,0.0009151195,3.0474913,Significant interval changes or new findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples included show variances in activation with a key factor being the way different types of anatomical and pathological changes, such as shifts in mediastinal structures or significant new findings compared to prior images, are discussed. High activation examples describe significant interval changes evident upon comparing imaging outcomes with prior studies or dramatic new findings from current images.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5388478169898172,0.5632183908045977,0.4915254237288136,0.3866666666666666,75.0,99.0
+13210,latent_13210,723,0.001446,0.0008513044,2.6247385,Description of interval changes on comparison with prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently mention comparisons between the current and prior images, highlighting interval changes or observations related to alteration in pathologies or medical devices, such as chest tubes, opacities, or endotracheal tubes. This pattern of comparing to previous diagnostics helps track progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.565596919127086,0.5691489361702128,0.5421686746987951,0.5113636363636364,88.0,100.0
+13211,latent_13211,672,0.001344,0.0009054256,2.1909933,Descriptions of clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette in chest imaging.,"These examples focus on descriptions of the lungs and cardiomediastinal silhouette in chest imaging studies. Clear lungs without pleural effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax, accompanied by normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size, exhibit high activation levels, indicating reports of unremarkable or unchanged chest findings are central to the pattern.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6648041204932106,0.6758241758241759,0.6716417910447762,0.5487804878048781,82.0,100.0
+13212,latent_13212,2492,0.004984,0.0020151397,1.8225931,Focus on comparison and change/stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often include explicit language or instructions to directly compare current imaging findings against prior images, with feedback or interpretation based on changes or stability over time. This is evident even when no comparison images from prior studies are mentioned. The emphasis is on comparison against previous patterns or measurements, especially for conditions being monitored over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4245919711758221,0.465,0.477124183006536,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13213,latent_13213,6438,0.012876,0.004504896,1.0565798,Reports detailing specific changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels include detailed descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior images, specifically noting changes or stability in findings. The other reports do not focus significantly on comparison or lack specific interval changes, placing importance instead on new findings.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6247196738022427,0.628140703517588,0.6101694915254238,0.72,100.0,99.0
+13214,latent_13214,3605,0.00721,0.002661135,1.5982485,Emphasis on stable or unchanged cardiothoracic radiology findings over time.,"Highly activated examples all emphasize stability or minimal change in cardiothoracic imaging findings across different exams. This is seen in repeated phrases like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'similar', describing structures such as the cardiac silhouette, pulmonary edema, hemodynamic effusions, or other noted abnormalities despite clinical indications for potential change or suggested pathology, thus reflecting a focus on stability over time in radiological assessment.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5309577514762907,0.5326633165829145,0.5402298850574713,0.47,100.0,99.0
+13215,latent_13215,504,0.001008,0.00068589486,3.2412076,Evaluation of normal heart and mediastinal contours with no pleural effusion or pneumothorax.,"The examples that have higher activation demonstrate evaluation of the cardiac and mediastinal contours, and whether the heart size is normal. This pattern includes noting the normalcy of these features and the absence of other issues like pleural effusion or pneumothorax.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6403384443585449,0.6645569620253164,0.5423728813559322,0.5517241379310345,58.0,100.0
+13216,latent_13216,594,0.001188,0.0008010576,3.376942,Use of multiple imaging views and comparison with prior images.,"These examples frequently reference the use of multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) in their descriptions. They emphasize the comparative analysis of current images with prior images, providing stability or identifying changes in findings across multiple views.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3738191632928475,0.4482758620689655,0.4339622641509434,0.92,75.0,99.0
+13217,latent_13217,823,0.001646,0.0010442502,2.751053,Presence of sarcoidosis-related findings in chest images.,"Many examples have high activation levels due to the presence of sarcoidosis or nodular densities related to sarcoidosis. Sarcoidosis is a pattern distinguishably recognized in chest radiographs due to consistent radiological findings like hilar adenopathy and nodular changes, and it shows stability or slight changes upon repeated examinations.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3839045051983057,0.52,0.8333333333333334,0.05,100.0,100.0
+13218,latent_13218,454,0.000908,0.0007656738,3.173962,Focus on comparison with prior findings and identifying any changes.,"The high activation examples focus on the interpretation of radiology findings with an emphasis on evaluating changes over time or in response to intervention. These examples consider previous imaging studies or reports in comparison to the current findings, using language that describes stability, improvement, or worsening of specific conditions.",0.375,0.3877551020408163,0.40625,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.3966059082338152,0.4,0.3392857142857143,0.6333333333333333,60.0,100.0
+13219,latent_13219,4225,0.00845,0.0030767093,1.8944836,Comparison of findings in current and prior imaging.,"The pattern noted in these examples is the inclusion of both frontal and lateral radiographic images with explicit reference to prior imaging reports or conditions. The emphasis lies in evaluating changes or consistencies between these sequential studies, with findings often specified as unchanged or stable compared to a previous study.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13220,latent_13220,443,0.000886,0.00075967034,2.8450792,New or developing opacities or nodular changes in the right lower lung lobe.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe new or developing opacities, infiltrates, or nodular changes in the right lower lung lobe. This is evidenced by frequent mentions of the 'right lower lobe' and associated changes like 'opacity', 'consolidation', or 'nodule', indicating these findings are pivotal to the pattern identified.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7081288670791551,0.7631578947368421,0.7575757575757576,0.4716981132075472,53.0,99.0
+13221,latent_13221,3473,0.006946,0.0026259671,2.0303771,High activation correlates with detailed technical descriptions of medical devices or anatomical changes in radiological evaluations.,"Most highly activated examples mention precise technical terms or jargon often seen in detailed radiology comparisons such as 'intubation', 'secondary verification', or descriptions of nuanced anatomical placements of devices. These detailed technical descriptions might signal complexity or intricacy in radiological evaluation, which aligns with the observed high activations.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13222,latent_13222,1880,0.00376,0.0015675972,2.6337535,Presence and evaluation of tubes and device placements in radiology reports.,"The presence of intubation (endotracheal or nasogastric tube placement) and devices related to patient management like tubes or central lines is a specific finding presented frequently in examples with higher activation, indicating a focus on discussing device positions, compared to usual findings of disease processes.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13223,latent_13223,3622,0.007244,0.0027056213,1.8888376,Comparison of current and previous radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes or comparisons with previous images, particularly noting specific observations or differences between current and prior states, such as the evolution of specific clinical features or status post-intervention assessments.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5062282572101897,0.56,0.536144578313253,0.89,100.0,100.0
+13224,latent_13224,419,0.000838,0.0007721569,4.4572034,Historical and temporal evaluation related to past medical conditions or ongoing observations.,"Examples with higher activation are primarily concerned with evaluating changes over time and the historical context in radiology, specifically relating to patient history indicated through prior studies, past medical conditions, or ongoing observations. The pattern involves a temporal comparison between current findings and past data, often referencing ongoing changes.",0.3777777777777777,0.4166666666666667,0.4324324324324324,0.6956521739130435,23.0,25.0,0.3829497016197783,0.3896103896103896,0.3275862068965517,0.7037037037037037,54.0,100.0
+13225,latent_13225,403,0.000806,0.0008060941,4.2270103,Comparison to previous imaging indicating stable or unchanged findings.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiology reports that describe changes in imaging findings compared to prior images, without significant new findings or stability in the condition (e.g., stable lesion sizes or unchanged contours). This includes detailed analysis or comparisons against prior states without indicating new acute abnormalities or significant changes.",0.3375291375291375,0.4081632653061224,0.2222222222222222,0.0833333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4096985716464189,0.4625850340136054,0.2142857142857142,0.2553191489361702,47.0,100.0
+13226,latent_13226,7236,0.014472,0.0051372508,1.0744891,Interpretation of changes relative to prior imaging.,"In these examples, the key pattern is evaluation and detailed description of interval changes or stability in radiological findings through comparison with prior imaging. This involves the consistent use of comparative language and identification of changes or stability in specific clinical findings between the current and prior images.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5667945405673426,0.585,0.5602836879432624,0.79,100.0,100.0
+13227,latent_13227,673,0.001346,0.0010178989,4.193929,Stability or change in position of medical devices compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve findings where there is a change or stability in the position or condition of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) compared to previous images. There is an emphasis on the positioning and potential need for adjustment of these devices, as well as the lack of significant interval changes regarding other health aspects in some of these examples.",0.5118367346938776,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7574698795180723,0.7595628415300546,0.7349397590361446,0.7349397590361446,83.0,100.0
+13228,latent_13228,2088,0.004176,0.0016214631,1.9746783,Unchanged indwelling support or monitoring devices and stable cardiomediastinal contours.,"In the examples where there is an activation, descriptions consistently mention the stability and unchanged position of indwelling support and monitoring devices, along with stable cardiomediastinal contours or silhouettes, suggesting that reports emphasizing unaltered medical devices and consistent anatomical structures trigger higher activations.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5949367088607594,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13229,latent_13229,420,0.00084,0.0007994106,3.5335882,Mentions of lung hyperinflation or mild cardiomegaly with clear lungs.,"Examples with higher activation levels are primarily associated with observations of hyperinflation or specific non-pathologic findings that the radiology AI needs to differentiate, often found within normal or near-normal findings.",0.595393307257714,0.6122448979591837,0.6666666666666666,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5912809657303049,0.6907894736842105,0.6,0.2884615384615384,52.0,100.0
+13230,latent_13230,4788,0.009576,0.0033971274,1.4261996,Comparisons to prior images showing stability or change in findings.,"These examples focus on changes or stability of specific medical conditions or findings in the patient's imaging over time, indicated by comparisons to prior images. Reports use phrases like 'unchanged since', 'stable compared to prior', or insights into new developments compared to prior studies to describe the progression or findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13231,latent_13231,862,0.001724,0.0010110989,2.7060523,Comparison of interval changes or findings stability relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with a relatively high activation level feature findings that note changes over time and detail intervals or stability, often referencing previous imagery. In contrast, those with low activation do not highlight stability or interval changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13232,latent_13232,1145,0.00229,0.0015672642,4.114686,Consistent and stable placement of medical tubes across imaging studies.,"High activation levels are associated with the stable placement of medical tubes (NG tubes, ET tubes, etc.) and their comparison to previous imaging studies. Reports consistently assess these support devices' position over time without significant change, indicating a focus on stability and proper positioning of inserted tubes.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.7442262845106447,0.745,0.7752808988764045,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13233,latent_13233,6895,0.01379,0.0049355486,1.4799305,Evaluation or description of medical device placement.,"Examples with higher activation levels include references to positioning or assessment of medical device placement, indicating that the presence and evaluation of medical devices in relation to anatomical landmarks or intervention sites is the pattern observed. Expressions describing device positioning were more frequent in highly activated examples, emphasizing their importance in the pattern.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5862068965517241,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13234,latent_13234,1827,0.003654,0.001560354,2.110005,Non-zero activation correlates with identifiable image changes and explicit comparisons to prior reports.,"The patterns frequently refer to identifiable changes in images when reviewed against prior studies, particularly focusing on lung changes, changes in opacity, and presence or absence of pneumothorax or effusion. Each report with activation contains phrases like comparison to prior images indicating the importance of prior report context. Non-zero activations emphasize the comparison or change observed, such as new opacities, increased fluid markings, or changes in device placement, which were not as significant or absent in examples with zero activation.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13235,latent_13235,1928,0.003856,0.0016183719,2.2552845,Imaging reports with specific comparisons to prior studies outlining changes or constants.,"The examples with higher activation contain comparative descriptions between a current and a prior image. The descriptive pattern involves noting changes or constants in position, size, or state of tubes, lines, or pulmonary features using explicit comparison phrases.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13236,latent_13236,466,0.000932,0.0006993507,3.358242,Findings related to aortic conditions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings related to the aorta, specifically mentioning aortic conditions or evaluations, such as stenosis, dissection, tortuosity, or calcification. This pattern is reflected in the majority of high activation examples which focus on the aorta or related structures.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.8227910966635062,0.8407643312101911,0.82,0.7192982456140351,57.0,100.0
+13237,latent_13237,6077,0.012154,0.0042574033,1.3835282,Descriptions of interval changes or persistence compared to prior imaging.,Reports with higher activation levels frequently discuss specific changes or features compared to prior imaging studies. These reports emphasize interval changes or persistent conditions prominently.,0.5462962962962963,0.5510204081632653,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5564516129032258,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13238,latent_13238,1060,0.00212,0.0011330429,2.350612,Specific and detailed comparisons with prior images or reports.,"In these examples, the presence of a previous report or specific comparison details with historical images is indicative of a pattern. The model seems to activate strongly for cases where there are extensive and detailed comparisons made across different time points or modalities, showcasing changes or stability in medical imaging findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4943806162549122,0.495,0.4953271028037383,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13239,latent_13239,4816,0.009632,0.003504271,1.3105062,"Comparison of radiographic findings with prior imaging, indicating change or stability.","Higher activation levels frequently include the presence of findings being described in relation to previous imaging studies, indicating notable changes, comparisons, or stability over time which are crucial for assessing disease progression or resolution.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5658724686534385,0.575,0.5581395348837209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13240,latent_13240,504,0.001008,0.0007377954,3.1210299,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies for changes or stability.,"Examples focus on providing descriptions justifying findings by comparing the current radiographs to prior images, indicating interval changes, stability, or lack of new findings. This reflection is typical in radiology to assess disease progression or recovery, highlighting this kind of comparison.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4661764705882353,0.4666666666666667,0.3904761904761905,0.6307692307692307,65.0,100.0
+13241,latent_13241,2688,0.005376,0.0020618255,1.5399507,Complete and continuous comparison to prior images.,The samples with higher activation typically involve assessments of interval changes and comparisons with prior images without missing comparisons data or explicit construction interruptions.,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4297719087635054,0.43,0.4270833333333333,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13242,latent_13242,1951,0.003902,0.0014576765,1.6948576,Radiological evaluations with explicit focus on interval changes in current vs prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve radiological evaluations that compare current findings with prior imaging, specifically noting interval developments or changes, such as post-procedural evaluation, stable vs changed conditions, and ongoing monitoring of pathologies. Examples with low activation lack detailed interval comparison or assessment focus.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13243,latent_13243,5505,0.01101,0.003894585,1.1330205,Alterations or stability in findings over multiple imaging studies.,"These examples are focused on interpreting subtle findings noted from subsequent imaging studies over time, which typically represents chronic conditions, disease progression or resolution, or monitoring of specific conditions like post-surgical changes.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5718433263343443,0.5829145728643216,0.5606060606060606,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+13244,latent_13244,674,0.001348,0.00086571823,2.1262872,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in radiology reports.,"The data shows that reports with findings of normal or unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours during evaluation of imaging are highly activated. Being described in a recurring format indicates that identifying and describing routine or unchanged findings, especially of cardiomediastinal structures, is a strong feature of this pattern.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6436069377245848,0.6436170212765957,0.6039603960396039,0.6931818181818182,88.0,100.0
+13245,latent_13245,511,0.001022,0.00084807735,3.0018969,Reports describe findings as unchanged from prior imaging.,"The activation pattern is linked to reports that describe findings as similar or unchanged compared to a prior study. These reports often explicitly state that there is 'no relevant change' in the findings or mention stability in conditions, which is a distinctive linguistic pattern indicating little to no change from previous images.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5227351614022909,0.5454545454545454,0.421875,0.4153846153846154,65.0,100.0
+13246,latent_13246,3088,0.006176,0.0023644466,1.3543767,Atypical radiologic findings compared to prior images.,"The higher activation levels involve radiological descriptions depicting unusual pathologies like linear artifacts, tortuous aorta, cardiomegaly with specific positional changes, or direct procedural changes that are atypical compared to existing conditions in the previous studies/files. These reports often focus on unusual or specific physiological or pathological changes noted in comparison to prior images that are unique or clinically significant.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5555555555555556,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13247,latent_13247,960,0.00192,0.001098765,2.9360564,References describing interval changes based on prior images and reports.,"Examples with high activation levels commonly involve descriptions of interval changes in past radiological findings related to cardiac silhouette, lung volume, or pulmonary conditions, emphasizing changes in medical devices, improvements/deteriorations, and comparative analysis of patient condition as seen in '_ prior' reports or images.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13248,latent_13248,442,0.000884,0.0007857687,2.957354,Comparison of current and previous frontal images in acute or post-surgical conditions.,"The examples with high activation involve both current and prior frontal radiographic images being referenced, and specifically relate to conditions that could have acute changes requiring close monitoring, such as pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or post-surgical states where complications can arise. These scenarios often have serious clinical implications.",0.5728337236533958,0.6041666666666666,0.5526315789473685,0.9130434782608696,23.0,25.0,0.5511832799968394,0.55625,0.452991452991453,0.8833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+13249,latent_13249,791,0.001582,0.0007341921,5.665452,Generated when prior report or full comparison is unavailable.,"The instances with positive activation include examples where there is no prior report provided or there is minimal information available for comparison, suggesting the pattern is associated with a requirement to provide a description when there is a lack of prior comparative information.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3965212876427829,0.4010152284263959,0.3428571428571428,0.6486486486486487,74.0,123.0
+13250,latent_13250,3153,0.006306,0.002350045,1.5147576,Reports note interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe changes or stable findings in radiological images compared to previous studies, focusing on changes such as effusions, cardiomegaly, equipment placement, or changes in lung pathology. The pattern emerges when the findings focus on specific or notable interval changes in pathology, hardware, or cardiopulmonary status from prior imaging.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13251,latent_13251,2130,0.00426,0.001660008,1.4969642,Significant or notable interval changes in image comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly focus on comparing current images with prior studies to note interval changes or stability in features, like increased consolidation or unchanged pacemaker position, even though comparisons are requested in lower activation as well, indicating that specific findings or changes in successive comparisons influence activation.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5490196078431373,0.28,100.0,100.0
+13252,latent_13252,3279,0.006558,0.0025447186,1.7916124,Findings in chest images with comparison to prior studies.,"Most examples with high activation focus on providing a description or evaluation of findings related to frontal and lateral views of chest images, often comparing them to prior reports or studies for changes, stability, and other observations.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4928571428571429,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13253,latent_13253,536,0.001072,0.00083528145,3.768732,Unchanged medical device positioning described.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of new positions or modifications of medical devices within the body, such as endotracheal tubes, catheters, or cardiovascular implants, often compared to previous imaging.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.7586206896551724,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.631106877802913,0.6745562130177515,0.6666666666666666,0.4057971014492754,69.0,100.0
+13254,latent_13254,801,0.001602,0.0009166836,2.3946152,"In-depth comparison of current and prior radiological findings, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels reflect reports that describe detailed changes or stability in medical imagery between current and prior examinations, focusing on specific anatomical or pathological changes, such as airflow improvements, device placements, or unchanged symptoms, while the assistant’s comparison further elucidates these findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4710260499734183,0.4723618090452261,0.4719101123595505,0.42,100.0,99.0
+13255,latent_13255,3322,0.006644,0.0023925032,1.5487666,Changes in lung opacities associated with pneumonia or effusions on sequential imaging.,"The examples that have higher activation consistently include references to changes in lung opacities, which are often associated with pneumonia or pleural effusions, as observed in comparisons to previous imaging. This pattern captures clinical follow-up regarding conditions like pneumonia or effusion through imaging comparisons, which is frequently seen in radiology assessment reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.6101694915254238,0.36,100.0,100.0
+13256,latent_13256,9460,0.01892,0.006667765,1.0384746,"Reports focus on interval changes from prior imaging, especially mediastinal or pleural findings.","The pattern involves highlighting changes or stability in comparison to prior images, particularly noting interval changes regarding mediastinal or pulmonary pathology, pleural effusions, pneumothorax, and device positioning. Consistent references or lack thereof in different examples reflects this pattern.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6247654784240151,0.625,0.6190476190476191,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13257,latent_13257,646,0.001292,0.00084860006,3.4664407,Monitoring tube or line placement on sequential chest X-rays.,"The pattern across these examples involves sequential chest radiographs evaluating the placement or changes in position of various medical tubes (like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) and lines. These processes often require reassessment to ensure correct placement or note changes, indicated by explicit descriptions of tube progression or repositioning between images.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7086181993259509,0.7134831460674157,0.6753246753246753,0.6666666666666666,78.0,100.0
+13258,latent_13258,3238,0.006476,0.0029813852,2.7185404,Presence of hiatal hernia and related structural effects.,"These examples highlight findings related to hiatal hernias and associated atelectasis or structural effects. They are often mentioned in radiology reports, especially when comparing changes across imaging studies, using consistent descriptors like 'hiatal hernia' and 'atelectasis'.",0.939783219590526,0.94,1.0,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.8579545454545454,0.86,0.9736842105263158,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13259,latent_13259,484,0.000968,0.0006671997,3.455031,Description of findings with interval comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples describe radiographic findings which compare the current imaging to prior studies or depict the interval change in conditions, such as placement changes of tubes or specific pathologies. This pattern is typical in radiology reports where previous imaging is used to contextualize current findings.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5137755887332616,0.5185185185185185,0.4310344827586206,0.8064516129032258,62.0,100.0
+13260,latent_13260,333,0.000666,0.0006783904,4.1758027,High attention to changes or stability in interval comparisons.,"In these examples, activation is high when there are comparative observations detailing interval changes or stabilities, especially when these changes are associated with factors like support devices, pleural effusions, or cardiovascular findings. Reports often stress comparison with previous radiographs to highlight new developments or steadiness.",0.7536087605774017,0.7555555555555555,0.6551724137931034,0.95,20.0,25.0,0.53550099535501,0.5357142857142857,0.3711340206185567,0.9,40.0,100.0
+13261,latent_13261,1222,0.002444,0.0011509373,2.0036857,Comparative description of imaging findings over time.,"Reports with a higher activation score contain explicit and structured comparisons with previous imaging findings, often using phrases that describe changes such as 'as compared to', 'similar in appearance', or 'unchanged'. Minor or no change in significant findings is highlighted, indicating a focus on stability or monitoring of existing conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4274277317524258,0.435,0.4471544715447154,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13262,latent_13262,1459,0.002918,0.0013699484,2.085405,"Detailed comparison of findings with prior images, highlighting any changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently provide detailed descriptions of radiographic findings and explicitly compare them to previous images, noting specific changes, interventions, or stability in medical devices or anatomical structures. The pattern focuses on interval changes detectable in comparative imaging studies, especially regarding implanted devices, effusions, or significant pulmonary findings. This consistent process of comparison and reporting new or unchanged findings based on prior images is key in understanding the pattern.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5048543689320388,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13263,latent_13263,847,0.001694,0.00092961313,2.7165513,Utilization of both frontal and lateral views in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently provide a detailed description of findings in both frontal and lateral views, tending to include a comparison of current and prior images. However, only specific examples mention a change or stability in condition in a clear manner, contrasting with others that might not demonstrate change or lack clear indication.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3760064412238325,0.38,0.396551724137931,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13264,latent_13264,1590,0.00318,0.002016317,3.2756808,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include direct requests to compare current images against prior studies, or have phrases indicating a description based on such comparisons. The significant activation indicates instructions for explicit comparative analysis between current and prior imaging.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,100.0,100.0
+13265,latent_13265,292,0.000584,0.0005823543,2.2805774,Presence of both current frontal and lateral chest images for comparison.,"High activation levels are noted when both frontal and lateral images are provided along with prior frontal images; these examples allow comparison of comprehensive chest imaging using multiple views. The comparisons likely capture intricate patterns, such as cardiac or lung silhouette details, providing richer information for analysis compared to single frontal images.",0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.4242424242424242,0.9333333333333332,15.0,25.0,0.4978642619838633,0.5,0.3296703296703296,0.7894736842105263,38.0,100.0
+13266,latent_13266,1478,0.002956,0.0014115169,2.366605,Detailed positioning of tubes relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina.,"Highlighted examples focus on the position of medical tubes, primarily the endotracheal tube, with instructions on precise positioning relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina. This specific detail is crucial for patient management and makes these reports highly representative of this pattern.",0.7564935064935066,0.76,0.8421052631578947,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6504530666021349,0.675,0.8723404255319149,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13267,latent_13267,345,0.00069,0.00063974585,3.9769173,Comparative findings with specific attention to interval changes in medical devices or anatomy.,"The examples with high activation primarily relate to the comparison of current imaging with prior studies, focusing on interval changes in devices or anatomical structures like tubes, effusions, pneumothorax, etc. These comparisons specify changes or stability, emphasizing follow-up imaging observations.",0.532656023222061,0.5434782608695652,0.5,0.7619047619047619,21.0,25.0,0.4436129032258064,0.45,0.2823529411764706,0.6,40.0,100.0
+13268,latent_13268,1252,0.002504,0.0010115376,2.0401244,Focus on findings in comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to comparison between current and prior images, particularly focusing on interval changes in findings or unchanged conditions against the prior reports. This pattern is indicative of assessing changes in a condition over time, which is crucial for evaluating the progression of various pathologies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13269,latent_13269,2943,0.005886,0.0022723605,1.669271,"Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, highlighting specific changes.","The examples with higher activation levels involve chest imaging findings where changes from previous radiographs are mentioned. The pattern suggests documentation of modifications or stability over time, with descriptions of implications and possible next steps.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.50995099509951,0.51,0.5098039215686274,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13270,latent_13270,2787,0.005574,0.0021395972,2.7995162,Minimal or no interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples showcase instances where such visual prompts (images) have comparisons with prior images but do not have notable or meaningful changes or differences in the physiological or diagnostic findings, resulting in low activation scores. These reports often describe common situations where comparison is a part of routine checks without significant events or updates, leading to low pattern activation.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5185185185185185,0.42,100.0,100.0
+13271,latent_13271,3113,0.006226,0.0023206007,1.3240342,Abnormal heart size or mediastinal contour without prior comparison.,"The highly activated examples all involve situations where there is abnormal heart size or mediastinal contour compared to prior examinations, and no prior studies are available for current comparison, making them significant indicators of standalone findings.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.6666666666666666,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.423007573025604,0.52,0.6111111111111112,0.11,100.0,100.0
+13272,latent_13272,705,0.00141,0.001066973,3.5380855,Low lung volumes affecting chest imaging observations.,"The examples exhibiting higher activation explicitly discuss low lung volumes and their implication, such as accentuation of bronchovascular markings. This pattern indicates that low lung volumes are a significant element impacting observation findings in chest imaging reports.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8983840983840984,0.8983957219251337,0.8333333333333334,0.9770114942528736,87.0,100.0
+13273,latent_13273,644,0.001288,0.0009900369,2.3487096,"Comparison of current findings with prior imaging, highlighting interval changes.","The common pattern across high-activation examples involves the comparison of current radiological images to prior images, specifically with some interval changes or assessments that might require further interpretation by a clinician. These discussions usually involve changes in clinical indicators or patient instrumentations that suggest active medical intervention or follow-up.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4264849942114168,0.4293478260869565,0.3793103448275862,0.3928571428571428,84.0,100.0
+13274,latent_13274,482,0.000964,0.00085272687,2.7050533,Explicit instruction to compare current imaging with prior.,"The examples with higher activation consistently emphasize providing a description of the findings in the current radiology image relative to prior imaging, often mentioning direct comparisons and noting changes or stability. The presence of 'comparison' and dates or terms indicating prior imaging for comparison tends to correlate with higher activation.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4633353045535186,0.4666666666666667,0.367816091954023,0.4923076923076923,65.0,100.0
+13275,latent_13275,1287,0.002574,0.0012427472,2.304599,Interval adjustment or assessment of tubes and catheters on comparison with prior image.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention placement, assessment, or adjustments regarding medical tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric) as compared to a prior chest image. The focus is on interval changes, such as the insertion, positioning, or adjustment of these tubes and catheters, which is a distinct radiological concern often reported in sequential imaging studies.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6208195353775374,0.625,0.6582278481012658,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13276,latent_13276,2295,0.00459,0.0017346335,1.927362,References to interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, evaluated to discern any 'interval changes', 'interval improvement', or similar phrases, indicating a focus on temporal changes in the patients' conditions.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,100.0
+13277,latent_13277,2238,0.004476,0.0018307731,1.8369408,Indications of changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The most representative examples highlight descriptions that contrast current and prior medical imaging. This pattern frequently mentions findings that are stable or have changed, use dates for comparisons, and often include references to medical devices or pathological features being unchanged or evolving.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.5634920634920635,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13278,latent_13278,362,0.000724,0.000721374,2.950874,Detailed comparison of current and prior radiographic findings.,"The examples with high activation involve descriptions of findings across multiple chest radiograph views, especially those including a prior examination when available, mentioning changes over time, and comparing previous studies for consistency, progression, or stability. These entries emphasize detailed image analysis and historical comparison, which is inherent in the radiology report context.",0.4244897959183673,0.425531914893617,0.4074074074074074,0.5,22.0,25.0,0.4627889255778511,0.4680851063829787,0.3023255813953488,0.6341463414634146,41.0,100.0
+13279,latent_13279,574,0.001148,0.0008449944,2.4137452,Instructions for comparison to prior images.,"The pattern involves instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images, which aligns with radiology practices where comparison with previous images is critical for assessing changes or stability in patient condition. These examples often explicitly mention evaluating and describing changes or stability in findings from the current images in relation to prior ones.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5056086414624014,0.5058823529411764,0.4270833333333333,0.5857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+13280,latent_13280,3448,0.006896,0.0025892383,1.7550493,Improvement or resolution of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently describe a resolution, decrease, or improvement in radiological findings between the current and previous images. This pattern focuses on positive change in conditions like opacifications, effusions, or atelectasis, indicating clinical improvement.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4273024777933614,0.51,0.5416666666666666,0.13,100.0,100.0
+13281,latent_13281,632,0.001264,0.00083017314,2.5940332,Cardiomegaly observed in chest radiographs.,"These examples describe findings of cardiomegaly, which is an enlarged heart silhouette as observed in chest imaging. The examples consistently refer to increased heart size, often unchanged from prior images, indicating this is a pattern the model recognizes well among these samples.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8333333333333334,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6785895484525621,0.6906077348066298,0.6923076923076923,0.5555555555555556,81.0,100.0
+13282,latent_13282,565,0.00113,0.00072342664,3.25317,Descriptions with explicit comparisons to prior images.,Examples with high activation levels show radiological findings described with an explicit reference to comparisons with prior images. These descriptions typically involve changes noted over time or compare current images to previous ones.,0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4185260311020959,0.4186046511627907,0.3571428571428571,0.4861111111111111,72.0,100.0
+13283,latent_13283,5625,0.01125,0.003984261,1.3605342,Stability or unchanged status on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions of unchanged positions or stability of medical devices, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or other findings upon comparison with prior images, indicating the instance of stability or unchanged status is key to the pattern.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5180722891566265,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13284,latent_13284,804,0.001608,0.0011630828,4.093334,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with clear lungs.,"The examples with high activation frequently describe unremarkable or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, coupled with clear lungs and specific mention of absence of acute pathology, often in direct comparison with prior images. The consistent use of these patterns indicates a stable or normal thoracic status despite the query for possible abnormalities.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8088086569579288,0.8090452261306532,0.8369565217391305,0.77,100.0,99.0
+13285,latent_13285,5325,0.01065,0.0038133953,1.4422084,Comparison with prior imaging findings.,"These examples describe comparative analysis explicitly mentioning a previous imaging report or evaluation, with specific observations on changes or stability in findings. The pattern involves comparing current radiologic images to prior studies, analyzing any changes or consistency over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13286,latent_13286,6681,0.013362,0.0047547426,1.151942,Comparison to prior imaging with a focus on interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiological findings described in relation to previous imaging, indicating a focus on interval change or stability of certain features. This is often signified by phrases like 'compared to prior' or 'in comparison with prior'.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.614990374759369,0.615,0.6138613861386139,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13287,latent_13287,2171,0.004342,0.0016166918,1.6893668,Provide findings compared to prior images or describe interval changes.,"Examples with activations clearly frequently involve phrases that describe image comparison, with a structure indicating a request to describe differences or identify interval changes from prior images. Examples with low activations lack explicit comparisons or intervals clearly stated.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13288,latent_13288,298,0.000596,0.00065624027,2.9016292,Description of interval changes in imaging compared to prior study.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include comparison between current and prior imaging, highlighting interval changes or stability in clinical findings. This pattern is prevalent in radiological assessments, evident by explicit references to previous results.",0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.35,0.4666666666666667,15.0,25.0,0.3848288621646623,0.4571428571428571,0.1568627450980392,0.1951219512195122,41.0,99.0
+13289,latent_13289,354,0.000708,0.000652209,3.954083,Description of findings as unchanged compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation samples consistently describe findings as 'unchanged,' 'stable,' or without interval change when comparing current images to previous ones. These reports exhibit minimal alterations between the current and prior imaging findings, often signifying stability or no progression of the condition.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5625,0.45,20.0,25.0,0.4266703026997546,0.4930555555555556,0.2156862745098039,0.25,44.0,100.0
+13290,latent_13290,3869,0.007738,0.002796216,1.8349676,Descriptions of unchanged features when comparing with prior images.,"Examples exhibiting the pattern mention comparisons to prior images but specifically highlight instances with unchanged or stable features, typically involving the cardiac silhouette and/or lack of new pulmonary findings, denoting a descriptive pattern that emphasizes the absence of change.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5263157894736842,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13291,latent_13291,825,0.00165,0.001084917,4.183456,Evaluation limitations due to patient anatomy obscuring the view in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels mention limitations in evaluating specific radiographs due to patient positioning or obscuring anatomy (e.g., neck or chin obscuring the view) and provide comparison with prior images. These limitations and comparative findings suggest a focus on evaluating changes or lack thereof, despite the challenges in image assessment.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6638513513513513,0.6683417085427136,0.7142857142857143,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+13292,latent_13292,773,0.001546,0.0009806335,2.9015954,Comparison against prior images indicating unchanged findings.,"These examples prominently focus on the relaying of findings in comparison to prior imaging, a prevalent practice in radiology to ascertain changes or confirm stability. Particularly high activation examples often highlight stable or unchanged findings compared to the prior images, signifying an absence of significant pathology change.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4515077189438753,0.484375,0.4339622641509434,0.25,92.0,100.0
+13293,latent_13293,1996,0.003992,0.0016896038,2.416319,Detailed temporal comparisons in imaging findings.,"Observations that yield high activation involve references to current and prior images being compared to describe changes or stability over time, particularly focusing on subtleties like small changes in effusions, opacities, or atelectasis. These comparisons are useful in detecting gradual or subtle changes crucial in medical diagnoses.",0.5234672304439746,0.5306122448979592,0.5161290322580645,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5074257425742574,0.507537688442211,0.5104166666666666,0.49,100.0,99.0
+13294,latent_13294,2743,0.005486,0.0021246544,1.6882572,"Comparative findings highlighting tube or catheter placement, repositioning, or status.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on comparative findings that highlight specific actions or changes noted such as the repositioning, placement, or stability of tubes, lines, or catheters within the body, which are relevant for ongoing patient management or procedural verification.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13295,latent_13295,1030,0.00206,0.001115895,2.2586923,Subtle pulmonary or cardiomediastinal changes in comparison to previous imaging.,"These examples emphasized a pattern of providing radiological findings with comparison to previous imaging studies when available. However, the comparisons also mention findings like low lung volumes, mild cardiomegaly, or hyperinflated lungs consistently among high activation samples. These descriptions, alongside comparisons, denote subtle pulmonary or cardiomediastinal changes which are emphasized through image reading patterns.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4781212364512244,0.48,0.4821428571428571,0.54,100.0,100.0
+13296,latent_13296,4765,0.00953,0.00346838,1.630065,Evaluation of medical device placement or change.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently refer to specific evaluations requested from the imaging analysis, such as assessing the position of medical lines, tubes, or catheters, particularly in relation to respiratory or cardiac support. These common clinical procedures highlight specific localized checks within radiology reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13297,latent_13297,1514,0.003028,0.001670768,2.237909,References to the position and stability of implants or devices relative to prior imaging.,"Higher activation examples feature explicit descriptions of findings in relation to previous studies, often detailing changes or stable conditions and frequently referencing implanted or monitoring devices, such as pacemakers or PICC lines. This reflects the focus of the model on observing and noting changes or stability in radiological findings, especially involving hardware or anatomical positioning.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4403970013726111,0.47,0.4444444444444444,0.24,100.0,100.0
+13298,latent_13298,2113,0.004226,0.0017386936,1.663358,Detailed comparison of radiographic findings with previous images.,"Examples with high activation often reference views being taken both prior and post a significant event or point of interest, highlighting the importance of providing direct comparative descriptions based on image history and current findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13299,latent_13299,1712,0.003424,0.0017018227,3.0781524,Comparison and adjustment of tube positions in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the position and adjustment of medical tubes and devices, such as endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, in comparison to previous images. This pattern emphasizes the monitoring and assessment of tube positioning and adjustments, which is a critical aspect of radiological reports.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.669297881179892,0.678391959798995,0.7611940298507462,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+13300,latent_13300,361,0.000722,0.0006923611,3.0138881,Instruction to describe current vs. prior image findings.,These examples focus on comparison and description of findings in radiological studies between current images and prior ones. They often include instructions like 'provide a description' and explicitly reference side-by-side evaluation of current versus prior images.,0.2740740740740741,0.3333333333333333,0.3513513513513513,0.7647058823529411,17.0,25.0,0.3539010009598244,0.3881578947368421,0.3481481481481481,0.903846153846154,52.0,100.0
+13301,latent_13301,444,0.000888,0.0007269053,3.1827526,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or change.,"In these examples, there is direct comparison with prior imaging studies to assess continuity or evolution of certain findings. The high activation levels correlate with the notion of describing findings relative to previous examinations, focusing on stability or change.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4661719233147804,0.4679487179487179,0.3516483516483517,0.5714285714285714,56.0,100.0
+13302,latent_13302,4600,0.0092,0.0033354694,2.372627,Substantial enlargement of the cardiac silhouette.,"The pattern is evident through descriptions of cardiac silhouette changes coupled with findings indicating underlying issues relating to cardiac health, such as edema or vascular congestion, where there's often mention of substantial enlargement or specific placement descriptions (like pacer lead, PICC line indication, or monitoring devices). The high activation examples specifically indicate cases with substantial and stable enlargement, which is often a critical indicator of cardiovascular issues in radiology reports.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,1.0,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4456893501592169,0.53,0.6363636363636364,0.14,100.0,100.0
+13303,latent_13303,897,0.001794,0.0010153679,3.7778368,Detailing position and changes in medical devices like tubes or catheters.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus primarily on the position and condition of endotracheal tubes, catheters, or similar devices, with findings such as pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum, or substantial changes since the prior imaging. The reports use consistent language to describe these interventions' details and changes identified in such contexts.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.6206896551724138,0.36,100.0,100.0
+13304,latent_13304,2855,0.00571,0.0022013197,1.747415,"Reports focus on direct comparison with prior images, often tracking disease progression or resolution.","Reports with positive activation levels predominantly include specific instructions to compare diagnosis with prior images, supplemented with detailed observations and differences noted in patient conditions over time. This often reflects ongoing clinical monitoring or follow-ups for conditions like pneumonia or COPD.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4834180970544607,0.507537688442211,0.5034965034965035,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+13305,latent_13305,3502,0.007004,0.0025582253,1.309942,Radiological change or stability compared with prior studies.,"The most representative samples demonstrate references to the findings and descriptions evolved from comparisons with prior studies, with an emphasis on changes or stability in specific radiological signs or patterns, including anatomies such as heart size, mediastinal contours, lung volumes, and infiltrates.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13306,latent_13306,1332,0.002664,0.0012000344,2.0919485,Comparison of current and prior images with changes noted.,"Examples with higher activations involve comparisons between current and prior radiographic studies with explicit details on changes in medical devices or anatomical findings, using comparisons to describe management changes or new clinical insights.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13307,latent_13307,535,0.00107,0.00085376337,3.0585792,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette without acute findings.,"These examples contain descriptions of radiology findings that indicate stability or lack of acute change in the observed images, often highlighting unremarkable cardiomediastinal contours as well as no signs of acute pathology like pneumothorax or pleural effusion. This pattern is typical in radiology reports that note clear lungs and normal heart size without acute findings.",0.7390606182256123,0.74,0.7727272727272727,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6473604826546002,0.6646706586826348,0.5873015873015873,0.5522388059701493,67.0,100.0
+13308,latent_13308,2346,0.004692,0.0017611792,2.4855695,Identification of older or non-acute bone fractures among findings.,"These examples do not include explicit language about comparison with prior imaging, making this isolated example of rib fracture identification based on non-acute changes indicative of a rare finding pattern in radiology reports. It not only identifies imaging findings but remarks on their age or stage as opposed to a simple acute finding comparison.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,1.0,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3730407523510972,0.5,0.5,0.05,100.0,100.0
+13309,latent_13309,1420,0.00284,0.0012949387,3.739564,Explicit instructions for comparison to prior images.,"Prompts with higher activation frequently involve instructions or text that explicitly requests comparison between the current and prior imaging studies, typically involving direct comparisons. These involve multiple references to prior image inscriptions, such as 'in comparison to previous', 'compared to prior', or 'comparison with previous studies'.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13310,latent_13310,429,0.000858,0.0007204703,3.2306554,Provide a description of findings compared to prior frontal image.,"The explanation ""Provide a description of findings compared to prior frontal image"" captures the essence of these examples, where clear instructions are given to describe any findings by making direct comparisons with previous frontal images. This phrasing appears consistently across examples, especially in how assistants are instructed to describe both current and changed aspects of each radiology study.",0.3919554985023534,0.4081632653061224,0.4242424242424242,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4578614257161892,0.4580645161290322,0.3505154639175257,0.6181818181818182,55.0,100.0
+13311,latent_13311,701,0.001402,0.0008541928,2.1306405,Detailed measurements or descriptions of findings suggesting specific conditions.,"These examples exhibit references to radiological findings with precise measurements or descriptions of anatomical or pathological features like nodules, opacities, or pleural effusions, often suggesting specific conditions or differential diagnoses. These references are linguistically specific and consistently included in reports with a higher activation level.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4569102526677694,0.5054347826086957,0.4222222222222222,0.2261904761904762,84.0,100.0
+13312,latent_13312,5775,0.01155,0.0040674596,1.1361959,Focus on unchanged findings from previous images.,"These examples often include a specific evaluation of changes over time by referencing prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability or lack of change, and these references are typically used when ensuring clinical stability or evaluating progress in a condition. Terms like 'unchanged', 'remained', 'comparable', or 'stable' suggest a pattern of monitoring longitudinal changes.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.537396401859713,0.5376884422110553,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,99.0
+13313,latent_13313,2977,0.005954,0.0022630608,2.0584414,Detailed comparison with prior imaging indicating change in medical condition.,"The higher activation levels in the examples consistently involve situations where a direct comparison with prior studies is facilitated, but specifically when changes are explicitly described in the context of an evolving medical scenario, such as worsening or resolving conditions. This signifies detailed comparative analysis in reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5552215799614644,0.5628140703517588,0.589041095890411,0.43,100.0,99.0
+13314,latent_13314,1299,0.002598,0.0012885906,2.3568008,Detailed findings of lung or pleural changes in comparison to prior studies.,"The pattern in the examples with high activation involves detailed descriptions of medical imaging findings that identify or assess potential lung or pleural abnormalities like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or subtle opacities, emphasizing subtle changes or interval progressions when compared to previous studies. These set of detailed observations are critical in monitoring changes over time, especially in patients with serious or chronic health issues.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5731967562953478,0.575,0.5663716814159292,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13315,latent_13315,2044,0.004088,0.0017363443,2.8592267,Detailed comparison with prior image showing interval changes or stability.,"Samples with high activation levels typically include descriptions of findings in current imaging compared to prior ones, emphasizing findings that are newly developed or unchanged. These descriptions are explicit, detailed, and frequently include continuity or alterations over time, indicating a strong focus on assessing progression or stability of conditions relative to previous imaging studies.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5149878746968675,0.515,0.5148514851485149,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13316,latent_13316,2530,0.00506,0.0019250497,1.748464,Analyzing radiological changes by comparing current and prior images.,"Activation levels are higher for examples that explicitly require comparison between current and prior radiological images to describe findings, often involving specific indications, measurements, or changes. This comparative element is present through consistent references to differences noted or evaluated against prior imaging or reports.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,100.0,100.0
+13317,latent_13317,748,0.001496,0.000952452,3.1283934,Stable chronic features in chest imaging compared to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently refer to the chest imaging findings in comparison with prior studies, specifically highlighting the unchanged chronic or stable conditions, such as interstitial markings or device placements. These comparisons emphasize a pattern of stability and absence of new acute changes, making them highly representative of the pattern.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.6666666666666666,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6156561298925406,0.6173469387755102,0.5929203539823009,0.6979166666666666,96.0,100.0
+13318,latent_13318,4519,0.009038,0.0032831868,1.5466075,Detailed comparison with prior imaging study.,"These examples contain extensive analysis or reassessment of imaging findings explicitly comparing the current exam with at least one prior study. This involves not only comparing the existence of findings but often pointing out changes, stability, or interval changes in findings over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13319,latent_13319,5068,0.010136,0.003693326,1.19149,Descriptive assessment of changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Descriptions often include detailed comparisons of findings in current and prior imaging studies, assessing for changes. Additionally, phrases such as 'compared to' and 'as noted on prior' indicate a meticulous evaluation of interval changes in the subject's condition, central in these examples and a characteristic component of their activation levels.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13320,latent_13320,4223,0.008446,0.0030092965,1.3749467,Comparison and assessment of changes over time in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation consistently ask for comparison with prior frontal images, emphasizing changes or stability of certain conditions over time. This suggests the task of assessing temporal changes in radiological findings is central to the identified pattern.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4807566862361383,0.5175879396984925,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,99.0
+13321,latent_13321,4383,0.008766,0.0031821576,1.9674869,Multiple image views and prior comparison data.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain multiple image views, both current and lateral, in addition to a comparison image or report. This pattern suggests that the presence of comprehensive imaging (multiple views) alongside comparison information engages the model more strongly because it requires interpreting consistent findings across different image modalities.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+13322,latent_13322,465,0.00093,0.00069188897,3.580205,Emphasis on comparing current images with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, often using specific language like 'compared to prior', 'in comparison to previous exam', or 'as on prior'. This suggests that the model is highly activated by tasks that involve evaluating radiological changes over time.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3830857786901743,0.3860759493670886,0.3243243243243243,0.6206896551724138,58.0,100.0
+13323,latent_13323,3339,0.006678,0.0025263433,1.8797108,Medical device placement in anatomical landmarks.,"The presence of medical devices and their placement in relation to anatomical landmarks are noted consistently in these reports. This pattern involves mentioning devices such as catheters, tubes, or ports, describing their positioning, and comparing it to prior placements in the body, often mentioning specific veins or anatomical areas like the SVC (Superior Vena Cava) or stomach.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5748557546310356,0.58,0.6025641025641025,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13324,latent_13324,2651,0.005302,0.0019560633,1.6777666,Analysis of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern focuses on changes over time reflected in serial imaging. Higher activations involve descriptions of changes, rather than stable conditions or absence of relevant priors. Phrases indicating previous states or interventions, such as interval changes, new or resolved findings compared to 'prior', 'previous', or specific date, relate to these higher activations.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13325,latent_13325,2784,0.005568,0.0020933705,2.2689104,Focus on low lung volumes or hypoinflation.,"High activation levels correlate with descriptions that emphasize changes in lung status such as reduced lung volume, hypoinflation, or crowded vasculature. These are common radiological indicators used to assess respiratory issues, especially in correlation with devices like central lines.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4736842105263157,0.18,100.0,100.0
+13326,latent_13326,967,0.001934,0.0010977439,2.4444957,"Comparison indicating changes in opacities, volume, or effusions.","The examples demonstrating high activation typically involve the presence of opacifications, effusions, or changes in volume which are compared to prior imaging. These findings often suggest some form of pathology compared to the prior state, such as worsening conditions or the monitoring of known abnormalities.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13327,latent_13327,311,0.000622,0.0005766153,4.9836454,Use of both frontal and lateral images in the examination.,The activation levels are higher for examples that describe using both frontal and lateral images. This suggests the pattern the model is detecting relates to the comprehensive imaging use which typically offers a more thorough diagnostic capability.,0.5477941176470589,0.5609756097560976,0.46875,0.9375,16.0,25.0,0.5902580178442247,0.5902777777777778,0.4257425742574257,0.9772727272727272,44.0,100.0
+13328,latent_13328,1002,0.002004,0.0013740021,3.3187647,Stability or adjustments in support device positions compared to prior imaging.,"The highly representative examples involve position changes or stability of tubes and support devices in comparison with prior studies, demonstrating consistent monitoring or adjustment of these devices, which is crucial in radiological assessments for ongoing care.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5895720909021813,0.595,0.6233766233766234,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13329,latent_13329,2882,0.005764,0.00232115,1.7770947,Trends in lung findings upon comparison with prior images.,"Highly activated examples commonly describe changes or stability in the condition of the lungs over time. This suggests the pattern is related to trends in lung findings when comparisons are made to prior images, emphasizing either improvement or notable stability in lung conditions such as opacity, effusion, or edema.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5631067961165048,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13330,latent_13330,2937,0.005874,0.002252146,1.7050574,Focus on tube/device placement with reference to prior comparison.,"Highly activated examples reference the chest radiographs that are compared to previous images or medical reports, focusing on specific updates such as new or unchanged features, notably involving tubes or devices. This pattern is prevalent in radiology reports where updates on devices or tube placements are critical for ongoing patient care.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.5066666666666667,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13331,latent_13331,295,0.00059,0.00069115224,2.980197,"Presence of effusion, atelectasis, or abnormal lung/pleural findings.","The notable pattern is the reporting of findings such as effusion, atelectasis, or other lung or pleural space abnormalities. These examples emphasize the presence of abnormalities such as blunting of costophrenic angles, minimal effusions, atelectasis, or changes in lung volumes. Such findings often suggest subtle, possibly chronic, abnormalities that aren't acute processes like pneumonia or pneumothorax but rather include stable chronic pleural and lung findings.",0.67987987987988,0.6829268292682927,0.5517241379310345,1.0,16.0,25.0,0.6891225059000214,0.6956521739130435,0.475,1.0,38.0,100.0
+13332,latent_13332,5150,0.0103,0.0036653846,1.4869692,"Comparison of current imaging findings with previous studies, noting interval changes.","The pattern is represented by the use of explicit comparison or mention of previous imaging studies and changes noted between them. Examples with high activations consistently describe findings in relation to past exams, using terms such as 'unchanged', 'improved', 'worsening', or mention of interval changes.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13333,latent_13333,597,0.001194,0.0008514438,3.002453,Presence of prior imaging comparison indicating stability or change.,"Examples with high activation consistently make explicit references to both prior imaging and the use of phrases like 'compared to,' indicating stable or changed conditions over time. This pattern emphasizes the use of past reports or comparisons in radiology interpretations to assess the progression or stability of findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4399249061326658,0.441340782122905,0.4036697247706422,0.5569620253164557,79.0,100.0
+13334,latent_13334,639,0.001278,0.0009281864,2.9234889,Comparisons between current and prior radiological images.,"The consistent theme involves evaluating the current imaging against any available prior images, to assess for changes over time. This makes comparisons a salient feature across most cases, contributing heavily to their activation level when such elements are explicitly present or missing.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4578839988341591,0.4833333333333333,0.4532374100719424,0.7875,80.0,100.0
+13335,latent_13335,1409,0.002818,0.0012008135,1.6775123,Enlarged cardiac silhouette or post-procedural changes in multiple image views.,"The consistent elements in highly activated examples refer to imaging findings related to enlarged heart size (cardiomegaly) or observed changes post-procedure, particularly comparing images from multiple views or prior reports. This reflects the pattern of detecting cardiomegaly or associated cardiopulmonary changes across various circumstances.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.2745658729333471,0.43,0.3968253968253968,0.25,100.0,100.0
+13336,latent_13336,667,0.001334,0.00087317795,2.9460444,Descriptive comments about interval changes or continuity from prior imaging studies.,"Examples with activations close to zero typically involve absent comparison studies or minimal detail relating to prior references or changes, whereas descriptions focusing on change or continuity often yield higher activations. This suggests that mentions of prior images and interval change contribute to increased activation.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4463768115942029,0.450261780104712,0.4396551724137931,0.5604395604395604,91.0,100.0
+13337,latent_13337,1179,0.002358,0.0011279606,2.910389,Presence of indeterminate placeholders ('_' or '[[]]') in radiology comparisons.,"The examples often involve the provision of detailed descriptions based on various imaging techniques and reference previous studies, usually as part of a routine radiological assessment. Additionally prominent is the use of indeterminate placeholders like '_' or '[[]]' indicating missing specifics or redaction, reflecting a template or anonymized format typical in draft reports when patient data is not fully filled in.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.5111111111111111,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3718998561826773,0.465,0.480225988700565,0.85,100.0,100.0
+13338,latent_13338,689,0.001378,0.000904897,2.3795838,Highlighted imaging abnormalities or significant change over multiple studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe extensive or pertinent findings such as persistent imaging abnormalities or changes in serial comparisons, which are informative. Reports without relevant or notable changes tend to have lower activation levels.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5228513940787582,0.5388888888888889,0.4776119402985074,0.4,80.0,100.0
+13339,latent_13339,2027,0.004054,0.0015183832,1.2129246,Focus on interval changes between current and previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples prominently describe changes observed in the comparison between current and prior imaging, focusing on interval changes in condition, improvement, or stability. The pattern highlights radiological attention to the change or lack thereof across imaging studies.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5546218487394958,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13340,latent_13340,462,0.000924,0.00086696923,3.2508087,Involves evaluation of both frontal and lateral chest views.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include both frontal and lateral chest view images and descriptions, whereas examples with just a frontal view or a single perspective tend to receive lower activation scores. The inclusion of both views allows for a more comprehensive assessment, potentially explaining the elevated activations.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4961947073594746,0.4968944099378882,0.4056603773584906,0.7049180327868853,61.0,100.0
+13341,latent_13341,907,0.001814,0.0010019476,2.7454062,Requests for comparative imaging descriptions with vague placeholders.,"The examples that have higher activation levels frequently contain requests for descriptions comparing current and prior images, but use vague placeholders for specific details such as age, history, comparison dates, or indications. This vagueness suggests a pattern where the key information guiding analytical decision-making needs to be inferred without explicit details.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4045082081830131,0.4623115577889447,0.4753086419753086,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+13342,latent_13342,2821,0.005642,0.0022011755,1.8845167,References to changes or stability of findings compared to prior images.,"The samples with higher activation generally discuss findings in comparison to prior images, which is a central task in radiological assessments. The clearer specification of changes over time is an essential aspect of diagnosing and managing patients.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4738797306710006,0.4797979797979798,0.4833333333333333,0.5858585858585859,99.0,99.0
+13343,latent_13343,570,0.00114,0.00082195527,2.5709758,Reports indicating stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed involves unchanged findings compared to previous studies. This consistent use of descriptors indicating stability, with words like 'unchanged', 'no interval change', or 'no significant change', encapsulates the model's focus on identifying reports where prior and current imaging findings are stable with no noted developments.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5457910832126187,0.5903614457831325,0.4893617021276595,0.3432835820895522,67.0,99.0
+13344,latent_13344,5276,0.010552,0.0037628985,1.4368888,Minor interval changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve comparisons of current and prior images to detect changes in conditions such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or cardiomegaly. They commonly mention 'interval change' or stability in these findings, indicating these are significant for the activation pattern.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.535707039967539,0.5376884422110553,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,99.0
+13345,latent_13345,3028,0.006056,0.0023258517,1.7155939,Detailed dynamic comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Reports with high activation levels frequently involve detailed sequential analysis of current imaging compared to prior studies, emphasizing changes in clinical findings over time. This involves tracking stability, improvement, or worsening of conditions, often with specific descriptors of technical and anatomical detail for each comparative aspect.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5949088544922607,0.595,0.5979381443298969,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13346,latent_13346,1287,0.002574,0.0012089317,2.490459,"Findings described as ""unchanged"" or ""stable"" when compared to prior images.","These examples with high activations focus on explicitly noting ""unchanged"" or ""stable"" findings when comparing current images to prior images. This comparison pattern is pervasive in radiology reports to identify stability or progression of medical conditions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5083167695365624,0.53,0.5517241379310345,0.32,100.0,100.0
+13347,latent_13347,463,0.000926,0.00079459994,3.5810277,Emphasis on comparison findings or unchanged findings in reports.,"The highly activated examples often reference comparisons to a prior image or state that no change has occurred since the prior assessment, with an emphasis on describing the current state in relation to any potential changes or constancies. These examples demonstrate the focus on evaluation of changes or confirmations of stability in medical imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4746625005007411,0.4746835443037974,0.3737373737373737,0.6379310344827587,58.0,100.0
+13348,latent_13348,885,0.00177,0.0013516913,2.701479,Description focuses on findings compared to prior images indicating stability or lack of change.,"The pattern indicates an examination wherein the current findings are explicitly compared with previous images to identify changes or stability relative to past studies. Each of these examples frequently incorporates phrases describing no significant change or stability, featuring monitoring/support devices, and any persisting conditions like cardiomegaly or opacities, indicating the continued relevance of prior conditions or lack of new developments.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.627001013171226,0.628140703517588,0.6126126126126126,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+13349,latent_13349,693,0.001386,0.00089586264,3.9222102,Focus on lung pathologies while cardiac silhouette remains unremarkable/stable.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe a chest radiography analysis involving the status of lung findings such as pleural effusions, consolidations, or atelectasis while ensuring the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes remain unremarkable or stable. These reports typically emphasize lung changes without concerns for heart morphology alterations.",0.7267759562841529,0.74,0.6666666666666666,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.6189839572192514,0.6210526315789474,0.5789473684210527,0.7333333333333333,90.0,100.0
+13350,latent_13350,3096,0.006192,0.002297774,1.9992571,Inclusion of comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The more active examples consistently incorporate findings from multiple imaging modalities or dates, comparing current observations against a prior baseline. This includes visualization of existing pathologies or devices and their evaluation for stability or change over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5296743697478992,0.5477386934673367,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,99.0
+13351,latent_13351,364,0.000728,0.0007346086,4.7248373,No significant interval change between current and prior images.,"All samples with high activation describe cases where there is minimal or no significant interval change when comparing current and prior imaging studies. Reports focus on stability observed between examinations, frequently using explicit phrasing about the lack of significant alterations in findings.",0.8042553191489361,0.8043478260869565,0.75,0.8571428571428571,21.0,25.0,0.7174938474159147,0.7379310344827587,0.5573770491803278,0.7555555555555555,45.0,100.0
+13352,latent_13352,635,0.00127,0.0009672223,2.854939,"Interpretation with comparison to prior images, focusing on changes or constants.","High activation examples involve the interpretation or comparison of new radiographic findings against known conditions or changes suggested by prior imagery. They emphasize tracking changes over time, particularly in relation to medical interventions or known pathology (e.g., device placement, progression of a disease).",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6016161616161616,0.6091954022988506,0.5241935483870968,0.8783783783783784,74.0,100.0
+13353,latent_13353,307,0.000614,0.0007294658,4.6373816,Structured prompts requesting normal findings comparison.,"Most examples with high activation levels use structured prompts including directives to specify findings ('Provide a description...') accompanied by reference to prior images, without clear reference to specific previous image dates. They frequently highlight normal findings across multiple anatomical regions, indicating completeness of imaging assessment without comparison.",0.4041666666666667,0.4090909090909091,0.3333333333333333,0.3684210526315789,19.0,25.0,0.4779220779220779,0.5037037037037037,0.2714285714285714,0.5428571428571428,35.0,100.0
+13354,latent_13354,424,0.000848,0.0007448008,3.5387807,"Evaluation of imaging findings in comparison to past studies, even with no significant change.","These examples that exhibit high activation all include phrases like 'compared to previous exam' or 'no prior', indicating that there is a focus on comparing the findings of the current imaging with prior studies. This indicates that the model activates strongly in scenarios where multiple time-point data is available or contrasted, even if the changes are not acute or significant.",0.5285714285714286,0.5416666666666666,0.5151515151515151,0.7391304347826086,23.0,25.0,0.5193994601889339,0.5194805194805194,0.4019607843137255,0.7592592592592593,54.0,100.0
+13355,latent_13355,920,0.00184,0.0010046874,2.3382757,High activation responses involve explicit instructions for comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a direct instruction to compare current images to prior imaging studies, indicating the model's primary focus on analyzing changes over time.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13356,latent_13356,2181,0.004362,0.0016524653,2.5796268,Changes in pleural effusion size and cardiac silhouette.,"These examples refer to the presence and interval change of pleural effusions, cardiac silhouette enlargement, and pulmonary edema, which are part of assessing heart failure or related cardiopulmonary conditions. Significant pleural effusion growth or cardiomegaly is particularly notable in comparison to prior studies, indicating progression or response to treatment.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5469744364146263,0.58,0.6739130434782609,0.31,100.0,100.0
+13357,latent_13357,629,0.001258,0.00095996284,2.3502076,Observation of medical device positioning relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe observations regarding the positional changes or stability of indwelling devices (e.g., PICC lines, endotracheal tubes) relative to prior imaging. This suggests the pattern of interest is linked to the documentation of changes or monitoring of medical device placement over time, often in conjunction with comparison to previous images.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4375317097919837,0.4585635359116022,0.3692307692307692,0.2962962962962963,81.0,100.0
+13358,latent_13358,531,0.001062,0.00081004965,2.8364677,Focus on comparative changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels primarily focus on radiological reports that provide comparative findings, highlighting differences between current and prior studies. This highlights the importance of tracking changes over time to assess disease progression or stability in such reports, using language indicating changes like 'interval increase', 'comparison', and 'compared to '.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4938836214909834,0.4939024390243902,0.4059405940594059,0.640625,64.0,100.0
+13359,latent_13359,1492,0.002984,0.001412815,2.7635636,Requests for comparative evaluation with previous studies.,Higher activation levels are associated with prompts that include descriptions or instructions to compare current imaging with prior imaging or notes on any interval changes or stability. Lower activation levels tend to lack these comparative insights or description of changes.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13360,latent_13360,4573,0.009146,0.0033820954,2.3656158,Complex anatomical evaluations or postoperative assessment.,"Examples that involve more complex descriptors or technical details beyond routine findings, such as considerations post-surgical interventions or evaluation of tube/catheter placement, receive higher activation levels. These descriptors highlight elements integrated for assessing prior findings or postoperative status.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6114937309215671,0.615,0.5966386554621849,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13361,latent_13361,1498,0.002996,0.001324892,2.696832,"Stable findings compared to previous imaging, with emphasis on no change.","The activation levels suggest that comparisons acknowledging stability or non-progression of certain findings across imaging studies (like unchanged heart size or stable nodules) are patterns that the model responds to. These patterns are related specifically to observations that are consistent with previous imagery, showing no new development or concern.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5792282430213465,0.59,0.6323529411764706,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13362,latent_13362,361,0.000722,0.0006054091,3.8535306,Tortuous thoracic aorta and comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often showcase the identification of a tortuous thoracic aorta and its prominence or a comparison of findings with prior images. These features appear critical to the pattern being assessed. When findings like aortic tortuosity are noted in conjunction with other findings that might not change significantly over time or are consistently observed across serial images, they trigger higher activation values.",0.6349206349206349,0.6521739130434783,0.6666666666666666,0.4761904761904761,21.0,25.0,0.5631746031746032,0.7013888888888888,0.5263157894736842,0.2272727272727272,44.0,100.0
+13363,latent_13363,4796,0.009592,0.0034759622,1.641898,Detailed ongoing condition comparison with prior images for temporal evaluation.,"The pattern involves descriptive detail on the specific findings or conditions observed via changes noted between current and prior imaging studies, often emphasizing stabilities, changes, or consistencies in the context of ongoing medical evaluation rather than focusing on a singular diagnostic conclusion. This reflects a focus on tracking temporal progress or lack thereof in the patient's condition.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5874818568409259,0.595,0.5748031496062992,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13364,latent_13364,4694,0.009388,0.0034084145,2.3207214,Interval changes in respiratory findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activations often include either mild or significant changes compared to prior imaging studies, with findings related to respiratory infections or changes in known pulmonary lesions. These changes could be suggestive of disease progression or resolution.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.59,0.59,0.59,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13365,latent_13365,4871,0.009742,0.0034917442,1.3342805,Structured placeholders and standard report components without specific findings.,"Many instances include a required interpretation of findings in the context of previous imaging but contain structured placeholders like 'EXAMINATION:', 'INDICATION:', 'TECHNIQUE:', and 'COMPARISON:', focusing on standard report structure but not detailing specific pathologies, leading to lower activation values.",0.2857142857142857,0.4,0.4444444444444444,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4198391100212327,0.515,0.5082872928176796,0.92,100.0,100.0
+13366,latent_13366,783,0.001566,0.0009139731,2.327576,Focus on comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples tend to focus on descriptions of findings across both current imaging and prior imaging, often indicating stability or change of existing conditions. This consistent comparison approach is seen across the examples that have high activation levels, suggesting the importance is in the act of comparing current to past imaging.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4314304723885562,0.4438775510204081,0.4496124031007752,0.6041666666666666,96.0,100.0
+13367,latent_13367,2041,0.004082,0.0019675854,2.6413088,Reports focused on ongoing evaluation or stable conditions over time.,"Examples with significant activation levels focus on findings that describe ongoing evaluation or reevaluation for underlying or ongoing conditions, often marked by stable, unchanged, or interval changes, especially in how they manage or monitor the condition over time, such as pulmonary edema, effusions, or similar conditions with a requirement for continuous assessment.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13368,latent_13368,500,0.001,0.0007167625,3.8302906,Comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation involve comparisons of current and prior studies, indicating analysis based on observed changes, while many zero-activation examples may lack prior image reference or the analysis might not highlight significant findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.481974825858487,0.4840764331210191,0.3666666666666666,0.5789473684210527,57.0,100.0
+13369,latent_13369,229,0.000458,0.000520818,3.849311,Explicit mention of interval changes or comparisons in imaging findings.,"These examples describe changes over time in radiological findings, with explicit mentions of intervals between imaging studies and changes noted in key terms like 'since' or 'interval'. These indicate the reports focus on comparing current imaging findings to previous ones, noting changes or stability, which is crucial for the evaluation of treatment response or disease progression.",0.4911909795630725,0.5,0.4,0.9230769230769232,13.0,25.0,0.5354897772352761,0.5426356589147286,0.3214285714285714,0.9310344827586208,29.0,100.0
+13370,latent_13370,867,0.001734,0.00096611754,2.7098508,Asymmetric or bilateral distribution of findings.,"High activation samples include references to bilateral distribution of findings, often involving effusions or opacities that are asymmetric but relevant to clinical settings, indicating bilateral processes or differential in pathology which require detailed interpretation of asymmetry or bilateral presence in radiological reports.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5212962962962963,0.5252525252525253,0.5308641975308642,0.4343434343434343,99.0,99.0
+13371,latent_13371,398,0.000796,0.0008895282,3.729077,Cardiac enlargement or mild cardiomegaly in comparison findings.,"The examples with high activation levels describe comparative assessments of sequential imaging over time focusing on changes or stability in findings, particularly regarding cardiac size and pulmonary conditions. Terminology related to cardiomegaly or cardiac enlargement is frequently seen in these samples, such as 'heart size is mildly enlarged', which correlates with higher activations.",0.7016828148903621,0.7111111111111111,0.7058823529411765,0.6,20.0,25.0,0.6323992062339674,0.6838709677419355,0.5714285714285714,0.4363636363636363,55.0,100.0
+13372,latent_13372,521,0.001042,0.0008069764,2.7028599,Comparison of radiological findings with prior images to identify changes over time.,"Examples with high activation involve explicit comparison with prior images and also focus on currently observed changes or lack thereof in radiological findings. These findings include descriptions such as opacities, effusions, or cardiomediastinal stability, indicating an emphasis on temporal changes in the current context of analysis.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4313430698739977,0.4437869822485207,0.4,0.7246376811594203,69.0,100.0
+13373,latent_13373,7802,0.015604,0.005521268,1.0304072,Comparison with prior imaging for assessing changes or device positioning.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include assessments that compare current findings against prior images or reports, specifically for tracking changes in clinical conditions or medical device placements. These instances often perform follow-ups to identify any changes, stability, or necessary adjustments, such as tubes or lines. Deviations or consistencies from prior states are pivotal for these evaluations.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+13374,latent_13374,1467,0.002934,0.001292525,1.6006207,Comparison focused on interventions or internal devices.,"These examples demonstrate a pattern of comparing current and prior radiological images specifically for assessing line and device placement or changes in the cardiopulmonary status. The analysis in the impressions indicates evaluations of continuity, stability, or changes in internal devices (e.g., catheters, tubes) and focuses on findings such as fluid status, lung volumes, or the presence or changes of infiltrates or effusions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13375,latent_13375,1188,0.002376,0.001527382,4.9671464,Presence of stents or vascular devices in chest imaging comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the presence of medical devices, such as stents or central venous catheters, in reference to prior radiology images. The pattern revolves around identifying these devices and their stability or change over time via comparison to previous imaging.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,0.8620689655172413,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.854967367657723,0.855,0.8446601941747572,0.87,100.0,100.0
+13376,latent_13376,714,0.001428,0.0009741656,4.128408,Descriptions involve findings compared with prior imaging.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels include assessments of radiographs based on comparisons with prior images. The analysis involves identifying changes or stability in clinical findings and structures between current and prior images, often noting changes in conditions, device placements, or significant abnormalities.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.460817419655333,0.4814814814814814,0.4671532846715328,0.7191011235955056,89.0,100.0
+13377,latent_13377,1051,0.002102,0.0010189663,3.5049,Comparison with prior images or studies indicating anatomical changes.,"Activation levels are high when a comparison is explicitly made with prior radiology images, indicating change or stability of specific anatomical features or medical devices.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13378,latent_13378,468,0.000936,0.0008626238,3.2311304,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels include a detailed comparison of the current and prior radiographs, often in combination with specific findings or a conclusion provided. They emphasize an evaluative process explicitly comparing two imaging points in time, using language that guides an assistant or reader through the evolution of imaging findings.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3870967741935484,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.50625,0.5063291139240507,0.4020618556701031,0.6610169491525424,59.0,99.0
+13379,latent_13379,3292,0.006584,0.0024798133,2.0049891,Focus on comparative image analysis without relying on prior reports.,"The pattern reflects the request for an analysis based on visual comparison, but without utilizing prior reports or information. High activation corresponds to prompts where interpretation should be based solely on visual cues from current and prior images supplied, locations where prior reports are explicitly referenced see lower activation.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5206611570247934,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13380,latent_13380,728,0.001456,0.0009175189,2.6628149,Emphasis on stable indwelling devices or improvement in lung condition.,"Examples with relatively high activation levels mentioned either improvement or change in lung conditions such as edema, effusion, or position of medical devices, while emphasizing stability or unchanged factors. 'Indwelling devices unchanged' and 'improvement' are recurring phrases related to device positioning or condition changes noted in high activation reports.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5380952380952381,0.5463917525773195,0.5405405405405406,0.425531914893617,94.0,100.0
+13381,latent_13381,813,0.001626,0.0009848704,2.0797017,Imaging findings compared with prior studies or reports.,"This set of examples shows a pattern in which current imaging findings are compared to those from previous studies or prior reports. The focus is on identifying whether changes or stability are noted over time, which is a standard practice in medical imaging to assess progression or resolution of findings.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4896551724137931,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13382,latent_13382,2213,0.004426,0.0018952182,2.3801796,Monitoring interval changes in placement/removal of medical devices.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe interval changes in terms of placement, removal, or adjustment of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or pacemaker wires. This pattern involves recent modifications or observations of medical equipment positions in imaging studies, suggesting a focus on tracking changes over time rather than just the anatomical or pathological findings.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5925925925925926,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13383,latent_13383,756,0.001512,0.0008997233,2.3121603,Detection of changes in medical device placements or internal conditions between current and prior images.,"The pattern of notable activation levels corresponds with the mention of specific changes or adjustments in medical devices or internal assessments in comparison to a prior study. Examples include changes in the placement of tubes, pacemaker leads, or changes in pleural effusion size, which are commonly highlighted in radiological examinations for follow-ups.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4667852447606527,0.467005076142132,0.4583333333333333,0.4536082474226804,97.0,100.0
+13384,latent_13384,917,0.001834,0.0011053598,3.1813664,"Description of interval changes, especially increases or stability in lung or pleural pathology.","The activated examples predominantly discuss the observation and documentation of changes or stability in imaging findings related to pleural effusions, opacities, and lung conditions, often using terms like 'increasing' or 'unchanged'. These descriptors specify alterations or maintenance in the pathology status, influencing higher activation due to the apparent emphasis on monitoring progression or resolution of certain conditions relative to previous imaging.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6946259167480163,0.695,0.7096774193548387,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13385,latent_13385,2435,0.00487,0.0019861835,1.8946631,Instruction to provide findings comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently include instructions or requests for providing a description or comparison to previous images as part of the radiology study analysis, although some do not contain the actual comparison sentence. This aligns with instructional prompts in systematic radiology workflows or educational settings and their engagement (or lack thereof) with previous data.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4649545211342964,0.525,0.5149700598802395,0.86,100.0,100.0
+13386,latent_13386,1057,0.002114,0.0011047832,2.5680296,Presence of medical devices such as tubes or surgical instruments in imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve descriptions of images showcasing changes or stability in the presence of medical devices such as tubes, catheters, or surgical instruments like sternotomy wires, often indicative of postoperative or intensive care contexts.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5851063829787234,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13387,latent_13387,539,0.001078,0.0008394906,2.8507073,Instructions to compare current and prior images for changes.,"This pattern involves explicit instructions to compare the current and prior radiographic images, with examples using phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This indicates a comparison-driven evaluation meant to assess changes or stability relative to previous images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5498652291105122,0.5508982035928144,0.4565217391304347,0.6268656716417911,67.0,100.0
+13388,latent_13388,396,0.000792,0.0007098412,2.5986013,Structured comparison and findings reporting in image analysis prompts.,"Highly activated examples consistently use structured prompts that involve comprehensive comparisons of frontal and lateral images with prior images, emphasizes considerations before and after analysis, and adhere to a clear systematic approach to reporting findings.",0.2918414918414919,0.3673469387755102,0.4146341463414634,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.3358756376001943,0.3673469387755102,0.3257575757575757,0.9148936170212766,47.0,100.0
+13389,latent_13389,535,0.00107,0.00084589695,2.7958274,Findings compared to prior imaging studies indicating interval changes or stability.,"These examples involve comparison of current imaging studies to prior ones with specific historical or clinical context like recent changes in medical condition, procedures, or stability of pre-existing conditions, using select medical findings. Descriptions often use terms such as 'unchanged', 'newly appeared', and 'slightly improved' to indicate evaluation of temporal changes.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4969696969696969,0.4969696969696969,0.41,0.6307692307692307,65.0,100.0
+13390,latent_13390,1542,0.003084,0.0014038398,2.525603,Reports indicating no change or stable findings from prior imaging.,Examples reveal that the pattern is present in reports that describe findings as unchanged or stable when compared to prior imaging. This type of language is indicative of a status update in medical imaging where the current condition is assessed against previous scans to determine any progression or regression of medical conditions.,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5274725274725275,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13391,latent_13391,1643,0.003286,0.0014049349,3.2481873,Description of changes or stability in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation describe a specific change or feature in the follow-up imaging findings when compared to the prior study. This emphasizes tracking of differences or stable features over time, highlighting the importance of change detection in radiological assessments.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13392,latent_13392,3393,0.006786,0.0025543263,1.9766136,Sequential analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples focus on providing a comparative analysis of current and prior imaging, often presented with a sequential set of instructions and analysis. The unified pattern lies in the detailed description of imaging findings and changes upon reviewing multiple imaging views, often driven by transitions or evaluations based on historical data.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4807566862361383,0.5175879396984925,0.5098039215686274,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+13393,latent_13393,890,0.00178,0.0010163081,2.8337715,Adjustment or changes in medical devices on imaging.,"Highly activated examples often involve descriptions or notes related to the placement, adjustment, or removal of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, PICC lines, pacemakers, and other similar equipment. These examples typically describe specific intervals of change in medical hardware or findings in imaging studies.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6214833759590792,0.63,0.6857142857142857,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13394,latent_13394,262,0.000524,0.0006124779,3.9191272,Interval changes in radiographic findings over short timeframes.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve short interval follow-up comparisons between radiographic studies, assessing for changes over a brief timeframe, often hours or a day, highlighting the importance of rapid interval monitoring to detect subtle changes.",0.8276276276276276,0.8292682926829268,0.7142857142857143,0.9375,16.0,25.0,0.5564563582870219,0.5859375,0.3181818181818182,0.7241379310344828,29.0,99.0
+13395,latent_13395,624,0.001248,0.0009137288,2.3095796,Comparative analysis and description of changes in follow-up imaging studies.,"Samples with higher activation levels feature detailed comparison with prior radiological images and findings, reflecting a pattern where change over time or stability is a key focus. The activation is notably higher in reports mentioning changes, consistent states, or further evaluation in comparison to previous imagery, irrespective of the current detected abnormalities.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4370651486401011,0.4382022471910112,0.3981481481481481,0.5512820512820513,78.0,100.0
+13396,latent_13396,5370,0.01074,0.0038624753,1.4769207,Comparison displays identifiable changes in patient condition.,"Examples with a pattern include comparison between current and prior images, but focus on identifying changes in a patient's condition, rather than a lack of information or normal results. These exhibit specific findings like changes in opacities, effusions, pneumothorax, etc., when compared to prior images or reports, reflecting the importance placed on evolving or resolving pathology.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.597165991902834,0.5979899497487438,0.6043956043956044,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+13397,latent_13397,3136,0.006272,0.0026350338,3.7228203,Explicit comparison of current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently require a description of radiological findings that compare current images to prior images. This can include phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating a need to explicitly compare current and prior study results.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.4210526315789473,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4298384542286981,0.46,0.4726027397260274,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13398,latent_13398,879,0.001758,0.0009693429,2.0885901,"Findings are normal for cardiac, mediastinal, and pulmonary features.","These examples contain findings where no abnormalities are detected and descriptions use the phrase 'normal' repeated across cardiac, mediastinal, hilar, or pulmonary features. This pattern indicates reports where the radiologist confirms the absence of abnormal findings using this specific descriptive convention.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5729166666666666,0.59,0.65,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13399,latent_13399,1515,0.00303,0.0013885144,2.2910328,Low lung volumes or technical factors affecting cardiomediastinal silhouette assessment.,Certain examples highlight technical factors like low lung volumes and rotation which compromise the assessment of the cardiomediastinal contours in radiographic imaging. This pattern indicates how positioning and lung volumes can affect the diagnostic radiological interpretation.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5452845866223515,0.5577889447236181,0.5909090909090909,0.39,100.0,99.0
+13400,latent_13400,630,0.00126,0.0010157357,3.5434222,"Presence of pleural scarring or thickening, often unchanged, in radiology reports.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe conditions like pleural scarring, thickening, or chronic abnormalities in the pleura. Common terms include 'biapical pleural scarring', 'apical thickening', and 'unchanged pleural features'. These conditions are frequently mentioned and stable across comparisons, which is repeated in the examples with high activation.",0.96,0.96,0.96,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8949197618543927,0.8961748633879781,0.9,0.8674698795180723,83.0,100.0
+13401,latent_13401,5341,0.010682,0.0037783345,1.1146466,Focus on interval changes or stability in significant clinical features based on prior imaging comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels indicate the identification of significant changes or the stability of critical features based on comparison with prior studies, focusing on interval changes concerning therapeutic, disease progression, or device placement contexts. These involve not only identifying changes but when no significant change is noted despite expectation of such.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5665146909827761,0.5678391959798995,0.5636363636363636,0.62,100.0,99.0
+13402,latent_13402,1370,0.00274,0.0012481695,1.8384192,Comparison report focus on lung/cardiomediastinal stability or device placement changes.,"The higher activation levels correspond to examples mentioning changes or stability in lung or cardiomediastinal findings from prior imaging as well as specific device or tube placement changes, indicating focus on these aspects within the radiological comparison reports.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13403,latent_13403,481,0.000962,0.0007764788,3.1718388,Elevation of the hemidiaphragm on chest imaging.,"The highly activated samples all mention elevation of the hemidiaphragm, indicating this is a key feature identified by the model. Elevated hemidiaphragm is a specific descriptive finding often associated with atelectasis or eventration and is noted in multiple comparison reports.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,1.0,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7805555555555556,0.810126582278481,0.8333333333333334,0.603448275862069,58.0,100.0
+13404,latent_13404,360,0.00072,0.00057452405,3.9104867,Description of findings in chest radiology studies compared to prior frontal images.,"Examples that show high activation levels exhibit descriptions of the findings in chest radiology studies in comparison to prior frontal images. The task specifically asks for this comparative analysis, indicating it as a pattern for high activation.",0.532656023222061,0.5434782608695652,0.5,0.7619047619047619,21.0,25.0,0.420662100456621,0.4206896551724138,0.3069306930693069,0.6888888888888889,45.0,100.0
+13405,latent_13405,859,0.001718,0.0008664339,2.5538888,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,Examples with high activation frequently involve detailed comparisons highlighting changes or stability in findings between current and prior imaging. This focus on longitudinal relationship and interpretation of changes aligns with high activation examples as they often stress the comparison.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4803921568627451,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13406,latent_13406,357,0.000714,0.00077719445,4.526556,Direct instruction to compare current and prior radiology images.,"Highly activated examples include specific phrases directing the assistant to provide a description of the findings in comparison to a prior radiology study. This prompts the model to focus on comparative analysis, a critical feature of these cases.",0.4219367588932806,0.4222222222222222,0.375,0.45,20.0,25.0,0.4701923076923077,0.4758620689655172,0.3176470588235294,0.6,45.0,100.0
+13407,latent_13407,1339,0.002678,0.0012505037,3.1578145,Description of interval changes in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The differences in activation levels are based on whether the reports describe changes over time in the condition of the lungs or mediastinum, such as new opacities, effusions, or consolidations, in comparison to a prior study. This can involve noting interval changes, stability of previous observations, or new developments.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5749893747343684,0.575,0.5757575757575758,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13408,latent_13408,836,0.001672,0.00085073133,2.445347,Unchanged cardiomegaly compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels often note findings of cardiomegaly that have remained unchanged compared to prior examinations. Reports emphasizing the unchanged nature of the heart size, often referred to as cardiomegaly, seem to garner high activation, indicating the model's sensitivity to stability in findings related to the heart.",0.7987117552334944,0.8,0.8571428571428571,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5602745602745602,0.59,0.6875,0.33,100.0,100.0
+13409,latent_13409,3240,0.00648,0.002423118,1.7178973,Focus on procedural or device placement in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention specific details related to procedural or device placement findings, often focusing on tubes or lines such as endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, PICC lines, etc. Other examples without these mentions have lower activation.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4565079365079365,0.465,0.4533333333333333,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13410,latent_13410,1049,0.002098,0.0011665183,2.1122117,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples focus on comparing current radiology findings to prior images with a clear emphasis on noting the stability or change of specific features. This pattern involves tracking changes or stability of certain elements like effusions, pneumothorax, cardiac silhouette, and other notable radiographic findings, which are often explicitly speculated as being stable, improved, or changed.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4491185897435897,0.45,0.4537037037037037,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13411,latent_13411,1891,0.003782,0.0016346129,1.7335496,"Reporting interval change, particularly in relation to medical devices or lung condition.","The highly activated examples focus on specific comparisons with prior imaging to assess interval changes, particularly the presence or position changes of devices such as tubes, catheters, or any notable lung conditions. The emphasis is on interval changes following medical interventions or developments.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5516316042631833,0.5527638190954773,0.5617977528089888,0.5,100.0,99.0
+13412,latent_13412,1073,0.002146,0.0010843276,3.5803437,Studies focus on comparing current findings to prior images to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include language requesting comparison to prior frontal images. These studies often focus on evaluating interval changes, treatment effects, or verifying the stability of previously noticed pathologies, which is applicable in ongoing clinical monitoring scenarios. By contrast, examples with low activation frequently lack the comparison element or follow-up assessment focus that characterizes the pattern.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5126582278481012,0.81,100.0,100.0
+13413,latent_13413,3715,0.00743,0.002780394,1.4201186,Structured comparison with previous imaging noting changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation scores feature a structured comparison of findings with previous imaging, noting specific changes or lack thereof. This aligns with the focus on documenting changes in medical conditions over time, which is critical for accurate diagnosis and assessment of patient progress.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13414,latent_13414,3137,0.006274,0.0022872644,1.5670134,Assistant provides description of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve a comparative analysis between current and previous images, but the key distinction is that the assistant is explicitly asked to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images, often implicating a request for interval change assessment. This specific prompt seems to trigger greater activation, as opposed to just citing prior comparisons without such directives.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13415,latent_13415,566,0.001132,0.00083324773,2.7645574,Comparisons to prior radiology studies with detailed findings.,"The examples with high activation mainly include radiology reports where a prior study is explicitly mentioned in comparison, detailing changes or the absence of changes between images. This focus suggests that the pattern activates discussions on prior imaging either through direct comparison or by stating stability or changes explicitly.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5755670486428016,0.5755813953488372,0.495049504950495,0.6944444444444444,72.0,100.0
+13416,latent_13416,6928,0.013856,0.0048964424,1.3259629,Bilaterally located rib fractures or signs of CPR-related trauma.,These examples describe findings in radiology studies that mention presence of bilateral rib fractures or other features consistent with cardiopulmonary resuscitation history. This pattern is indicative of trauma related to CPR and is specified through presence of rib fractures or other traumatic signs.,0.3762993762993762,0.52,1.0,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3420186866692986,0.5,0.5,0.01,100.0,100.0
+13417,latent_13417,846,0.001692,0.0010345455,2.42664,Concise impression statements summarizing findings.,Examples with high activation levels typically give a brief impression statement that directly summarizes the radiological findings or general impression of the overall image in a crisp way. This style provides a quick overview of the findings without elaborating too much on the technical details.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.53125,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13418,latent_13418,728,0.001456,0.0009540394,3.3344781,Active comparison of current and prior findings in the provided images.,"Examples with high activation include cases where findings are described in terms of prior imaging studies, with explicit or implicit references comparing changes or noting stability over time. The examples with highest activation emphasize the observation of changes in imaging findings compared to previous images, reflecting the concept of variation from the established baseline.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.510363537710255,0.5104166666666666,0.4901960784313725,0.5434782608695652,92.0,100.0
+13419,latent_13419,743,0.001486,0.00090601953,3.8505316,Detailed comparison of radiological findings to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations focus on providing detailed descriptions of image findings compared to prior studies, using the task format ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image."" This suggests that the detailed articulation of findings in reference to prior exams fits the intended pattern.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.2631578947368421,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4353525211958947,0.4450261780104712,0.4,0.3296703296703296,91.0,100.0
+13420,latent_13420,839,0.001678,0.0009767858,3.0806267,Calcified structures indicating chronic conditions or prior diseases.,"The activated examples describe specific anatomical or pathological changes, particularly calcified or enlarged structures (e.g., pleural plaques, mediastinal lymph nodes) associated with prior conditions such as asbestos exposure, chronic infections, or granulomatous diseases. They frequently involve comparison with a prior study and focus on calcifications or findings that indicate chronic or stable conditions rather than acute changes.",0.8193496587715776,0.82,0.8636363636363636,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7349203461628421,0.745,0.9016393442622952,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13421,latent_13421,1911,0.003822,0.0015692771,1.5846082,Comparison of current with prior chest images with focus on changes/stability.,"Examples with high activation involve comparison of current chest images with prior frontal views, mentioning specific differences or changes between them, even if prior images are not available or noted as such. These reports tend to ask for a detailed description or provide one about interval changes or the stability of findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4634146341463415,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13422,latent_13422,3868,0.007736,0.0028215994,1.89874,Analysis of interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve tasks where changes in imaging findings are discussed in the context of specific clinical indications or interventions—usually stability, interval changes, or absence of specific expected changes are highlighted. This distinctively points to descriptions focused on `interval changes or stability of findings` in comparison to prior studies.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5203252032520326,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13423,latent_13423,513,0.001026,0.00089827424,3.0228994,Comparison of current image findings with prior images.,"Activation is high when the task involves comparing the current frontal image with a prior image, as indicated by texts explicitly asking for descriptive changes with respect to prior imaging findings. This pattern emerges from examples stating 'compare to prior' or asking for a description of findings compared to previous images, indicating consistent activation when a prior reference is clearly asked for or documented in the prompt.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3768566493955095,0.3963414634146341,0.3643410852713178,0.734375,64.0,100.0
+13424,latent_13424,1258,0.002516,0.0012314009,2.0823507,Inconclusive findings with complex chest imaging comparisons.,"The pattern exhibits a focus on analyzing multiple views of current chest images and comparing them against previous frontal images. There is an emphasis on findings such as subtle patchy opacities, interstitial changes, effusions, and changes in mediastinal or hilar contours, often involving unclear or unresolved imaging findings, making the results nonspecific or inconclusive.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13425,latent_13425,2016,0.004032,0.001637322,3.2293365,Descriptive comparison of imaging findings focusing on medical device status or changes.,"The examples with higher activation contain detailed comparative analyses, especially in the context of specific medical devices or conditions (e.g., catheters, tubes, presence/removal of medical devices) across current and prior imaging. These do not merely list findings but contextualize changes or stabilities relative to previous images, emphasizing technical detail and device status.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5352112676056338,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13426,latent_13426,252,0.000504,0.000604549,3.3679476,Unique format for interval change comparison in radiology reports.,"Highly activated examples feature radiology reports that indicate interval change by comparing current imaging findings with prior images, frequently using phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' and indentation for 'evaluation' or 'assessment'. This pattern highlights changes or stability over time, focusing often on specific conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion.",0.3734767025089606,0.3947368421052631,0.34375,0.8461538461538461,13.0,25.0,0.4190862395241957,0.4191176470588235,0.2871287128712871,0.8055555555555556,36.0,100.0
+13427,latent_13427,5438,0.010876,0.0039454824,1.530669,Focus on interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain references to prior imaging comparisons on frontal views or similar, with specific details about changes or stable states in lung conditions or devices, indicating assessment of interval change based on previous exams.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13428,latent_13428,3309,0.006618,0.0023702772,1.8102722,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes.,The presence of low activations is likely due to either the absence of pattern recognition or patterns outside of specific 'given' comparisons. High activations typically indicate recognizable patterns or comparisons given a current image and a prior report or image.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13429,latent_13429,693,0.001386,0.001035931,2.1825676,Reduced lung volumes causing mediastinal crowding.,"The examples consistently have similar linguistic patterns, focusing on specific measured attributes in the imaging findings. This attention to specific structural findings aligns with the hallmark of detailed radiological assessment. Lung volumes and their effect on the perceived size of mediastinal structures are frequently mentioned as notable features, which could relate to their effect on the clarity and interpretability of the radiological findings.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4878242294781813,0.7419354838709677,0.8305084745762712,0.5697674418604651,86.0,100.0
+13430,latent_13430,1027,0.002054,0.0010535696,2.9388568,Comparison against prior imaging studies to assess changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include explicit reference to prior imaging studies, comparison remarks, or indication of multiple studies for evaluation. This reflects a pattern of assessing current radiological findings against past images to monitor changes, stability, or progression of findings in medical diagnostics.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13431,latent_13431,424,0.000848,0.00058988994,4.3449903,Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation consistently feature detailed descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, often highlighting changes or stability in various pathological features over time. This emphasis on comparison and interval change is a common narrative in radiology reports for tracking disease progression or stability.",0.5826086956521739,0.5833333333333334,0.5555555555555556,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.56649776969382,0.577922077922078,0.4266666666666667,0.5925925925925926,54.0,100.0
+13432,latent_13432,1655,0.00331,0.0014897089,2.3573227,Cardiac silhouette enlargement or cardiomegaly in radiological comparison.,These examples tend to exhibit references either to the enlargement of the cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly in chest imaging. This finding is often noted explicitly in comparison to previous studies in radiology reports to assess its significance or progression.,0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5652173913043478,0.26,100.0,100.0
+13433,latent_13433,384,0.000768,0.0007490306,3.5501673,"Report of normal heart, mediastinal, and hilar contour.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar features without indicating any abnormalities. They often use the phrase ""Heart [[size]] is normal. The mediastinal and hilar contours are normal."" which is a specific pattern frequently observed and likely matches a common radiological report style when summarizing normal findings.",0.6581818181818182,0.6595744680851063,0.6071428571428571,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.6938534278959811,0.7162162162162162,0.55,0.6875,48.0,100.0
+13434,latent_13434,887,0.001774,0.0010080483,2.5662057,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with clear lungs.,"These examples consistently describe the presence of a normal cardiomediastinal and hilar silhouette along with clear lung fields, notably lacking pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or consolidation, despite the presented clinical indications. This pattern is characterized by the absence of notable pathological findings.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6430028559771522,0.65,0.7083333333333334,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13435,latent_13435,2056,0.004112,0.001707776,2.6567917,Changes in assessment of tube positioning compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe findings related to the positioning or evaluation of tubes (endotracheal, nasogastric, etc.) during intervals between imaging studies, indicating a pattern of evaluating proper tube placement and its associated complications or lack thereof.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5957446808510638,0.28,100.0,100.0
+13436,latent_13436,2522,0.005044,0.0019421836,1.6357822,Consistent device placement or anatomical findings without acute change.,"The examples with low activation demonstrate something constant across multiple reports: an unchanged or non-acute status or findings of particular devices placed inside the body, or anatomy, where the focus is on devices like tubes or catheters rather than acute pathologies or significant changes. The presence or management of these devices is a critical component but doesn't activate the focus on significant medical conditions. Consistent settings or descriptions of these devices without acute changes result in low activation.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4356863658719681,0.455,0.4671532846715328,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13437,latent_13437,332,0.000664,0.0008235149,2.7655544,Focus on interval changes or interventions between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels all contain observations about changes or interventions that have occurred between the current image(s) and prior image(s), often mentioning 'interval' changes. Specific examples highlight the detection of interval procedures or the emergence/resolution of conditions in comparison to previous studies, clearly indicating that the model is activated by recognition of these differences.",0.7016828148903621,0.7111111111111111,0.6060606060606061,1.0,20.0,25.0,0.5843570843570843,0.5857142857142857,0.4021739130434782,0.925,40.0,100.0
+13438,latent_13438,463,0.000926,0.00074740744,4.3188343,Explicit comparative analysis with prior images in radiology reports.,"The positive examples prominently include phrases and structures that indicate a description of findings relative to an available previous image, demonstrating direct comparisons are being made based on prior exam data notably present in both the 'PRIOR_REPORT' and 'FINDINGS' sections. High activations correspond to where findings are clearly contrasted with previous images, such as those indicating unchanged conditions or interval changes.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4869913556820577,0.487012987012987,0.3737373737373737,0.6851851851851852,54.0,100.0
+13439,latent_13439,2465,0.00493,0.0018879494,1.8276457,Reports include specifics of medical device placement or adjustments.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions of specific medical devices such as tubes, catheters, pacemakers, or lines and their positions or adjustments compared to prior imaging. This pattern reflects the importance of tracking medical device placement in radiology reporting.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5394736842105263,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13440,latent_13440,6734,0.013468,0.004742602,1.582938,Unchanged or stable findings from prior imaging studies.,"These examples demonstrate the pattern of noting unchanged or stable findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, indicating close monitoring for variability in conditions like lesions, opacities, or pleural effusions by consistently referencing ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" or similar in relation to prior reports or images.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.550561797752809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13441,latent_13441,568,0.001136,0.0007574232,3.2303429,Normal lung or cardiomediastinal silhouette descriptors.,The examples with higher activation levels include descriptors that relate to the normal appearance of the lungs or cardiomediastinal silhouette. These phrases are likely indicative of a pattern where the system recognizes normalcy amidst a dataset primarily focused on abnormal findings.,0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.509090909090909,0.5207100591715976,0.4189189189189189,0.4492753623188406,69.0,100.0
+13442,latent_13442,234,0.000468,0.0005326306,3.6978514,Radiology reports indicating normal chest radiography findings.,"Examples with high activation values often describe normal findings such as a normal heart size and mediastinal contours, along with normal pulmonary vasculature and clear lungs. These reports typically lack urgent or abnormal findings, which may not prompt further interventions. This pattern suggests that the model is triggered by reports concluding that there is no significant pathology.",0.8303571428571428,0.8421052631578947,0.7333333333333333,0.8461538461538461,13.0,25.0,0.7399820677288089,0.7769230769230769,0.5098039215686274,0.8666666666666667,30.0,100.0
+13443,latent_13443,3802,0.007604,0.0027517958,1.846382,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss imaging findings while comparing them with prior studies, often indicating changes or stability in specific pathologies or anatomical findings across time. The comparisons involve a detailed analysis of current images against previous ones, unlike lower activation examples where such comparisons are not explicitly present or detailed.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13444,latent_13444,637,0.001274,0.00080489856,3.1788533,Descriptions focus on comparison with prior frontal image.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings in direct comparison to a prior frontal image, despite the prompt's request for comparison with a prior image. This suggests a focus on comparison even when none is strictly required, reflecting attention to change over time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4634146341463414,0.4659090909090909,0.4196428571428571,0.618421052631579,76.0,100.0
+13445,latent_13445,3693,0.007386,0.0026661307,1.9660461,Descriptions focus on interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activations specifically involve analyzing new findings or changes compared to previous imaging. The focus is on identifying subtle changes, stability, or the emergence of new abnormalities when compared to prior studies. Several examples also detail specific changes following patient interventions like tube placement or removal.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13446,latent_13446,3801,0.007602,0.0027851115,1.5888432,Focus on stable findings in imaging comparison with prior.,"Images coupled with descriptions asking to compare present findings against a prior image; focus on stability or minor changes, like stable pneumothorax or lung opacities, which typically reflect changes in based-on-past interpretation rather than new or acute changes, drive the observed pattern of higher activation levels.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4705882352941176,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13447,latent_13447,1242,0.002484,0.0011833726,2.3096917,Comparison and evaluation relative to prior imaging studies.,"The activation level is higher for examples where the radiological findings are compared to prior studies or findings from multiple comparisons. The pattern involves identifying changes or stability in observations relative to previous studies, established through explicit comparative analysis language.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13448,latent_13448,490,0.00098,0.0009741585,3.565645,"Mention of aortic tortuosity, dilation, or ectasia.","Examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings associated with the aorta, such as aortic tortuosity, dilation, or ectasia, often with comparisons to prior images. These characteristics, along with the aorta's prominence or calcifications, are a recurring theme, whether stable or new development. Reports without these aorta-related mentions are rated with low activation, indicating the pattern focuses on detecting aortic anomalies in the imagery.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.8452635327635327,0.8607594936708861,0.86,0.7413793103448276,58.0,100.0
+13449,latent_13449,710,0.00142,0.00074101065,2.1807315,Interval changes related to medical interventions or acute conditions.,"These examples describe changes or interval changes related to a patient's condition, consistently referring to comparisons either in relation to prior studies or changes over a short-term interval, notably in association with medical interventions or assessments of acute conditions.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4827136333985649,0.5027322404371585,0.4375,0.3373493975903614,83.0,100.0
+13450,latent_13450,2105,0.00421,0.0017011893,1.770033,Assessment of changes between current and previous imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain explicit or implicit references to prior imaging or findings ('unchanged', 'again seen', 'comparison', etc.), indicating that pattern recognition involves change assessment between current and previous imaging studies.",0.2929292929292929,0.3,0.3333333333333333,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+13451,latent_13451,1128,0.002256,0.001170725,2.603834,Comparison to prior imaging focusing on anatomical changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current imaging with prior images, highlighting changes or stability in specific anatomical findings. This pattern of referencing prior imaging studies and emphasizing stability or change appears to be key in these activations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13452,latent_13452,369,0.000738,0.0006421294,2.512168,Detailed comparison to prior imaging showing changes or stability.,"Each example with a high activation level refers to the comparison of current imaging findings and a prior imaging report, indicating that the activation level aligns with reports where previous imaging findings are not only referenced but detailed comparisons are made, typically showing changes or stability over time.",0.4500239120038259,0.4565217391304347,0.4,0.3809523809523809,21.0,25.0,0.5402298850574713,0.5586206896551724,0.3661971830985915,0.5777777777777777,45.0,100.0
+13453,latent_13453,478,0.000956,0.0008948033,4.2119684,Presence of 'tiny' abnormalities noted in imaging reports.,"The pattern involves the identification or mention of very small abnormalities, such as tiny pleural effusions or pneumothoraces, which are frequently noted as either unchanged or new in comparison to prior imaging. These findings are often reported with the term 'tiny' and typically require close inspection.",0.898989898989899,0.9,1.0,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.660415689951555,0.7421383647798742,0.9090909090909092,0.3389830508474576,59.0,100.0
+13454,latent_13454,851,0.001702,0.0012287514,4.5456643,Detailed comparative analysis indicating stable or worsening conditions.,"The examples with higher activation scores highlight findings described in terms of changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies, primarily focusing on specific, unchanged features or increased severity of existing conditions. Examples with lower scores lack emphasis on the detailed comparison of specific features over time.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,0.5813953488372093,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.6783898744683059,0.69,0.6376811594202898,0.88,100.0,100.0
+13455,latent_13455,3598,0.007196,0.002594496,1.1054041,Change detection in comparison to prior imaging or procedures.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to describe adjustments or comparisons related to prior imaging or procedural interventions, including positioning and noting changes in lines, pleural effusions, or other notable features. Key terms like 'compared to prior,' 'interval change,' 'no change from previous,' or 'remarkable adjustment' signify a focus on change detection, which seems to drive the activation.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13456,latent_13456,3999,0.007998,0.0029266856,1.4801803,Assessment of stability or change in radiographic findings over time.,"These examples demonstrate descriptions of comparisons between current and prior imaging, frequently mentioning findings or devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) remaining 'unchanged', 'similar', or noting 'interval changes'. Such language indicates a stability or change assessment, typical in serial radiographic evaluations.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13457,latent_13457,221,0.000442,0.00046725647,5.4729958,Describes stability or changes in thoracic structures by comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature comparisons to both current and prior imaging, specifically focusing on recognizing unchanged or stable findings over time and assessing changes in thoracic structures, including the aorta, the heart size (cardiomegaly), or lung conditions. This reflects a detailed comparison process in radiological evaluation that emphasizes stability or change in key structures based on past images.",0.3939393939393939,0.4,0.2857142857142857,0.4,15.0,25.0,0.4398178269355888,0.4878048780487805,0.1875,0.5217391304347826,23.0,100.0
+13458,latent_13458,3076,0.006152,0.0023518591,2.678218,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. This includes language that directly contrasts findings across multiple studies, utilizes historical sequencing to highlight similarities or changes, and uses comparisons to formulate clinical impressions or recommendations. These in-depth comparative analyses appear to trigger greater activation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5784313725490197,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13459,latent_13459,6026,0.012052,0.004312972,1.6208308,Comparison of current with prior imaging studies indicating interval change in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the description and monitoring of changes in lung pathologies, heart sizes, pleural effusions, or medical devices that are explicitly compared to prior imaging studies, which indicates their utility in assessing interval changes, thus affecting management plans.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5543478260869565,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13460,latent_13460,1825,0.00365,0.0014986533,1.9420217,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with no interval change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently note normal or unchanged aspects of the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal, and hilar contours. This suggests a focus on stable or normal appearances of these structures, ignoring other potential pathologies or findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.6097560975609756,0.25,100.0,100.0
+13461,latent_13461,546,0.001092,0.0006446303,3.8317623,Low lung volumes altering cardiac silhouette and bronchovascular structures.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on the specific findings in the radiology reports, primarily describing low or altered lung volumes that contribute to the alteration of the cardiac silhouette and bronchovascular structures, often mentioning comparison to prior exams or mentioning stable findings. This pattern due to low lung volume impacts is evident in several cases, which likely contributes to the pattern being studied.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3626016260162601,0.5,0.1363636363636363,0.0441176470588235,68.0,100.0
+13462,latent_13462,5066,0.010132,0.003659372,1.3279333,Comparison indicating stable findings across studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve comparison to prior studies for interval changes, specifically mentioning stability or lack of significant change in findings, which is a common aspect in follow-up radiological evaluations. The presence of explicit guidance on comparing current with prior imaging seems to increase the relevance of these examples relative to the pattern.",0.4071756362119316,0.4081632653061224,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,24.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5135135135135135,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13463,latent_13463,600,0.0012,0.0007866511,4.1903834,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and noted interval changes.,"Reports with high activation levels repeatedly emphasize the presence of explicit comparison between current and prior radiographic studies. The consistent high activation stems from detailing changes or stability of specific findings over time, often with direct referencing of prior images or conditions for comparison.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.521465682253213,0.5428571428571428,0.4603174603174603,0.3866666666666666,75.0,100.0
+13464,latent_13464,1142,0.002284,0.0011540046,2.5071552,Two or more `<image>` references within a detailed report description.,"Level of detail in image descriptions doesn't always dictate higher activations, though prolonged descriptions with numerous comparisons are moderately related. Notably, this img `<image>` pattern exemplifies routine image interpretation steps manually described.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3749248707777377,0.48,0.489010989010989,0.89,100.0,100.0
+13465,latent_13465,937,0.001874,0.0010095893,2.5740058,Evaluation of catheter or line placement relative to the 'low SVC'.,"These examples consistently involve the evaluation of central line or catheter placement, specifically lines terminating in the 'low SVC' (superior vena cava), along with other chest findings. This reflects a pattern of describing the position of indwelling lines or tubes, which are commonly evaluated in ICU or hospitalized settings.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,1.0,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.691683569979716,0.715,0.9777777777777776,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13466,latent_13466,1251,0.002502,0.0011166005,2.3348572,"Comparison of current findings with prior imaging study, noting interval changes or stability.","Examples that have higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of current imaging findings compared with a prior image, specifically noting interval changes or stability, which is often found in radiological comparison studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13467,latent_13467,601,0.001202,0.0008580157,2.0259888,Analysis involves multiple image views and comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation illustrate complex radiological descriptions involving the presence of multiple views (frontal and lateral) and detailed comparison to prior images, which helps in identifying stable or changed conditions, often in urgent or complex clinical contexts. This pattern is characterized by the need for multiple view interpretations and background comparison rather than isolated single view assessments.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3636363636363636,0.4057142857142857,0.4,0.7733333333333333,75.0,100.0
+13468,latent_13468,3928,0.007856,0.0027829218,1.2517544,Explicit comparison to prior imaging study findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings by explicitly comparing them to prior imaging studies, even when the findings are unchanged or stable. This pattern of comparing current imaging to previous ones to assess for changes is the key feature that triggers higher activations.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13469,latent_13469,4341,0.008682,0.0031194624,1.6042976,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies highlighting changes or stability.,"The activation pattern shows higher levels when the report involves updating findings based on comparison with previous imaging studies, underscoring the significance of change or stability in the patient's condition over time.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13470,latent_13470,1065,0.00213,0.0011232608,2.7080154,Instructions to compare findings with specific prior images.,"These examples consistently reference descriptive instructions to provide findings in comparison to previous images. This is a structured prompt requiring radiologists to explicitly compare and contrast with prior imaging studies using the given images, which are often chest radiographs or CTs.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4518302210609903,0.465,0.4732824427480916,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13471,latent_13471,621,0.001242,0.00088439573,2.3228006,Focus on detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples with high activation levels consistently indicate both the current and prior images, focusing heavily on thorough comparisons between them, explicitly noting changes or stability, which may be reflected in consistent phraseology for 'comparison to prior study'. This suggests the model is sensitive to detailed comparison language typically used in serial imaging evaluations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4771155121766322,0.4775280898876404,0.4210526315789473,0.5128205128205128,78.0,100.0
+13472,latent_13472,474,0.000948,0.00083678873,3.499514,Evaluation in relation to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples often include phrases like 'comparison to prior frontal image', 'prior report', or explicit references to past studies, indicating that these examples focus on evaluating interval changes by comparing current imaging to previous ones. This pattern reflects the radiologist's common approach to ascertain stability or progression of noted features.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.2583053691275168,0.3870967741935484,0.3142857142857143,0.6,55.0,100.0
+13473,latent_13473,681,0.001362,0.00081601256,2.7861192,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal silhouette described amidst significant findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often describe clear lungs — in terms of absence of consolidation, effusion or pneumothorax — paired with a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette despite significant findings elsewhere. This pattern, which involves describing absence of pathology in lungs and cardiomediastinal silhouette in more detail than typical when other significant findings are present, aligns with classic descriptive patterns in radiology where normative stability or clarity contrasts with pathological changes outside those areas.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4618279569892473,0.5164835164835165,0.4285714285714285,0.2195121951219512,82.0,100.0
+13474,latent_13474,2510,0.00502,0.001911423,2.9986076,Evaluation of interval change in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels are characterized by prompts for describing radiological findings through the comparison of current images to prior ones, indicating evaluation of the interval change and trends across multiple imaging examinations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13475,latent_13475,678,0.001356,0.00085189304,2.1966605,Direct image comparison prompts increase activation.,"The presence and visible description of images, mentioning them specifically helps guide the pattern. Activation is strongest when the task involves direct comparison between the current and prior images, as seen in prompts explicitly requesting comparison input.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.465911614479236,0.5081081081081081,0.4802631578947368,0.8588235294117647,85.0,100.0
+13476,latent_13476,431,0.000862,0.00083508185,2.7709672,Description of stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with reference to past imaging.,"These examples focus on stability or changes in cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, as well as the absence of complications such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax. Many of them also involve notable conditions or devices such as hyperinflation, cardiomegaly, or placements like a tracheostomy or catheter, always with reference to prior images for comparison, implying an emphasis on monitoring for changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5459724639974679,0.6225165562913907,0.4210526315789473,0.3137254901960784,51.0,100.0
+13477,latent_13477,909,0.001818,0.0012691425,2.1693087,Cardiomegaly with pulmonary edema or vascular congestion.,"Highly representative samples highlight findings of cardiomegaly or enlargement of the cardiac silhouette, often accompanied by signs of pulmonary edema or vascular congestion, which are common patterns in radiology reports evaluating cardiac and pulmonary health.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4910941475826972,0.54,0.6052631578947368,0.23,100.0,100.0
+13478,latent_13478,5408,0.010816,0.0038045582,1.113731,Progressive change in clinical findings on serial imaging.,"The patterns in descriptions with high activations often involve changes over time or with treatment, such as worsening or improvement of conditions observed in sequential images, rather than consistent or static findings. This reflects how radiologists monitor disease progression or treatment efficacy through serial imaging comparisons.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5404390305798756,0.542713567839196,0.5529411764705883,0.47,100.0,99.0
+13479,latent_13479,2151,0.004302,0.0016212808,1.637465,Interval development or change in radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe scenarios where there are specific types of radiological changes or developments noted between current and prior studies, such as interval appearance of pathologies or changes indicating progression or improvement. While comparisons are made in other examples, the presence of definitive interval change or findings determines higher activation.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13480,latent_13480,758,0.001516,0.00098466,3.5083935,Comparative analysis of current vs. prior imaging studies.,"Examples activating the model highly all include instructions to provide a comparative analysis between current and prior imaging, typically assessing changes or stability over time using specific radiological terminology. This pattern indicates that the model is activated when comparisons between different timelines of imaging are involved, particularly focusing on observed stability or changes in patient studies.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4158898127152095,0.4512820512820513,0.4594594594594595,0.7157894736842105,95.0,100.0
+13481,latent_13481,4003,0.008006,0.002941048,1.9083691,Focus on mediastinal and hilar contours or cardiac silhouette size.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe the mediastinal and hilar contours in the context of stability or change, along with other cardiac or pulmonary findings. These examples often feature descriptions of cardiac silhouette size or mediastinal contours in relation or in contrast to previous imaging.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13482,latent_13482,1438,0.002876,0.0012039597,2.765349,Stable cardiomediastinal features on comparison with prior imaging.,"The explanation revolves around instances where the normality or stability of certain features, such as cardiac size and mediastinal contours, is repeatedly mentioned. Additionally, comparisons to previous images that emphasize stability or lack of change in critical features contribute to this observed pattern.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4264705882352941,0.29,100.0,100.0
+13483,latent_13483,1113,0.002226,0.0010054035,1.6375391,Comparison with prior images showing interval changes or resolution of abnormalities.,"These examples describe situations where multiple views (frontal and lateral) of the current radiographic exam are compared to prior imaging, specifically looking for interval changes or resolution of identified opacities or conditions. They often refer to presence, resolution, or improvement of previously identified issues such as opacities, pneumothorax, or pleural effusions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4814814814814814,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13484,latent_13484,350,0.0007,0.00065362384,3.2831838,Changes or evaluations related to respiratory failure/distress and comparison with prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve evaluating radiographic changes related to respiratory failure or distress, often necessitating close monitoring or comparison with prior exams to assess the progression or status of pneumonia, pleural effusions, atelectasis, or other similar respiratory conditions. They often include instructions for clinical correlation, follow-up, or detailed comparisons.",0.733201581027668,0.7333333333333333,0.6666666666666666,0.8,20.0,25.0,0.5180208585981081,0.5208333333333334,0.3595505617977528,0.7272727272727273,44.0,100.0
+13485,latent_13485,6868,0.013736,0.004828896,1.2118864,Explicit comparison with prior imaging is emphasized.,"The high availability or presence of explicit instructions to compare numerous features across examples appeals to radiological practice involving evaluation against previous exams. Consistently applied language and reporting styles reiterate the emphasis on comparing current imaging results with prior ones, enabling tracking of progression or stability of findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.552,0.58,0.5533333333333333,0.83,100.0,100.0
+13486,latent_13486,4126,0.008252,0.0029599194,1.2308836,Emphasis on interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern in highly activated samples involves comparisons with previous imaging using not only direct descriptions but also consistent emphasis on interval changes, especially those related to monitoring/support devices and other changes. These samples often narrate actual physiological changes between images, highlighting the specific modifications observed in follow-up images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5675675675675675,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13487,latent_13487,3814,0.007628,0.0027881418,1.3943636,Command structure for comparing current to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention comparison to previous images and describe specific findings or lack of significant changes in those comparisons, much like earlier datasets. However, they contain explicit commands indicating tasks (like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study...'). This additional command structure with imaging comparisons might highlight the task-oriented focus of the model's activation pattern.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5060949978982766,0.53,0.5208333333333334,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13488,latent_13488,621,0.001242,0.0008835684,4.5069227,Comparison noting changes at thoracic inlet or specific mediastinal findings.,"Examples with higher activations often describe comparative studies with focus on the thoracic inlet, frequently noting specific findings like tracheal displacement or mild enlargement discerned through prior images or historical changes. Lower activations lack such distinct comparative thoracic inlet references or findings.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5322489626556017,0.5792349726775956,0.5714285714285714,0.2891566265060241,83.0,100.0
+13489,latent_13489,4302,0.008604,0.0030929565,1.9824977,Detailed comparative findings in serial imaging with emphasis on changes.,"The pattern observed with higher activation levels involves providing detailed comparisons of radiological changes over time for both the new imaging and the previous. Specific findings related to devices, size changes, or persisting abnormalities are highlighted in detail when noting differences. Lower activations occur in cases without detailed comparative findings, or where relatively normal findings without changes are noted.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5188679245283019,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13490,latent_13490,427,0.000854,0.0007172695,2.764043,Pulmonary edema and associated cardiopulmonary findings.,"The pattern exhibits a focus on pulmonary edema or related indicators, such as cardiac silhouette enlargement, heart or lung observation changes, pulmonary vascular congestion, and pleural effusion. These reports describe nuanced findings indicating fluid overload or potential pulmonary discomfort, a common concern in clinical radiologic assessments.",0.7740041928721174,0.7755102040816326,0.8095238095238095,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.7692716640085061,0.7987012987012987,0.7555555555555555,0.6296296296296297,54.0,100.0
+13491,latent_13491,482,0.000964,0.00092387706,4.479433,Reports include specific comparison to prior imaging showing stability or change.,"Examples with high activation involve reports that include prior imaging explicitly for comparison, often indicating stability or change. These examples consistently contain an analysis based on previous imaging studies or highlight continuity of findings over time.",0.4889445139758031,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.4861303453774812,0.4903225806451612,0.3604651162790697,0.5636363636363636,55.0,100.0
+13492,latent_13492,965,0.00193,0.0010376533,2.933631,Comparison of both frontal and lateral images to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the pattern all explicitly involve the evaluation of both frontal and lateral image perspectives compared against previous or prior frontal images or radiology reports. This specific comparative approach is emphasized through multiple examples, indicating a pattern that relies on the use of detailed review of multiple image angles and their comparison to earlier reference images or reports.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.4864864864864865,0.36,100.0,100.0
+13493,latent_13493,4384,0.008768,0.0032047213,1.6099232,"Comparison of current versus prior imaging, noting interval changes or stability.","This set demonstrates a pattern where findings from current imaging are compared to prior imaging, noting changes or stability. These examples consistently involve providing a description of findings with explicit attention to interval changes, often addressing the position or status of medical devices or observed conditions.",0.5528031290743155,0.5714285714285714,0.5428571428571428,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13494,latent_13494,3137,0.006274,0.0023068024,2.1925128,Detailed tracking of changes or stability in imaging over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve a detailed description of radiologic findings with specific changes or stability over time, with an emphasis on documented intervals and comparisons of ongoing or repeated pathologic or clinical evaluations relevant to the patient's history. This shows a pattern of focusing on significant detail within repetitive studies where changes or stability are integral to patient management.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.5785123966942148,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13495,latent_13495,7042,0.014084,0.0050092693,1.3817207,Detailed comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The pattern here appears to be the comparison between current and prior imaging studies to identify any significant changes, as highlighted in the examples with more specific descriptions of interval findings, such as interval improvement, new developments, or stability of previous findings. This is a linguistically consistent element observed in the samples with higher activations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5564336372847012,0.5577889447236181,0.5545454545454546,0.61,100.0,99.0
+13496,latent_13496,3606,0.007212,0.0027458295,2.129582,Comparison with multiple or specifically dated prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels detail the comparison of current radiographic findings to multiple or specifically dated prior imaging studies, indicating a strong focus on observing changes over time regardless of the observed abnormalities or lack thereof.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5747342088805503,0.575,0.5714285714285714,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13497,latent_13497,505,0.00101,0.0008135485,2.9198887,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with no acute findings.,"The examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently contain descriptions indicating normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, as well as the absence of acute findings such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or lung consolidation. These descriptors suggest stability and lack of acute pathology on chest radiographs.",0.76,0.76,0.76,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.685968137254902,0.6951219512195121,0.5972222222222222,0.671875,64.0,100.0
+13498,latent_13498,563,0.001126,0.0008199709,2.4244025,Focus on unchanged anatomical features or devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often include a detailed description of devices or anatomical changes that are unchanged from prior imaging, specifically mentioning support devices, tubes, or significant anatomical features that are consistent over time.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5038252143899228,0.5059523809523809,0.4324324324324324,0.7058823529411765,68.0,100.0
+13499,latent_13499,5025,0.01005,0.0036369993,1.6530765,Interval change or stability assessment in reports with comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples demonstrate radiology reports where there is a clear comparison to prior imaging studies with interval changes or stability highlighted. The pattern consistently involves reassessment of known findings, such as tubes, opacities, or other features, which are evaluated against earlier reports or studies, often with explicit mention of improvement or stability.",0.6063424947145877,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.576,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13500,latent_13500,622,0.001244,0.00089498423,3.3946717,"Comparison of current radiological findings to a prior study, noting changes.","The examples reveal a pattern of comparing current imaging findings with prior ones. The activations with high levels are often associated with noted differences or changes, like resolution, enlargement, or stability of previous findings, while maintaining a structured presentation that often starts with comparison statements followed by named changes (or lack thereof) in pathologies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5727042857600102,0.5786516853932584,0.512396694214876,0.7948717948717948,78.0,100.0
+13501,latent_13501,2626,0.005252,0.0021346493,2.1463745,Use of specific comparison language detailing stability or changes from prior imaging.,"The higher activation level of reports involving comparison with prior images suggests that the model activates strongly when given tasks that involve detailed radiological image assessments where changes are identified from previous imaging studies, especially those that note stability or new findings with specific descriptors like 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'increased'. Examples with explicit absence of comparison, recent technique, or without new or specific findings show low activation.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13502,latent_13502,584,0.001168,0.0009644247,3.2124922,Emphasis on providing a description of findings compared to prior images.,"The high activation examples consistently reference both current and prior images but emphasize the necessity to provide descriptions based on comparison to prior. Many examples lack initial comparison details but request such comparison in the description, indicating the focus on comparative analysis as a pattern.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4027388733271086,0.4093567251461988,0.3728813559322034,0.6197183098591549,71.0,100.0
+13503,latent_13503,257,0.000514,0.0005639542,3.1094658,Comparison to prior imaging for interval changes.,"The examples with high activation consistently mention the task of comparing current images to prior images, specifically for determining changes or stability of conditions or positioning after some form of clinical intervention or medical history. These reports focus on detailing differences or similarities noted from previous imaging.",0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.4285714285714285,0.8,15.0,25.0,0.3294047619047619,0.3435114503816794,0.1604938271604938,0.4193548387096774,31.0,100.0
+13504,latent_13504,1361,0.002722,0.001198574,2.1678317,Clear comparisons to prior imaging studies showing stability or improvement.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss evaluation of radiological findings in direct comparison with prior imaging studies, specifically identifying stable or improving findings rather than changes or absence of comparison.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13505,latent_13505,2153,0.004306,0.001748288,1.714613,Frontal and lateral image views are provided and analyzed.,"High activation levels occur in examples where descriptions include both frontal and lateral image views, especially when there is mention of analyzing findings between these views and previous images. The pattern distinctly involves utilizing multiple simultaneous perspectives, enhancing the analysis or confirmation of findings.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4983658888804438,0.505,0.5040650406504065,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13506,latent_13506,486,0.000972,0.0008941981,3.4563646,Mention of scoliosis in radiological comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels include a distinct pattern of findings indicating scoliosis in the thoracic spine, often in combination with other chest diagnostic features. The mention of scoliosis is consistent across high activation examples, suggesting it is a key feature that prompts high activation.",0.9399759903961584,0.94,0.9230769230769232,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.89688740873575,0.906832298136646,0.96,0.7868852459016393,61.0,100.0
+13507,latent_13507,1351,0.002702,0.0021114156,3.9283845,Focus on stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes in comparison reports.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels emphasize the stability of cardiomediastinal silhouettes when comparing different chest radiographs, especially when evaluating for changes over time or post-treatment. This reflects the model's tendency to activate when radiologic findings specify that there's no notable change or stability in the size and contour of these structures in successive imaging.",0.7799119647859143,0.78,0.7916666666666666,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7295673076923077,0.73,0.7129629629629629,0.77,100.0,100.0
+13508,latent_13508,740,0.00148,0.00094901724,1.9366121,Comparison focuses on changes in devices or interval pathology changes.,"Most examples focus on the evaluation of current radiographic findings with prior images, including references to positions or changes in medical devices such as tubes and catheters or intervals in pathologies like pleural effusions and pneumothorax.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5230895870489779,0.5235602094240838,0.5,0.5824175824175825,91.0,100.0
+13509,latent_13509,519,0.001038,0.0007681778,2.6155558,Comparison of tube placements or positioning in imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the placement or positioning of tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric) as compared to prior studies. This is a distinct radiological practice to ensure tube placements do not change between imaging studies, often prompting essential descriptions and comparisons.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5616851368970013,0.5950920245398773,0.4727272727272727,0.4126984126984127,63.0,100.0
+13510,latent_13510,1646,0.003292,0.0014852228,2.3639321,Evaluation compared to prior images for interval changes in condition or medical devices.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize modifying analysis based on comparison to prior radiographic images, focusing particularly on determining changes in conditions like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, lung opacities, or the presence of medical devices. Such comparison indicates frequent ""interval"" findings to assess progress or stability of diagnosed conditions.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.5578231292517006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+13511,latent_13511,955,0.00191,0.0010851682,2.4767246,Follow-up assessment of medical devices' position relative to prior imaging.,"Examples that refer to observations of devices (pacemakers, tubes, catheters) mention specific positions and detailed comparisons with prior images in their description. This indicates radiological reviews of medical device placements in follow-up assessments.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13512,latent_13512,4077,0.008154,0.0030346974,2.1893728,Findings compared to prior imaging studies with noted stability or changes.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve descriptions of stable, unchanged, or newly identified findings between a current imaging study and a previous one, emphasizing the assessment of progression, stability, or resolution of clinical features over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4899489948994899,0.49,0.4901960784313725,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13513,latent_13513,517,0.001034,0.00071922166,3.9677143,Utilization of current lateral and frontal chest images with prior frontal image comparison.,The examples with high activation consistently include a description of findings using both the frontal and lateral images of the chest as well as a comparison to a prior frontal image. This pattern emphasizes the presence of multiple current views and a prior comparator.,0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4772684399169967,0.4785276073619632,0.3981481481481481,0.6825396825396826,63.0,100.0
+13514,latent_13514,888,0.001776,0.0010143811,3.3502223,Focus on comparisons of current and prior imaging findings for notable clinical changes.,"High activation levels are associated with language that prominently compares current imaging findings to previous studies, focusing on changes in identifiable clinical findings or stability of previously noted issues.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13515,latent_13515,159,0.000318,0.0004224622,3.7699358,Elevation of the hemidiaphragm.,"The examples that show high activation levels all describe ""elevation of the hemidiaphragm"" as a consistent radiological finding. This pattern is directly linked to the high activation levels as they precisely reflect this finding across multiple examples with variations related to reasons for the elevation and its persistence over time.",0.9659863945578232,0.9714285714285714,0.9090909090909092,1.0,10.0,25.0,0.9686337054758108,0.9830508474576272,0.9,1.0,18.0,100.0
+13516,latent_13516,431,0.000862,0.0005981691,2.1373742,Descriptions of findings compared to prior images in radiology reports.,"In these examples, activation levels are high for instances where findings are described in direct comparison to prior imaging studies. This suggests that such descriptive comparisons are an important part of the pattern for the model. The examples often include explicit examination of changes or stability in radiological appearances, which is documented as a key factor.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.3203883495145631,0.66,50.0,100.0
+13517,latent_13517,2458,0.004916,0.001988785,1.8793014,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting stability in clinical concern cases.,"The pattern here emerges around the inclusion of comparison to prior imaging when there are concerns about a patient's clinical condition, despite some existing or unchanged findings. Reports showing high activations frequently note comparisons to prior radiographs, but include stable findings, especially in cases related to trauma or monitoring known conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13518,latent_13518,3443,0.006886,0.0025984074,2.7903817,Reference or description of findings relative to prior imaging studies or reports.,"Examples with higher activation involve descriptions that utilize past assessments or states of findings such as positioning of tubes, unchanged pathologies, or stable features, indicating that the pattern involves discussing imaging findings in reference to preceding assessments or reports.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13519,latent_13519,2813,0.005626,0.002106136,1.6817547,Detailed findings based on comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation consistently involve providing descriptions or interpretations of the findings in comparison to prior images. They focus on detailing changes or stabilities in the clinical condition over time, using historical context for assessing progression or resolution of findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13520,latent_13520,1936,0.003872,0.0017552356,2.9132314,Significant findings identified via comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation consistently feature significant language structuring around the explicit comparison of findings in current images with prior imaging results. These examples include updates or changes observed from previous images, often including precise or notable differences and frequently using words indicative of a comparative nature such as ""new,"" ""unchanged,"" ""decreased,"" or ""interval change."" This pattern reflects a focus on documenting evolution over time compared to previous studies.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4482758620689655,0.26,100.0,100.0
+13521,latent_13521,738,0.001476,0.0010205562,3.0765624,Comparisons made between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels include instructions to compare the current imaging findings with a previous study, indicating the task of assessing changes or stability across multiple imaging studies, a crucial part of many radiological assessments.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4549169859514687,0.4896907216494845,0.4832214765100671,0.7659574468085106,94.0,100.0
+13522,latent_13522,3779,0.007558,0.002851033,1.4103826,Emphasis on unchanged or stable features since prior imaging.,"The radiology reports with higher activation levels frequently include specific comparisons with prior imaging, noting placements and conditions that remain unchanged. This pattern suggests the model is activated by language emphasizing no change or constant features in consecutive imaging studies, a common practice to indicate stability in medical conditions over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5914793319309628,0.592964824120603,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,99.0
+13523,latent_13523,4150,0.0083,0.00299088,1.2907443,Comparison of medical device placement or interval changes in findings using prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation frequently describe changes or comparisons made using prior imaging studies. These examples consistently involve direct comparison or assessment for interval changes of findings, particularly focusing on detailing the placement and assessment of medical devices compared to prior images.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13524,latent_13524,2161,0.004322,0.0016232036,1.5557073,Comparison between current and prior imaging with emphasis on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include phrases discussing a comparison of new and prior imaging studies, focusing on noticeable changes or stability in medical conditions over time, such as volume loss, line placements, and effusions. This implies attention to temporal changes and stability across scans, not just initial findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13525,latent_13525,2269,0.004538,0.001993602,3.2949836,Explicit observation of changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight findings related to changes or stability in the context of previous radiographic examinations. High activations typically involve explicit mention of observed changes from past imaging studies like resolution of previously noted consolidation, unchanged lesion sizes, or stable abnormalities, demonstrating how the current images differ from prior ones.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5364906832298137,0.5477386934673367,0.5343511450381679,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+13526,latent_13526,1513,0.003026,0.0013092533,1.9466871,Detailed analysis of device placement or changes in radiology reports.,"The examples with higher activations show descriptions focusing on the precise placement and changes of medical devices such as catheters, tubes, or pacemakers in the comparison with prior images. This includes analyzing these changes to evaluate device positioning, drains, or removal, which is why the activation levels are high when such focus is present.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.5526315789473685,0.42,100.0,100.0
+13527,latent_13527,2267,0.004534,0.0018813504,2.3698401,Descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions where changes from previous images are being discussed, with specific mention of interval changes indicating progression or stability of findings. The high activation examples also often involve conditions affecting respiratory or cardiovascular systems.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.5288461538461539,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13528,latent_13528,3208,0.006416,0.0023949747,1.4620906,Assessments of interval change in radiological findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve descriptions evaluating radiological findings in terms of changes compared to previous examinations, often with described improvements or deteriorations in those findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.5166666666666667,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13529,latent_13529,471,0.000942,0.00087869336,2.9274082,Comparison of findings to prior imaging for interval changes.,"The pattern is seen in reports that compare current imaging findings to prior images to describe changes. Descriptions involve stability, interval changes, and removal or positioning of tubes or devices within the chest. This pattern is typical in radiology where sequential comparisons determine the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5655172413793104,0.5679012345679012,0.4642857142857143,0.8387096774193549,62.0,100.0
+13530,latent_13530,2515,0.00503,0.001946505,1.6474996,Detailed comparisons to prior images with noted changes or stability.,"Samples exhibiting higher activations involve comparative analysis with previous imaging studies, stating specific changes or stability in the findings. The pattern detected involves not just the mention of a comparison, but the use of text describing specific changes (e.g., interval improvement, loss, or no significant change) to the current imaging findings relative to a previously performed examination.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4449861246531164,0.445,0.4444444444444444,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13531,latent_13531,7181,0.014362,0.0050295587,1.1152142,Imaging descriptions highlight interval changes or stability from prior studies.,"The higher activation levels consistently occur in examples where comparison to prior imaging is an explicit part of the interpretation, particularly where changes or stability over time are described. This correlates with a pattern where the radiologist is tasked with identifying any interval change, a common request in follow-up studies, thus affecting activation more than other examples which describe absence of comparison or clinical decision-making without prior reference.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6052502769405157,0.6130653266331658,0.5905511811023622,0.75,100.0,99.0
+13532,latent_13532,643,0.001286,0.00077522773,3.845602,Detailed image comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently focus on describing findings from current radiology images and making detailed comparisons to prior images. The pattern involves noting changes or stability without introducing new comparisons within subsequent segments, as indicated by phrases like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image' or specifying direct observations of potential changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4883603398717584,0.4887640449438202,0.431578947368421,0.5256410256410257,78.0,100.0
+13533,latent_13533,1025,0.00205,0.0010798441,2.4050214,Identification of changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The pattern here involves making a detailed comparison to previous imaging studies to identify any changes, improvements, or persistent findings. This involves phrases like 'Compared to the prior study', 'unchanged since', 'providing a description of findings in comparison to the prior'. The explicit comparison language is crucial for pattern recognition and is commonly found in radiology reports, highlighting any interval changes or stable appearances.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4049851246281157,0.405,0.404040404040404,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13534,latent_13534,275,0.00055,0.0005335094,5.1007867,High activation when explicit description comparison requested for multiple images.,"High activation examples consistently involve reports that provide descriptions of findings in radiology studies in comparison to prior images. They often request a description of changes across multiple images. When this comparative element is explicitly mentioned and involves multiple images, the activation is high. The punctuation and explicit request for comparisons contribute to high activation.",0.4068343004513217,0.425,0.375,0.8,15.0,25.0,0.3543951546898019,0.3602941176470588,0.2743362831858407,0.8611111111111112,36.0,100.0
+13535,latent_13535,4163,0.008326,0.002990945,1.4283204,Identification of acute or significant pathological changes.,"In these examples, high activation levels occur when there are definite findings of acute or notable changes in pathology, such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, atelectasis, or opacifications, especially when differences are explicitly compared to prior studies. Specific identification of new abnormalities or changes, even in the presence of prior imaging comparison, seems key to triggering high activation.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13536,latent_13536,7341,0.014682,0.005158101,1.1574857,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, often noting changes or stability, with mention of medical device placements.","A notable aspect of these activations is the inclusion of findings that reference either the presence or comparison to prior imaging, along with mention of specific medical devices or conditions such as endotracheal tubes and their placement or changes over time as observed on sequential images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5434782608695652,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13537,latent_13537,600,0.0012,0.0010071447,2.6285696,Stable imaging findings despite acute symptoms.,"These examples frequently mention the evaluation or comparison with prior images while demonstrating no acute cardiopulmonary findings, despite the presence of current symptoms like dyspnea, cough, or other pulmonary complaints. This pattern indicates that the stability of findings between images signifies no new issues despite symptomatic presentation.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6638607047978747,0.6685393258426966,0.6282051282051282,0.620253164556962,79.0,99.0
+13538,latent_13538,720,0.00144,0.000856628,3.824001,Findings compared to prior images with explicit reference to changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of images where findings are being directly compared with prior reports to identify changes in the patient's condition over time, especially when investigating potential changes in clinical findings with specified history or indications. This pattern highlights the importance of temporal comparison in managing patient cases.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.481283422459893,0.481283422459893,0.45,0.5172413793103449,87.0,100.0
+13539,latent_13539,1599,0.003198,0.0014586456,1.8771069,Emphasis on comparing current and prior radiological images.,"These examples consistently focus on providing detailed analysis of radiographic findings while directly comparing them with previous studies. Examples with higher activation emphasize the differences or similarities to previous studies in a manner that effectively aids clinical decision-making. Obtaining both current and previous images for comparison is key to these patterns, revealing stability, changes, or progression over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4540888743312589,0.5,0.5,0.79,100.0,100.0
+13540,latent_13540,1972,0.003944,0.0016128524,1.5711405,Process of comparison of current imaging findings to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the process of comparing current imaging findings to previous studies, indicating a focus on relative changes over time or stability of findings. This pattern emphasizes temporal stability or change in interpretation of imaging results, which appears as a significant factor in these examples.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13541,latent_13541,2380,0.00476,0.001974308,2.501663,Comparison with prior images for pulmonary or cardiac evaluations.,The examples with high activation levels often describe changes or comparisons related to heart-related findings or changes in pulmonary conditions between current and prior images. This suggests the model is activated by the mention of previous cardiac conditions or pulmonary statuses.,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4687696815356389,0.515,0.5094339622641509,0.81,100.0,100.0
+13542,latent_13542,3683,0.007366,0.0027422907,1.3019838,Radiological assessment of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples show explicit mention of interval changes in pathology, often focusing on changes since a previous image. Descriptions such as 'worsened,' 'increased,' 'improved,' or 'unchanged' indicate the importance of changes or stability in findings between imaging studies, and these changes are assessed for their clinical implications.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5364906832298137,0.5477386934673367,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,99.0
+13543,latent_13543,3878,0.007756,0.0028729574,1.8699996,Discussion of interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation involve radiological findings that are described with references to current and prior imaging, and demonstrate some interval change or new findings compared to previous studies. This includes discussions of new infiltrates, increased masses, or changes in effusions, supporting ongoing clinical assessment.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5796216594935442,0.58,0.5754716981132075,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13544,latent_13544,2795,0.00559,0.002081323,3.1223805,Clinical recommendations or actions based on findings.,"Statements indicating changes, recommendations, or plans, often reflecting the clinical relevance of observed radiological findings, are characteristic in reports with higher activations. Examples with activation levels show findings tied to clinical actions, such as 'recommend evaluation', 'suggests follow-up', 'recommend further evaluation', or 'suggest follow-up to document resolution'.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4241898148148148,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.14,100.0,99.0
+13545,latent_13545,4119,0.008238,0.0030554708,1.6750534,Comparison of pulmonary/chest findings between current and prior images.,"Every example with high activation includes not only a current and prior image but also refers to comparing specific findings between these two images, especially involving pulmonary or chest-related issues, like changes in pneumo- conditions or rib fractures.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5685958574807037,0.585,0.5611510791366906,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13546,latent_13546,696,0.001392,0.00092697097,2.8013856,Stability of findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include findings that are described as unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging studies. This emphasis on stability or lack of significant change from previous images, despite the presence of medical devices or minor findings, is a distinct pattern in these reports.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5091089168342388,0.5372340425531915,0.509090909090909,0.3181818181818182,88.0,100.0
+13547,latent_13547,2032,0.004064,0.0016992305,2.4088726,Comparative evaluation highlighting interval changes or stability from prior imaging.,"These examples focus on comparing current imaging findings to previous reports, particularly highlighting any interval changes in devices, pathologies, or anatomical findings indicating stability or modification over time. This pattern uses phrases indicating the contrast or stability compared to prior studies.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5219860707769012,0.535,0.5263157894736842,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13548,latent_13548,670,0.00134,0.0008292734,3.77442,Focus on device positioning changes or complications in imaging.,"The high activation examples typically involve cases where there is a notable change or problem related to devices such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or nasogastric tubes in comparison with previous images, and the presence of pleural effusion or lung opacities worsening since the last comparison. They highlight radiological findings that emphasize device positioning and its associated complications or changes.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5796997212982109,0.5989304812834224,0.6,0.4137931034482758,87.0,100.0
+13549,latent_13549,6036,0.012072,0.004263598,1.2105083,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting changes or stability in findings.,"The examples with high activation all include radiology findings that are compared to previous imaging studies. The reports highlight interval changes or stability in findings over time, indicating a pattern where such comparisons are emphasized.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13550,latent_13550,1434,0.002868,0.0012589704,2.7114885,"Descriptions of pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or related cardiopulmonary features.","This pattern is characterized by the presence or evaluation of pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or related cardiopulmonary features. Examples consistently mention pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, or related cardiopulmonary observations, indicating an investigation of heart and pleura conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13551,latent_13551,3750,0.0075,0.0026574864,1.4279025,Evaluation of interval changes in medical device placement and positioning.,"Many examples focus on interval changes between imaging studies and specifically describe placement and positioning of medical tubes or devices. Findings such as endotracheal tube placement, no change in condition, and positions of intrathoracic lines are consistently reported in relation to prior images. Observations of stability in cardiomediastinal contours in postoperative settings also seem relevant.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13552,latent_13552,511,0.001022,0.00074658904,2.5330205,Focus on medical device positioning or changes between images.,"Examples with high activation feature explicit instructions or descriptions regarding comparison with prior images, specifically involving details of medical devices or tubes such as nasogastric tubes, endotracheal tubes, or catheters, often focusing on their placement or changes in successive images.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6586762075134168,0.6728395061728395,0.5671641791044776,0.6129032258064516,62.0,100.0
+13553,latent_13553,593,0.001186,0.000926083,3.3520498,Detailed evaluation of tube or device positions in imaging.,"The pattern in these examples is consistently characterized by references to tube placements or medical devices. Particularly, examples allege the specific placements and description of these devices within the body (e.g., PICC lines, NG tubes, ET tubes) along with their status or positional changes, often using verbs like 'extending', 'terminates'.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6261280618822518,0.6264367816091954,0.5473684210526316,0.7027027027027027,74.0,100.0
+13554,latent_13554,763,0.001526,0.00087221584,3.0271325,Comparison of current and prior images to note resolution or stability of findings.,"These examples reflect the necessity of using multiple images and comparisons, particularly for the presence or absence of changes in pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, or cardiomediastinal silhouette when analyzing chest images with a focus on recent change versus stability or resolution.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5189542483660131,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.6086956521739131,92.0,100.0
+13555,latent_13555,593,0.001186,0.0007401124,4.3270082,Focus on comparative descriptions of device placements between current and prior images.,"The higher activation levels are associated with examples that include comparisons of device placements or changes between current and prior imaging studies, specifically emphasizing monitoring and support devices such as NG tubes, ET tubes, and central venous lines. The focus is on change, stability, or adjustment of these devices between exams, highlighted through specific text patterns indicating unchanged or changed device positions.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5287671232876712,0.563953488372093,0.4716981132075472,0.3472222222222222,72.0,100.0
+13556,latent_13556,2705,0.00541,0.0021153884,1.5771866,Evaluations without prior imaging for comparison.,"The pattern here involves a lack of prior comparison images when evaluating the current findings, as clearly stated in the examples. This suggests evaluations are made based solely on the current image without direct reference to past imagery, making interval comparisons impossible.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4920396831662325,0.5125628140703518,0.5166666666666667,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+13557,latent_13557,532,0.001064,0.0007894738,3.3219745,Decreased focus on comparison to prior studies and emphasis on mediastinal or lung abnormalities for activation.,"Samples with higher activation levels emphasize descriptions of radiology findings or patient examination details without offering explicit comparisons to prior studies, or indicate new abnormalities involving the mediastinum or lung volumes.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4976982476982477,0.503030303030303,0.3975903614457831,0.5076923076923077,65.0,100.0
+13558,latent_13558,436,0.000872,0.00076983473,3.4147449,"Direct comparison against prior images, regardless of presence of current lateral views.","The pattern is present in examples that specifically emphasize findings directly compared with prior images despite the presence of both current frontal and lateral images. The significant activations suggest that comparing the current findings extensively against previous ones, particularly with specific changes noted between time points, drives the explanation.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3344913151364764,0.3355704697986577,0.2641509433962264,0.5714285714285714,49.0,100.0
+13559,latent_13559,3540,0.00708,0.0026104522,1.7220042,Explicit and detailed radiological findings compared with prior images.,"The key pattern across examples with high activation is the detailed and systematic description of current radiology findings by comparing them explicitly with prior imagery, including observed changes or stability of specific conditions whether positive or negative.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5087719298245614,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13560,latent_13560,628,0.001256,0.0007367149,3.9275453,"Comparison of findings, specifically tubes/lines placement, with prior images.","Numerous examples demonstrate a pattern where comparisons to previous studies are emphasized, along with specific focus on the evaluation and/or changes in tubes (ET tube, NG tube, etc.), lines, or devices. These comparisons are associated with high activation and are key in checking for proper tube placement and noting other changes or stabilities by comparing with past imaging.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4893317230273752,0.5141242937853108,0.4262295081967213,0.3376623376623376,77.0,100.0
+13561,latent_13561,1761,0.003522,0.0013935724,2.3401835,"Comparison of current to prior imaging, mentioning specific changes or lack thereof.","Higher activations occur in examples where imaging descriptions involve explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies, regardless of the completeness of the current study or detailed descriptions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4599459945994599,0.46,0.4607843137254901,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13562,latent_13562,278,0.000556,0.0005219944,4.0593743,Descriptive comparisons of cardiopulmonary changes to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation frequently describe changes in cardiopulmonary findings from prior imaging. These include references to conditions like cardiomegaly, vascular congestion, and atelectasis, with explicit comparisons to prior imaging dates and comments on stability or changes in these findings.",0.6153846153846154,0.6153846153846154,0.48,0.8571428571428571,14.0,25.0,0.5383976753839768,0.539568345323741,0.3655913978494624,0.8717948717948718,39.0,100.0
+13563,latent_13563,360,0.00072,0.00072051754,5.127784,Comparison of current and prior images highlighting issue changes or stability.,"This pattern shows consistent reference to prior comparisons in reports, indicating changes in conditions such as effusions, consolidations, device placements, or nodular appearances. The high activation values are associated with detailed comparisons revealing new findings, stability, or progression of conditions based on previous images.",0.5285087719298246,0.5348837209302325,0.4666666666666667,0.7777777777777778,18.0,25.0,0.3842810413586055,0.3973509933774834,0.3360655737704918,0.803921568627451,51.0,100.0
+13564,latent_13564,1648,0.003296,0.0015293324,2.1508954,Comparison with prior images highlighting changes or stability in findings.,"Examples where the activation level is notable involve the comparison between current and prior images to describe changes such as stability or interval changes in conditions, especially focusing on lung opacities or other features. This pattern highlights the model's focus on detecting conditions that have been compared over time with an emphasis on monitoring changes in images or patient status.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13565,latent_13565,929,0.001858,0.0010734937,2.6474974,Evaluation of cardiomediastinal and hilar contours as 'unremarkable'.,"These examples show a focus on the evaluation of the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in chest radiographs, frequently described as 'unremarkable'. Such contour stability is often emphasized in radiology reports to indicate that there is no significant pathology in those areas, even amidst other findings.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5733333333333334,0.6,0.7,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13566,latent_13566,3169,0.006338,0.0024197586,2.3602393,Reports emphasize stable conditions or minimal changes in comparative analysis.,"Despite the descriptions involving previous radiographs for comparative analysis, none of the depicted scenarios provide details manifesting or reaching significance in diagnostic inference. The reports describe largely stable conditions or minimal changes that do not give rise to new acute pathologies or warrant novel clinical interpretations, thereby generating low activation levels.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13567,latent_13567,1007,0.002014,0.0009946493,3.3577688,Detailed descriptions of tube/catheter placement in radiographs.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe the placement and status of various medical tubes and catheters in chest radiographs. These descriptions often include precise locations relative to anatomical landmarks such as the carina, diaphragm, or SVC, noting if changes in placement have occurred. In contrast, lower-activated examples are less focused on the tube/catheter positioning details or do not mention them at all. This indicates the pattern detects detailed evaluation and description of invasive support devices' placement in successive radiological assessments.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6635786196680977,0.665,0.6896551724137931,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13568,latent_13568,534,0.001068,0.0008127408,4.373207,Reports highlighting changes or interventions between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently illustrate intervals of notable change in clinical devices, such as intubation tubes or nasogastric tubes, the introduction of new support devices, or changes in lung opacity or other radiological findings. The focus on procedures or anatomical changes highlights the model's identification of significant interventional or observational updates from one image to the next.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5617335562987738,0.5647058823529412,0.4824561403508772,0.7857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+13569,latent_13569,2283,0.004566,0.0017009784,1.3319802,Findings emphasizing stability or unchanged state in comparison with previous images.,"Examples with high activation contain comprehensive descriptions of current findings in direct comparison with previous imaging studies, emphasizing stable or unchanged findings over time. This pattern highlights radiologists' focus on temporal stability as indicative of benignity or controlled pathology.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13570,latent_13570,2447,0.004894,0.0019002871,1.4888191,Focus on cardiac size and cardiomediastinal contour analysis in chest radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels reference the importance of analyzing the heart size and cardiomediastinal contours in chest imaging. Such descriptions often relate to assessing heart failure, cardiomegaly, and cardiothoracic implications alongside pulmonary issues, which are important clinical concerns requiring further investigation.",0.6198275862068966,0.6326530612244898,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.534950145409223,0.5477386934673367,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,99.0
+13571,latent_13571,1469,0.002938,0.0013032266,2.1637487,Comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples consistently mention evaluating or assessing the findings in current imaging in direct comparison with previous studies, often using explicit phrases such as 'compared to the previous radiograph' or 'comparison to prior frontal image.' This pattern of comparison language is typical in radiology reports where continuity and changes over time are key aspects of interpretation.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13572,latent_13572,4126,0.008252,0.0030150681,1.4992146,Description of interval changes in imaging findings.,"These examples all highlight an 'interval change,' which is a term used in radiology to describe a change of condition between two points in time as seen in successive imaging studies. Phrases like 'interval increase', 'interval removal', or 'new interval placement' capture this evolution in findings compared to prior imaging, underscoring a temporal pattern of progression or resolution.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13573,latent_13573,328,0.000656,0.0006008547,3.8958437,"Comparison of current and previous images, particularly focusing on pulmonary or cardiomediastinal findings and their stability or change.","The examples with high activation levels consistently make comparisons between the current and prior imaging. A commonality is the presence of certain pulmonary abnormalities such as atelectasis, nodules, or pleural effusion in these comparisons, often with findings like normal lungs or no acute changes. This suggests the model emphasizes changes or stability in specific relational observations between imaging studies.",0.4078674948240165,0.4090909090909091,0.3703703703703703,0.5263157894736842,19.0,25.0,0.3205619412515964,0.3214285714285714,0.2105263157894736,0.5,40.0,100.0
+13574,latent_13574,1437,0.002874,0.0013325029,1.8718632,Presence of new or changing lung opacities or findings compared to past exams.,"Examples with higher activation values consistently mention either the presence of new abnormalities or changes in lung opacities compared to past examinations, suggesting a dynamic or evolving condition such as pneumonia, atelectasis, or effusion. Such findings underscore their impact in clinical diagnosis and management.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4857067510548523,0.507537688442211,0.5084745762711864,0.303030303030303,99.0,100.0
+13575,latent_13575,4454,0.008908,0.0032130014,1.917838,Frequent use of PACS references and comparative evaluations.,"Samples with high activation often include PACS system references and explicit request for findings comparison with previous images, indicating reliance on past imaging for diagnostic insights. Such comparisons inform evaluations of interval changes or stability, vital for pattern detection.",0.4676227727075185,0.4897959183673469,0.4857142857142857,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13576,latent_13576,1398,0.002796,0.0012786103,3.794538,Evaluations for lung infiltrates with findings showing stability or minor changes.,"This example set features indications of assessment for lung infiltrates or respiratory complaints with findings indicating stability or minor changes over time that could reflect underlying conditions like atelectasis or pulmonary congestion. Indicative phrases include 'well inflated lungs', 'persistent cardiomegaly', or 'unchanged effusion', suggesting attention to chronic thoracic conditions with minor variations over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13577,latent_13577,556,0.001112,0.0008944628,3.1901026,Interpretation of chest imaging with both frontal and lateral views.,"The most activated examples consistently involve chest imaging interpretation where the technique includes both a frontal and lateral view. The presence of a lateral view seems crucial given its consistent appearance in higher activation examples, which might indicate the model is triggered by more detailed chest imaging studies, possibly interpreted comprehensively when multiple views are available.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5543672014260249,0.5588235294117647,0.4786324786324786,0.8,70.0,100.0
+13578,latent_13578,3598,0.007196,0.0026359626,1.3960567,Emphasis on comparing current with prior imaging findings.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently include explicit instructions or requests to compare the findings with prior images. This is evident in phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating a focus on evaluating changes over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4436559139784946,0.4773869346733668,0.4832214765100671,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+13579,latent_13579,2248,0.004496,0.0016432077,1.319848,Notable lung changes or pathologies with stable line/tube positions.,"The highly activated examples describe notable changes in lung opacities, consolidation, or other lung pathologies on imaging while mentioning endotracheal tube position or other lines without significant changes. This involves reports of findings such as pneumothorax or marked changes in lung opacities in comparison to prior imaging. Less activated examples often focus on stable line/tube positions without major lung pathology changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13580,latent_13580,701,0.001402,0.001065249,4.214259,Comprehensive comparison between current and prior images.,"The pattern captures lengthy summaries which involve multiple technical aspects, often stating findings in light of their appearance on current and previous examinations. They frequently comment on past studies, and are broader, addressing issues beyond just focal changes or acute findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5941860142575796,0.5947368421052631,0.5607476635514018,0.6666666666666666,90.0,100.0
+13581,latent_13581,777,0.001554,0.0010292993,3.5282166,"Clear lungs with no evidence of consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax.","The examples with higher activation levels all describe findings of clear lungs without any signs of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. This indicates that the pattern focuses on identifying instances where the radiology report concludes that there are no acute or significant pathology in terms of lung abnormalities.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7796428478050565,0.7806122448979592,0.7345132743362832,0.8645833333333334,96.0,100.0
+13582,latent_13582,4953,0.009906,0.003537769,1.6423703,Emphasis on interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently emphasize analyzing and describing interval changes between current and prior images, particularly noting stability or resolution of previously observed conditions. The pattern reveals a focus on identifying changes in comparison images, highlighting findings like 'unchanged', 'resolved', 'improvement', 'interval change', or specifically dated prior images.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13583,latent_13583,612,0.001224,0.0007458809,2.624158,Reports emphasize minor or no interval change compared to previous images.,"The cases highlight descriptions that include the presence or absence of changes upon comparison with prior studies, often noting minor or no significant changes, suggesting an emphasis on stability or minimal interval change, which explains the focus on comparative analysis rather than substantial findings.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5448152410177727,0.550561797752809,0.4875,0.5,78.0,100.0
+13584,latent_13584,1717,0.003434,0.0015500087,2.1225471,"Comparison of imaging findings with prior studies, focusing on changes.","Higher activation occurs when reports explicitly compare current radiological findings with prior findings, highlighting changes in the patient's condition. This is evident in the use of terms like 'compared to the prior study', 'interval change', or providing direct comparisons to prior imaging, often with emphasis on stability or changes in specific observations.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4895405865278751,0.49,0.490566037735849,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13585,latent_13585,417,0.000834,0.0007012127,4.5594525,References to stability or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples contain specific references to prior imaging studies for comparison, including indications of changes, stability, or improvements based on direct comparison with previous imaging. This linguistic pattern is common in radiology to note changes over time and assess clinical stability.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5256336020667232,0.5266666666666666,0.3870967741935484,0.72,50.0,100.0
+13586,latent_13586,4940,0.00988,0.0035491057,1.3379873,Comparison of lung or pleural pathology with prior imaging.,"The pattern of the examples with high activation levels consistently includes the presence of certain lung or pleural pathologies (e.g., effusions, opacities, atelectasis, etc.) and details a comparison with prior chest imaging to assess for changes in these conditions.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13587,latent_13587,3310,0.00662,0.0024815546,1.8602381,Focus on cardiomediastinal and hilar contours in frontal and lateral chest views.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on the description of radiological findings based on a comparison between frontal and lateral chest views, emphasizing normal cardiomediastinal contours, heart size, and the lack of acute abnormalities. This pattern highlights attention to finding consistency across multiple views, especially when the comparison elaborates on normalcy or stability.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4948863494286215,0.495,0.4951456310679611,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13588,latent_13588,474,0.000948,0.0007310146,3.0897837,"Comparison of current chest images with prior, particularly post-surgical or procedural intervals.","The highly activated examples involve radiology reports that request a description of comparison between current chest X-ray images and prior frontal images, often in the context of evaluating changes after a surgical procedure or intervention, such as CABG or thoracotomy. This specificity and comparison indicate interval change assessments tied to surgical contexts.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4265045405571802,0.4320987654320987,0.3214285714285714,0.4354838709677419,62.0,100.0
+13589,latent_13589,606,0.001212,0.0009232787,2.796392,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve the presence of both a current and a prior image, usually specifying comparison details which indicate changes in findings or progression of conditions that require medical evaluation. The pattern emphasizes evaluating current images against prior ones to assess changes.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4761904761904761,0.4772727272727273,0.4259259259259259,0.6052631578947368,76.0,100.0
+13590,latent_13590,5291,0.010582,0.0039228867,1.7990416,Presence of interval changes in diagnostic features or support devices.,"Examples with higher activations frequently mention interval change in diagnostic or support features, such as chest tubes, effusions, or specific anatomical changes, indicating a focus on dynamic or evolving medical situations.",0.72,0.72,0.72,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5714285714285714,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13591,latent_13591,6879,0.013758,0.004812147,1.0807737,Focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activations prominently feature a consistent pattern of comparing findings with prior studies or images, often indicated by explicit comparative terminology like 'compared to', 'interval change', 'since prior', or referencing specific measurement changes or intervals. This indicates a focus on monitoring change over time against previous records in radiological interpretation.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13592,latent_13592,416,0.000832,0.00086189795,3.3660278,Presence and mention of surgical clips in the imaging reports.,"The presence of surgical clips is a common radiological finding that often indicates past surgical intervention. The references to surgical clips in various anatomical locations appear consistently in the activated examples. The model likely associates high activation with the mention of surgical clips, given their recurrence in reports as notable findings.",1.0,1.0,1.0,1.0,24.0,25.0,0.956758304696449,0.9602649006622516,0.8947368421052632,1.0,51.0,100.0
+13593,latent_13593,2343,0.004686,0.0018294613,1.7455875,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently note prior imaging findings or intervals for comparison, emphasizing changes or stability in the context of previous results, with specific focus on features like implants, fluid accumulation, or consolidation changes. These examples are activated because comparisons help interpret whether changes are clinically significant, new, or stable.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5220125786163522,0.83,100.0,100.0
+13594,latent_13594,410,0.00082,0.0008222145,3.5139005,Instructions to describe findings with an emphasis on comparison or interval change.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve instructions to perform an analysis or description based on a visible change or comparison with prior imagery, particularly emphasizing changes in medical conditions or device positioning, despite the absence of detailed findings in the sample text itself.",0.4629905613512171,0.5106382978723404,0.4871794871794871,0.8636363636363636,22.0,25.0,0.3632432432432432,0.3870967741935484,0.3461538461538461,0.8181818181818182,55.0,100.0
+13595,latent_13595,382,0.000764,0.00063868705,4.5072722,Bronchial wall thickening noted in comparison to prior imaging.,"Reports with high activation levels prominently describe the state or changes of bronchial wall thickening, a common radiological finding linked with chronic pulmonary conditions such as bronchitis or bronchiectasis. These examples often compare current findings with prior imaging results, focusing on changes in bronchial wall appearance.",0.5989407799711122,0.6530612244897959,1.0,0.2916666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.623342175066313,0.7746478873239436,1.0,0.238095238095238,42.0,100.0
+13596,latent_13596,1114,0.002228,0.0011603023,1.9646832,Description of cardiomediastinal silhouette stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation share a consistent pattern of mentioning 'cardiomediastinal silhouette' or similar wording referring to the heart and mediastinal contours, frequently in the context of comparing present and previous imaging studies.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13597,latent_13597,678,0.001356,0.0008528854,2.8372536,Description of tube or catheter position in relation to prior images.,"The examples with highest activations consistently focus on the presence and positioning of tubes or catheters, such as orogastric, nasogastric, or central venous catheters in relation to prior images. The comparison of tube positions or new placements is a distinct pattern described in the higher activated examples.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4760518317069269,0.5163043478260869,0.4489795918367347,0.2619047619047619,84.0,100.0
+13598,latent_13598,251,0.000502,0.0005533734,2.5781713,Emphasis on comparison to prior images for stability or change in condition.,"The highly activated examples specifically compare findings to prior images, indicating either stability or known changes in certain conditions. This pattern reflects radiology practices highlighting past reference to derive diagnostic conclusions, which is prominent in cases showing detailed comparison of patient history alongside present findings.",0.358974358974359,0.358974358974359,0.28,0.5,14.0,25.0,0.3086618705035971,0.3106060606060606,0.1827956989247312,0.53125,32.0,100.0
+13599,latent_13599,943,0.001886,0.0009711762,2.5015645,Detailed comparison or stability in findings with prior imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels refer to specific changes or stable findings in comparison with prior imaging reports, often with direct or explicit reference to unchanged measurements, prior complications, or interval changes in state. Descriptions explicitly involve comparison with previous assessments, indicating that the model identifies patterns related to the documentation of changes over time or stability based on historical imaging data.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13600,latent_13600,889,0.001778,0.0010275703,2.7133434,Request to describe findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit requests to provide comparative descriptions of current findings with prior images. The reports use directives like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', indicating an instructional format inherent to the task or prompt.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+13601,latent_13601,722,0.001444,0.0011046347,4.4276643,Detailed comparison focusing on interval changes in abnormalities.,"The high-activation examples consistently mention the comparison between current and prior images, specifically noting abnormalities or stable findings in the context of such comparisons. They focus on the description of interval changes or stability of known abnormalities and findings, especially in cases evaluating for changes in conditions like pneumonia, pleural effusions, or cardiac size. The clear differentiation hinges on describing the abnormalities while providing explicit diagnostic actions based on the changes over these images. In contrast, low-activation examples generally lack detailed comparison findings or focus more on normal findings without elaborate historical comparison.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5133554299083642,0.5260416666666666,0.5072463768115942,0.3804347826086957,92.0,100.0
+13602,latent_13602,764,0.001528,0.0010638142,2.7251134,Description of findings with emphasis on comparison to prior images.,"Many examples demonstrate a pattern of requiring a description of radiological findings in comparison to previous images. This suggests that the presence of a prior image for comparison, with an emphasis on detecting any changes over time, significantly affects the level of activation. The repeated emphasis on 'comparison' implies that analyzing change from past to present images is central to the pattern.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13603,latent_13603,2122,0.004244,0.0018297612,1.8674254,Stable radiological findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern focuses on the absence of new or acute findings compared to prior imaging, regardless of existing conditions like devices or abnormalities. The descriptions highlight stable findings or unchanged status, indicating no significant differences from previous assessments.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4743589743589743,0.37,100.0,100.0
+13604,latent_13604,539,0.001078,0.000851779,2.4812632,Complex and multi-view comparative analysis with noted medical device observations.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve detailed analysis of prior comparisons and multiple observations across different orientations or types of imaging (e.g., frontal and lateral views), capturing thorough evaluations with various findings and possible complications or known conditions. They involve multi-view contextualization often linked with complex patient histories or ongoing monitoring of devices or chronic conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5182813104831615,0.5207100591715976,0.4318181818181818,0.5507246376811594,69.0,100.0
+13605,latent_13605,6614,0.013228,0.0046561593,1.1628641,Radiology reports emphasize comparison with prior images indicating interval changes or stability.,"Cases with higher activation levels consistently involve comparisons to previous imaging, indicating monitoring or changes over time. This can be seen in examples where interval change, resolution, or persistence of findings is specifically noted or changes in interventions like chest tubes and lines are recorded.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13606,latent_13606,300,0.0006,0.0007019723,3.4868631,Clear lungs and normal cardiomediastinal/hilar silhouettes.,"The most activating examples describe the lack of findings, specifically highlighting clear lungs, normal silhouette contours, and absence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pneumonia. These evaluations often come with information about procedure consistency or comparisons with prior images. It appears the model emphasizes detailed report structure and terms denoting normalcy.",0.873015873015873,0.875,0.75,1.0,15.0,25.0,0.6839092643629425,0.704225352112676,0.5,0.7619047619047619,42.0,100.0
+13607,latent_13607,1286,0.002572,0.0012459687,2.3199759,Descriptions of interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"These examples mainly involve radiological assessments that compare current images to prior ones, focusing on evaluation findings such as tube positions, changes in effusions, or previously noted pathologies. The details often include specific measurements for tube placements, alterations in previously noted conditions or stability of certain findings, highlighting the practice of tracking changes over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.480497542997543,0.4874371859296482,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,99.0
+13608,latent_13608,1390,0.00278,0.0015761855,2.3981593,Comparison with prior image shows interval change or stability of major findings.,"The pattern focuses on the stability or change in certain radiographic features, assessed by comparative analysis with previous images or reports, and typically involves significant findings such as pneumothorax, atelectasis, or device positions. Comparisons often involve cardiovascular or pulmonary features and associated medical conditions or interventions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5837408159683042,0.585,0.5765765765765766,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13609,latent_13609,742,0.001484,0.0010169892,3.236144,Clear lung fields despite indications suggesting possible pathology.,"High activation levels in the examples correspond to the presence of clear lung fields without signs of new abnormalities, such as pleural effusion, pneumonia, or pneumothorax, despite a medical history of potential pulmonary issues indicated in the examination reports. These cases emphasize a reassurance of absent acute findings despite symptoms or indications that could suggest issues.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5371102327624067,0.543010752688172,0.5128205128205128,0.4597701149425287,87.0,99.0
+13610,latent_13610,1426,0.002852,0.0013535467,2.36576,Inclusion or comparison of lateral views with frontal images.,"The pattern seen here is the presence or comparison of imaging studies that include current lateral views, alongside frontal views. This reflects a common practice of assessing the chest in multiple perspectives, particularly when evaluating structural changes or pathology.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13611,latent_13611,4343,0.008686,0.0032428121,1.2172593,Detailed interval changes in comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve a comparison of current imaging with prior imaging that distinctly describes stability or changes in specific findings, often in the context of ongoing or resolving conditions. Such consistent mentions of interval changes, improvements, or worsening findings related to previously identified issues indicate the sought pattern.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5447154471544715,0.545,0.5473684210526316,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13612,latent_13612,1858,0.003716,0.0015380244,2.048406,Descriptions comparing findings to prior observations.,The examples consist of observations from radiological images where previous reports or conditions are compared to updated or new images. Activation is high where analyses note changes or comparisons with prior conditions that factor prominently in the clinical evaluation and radiological study description.,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4270833333333333,0.45,0.4642857142857143,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13613,latent_13613,455,0.00091,0.00074142707,2.741857,"Changes noted since prior imaging, especially with opacities, effusions, or medical devices.","Descriptions of comparison studies, indicating changes since prior imaging, are a recurring theme. In specific, activation levels are focused on changes in opacities, pleural effusions, tube placements, surgical materials, and consolidations described in comparison to earlier images.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6404454022988506,0.6623376623376623,0.5161290322580645,0.5925925925925926,54.0,100.0
+13614,latent_13614,1694,0.003388,0.0015697288,2.503727,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently include references to comparing findings in current imaging to those in prior radiographs, particularly noting any interval changes or stability in findings. This is a common practice in radiology reporting to monitor disease progression or response to treatment. The instruction repeatedly specifies providing comparisons based on prior imaging, indicating that comparison language is central to activating the pattern.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13615,latent_13615,753,0.001506,0.00089689525,2.4423203,Description compares current to prior images despite 'N/A' prior reports.,"These examples predominantly involve providing a description of imaging findings by comparing the current study to prior images, specifically calling out explicit changes, stability, or unchanged conditions in the context of imaging diagnosis, even when a prior report is unavailable or N/A. This reflects a pattern of consistency check against previous benchmarks or reference imaging.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4803323306116602,0.481283422459893,0.4456521739130434,0.4712643678160919,87.0,100.0
+13616,latent_13616,7119,0.014238,0.0050927326,1.4174452,"Comparison of findings over time, noting stability or change.","These examples describe changes over time in a patient's condition, such as before-and-after comparisons, intervals of stability, or progression of diseases. The key information comes from comparing current findings with previous imaging, expressed with words like 'compared to', 'improved', 'stable', 'unchanged', or specific changes in medical devices' positions or medical conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5791933167993735,0.592964824120603,0.5703703703703704,0.77,100.0,99.0
+13617,latent_13617,746,0.001492,0.00074335694,2.9623842,Explicit comparison to prior images in the findings.,"High activation levels consistently occur in examples where there are explicit instructions to compare current images with prior ones, irrespective of the specifics of the findings or the patient's condition. This suggests a pattern focused more on the process of comparison described in the reports rather than the clinical outcomes themselves.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4184244511407662,0.4196891191709844,0.4128440366972477,0.4838709677419355,93.0,100.0
+13618,latent_13618,642,0.001284,0.000933206,2.6991155,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve radiological descriptions that emphasize the unchanged status of findings compared to previous imaging. Such descriptions often include terms like 'unchanged', 'persistent', 'stable', or referencing previous examination results to highlight stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.580339177924691,0.5944444444444444,0.5606060606060606,0.4567901234567901,81.0,99.0
+13619,latent_13619,671,0.001342,0.0009346864,3.2261076,"Comparisons of current images to prior images, noting changes or stability.",Highly activated examples emphasize the bilateral comparison between frontal and lateral chest images with explicit references to comparisons made to prior images. These examples typically contain detailed descriptions of how current findings have or have not changed relative to previous studies.,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4806261763212141,0.4808743169398907,0.4423076923076923,0.5542168674698795,83.0,100.0
+13620,latent_13620,2638,0.005276,0.0019877146,2.1049864,Emphasis on describing findings in relation to a prior image.,"Examples with higher activation frequently reference a 'prior image' and request specific descriptions or comparisons of findings in relation to a previous image. These texts are structured to highlight the interpretive comparison process which relies on evaluating changes over time or stability, a common diagnostic practice.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13621,latent_13621,2035,0.00407,0.0015554181,1.4354614,Provision of both frontal and lateral chest images for analysis.,"The models are being assessed based on recognizing differences between lateral and frontal views when both are available for comparison, suggesting the utilization or analysis of multiple plane imaging affects the astuteness of the reports.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13622,latent_13622,2560,0.00512,0.0019980567,2.8033414,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern here involves descriptions of stable or unchanged findings compared to previous radiological studies. Despite different indications and findings, examples with higher activation levels frequently note stability or lack of significant change since the last assessment, often suggesting benign conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13623,latent_13623,2374,0.004748,0.0019462125,2.5091374,Comparison of stable chronic lung conditions with prior imaging findings.,"Sample 6 exhibits a detailed comparison of chronic scarring and emphysema with prior image findings, suggesting a pattern where chronic lung conditions, stable or progressing changes, and comparisons to prior imaging are identified. This pattern emphasizes stable findings alongside minimal acute changes related to chronic respiratory conditions, often clarified by past imaging references.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5421686746987951,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13624,latent_13624,1037,0.002074,0.0009245114,3.3926597,Detailed comparative descriptions of asymmetries or regional lung abnormalities.,"Examples with high activation scores focus on descriptions involving the comparison of new radiographic findings to prior images where an emphasis is placed on azygous asymmetries or any kind of detailed area-specific abnormality, especially when speculating on potential underlying issues such as aspiration pneumonia, scarring, interstitial edema, or regional opacities. The frequent mention of asymmetry or detailed abnormal pattern noted in comparison reports could trigger higher activation.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5813953488372093,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13625,latent_13625,429,0.000858,0.00078368775,3.4753861,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently feature interval changes between the current and prior imaging studies, often indicating improvement, resolution, or increase in certain features (e.g., effusion, infiltrates, nodules) that indicate clinical progression or stability. Reports include phrases like 'interval change', 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or specific descriptions of changes over time.",0.609643605870021,0.6122448979591837,0.5862068965517241,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5248447204968945,0.5294117647058824,0.388235294117647,0.6226415094339622,53.0,100.0
+13626,latent_13626,727,0.001454,0.0010494876,3.4050288,Radiological findings in current images described in comparison to prior images.,"These examples focus on providing a detailed radiological description of changes observed when comparing current chest images against prior ones. Examples with high activation elaborate on such changes, indicating interval findings, stability, or improvement/deterioration compared to prior radiographs.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5565358718365452,0.581151832460733,0.5379310344827586,0.8571428571428571,91.0,100.0
+13627,latent_13627,816,0.001632,0.001058288,3.109707,Comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"These highly activated examples describe changes, stability, or lack thereof, in radiology findings in the context of prior examinations. Throughout these examples, explicit comparisons with previous imaging findings are emphasized, using terms like 'unchanged', 'new', 'removal', and 'stable', illustrating an overall theme of temporal comparison.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4577218728162124,0.515,0.509090909090909,0.84,100.0,100.0
+13628,latent_13628,1003,0.002006,0.0010989951,2.644413,Request to describe findings and compare with previous images.,"The highly activated examples frequently contain instructions to describe findings in the current images and then explicitly compare these to prior images. This linguistic construct focuses on interval changes by using phrases like 'compare', 'in comparison to', and explicitly noting past findings.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4875222816399287,0.54,0.524390243902439,0.86,100.0,100.0
+13629,latent_13629,4123,0.008246,0.003023666,1.2191211,Stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples all reference prior exams and find stability in the comparison. This stability is highlighted with terms like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or 'stable in size'. It often points towards non-progression of disease or unchanged mechanical line placements, which reassures clinicians about the lack of new complications or growth in findings.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5352112676056338,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13630,latent_13630,1218,0.002436,0.00096687727,1.8112804,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior radiographs.,"The pattern involves evaluating radiographs and their findings against previous imaging. The model highly activates when the comparison notes specific interval changes in disease processes, anatomical structures, or medical devices, indicating increased complexity or detailed assessment of clinical changes over time.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6381087088300668,0.6381909547738693,0.6372549019607843,0.65,100.0,99.0
+13631,latent_13631,515,0.00103,0.0008353984,2.4091303,Descriptive analysis involving comparison to prior radiographic images.,"Examples with high activation mention changes or reference to prior imaging findings or direct comparisons to previous studies or imaging techniques explicitly. These reports often discuss whether abnormalities have changed, are stable, or have new findings compared to earlier images, which is a key pattern for high activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.454109512657522,0.4606060606060606,0.3983050847457627,0.7230769230769231,65.0,100.0
+13632,latent_13632,2164,0.004328,0.0017321499,2.889261,Comparative descriptions indicating changes in pulmonary conditions over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve references to observed changes in radiological features over time, particularly emphasizing language like 'improved', 'worsening', and 'unchanged', often linked to specific indicators of pulmonary edema or other pulmonary conditions. This distinct comparison language about pulmonary findings shows the pattern represented by higher activations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13633,latent_13633,1612,0.003224,0.0014697707,1.735569,Reports of clear changes or stabilities compared to prior imaging.,"The significant activations demonstrate scenarios where clear, relevant changes or stabilities in findings are noted upon comparison with prior imaging. This pattern is common in radiology when reporting newly observed findings, or lack thereof, in sequential imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stabilities explicitly related to a previous report.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5169491525423728,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13634,latent_13634,4111,0.008222,0.0040962202,3.6818967,Comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with non-zero activations often involve a comparison between current and previous imaging studies, even when the prior image is not directly available for comparison. This pattern reflects the emphasis on interval changes or stability in radiological assessments, thus increasing activation levels when explicit comparisons are requested or made.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13635,latent_13635,5712,0.011424,0.004079497,2.688099,Directive to compare findings with prior imaging or reports.,"The presence of activation primarily occurs when there is a directive to compare findings with prior studies, especially when prior imaging data or a prior report is explicitly mentioned or required. This aligns closely with clinical practice for monitoring disease progress or resolution.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.528169014084507,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13636,latent_13636,2467,0.004934,0.001956442,1.8796692,Recent interval change or comparison with short timeframe imaging.,"Many examples describe medical imaging findings in the context of a time interval, often comparing current status to a recent or concurrent prior imaging study. This temporal focus captures clinical interest in monitoring changes over short periods, such as hours or days, like examples mentioning conditions 'since 5 hours prior' or referencing very recent prior imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13637,latent_13637,1116,0.002232,0.0009407374,1.842093,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and specific assessment of changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include a detailed description of changes or consistencies observed in the current imaging compared to prior imaging. They frequently mention phrases such as 'compared to previous', 'unchanged from prior', or 'minimal interval change' alongside specific details on observed pathologies or conditions.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4415584415584415,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13638,latent_13638,1013,0.002026,0.0010645286,2.3166022,Focus on comparison to prior imaging findings or reports.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve interpretation or description of current radiological findings in the context of previous images or reports. This comparative analysis with prior images, often denoted with ""the prior image"" or equivalent wording, tends to show higher activations.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4321783952148625,0.485,0.4906832298136646,0.79,100.0,100.0
+13639,latent_13639,551,0.001102,0.00077942753,2.2819417,Emphasis on changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples primarily focus on a comparison of current and prior imaging studies, which is essential for assessing changes over time. This pattern often involves highlighting unchanged conditions, newly observed changes, or resolved findings, emphasizing stability or progress in radiological findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5268090671316478,0.5329341317365269,0.453781512605042,0.8059701492537313,67.0,100.0
+13640,latent_13640,5980,0.01196,0.00429516,1.538399,Analysis focuses on interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit the highest activation levels often involve cases where direct comparisons are made between current images and prior images, with an emphasis on detecting changes or stability in findings. These comparisons often specifically identify interval changes or stability of conditions, such as changes in effusion size, nodule status, and other conditions over time as referenced by 'compared to prior'.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5085408520271661,0.5175879396984925,0.5118110236220472,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+13641,latent_13641,687,0.001374,0.00091023016,2.9576094,Comparison of tube/device placement or lung/heart status changes with prior imaging.,"The model exhibits higher activation levels on reports that emphasize detailed device placement and/or changes in lung or heart conditions in comparison to prior images. The pattern involves noting the interval placement or adjustment of tubes and devices, along with any newly observed pulmonary or cardiological conditions.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5368518518518518,0.5519125683060109,0.5037593984962406,0.8072289156626506,83.0,100.0
+13642,latent_13642,2092,0.004184,0.0017290908,1.636784,Reports on interventional elements or post-procedural changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of findings concerning interventional elements, such as tubes, catheters, or lines, particularly noting changes in their positions, presence, or effects. This pattern is important in radiological assessments, especially when evaluating for complications following medical procedures or interventions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5510204081632653,0.54,100.0,100.0
+13643,latent_13643,2289,0.004578,0.0017428515,2.1126947,In-depth comparison with prior imaging showing change or stability in pathology.,"Examples with increased activation involve providing comprehensive details on pathological changes or medical devices in relation to prior imaging, such as changes in effusion or density. The reports emphasize new, increased, or unchanged enlargements, opacities, or complications over time. The high activation examples are those which mention significant new findings or changes in conditions and are focused on thorough explanations of findings in relation to previous images.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4497799119647859,0.45,0.4519230769230769,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13644,latent_13644,3995,0.00799,0.0028784997,1.3040266,Direct comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently reference direct comparisons with prior imaging studies, a common practice in radiology for evaluating changes in findings over time. The specific mentions of comparing current images with prior ones are indicative of a recurrent pattern in the data.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5184038527691779,0.545,0.5306122448979592,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13645,latent_13645,488,0.000976,0.0006921839,3.1299841,Comparison-based analysis with or without explicit prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve providing analyses of current imaging in direct comparison to either specific prior studies or general references to previous states without defined comparisons, focusing on the sequential analysis rather than purely new observations.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3702313946216385,0.4025157232704403,0.3703703703703703,0.8333333333333334,60.0,99.0
+13646,latent_13646,4784,0.009568,0.0034966622,1.8717283,Detailed comparative analysis or stability of findings relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings in context or comparison relative to current images. This includes assessing changes from previous studies or evaluating current placement or changes in medical devices. Patterns include phrases like 'compared to previous examination' and terms such as 'stable', 'no significant change', or specific location and descriptions of medical devices, all indicating detailed analysis in comparison to past imaging results.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5526342816062442,0.5555555555555556,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,98.0
+13647,latent_13647,1746,0.003492,0.0014820249,1.7444949,Comparisons indicating changes or stability in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently compare the findings of a current image against a prior image radiograph and note changes in findings, especially lung and cardiac structures, or stability of prior findings. This comparison approach and indication of interval changes characterize the pattern for high activation.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4782608695652174,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13648,latent_13648,478,0.000956,0.00083851133,3.4165838,Comparisons to prior images highlighting stability or minimal change.,"Prompts with high activations consistently reference a description of findings compared to prior imaging, emphasizing unchanged or explicitly stable features including no major new findings or comparison-based stability usual in high-activation examples.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4931466899970836,0.5126582278481012,0.3623188405797101,0.4310344827586206,58.0,100.0
+13649,latent_13649,1913,0.003826,0.0015171019,2.1420133,Interval changes or stability comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently utilize phrases comparing current chest imaging findings to prior radiographs. They often describe interval changes or stability in abnormal findings, highlighting an interval assessment aspect that is a common reporting element in follow-up radiological examinations.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5043478260869565,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13650,latent_13650,1124,0.002248,0.0010800962,1.815018,"Comparison with prior imaging, showing interval changes or stability.","The pattern is highly activated when there is a radiological finding compared against a prior image, showing a clear interval change or assessment of stability. This indicates the model is acknowledging and providing a description of changes or stability in the features since the prior study, which is a common practice in radiology reporting.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13651,latent_13651,1204,0.002408,0.0011739582,2.481379,Stable anatomical or procedural findings over multiple imaging comparisons.,"The pattern exhibits a tendency to describe radiology findings in terms of consistency or stability over time, with emphasis on unchanged features or lack of new development between current and prior images. This stability is often linked with the presence of detailed findings, such as specific equipment or anatomical features (e.g., pacemakers, tubes).",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4186046511627906,0.43,0.4027777777777778,0.29,100.0,100.0
+13652,latent_13652,567,0.001134,0.00085318304,2.7962353,"Focus on comparison to prior imaging, noting specific changes.","The most notable pattern across examples with higher activations is the focus on comparing current and prior imaging for specific changes or stability, especially when distinct findings are mentioned or detailed. This characteristic is present in reports where there are comparisons made to previous examinations, which include either specific measurement changes or observed changes in conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4906784412671713,0.4911242603550296,0.4105263157894737,0.5652173913043478,69.0,100.0
+13653,latent_13653,2981,0.005962,0.002330969,1.673964,Multiple imaging views and comparison to prior studies.,Higher activated examples tend to include multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral or other projections) and explicitly mention comparisons to prior imaging studies. This structure suggests that the comprehensive assessment with more views and historical comparison results in higher activation due to detailed evaluation patterns.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13654,latent_13654,626,0.001252,0.0008724869,3.7410493,"Descriptions of unremarkable, stable findings compared to prior images.","The examples indicate a pattern where radiology reports describe findings compared to past images, emphasizing a lack of acute issues or consolidations, consistent with stable and unremarkable observations, often mentioning normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes and absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4979087637389359,0.5112359550561798,0.4366197183098591,0.3974358974358974,78.0,100.0
+13655,latent_13655,3789,0.007578,0.0027534796,1.5311247,Detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels provide a clear instruction of comparing current imaging findings to those of previous images, distinguishing between 'current' and 'prior' in the report. The pattern focuses on detailed examination techniques and comparison with sequenced historical imaging, often showing the unchanged status or describing stability of findings.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.509090909090909,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13656,latent_13656,847,0.001694,0.0010577295,2.3923578,Comparisons to prior images showing stability or unchanged findings.,"These examples consistently feature reports comparing current images to prior images, often noting unchanged, stable, or persistent findings over time. Terms like 'compared to previous', 'unchanged', 'stable', 'in comparison to', or explicit references to past dates are commonly used to highlight the lack of progression or change in observed anomalies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.433141006174714,0.44,0.4230769230769231,0.33,100.0,100.0
+13657,latent_13657,418,0.000836,0.0007375231,3.2226477,"Acute conditions indicated like tachycardia, pneumonia, or pleural effusion.","The examples with high activation levels frequently include references to clinical indications like tachycardia or evaluating for pneumonia or effusion, often in an urgent or acute context. Such phrases suggest that the focus of these reports is on acute or potentially severe conditions needing immediate evaluation, aligning with the observed activation pattern.",0.6122448979591837,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6220800889877642,0.6423841059602649,0.484375,0.5961538461538461,52.0,99.0
+13658,latent_13658,387,0.000774,0.0007234617,4.445807,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings with focus on changes.,"High activation examples prominently feature detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, often focusing on changes in radiologic appearances such as stable or increasing opacifications, device positions, effusions, atelectasis, and cardiomegaly. They provide evaluations of medical or support devices in great detail, indicating temporal changes or stability relative to previous images, which are vital in monitoring patient progress or detecting changes.",0.7078260869565217,0.7083333333333334,0.6666666666666666,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.6604651162790698,0.6712328767123288,0.4864864864864865,0.782608695652174,46.0,100.0
+13659,latent_13659,4481,0.008962,0.003300408,1.6869142,Stable or changed position of monitoring devices and tubes in comparison images.,"These examples exhibit descriptions of radiological findings compared to prior images, specifically noting changes in monitoring devices and catheters between exams. The pattern often highlights the stable or removed position of support devices over time, aiding in the management assessment without noting significant changes in underlying pathology.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.5769230769230769,0.3,100.0,100.0
+13660,latent_13660,2100,0.0042,0.0017164991,2.6856625,Image comparison with determination of changes or stabilities.,"The pattern focuses on the use of image comparisons to identify changes or verify stability between current and prior imaging studies, particularly when descriptions reference past examinations, indicating unchanged, improving, or worsening conditions.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13661,latent_13661,2671,0.005342,0.0020955426,1.943067,Focus on changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels typically refer to prior imaging for comparison in assessing the current findings, often specifying changes observed or confirming stability. This indicates a focus on the assessment of changes or stability over time in medical imaging.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13662,latent_13662,940,0.00188,0.0011436571,2.850128,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparison between current and prior radiological findings, focusing specifically on changes in pulmonary or cardiovascular status noted through imaging studies. These examples often address incremental changes or status stability rather than initial diagnostic findings. The pattern highlights subtle interval changes or confirmations of ongoing conditions in subsequent examinations.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13663,latent_13663,576,0.001152,0.0007855596,2.3349447,Comparison between current and prior images in radiological descriptions.,"The pattern observed is that this language model gives higher activation for descriptions where there is a direct mention of comparison between the current and prior images, a common requirement in radiological evaluations. The detail of describing changes or stability in findings between multiple studies indicates the presence of the pattern.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3704292527821939,0.3863636363636363,0.375,0.631578947368421,76.0,100.0
+13664,latent_13664,3661,0.007322,0.0027534217,2.071854,Findings consistent with stable conditions or no acute changes compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern of highest activations in these examples centers around detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies that identify no significant interval change in specific features (e.g., mediastinal contours, catheter positioning, lung opacities) or confirming a known clinical context without new acute findings. The pattern highlights stable conditions rather than detecting new or changed pathology.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13665,latent_13665,496,0.000992,0.0006007185,3.126255,Complex comparative analysis requested with multiple imaging contexts.,"These samples show higher activation levels when the assistance requested involves complex interpretative comparison tasks in the context of medical imagery, often including multiple prior studies or complex conditions. The comparison may include previous imaging data or condition status requiring detailed assessment.",0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.4102564102564102,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4984126984126984,0.5123456790123457,0.4330708661417323,0.8870967741935484,62.0,100.0
+13666,latent_13666,1523,0.003046,0.0014080547,1.9558624,"Comparison of current imaging findings with previous studies, noting stability or change.","The pattern is focused on descriptions that involve comparing the current medical imaging findings with previous studies, with considerable emphasis on noting stability or change of specific pathologies such as cardiomegaly, pulmonary emphysema, or known device placements. Many examples include medical devices and emphasize the stability of the findings relative to previous images, indicating that the pattern involves the comparison of the current state with the historical state to assess progression or stability in radiological health.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13667,latent_13667,3416,0.006832,0.002593582,2.5851924,Detailed comparisons to prior imaging findings indicating stability or changes.,"Reports that exhibit high activation levels consistently include specific comparisons of new and past findings, indicating changes in clinical conditions or stability over time. Examples with detailed comparative descriptions of radiological changes or stability, particularly concerning conditions like aortic changes or nodule status, tend to have higher activations.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5315315315315315,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13668,latent_13668,2530,0.00506,0.0019210984,2.0500636,Identification of new changes or interventions on comparisons with imaging history.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention new medical conditions, interventions, or developments in patient condition compared to prior images. They emphasize interval changes, device placements, or pathologies not present or altered from prior exams. This implies importance placed on changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4953337390951511,0.4974874371859296,0.4942528735632184,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+13669,latent_13669,656,0.001312,0.0009262294,2.668918,"Comparison of current findings with prior images, noting stability or minor changes.","Many examples involve the comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies. Specifically, the presence of indications, techniques, and descriptions regarding unchanged or stable observations suggest the pattern of monitoring interval changes, especially looking for stability or changes in specific findings like atelectasis, cardiomegaly, effusions, and more. This pattern is often seen when the clinical context is uncertain or when ensuring consistency with previous imaging findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5161479914190836,0.518918918918919,0.4767441860465116,0.4823529411764706,85.0,100.0
+13670,latent_13670,4370,0.00874,0.0031162475,1.4144543,Comparison language noting unchanged or improved findings relative to prior studies.,"The pattern that emerges is reports comparing findings to previous imaging studies and explicitly noting either interval improvement or stability of a medical condition. Whether addressing pleural effusions, tubes placements, or nodular opacities, this pattern consistently uses comparison language to contextualize current findings against past data.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5833333333333334,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13671,latent_13671,3301,0.006602,0.002444391,1.7360874,Comparison of current with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently emphasize changes or stability between current and prior imaging. This reflects a focus on comparative analysis of radiological findings, particularly looking at variability or constancy in conditions over time, such as tube positions, consolidations, or cardiomegaly.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13672,latent_13672,442,0.000884,0.0008596525,3.645997,Tube placement relative to carina or anatomical landmarks.,"The examples with higher activation predominantly describe tube placements (endotracheal, enteric, venous catheters) relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina in chest imaging. This suggests that correctly documenting tube placement against these landmarks is a key pattern for determining activation.",0.7349624060150376,0.7446808510638298,0.8125,0.5909090909090909,22.0,25.0,0.6033701221915648,0.6894409937888198,0.72,0.2950819672131147,61.0,100.0
+13673,latent_13673,2296,0.004592,0.0018359881,1.8205589,Evaluation of device placement or status compared to prior image.,"Highly activated examples commonly include detailed findings concerning medical devices such as Port-A-Caths, PICC lines, or tubes, particularly their positioning changes or status compared to prior exams. These examples show direct evaluations and updates regarding procedural or device-specific details, indicating a focus on medical devices and their stability in comparative imaging.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5072463768115942,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13674,latent_13674,3213,0.006426,0.0022984454,1.1736488,Description of findings compared to multiple prior imaging studies.,"This pattern identifies that samples mentioning interpretations of current imaging in the context of changes from diverse prior imaging studies, often specifying the prior examinations and the explicit comparisons made, tend to show high activation. This is typical in comprehensive radiological interpretations, which heavily rely on comparative analysis over time.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5268808957742158,0.5326633165829145,0.5454545454545454,0.42,100.0,99.0
+13675,latent_13675,2060,0.00412,0.0018237095,3.0615234,Comparisons with prior imaging showing changes or consistency in conditions.,"Examples with higher activations tend to contain descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images, along with some current clinical context highlighted, such as changes or consistencies in the state of certain health conditions, like pneumonia or opacities.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4649122807017544,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13676,latent_13676,690,0.00138,0.0010495239,2.6247852,Detailed comparison with prior report in imaging analysis.,"The examples with high activation levels involve the presence of prior imaging reports that are explicitly mentioned or involved in the contextual analysis. The pattern is noticeable where the current findings are related or contrasted back to the detailed context of prior imaging, especially when a prior report or study is highlighted along with a historical perspective on changes since previous exams.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.44643445446105,0.448087431693989,0.4220183486238532,0.5476190476190477,84.0,99.0
+13677,latent_13677,1163,0.002326,0.0010963958,2.7539992,Emphasizing interval changes from prior imaging in descriptions.,"High activation samples consistently highlight specific observations or comparisons made between current and prior images, even if the clinical findings indicate subtle or slight changes. This suggests that the crucial pattern is capturing detailed interval changes.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13678,latent_13678,2690,0.00538,0.0020968218,1.5147679,Evaluation of changes or stability in radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"The high activation examples involve descriptions of current imaging findings compared to prior studies, specifically noting stability or changes in findings that are considered clinically relevant, such as device placement, opacities, or effusions.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13679,latent_13679,5011,0.010022,0.003549242,1.5046403,Unchanged position of medical devices or tubes on imaging comparison.,"These examples show a pattern where specific medical devices or lines placed within the patient are mentioned as stable or unchanged when comparing to prior imaging studies. Devices such as PICC, endotracheal, or feeding tubes are noted with their position being unchanged as a point of comparison.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5123785382340516,0.5628140703517588,0.6857142857142857,0.24,100.0,99.0
+13680,latent_13680,307,0.000614,0.0005933739,4.436915,Bibasilar atelectasis or opacities in radiology reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently detail the presence or changes in bibasilar atelectasis. This pattern of changed or unchanged opacities at the lung bases consistently appears in the context of diagnostic assessments concerning respiratory status changes, often indicating atelectasis. Phrases like 'bibasilar atelectasis', 'streaky bibasilar opacities', and 'basilar opacity', recurred in activated examples, suggesting this specific focus contributes to high activation.",0.8834688346883468,0.8837209302325582,0.782608695652174,1.0,18.0,25.0,0.7334090909090909,0.7536231884057971,0.532258064516129,0.868421052631579,38.0,100.0
+13681,latent_13681,649,0.001298,0.00088729605,3.4217482,Interval changes or stability in imaging findings over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve the use of imaging comparisons to identify changes over time, particularly emphasizing significant or interval changes in findings between exams. Such descriptions often indicate stability or progression in medical conditions, highlighting their value in longitudinal patient assessment. This pattern of identifying changes or stability over time reflects the clinical importance of trend analysis in radiological interpretations.",0.6379834854411126,0.6530612244897959,0.6,0.875,24.0,25.0,0.6057142857142856,0.6086956521739131,0.5565217391304348,0.7529411764705882,85.0,99.0
+13682,latent_13682,4044,0.008088,0.0030387945,1.3915015,Evaluation or description of interval change in medical imaging.,"These instances all contain phrases like 'evaluate interval change' or 'comparison' indicating reassessment of radiological findings, with a focus on assessing changes in condition, hardware position, or structural anomalies over time. Reports emphasize comparisons with prior images to assess interval changes, stability, or improvement.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13683,latent_13683,1471,0.002942,0.0011198188,1.795939,Focus on medical device positioning or adjustment evaluations.,"The pattern is associated with reports that involve evaluating or confirming the positioning of medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes, PAC lines, etc., or changes in plastic or metal components within patients (e.g., NG tubes, stents, pacemakers). These descriptions often include technical terms for placement or adjustment of these devices, reflecting the frequent focus of the model on technical analysis, especially in comparison to prior exams.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.60996099609961,0.61,0.6078431372549019,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13684,latent_13684,3510,0.00702,0.002528648,2.2784746,Detailed chest imaging findings with interval change comparison.,"These examples have a pattern of mentioning detailed descriptions of chest imaging findings requiring clinical correlation or showing interval changes over time, stability or resolution, utilizing specific descriptive phrases like 'unchanged', 'as compared to', 'descrease', 'increase', 'placement of', or 'continued enlargement'.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.5572519083969466,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13685,latent_13685,591,0.001182,0.0008389247,2.79033,Comparison to prior imaging indicating stability or subtle changes.,"These examples feature radiological reports that compare the current images to prior images, and it appears that findings indicating subtle changes or confirmation of stability often result in higher activation levels. The comparison to previous imaging allows for evaluation of interval changes, stability, or progression of observed conditions. This pattern suggests a focus on findings that confirm stability or identify subtle changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4534161490683229,0.4545454545454545,0.391304347826087,0.4736842105263157,76.0,100.0
+13686,latent_13686,656,0.001312,0.00079780177,2.120326,Absence of prior imaging available for comparison.,The activation is high for examples where there are no prior studies available for comparison and the evaluator is required to provide findings without making direct comparisons to previous images. This suggests the pattern is focused on initial assessments in the absence of previous radiographic baseline for comparison.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4928365894290474,0.5054347826086957,0.4507042253521127,0.3809523809523809,84.0,100.0
+13687,latent_13687,941,0.001882,0.0010455459,2.5750597,Radiology findings presented with comparison to prior imaging or noted absence of prior imaging.,"These examples demonstrate either an indication of comparison with prior imaging or explicitly state the absence of available prior imaging for comparison. These findings are consistent with a common pattern in radiology reporting where studies are evaluated in the context of historical imaging data, and if no prior data is available, that fact is explicitly mentioned.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4273024777933614,0.51,0.5056818181818182,0.89,100.0,100.0
+13688,latent_13688,3777,0.007554,0.0028168096,2.5132332,Focus on stable or improving conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation focus on noting changes in the findings that suggest conditions or abnormalities have been resolved, improved, or are stable, often in comparison to a prior imaging. The key contrast is on conditions that are stable versus those that have resolved, suggesting a specific interest in non-deteriorating conditions in follow-up imaging.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5930232558139535,0.51,100.0,100.0
+13689,latent_13689,3426,0.006852,0.0025967287,1.7347648,Explicit description required for current vs. prior image comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on explicitly narrating comparisons between current and prior imaging, typically asking for a description or analysis of such comparisons, distinct from simply presenting or listing findings.",0.3824424163407214,0.4081632653061224,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5165562913907285,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13690,latent_13690,3371,0.006742,0.0024421029,2.0735404,Findings detail medical device placement or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation involve descriptions indicating the state of medical devices, tubes, or lines, such as catheters or endotracheal tubes, specifically their position, orientation, or condition, in relation to prior imaging. This contrasts with examples having lower activation that focus less on such details.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+13691,latent_13691,588,0.001176,0.00080737186,2.2878563,Comparison between frontal and lateral chest images.,"The examples consistently highlight descriptions of two radiographic views, emphasizing the importance of changes or confirmations between different anatomical perspectives. These descriptions suggest a focus on findings or comparisons that arise from multiple imaging angles, typical in evaluations needing spatial orientation in diagnosis.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498366013071896,0.5632183908045977,0.4857142857142857,0.4594594594594595,74.0,100.0
+13692,latent_13692,1408,0.002816,0.0013009697,2.4759445,Radiology interpretation with a focus on significant clinical findings.,"Examples with high activation levels typically involve the confirmation or update of significant medical findings such as pacemaker positions, pleural effusions, and comparison or detection of significant changes from prior imaging, indicating an interpretation of ongoing or evolving conditions.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13693,latent_13693,734,0.001468,0.0009596211,2.9071891,Explicit request for comparison to prior images with no available reference images.,Activations correlate with requests to compare current images with prior images explicitly when it involves processing the images without an existing comparison. Instances where the comparison is made with another type of imaging or acknowledgment that no comparison is available tend to have lower activations. The pattern favors situations where the absence of comparison is stated or implicitly required.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4627772550073935,0.4690721649484536,0.4628099173553719,0.5957446808510638,94.0,100.0
+13694,latent_13694,944,0.001888,0.0010286132,2.1579413,Explicit instruction to compare current findings to prior exams.,"Examples with higher activation include the task explicitness of describing and comparing current findings to prior exams directly, which may be part of training data that requires detailed observations and clinical correlations of changes or stability over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4637248142189535,0.475,0.4806201550387597,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13695,latent_13695,295,0.00059,0.0005819064,3.6267042,Frequent use of 'interval' to describe changes from previous imaging.,"The higher activation levels identify descriptions involving the term 'interval', indicating changes or observations from a prior state, commonly suggesting progression, regression, or removal of pathologies or devices. This pattern is critical in tracking changes over time in medical imaging reports.",0.8995098039215685,0.902439024390244,0.8333333333333334,0.9375,16.0,25.0,0.714063714063714,0.7681159420289855,0.575,0.6052631578947368,38.0,100.0
+13696,latent_13696,2057,0.004114,0.0016226262,2.2163126,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette without pleural effusion or significant abnormality.,"Examples with activation emphasize the presence of normal cardiomediastinal silhouette or contours without major abnormalities, such as pleural effusion or pneumothorax, indicating an unremarkable cardiac structure. They often describe findings in a standard comparative radiological manner.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.543859649122807,0.31,100.0,100.0
+13697,latent_13697,1117,0.002234,0.0013000586,4.4035034,Positioning of endotracheal or other tubes with measurements.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on the precise placement of tubes or lines (e.g., endotracheal tubes, NG tubes) with numeric measurements of their terminus relative to the carina, and any suggestions for adjustment. This highlights the model's sensitivity to procedural support particularly regarding interventions or monitoring post-intubation.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.9473684210526316,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.7229064039408868,0.73,0.8382352941176471,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13698,latent_13698,2436,0.004872,0.0019465793,1.6701841,Clear interval changes in pathology when compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate specific changes in radiological findings when directly compared to prior images, indicating interval progress, regression, or stability of certain pathologies. The pattern includes describing diagnostic findings with reference to temporal changes across serial imaging.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.54,0.27,100.0,100.0
+13699,latent_13699,459,0.000918,0.0007749241,4.1020346,Reports indicating 'No acute intrathoracic process' despite technique limitations for osseous evaluation.,"Examples with high activation scores highlight findings related to absence of acute intrathoracic issues, such as normal cardiac silhouette, absence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or focal consolidation. Reports often conclude with ""No acute intrathoracic"" findings regardless of prior imaging context and technique limitations in evaluating osseous trauma.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,1.0,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.38,0.6129032258064516,0.0,0.0,55.0,100.0
+13700,latent_13700,450,0.0009,0.0008102056,2.8907156,Evaluation for interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples consistently reference the evaluation of current imaging findings against prior radiological images to assess for interval changes. This reflects a high activation level in cases where comparison is explicitly made between current and previous examinations, termed explicitly or implicitly.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3982829413960432,0.4038461538461538,0.3391304347826087,0.6964285714285714,56.0,100.0
+13701,latent_13701,632,0.001264,0.0008271866,2.1017194,Documentation of procedural intervention changes in recent imaging comparisons.,"The pattern is focusing on descriptive changes in imaging findings over short intervals involving advanced medical device placement, like tubes and catheters. These changes, not visible or acknowledged in absence of direct comparison, highlight current versus immediate prior alterations, suggesting a pattern where documentation of procedural interventions or positioning in imaging is key.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4642701012207014,0.5027932960893855,0.4038461538461538,0.2658227848101265,79.0,100.0
+13702,latent_13702,404,0.000808,0.00066335115,2.9137301,Comparison of current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal images.,The examples with high activation levels are characterized by the presence of a combination of frontal and lateral images being compared to prior frontal images specifically. This differentiation is emphasized in the prompts and commands the analysis of multiple views.,0.5727272727272728,0.574468085106383,0.5357142857142857,0.6818181818181818,22.0,25.0,0.427852998065764,0.4313725490196078,0.3068181818181818,0.5094339622641509,53.0,100.0
+13703,latent_13703,3044,0.006088,0.0023482244,2.062833,Evaluation of changes or no changes on comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples given are primarily about the correlation and comparison of current and previous imaging reports, which assess change or stability. However, the pattern emphasizes a language structure that involves clear comparisons and descriptions of deviations from standard or usual anatomy and physiological structures, which is critical in identifying changes post-treatment or procedure.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13704,latent_13704,3229,0.006458,0.002437454,1.5939208,Comparison of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels are consistently focused on providing comparative findings between current and prior imaging studies. Specifically, they describe interval changes or state that findings have remained stable or unchanged since prior imaging. This reflects input prompts that require analysis of changes over time in comparison to earlier images.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5225225225225225,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13705,latent_13705,461,0.000922,0.00072037935,4.4364266,Comparison against prior image for interval changes.,"Many examples refer to evaluating interval changes or comparing findings with prior images despite a lack of explicit diagnostic findings, indicating the pattern involves incremental updates compared to previous images often requested for evaluating suspected progression or resolution of existing conditions, potentially ambiguous or complex in nature.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4493450306453551,0.4493670886075949,0.3564356435643564,0.6206896551724138,58.0,100.0
+13706,latent_13706,4468,0.008936,0.003185107,2.0317392,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve radiological findings that reference previous examinations, focusing on changes or stability in comparison. The pattern is characterized by a comparison with previous imaging to highlight changes or the stability of conditions like pneumothorax, consolidation, or pneumonia.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13707,latent_13707,582,0.001164,0.0009566326,3.5596063,Interpretation of findings or changes beyond mere stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels reference specific findings, potential diagnoses, or changes in patient condition. The pattern likely focuses on analyzing and deducing insights beyond mere stability, such as interpreting changes or specific pathologies from the imaging data compared to a baseline or previous findings.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.386488131466829,0.4285714285714285,0.25,0.2058823529411764,68.0,100.0
+13708,latent_13708,708,0.001416,0.0008124666,2.803668,Presence of a specific medical device or equipment mentioned in findings.,"In these highly activated examples, there is a consistent pattern of referring to a specific device, tube, or medical equipment in place as a key finding, such as 'IVC filter', 'central venous catheter', 'nasogastric tube', etc. These references help to identify the patient's monitoring or support devices in the context of the radiological image.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5592307692307692,0.5602094240837696,0.5384615384615384,0.5384615384615384,91.0,100.0
+13709,latent_13709,649,0.001298,0.0006618412,2.109844,Evaluation using prior comparison.,"Highly representative samples consistently feature a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, a common approach in radiological assessments that informs about interval changes, stability, or configuration of findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4308573452999527,0.4603174603174603,0.4545454545454545,0.7303370786516854,89.0,100.0
+13710,latent_13710,2195,0.00439,0.0016936511,2.3687382,Emphasis on interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples demonstrating higher activation levels focus on changes in imaging findings compared to previous studies, and explicitly highlight stability, improvement, or progression in conditions such as pleural effusions, pulmonary edema, lung consolidation, and cardiomegaly. They emphasize comparison and interval changes often noted in follow-up or monitoring cases.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13711,latent_13711,3026,0.006052,0.0023096763,1.9496617,Interval changes or persistent radiographic findings compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples involve radiographic studies comparing findings to prior imaging where interval changes or persistent pathologies were noted, such as persistent lung abnormalities, unchanged abnormalities, or detailed comparisons indicating potential clinical concerns. This suggests a focus on close inspection of imaging changes or stability over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13712,latent_13712,469,0.000938,0.00072401454,2.9879436,Unchanged findings in comparison to prior radiographic studies.,"These examples consistently feature explicit comparisons of the current radiographic findings to prior images, specifically noting stable or unchanged findings, devices, or positions over time. Phrases such as 'as compared to prior' or 'unchanged' stabilize the pattern of comparison over radiographic intervals, indicating an ongoing assessment rather than acute findings.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5021551724137931,0.5324675324675324,0.3548387096774194,0.4074074074074074,54.0,100.0
+13713,latent_13713,1321,0.002642,0.0013038549,2.7768948,Descriptions of tube or line placement in relation to anatomical landmarks.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention the positioning and placement of tubes (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric, etc.) and central lines, with specific measurements such as distance from the carina or SVC. This suggests that the pattern identified is related to evaluating the positions of medical tubes and lines on imaging.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.562608076492727,0.57,0.5945945945945946,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13714,latent_13714,307,0.000614,0.000648759,3.3813925,"Focus on procedural updates, device placements or changes, documented in relation to past imaging.","The pattern in these examples involves identifying changes or updates over time regarding specific medical interventions such as tube placements, procedures, or removal of medical devices. The reports focus on describing these procedural updates and changes in device placement, frequently in the context of portable chest radiographs and comparisons to prior images.",0.4604473540643753,0.4651162790697674,0.3809523809523809,0.4444444444444444,18.0,25.0,0.4757971454600668,0.5401459854014599,0.25,0.3513513513513513,37.0,100.0
+13715,latent_13715,250,0.0005,0.0004710926,4.1023006,Evaluation of interval changes or stability in radiological findings against prior images.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to changes or stability in radiological findings compared to previous images or reports. This suggests the pattern involves assessing interval changes or stability in findings across examinations.,0.4615384615384615,0.4615384615384615,0.36,0.6428571428571429,14.0,25.0,0.4170641229464759,0.4318181818181818,0.2278481012658227,0.5625,32.0,100.0
+13716,latent_13716,410,0.00082,0.0007339852,2.7422607,Describing findings in relation to comparison with previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve those where current findings are compared to a prior radiographic examination. This pattern focuses on descriptions making direct comparisons to previous imaging studies to identify changes, stability, or progression in imaging findings.",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.4848484848484848,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.506578947368421,0.5066666666666667,0.3775510204081632,0.74,50.0,100.0
+13717,latent_13717,3992,0.007984,0.002987176,1.7675763,"Comparison of radiological findings with prior images, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention findings compared to previous imaging studies, specifically indicating progression, stability, or lack of significant change in findings over time. This involves comparing specific features like pleural effusions, infiltrates, or edema using terms like 'improvement', 'unchanged', or 'worsened'.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13718,latent_13718,1809,0.003618,0.0015203316,1.7946591,Relating current radiology findings to prior with actionable implications.,"The samples that show significant activation levels contain descriptions of findings in the current radiology study compared to the prior, with suggested follow-up actions or considerations based on these comparisons. These comparisons often lead to recommendations for further imaging or clinical correlation, indicating a change or notable stability worth reporting to healthcare providers.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4426451758680425,0.445,0.4367816091954023,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13719,latent_13719,1284,0.002568,0.0012627305,2.6414452,High focus on comparison of current images with prior results.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve analysis and findings that focus on changes in radiological images over time in direct comparison with prior imaged results, noting either the presence of new developments or the stability and persistence of previous conditions. This pattern is critical in radiology reporting to gauge disease progression or stability.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4558077791052701,0.4824120603015075,0.4861111111111111,0.7070707070707071,99.0,100.0
+13720,latent_13720,553,0.001106,0.00088039227,3.0447628,"Presence of low lung volumes, pleural effusions, or notable variations in cardiac/mediastinal contours.","Higher activation levels consistently appear with the presence of one or more of the following features: low lung volumes, pleural effusions, mild atelectasis, or undesirable variations in cardiac or mediastinal contours. These findings likely reflect pathological features the model is trained to recognize or find noteworthy, distinct from cases with normal findings or expected variations.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4736608211123645,0.4855491329479768,0.3918918918918919,0.3972602739726027,73.0,100.0
+13721,latent_13721,321,0.000642,0.0006374615,2.8563187,Focus on current image findings without comparison details.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings and provide interpretations specifically in relation to the radiology study current images without incorporating details about previous images, yet promise a description in comparison to prior images, thus suggesting a discrepancy which appears to trigger the model's expected pattern.",0.7306122448979592,0.7380952380952381,0.6666666666666666,0.7058823529411765,17.0,25.0,0.5617633191890617,0.6363636363636364,0.3902439024390244,0.3720930232558139,43.0,100.0
+13722,latent_13722,542,0.001084,0.0008063742,2.60235,Reports evaluating interval changes in comparison to prior imaging studies.,These examples typically assess radiological findings for interval changes compared to previous imaging and are required to contain clear references to prior imaging within the assistant-provided comparisons of those findings. The pattern emphasizes an evaluation of changes between the current and prior images in a structured comparison format.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4251868051758702,0.4277108433734939,0.3693693693693693,0.6212121212121212,66.0,100.0
+13723,latent_13723,358,0.000716,0.0006499931,3.8951597,Stable findings in comparison to prior scans.,"Examples 1, 2, 3, 5, 13, 19, 23, 39, 43, and 45 demonstrate the presence of comparative reports with stable or unchanged findings, particularly using phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' or 'unchanged appearance'. This pattern focuses on evaluating changes (or lack thereof) over time using previous imaging as a reference point.",0.5771649733913884,0.5869565217391305,0.5555555555555556,0.4761904761904761,21.0,25.0,0.59375,0.6388888888888888,0.4230769230769231,0.5,44.0,100.0
+13724,latent_13724,6246,0.012492,0.0043887426,1.4204782,Comparison of device or tube placement with previous study.,"These examples involve radiological comparison and evaluation, but the pattern aligns specifically around descriptions of tubes (e.g., endotracheal, PICC, gastric) or other devices (e.g., stent graft, prosthesis) maintained in correct or observed positions between exams. Changes in these device positions or states are highlighted.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.6290322580645161,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13725,latent_13725,262,0.000524,0.00050550303,3.2937813,Use of prior reports for interval change comparison.,High activation levels are associated with mentions of a prior report or a comparison with previous specific imaging in the context of evaluating interval changes or ongoing conditions. The presence of explicit references to prior radiological findings allowing for comparison influences the pattern recognition of the model.,0.7071428571428571,0.7073170731707317,0.5769230769230769,0.9375,16.0,25.0,0.4575094779819189,0.4580152671755725,0.2916666666666667,0.9032258064516128,31.0,100.0
+13726,latent_13726,1848,0.003696,0.0015608793,1.9084754,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high-activation examples mention a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting stable or unchanged findings. This pattern accommodates the structure where findings are documented in continuity with how they appear over time, placing importance on stability. It illustrates how reports often emphasize whether certain observed differences or continuities exist when referred back to previous studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.5733333333333334,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13727,latent_13727,336,0.000672,0.00063445774,3.1669626,Comparison with prior images focusing on changes or stability of findings.,"These examples frequently mention the comparison between current and prior images, specifically focusing on any changes or stability of findings, despite lacking specific radiological changes. Reports often include phrases such as 'unchanged', 'comparison', or explicit reference to prior images, which indicates the pattern of evaluating stability or progression between subsequent radiological assessments.",0.386046511627907,0.3863636363636363,0.3461538461538461,0.4736842105263157,19.0,25.0,0.3826305220883534,0.3986013986013986,0.2207792207792207,0.3953488372093023,43.0,100.0
+13728,latent_13728,4412,0.008824,0.0032119905,2.3449328,Use of prior images to assess stability or changes.,"Samples with higher activation refer to the analysis of sequential or comparison images, with particular emphasis on using prior imaging for interpretation and tracking stability or changes. This aligns with the pattern detected in samples involving change or lack thereof identified through direct radiographic comparison, which is commonly emphasized in radiology tasks involving stability or follow-up evaluation of known conditions or treatments.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.443170651817884,0.49,0.4936708860759494,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13729,latent_13729,958,0.001916,0.00097217277,3.4829984,Interval changes or resolution of findings compared to prior.,"Examples with activation greater than zero contain findings of interval changes or improvements, often in the context of resolution of acute issues like effusions or opacities. They focus on dynamic assessment, observing differences between the current and prior imaging, such as 'interval improvement' or 'resolution'.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5085408520271661,0.5175879396984925,0.5277777777777778,0.38,100.0,99.0
+13730,latent_13730,2315,0.00463,0.0017949048,2.1231692,Documents detailing interval changes in imaging findings.,"Positive examples include both a description of findings and a section for comparison with previous imaging, often noting changes or stability. They are also specifically indicated for evaluation or follow-up which aligns with the pattern of reviews centered around prior comparison, highlighting any developments or interval changes.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13731,latent_13731,243,0.000486,0.00054500916,3.3930833,Detailed comparative assessment between current and prior images.,"Activation levels are high in reports that integrate comparison details derived both from descriptions in the current images and prior imaging records. This detailed contrast facilitates nuanced understanding of patient developments, highlighting changes or stability.",0.6657877389584708,0.6666666666666666,0.5217391304347826,0.8571428571428571,14.0,25.0,0.4828947368421052,0.4961832061068702,0.2784810126582278,0.7096774193548387,31.0,100.0
+13732,latent_13732,1444,0.002888,0.001116985,1.9216554,Comparison of current and prior images in radiology study.,"This pattern involves comparing findings on current radiological images to previous studies, which is a common task in radiology used to assess changes or stability in visualized pathology. This comparison is crucial for understanding any interval changes, improvement, or progression of medical conditions.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.441474507300726,0.475,0.4832214765100671,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13733,latent_13733,3451,0.006902,0.0025929606,1.6769713,Presence of significant abnormalities or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Reports with higher activation levels focus on the presence of a specific abnormality or condition, often emphasizing findings about lung opacities or positioning of medical devices, and are compared with previous imaging. However, those with activation levels of 0 tend to include a normal or unchanged status compared to past studies or provide descriptions without significant findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4675324675324675,0.36,100.0,100.0
+13734,latent_13734,4932,0.009864,0.0035804957,1.8459721,Changes in the position or presence of medical devices compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently detail the presence of medical devices like tubes or catheters and modifications in their positioning or condition when compared to a prior imaging study. This pattern highlights the importance of assessing changes in device positioning in follow-up radiological assessments, which is crucial in patient management and care.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5370370370370371,0.29,100.0,100.0
+13735,latent_13735,2021,0.004042,0.0017565156,2.4617941,Emphasis on interval changes in pathology or devices.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings and changes, especially regarding medical devices or anatomy, through explicit comparison to prior images. The comparison frequently notes changes such as placements or condition of devices like tubes or catheters, and changes or stability in lung pathology or pleural conditions.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13736,latent_13736,669,0.001338,0.0010709283,4.2547984,"Detailed comparisons with prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve comparing current imaging results with prior images, especially in determining changes related to conditions like CHF, pneumonia, or surgical placements. They often include details about variances from previous images, such as increased or unchanged features, or noting the stability of conditions like effusions or edema.",0.3220125786163522,0.3265306122448979,0.2857142857142857,0.25,24.0,25.0,0.3803932531916876,0.4043715846994535,0.296875,0.2289156626506024,83.0,100.0
+13737,latent_13737,5513,0.011026,0.003978627,2.0608447,"Explicit comparison to prior image findings, detailing change or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels typically contain observations of changes like tube placement, lung opacities, or pleural effusion explicitly noted against a prior study, often mentioning stability or small changes in notable structures. Lower activations lack explicit change comparisons between current and prior images, focusing instead on present findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.567882624861823,0.57,0.5614035087719298,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13738,latent_13738,2096,0.004192,0.0017695501,1.8659587,Provision of both frontal and lateral views for comparison.,"Examples that show higher activation often include references to both frontal and lateral views being provided. This pattern suggests adherence to a more comprehensive radiological evaluation, as both angles provide a more complete spatial understanding of anatomical structures and anomalies, making it representative of in-depth comparative analysis to past images.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13739,latent_13739,420,0.00084,0.00068947044,3.958632,Stable findings in radiology reports compared to prior images.,"The pattern involves descriptions of radiological findings that are unchanged compared to previous studies. These descriptions emphasize stability in cardiomediastinal contours, the positioning of tubes/devices, or existing thoracic findings like atelectasis or effusions, often indicating no acute changes or progression in conditions.",0.6761133603238867,0.6875,0.6176470588235294,0.9130434782608696,23.0,25.0,0.627972027972028,0.6298701298701299,0.4831460674157303,0.7962962962962963,54.0,100.0
+13740,latent_13740,434,0.000868,0.00084712,2.8537524,Reference to 'linear' opacities or changes in lung tissues.,"The examples with high activation all mention the presence or evaluation of 'linear' opacities, densities, or findings in various lung zones, often representing scarring or atelectasis. This pattern stands out as a distinguishing feature in radiological descriptions that focus on subtle changes in lung tissue from prior imaging, making it a key aspect being activated on.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.8,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.6086856086856087,0.7142857142857143,0.75,0.2777777777777778,54.0,100.0
+13741,latent_13741,661,0.001322,0.0010575899,3.2291238,Unchanged interstitial lung markings from prior imaging.,These examples consistently describe increased interstitial lung markings or opacities that are unchanged from previous exams. This stable finding is a common pattern in patients with chronic lung conditions like interstitial lung disease where new acute processes have not developed.,0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5324283559577677,0.5967741935483871,0.6774193548387096,0.2441860465116279,86.0,100.0
+13742,latent_13742,832,0.001664,0.00091406447,3.2272975,Radiological comparison highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include radiological comparisons referencing changes or stability in pathology relative to previous imaging studies. This pattern emphasizes how the radiologist communicates stability, improvement, or deterioration by explicitly noting interval changes, with focus on pulmonary opacities, effusions, or device positions.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13743,latent_13743,5182,0.010364,0.0037463608,1.5806746,Comparative analysis of current study with prior studies.,"The examples with activation levels above 3.0 all reference comparisons to prior studies or reports, often discussing stability or changes of findings, while those with lower activation typically do not focus on such comparative analysis, but rather on standalone observations. This indicates the emphasis is on understanding changes or evolutions in medical imaging findings over time using comparative study.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5353468304015931,0.58,0.5493827160493827,0.89,100.0,100.0
+13744,latent_13744,4315,0.00863,0.003136652,2.2000577,Comparison of current and previous medical imaging results.,"The pattern identified in examples with higher activation levels is the presence of a comparison between current and previous images. This common element provides context and tracks changes or stability over time, which is a key technique used in radiology to assess patient's conditions or treatment effectiveness.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+13745,latent_13745,980,0.00196,0.00093716464,1.9010977,Comparison with prior imaging to assess change or stability.,"The pattern identified by the high activation examples involves making comparisons to prior imaging. These examples focus on findings in current radiology images versus past examinations to report changes or stability, which is a common approach in radiological analysis to monitor patient conditions over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13746,latent_13746,1069,0.002138,0.0012410288,2.1093793,"Subtle atelectasis, scarring, or indeterminate opacities possibly indicating early infection.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe subtle atelectasis, scarring, or patchy opacities that could represent early infection. These findings are typical in imaging reports where consolidation is minimal or ambiguous, highlighting indeterminate conditions that require further clinical correlation.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.6774193548387096,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6254681647940075,0.63,0.6065573770491803,0.74,100.0,100.0
+13747,latent_13747,387,0.000774,0.00093757804,4.3465757,Explicit requests for comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples uniformly involve a specific request for a detailed description and comparison of findings between current and prior imaging. These are verbatim instructions or directives given to the model, indicating a focus on comparison-based analysis, unlike the less activated examples which do not emphasize this as explicitly.",0.3774436090225563,0.4130434782608695,0.4166666666666667,0.7142857142857143,21.0,25.0,0.4460511679644049,0.4466666666666666,0.3428571428571428,0.72,50.0,100.0
+13748,latent_13748,2787,0.005574,0.0023399976,2.8615952,Cardiac silhouette described as 'top normal' or stable across evaluations.,"The examples often reference imaging findings where the heart size is described as 'top normal' or borderline normal, focusing on cases where there is no significant change in the cardiac silhouette despite various other findings or conditions.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7097094548139848,0.715,0.7945205479452054,0.58,100.0,100.0
+13749,latent_13749,7609,0.015218,0.005416192,1.7146258,Specificity in radiological findings showing stability or change over time.,"The model differentiates between examples based on the degree of specific prior changes in radiological findings. Higher activations correspond to examples where radiological findings show noted differences or stability across time, while lower activations are indifferent or vague about changes.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.5818181818181818,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13750,latent_13750,4323,0.008646,0.003219338,1.8985229,Presence of significant interval changes in radiological findings.,"The pattern is characterized by imaging reports that emphasize interval changes, often using language like 'interval change,' 'new,' 'given concerning growth,' or 'appeared since the last study,' indicating that a particular condition has progressed or appeared since the last examination. This reflects the clinical significance of such changes in patient management.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5172413793103449,0.3,100.0,100.0
+13751,latent_13751,3798,0.007596,0.0028315445,1.6339364,Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,Examples with higher activations involve detailed comparison between the current and prior radiology images to describe findings consistently. These examples consistently include observations of changes or stability in specific pathologies or interventions noted in both current and prior imaging. Low activations involve simpler summaries without intricate or explicit comparison.,0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5555555555555556,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13752,latent_13752,1951,0.003902,0.0016528164,1.9787,"Interval changes in extubation or tube removal, and changes in opacities or effusions.","Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions of either the extubation or removal of tubes (like endotracheal, nasogastric, or catheters) or changes in opacities or effusions. These are specific findings that result in significant interval change noted in the radiology report, which is distinct from those that show stable conditions or no significant changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13753,latent_13753,2734,0.005468,0.0021860113,1.8949395,Explaining current findings by comparing them to prior images.,Examples with moderate to high activation focus on interpreting current findings in the context of comparison to prior imaging. These typically involve changes or stability of observed features or adjustments in medical devices. The emphasis on comparing current images against historical imaging to draw conclusions about changes aligns with the pattern.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13754,latent_13754,1132,0.002264,0.0011735032,2.4068313,Interval changes or stability in radiographic findings compared to prior imaging.,"Patterns with positive activation levels describe the current state or changes in findings compared to prior imaging, showing specific interval changes or trends in the patient’s condition such as improvement, worsening, or consistency over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13755,latent_13755,684,0.001368,0.0009896448,2.9472947,Mild to moderate enlargement of the cardiac silhouette.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe slightly to mildly enlarged cardiac silhouettes. This pattern focuses on identifying subtle to moderate increases in heart size that are observed across different radiology studies, referencing stability or minor changes over time.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8400751446838166,0.8406593406593407,0.797752808988764,0.8658536585365854,82.0,100.0
+13756,latent_13756,4218,0.008436,0.0031347275,1.4741762,Significant observed interval changes or comparisons to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations frequently include references to changes or comparisons with prior radiographs, focusing on specific patient outcomes or evaluations like tube placement and pulmonary changes. These emphasize specific medical events or interventions between image acquisitions.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5896306676008407,0.59,0.5849056603773585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13757,latent_13757,1433,0.002866,0.0012403734,2.1083045,Evaluation of placement or positioning of enteric/nasogastric tubes.,"These examples focus on identifying and describing the placement or changes in placement of enteric or nasogastric tubes in imaging studies. This is a common and critical finding in radiology reports, given the need to ensure correct tube positioning to prevent complications, especially in patients with altered anatomy or postoperative conditions.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.50997150997151,0.57,0.7333333333333333,0.22,100.0,100.0
+13758,latent_13758,446,0.000892,0.00070644764,2.435609,Prompt for comparing current findings with prior images for changes.,"The examples consistently ask for a comparison between the findings of current imaging and previous imaging, often with explicit or implicit instruction to provide descriptions in light of prior images. The prompt setup for these examples involves variables for current and prior images, common in radiology reports when comparing current and prior studies.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.3823529411764705,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3538461538461538,0.3571428571428571,0.2972972972972973,0.6111111111111112,54.0,100.0
+13759,latent_13759,754,0.001508,0.001063471,3.7368407,Interval change or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,"The pattern involves descriptions of changes in findings across multiple chest radiography exams. Specifically, these reports highlight interval changes, stability or progression in medical findings compared to previous imaging studies. This recurring theme indicates that examples with this pattern focus on progression and stability of findings via comparative imaging analysis.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5815889029003782,0.582010582010582,0.5471698113207547,0.651685393258427,89.0,100.0
+13760,latent_13760,776,0.001552,0.00097223907,2.7481787,Comparisons highlighting change or stability in radiological findings.,"The samples highlight narrative reports that specify increments, reductions, or stable states concerning past findings in chest imaging. Such radiological texts focus on changes in medical conditions or specific observations (like medical devices or pleural effusions) between the current and prior imaging.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4763157894736842,0.4874371859296482,0.4883720930232558,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+13761,latent_13761,1684,0.003368,0.0016222382,4.0197225,Request for interval change evaluation from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve requests to compare current imaging with prior radiographs and provide a description of interval changes. These examples frequently mention findings by directly comparing them to previous imaging, indicating an interest in the identification of changes over time.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5525830491347732,0.5527638190954773,0.5480769230769231,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+13762,latent_13762,1858,0.003716,0.0016111523,3.2013776,Presence of pacemaker or ICD devices in radiology reports.,"High activation occurs when pacemaker or implantable cardio-defibrillator (ICD) devices are explicitly mentioned, indicating focus on cardiac device positioning or presence. These reports often detail the assessment of device placement relative to health conditions, forming a pattern of emphasis on cardiac electrical appliances.",0.5989304812834224,0.64,0.8888888888888888,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,100.0,100.0
+13763,latent_13763,2981,0.005962,0.0021749018,2.11739,Includes interval change with prior comparison when possible.,"Examples with activation closer to 0 involve the absence of relevant changes, lack of prior images for comparison, or stable findings without significant alteration. Activated examples more closely relate to noticing a difference despite limitations, or observations made with clear reference to previous assessments. This demonstrates the pattern of involving assessment or change over time, even if previous data is not clearly available.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6022031823745411,0.61,0.5859375,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13764,latent_13764,871,0.001742,0.0010695991,2.8788087,Explicit requests for comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve clear requests to compare new findings with prior studies or radiographs, often with explicit phrasing indicating such comparison is necessary, even mentioning missing prior comparisons. Non-representative examples lack this clear comparative approach or omit previous studies.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13765,latent_13765,1080,0.00216,0.0011415307,2.5897987,Changes in lung opacities compared to prior images.,"Examples with an activation level above zero generally include a comparison with a prior image and some form of significant change or suspicion of a pathology like increased opacities or potential nodules, which suggest changes prompting closer evaluation. This change is usually signified by specific changes in lung opacity or suspected abnormalities.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4464285714285714,0.25,100.0,100.0
+13766,latent_13766,764,0.001528,0.0009375173,2.4595711,Reports emphasizing comparison to prior imaging findings.,"These examples describe comparisons to prior imaging findings and often highlight changes, stability, or evolution in specific radiological abnormalities. The presence of comparison, changes in imaging findings, or uncertainties are notable in the higher activation examples and form the core pattern.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4836756756756757,0.5175879396984925,0.5099337748344371,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+13767,latent_13767,3845,0.00769,0.0028155183,1.8000572,Detailed comparison between current and previous images.,"Examples with higher activation levels are all marked by the presence of specific language patterns focused on detailed comparisons between a current radiological image and prior imaging. This often involves explicit phrases describing interval changes or stability over time, and closely describes the specific findings from prior studies to evaluate such changes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13768,latent_13768,1133,0.002266,0.0011327808,2.8038292,Use of current and prior images to describe findings comparatively.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve narratives where findings are evaluated directly in comparison with previous images, focusing on assessing changes or stability over time. This comparative evaluation often includes noting stability or changes in various anatomical structures or pathology.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4597285067873303,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+13769,latent_13769,5609,0.011218,0.00399037,1.5322427,Comparison of multiple views (frontal and lateral) to prior frontal images.,"Highly activating examples mention the use of multiple projection views, specifically frontal and lateral images are compared to previous or baseline frontal images, a common radiological practice to assess changes over time or verify tube positions. This comparison across multiple views to a specific reference image likely distinguishes these examples.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13770,latent_13770,5529,0.011058,0.003920261,1.1521418,Description of interval change or stability in radiology findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels detail changes between current and prior imaging, emphasizing findings such as interval development, improvement, or stability of known conditions. This pattern includes the use of comparison phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged since', and references to specific changes over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13771,latent_13771,2169,0.004338,0.0017565947,1.9169617,Detection of significant changes or interventions involving apparatuses or structures.,"The examples with high activation pertain to scenarios measuring changes or interventions involving apparatuses or physiological structures, which directly influence diagnostic or treatment considerations. This suggests that the detection of significant changes or direct interventions is what the model is particularly sensitive to in this context.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5773195876288659,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13772,latent_13772,2372,0.004744,0.0018865272,2.077455,Comparison of current with prior imaging for positional changes or stability.,"These examples all involve a comparison of current radiological imaging findings with previous studies, specifically regarding positional changes or stability of various internal objects or anatomical features like bilateral pulmonary fields, heart size, or lung opacities. There is a focus on reporting no or minimal change, slight improvement, or continued stability over time.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.5474452554744526,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13773,latent_13773,502,0.001004,0.000871901,4.303405,Focus on direct findings comparison without standout interpretation conclusions.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological comparisons with annotations that include findings descriptions, but they were frequently seen to exclude explicit interpretation conclusions such as a direct diagnosis or overall impression unrelated to the comparison.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4186436056250243,0.4451219512195122,0.4,0.84375,64.0,100.0
+13774,latent_13774,535,0.00107,0.0007932319,4.0503993,Minimal atelectasis noted often in lung bases without other major findings.,"The pattern that leads to high activation levels involves explicit mention of atelectasis, often in the lung bases, without the presence of major acute findings like pneumonia or pleural effusion. This is a distinct radiological finding that consistently appears in the highly activated examples using terms like 'atelectasis', 'minimal', and location within 'lung bases'.",0.9194847020933976,0.92,0.8620689655172413,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7499141188594984,0.7678571428571429,0.7636363636363637,0.6176470588235294,68.0,100.0
+13775,latent_13775,414,0.000828,0.0006261243,3.5237727,Comparison involving multiple prior imaging or modalities.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize evaluating findings in the context of prior imaging studies, specifically where the comparison is made to multiple prior examinations or different imaging modalities. This indicates a focus on patterns of change or stability across various examinations, often highlighting interval changes or stability.",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.4848484848484848,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4511947242422873,0.46,0.3086419753086419,0.5,50.0,100.0
+13776,latent_13776,555,0.00111,0.00086456543,5.796028,"Clear lungs, normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, no pleural effusion or pneumothorax.",Examples with higher activations consistently reference normal lung and cardiomediastinal findings in the presence of no pleural effusion or pneumothorax. This pattern emphasizes the absence of acute cardiothoracic pathology as a signal for high activation.,0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7316770186335404,0.7321428571428571,0.6236559139784946,0.8529411764705882,68.0,100.0
+13777,latent_13777,2093,0.004186,0.0018014085,1.9811016,Comparisons indicating stability or non-progressive findings.,"The examples with high activation involve a comparison that highlights findings suggestive of stability or changes that could indicate a benign or non-progressive condition. Descriptions often note findings such as 'unchanged', 'stable', 'no new', or provide explicit comparative context.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.37,100.0,100.0
+13778,latent_13778,5193,0.010386,0.0037085055,1.4039416,Explicit procedural instructions for comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with significant activation levels involve detailed analyses of current and prior images with explicit instructions to compare their findings. The language of instruction specifies a prior and current image, with a clear directive to evaluate for changes between the two, often with specific instructions or considerations in mind.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13779,latent_13779,512,0.001024,0.0008146951,3.506408,Normal heart size and stable mediastinal and hilar contours.,"Most samples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of the heart being normal in size within a radiological study, often accompanied by stable mediastinal and hilar contours. These are common findings reported in negative chest radiographs, which focus on the clear, expected, normal anatomical appearances.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5489548954895489,0.573170731707317,0.4516129032258064,0.4375,64.0,100.0
+13780,latent_13780,1042,0.002084,0.0012097658,2.1205177,Description of stable or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions of anatomical structures and features that are unchanged or stable in comparison to previous studies. The reports highlight no significant interval changes despite various ongoing medical conditions, treatments, or surgical indications. Words like 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'no significant change' frequently appear in combination with specific references to prior images and reports.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.5526315789473685,0.42,100.0,100.0
+13781,latent_13781,4180,0.00836,0.0030075428,1.9805549,Changes identified in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels predominantly include passages where findings between current and prior images demonstrate change, be it improvement, deterioration, or otherwise significant interval difference. Examples with lower activation often show stability or lack of comparative insight in findings.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.51995199519952,0.52,0.5196078431372549,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13782,latent_13782,282,0.000564,0.0006734017,2.701475,Changes or details in support and monitoring devices.,"Examples with high activation consistently describe changes in support and monitoring device positions or details. This includes interval placements, unchanged positions, or the removal of medical lines and tubes in chest radiographs, indicating a focus pattern on these devices' management within patient care context.",0.731067382230173,0.7317073170731707,0.5925925925925926,1.0,16.0,25.0,0.7997054491899853,0.8161764705882353,0.5901639344262295,1.0,36.0,100.0
+13783,latent_13783,1927,0.003854,0.0016201684,1.82158,Low activation for routine comparisons; higher activation for notable changes.,"The pattern involves the presence of a frontal image and prior image, but with low or zero activation, it appears that these are typically routine assessments and do not present significant changes in findings. Higher activations are associated with notable changes or specific assessment instructions relating to fluid dynamics, patient positioning, or interval developments, indicating that stability or small changes are less representative of the pattern.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4590163934426229,0.28,100.0,100.0
+13784,latent_13784,2048,0.004096,0.0015635459,1.3840181,Complex findings requiring detailed interpretation in comparison studies.,"The higher-activation examples describing radiological findings include analysis of findings involving complex pathophysiology or changes in pulmonary opacities/consolidation or mediastinal concerns. These typically require nuanced interpretation due to multifaceted changes in clinical context, seen in follow-ups or conditions like pneumonia.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5505777310924369,0.5678391959798995,0.5467625899280576,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+13785,latent_13785,1340,0.00268,0.0013993153,2.869956,Evaluation of medical tube and line placement in imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve the assessment of medical tubes and lines, such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, particularly in comparison to prior imaging. This includes checks for correct tube placement and any changes over time, manifesting as terms like 'NG tube', 'endotracheal tube', 'Dobbhoff', and 'PICC line' with specific attention to anatomical positioning.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5980303487086724,0.6,0.6162790697674418,0.53,100.0,100.0
+13786,latent_13786,2775,0.00555,0.0022324177,2.0601678,Changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies involving interventions or apparatus.,"The pattern of high activation is seen in examples where there is typically a description of changes comparing current and prior radiology images, especially highlighting alterations in medical apparatus positions or pulmonary conditions. Additionally, comparisons are related to changes following clinical interventions or conditions noted previously, with implications for clinical management or reassessment suggested.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.5581395348837209,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13787,latent_13787,3128,0.006256,0.0023205474,1.807282,Detailed comparison to prior imaging focusing on changes.,"The examples with higher activation systematically involve a comparison with prior imaging. However, those with higher activation specify acute changes or detailed assessments in conditions or equipment positions over time, such as improvements, stabilities, or new developments.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5544554455445545,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13788,latent_13788,3164,0.006328,0.002353222,1.854453,"Reports emphasize on placement and status of procedural devices (e.g., ETT, chest tube, catheter) with comparison to prior imaging.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently reference changes or comparisons with prior radiological studies, highlighting criteria like PACEMAKER, ETT, or CATHETER PLACEMENT. These phrases suggest a high level of attention to certain procedural or device-related changes coupled with an indication for comparison to evaluate the positioning or condition as unchanged or modified.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5797101449275363,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13789,latent_13789,916,0.001832,0.0009638546,2.238026,Focus on comparison with and evaluation of changes from prior imaging.,"High activation samples consistently emphasize the mention of 'comparison' with previous imaging studies, mirroring a focus on evaluating changes over time. Even when PROR_REPORT or INDICATION descriptions are not provided, the presence of prior comparisons correlates with a higher activation.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+13790,latent_13790,426,0.000852,0.00066556805,2.9786954,"Consistent findings or minor changes in comparison to prior imaging, focusing on stability.","Samples with high activation levels tend to indicate evaluations or findings in the comparison between current and prior radiographs, with a focus on unchanged status or minor updates to interpretations like steady appearances, continued observations, or unchanged conditions.",0.51,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.3288648972859499,0.5194805194805194,0.3492063492063492,0.4074074074074074,54.0,100.0
+13791,latent_13791,605,0.00121,0.00088993966,2.2941012,Explicit descriptions of changes or comparisons to prior states or imaging.,Examples with high activation levels involve scenarios where findings are explicitly stated as changes or comparisons to previous imaging or treatments. This suggests that the model highly activates for descriptions of interval changes rather than interpretations without comparisons.,0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4647277227722772,0.4797687861271676,0.4341085271317829,0.7671232876712328,73.0,100.0
+13792,latent_13792,4971,0.009942,0.0035308586,1.1936247,Reports showing stability or no significant change compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activations are associated with reports that indicate stability or no significant change in findings when compared to prior imaging. These samples frequently use specific terminology such as 'stable', 'unchanged', 'no significant change', or indicate improvement or resolution from a comparative standpoint.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+13793,latent_13793,511,0.001022,0.00087595684,2.7270472,Assessment for pneumonia or pneumothorax with radiological comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve evaluating possible pneumonia or pneumothorax. These examples tend to have indications mentioning pneumonia evaluation, followed by a structured comparison of current and previous images, and a conclusion often stating detection or exclusion of pneumonia.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5796999805182155,0.5838509316770186,0.4642857142857143,0.639344262295082,61.0,100.0
+13794,latent_13794,1816,0.003632,0.0015086076,1.8691561,Stable or unchanged findings compared to previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe the radiological study findings with explicit detailed comparison to prior imaging studies, specifically mentioning stable, unchanged, or resolved conditions in terms of devices, features, or pathologies (e.g., lung opacities, effusions, cardiac silhouette), with references to specific previous dates or intervals.",0.4480600750938673,0.4489795918367347,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.517636418450407,0.52,0.5232558139534884,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13795,latent_13795,3058,0.006116,0.0023709328,2.1740813,Observation of interval change in conditions compared to previous imaging.,"Higher activations consistently occur in examples where there is a change or interval change in findings compared to prior imaging studies. This can include both improvements or deteriorations in the patient's condition, demonstrated through phrases like 'decreased', 'less' or 'more' pronounced findings, and references to changes over time.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.4842105263157895,0.46,100.0,100.0
+13796,latent_13796,647,0.001294,0.0008950234,2.7787192,Presence of severe or unchanged cardiopulmonary pathologies.,"Examples with high activation discuss increased or unchanged pathologies like cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or other severe lung conditions. These findings often reflect concerning or noteworthy conditions that may require further clinical intervention or monitoring. Examples with zero activation often lack severe or updated pathological findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5550422428250483,0.5561797752808989,0.4945054945054945,0.5769230769230769,78.0,100.0
+13797,latent_13797,914,0.001828,0.0010042159,2.1639037,Detailing progressive or stable imaging findings against previous images.,"Samples with high activation levels often contain indications about changes or intervals when comparing prior imaging results, especially highlighting new findings or stability over the time concerning medical conditions like opacities or benign findings. These descriptions often comment on the progression or resolution of conditions, suggesting a focus on tracing developments relative to previous studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4051819739893134,0.41,0.423728813559322,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13798,latent_13798,2347,0.004694,0.0016971627,1.499326,Comparison and description in relation to prior imaging findings.,"The samples with higher activation levels share a consistent pattern of comparing current findings with prior image sets, often detailing specific changes or stability concerning focal abnormalities, techniques, or interventions. Moderate activation indicates slightly weaker but present comparative details.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4689900541764373,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+13799,latent_13799,2444,0.004888,0.0020688167,2.2147186,Evaluation or assessment of medical device positioning.,"The highly activated examples involve assessment or evaluation of the positioning of medical devices such as central venous catheters, IJ catheters, or endotracheal tubes. These descriptions focus on ensuring proper placement of such devices within patients.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.496071009006657,0.5125628140703518,0.5238095238095238,0.33,100.0,99.0
+13800,latent_13800,5107,0.010214,0.0036831077,1.7630072,Reports focused on changes or evolution in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are seen in reports that specify changes in findings compared to prior imaging, especially when terms like 'new', 'increased', 'improved', or 'decreased' are used to highlight these changes, indicating a focus on the evolution of patient conditions over time.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5815461868396276,0.6,0.5704225352112676,0.81,100.0,100.0
+13801,latent_13801,4116,0.008232,0.0030311334,1.807596,Explicit comparison with previous imaging showing stability or improvement.,"Analysis reflects that higher activation levels occur when changes between current and prior imaging studies are explicitly described in terms of stability or improvement, often justified by reference to past studies for corroboration. This includes wording like ""unchanged from prior,"" ""stable appearance,"" or ""improvement compared to previous,"" rather than just mentioning comparison without specific findings.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4857142857142857,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13802,latent_13802,4149,0.008298,0.0031432032,1.600155,Precise description and measurement of support device positions.,"Examples with high activation levels contain a detailed description of findings related to support devices such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, with specific measurements of their positions relative to anatomical landmarks (e.g., distance above the carina). This pattern reflects a focus on the positioning and status of supportive medical devices, rather than diagnosing pathologies.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.6111111111111112,0.33,100.0,100.0
+13803,latent_13803,3873,0.007746,0.0028368332,1.693382,Report stability or minimal changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe radiological findings with an emphasis on stability or minor changes in comparison to a previous study, noting minimal interval changes, stable positions of tubes or lines, and absence of major new findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5119047619047619,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13804,latent_13804,646,0.001292,0.0008662221,3.9749942,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images in radiology.,"These examples demonstrate significant use of structured radiology reports instructing AI to provide evaluative descriptions of current images compared to prior ones. High activations occur with detailed, explicit, and comparative descriptions, highlighting changes or stability in pathologies or features across different time points, suggesting the AI comprehends and emulates the process of comparison within radiology workflow.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5789540979414397,0.5842696629213483,0.5166666666666667,0.7948717948717948,78.0,100.0
+13805,latent_13805,598,0.001196,0.00080059527,2.2099693,Normal cardiopulmonary findings and mediastinal contours with no acute abnormalities.,"The examples exhibiting this pattern consistently describe findings of no acute cardiopulmonary abnormality, normal heart size, and normal mediastinal contours, often supporting the absence of acute chest pathology. This pattern focuses on stability and normalcy in radiographic findings, regardless of clinical indications.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4941033836658217,0.5235294117647059,0.4137931034482758,0.3380281690140845,71.0,99.0
+13806,latent_13806,4766,0.009532,0.0035042802,1.4944501,"Changes in lung opacities, effusions, or new pathologies on comparison with previous images.","The examples with higher activation levels involve cases where focal consolidations, pleural effusions, or pneumothoraxes are suggested, identified, or changes are noted as compared to prior imaging studies. Particularly, they involve notable findings related to opacities, effusions, or new changes.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5223880597014925,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13807,latent_13807,3649,0.007298,0.0026671253,2.1172605,Description of interval changes or stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels appear in samples where findings in the current radiology study are described in comparison to prior imaging, and changes in certain features or structures are noted, such as opacities, tube placements, or existing medical devices. These descriptions focus on identifying changes over time, which is often critical in radiological assessments.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5727799816905706,0.58,0.5634920634920635,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13808,latent_13808,2575,0.00515,0.0020199518,1.8608938,No available prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation mention no comparison available or no previous imaging to evaluate against. This pattern indicates more detailed findings are required from the current imaging, especially when a direct comparison isn't possible.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4743589743589743,0.37,100.0,100.0
+13809,latent_13809,2175,0.00435,0.0017418106,1.8879826,"Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging, noting interval changes.","The observations in the samples consistently note changes or stability observed when comparing current imaging findings to prior studies, particularly noting interval changes or stability in specific findings like opacities, tube placements, or effusions. This pattern emphasizes interval observations rather than new findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4394366197183098,0.4422110552763819,0.4473684210526316,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+13810,latent_13810,4123,0.008246,0.0029853906,1.1718389,Comparison of current findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention descriptions of the current radiographic findings in comparison to previous images, analyzing stability or changes over time. This pattern applies to both positive and negative findings for specific thoracic diseases or conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13811,latent_13811,3146,0.006292,0.0024397236,1.8800728,Comparison with prior images focusing on changes in clinical status or device positioning.,"The examples with higher activations involve comparison between current and prior imaging studies to identify changes over time. These comparisons are explicit and often identify specific changes in clinical status or in the positioning of medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes. Examples without such comparative analysis have lower activation levels.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13812,latent_13812,4602,0.009204,0.0033120585,1.4763249,Presence or assessment of pneumothorax.,"The pattern involves references to the presence or absence of pneumothorax. Although atelectasis, pleural effusions, cardiomegaly, and effusions are frequently discussed, references, phrases, or specific terms directly assessing pneumothorax and ruling it out seem to be most pertinent to higher activation levels.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,100.0
+13813,latent_13813,1262,0.002524,0.001755054,3.5761855,Tasks involving detailed comparison to prior imaging results.,The examples with high activation levels consistently request a description of radiologic findings in comparison to prior imaging studies.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5112781954887218,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13814,latent_13814,1181,0.002362,0.0010630497,1.8604811,Description of interval changes from prior imaging.,"All examples with high activation levels mention a direct comparison to a prior radiology study to assess interval changes, especially focusing on the stability or change in appearance of certain features like nodules or effusions.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4443192911316362,0.445,0.4408602150537634,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13815,latent_13815,743,0.001486,0.0010021422,2.827586,Pulmonary vascular congestion or engorgement.,"High activation examples often contain descriptions indicating pulmonary vascular congestion, engorgement, or related changes. These terms suggest increased blood flow or pressure in the pulmonary vasculature, which is a common finding in heart-related conditions. Reports frequently mention central or perihilar vascular prominence, mild pulmonary edema, or cephalization of vessels as these indicative changes.",0.8996386993175431,0.9,0.8571428571428571,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8306451612903226,0.8306878306878307,0.7938144329896907,0.8651685393258427,89.0,100.0
+13816,latent_13816,751,0.001502,0.0009315921,2.4825492,Stable findings with respect to previous radiology images.,"These examples frequently contrast current imaging findings with previous images, emphasizing stable findings over time. Stability in cardiac, mediastinal, and specific conditions in relevant anatomical or pathological contexts, or the identification of minimal changes provided as comparison insights, serve as key elements for reports that maintain consistency or show subtle difference in condition over time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.411847894406034,0.4213197969543147,0.3866666666666666,0.2989690721649484,97.0,100.0
+13817,latent_13817,1623,0.003246,0.0015555206,2.4502578,Comparison of current findings with prior images.,"Reports with activation levels indicating a pattern (e.g., above 3.0) consistently include both a description of the findings and a comparison to prior images. They are focused on evaluating stability, progression, or changes in specific conditions, such as the evaluation of lung opacities or pleural effusions.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13818,latent_13818,6055,0.01211,0.0043163695,1.4754776,Comparative analysis of temporal change in radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels depict reports identifying changes in conditions such as atelectasis, fluid collections, or masses when explicitly comparing current and prior thoracic imaging findings. This demonstrates temporal evolution, a key component radiologists seek in follow-up evaluations, which can indicate either improvement, stability, or worsening of previously identified abnormalities.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4337276071022201,0.465,0.4761904761904761,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13819,latent_13819,887,0.001774,0.0012229668,4.6835084,Comparative assessment of monitoring/support device changes.,These examples consistently mention a change or removal of monitoring and support devices between current and prior imaging. The pattern focuses on comparative assessment of device presence across imaging studies.,0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6269785260610949,0.63,0.6585365853658537,0.54,100.0,100.0
+13820,latent_13820,1584,0.003168,0.0018224763,4.181011,Specific instructions or analyses related to comparing current images with prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation levels involve specific instructions or analysis requests in radiology reports directed towards comparing new imaging with prior ones. This often involves evaluating for changes, stability, or the emergence of new findings on a new study compared to previous images. This linguistic pattern is central to understanding the usage pattern in question.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+13821,latent_13821,3274,0.006548,0.0025267762,1.8342786,Descriptions of medical device/tube positioning in imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels (above 3.0) include sentences in which medical devices or tubes are described in relation to their placement in the clinical imaging. This often correlates with precise descriptions like 'tip of the Dobbhoff catheter' positioning or consistent description of unchanged medical tube positions.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13822,latent_13822,232,0.000464,0.00052555173,3.3386421,Consistency and changes in medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"In examples with higher activation, there's an emphasis on the comparison or description of interval changes observed in medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) as detected by radiological images, including position consistency or changes over time.",0.9163609684519444,0.9210526315789472,0.8125,1.0,13.0,25.0,0.7175697865353038,0.751937984496124,0.4727272727272727,0.896551724137931,29.0,100.0
+13823,latent_13823,452,0.000904,0.0007819603,2.5343168,Detailed comparison with multiple prior imaging studies involving precise change evaluation.,"Highly activated examples consistently show detailed descriptions comparing current imaging findings with multiple previous studies, involving precise text matching to determine differences over time, reflective of changes or stability. Moderate activation examples reference prior studies without emphasizing detailed temporal comparison, while low or zero activation examples lack detailed comparative analysis.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4164826286022084,0.5605095541401274,0.2272727272727272,0.087719298245614,57.0,100.0
+13824,latent_13824,1056,0.002112,0.0011353225,3.2398705,References to low lung volumes in radiology comparisons.,"Prompts with higher activation levels discuss low lung volumes frequently, which might be a significant focus in these radiology comparisons. These examples note the effect low lung volumes have on the appearance of the chest radiograph, indicating it is a common observation.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.424,0.505,0.52,0.13,100.0,100.0
+13825,latent_13825,333,0.000666,0.00070173794,2.7454543,Comparison required without available prior imaging.,"The model shows high activation for examples where a comparison is explicitly stated to have been made but lacking in prior data to make such a comparison, especially noting when there is a directive to perform a comparative evaluation without prior images available or prior comparison possible.
+",0.6277056277056277,0.627906976744186,0.5416666666666666,0.7222222222222222,18.0,25.0,0.5712165412764215,0.5845070422535211,0.3866666666666666,0.6904761904761905,42.0,100.0
+13826,latent_13826,4065,0.00813,0.002991301,1.7673521,Descriptions comparing current and prior images for interval changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve providing a description of the current image in comparison to a prior, specifically focusing on interval changes or stability. This task often involves checking if there are changes in medical devices, pathology progression, or unchanged findings in repeated imaging scenarios.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+13827,latent_13827,6466,0.012932,0.0046278355,1.6363459,Emphasis on stability and minor changes in comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels show consistent linguistic patterns where current images are explicitly compared to prior images, with emphasis on the absence of change ('stable', 'unchanged') or minor changes ('improved', 'resolved'). This suggests emphasis on stability or very specific interval changes in the findings rather than reporting new abnormalities.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6345523266000851,0.635,0.6261682242990654,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13828,latent_13828,2848,0.005696,0.002170084,1.7817928,Unchanged or minor findings from comparison with prior images.,"The pattern is based on the notable absence of consistent and substantial changes observed in the imaging findings when compared to prior reports. The reports often highlight minor stability or the presence of unchanged findings without significant new developments, which aligns with the lower activations focusing on lack of observable shifts between images.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,100.0,100.0
+13829,latent_13829,2031,0.004062,0.0016608182,1.4079195,"Comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies for interval changes, especially in catheter or tube placement and pneumothorax or effusion status.","These examples indicate findings based on current radiographic images and provide a comparison to previous radiographic studies. Emphasis is placed on the evaluation of interval changes regarding the positions of invasive tubes and/or catheters, and findings like pneumothorax or pleural effusion changes. Usually, findings are similar to or show progression compared to previous images, or recommendations are given regarding tube placement.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13830,latent_13830,1937,0.003874,0.0016472329,2.6418498,"Comparison with prior imaging reports, whether prior images are available or not.","Higher activations are observed in examples that reference a comparison with prior imaging even when prior reports or images are not available. These examples typically describe static findings or changes in relation to prior studies. The pattern is characterized by the specific focus on phrasing that indicates comparison, leading to a narrative of stability or change, regardless of the availability of prior data.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3675595238095238,0.49,0.4946808510638298,0.93,100.0,100.0
+13831,latent_13831,6342,0.012684,0.004651711,1.4919442,"Descriptive, checklist-based observation without diagnostic conclusions.","Examples with high activations consistently involve the use of descriptive sentences, systematic imaging techniques, and specific findings without deviating into diagnostic or predictive conclusions. These reports focus on detailed descriptions of the image observations with factual, non-diagnosing language, aligning with routine checklist-based radiology reporting.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.5454545454545454,0.84,100.0,100.0
+13832,latent_13832,489,0.000978,0.0008033353,3.3408203,Reports noting placement and position of medical tubes.,"High activation levels are linked to reports that reference the positioning of medical tubes such as endotracheal, nasogastric, or central venous catheters. These references include details about the distance of the tube tip relative to anatomical landmarks, usually the carina or diaphragm, which suggests the pattern is tube verification in radiological assessments.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6386018237082067,0.6463414634146342,0.5394736842105263,0.640625,64.0,100.0
+13833,latent_13833,4460,0.00892,0.0032323063,1.3629702,Interval change comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples consistently involve the comparison between current and previous imaging studies, highlighting interval changes such as worsening or improvement of conditions like pulmonary edema, atelectasis, or effusions. The pattern emerges from examining changes in imaging over time, which is a common practice to assess progression or regression of thoracic conditions.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13834,latent_13834,3504,0.007008,0.0026580042,1.8913802,Inclusion of interval changes or comparison with previous images.,"Highly activated reports include comparative analysis with previous imaging to assess changes or progression of a condition. Such comparisons are consistently noted in reports with activation levels above 2.0, emphasizing the importance of interval change in medical assessments.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+13835,latent_13835,377,0.000754,0.00067289826,2.811234,Comparing current images to prior images and interpreting changes.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve descriptions requiring the assistant to interpret current and prior images. The assistant's task is to compare and contrast these images, rather than provide a straightforward analysis of a single or multiple current images. The task involves integration with a historic reference, and this distinction is key to higher activation levels.",0.4874348032242769,0.5106382978723404,0.4857142857142857,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.4338095238095238,0.4344827586206896,0.3052631578947368,0.6444444444444445,45.0,100.0
+13836,latent_13836,917,0.001834,0.0011920282,3.3955996,"Detailed descriptive comparison with prior imaging, noting stability or interval changes.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging studies, often noting both stability and specific interval changes in radiological findings. This reflects a focus on detailed longitudinal assessment, which is key in ongoing patient management.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.55,0.55,0.55,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13837,latent_13837,2964,0.005928,0.0021339068,1.3340225,Explanation of interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"These data examples describe radiological findings with specific emphasis on interval changes, stability, or improvements compared to previous imaging. They frequently note improvements or stability in conditions or pathologies such as effusions, atelectasis, or cardiomegaly, marked by phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'improvement', or 'interval change'.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13838,latent_13838,565,0.00113,0.0008572092,3.086719,Detailed positioning and placement of medical tubes and lines.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention the specific positioning and placement details of tubes and lines like endotracheal, nasogastric, and central venous catheters. The reports emphasize their legal importance by frequently highlighting if these devices are correctly positioned or need adjustment in emergency or intensive care settings.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8401471361008933,0.8402366863905325,0.7263157894736842,0.9857142857142858,70.0,99.0
+13839,latent_13839,855,0.00171,0.0009025766,2.9576108,Emphasis on comparison with prior radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve comparative analysis using prior imaging as a reference to evaluate changes over time. These often include stable or changing findings compared to prior studies, demonstrating attention to shifts in radiological patterns or the stability of known anomalies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5127741111347669,0.5376884422110553,0.5241379310344828,0.7676767676767676,99.0,100.0
+13840,latent_13840,2982,0.005964,0.002251798,1.5286554,"Comparisons to prior imaging, highlighting interval changes.",Examples that show activation describe findings with explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies and note interval changes in findings. Examples without activation either lack comparisons or report no changes.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+13841,latent_13841,775,0.00155,0.00094235333,2.0772543,Changes post-intervention or clinical context comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation often describe findings in which changes or abnormalities are identified through comparison to prior images, specifically after some interventional procedure or change in clinical status, such as intubation or insertion/removal of a tube or line. The constant reference to intervention or associated clinical context links these high-activation examples together.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.5510204081632653,0.528169014084507,0.78125,96.0,100.0
+13842,latent_13842,1412,0.002824,0.0011365659,2.036962,Comparison focusing on changes in implanted devices or post-surgical intervals.,"The most pertinent characteristic among these examples is a direct comparison with previous images and the emphasis on any detected progressions or stabilities of certain features, specifically regarding interventions or implanted devices. Activations are higher when studies specifically assess post-surgical or other device-related intervals, with lower scores typically due to either unrelated indications or lack of notable findings or changes relevant to the implanted devices or post-surgical aspects.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.5373134328358209,0.36,100.0,100.0
+13843,latent_13843,1454,0.002908,0.0013751021,2.39584,Explicit requests for image comparison and description in the prompt.,"Samples with high activation levels contain explicit instructions or requests for the assistant to provide a description or to compare findings between current and prior images, often using phrases like 'provide a description of the findings' or 'in comparison to the prior image'. This suggests the model is triggered by explicit prompts for comparison and description.",0.2857142857142857,0.4,0.4444444444444444,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4318011902269805,0.525,0.5138121546961326,0.93,100.0,100.0
+13844,latent_13844,617,0.001234,0.0008251657,2.938112,Detailed comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies.,"These examples predominantly involve providing detailed descriptions of findings from current and prior imaging, along with specific medical history, techniques used, and any changes noted in comparison to previous reports. The pattern signifies a detailed, methodical approach to analyzing clinical imaging within a context of patient history and technical parameters.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4992255413308045,0.5,0.4408602150537634,0.5256410256410257,78.0,100.0
+13845,latent_13845,390,0.00078,0.00071021134,2.508937,Instruction to compare findings to prior imaging.,"Each highly activated sample refers to providing a description of radiological findings in comparison to at least a prior frontal image, using a consistent structure or format in the reports.",0.5900621118012422,0.5909090909090909,0.5185185185185185,0.7368421052631579,19.0,25.0,0.5125,0.5128205128205128,0.4038461538461538,0.75,56.0,100.0
+13846,latent_13846,4948,0.009896,0.0035474868,1.4345251,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, noting changes or stability.","Activation levels are high when there is a specific comparison explaining either a stability or change in findings between current and prior imaging, often emphasizing changes that indicate disease progression or stability. This pattern is consistent with observing changes that may impact clinical decisions.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13847,latent_13847,1010,0.00202,0.0012183364,3.8186111,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples predominantly feature findings that are stable, unchanged, or unremarkable compared to previous imaging, indicating the importance of prior examinations in assessing stability or lack of progression in radiological findings.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+13848,latent_13848,558,0.001116,0.0008844034,3.777165,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images.,"The examples with high activations describe detailed diagnostic comparisons made between current and prior frontal images, often noting anatomical changes like pulmonary edema, pleural effusions, or aortic alterations, and correlating these with patient history or clinical indication.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5380194518125552,0.5393939393939394,0.4395604395604395,0.6153846153846154,65.0,100.0
+13849,latent_13849,892,0.001784,0.0010558497,2.4568095,Comparison to prior imaging studies with focus on stability or change.,"Prompts with high activation levels consistently involve specific comparisons to prior imaging studies. The pattern reflects the model's emphasis on detecting intervals of change over time, focusing on terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', or explicit dates and qualitative assessments of change.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13850,latent_13850,617,0.001234,0.00085190596,3.116961,Implicit or explicit references to comparison with previous imaging.,"The pattern involves referencing comparison with a prior radiograph even when explicitly not provided or stated as unavailable, indicating reliance on observed continuity or past information when interpreting current radiology scans. Some examples without prior radiographs still contain language suggesting comparison or a continuity assessment, which affects activation scores.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4047339593114241,0.4301675977653631,0.4160583941605839,0.7215189873417721,79.0,100.0
+13851,latent_13851,1323,0.002646,0.0014772414,3.5827975,Current findings compared to prior images to assess interval change.,"The examples with the highest activation levels often feature comparative analysis between current and prior imaging specifically pointing out changes or improvements as the central focus of the radiological assessment. These involve discussions about stability or interval change in the identified findings, which can provide critical information about the patient's condition and indicate whether treatment or pathology is progressing.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4750383325970009,0.495,0.4964028776978417,0.69,100.0,100.0
+13852,latent_13852,1438,0.002876,0.0012808038,2.252075,Stable positioning of medical devices in chest imaging compared to prior studies.,"The activations are high when there is stable positioning of devices such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, chest tubes, or catheters in comparison to prior imaging, even if other findings are noted. These reports often note 'unchanged', 'stable', or specific device positioning as compared to previous exams, which consistently correlates with higher activation levels in the examples.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5098039215686274,0.26,100.0,100.0
+13853,latent_13853,520,0.00104,0.00070060877,2.1760058,Detailed interval change descriptions without explicit prior references.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently feature movements or changes in findings when compared to prior images or descriptions, but these examples also display more extensive interpretation of changes related to pathologies without explicit or absence of prior detail references.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4231089934484812,0.4790419161676646,0.2978723404255319,0.2058823529411764,68.0,99.0
+13854,latent_13854,732,0.001464,0.0008911058,2.275412,Interval change or stability in medical imaging compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently reference changes or stability in findings ""compared to previous studies,"" indicating that such comparison and documentation of interval changes are key to the pattern.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4597852651234313,0.4607329842931937,0.4444444444444444,0.5274725274725275,91.0,100.0
+13855,latent_13855,411,0.000822,0.0006315512,4.806775,Stable or mildly abnormal cardiomediastinal features without acute pathology.,"Instances with high activation levels consistently describe or detect baseline or mildly abnormal cardiac or pulmonary features such as 'top-normal to mildly enlarged' heart size or mediastinal contour stability, without overt acute pathologies. They frequently note stability or mild changes compared to prior imaging, or subtle findings that lack acute changes.",0.6262024736601008,0.6458333333333334,0.5833333333333334,0.9130434782608696,23.0,25.0,0.5161803713527852,0.5263157894736842,0.4180327868852459,0.9807692307692308,52.0,100.0
+13856,latent_13856,1744,0.003488,0.0012663545,1.8447798,Detailed analysis of device positioning or anatomical changes between current and prior images.,"The prominent features in these examples involve descriptions focused on the placement and changes in medical devices and anatomical structures between current and prior imaging studies. High activations emphasize detailed analysis of alterations, positioning, and stability of tubes or tissues, often following medical procedures.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13857,latent_13857,1155,0.00231,0.0011912389,2.542016,Use of both frontal and lateral views in radiology comparison.,"The highly activated samples consistently reference using both frontal and lateral radiographic views in the imaging study, as indicated by the presence of both 'frontal' and 'lateral' views in a single example, often in a comparative context. This pattern distinction is subtly included throughout the examples with the model responding to comparisons of two different view angles in the imaging sequences.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5122564424890006,0.515,0.5130434782608696,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13858,latent_13858,6155,0.01231,0.0043799602,1.0735731,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples highlight the fact that findings in radiology reports often indicate a stable or unchanged condition compared to prior imaging, which is typically presented explicitly in the reports. This stability is the pattern where new findings are either similar to past reports or interpreted as having no significant change.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4295914112987283,0.4472361809045226,0.4153846153846154,0.2727272727272727,99.0,100.0
+13859,latent_13859,1710,0.00342,0.0014878132,1.9639407,Presence of frontal and lateral views with prior comparisons.,"The activation levels correlate with the explicit presence and mention of frontal and lateral views in conjunction with a comparison to prior studies. This pattern suggests comprehensive imaging analysis that involves multiple observational perspectives alongside comparison, which is well-representative of robust radiological reporting.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4285869772251095,0.475,0.4840764331210191,0.76,100.0,100.0
+13860,latent_13860,643,0.001286,0.0007747932,2.9152825,Comparative analysis from multiple imaging perspectives.,"Highly activated examples contain phrases indicating findings across multiple imaging perspectives, as well as previous exams or studies, highlighting the importance of comparative analysis and comprehensive anatomical viewpoints in these examples for effective radiology assessment.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3458195984417141,0.3728813559322034,0.375,0.6623376623376623,77.0,100.0
+13861,latent_13861,3219,0.006438,0.0025268334,2.6062908,Mild to moderate cardiomegaly with notable interval change or stability.,"Reports with mild to moderate cardiomegaly often describe stable heart size over time or reference it as a known condition without significant change. However, the pattern of activation is influenced when specific comparisons to previous imaging show any notable changes in heart size, even if small. This suggests a notable interest in not the cardiomegaly per se, but in its interval changes or its stability.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5353468304015931,0.58,0.7105263157894737,0.27,100.0,100.0
+13862,latent_13862,3492,0.006984,0.0025519573,1.5519474,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The observed activation levels highlight the comparison of current imaging with prior studies. High activation implies a focus on changes or stability of conditions over time, such as opacity changes, tube placements, or anatomical changes signifying disease progress or stability.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5819110370193962,0.605,0.5714285714285714,0.84,100.0,100.0
+13863,latent_13863,5801,0.011602,0.004020934,1.0228186,Descriptive changes or interventions in lung pathology compared to prior imaging.,"In the highly activated examples, there is a clear emphasis on describing lung pathologies or conditions that necessitate mentioning specific alterations or interventions (such as atelectasis, effusions, pneumothorax, or changes in tubing/lines) rather than simply a normal state. These variations often require a comparison to prior states to note any significant changes or stabilities in the pulmonary and cardiomediastinal aspects.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.5904761904761905,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13864,latent_13864,383,0.000766,0.0006291917,2.6273022,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings.,"The pattern among high activation examples involves evaluating changes such as increase or decrease in previously identified pathologies (like pleural effusions or opacities) or interventions (e.g., pleural catheter placement) between the current images and prior studies. The descriptive elements focus on interval changes rather than stability or initial findings.",0.4171539961013645,0.4347826086956521,0.3529411764705882,0.2857142857142857,21.0,25.0,0.3996336996336996,0.4093959731543624,0.2592592592592592,0.4285714285714285,49.0,100.0
+13865,latent_13865,2244,0.004488,0.0017002173,2.2931998,Tracking stability and placement of medical devices from prior imaging.,"These examples highlight changes observed in imaging that specifically pertain to medical devices, such as pacemakers, catheters, or stents, with additional findings indicating stable cardiac conditions or details that maintain notable consistency after device placement. The pattern includes phrases indicating the state, placement, or changes in medical devices from prior imaging studies.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+13866,latent_13866,5947,0.011894,0.0042323666,1.1676551,Significance in changes or stability of findings compared to prior images.,"The consistent references across most activated examples include significant descriptions relating current findings to observations in prior imaging. These examples emphasize either new or unchanged findings like pneumonia, pleural effusion, or device placement, which are essential elements for monitoring the patient's condition over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13867,latent_13867,1060,0.00212,0.0011202614,3.5447621,Unremarkable or stable mediastinal and hilar contours in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples of various medical imaging references consistently mention mediastinal and hilar contours being unremarkable or stable, even when other abnormalities or changes are noted elsewhere in the report. Stable mediastinal and hilar contours imply no significant changes in the central chest structures in comparison to previous images.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.525,0.42,100.0,100.0
+13868,latent_13868,2658,0.005316,0.0019239857,1.6162494,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior studies.,"Examples consistently denote findings compared to a prior report, indicating stability or change in specific pathologies such as opacities, pleural effusions, and heart size. This pattern reveals the importance of tracking changes over time in radiology.",0.5274633123689727,0.5306122448979592,0.5172413793103449,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13869,latent_13869,1823,0.003646,0.0015713143,1.9623971,Request for comparison with prior images in absence of available prior data.,The model shows high activation for examples where there is a lack of previous comparison data despite a request for comparison to a prior. The language explicitly mentioning 'no comparison available' or situations where prior reports are absent or labeled 'N/A' appears to trigger high activation.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13870,latent_13870,955,0.00191,0.0008833473,2.4617658,"Heart, mediastinal, and hilar structure assessment using frontal images for comparison.","Highly activated examples primarily include detailed assessments of heart and mediastinal structures using the frontal image for comparison, with emphasis on heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, and pulmonary vessels. They focus on findings that establish the cardiac and mediastinal status and often reference key conditions impacting these areas.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+13871,latent_13871,7095,0.01419,0.005033967,1.4011602,Stable or interval changes assessed via comparison with prior imaging.,"Examining and reporting changes with respect to prior imaging is crucial in many radiological assessments, often to track progress, the stability of conditions, or response to treatments. This series of examples frequently mentions the unchanged or changed statuses of pulmonary features, pleural effusions, or devices along with comparisons to prior images.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5435211121485631,0.56,0.5434782608695652,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13872,latent_13872,7455,0.01491,0.005286795,1.0914713,"Findings described through comparison to prior imaging, noting changes in patient's condition or medical device position.","The pattern involves descriptions of findings that indicate or confirm changes in the condition of the lungs, mediastinum, heart, or any identified medical devices, especially through comparison of current and prior imaging. This is confirmed by the specific mention of prior exams and changes such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or device positions.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.5916666666666667,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13873,latent_13873,2737,0.005474,0.0021863536,2.4328537,Changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings using language that involves both images to generate new insights or suggest changes across time compared to prior studies. Less activated examples often simply report stability or normal findings without actionable changes. Terms like 'unchanged', 'mild', and 'unchanged lungs' characterize lower activations.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5350877192982456,0.61,100.0,100.0
+13874,latent_13874,334,0.000668,0.0006578895,3.5649443,Prominence of interstitial markings or pulmonary vasculature.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently discuss the prominence of interstitial markings or vascular features such as the pulmonary vasculature or pulmonary arteries. This pattern highlights findings that indicate potential chronic pulmonary conditions affecting vasculature prominence, like pulmonary hypertension or chronic interstitial disease.",0.8147368421052632,0.8181818181818182,0.7894736842105263,0.7894736842105263,19.0,25.0,0.7662936142198815,0.7887323943661971,0.6071428571428571,0.8095238095238095,42.0,100.0
+13875,latent_13875,4819,0.009638,0.003478619,1.3729707,Mention of interval change or stability compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels all feature descriptions involving comparisons to prior imaging studies, specifically indicating interval change (improvement or worsening) in specific pathologies or findings. Common phrases include 'comparison made to prior', 'interval change', and explicit evaluations of stability or change in conditions like opacities and effusions.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5630252100840336,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13876,latent_13876,1219,0.002438,0.0013539871,2.3210728,Emphasis on device position or course comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature descriptions of changes in medical devices' positions (like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes) between current and prior images, emphasizing comparisons highlighting device stability or necessary adjustments. This language pattern involves precise location references and recommendations for device adjustment, a routine and critical documentation aspect in radiological evaluations.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6550324675324675,0.66,0.6290322580645161,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13877,latent_13877,5555,0.01111,0.003984236,1.5924544,Findings described without comparison to prior imaging or no previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation all describe the radiological findings without making comparisons to prior imaging or have no previous imaging available for comparison, indicating focus is solely on the current state without change evaluation, marked by phrases like 'provide a description', 'comparison none', or absence of change comments.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4133333333333333,0.45,0.4,0.2,100.0,100.0
+13878,latent_13878,420,0.00084,0.0006887658,4.138539,References to enlarged cardiac silhouette in the radiology findings.,The examples consistently highlight references to the cardiac silhouette being either enlarged or modestly enlarged. This is a common finding in radiology reports and can indicate various cardiac conditions or be an incidental finding based on patient factors or imaging technique. The expressions vary slightly but focus on heart size as a central finding across multiple examples with high activation.,0.8535947712418301,0.8541666666666666,0.7857142857142857,0.9565217391304348,23.0,25.0,0.7570126227208976,0.7662337662337663,0.6285714285714286,0.8148148148148148,54.0,100.0
+13879,latent_13879,3721,0.007442,0.002775426,2.068579,Clear description of imaging comparisons to prior studies.,"These examples typically involve radiology reports that mention specific imaging comparisons to prior studies, often reflecting quantitative or qualitative assessments of stability or change in various findings, whether it be in terms of heart size, pulmonary structures, or other aspects identified in the images.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4718817136357892,0.4723618090452261,0.4680851063829787,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+13880,latent_13880,287,0.000574,0.00042450105,4.336204,Comparison to prior imaging findings showing interval changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include references to prior imaging for comparison and interpreted findings based on them, suggesting the importance of interval changes or stability over time. This pattern correlates with radiological assessments that evaluate the evolution or persistence of findings, highlighting changes or stability of features such as opacities, effusions, or device positioning.",0.4828828828828829,0.4878048780487805,0.4137931034482758,0.75,16.0,25.0,0.5078947368421053,0.5147058823529411,0.3214285714285714,0.75,36.0,100.0
+13881,latent_13881,2921,0.005842,0.002277812,1.8974696,Usage of standard radiology report structure with emphasis on comparison to previous images.,"The examples show reports that include specific comparisons of current imaging findings to previous images, with a focus on any changes from prior reports. The reports typically follow a structure of INDICATION, TECHNIQUE, COMPARISON, FINDINGS, and IMPRESSION, often including terms like 'interval change', 'since prior', 'as compared to', or noting the identification of changes or stability of findings compared to earlier images.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.443170651817884,0.49,0.4936708860759494,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13882,latent_13882,555,0.00111,0.00090740336,2.5804138,Normal cardiac contour or heart size with associated aortic changes.,"Sample responses with higher activation levels emphasize evaluating and identifying findings from normal-sized hearts or normal cardiomediastinal contours, often with identifiable aortic changes (like slight unfolding or tortuosity) across multiple imagings. The lower-activation samples do not emphasize such changes or findings connected to normal cardiac contours or do not mention comparison with prior studies.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5704866562009419,0.6607142857142857,0.7391304347826086,0.25,68.0,100.0
+13883,latent_13883,2142,0.004284,0.0016466295,2.0870626,Comparison of specific persistent or changed findings across imaging studies.,"The pattern reveals a comparison-driven approach focusing on the persistence or change in findings across various radiographic studies, often related to ongoing conditions or significant devices (e.g., LVAD, mediastinal structures). Higher activations are associated with a focus on specific findings, like cardiomegaly, and artifacts or devices, compared across time or between previous studies. Less relevant examples, with lower activations, do not emphasize these comparison elements or ongoing conditions.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4926948051948052,0.5,0.5,0.62,100.0,100.0
+13884,latent_13884,495,0.00099,0.0008128948,3.0511088,Comparison of current radiograph with previous imaging for changes.,"These examples feature phrases indicating a comparison of current radiological findings with prior images, especially focusing on changes or stability in findings. Such comparisons are frequently noted alongside history, indications, and noted intervals or lack thereof, which are outlined using specific wording like 'in comparison with' or 'compared to', often highlighting consistency or interval changes in clinical conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4159896385258448,0.41875,0.3513513513513513,0.65,60.0,100.0
+13885,latent_13885,708,0.001416,0.0009602487,3.7279787,"Emphasis on medical device positioning, particularly balloon pumps and catheters.","Analysis of examples with high activation levels indicates a focus on the positions and management of internal medical devices, particularly intra-aortic balloon pumps and Swan-Ganz catheters, in relation to prior imaging. They frequently describe adjustments, removals, or stable positions of these devices, highlighting a specific interest in these elements of the reports.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7704878562614741,0.7795698924731183,0.8571428571428571,0.627906976744186,86.0,100.0
+13886,latent_13886,1499,0.002998,0.0013550492,2.4671602,Focus on changes in pleural effusion or pneumothorax compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently include the presence of pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or significant changes in these conditions across multiple studies, contrasting current conditions against the previous situation noted, often recommending further follow-up or clinical correlation. They focus on detailed descriptions of changes from prior studies regarding fluid collections or pneumothorax and less on normal findings.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4835164835164834,0.53,0.575,0.23,100.0,100.0
+13887,latent_13887,1189,0.002378,0.0011234562,2.2157001,Comparison focuses on interval changes in specific findings like opacities or effusions.,"Highly activated examples frequently assess changes based on comparison to prior imaging, highlighting interval improvement or persistence in specific findings such as opacities or effusions. This pattern suggests focus on interval changes in specific features rather than overall assessment or new findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4878048780487805,0.4,100.0,100.0
+13888,latent_13888,5335,0.01067,0.003759824,1.2689124,Detailed interval change or stability in comparison findings.,"Highly active examples emphasize a thorough description of findings as related to changes from prior images, especially noting stability or changes in conditions like cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or interstitial opacities. The examples specifically highlight interval comparisons like 'unchanged', 'new', or 'decreased', related to prior imaging studies.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5599559955995599,0.56,0.5588235294117647,0.57,100.0,100.0
+13889,latent_13889,4713,0.009426,0.003460412,1.720808,Comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,"This dataset predominantly demonstrates examples where radiology findings are described by comparing current images to prior exams. The comparison highlights changes or stability in observed abnormalities, such as effusions or opacities, over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13890,latent_13890,3845,0.00769,0.0027871605,1.7667909,"Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior imaging, focusing on changes in pathologies.","The examples with higher activation levels often involve a clear description and assessment of the current imaging in comparison to previous imaging. This includes noting changes or the lack thereof in structures or conditions, especially when less direct comparison information (e.g., specific prior imaging comparisons) is available. The key component is the emphasis on a clear comparative analysis focusing on pleural effusions, consolidation, or other specific pathologies looking for changes, stability, or improvement.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5208333333333334,0.5,100.0,100.0
+13891,latent_13891,863,0.001726,0.0009712939,2.1752431,"Engages in detailed comparison with prior radiological findings, especially involving medical devices or specific pathologic changes.","The samples demonstrate comparisons of current radiological findings to prior reports or images. Examples with higher activations include specific descriptions of current findings measured against previous results, and the context often involves changes in medical devices (like tubes or catheters) or involves findings like 'atelectasis', 'cardiomegaly', and 'pleural effusion' that typically require follow-up comparisons. Examples in lower or zero activations mostly involve cases without significant change or a lack of specific device-related or pathologic comparisons.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5242433444680635,0.53,0.5245901639344263,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13892,latent_13892,499,0.000998,0.00081983575,2.0661392,Evaluation of stability or change by comparing findings to prior imaging reports.,"The activations are higher when the prompts focus on comparing current imaging findings to prior reports, particularly highlighting whether findings are stable, have resolved, or need further description in relation to past examinations. This pattern of comparing current to prior imaging is typical in radiological follow-up to evaluate changes over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3950538998097653,0.3962264150943396,0.3271028037383177,0.5932203389830508,59.0,100.0
+13893,latent_13893,3646,0.007292,0.002635328,1.1153588,Emphasis on comparison findings with prior imaging studies.,"The high activation examples reference radiology reports involving comparison to prior imaging studies, often highlighting changes or stability in findings. The phrase 'compared to the prior' or specific mention of intervals since previous exams are commonly used in these examples.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13894,latent_13894,3854,0.007708,0.002838255,1.7738209,Descriptions of interval changes or comparisons with prior radiologic images.,"The examples with higher activations highlight explicit comparisons between current and prior radiologic images, often indicated by phrases such as 'compared to the previous exam' or 'interval changes'. They focus on the continuity or changes over time in the medical conditions diagnosed through image comparisons, which are crucial in patient management and follow-up.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5125824913058956,0.555,0.5345911949685535,0.85,100.0,100.0
+13895,latent_13895,480,0.00096,0.0008675586,3.5634255,Mentions of opacity or consolidation consistent with pneumonia.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention pneumonia using terms such as 'opacity', 'consolidation', or 'opacification', often with a clinical context suggesting or confirming pneumonia. They may also discuss changes over time with focus on opacity, a common diagnostic feature for pneumonia in imaging.",0.9175084175084176,0.9183673469387756,0.8620689655172413,1.0,25.0,24.0,0.7143300936404384,0.7388535031847133,0.6481481481481481,0.6140350877192983,57.0,100.0
+13896,latent_13896,3735,0.00747,0.0026621462,1.6064343,Detailed comparison of current and prior chest imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation often include terms like ""prior report"" and specific instructions or comments regarding changes or stability between the current and previous imaging results. These instances clearly reference direct comparisons over time and exhibit linguistic patterns indicating detailed analysis or follow-up of previous findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13897,latent_13897,543,0.001086,0.00071703945,2.7092524,Focused comparative evaluation of chest imaging against prior studies.,"Activation is higher when specific findings related to pulmonary or cardiac conditions are described in the context of comparison to prior imaging. These often involve detailed mention of stability or change in such findings. The reports reference past images for comparison, aiming to track changes in disease progression or response to previous treatments, thus reflecting careful comparative analysis over time.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4337203257667649,0.4476744186046512,0.4094488188976378,0.7222222222222222,72.0,100.0
+13898,latent_13898,2532,0.005064,0.0020031594,2.14075,Explicit mention of interval changes between current and previous imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activations frequently describe changes or comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, noting specific details about shifts or stability in medical devices or conditions. These examples focus on variations observed over time, indicating a pattern of emphasizing changes (or lack thereof) between imaging studies.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13899,latent_13899,983,0.001966,0.0010354681,1.9450735,Evaluations of medical device placements or changes.,The examples with higher activation levels focus on cases where there are changes or assessments needed due to recent medical procedures such as the repositioning of lines or tubes. The examples consistently mention ongoing evaluations regarding medical devices.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13900,latent_13900,2449,0.004898,0.0018485802,1.9602165,Comparisons emphasizing minor changes or stability in lung findings from prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on detailed comparisons of lung findings to prior imaging, with particular emphasis on vague or minor changes in opacities, nodules, or inflammatory processes. These descriptions often highlight stability or mild progression of certain elements like opacities, atelectasis, or small pleural effusions and often involve stating that components are unchanged from a prior state.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5256137147494421,0.5276381909547738,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,99.0
+13901,latent_13901,857,0.001714,0.0009732836,2.4856958,Explicit comparison with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve diagnostic imaging reports that make explicit comparisons to prior images. This pattern likely increases activation as it involves monitoring changes or stability over time, which is critical for identifying disease progression or stability.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4919650258028289,0.525,0.5165562913907285,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13902,latent_13902,724,0.001448,0.00092872884,2.5344534,Low or hypo-inflated lung volumes with bronchovascular crowding.,"The pattern involves descriptions where lung volumes are reported as being low, mildly hypo-inflated, or hyperinflated, leading to bronchovascular crowding or overcrowding. These descriptions correspond to changes due to chronic lung conditions like COPD or atelectasis in chest radiographs.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.535601692749013,0.5786802030456852,0.675,0.2783505154639175,97.0,100.0
+13903,latent_13903,5413,0.010826,0.003929404,2.0717628,Detailed comparison with prior imaging identifying changes or stability over time.,Examples with higher activation levels systematically refer to comparison with prior images and provide detailed analysis of interval changes or unchanged findings over different examinations. This highlights that engaging in comparative analysis to discuss changes based on previous studies is central to these examples' activation.,0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.65,0.65,0.65,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13904,latent_13904,1417,0.002834,0.0013854473,2.6437454,Stable or unchanged findings between current and prior imaging.,"These examples describe a comparison between a current imaging study and a prior one, indicating stable, unchanged, or resolved conditions. The examples often list specific unchanged findings, suggesting ongoing monitoring rather than new developments. This consistency in the language of radiological comparison is key to understanding the pattern.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4806594144854138,0.4924623115577889,0.4927536231884058,0.34,100.0,99.0
+13905,latent_13905,400,0.0008,0.00074234157,4.5545397,Language indicating interval change or comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples correlate with query requests for 'interval change' or 'no significant change' in radiology reports, where comparisons are made between the current and prior images to assess for any differences in findings.",0.3896805896805896,0.4130434782608695,0.4117647058823529,0.6666666666666666,21.0,25.0,0.4376321353065539,0.4473684210526316,0.3666666666666666,0.8461538461538461,52.0,100.0
+13906,latent_13906,3225,0.00645,0.0027550908,3.375598,Technical limitations or anatomical obscuration affecting image interpretation.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels focus on the impact of abnormal positioning or limited diagnostic assessment due to technical positioning issues like chest wall asymmetries or technical limitations of the imaging view. This pattern is reflected through descriptions of obscured anatomical areas or limitations noted due to positioning, which might affect diagnostic clarity.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+13907,latent_13907,484,0.000968,0.00089221855,2.190333,Evaluating cough-related findings excluding other acute processes in image comparisons.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention the comparison of images, but specifically emphasize the evaluation of findings related to a cough, pneumonia, or pleural issues while excluding other acute processes. This narrow focus aligns the findings with particular respiratory concerns seen in the image comparisons.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4997273146788605,0.5283018867924528,0.3709677419354839,0.3898305084745763,59.0,100.0
+13908,latent_13908,1024,0.002048,0.0011545677,2.5736573,Integration of prior radiology reports with device positioning and comparison.,"The instances with high activation levels involve direct, clear integration of past radiological reports and significant findings along with description of devices like catheters and tubes, highlighting changed or unchanged states. They emphasize the assessment of stability or movement in thoracic or abdominal regions, especially in relation to medical devices.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5540441942880967,0.5678391959798995,0.5481481481481482,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+13909,latent_13909,453,0.000906,0.00071496615,2.7315617,Explicit interval comparison in radiological interpretations.,Highly activated examples consistently describe the interpretation of findings in radiology studies that compare current images to prior ones. The assistant output for these examples often involves a detailed examination of interval changes by comparing the provided images with those from previous reports.,0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4179570482258132,0.4258064516129032,0.2926829268292683,0.4363636363636363,55.0,100.0
+13910,latent_13910,1506,0.003012,0.001297281,2.1688387,Structured radiology report with placeholder text indicating missing data.,"The examples with higher activation levels all involve structured radiology report formats that include placeholder texts indicating missing or incomplete data for various sections such as 'INDICATION', 'COMPARISON', and 'HISTORY'. These repeated patterns suggest a recognition trigger based on the presence of incomplete or structured template components within the report.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3592677345537757,0.475,0.4864864864864865,0.9,100.0,100.0
+13911,latent_13911,412,0.000824,0.00076547766,3.316908,Elevation of the hemidiaphragm.,"In the samples with higher activation levels, there is a consistent mention of the 'elevation of the hemidiaphragm', a specific anatomical feature or finding in radiological studies. This recurrent detail across the examples suggests this is the key pattern that triggers the model activation.",1.0,1.0,1.0,1.0,23.0,25.0,0.8953465346534654,0.9072847682119204,0.8775510204081632,0.8431372549019608,51.0,100.0
+13912,latent_13912,680,0.00136,0.00091982144,2.1774068,Comparison to prior imaging studies with interval change or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention 'comparison' or 'prior' images. Additionally, the descriptions often include intervals of change or stability based on prior imaging data. This pattern highlights that the inclusion of a comparison to previous studies and noting any interval changes increases activation.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5296747611115982,0.5297297297297298,0.4901960784313725,0.5882352941176471,85.0,100.0
+13913,latent_13913,1296,0.002592,0.0012280246,1.7811078,Changes in imaging findings or device positioning over time.,"The examples with high activation levels describe changes observed in the imaging series or equipment positioning over time. The emphasis is on interval changes, updates regarding medical devices like tubes, or modifications in patient condition between consecutive images, often involving qualitative terms like 'increased', 'decreased', or 'advanced'.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.546875,0.7,100.0,100.0
+13914,latent_13914,2507,0.005014,0.0020163779,3.1672723,Focus on unchanged intervals in radiological comparisons.,"The activation is associated with both the use of past comparisons and the focus on unchanged or resolved features which suggest stability or no new issues, often noting detailed interval changes like resolution, stability, or unchanged findings since prior comparisons, and descriptions of normal findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5380474987882962,0.542713567839196,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,99.0
+13915,latent_13915,4647,0.009294,0.0033307932,1.4022726,Comparison of current radiology findings to prior images.,"These examples focus on radiology findings in current imaging assessed in comparison to prior images, often with specific descriptions of changes or stability. Specific comparisons are requested even if the current or prior findings are unremarkable. Many examples also show use of current and previous imaging to assess for stability or changes to previously known conditions or devices in the body.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13916,latent_13916,360,0.00072,0.000553836,2.8843076,Focus on interval change compared to prior imaging.,"These examples heavily utilize phrases highlighting interval changes or stability compared to prior exams, frequently seen in radiology reports. They often describe changes like progression, worsening, or stability of findings, which directly correlate with the presented activation levels. Common words and phrases include 'progressed', 'stable', 'unchanged', or explicit dates and prior comparison points, indicating focus on temporal changes.",0.5398601398601399,0.5531914893617021,0.5151515151515151,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.5320184556102012,0.5422535211267606,0.3544303797468354,0.6666666666666666,42.0,100.0
+13917,latent_13917,320,0.00064,0.0006207106,3.509316,Significant interval change in pulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"This set of data shows a high level of activation when the reports involve comparing imaging findings to previous studies AND noting significant changes, especially improvements or worsening, in the pulmonary or pleural conditions between the current and prior images.",0.6363636363636364,0.6590909090909091,0.6428571428571429,0.4736842105263157,19.0,25.0,0.5733424939883202,0.6739130434782609,0.3939393939393939,0.3421052631578947,38.0,100.0
+13918,latent_13918,990,0.00198,0.0010898082,3.0902505,Comparison between current and prior imaging with identification of change.,High activation levels appear in examples where findings from current imaging are described in relation to significant prior radiological findings or recognizable anatomical features. Lower activation may arise from generic comparisons or lack of specific observed changes between prior and current imaging results.,0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13919,latent_13919,4268,0.008536,0.0030521594,1.9384351,Imaging reports involving medical device placements with detailed descriptions.,"The lower activation levels in most examples suggest no consistent or standout pattern. However, the examples with slightly higher activation (like Example 48) describe instances of specific medical devices, such as feeding tubes or catheter placements, with detailed imaging findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.6,0.42,100.0,100.0
+13920,latent_13920,6152,0.012304,0.004361754,1.6691952,Instructions to compare current findings with prior images.,"The examples that show higher activation levels consistently include instructions to provide findings by comparing current images to prior studies. This pattern suggests that reports prompting a comparative analysis between current and past imaging studies are more activating, which may relate to a model's focus on changes over time as indicators of pathologic or clinical significance.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+13921,latent_13921,2509,0.005018,0.0019598943,2.5540822,Clinical description of notable changes between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with lower activation scores tend to include explicit comparisons with prior studies. Examples with higher activation scores highlight descriptions of specific changes or notable findings, suggesting clinical relevance beyond normal stability or unchanged observations from prior reports.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5819798040845106,0.585,0.5726495726495726,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13922,latent_13922,641,0.001282,0.0009071424,4.3534017,Radiographic comparison with prior frontal and lateral images.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve providing detailed descriptions of radiographic findings, specifically highlighting differences observed in current imaging compared to prior imaging of both the frontal and lateral views.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5261856398480967,0.5297297297297298,0.4913793103448275,0.6705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+13923,latent_13923,432,0.000864,0.0006671126,3.1892252,Presence of explicit comparison to prior images.,"These examples emphasize the presence or absence of comparison studies for radiological evaluation, with high activations often occurring when current findings are compared to prior studies. This highlights the use of previous images as references in formulating a detailed diagnosis and assessing changes over time.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4131097560975609,0.4155844155844156,0.3363636363636363,0.6851851851851852,54.0,100.0
+13924,latent_13924,1558,0.003116,0.0013714771,2.629036,Comparison between current and prior imaging findings to note changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation involve descriptions where findings in current images are compared against previous findings, indicating interval changes or stability of specific conditions. The pattern emphasizes ongoing diagnostic evaluation by directly comparing images over time for changes or stability in medical conditions.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13925,latent_13925,696,0.001392,0.0009416829,2.1781812,Explicit comparison of current and prior images with detailed descriptions.,"The examples with high activation share a consistent format and language pattern, explicitly indicating the comparison of two or more sets of images. They provide the comparison context with phrases such as 'compared to', 'no significant change', 'stable', and similar descriptive phrases directly addressing changes or consistencies. This consistency in language and structure, focusing on comparative aspects, aligns with higher activation.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5187999220728619,0.5210526315789473,0.4942528735632184,0.4777777777777778,90.0,100.0
+13926,latent_13926,583,0.001166,0.00087653,2.6834147,Detailed comparative analysis of imaging findings over time.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on comparing current findings to prior imaging, with extensive elaboration of existing conditions and details, such as unchanged observations, progressions, or technical changes over time. The pattern involves detailed comparative descriptive analysis to highlight what has changed or remained stable in sequential radiological examinations.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4407084544070845,0.4534883720930232,0.3513513513513513,0.3611111111111111,72.0,100.0
+13927,latent_13927,1504,0.003008,0.0013218111,2.3642564,"Inclusion of prior report, structured history, findings, impression, and comparison instructions.","Examples with positive activation levels often contain a structured format starting with given images, a prior report, explicit history, the phrase ""provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,"" followed by structured subheadings like indication, technique, and comparison.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4465408805031446,0.505,0.503030303030303,0.83,100.0,100.0
+13928,latent_13928,2381,0.004762,0.0018474358,1.6936125,Comparison of current radiology findings to prior images.,"Many examples focus on comparing findings from current imaging studies with prior images, specifically identifying changes, stability, or improvements over time. This linguistic pattern is prevalent in radiology and is used to discern progression or resolution of observed medical conditions.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13929,latent_13929,3967,0.007934,0.0028525346,1.7481169,Emphasis on interval changes and detailed comparison to priors.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize description or confirmation of changes, particularly related to specific findings like pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or masses, and their interval changes when compared to prior imaging studies. They consistently request a comparison to previous images to identify any significant changes.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5084745762711864,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13930,latent_13930,791,0.001582,0.00073792384,1.9782432,Postoperative evaluation with focus on changes or complications.,"High activation examples consistently include specific surgical details, such as 'status post' descriptions about procedures like pacemaker placement, lobectomy, or valve replacement. The focus is on postoperative evaluations for any changes or complications. This pattern prioritizes tracking post-surgical outcomes and relevant changes.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5729166666666666,0.59,0.65,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13931,latent_13931,2366,0.004732,0.0018313067,2.7238145,Instruction to compare current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activations involve explicit instructions to provide a comparison between the current image(s) and prior image(s). The task explicitly asks for this comparison, which is a significant aspect of these examples as compared to those with lower activations which do not emphasize this comparative element.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13932,latent_13932,1113,0.002226,0.0014826693,4.2431655,Mentions of a tortuous and calcified aorta in the reports.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention tortuosity and calcification of the aorta. This specific finding is noted in multiple reports which exhibit high activation, indicating it as a recurring pattern the model responds strongly to.",0.8357963875205254,0.84,1.0,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6483516483516483,0.68,0.95,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13933,latent_13933,4705,0.00941,0.0033624552,1.15596,Direct comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,The examples that exhibit higher activation levels have consistent references to direct comparisons with prior imaging. The radiology reports focus on evaluating changes or stability by comparing findings to previous images.,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+13934,latent_13934,2435,0.00487,0.0017966583,2.1635628,No clear pattern related to presence of comparison reference alone.,"The highly activated examples tend to involve findings that are compared to prior imaging studies, indicating whether changes are present or stable. However, activation levels are inconsistently aligned with comparison references, suggesting no clear pattern related to comparison presence alone.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.4,0.16,100.0,100.0
+13935,latent_13935,674,0.001348,0.0011286708,3.867508,Presence and positioning of pacemakers or ICD devices in chest imaging.,"Six samples with high activation feature descriptions involving pacemaker or ICD presence, positioning verification, and lead extension location within the chest while observing cardiopulmonary status. This pattern appears indicative of checks on cardiac devices in conjunction with other radiographic findings.",0.8594941790445605,0.86,0.9090909090909092,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.8204921339249698,0.8314606741573034,0.9285714285714286,0.6666666666666666,78.0,100.0
+13936,latent_13936,594,0.001188,0.0008511333,3.1276846,Description of comparative findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve instructions for generating radiological findings based on the comparison between current and prior images. There is an emphasis on assessing changes, stability, or the progression of observed pathologies, often with explicit instructions to provide comparative descriptions. This pattern indicates the model is likely recognizing and following instructions to compare radiological images.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4572662057324633,0.4602272727272727,0.415929203539823,0.618421052631579,76.0,100.0
+13937,latent_13937,289,0.000578,0.000554139,3.743845,Requests to compare current images to prior without direct prior lateral view comparison.,"The highly activated examples demonstrate scenarios where the prompt requires a comparative description of radiological findings against prior images, specifically when no direct prior comparison is available for specific views being examined (e.g., lateral views with no prior comparison). They often contain detailed requests for the assistant to hypothetically compare or fabricate a comparative assessment.",0.5769230769230769,0.5909090909090909,0.5294117647058824,0.4736842105263157,19.0,25.0,0.504802627502014,0.5343511450381679,0.2794117647058823,0.6129032258064516,31.0,100.0
+13938,latent_13938,574,0.001148,0.0008681866,3.9068704,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in imaging descriptions.,"The examples with a high activation level consistently mention findings related to the cardiac and mediastinal silhouette in radiology reports. Specifically, they point out the stability or normalcy of these structures, even when evaluating for changes or abnormalities compared to prior imaging. This uniformity in evaluation seems to be the pattern the model is responsive to.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.60169256381798,0.6206896551724138,0.5645161290322581,0.4729729729729729,74.0,100.0
+13939,latent_13939,921,0.001842,0.0011908282,2.815158,Description of vascular structures like aorta and mediastinal assessments in images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature commentary on chest images describing vascular structures, particularly the aorta or cardiomediastinal silhouette, often mentioning ""normal"" or ""mild"" variations like unfolding or tortuosity that is noted but not critical.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5598239295718287,0.56,0.5625,0.54,100.0,100.0
+13940,latent_13940,332,0.000664,0.0005902451,3.0830107,Moderate cardiomegaly with abnormal mediastinal prominence.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention cases where there is moderate or severe cardiomegaly along with increased mediastinal prominence, often indicating a significant cardiopulmonary issue without the exclusion of pneumonia or pulmonary edema.",0.3768115942028985,0.5116279069767442,0.2,0.0555555555555555,18.0,25.0,0.4484848484848485,0.6573426573426573,0.25,0.0697674418604651,43.0,100.0
+13941,latent_13941,3131,0.006262,0.0023868072,1.7816935,Detailed description and comparison of findings to prior images.,"In these examples, accurate guidance is given on how to provide concise radiological findings in comparison to previous images. High activation levels are observed in cases where a detailed comparison to past findings is explicitly requested or the progression of certain conditions needs to be highlighted compare to prior imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5599389091662137,0.575,0.5547445255474452,0.76,100.0,100.0
+13942,latent_13942,2789,0.005578,0.0021743963,1.8696649,Limited or stable changes noted in thoracic structures compared to prior imaging.,"Examples suggest a focus on stability or interval change of specific thoracic structures observed over time through imaging comparisons. Instances with minor changes in pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or edema mention the dimension of change using consistent descriptors compared to a prior study.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5217391304347826,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13943,latent_13943,647,0.001294,0.001003641,2.7862632,Routine description of normal cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include normal findings in the descriptions of the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal, and hilar contours, alongside other findings in the radiology study. This indicates the pattern the model activates on is the labeling of normal findings related to the heart and mediastinum, showing standard radiological phrases for typical appearances without severe abnormalities.",0.6527777777777778,0.68,0.6153846153846154,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.734733756717147,0.7348066298342542,0.6601941747572816,0.8395061728395061,81.0,100.0
+13944,latent_13944,5549,0.011098,0.003978361,1.275995,Comparison with prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"Examples that describe the findings and assessments in radiology studies often make explicit references to comparisons with prior imaging, highlighting changes or the absence of changes between exams. Phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'than on prior imaging', or similar descriptions are prevalent in radiology reports that aim to track disease progression or regression over time.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.65625,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.5474452554744526,0.75,100.0,100.0
+13945,latent_13945,396,0.000792,0.0006873507,2.9645188,Clear lungs and unremarkable cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes.,"Examples with high activations consistently describe clear lungs, normal cardiac silhouettes, and lack of significant findings such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or focal consolidations. This signifies a pattern of identifying typical or normal imaging findings with emphasis on absence of abnormalities.",0.9165217391304348,0.9166666666666666,0.8518518518518519,1.0,23.0,25.0,0.7530632411067193,0.7687074829931972,0.6031746031746031,0.8085106382978723,47.0,100.0
+13946,latent_13946,930,0.00186,0.00075365935,3.825444,Low activation with less focus on detailed image comparisons.,"The variations in activation levels reflect different levels of explicit description and detail in the comparison to prior images. When the comparison is not made or is less detailed, activation is lower, reflecting less focus on comparative analysis in these reports.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13947,latent_13947,1353,0.002706,0.0012544655,2.3622456,Use of both current frontal and lateral images with a prior frontal image for comparison.,"The common pattern in the examples with high activation is that the radiological study descriptions include observations from multiple imaging views, specifically both frontal and lateral views, often with comparisons made to a prior frontal image.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13948,latent_13948,471,0.000942,0.0007642962,2.724754,Mild pulmonary vascular congestion and stability over time.,"These examples show discussions of specific findings related to pulmonary vascular congestion, pleural effusions, atelectasis and changes over time, often in relation to cardiac silhouettes. The descriptions often involve stability or improvement in mild-to-moderate pulmonary vascular congestion, reflecting a common pattern of chronic cardiopulmonary conditions without significant acute changes.",0.8199279711884754,0.82,0.8076923076923077,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7815126050420168,0.8076923076923077,0.782608695652174,0.6428571428571429,56.0,100.0
+13949,latent_13949,2127,0.004254,0.0017121285,1.6221517,Patterns of findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The high activation examples consistently describe findings through comparison with prior imaging studies, using specific phrases to reference changes or consistency in medical imaging. Despite variable content, comparison to past images forms the core of the pattern.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13950,latent_13950,449,0.000898,0.0007742801,3.4800122,Absence of prior imaging for comparison ('N/A').,"Examples with high activation levels consistently specify that there is no available prior imaging available for comparison, represented by 'N/A' or similar phrasing in the comparison section. This absence of comparison seems to be the recurring trigger rather than the actual findings or indications in the study.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5325177350155048,0.5419354838709678,0.3974358974358974,0.5636363636363636,55.0,100.0
+13951,latent_13951,6314,0.012628,0.0044386233,1.0520315,Interval changes or resolution found in comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with activations have consistent descriptions of new findings in comparison to prior imaging, specifically noting changes such as interval changes or resolution from a previous abnormal state. Examples without activation describe either stable conditions or clear lungs without significant changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+13952,latent_13952,2246,0.004492,0.0017305907,1.7072704,Comprehensive detailed analysis of anatomical findings.,"The instances with higher activations frequently involve fully specified or detailed description of multiple anatomical areas, including the cardiomediastinal silhouette, aorta, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, and specific comparison details from previous images. They provide detailed impressions or findings for each significant area in the chest region and compare current and prior images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4849711723254324,0.4924623115577889,0.4919354838709677,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+13953,latent_13953,3187,0.006374,0.0024081345,2.0820725,Explicit image comparison and documentation of interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation typically include explicit descriptions of the provided and prior imaging studies, focusing on comparing specific changes across these images. This involves documentation of intervals or differences between images taken at different times, indicating investigations or clinical questions being answered by these comparative assessments.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.5739130434782609,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13954,latent_13954,2121,0.004242,0.001764418,1.8369415,"Complex comparisons with explicit reference to interval changes, often involving tube or line placement.","The examples with high activation often include imaging findings that explicitly focus on changes over time, such as 'interval change', 'unstable', or 'previously noted', and usually involve complex comparisons, while factoring in placement of equipment like tubes and lines.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5735294117647058,0.39,100.0,100.0
+13955,latent_13955,6545,0.01309,0.0046251584,1.356374,Detailed comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging findings.,"Analysis of the activated examples reveals a coherent pattern of detailed descriptions in the radiology reports. These examples consistently provide comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing differences, stability, or changes in specific features, particularly pertaining to pathologies like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or other conditions. This detail in comparative analysis appears to be key, driving higher activation levels.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+13956,latent_13956,676,0.001352,0.0008485575,2.643108,"Focus on lung changes such as opacities, effusions, or atelectasis.","The examples with higher activation specifically mention findings or comparisons involving pleural opacities, effusions, or atelectasis, either through descriptive terms or by highlighting changes in these conditions over time. This examination suggests an emphasis on describing lung changes rather than a specific pattern like pleural effusions or atelectasis in isolation.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4801873536299765,0.4804469273743016,0.4270833333333333,0.5189873417721519,79.0,100.0
+13957,latent_13957,602,0.001204,0.0008318582,3.3937516,Analysis of medical device or tube positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently discuss changes in medical devices or tubes' positions and relate these changes to previous imaging. Descriptions frequently focus on repositioning of tubes, whether it be ET tubes, NG tubes, or other devices, indicating their appropriateness or need for adjustment. The examples often address new findings like pneumothorax or atelectasis in the context of procedural interventions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5011150047785919,0.5344827586206896,0.4363636363636363,0.3243243243243243,74.0,100.0
+13958,latent_13958,727,0.001454,0.0010022265,1.8527473,Tortuosity or unfolding of the thoracic aorta in chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation scores feature a common finding of thoracic aorta tortuosity or unfolding noted on chest imaging. This pattern appears alongside the observation of the cardiac silhouette, even when other findings like cardiomegaly or pleural effusions are present or absent.",0.7688104245481295,0.78,1.0,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6086905460951263,0.6530612244897959,0.9117647058823528,0.3229166666666667,96.0,100.0
+13959,latent_13959,298,0.000596,0.00058389746,3.4733207,"Normal findings with no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, clear cardiomediastinal silhouette.","Samples with higher activation levels consistently describe clear findings or absence of abnormalities in contrast to images with an unclear comparison context. Clarity in stating 'no focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax' and listing normal mediastinal and cardiac contours, alongside descriptions like 'lungs are clear' indicates it fits a regular, recognizable pattern in radiology reporting.",0.8357883251500273,0.8372093023255814,0.7619047619047619,0.8888888888888888,18.0,25.0,0.6491978609625668,0.6985294117647058,0.4489795918367347,0.6111111111111112,36.0,100.0
+13960,latent_13960,2585,0.00517,0.0019818994,1.6104273,Focus on explicit interval changes in medical support devices or pathology resolution.,"These examples illustrate a focus on specific changes or interventions between current and prior images. Activation is strong when there's an explicit change like placement or removal of tubes, devices, or resolution/progression of specific pathologies (compared to prior images), often indicating ongoing evaluation and treatment management.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5074626865671642,0.34,100.0,100.0
+13961,latent_13961,5332,0.010664,0.0038429874,1.7819012,Focus on interval changes and comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels highlight specific changes, stability, or absence of changes when comparing the radiographic studies to prior imaging. The reports focus on differences or lack thereof, in size of heart, presence of tubes, changes in effusions, or other specific radiological findings, often using terms like 'unchanged', 'as compared to previous', or 'interval'.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5685958574807037,0.585,0.5611510791366906,0.78,100.0,100.0
+13962,latent_13962,450,0.0009,0.000717666,3.1034875,Comparison between current and prior images.,"The activation levels are elevated when the task involves describing or comparing current imaging against prior images. This indicates a pattern where current findings are contextualized with reference to previous imaging, emphasizing changes or stability over time.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4000677506775068,0.4025974025974026,0.3272727272727272,0.6666666666666666,54.0,100.0
+13963,latent_13963,258,0.000516,0.00065305096,3.8758612,Attributes suggestive of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).,"The observed pattern involves descriptions where the findings support a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Common phrases include 'lungs are hyperinflated', 'flattening of the diaphragms', 'suggestive of COPD', and sometimes 'chronic obstructive pulmonary disease'. This pattern highlights respiratory attributes associated with COPD.",0.9226305609284332,0.925,0.8333333333333334,1.0,15.0,25.0,0.941678939617084,0.9545454545454546,0.8421052631578947,1.0,32.0,100.0
+13964,latent_13964,592,0.001184,0.00089595374,3.0514262,Radiological findings compared for interval progression or resolution.,"The examples with higher activation levels refer to radiological findings that not only include the evaluation of current imaging but explicitly compare detailed changes or resolutions in condition from the prior study or studies. They use language to indicate checking for 'interval progression','resolution', or other transitions in the findings.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5430939983557139,0.543859649122807,0.4716981132075472,0.6944444444444444,72.0,99.0
+13965,latent_13965,2586,0.005172,0.0018718184,1.1839464,Explicit comparison to prior images focusing on stability or subtle changes.,"The highly activated samples often show detailed comparisons of current to prior images to track changes or stability, while indicating findings like unchanged or stable conditions, subtle changes, or ongoing issues. This indicates the model is prioritizing the task of assessing progression, stability, or resolution of conditions based on longitudinal image comparisons.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13966,latent_13966,988,0.001976,0.0014162872,3.7349753,Consistent comparison with previous images indicating unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe pulmonary, cardiac, or pleural changes or pathologies that are assessed relative to a previous imaging study, highlighting either a lack of significant change or specific interval changes. This comparison with a prior radiograph, especially noting 'unchanged' aspects, is key to the pattern.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6349908747718693,0.635,0.6363636363636364,0.63,100.0,100.0
+13967,latent_13967,4979,0.009958,0.0035710493,1.7206296,Lack of significant change in comparison to prior images or absence thereof.,"The examples predominantly show an absence of prior comparison images or lack significant change or new findings when compared to previous imaging. This indicates that the activation might relate to findings not involving change since prior exams, or new detections in cases with prior exams are absent or non-comparative.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5503875968992248,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13968,latent_13968,1197,0.002394,0.0010645092,1.9776889,"Analysis of findings in comparison with prior images, including assisting diagnostic interpretations.","Examples with high activations consistently describe findings in relation to prior reports, creating an ""assistant"" section that adds clinical interpretation or further diagnostic suggestions based on the comparison. High activation appears in examples where comparison reveals changes or stability in patient condition.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+13969,latent_13969,906,0.001812,0.0009314186,3.0198913,Comparison to prior reports/images indicating stability or unchanged findings.,"The common theme in the high activation examples is the explicit reference and comparison to a prior report or image. These reports provide a narrative of unchanged or stable conditions compared to previous assessments, which seems to be the focus of the model's activation.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.2727272727272727,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5694444444444444,0.41,100.0,100.0
+13970,latent_13970,337,0.000674,0.00067123875,2.8286026,Unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours in radiology comparisons.,"These examples consistently use reports of unchanged or stable findings when comparing current imaging studies to prior ones, particularly regarding cardiac, mediastinal and hilar contours appearing unchanged. This highlights stability over time as a key observation in the reports with high activation levels.",0.7467294610151753,0.75,0.7,0.7368421052631579,19.0,25.0,0.645,0.704225352112676,0.5,0.5,42.0,100.0
+13971,latent_13971,671,0.001342,0.0010692974,4.0621066,Examples focus on comparison between current and previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature a structure that includes 'comparison' with prior or current imaging, using the word 'comparison'. This pattern is integral to identifying changes or stability in medical imaging over time. The activation captures this repetitive linguistic construct, including when previous images are mentioned but no changes are highlighted.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4104066985645933,0.4301075268817204,0.4253731343283582,0.6627906976744186,86.0,100.0
+13972,latent_13972,2072,0.004144,0.0016154958,1.6892681,Comparison with prior imaging for changes or stability.,"The examples consistently involve comparison between current and prior images to evaluate stability or changes in findings. This reflects a common pattern in radiological assessments focusing on longitudinal imaging evaluations to ascertain if there is any progression, improvement, or stasis of detected issues.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+13973,latent_13973,406,0.000812,0.00070039433,3.333618,Emphasis on stable cardiopulmonary findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples typically note the lack of acute changes from prior examinations, emphasizing stability across various aspects such as cardiac silhouette, mediastinal silhouettes, and presence or absence of lung pathology. They highlight maintaining consistency rather than identifying new pathologies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4861469072164948,0.5448275862068965,0.2941176470588235,0.3333333333333333,45.0,100.0
+13974,latent_13974,565,0.00113,0.0008499671,3.0890465,Comparison of current radiological findings to prior images.,"The examples consistently involve providing radiological findings by comparing current images to prior images. This involves an examination of changes or stability over time, often with specific details about any variations detected in heart, lung, or mediastinal structures.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.464585666293393,0.4705882352941176,0.4152542372881356,0.7,70.0,100.0
+13975,latent_13975,643,0.001286,0.00084410084,2.315178,"Clear lungs without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax; normal cardiomediastinal silhouettes.","Highly activated examples frequently involve clear lungs without focal consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax, with most examples also noting the cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes as unremarkable. The findings generally indicate no acute cardiopulmonary process, focusing on stability and lack of significant change.",0.7996794871794872,0.8,0.7777777777777778,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7291058972733038,0.7303370786516854,0.6704545454545454,0.7564102564102564,78.0,100.0
+13976,latent_13976,621,0.001242,0.0008459307,3.7434876,Describing changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include instructions to compare the current study with a prior study, and all describe findings in relation to prior imaging. Descriptions in high activation examples involve changes noted over time, suggesting the identified pattern is the process of comparison to previous findings.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4638521928303433,0.4692737430167598,0.4024390243902439,0.4177215189873418,79.0,100.0
+13977,latent_13977,342,0.000684,0.00068740686,3.0615556,Mention of epigastric pain.,"In these examples, there is a linkage between the phrases tied to epigastric pain indicated in the context and the high activation levels. The referenced conditions or symptoms, particularly 'epigastric', seems to have a notable frequency across the highly activated samples.",0.7201808931599774,0.7555555555555555,1.0,0.45,20.0,25.0,0.563076923076923,0.7464788732394366,0.875,0.1666666666666666,42.0,100.0
+13978,latent_13978,1067,0.002134,0.0011196986,2.5935826,Presence of a PRIOR_REPORT for comparison.,The pattern observed here indicates that the presence of a PRIOR_REPORT or specific indication for comparison prompted a higher activation level. The elevated activation suggests a focus on the need to compare current images with past studies to draw conclusions on changes or stability in the patient's condition.,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.48,0.72,100.0,100.0
+13979,latent_13979,1219,0.002438,0.0011124538,1.952901,Performing directed comparison and description of radiological findings.,"Examples with above-zero activation levels all contain instructions directing the user to provide a description or evaluation of the imaging findings and make comparisons with the prior frontal image. This instruction is consistent in form across these examples, indicating that the dataset's target pattern is about performing specific comparative evaluations or descriptions on imaging results.",0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.4864864864864865,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.4523194779401333,0.5125628140703518,0.5060240963855421,0.8484848484848485,99.0,100.0
+13980,latent_13980,657,0.001314,0.00091561326,3.0758357,"Description of findings compared to prior imaging, noting interval changes.","The examples with high activation levels include findings that are compared with a prior image or radiograph. Additionally, these examples generally describe specific changes in the patient's condition since the last imaging. This indicates a pattern focused on assessing interval changes based on previous records.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4811750911933299,0.4915254237288136,0.4189189189189189,0.3974358974358974,78.0,99.0
+13981,latent_13981,295,0.00059,0.0005463577,3.117934,Use of current and prior images with detailed descriptions of cardiac or mediastinal changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently include both a current frontal and lateral image provided for comparison, along with reference to previously obtained images for comparison of findings, while incorporating some form of findings on the cardiac or mediastinal silhouette or changes in lung appearance related to prior pathology that is explicitly described. There is often mention of prior findings persisting or resolving, highlighting the comparative nature of the evaluation.",0.5831578947368421,0.5909090909090909,0.5263157894736842,0.5263157894736842,19.0,25.0,0.5070540411286466,0.5338345864661654,0.2898550724637681,0.6060606060606061,33.0,100.0
+13982,latent_13982,3262,0.006524,0.0025228646,2.0233366,Significant change or comparison in findings from prior imaging.,"The examples showing higher activation refer to direct comparisons with prior imagery, indicating descriptions of detected changes or stability in the patient's condition over time. Where there is a focus on change or continued stability, such as 'no significant change' or 'new findings,' activation is higher due to the importance of temporal changes in clinical assessment.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,100.0,100.0
+13983,latent_13983,1562,0.003124,0.0013875153,2.338528,Medical interventions or hardware changes noted in imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve observations related to changes due to medical interventions (like insertion or removal of tubes or other hardware) or distinct conditions/malformations identified. The activation seems tied to explicit findings related to medical devices or procedural outcomes.,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4691358024691358,0.38,100.0,100.0
+13984,latent_13984,1826,0.003652,0.0014736749,3.1597595,Tortuous aorta in chest imaging findings.,"Examples activated describe the presence of a tortuous aorta in a chest radiograph. Descriptions of the aorta's tortuosity or relevant observations such as stability or changes in this condition seem to lead to higher activation scores, indicating a focus on this vascular feature.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.3333333333333333,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.382773777237445,0.505,0.5454545454545454,0.06,100.0,100.0
+13985,latent_13985,847,0.001694,0.00092583447,3.1821501,Unchanged radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies.,Examples with moderate to high activation primarily describe radiological findings that are unchanged from prior studies. This specific phrasing indicates stability and commonality in follow-up radiology reports. The detailed comparison with prior imaging implies that the findings are predictable and non-dynamic.,0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5833333333333334,0.49,100.0,100.0
+13986,latent_13986,630,0.00126,0.00086571416,2.4152982,Focus on changes or stability in findings over time via prior image comparison.,"These examples frequently highlight phrases indicating ""comparison to prior"" or analysis over time, synonymous with temporal changes or comparisons. High activation is seen when differences in radiographic findings are emphasized, even more so when subtle or significant changes from prior images are noted, alongside identification of specific findings or stability in medical devices or conditions after interventions.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4155011655011655,0.423728813559322,0.396694214876033,0.6233766233766234,77.0,100.0
+13987,latent_13987,594,0.001188,0.00082086766,2.6838627,Low lung volumes and atelectasis observed on chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings on radiographic images that denote low lung volumes and atelectasis. These examples do not comment on significant cardiomegaly or prominent effusions. Notably, this pattern does not include cases where the lungs are hyperexpanded or where there are significant pleural effusions or pneumothorax.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4391592920353982,0.5029585798816568,0.3255813953488372,0.2028985507246377,69.0,100.0
+13988,latent_13988,1709,0.003418,0.001540861,2.901684,Comparative findings indicating acute changes in relation to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve current comparisons to prior imaging reports, specifically noting differences in acute conditions or changes in pathology. This is emphasized by statements indicating a need for comparative assessment to determine changes in medical conditions between the two images.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3951612903225806,0.43,0.3653846153846153,0.19,100.0,100.0
+13989,latent_13989,604,0.001208,0.000857993,2.3952892,Consistent use of comparison with prior imaging to determine interval change.,"These examples show a consistent observation pattern where descriptions from prior reports are used to identify changes or stability in radiology findings, often using the term 'comparison'. Reports make use of phrases like 'interval change', 'no significant interval change', or provide detailed descriptions of the differences (or lack thereof) between current and previous studies, indicating the model's focus on utilizing sequential images for identification of patterns over time.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4694776802359082,0.4709302325581395,0.4128440366972477,0.625,72.0,100.0
+13990,latent_13990,2237,0.004474,0.0018040386,1.9020324,Detailed comparison of findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports that include specific comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, using terms like 'compared to prior,' 'unchanged,' or referencing explicit dates. This pattern shows detailed temporal comparison in medical imaging descriptions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5238095238095238,0.55,100.0,100.0
+13991,latent_13991,374,0.000748,0.0007325202,3.523936,Focus on 'interval change' in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention 'interval change', which refers to changes observed in the imaging over a period of time. This is commonly used in radiology to assess disease progression or resolution by comparing current imaging findings with previous scans.",0.6302600472813239,0.6304347826086957,0.5833333333333334,0.6666666666666666,21.0,25.0,0.5440850686752325,0.5714285714285714,0.3809523809523809,0.5,48.0,99.0
+13992,latent_13992,669,0.001338,0.00091937726,2.5038996,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior images to assess changes.,Highly activated examples consistently reference the 'comparison' of current imaging with 'prior' images to assess stability or change in findings. This suggests a strong pattern focus on the evaluation of changes in medical conditions over time via imaging.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5076951951951951,0.5300546448087432,0.4892086330935252,0.8192771084337349,83.0,100.0
+13993,latent_13993,881,0.001762,0.00090309925,2.9203432,Presence of detailed indications for imaging study.,High activation examples consistently highlight the presence of an 'indication' section detailing patient symptoms or the reason for examination... while less activated ones lack detailed indications.,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+13994,latent_13994,2870,0.00574,0.0022491524,1.9006231,Significant attention to changes or stability of medical findings/devices over serial imaging.,Examples with high activation clearly demonstrate interpretation of changes in patient anatomy over time using previously described baseline findings or the results of previous imaging as direct comparators. The pattern specifically involves noting stability or changes in medical devices or abnormalities across serial imaging.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+13995,latent_13995,3942,0.007884,0.0028515167,1.0556884,Emphasis on radiological findings with interval changes or persistent abnormalities.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings in radiology reports that indicate significant changes or persistence of abnormalities like pleural effusion, cardiomegaly, or other specific pathological findings across sequential imaging studies, highlighting interval changes or ongoing issues.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+13996,latent_13996,2763,0.005526,0.0021633194,1.8587261,Interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples all involve evaluations of changes or assessments of current imaging findings compared to previous ones. They reference findings such as device placements, changes in pleural effusions, aeration improvements, or regression/progression of specific conditions, based on comparison with previous images or reports, detailing an interval change or stability/outcome of a condition or placement.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.5803571428571429,0.65,100.0,100.0
+13997,latent_13997,3983,0.007966,0.0028994617,1.8350655,Provide findings comparing current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels contain explicit prompts asking for a comparison between current and previous images, encouraging detailed comparison discussions. These often mention imaging examens like 'radiograph', 'CT', or 'X-ray' along with terms indicating new vs old status such as 'interval', 'stable', or 'increased'.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5263157894736842,0.6,100.0,100.0
+13998,latent_13998,736,0.001472,0.0008785784,2.0398002,Explicit comparison with prior frontal images in reports.,"The data clearly emphasizes the importance of comparison with prior imaging studies, denoting this as a fundamental component of highly activated examples. These examples refer to previous frontal images explicitly, showing clear emphasis on continuity and comparison for evaluation.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.496790757381258,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.6875,96.0,100.0
+13999,latent_13999,773,0.001546,0.0010813137,3.7796416,Comparison to prior imaging for interval changes or device placement/stability.,"Activated examples consistently incorporate comparison to prior radiograph detecting changes or stability, specifically monitoring for interval changes or positioning/stability of medical devices such as tubes or catheters, often with explicit reference to prior image studies.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4953245697248949,0.5153061224489796,0.5035971223021583,0.7291666666666666,96.0,100.0
+14000,latent_14000,515,0.00103,0.00067864,3.419856,Positioning and placement of tubes or medical devices discussed.,"The pattern observed here is the mention of placement or positioning of tubes, catheters, or similar medical devices. Descriptions are focused on their placement, position, and any necessary adjustments or comparisons with previous reports—noting if their positions are stable, instructions for adjustment, or implications regarding their placement.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4903943377148635,0.5178571428571429,0.3934426229508196,0.3529411764705882,68.0,100.0
+14001,latent_14001,1991,0.003982,0.0016271176,2.3297114,Presence of medical devices or attention to specific findings in comparison with prior image.,"The examples with high activation predominantly feature situations where a new finding, intervention, or state of a device/catheter was anticipated or confirmed, describing changes or the lack thereof when comparing radiographs. The detailed reports highlight changes or status in medical devices or specific bodily conditions, absent from zero-activation cases.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14002,latent_14002,581,0.001162,0.00079980755,2.4700642,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging to detect changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include language prompting a comparison between the current imaging findings and past images, often highlighted by terms like 'comparison', previous imaging dates, or changes over time ('improved', 'unchanged'). This suggests a focus on change detection in imaging findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4070601213458356,0.4186046511627907,0.3870967741935484,0.6666666666666666,72.0,100.0
+14003,latent_14003,2016,0.004032,0.0016707972,2.0121155,Evaluation of tube or device placement in radiology studies.,"The pattern in these examples is references to presence, placement, or adjustment of tubes (e.g., nasogastric, endotracheal) or other devices within the body, which commonly requires radiographic evaluation to ensure accurate placement without complications.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14004,latent_14004,1023,0.002046,0.0010684914,2.0455408,"Focus on interval changes or findings compared to prior studies, indicating clinical relevance.","The examples with higher activation levels often include an explicit interpretation of the patient’s findings with respect to changes from prior studies and emphasize the medical significance or need for clinical correlation of new findings such as opacities, atelectasis, or other changes indicating progression, resolution, or stability of a condition.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.5590551181102362,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14005,latent_14005,1074,0.002148,0.001144919,2.4849946,Evaluation of device or line placements compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the evaluation of medical devices, lines, or tubes, such as nasogastric tubes and PICC lines, regarding their position or changes relative to prior imaging studies. Reports often compare the current state with previous images to determine any migration, change, or potential complications.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14006,latent_14006,409,0.000818,0.00074759236,3.577508,Identification of new or interval changes in imaging findings.,"The high-activation examples consistently involve identifying new or changing conditions between current and prior imaging, such as interval placement or removal of tubes, development of complications (e.g., pneumonia, pleural effusion), or improvement or deterioration in patient status. This reflects the model's focus on identifying significant clinical updates between comparisons.",0.5707133917396746,0.5714285714285714,0.5652173913043478,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4465332524762482,0.5,0.2592592592592592,0.2916666666666667,48.0,100.0
+14007,latent_14007,444,0.000888,0.000755282,4.3174667,Instructions to compare current and prior radiological images.,"The examples with high activation levels primarily involve instructions to provide descriptions or findings based on the current images in comparison to a prior image, often included in formal medical reports with structured sections and syntactic complexity. The explicit request to describe and compare findings consistently appears across these samples.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4507899453916378,0.4516129032258064,0.3584905660377358,0.6909090909090909,55.0,100.0
+14008,latent_14008,2967,0.005934,0.002233131,2.2035375,Radiology report with a focus on comparison against prior images.,"These examples all include comparisons between current and prior images, which is often done to evaluate stability, changes, or progress of a condition. The focus seems to be on the documentation of changes over time or consistency of findings between imaging sessions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4968944099378882,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14009,latent_14009,3467,0.006934,0.0026110436,1.8429574,Evaluation of interval changes through comparison with previous imaging studies.,"The examples with non-zero activations consistently feature explicit references to a comparison between current and prior imaging studies, indicating observations of interval changes or stability in findings over time. These elements are commonly highlighted in radiology assessments to evaluate the progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4895104895104895,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14010,latent_14010,360,0.00072,0.0007298649,3.7722857,Clear cardiomediastinal and pulmonary findings without acute changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include clear cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours without consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, often indicating a normal or stable state in imaging reports.",0.6661828737300435,0.6739130434782609,0.59375,0.9047619047619048,21.0,25.0,0.652998563858763,0.6573426573426573,0.4642857142857143,0.9069767441860463,43.0,100.0
+14011,latent_14011,483,0.000966,0.00084591657,3.4261894,Presence of both current lateral and prior frontal views for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels generally include mention of both lateral and prior frontal views, supporting evaluation with past radiographs on a lateral basis, whereas examples with lower activation often mention only single or specific views without comprehensive comparative analysis.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5636784268363215,0.5792682926829268,0.463768115942029,0.5,64.0,100.0
+14012,latent_14012,4014,0.008028,0.0030119743,1.6532949,Comparison highlighting unchanged findings or stable device positions.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently indicate follow-up or evaluation of changes in prior findings or conditions, such as areas of concern or previously noted issues, along with references to stable apparatus positions like tubes or catheter placements.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.531480215690742,0.5326633165829145,0.5333333333333333,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+14013,latent_14013,2531,0.005062,0.001973403,2.5901432,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior image.,"Examples with activation levels at 2.0 or above describe radiological findings that are stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging, suggesting no significant interval changes. This stability or lack of interval change is highlighted, which could imply benign or non-urgent findings, hence the activation.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14014,latent_14014,2557,0.005114,0.0019994096,2.1796205,Describing findings without actual prior image comparisons.,"Most examples with higher activation levels feature the model dealing with situations where multiple images are available but comparison with prior images is not achievable due to lack of prior images, making evaluation more limited. This challenge of comparison without actual previous image data constitutes the pattern.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4805231010973971,0.4824120603015075,0.4772727272727273,0.4242424242424242,99.0,100.0
+14015,latent_14015,388,0.000776,0.0005812873,5.499588,Significant changes or specific features compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve radiological reports where findings are compared to previous imaging, focusing on notable changes or specific features. Examples with low activation levels either lack meaningful comparison or the reports state 'no relevant change,' indicating stable findings.",0.4009803921568627,0.4468085106382978,0.3333333333333333,0.1818181818181818,22.0,25.0,0.5458524070627295,0.5878378378378378,0.3818181818181818,0.4375,48.0,100.0
+14016,latent_14016,2440,0.00488,0.0017931964,1.8556082,Explicit comparison of different image views in the study.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently describe making explicit comparisons between different image modalities or views (e.g., frontal, lateral) as a critical part of the task, using phrases like 'comparison to prior image'. The task focuses on contrasting current with prior images to describe changes or stability in the patient's condition.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14017,latent_14017,4026,0.008052,0.0028876814,1.0950241,Emphasis on interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The significant correlation across these examples is the noted indications of interval change or stability when compared to prior studies. This pattern reflects the focus on evaluating changes over time, such as ""unchanged,"" ""stable,"" or ""compared to previous"" conditions noted in the reports.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14018,latent_14018,449,0.000898,0.00074947235,2.719341,Detailed comparisons with previous imaging studies noting intervals or stability.,"The samples show a pattern where radiology reports contain findings in comparison to previous imaging studies. Examples with high activation levels often show a linguistic pattern with detailed descriptions of comparisons, especially noting any consistent or unchanged findings, intervals, or no acute changes, which are part of radiological follow-up evaluations.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5164835164835164,0.5324675324675324,0.375,0.5,54.0,100.0
+14019,latent_14019,6658,0.013316,0.004689512,0.9932887,Significant change or new findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instances where significant changes, interventions, or new findings are compared to prior images. This pattern reflects detailed comparative analysis, often marked by the identification of changes in conditions, placement of medical devices, or patient status, as opposed to other descriptive approaches in low activation examples.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5416666666666666,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14020,latent_14020,2899,0.005798,0.0022533848,3.1308413,Monitoring or changes in catheter and tube placement.,"Highly activated examples involve reports that provide assessments or measurements related to tube placements, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, PICC lines, and central catheters. These reports often describe the position of tubes in relation to anatomical landmarks and observe changes or stabilities compared to previous images.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5925925925925926,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14021,latent_14021,6262,0.012524,0.0044928617,1.7719162,Detailed comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies.,"Reports with higher activations detail intricate comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, typically specifying stability, improvement, or changes in clinical conditions or device placements over time. These documents emphasize specific comparisons with prior images.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5999599959995999,0.6,0.5980392156862745,0.61,100.0,100.0
+14022,latent_14022,1096,0.002192,0.0010517653,2.4674313,Increased activation with low or no visual comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels often lack visual support or prior reference for comparison, indicating the model recognizes a distinct pattern when suggesting on its own without relying on comparative data. The focus is on autonomous diagnostic visualization.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.56,0.28,100.0,100.0
+14023,latent_14023,420,0.00084,0.0007371725,3.462355,Explicit comparison to previous imaging studies.,"The examples highlight a pattern where the findings are described in clear comparison to prior imaging studies. Often the content refers to changes or stability in features relative to previous exams, indicating a focus on evaluating changes over time, especially where prior details are explicitly noted and comparisons drawn.",0.4170040485829959,0.4375,0.4411764705882353,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.4088665794912894,0.4090909090909091,0.3092783505154639,0.5555555555555556,54.0,100.0
+14024,latent_14024,601,0.001202,0.0009551002,4.3161035,Stable or mild enlargement of cardiac silhouette amidst other chest findings.,The high activation examples tend to describe findings where the cardiac silhouette or heart size is mentioned as 'mildly enlarged' or 'unchanged' despite reports of other thoracic abnormalities or procedures. This suggests a pattern where mild cardiac enlargement or stability is consistently noted.,0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.604495508071155,0.6176470588235294,0.5362318840579711,0.5285714285714286,70.0,100.0
+14025,latent_14025,1775,0.00355,0.0015182197,2.8292043,Emergency care evaluation using prior imaging comparison following acute clinical change.,"Examples of higher activation levels explicitly mention extreme cases or urgent conditions for evaluation such as placement of tubes following rapid clinical status changes, juxtaposed against prior imaging findings. These descriptions indicate an emergency or acute care context, requiring immediate intervention or comparison due to recent clinical developments in patients.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14026,latent_14026,2578,0.005156,0.0019819695,2.0785394,Assessment of significant changes or developments since prior imaging.,"The examples with activation values greater than zero tend to describe changes or observations that require clinical decision or further action. They usually report developments like interval changes in conditions, particularly concerning findings or new complications, prompting more careful study or additional examinations. This contrasts with neutral findings that report stability, which do not elicit high activations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.64349376114082,0.645,0.6666666666666666,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14027,latent_14027,2262,0.004524,0.0018691842,1.7158365,Description of changes or stability in imaging compared to prior studies.,Highly activated examples predominantly involve cases that compare current imaging findings to previous images and note changes or stability. The consistent element is the explicit mention of stability or change in pathology or devices over time compared to prior imaging.,0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+14028,latent_14028,508,0.001016,0.00076772284,2.665485,Comparison between current and prior images highlighting changes.,"The examples with higher activation scores frequently contain findings or comparisons with prior films. The model appears responsive to prompts that invite comparison between current and prior imaging, emphasizing observed changes such as stability, improvement, or worsening of conditions.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.3634205983889528,0.3652694610778443,0.2857142857142857,0.3880597014925373,67.0,100.0
+14029,latent_14029,395,0.00079,0.00059915514,4.095206,Changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently highlight changes or stability in the patient's condition over time by referencing previous studies or imaging for comparison, such as ""newly appeared"" findings or ""no relevant change"" with specific context of evaluating interval progress.",0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.5806451612903226,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.5816845675522895,0.5945945945945946,0.4189189189189189,0.6458333333333334,48.0,100.0
+14030,latent_14030,1152,0.002304,0.001129847,1.6172981,Unchanged position of medical devices in imaging comparison.,"These examples include references to monitoring, support devices, or prosthetics such as pacemakers, stents, and catheters which are stable or unchanged in position compared to prior imaging. These medical devices are commonly documented in radiological reports, especially when they remain unchanged over time.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5135135135135135,0.19,100.0,100.0
+14031,latent_14031,2133,0.004266,0.0016226975,2.388722,Explicit requirement for description compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve directives to compare current imaging with prior studies, specifically requesting a description of findings in relation to prior imaging. This pattern highlights the emphasis on identifying changes or stability in radiological assessments over time.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,100.0,100.0
+14032,latent_14032,339,0.000678,0.00071302336,4.713261,Aorta described as tortuous or unfolded.,"The pattern visible in the data is the notable observations of an unfolded or tortuous aorta, regardless of whether there are comparison studies or interval changes. Such phrases describing the aorta ('tortuous', 'unfolded') are consistently present in examples with higher activation levels.",0.7511574074074074,0.7674418604651163,0.7857142857142857,0.6111111111111112,18.0,25.0,0.667191291232212,0.7586206896551724,0.7083333333333334,0.3777777777777777,45.0,100.0
+14033,latent_14033,783,0.001566,0.0008644868,1.9964008,Stable findings compared to prior studies.,"Highly activated examples frequently list findings that indicate a stable and unchanged state of various chest structures or pathologies compared to prior studies. They emphasize stability or lack of significant change, which is common in follow-up radiology reports to ensure monitoring without deterioration.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4475351068704347,0.4824120603015075,0.46,0.2323232323232323,99.0,100.0
+14034,latent_14034,737,0.001474,0.000946009,2.7161295,Assessment of medical device placements relative to anatomical landmarks.,"The examples analyzing the placement of tubes and catheters and their positions relative to anatomical landmarks, particularly focusing on the terminations within or near key landmarks like the carina, SVC, or stomach. These are specific aspects of radiological practice when reporting on medical devices seen in imaging.",0.8,0.8,0.8,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5939807563213246,0.6020942408376964,0.6027397260273972,0.4835164835164835,91.0,100.0
+14035,latent_14035,1892,0.003784,0.0015310437,2.019498,Comparative evaluation of radiological findings indicating change or stability over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels (3 and above) consistently include some aspect of evaluating or assessing changes over time in the patient's condition as revealed by imaging. This includes new findings, changes in structures measured or compared with prior exams, or stable appearances being noted, focusing primarily on anything that implies progression, monitoring or temporal change in conditions.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14036,latent_14036,911,0.001822,0.0013309212,4.0745797,Detailed comparative analysis between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation mention imaging comparisons with phrases emphasizing descriptions of findings in the current images as compared to prior examinations. The pattern identified is the emphasis on providing detailed comparative assessments, often with a strong focus on changes or stability in findings, especially in context of specific indications or history provided before the assistant's description.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.3646028767979987,0.365,0.3578947368421052,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14037,latent_14037,652,0.001304,0.00087051006,3.12407,Detailed comparative imaging analysis with emphasis on changes or stability.,"This pattern involves providing detailed radiological descriptions that compare the current imaging with previous studies, focusing on the evaluation of changes or stability in findings, such as pleural effusions, pneumonia, or surgical alterations. Specific reference to current and prior images, comparison dates, and changes in clinical findings are crucial in these reports.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5530586766541823,0.553072625698324,0.494949494949495,0.620253164556962,79.0,100.0
+14038,latent_14038,1144,0.002288,0.0022051411,3.0552943,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in findings based on prior imaging comparisons.,"These examples all describe significant observations from a comparison of current imaging with prior imaging, highlighting interval changes such as placement or removal of devices, appearance or resolution of opacities or other findings suggesting change over time. They frequently use specific terms indicating change, stability, or resolution of findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5789989680082559,0.5879396984924623,0.5703125,0.73,100.0,99.0
+14039,latent_14039,3830,0.00766,0.0028216653,1.6099476,Explicit description of unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation often discuss technical findings about devices or abnormalities in specific anatomical areas and describe them explicitly with comparison to previous tests. They frequently mention terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and provide intricate details over time, but Example 2 and others with an activation of 0 do not have the same level of comparison detail.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14040,latent_14040,608,0.001216,0.000876266,2.7478,Making explicit comparisons to prior images to identify changes or stability.,"The examples highlight a pattern of conducting image comparisons, specifically identifying changes from previous medical images. The high-activation examples discuss these comparisons, whereas low-activation ones do not contribute any meaningful comparison details. Instances of statement and description relativity predicated on changes or stable elements between the current and prior diagnostic images result in heightened activation.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.516750714675746,0.519774011299435,0.4649122807017544,0.6883116883116883,77.0,100.0
+14041,latent_14041,905,0.00181,0.00102485,2.3982499,Radiology report with comparison to prior imaging.,The high activation examples all feature findings derived from direct comparisons between current imaging studies and prior ones. This helps identify changes over time and monitor progression or resolution of conditions. Comparisons highlight interval findings which is a central aspect of radiographic interpretations.,0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4928571428571429,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14042,latent_14042,484,0.000968,0.0007937276,3.0615447,Radiological reports requiring description in absence of detailed prior comparison.,"High activation examples focus on descriptions that involve either providing findings in the current and prior images or comparison, without clear prior data provided for effective comparison, leading to the emission of generalized findings. This contrasts with low activation examples which either describe intricate medical scenarios or have historic comparisons.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5135063659375118,0.5153374233128835,0.4272727272727272,0.746031746031746,63.0,100.0
+14043,latent_14043,3860,0.00772,0.002866628,3.0335767,Focus on interval changes or comparisons with prior images in radiology reports.,The pattern indicates that the instances comparing findings of the current imaging to a prior study or emphasizing interval changes tend to have higher activation levels. Instances with prior reports and explicit mentions of comparison or changes are more actively analyzed as they measure and assess radiological progression or stability.,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5312705727452272,0.555,0.5379310344827586,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14044,latent_14044,617,0.001234,0.0009210087,1.9635592,"Comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels frequently compare current imaging findings to previous ones, noting differences in pathological features or medical device positioning. This suggests that the pattern focuses on detecting changes or stability over time through comparison with prior images.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3731308948700252,0.3771428571428571,0.3508771929824561,0.5333333333333333,75.0,100.0
+14045,latent_14045,3878,0.007756,0.002933995,2.5632842,Emphasis on stability or normality in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation refer to findings or disease status stability rather than specific features or changes, implying a focus on descriptions emphasizing lack of significant change, 'normal' findings, or clarified lack of pathology.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4839550088930083,0.485,0.4862385321100917,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14046,latent_14046,765,0.00153,0.001219587,3.300333,"Clear lungs, normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, and absence of effusion or pneumothorax.","High activation examples consistently include descriptions of clear lung fields, unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, and no presence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax. This trend indicates that the model recognizes these normal findings as the pattern.",0.9599358974358976,0.96,0.925925925925926,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8317232543241512,0.8341708542713567,0.7661290322580645,0.9595959595959596,99.0,100.0
+14047,latent_14047,5901,0.011802,0.0042148596,1.3617638,Comparison to prior imaging for interval change assessment.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to direct comparison with prior imaging studies to assess the interval change, stability, or progression of findings. Additionally, these reports use similar phrases like 'compared to', 'no significant interval change', or specific differences in findings between reports.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14048,latent_14048,2527,0.005054,0.00205378,2.0655205,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern described in these examples emphasizes the use of radiographic findings in conjunction with comparing current and prior images to identify and report stability or change in specific findings, typically used for managing chronic conditions or in follow-up studies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.525765534913517,0.5326633165829145,0.5241935483870968,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+14049,latent_14049,719,0.001438,0.0010037111,3.718924,Detailed comparison of clinical devices or abnormal findings with prior images.,"Most samples with higher activation mention a detailed comparison to prior observations, particularly highlighting changes or stability in clinical devices like chest tubes or catheters, pneumothoraces, or subcutaneous emphysema. This reflects a focus on interval changes in specific abnormal findings or devices.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4778208440999139,0.4845360824742268,0.4754098360655737,0.6170212765957447,94.0,100.0
+14050,latent_14050,4416,0.008832,0.0031442319,1.3710749,Comparison of medical device positions on serial imaging.,"The pattern emphasizes observations of unchanged, stable, or new positions of medical devices such as lines, tubes, or catheters, often contextualized in comparison to prior imaging studies. The consistent reference to the positions or changes in these devices used in medical care explains the activation levels corresponding to operational adjustments or corrections over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5396825396825397,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14051,latent_14051,592,0.001184,0.00088204833,2.685909,Comparisons to previous images highlighting new or stable pathologies.,"The examples consistently involve the evaluation of images with comparison to previous images, particularly with an emphasis on identifying new or unchanged pathologies. Note the high activations when detailed comparisons between the current findings and prior images are explicitly mentioned, highlighting stable, developed, or resolved conditions.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4986664032401462,0.5028571428571429,0.4285714285714285,0.48,75.0,100.0
+14052,latent_14052,2538,0.005076,0.0020268348,1.7911862,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability.","The highly activated examples focus on providing a detailed description and evaluation of changes seen in comparison to prior studies, emphasizing any specific change, stability, or improvement, often mentioning conditions like pneumonia, pneumothorax, or pleural effusion. They highlight the comparison aspect, whether there's a noted change in opacities, placement of devices, or size of anatomical features like the cardiac silhouette.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.2916666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4895833333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14053,latent_14053,4062,0.008124,0.0029748005,1.5818613,Descriptive comparison with prior radiological studies indicating stability or changes.,"Examples with activation close to zero often have normal findings or do not rely heavily on comparisons between images. In contrast, examples with higher activation tend to feature descriptive comparisons with previous images, indicating changes or stability in findings since the prior study, often with specific pathologies noted.",0.5462962962962963,0.5510204081632653,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5863019995403356,0.595,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14054,latent_14054,259,0.000518,0.0007028051,3.796526,Requests for lung findings comparison using lateral and frontal images.,Examples with high activation levels often include a direct prompt to describe findings in both current lateral and frontal images in comparison with prior images. This pattern suggests that the model is activated by instructions that request detailed analysis based on lateral and frontal views alongside prior comparisons.,0.5048309178743962,0.5121951219512195,0.4,0.5,16.0,25.0,0.5368067226890756,0.5923076923076923,0.2909090909090909,0.5333333333333333,30.0,100.0
+14055,latent_14055,578,0.001156,0.0008025782,3.4161863,Cardiomegaly with pleural effusion or volume changes in thoracic cavity.,Highly representative examples describe cardiomegaly with accompanying radiological observations such as pleural effusion or other volume changes. This pattern is observed in cases where cardiac silhouette enlargement is noted along with fluid displacement or accumulation changes in the thoracic cavity.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3627770534550196,0.4588235294117647,0.1764705882352941,0.0857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+14056,latent_14056,2625,0.00525,0.002077682,1.7440311,Comparison between current and prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation exhibit comparisons between current and prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability in clinical findings. The comparison involves noting differences or reiterating stability of observed pathologies with reference to prior images.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14057,latent_14057,738,0.001476,0.0009438511,2.1872275,Mild pulmonary vascular congestion in chest imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of mild pulmonary vascular congestion, often associated with other findings but typically without overt indications of edema or fluid overload. This pattern is distinct in radiology reports as it highlights subtle changes in pulmonary vasculature without more severe presentations.",0.8572011423908609,0.86,1.0,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6417811253876828,0.6632653061224489,0.7884615384615384,0.4270833333333333,96.0,100.0
+14058,latent_14058,1996,0.003992,0.0014437711,1.4908583,Explicit instruction to compare current and prior images for changes.,"The examples with higher activation often involve instructions that explicitly mention comparing current findings to prior images, particularly noting changes or stability in radiological findings. This comparison is a standard practice when evaluating progress or stability in a patient's condition, especially when assessing the impact of treatments or the progression of disease.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5698924731182796,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14059,latent_14059,4074,0.008148,0.0029578914,1.344383,Comparison language noting unchanged or stable findings over time.,"The pattern here involves reports that compare current imaging to prior studies with descriptions of changes or consistencies over time, emphasized by explicitly mentioning findings that remain stable or unchanged, or demonstrate improvement relative to previous examinations, often using language like 'stable' or 'unchanged'.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5061728395061729,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14060,latent_14060,1017,0.002034,0.0010550207,2.3109865,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and description of interval changes.,"The pattern in the examples is the presence of commentary or analysis that explicitly requires comparing current imaging with previous or prior imaging, where changes, abnormalities, or a lack thereof, are detailed. This is exemplified by references to prior reports and calls for descriptions of interval changes or stability noted across the examples with higher activation.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5065283400809717,0.507537688442211,0.5111111111111111,0.46,100.0,99.0
+14061,latent_14061,5228,0.010456,0.0036560127,1.599852,Focus on medical device or line positioning in comparison to prior images.,"This set of examples highlights the comparison of current images to prior ones, focusing on assessing changes in medical lines or devices, such as endotracheal tubes, central lines, or feeding tubes. Reports with high activation levels noted specific changes or stability in tube placements or device positioning, contrasting images over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5657894736842105,0.43,100.0,100.0
+14062,latent_14062,2506,0.005012,0.001870513,1.5913364,Detailed findings or changes compared to prior images drive higher activation.,"Activation levels tend to be higher in reports highlighting detailed change or lack thereof compared to prior imaging, emphasizing specific findings such as increased scarring, tube placement, or atelectasis.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+14063,latent_14063,2313,0.004626,0.0018220141,1.85896,"Stable findings or slight changes compared to prior imaging, focusing on medical devices or stable conditions.","In this set, activations are elevated when descriptive changes are made to patient-related medical devices or a stable or mildly changed condition is described, as compared to prior imaging. These readings relate to the monitoring of medical tools or other consistent findings across time, without major new findings or immediate acute changes.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5336405529953917,0.5353535353535354,0.5465116279069767,0.47,100.0,98.0
+14064,latent_14064,4032,0.008064,0.0029594607,1.4140128,Presence of pneumothoraxes or pleural effusions.,"The pattern highlights that radiology findings are presented with explicit evaluations of the cardiomediastinal silhouette along with pneumothoraces, pleural effusions, or other detailed evaluations of pulmonary and thoracic structures. The unremarkable examples do not report changes in these either.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14065,latent_14065,272,0.000544,0.00054247514,3.555997,Focus on interval change or stability versus prior images.,"These examples have explicit comparison between current and prior imaging findings, often noting interval changes such as updates on pre-existing conditions or introduction of new findings. This emphasis on interval change or stability compared to previous studies is a characteristic pattern in radiologic reports.",0.4068343004513217,0.425,0.375,0.8,15.0,25.0,0.5472538347352796,0.5481481481481482,0.3617021276595745,0.9714285714285714,35.0,100.0
+14066,latent_14066,2269,0.004538,0.0018298926,2.3412428,Radiographic findings showing stability compared to prior images.,"These examples consistently describe radiographic findings as either unchanged or demonstrate minimal interval change when compared to a prior study, emphasizing the stability of some condition or anatomical feature, even when other findings are present.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5556577032099901,0.565,0.5915492957746479,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14067,latent_14067,529,0.001058,0.00076569535,3.508709,Significant finding without prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with high activation often feature abnormalities detected on a single frontal view without prior imaging for comparison, which increases the uncertainty or significance of findings, emphasizing acute observations.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6227272727272728,0.6626506024096386,0.6086956521739131,0.4242424242424242,66.0,100.0
+14068,latent_14068,4300,0.0086,0.0031190412,1.7759502,Stable or unchanged appearance in relation to prior imaging.,"The pattern observed in these examples is references to an unchanged or stable appearance between current and prior imaging studies, indicating no significant change in findings. This pattern involves descriptive terms about consistency and lack of progression or interval change.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5454545454545454,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.5526315789473685,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14069,latent_14069,460,0.00092,0.00072517956,2.9610763,Comparison of medical device positioning between images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve analyzing changes in medical devices (such as tubes or catheters) between current and prior imaging, focusing on their position and any associated complications or stability.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6339544513457557,0.6730769230769231,0.5510204081632653,0.4821428571428571,56.0,100.0
+14070,latent_14070,1028,0.002056,0.0010103822,2.094924,Low lung volumes with interstitial or pulmonary changes.,"The pattern is present in examples where a deficiency in lung volumes is consistently mentioned, particularly in the context of increased interstitial markings, possible pulmonary edema, or other descriptive lung processes. This is a common observation in radiology reports for patients with pathologies affecting lung expansion or fluid accumulation.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6587812889918769,0.665,0.726027397260274,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14071,latent_14071,1611,0.003222,0.0014048864,2.0830264,Focus on comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Many of the examples that have high activation levels involve descriptions that compare current imaging findings to prior images, often specifying the view types (frontal, lateral) and including historical details such as placement of medical devices or persistent conditions. The emphasis on direct comparison and historical perspective seems to trigger high activations.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5501621508525996,0.57,0.5492957746478874,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14072,latent_14072,6864,0.013728,0.00481423,1.4158828,Complex changes in imaging compared to prior studies requiring interpretation.,"The representative examples with activations of 3.0 or higher typically involve complex changes in radiological features, like consolidation, fluid, or device position, and require detailed reconciling differences with prior reports, sometimes involving unclear improvement or deterioration. Less activated examples generally show straightforward description or interpretations without complex assessments.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14073,latent_14073,1487,0.002974,0.0013569689,2.670492,Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly or aortic tortuosity on imaging comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe cases where there is noted cardiomegaly or specific aortic findings, often combined with explicit descriptions of these features as part of the heart or aorta evaluation. These references tend to be consistent between compared studies, which aligns with the analysis goal of monitoring heart size or aortic features over time.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5644152595372107,0.5778894472361809,0.625,0.4,100.0,99.0
+14074,latent_14074,2419,0.004838,0.001954227,2.2659504,Specific findings in chest imaging comparison using a frontal view.,"Examples with high activation describe radiological findings from a frontal or lateral chest image along with the comparison to previous images. These findings indicate changes or consistencies in position or conditions like tube placements, opacities, or volume changes, all performed using a frontal image for reference, indicating that these examples are shining a light on the importance of framing within a frontal view.",0.5404411764705883,0.6,0.5581395348837209,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5132204889921451,0.56,0.5370370370370371,0.87,100.0,100.0
+14075,latent_14075,6142,0.012284,0.004369287,1.0869718,Detailed narrative comparing current and prior image findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include explicit and detailed descriptions of changes in imaging findings compared to prior images along with comparison dates or references. This pattern emphasizes the importance of noting changes from previous studies in radiology reports, enhancing the clinical understanding and decision-making process.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14076,latent_14076,2746,0.005492,0.00208786,1.8364562,Clear lungs in radiographic studies evaluating for pulmonary issues.,"The pattern here involves evaluating pulmonary status while finding clear lung fields in radiographs. This pattern is seen in multiple examples where the lungs are described as clear without focal consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax despite varied indications for cardiopulmonary evaluation.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4353472614342179,0.475,0.4468085106382978,0.21,100.0,100.0
+14077,latent_14077,916,0.001832,0.0010755578,2.5418732,Documentation of changes compared to prior radiographic findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize changes between the current and prior radiology studies, describing differences or stabilities in findings. They often note changes in device positions, effusions, or atelectasis, indicating a focus on the updates since previous imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5254081819849569,0.542713567839196,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,99.0
+14078,latent_14078,626,0.001252,0.00080578437,2.9460657,Detailed comparison of findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation use language providing detailed findings, comparing the current images to prior studies despite variable levels of change. The pattern is seen through phrases like 'increased compared to prior,' 'similar to prior,' or 'unchanged size.' This suggests that the model activates more on detailed comparison statements that elaborate on change, or lack thereof, referencing prior images.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.491312483293237,0.4913294797687861,0.4285714285714285,0.5675675675675675,74.0,99.0
+14079,latent_14079,682,0.001364,0.0008618006,2.128749,Routine comparison to prior imaging studies.,"These examples consistently involve the presence of prior imaging and comparison notes, typically with specified techniques and either explicit comparisons or lack thereof. Significant activations occur when comparisons are made to prior imaging studies, particularly when assessing changes or stability in pathological features noted between reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.4444444444444444,0.4230769230769231,0.6875,80.0,100.0
+14080,latent_14080,2667,0.005334,0.0022120785,2.1236892,Explicit references to current and prior images for comparison.,"Activations appear to correlate with reports where a current radiological image is provided and focus mainly on describing findings in comparison to prior images, using explicit image references rather than broader conclusions. This suggest an emphasis on explicit image reference and comparison as a key pattern.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4357782940590773,0.49,0.4938271604938271,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14081,latent_14081,3813,0.007626,0.0027174568,1.4805108,Comparison with prior imaging studies emphasizes unchanged findings or stabilities.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of past findings to compare with current radiographs or images. This pattern emphasizes the evaluation of current findings against previous exams, highlighting explicit changes or stabilities such as unchanged positions, conditions of medical devices, or opacities noted in prior imaging.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5421686746987951,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14082,latent_14082,1334,0.002668,0.001137315,1.6602571,Emphasis on comparing current findings to prior radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight the presence of prior imaging and compare current findings against these priors. They often include explicit descriptions of changes or stability relative to past observations, indicating the model's sensitivity to longitudinal comparisons in the data.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4579046354685253,0.51,0.5061728395061729,0.82,100.0,100.0
+14083,latent_14083,2647,0.005294,0.0021618663,2.0167756,Explicit comparison to prior images indicating interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on descriptions that explicitly compare findings with prior images/results, indicating either stability or small changes in medical findings. This suggests a pattern of evaluating interval changes in medical imaging against established baselines.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.6043956043956044,0.55,100.0,100.0
+14084,latent_14084,4569,0.009138,0.0033295231,1.499114,Comparison between current lateral and prior frontal images.,Activation in examples arises primarily from references to images that include both a frontal and a lateral view. Description repeatedly involves comparing those views with prior frontal images. High activation scores correlate with explicit mention of both types of image views being used for comparison.,0.3055555555555556,0.36,0.1818181818181818,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4495557128253519,0.475,0.4561403508771929,0.26,100.0,100.0
+14085,latent_14085,1811,0.003622,0.0015569499,2.2549877,Comparison-based evaluation of image findings.,The highly activated examples consistently involve comparing current image findings to prior studies and offering a comprehensive analysis of any changes or stability in the condition based on this comparison. This pattern is often seen in follow-up assessments where interval changes or the stability of a condition are being evaluated.,0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3829852658552209,0.3919597989949748,0.4146341463414634,0.51,100.0,99.0
+14086,latent_14086,298,0.000596,0.00056073867,2.8160725,Detailed reporting of tube and catheter positioning in chest radiographs.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve descriptions of precise locations and positions of various tubes and catheters within the patient's body as seen in chest radiographs. Such descriptions often include measurements in centimeters from specific anatomical landmarks like the carina, as well as descriptors about how the positioning has changed between imaging sessions.",0.6516203703703703,0.6744186046511628,0.6428571428571429,0.5,18.0,25.0,0.5330390302011071,0.6397058823529411,0.3142857142857143,0.3055555555555556,36.0,100.0
+14087,latent_14087,2277,0.004554,0.0018639613,2.35599,Comparison of current and prior radiographic findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involved comparisons with prior radiographic examinations and mentioned changes or findings that are visualized using current and prior imaging, such as changes in opacity, consolidation, or pleural effusion. Since the task involves assessing activation in terms of comparison with prior images, referencing to prior imaging appears central to higher activation.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.460683852874555,0.5,0.5,0.77,100.0,100.0
+14088,latent_14088,347,0.000694,0.0008246482,4.2967997,Detailed descriptions of abnormal findings and comparison with prior imaging.,"Most examples with high activation levels feature detailed observations and descriptions focusing on abnormalities or specific clinical findings such as changes in lung volumes, presence of effusions, heart enlargement, or hypertrophic spinal changes. They typically describe findings in a detailed and definitive manner, often in comparison with previous or current images, distinguishing cases with significant observations from those that are essentially clear or demonstrate non-critical changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.4545454545454545,0.4,0.5263157894736842,19.0,25.0,0.3485821940969035,0.3586206896551724,0.2073170731707317,0.3777777777777777,45.0,100.0
+14089,latent_14089,4889,0.009778,0.0035589586,1.6887019,Inclusions of specific follow-up or recommendation due to findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels have clear recommendations or direct instructions for further evaluation of findings, often introducing uncertainty or potential areas for concern, necessitating further imaging or follow-up to address the radiologic findings.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.04,25.0,25.0,0.3839528694039893,0.485,0.4210526315789473,0.08,100.0,100.0
+14090,latent_14090,489,0.000978,0.0007683923,3.0348244,"Reports focused on acute lung conditions, pleural effusion, or fluid overload.","Examples with high activation levels often include specific conditions or findings such as pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or pneumonia evaluations, regardless of comparison availability. High activations correlate with reports emphasizing acute processes, fluid overload, or lung abnormalities.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.2916666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3797802197802198,0.3855421686746988,0.2857142857142857,0.3636363636363636,66.0,100.0
+14091,latent_14091,616,0.001232,0.00070348085,3.5886211,Evaluation of cardiomegaly or pulmonary edema in comparison imaging.,"High-activation examples are focused on evaluating for pulmonary edema or changes in heart size despite lung imaging, and often touch upon cardiomegaly or indicate conditions related to heart dimensions or presence of fluid (edema) in the lungs. These reports frequently note unchanged heart size and presence of devices like tubes when comparing current images to prior ones.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4312354312354312,0.4754098360655737,0.3673469387755102,0.216867469879518,83.0,100.0
+14092,latent_14092,901,0.001802,0.0014306433,3.60707,Analysis includes prior reports and comparison with explicit indication.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently reference specific prior reports and examinations, suggesting an emphasis on comparative analysis between current imaging and detailed prior findings, often with specific medical indications or conditions. This comparison aspect is vital even when prior imaging is emphasized as providing context for current findings, but the new condition or change is of primary interest.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4705454545454545,0.545,0.5257142857142857,0.92,100.0,100.0
+14093,latent_14093,3513,0.007026,0.00260329,1.8167523,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently use comparative language to assess stability or changes over time, referencing previous imaging reports or stating unchanged findings explicitly. Such language is indicative of radiological pattern assessment when comparing current and prior images to identify changes in patient conditions or stability of previously noted issues.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14094,latent_14094,1166,0.002332,0.0012133305,3.6868715,Contextual interval changes in imaging compared to previous studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include references to change or stability in the radiological findings when compared to prior images, specifically mentioning interval changes or interpretation of improvement or stability in the context of a patient's medical condition. This suggests attention to longitudinal assessment is a strong trigger for the model. The variable activation levels may indicate that consistent phrasing and substantive image differences influence representation.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14095,latent_14095,1322,0.002644,0.001453447,3.4803352,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"The common element in highly activated examples is a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging, focusing on changes over time, including stable findings or resolved conditions. The less activated examples generally lack any emphasis on comparisons or described changes in the images.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4627300343953202,0.465,0.4597701149425287,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14096,latent_14096,943,0.001886,0.00094885216,2.8440924,Significant changes or explicit comparisons in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe scenarios where specific pathologies or changes are observed in current images and are directly compared with previous imaging findings, especially when noteworthy differences or notable unchanged conditions are particularly mentioned. These examples often include suggestions for further action based on significant comparisons.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.3846153846153846,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14097,latent_14097,1730,0.00346,0.0014858925,2.7916975,Detailed interval changes or stability in chest imaging features.,"The observed pattern in highly activated examples includes providing detailed descriptions of changes or stability in specific chest imaging findings when compared to prior images or reports. It often involves changes in pleural effusions, pleural thickening, rib fractures, opacifications due to pneumonia or atelectasis, or changes following interventions like tube placements or surgery. These reports emphasize interval changes or stability detected in follow-up imaging, often after a noted clinical indication or intervention.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5773195876288659,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14098,latent_14098,813,0.001626,0.00080875616,2.8889375,Low lung volumes enhancing thoracic structures.,Higher activation levels are observed in reports that describe low lung volumes or similar findings that lead to bronchovascular crowding and enhance the appearance of cardiac and other thoracic structures. This effect of low lung volumes and resulting visual changes in radiographic interpretation is consistent across examples with higher activations.,0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5555555555555556,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4321783952148625,0.485,0.4615384615384615,0.18,100.0,100.0
+14099,latent_14099,643,0.001286,0.00096796366,2.8663602,Reports using comparison to identify new or unchanged radiological findings.,The examples with higher activation levels all involve comparisons with prior images where new or unchanged findings are reported. This includes identification of new findings not present before or changes in known findings that remain unchanged. This pattern is common in radiological monitoring of disease progression or stability.,0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4701813756048327,0.4728260869565217,0.4424778761061947,0.5952380952380952,84.0,100.0
+14100,latent_14100,1316,0.002632,0.0013233523,2.429097,Focus on interval changes compared to prior radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels often describe comparison to prior imaging studies and focus on changes or stability in specific findings over time. The emphasis is on evaluating differences or lack thereof in specific anatomical or pathological details compared to previous reports, using terms like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', or 'interval changes'.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.43,0.4363636363636363,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14101,latent_14101,583,0.001166,0.00069813523,3.7328799,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings that are compared to prior imaging, assessing changes and stability over time. The model seems particularly activated by descriptions evaluating differences in consecutive images, indicating the importance of temporal comparison in the analysis.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4777241914269333,0.4885057471264368,0.44,0.7432432432432432,74.0,100.0
+14102,latent_14102,351,0.000702,0.0006295905,3.050114,Low lung volumes affecting cardiac appearance and bronchovascular crowding.,"These examples use multiple types of chest images, including frontal and lateral views, and often refer to low lung volumes influencing the appearance of cardiac or bronchovascular structures. Low lung volumes cause the heart to appear larger due to compression effects which also affect the lung appearance.",0.55,0.6,0.6,0.3,20.0,25.0,0.4889434889434889,0.6388888888888888,0.3181818181818182,0.1590909090909091,44.0,100.0
+14103,latent_14103,1197,0.002394,0.0011244,2.9937012,Comparison indicating interval changes or stability of cardiac silhouette/devices.,"The examples showing this pattern involve cases where cardiac silhouette enlargements, monitoring devices, or notable changes occur when comparing the current image to prior imaging studies. They feature explicit indications of interval changes, stability, or signs of acute processes after surgery or interventions, often communicated through comparative descriptions.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4415584415584415,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14104,latent_14104,2747,0.005494,0.0020710323,2.1484904,Comparison-focused description of radiological findings.,"The examples with notable activation levels all describe comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, often noting changes (e.g., improvement or worsening) in certain findings. This pattern is often emphasized in radiological reports to assess progression or resolution of clinical conditions, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'interval improvement', or 'no change'.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14105,latent_14105,2898,0.005796,0.002205603,2.140806,Focus on comparing current and prior imaging results.,Examples with non-zero activation levels request additional descriptions or emphasize changes after comparing current and prior images.,0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14106,latent_14106,1156,0.002312,0.0010612997,2.8322837,Presence of lateral images along with frontal images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently feature the presence of additional views (lateral images) paired with frontal images, which often provide more detailed evaluation and findings compared to those with only frontal images. The text prompts include specific indications related to diagnosis, evaluation, or comparisons with prior diagnostic images.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14107,latent_14107,665,0.00133,0.00090907083,2.387271,Implicit interval change assessment using current vs. prior imaging.,"High activation examples systematically involve providing comparative descriptions based on current and prior imaging without explicit previous report data, whereas low activation examples involve no comparison or mention of interval changes. This pattern highlights the importance of generating findings based on inferred past imaging comparisons when explicit prior details are missing.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4399928774928774,0.4486486486486487,0.4308943089430894,0.6235294117647059,85.0,100.0
+14108,latent_14108,257,0.000514,0.0004769709,3.9506207,Involvement of medical devices or instruments in imaging reports.,"The examples with high activation levels concern scenarios where medical instruments or devices, such as nasogastric tubes or central lines, are involved. The presence or change in positioning of these devices is a critical finding in radiological examinations where comparison with prior images is needed to verify placement or identify complications.",0.6657142857142857,0.6923076923076923,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,14.0,25.0,0.4989224137931034,0.5407407407407407,0.2786885245901639,0.4857142857142857,35.0,100.0
+14109,latent_14109,4387,0.008774,0.0031084507,1.90032,Findings related to right hemidiaphragm or hilum discrepancies/changes.,"Examples with higher activation describe findings in context with marked changes in structure or visualization, particularly right-sided findings such as elevated hemidiaphragm, altered placement or positioning visibility, or hemidiaphragmatic or hilar comparisons implying possible issues such as improper visibility or unusual comparison which affect diagnostic clarity.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4306008042029879,0.515,0.5652173913043478,0.13,100.0,100.0
+14110,latent_14110,568,0.001136,0.0007230813,3.2868369,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The samples with high activation levels discuss findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, emphasizing radiological changes or similarities over time or detecting interval changes. This is distinct from simple observations in a single report, focusing on how current images compare to previous ones, and potentially indicating progression or stability of pathology.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4334154470366613,0.4588235294117647,0.4191176470588235,0.8142857142857143,70.0,100.0
+14111,latent_14111,475,0.00095,0.000914688,4.108262,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"The highly activating samples focus on explicit observations related to the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours being within normal limits. This is a pattern of reassuring findings despite the presence of the cardiomediastinal term. Examples with minimal activation often either mention comparisons or findings unrelated to these contours, or they explicitly note cardiomegaly or other abnormalities of these regions.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.7058823529411765,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.8321895424836601,0.8354430379746836,0.7051282051282052,0.9482758620689656,58.0,100.0
+14112,latent_14112,4825,0.00965,0.003471599,1.559144,Detailed anatomical observations and interval changes.,"The examples demonstrating higher activation levels often include specific descriptions of anatomical structures like the heart, aorta, PICC lines, and catheters. These samples frequently detail observations such as position stability or interval changes, focusing on data crucial for clinical assessments.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5628703094140882,0.585,0.5586206896551724,0.81,100.0,100.0
+14113,latent_14113,1271,0.002542,0.0013571755,3.937799,Volume loss with associated infiltrate or effusion.,"These examples focus on identifying volume loss coupled with either infiltrate or effusion in one or more lungs, often with a comparison to a previous image to confirm the findings. This specific combination of descriptive terms is consistent across examples with high activation levels.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.8125,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6189887756152817,0.63,0.696969696969697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14114,latent_14114,674,0.001348,0.0010057533,2.626243,Cardiac silhouette enlargement compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation mention cardiac silhouette or cardiomediastinal silhouette changes, particularly enlargement, with accompanying findings such as pulmonary congestion without overt edema. Reports frequently compare these features to prior images to assess interval change, reflecting the typical structure of radiology reports where comparisons help determine the significance of findings over time.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4708165105248716,0.5833333333333334,0.6470588235294118,0.1375,80.0,100.0
+14115,latent_14115,609,0.001218,0.000916159,3.3624659,Comparison between current and prior images despite 'COMPARISON: None' indication.,"Higher activations are found in examples where the given task is to compare current images to prior ones, despite the comparison field indicating 'None' or no comparisons are expected ('COMPARISON: None'). This is often seen in radiology reports where findings are contextualized against past examinations even in the absence of explicit comparison data.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4147538337368845,0.4147727272727273,0.3636363636363636,0.4736842105263157,76.0,100.0
+14116,latent_14116,282,0.000564,0.00060359394,4.4899955,Explicitly compares current imaging with prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve situations where findings in current imaging studies are explicitly described and compared to prior imaging results. This involves referencing stability, change, or absence of new findings based on past images, a common practice in medical imaging to monitor progress or stability over time.",0.3351351351351351,0.3414634146341463,0.3103448275862069,0.5625,16.0,25.0,0.385687074829932,0.3897058823529412,0.2359550561797752,0.5833333333333334,36.0,100.0
+14117,latent_14117,3192,0.006384,0.002426215,1.6639854,Findings explicitly compared to prior imaging.,"The prompts with higher activation levels consistently focus on providing detailed and systematic descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging, sometimes noting specific interval changes, such as increased pleural effusion or other evolving conditions. This linguistic pattern centers around making explicit comparisons to previous exams.",0.3333333333333333,0.34,0.3666666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5076923076923077,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14118,latent_14118,2558,0.005116,0.0020103257,1.6815449,Comparison of current and prior images with emphasis on changes or assessments of chronic conditions.,There is a pattern in the activation where examples contain substantial changes between current and prior imaging studies or a clear directive to compare current findings with prior ones to evaluate for significant changes or evolving conditions.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5440456978918518,0.555,0.5419847328244275,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14119,latent_14119,1833,0.003666,0.0022659353,2.727933,Large or changing pneumothorax and potential tension signs.,"Many examples describe findings related to pneumothorax, including size changes and effects like mediastinal shift or diaphragm flattening. References to prior images often focus on pneumothorax status, changes, and resolution signs, indicating the pneumothorax and associated structural deviations, rather than general lung pathology.",0.7726333195535345,0.78,0.9375,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.7640953054965793,0.775,0.9824561403508772,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14120,latent_14120,545,0.00109,0.0009055039,3.3504777,Acute chest processes in comparison to prior radiological images.,"Highly activated examples include findings with specific indications of acute chest processes like pneumonia, blockages, or changes relevant to current health concerns such as heart size or vascular congestion. Such comparisons drive adjustments in diagnoses and management based on acute health shifts as determined by previous imaging.",0.3178999586606035,0.34,0.25,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3425742574257425,0.3734939759036144,0.203125,0.1969696969696969,66.0,100.0
+14121,latent_14121,540,0.00108,0.0006301184,3.5942533,Low lung volumes mentioned in radiology report.,"These examples frequently cite the observation of 'low lung volumes', a specific radiological finding that has been observed both in direct findings and in association with other conditions like atelectasis or pulmonary edema. The activation levels coincide with comments on lung volumes that can affect interpretation, implying a pattern related to noting and evaluating lung volume in these contexts.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5683279395900755,0.6280487804878049,0.5384615384615384,0.328125,64.0,100.0
+14122,latent_14122,838,0.001676,0.0012118076,3.866096,Heart size noted as enlarged or top normal alongside low lung volumes.,"These examples with higher activation levels often describe mildly enlarged or top normal heart size in combination with phrases indicating low lung volumes such as 'accentuated by the low inspiratory lung volumes', which contribute to appearances that could be misinterpreted as cardiomegaly. The pattern is evident when heart size assessments are influenced by the lung volume conditions described in the reports.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6051386071670047,0.635,0.8,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14123,latent_14123,6352,0.012704,0.0045117494,1.2998718,Assessment of interval changes in clinical findings over time with focus on stability or resolution.,Stable conditions with no significant interval changes or resolution of some conditions between imaging are indicative of this pattern. This is often reflective of assessing treatment efficiency or disease stability over time.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5526472184181287,0.5628140703517588,0.5461538461538461,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+14124,latent_14124,2299,0.004598,0.001770783,2.1809587,Findings related to tube placement and their medical implications.,"Highly activated samples often contain findings about the presence and identification of medical tubes, their positions, and implications, such as intubation or NG tube placement. This information is critical for understanding patient treatment and monitoring adherence to treatment protocols.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.529239460194581,0.55,0.5862068965517241,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14125,latent_14125,2685,0.00537,0.0020758011,1.6669803,Stability or change in imaging findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve the presence of comparison between current and prior images, and specifically focus on the stability or change of certain features over time. Terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or referencing specific radiological changes (e.g., 'drainage of effusion', 'PICC placement') are common in these reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4875536480686695,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+14126,latent_14126,3327,0.006654,0.0025920568,3.1652837,Presence of prior imaging comparison in study description.,The key commonality in the examples with higher activation scores is the frequent mention of comparison between current images and prior ones. This suggests the presence of a comparative element or follow-up context in the description with explicit prior records is sufficient for activation.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4488139311668723,0.4924623115577889,0.4935897435897436,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+14127,latent_14127,564,0.001128,0.0007839058,2.7108333,Stable or interval change findings in cardiac or mediastinal contours.,"The examples with high activation feature descriptions of interval changes or stable findings in the cardiac or mediastinal contours, often in relation to pulmonary or pleural abnormalities. Common phrases include 'stable/from prior', 'unchanged appearance', 'compared to prior', or 'interval progression/regression'.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4940279992911572,0.5174418604651163,0.4193548387096774,0.3561643835616438,73.0,99.0
+14128,latent_14128,4762,0.009524,0.0034688953,1.8459462,Structured clinical comparison in radiology reports.,"All higher activation examples contain structured examination records with direct references to imaging studies for comparison (e.g., findings, impressions, and specific post-examination guidance). These elements form an essential part of detailed and actionable radiological assessments, hence leading to higher activations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14129,latent_14129,4517,0.009034,0.0033086943,1.5953395,Comparison of current and prior images noting interval changes or stability.,"These examples discuss the interval comparisons between current and prior radiographic images, with observations of changes or stability in specific findings. The pattern often involves descriptions of alterations in certain anatomical or pathological features across time points, for instance, a stable finding, or a modification like 'interval increase' or 'unchanged'.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14130,latent_14130,3931,0.007862,0.0029467843,1.7826493,Detailed comparison indicating changes over time with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, providing detailed observations of changes or stability over time regarding specific findings. They often reference specific intervals, improvements, or worsening conditions, which is a common feature in radiology reports analyzing ongoing conditions.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.551761476668933,0.555,0.5662650602409639,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14131,latent_14131,558,0.001116,0.0008586248,2.9310336,Atherosclerotic calcification at the aortic arch noted.,These examples consistently refer to findings of atherosclerotic calcification at the aortic arch across various forms of imaging. Such vascular calcifications are often described in connection with heart or lung evaluations and signify chronic cardiovascular changes.,0.8389694041867954,0.84,0.9047619047619048,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6291693088142042,0.7034883720930233,0.9565217391304348,0.3055555555555556,72.0,100.0
+14132,latent_14132,911,0.001822,0.0010407864,2.0145864,Use of multiple imaging views for comparison with prior radiographs.,"The higher activation levels are associated with cases where multiple views (e.g., frontal and lateral) and the prior frontal image are used, while also providing explicit comparisons to prior radiographs or descriptions. This suggests a focus on evaluating changes or confirming findings with previous images which is common in radiological examinations to assess progress or stability of conditions over time.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14133,latent_14133,450,0.0009,0.00070169824,2.673569,Stable findings or minor interval changes against prior imaging.,"These examples primarily feature radiological interpretations that indicate stability or minor interval changes compared to prior studies. The emphasis is on findings that demonstrate no new, acute, or significant changes in the pathology, often using terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'no new', or 'within normal limits'.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4980901451489686,0.5228758169934641,0.3484848484848485,0.4339622641509434,53.0,100.0
+14134,latent_14134,4012,0.008024,0.0029323108,1.4638522,Comparison and changes in pathologies on serial imaging.,"Examples with high activation frequently focus on comparing current and prior images, with noticeable variations in pathologies such as opacities or effusions, and specific changes noted in conditions over time. These include interval increases, new findings, and unchanged pathological states over repeated studies.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14135,latent_14135,465,0.00093,0.0007496208,2.8232427,Provision of frontal and lateral images with no available comparison.,"The highly activated examples describe radiological studies where both frontal and lateral images are provided, yet there is no available previous image for comparison, which is highlighted by the phrase 'comparison: none'. This suggests that providing comprehensive imaging without prior comparison makes these cases more representative of the pattern.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5737274220032841,0.6168831168831169,0.4509803921568627,0.4259259259259259,54.0,100.0
+14136,latent_14136,1322,0.002644,0.0014202672,4.0467014,Description of changes compared to prior frontal image.,"Examples with high activation levels include specific mention of a prior frontal image and the presence of certain terms that capture acute conditions such as clear comparisons, expressions like 'improved' or changes in states. These are often highlighted when concisely evaluating changes over time or progression in conditions.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4146341463414634,0.415,0.4105263157894737,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14137,latent_14137,1613,0.003226,0.0014302923,2.2749026,Comparison with prior frontal image for interval changes.,"These examples consistently involve imaging and comparison to 'prior frontal image', suggesting an evaluation for changes over time. The use of 'prior' in the context indicates reliance on historical data for assessing stability or progression of findings like cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, consolidative changes, or other imagery features across multiple time points.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14138,latent_14138,4167,0.008334,0.0030198188,1.5310968,Detailed comparison of medical device placement over time.,"The examples with higher activation contain references to specific positions, presence, or removal of medical devices, such as catheters or tubes, with precise descriptions of their placements and changes over time. This suggests that the observed pattern involves reports that focus on detailed monitoring and comparison of device placement or changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5777777777777777,0.26,100.0,100.0
+14139,latent_14139,5452,0.010904,0.0039383294,1.351208,Reporting on changes or comparisons with prior imaging.,"These examples involve the detailed assessment of radiological findings by comparing them to previous images of the same patient. Terminology such as 'comparison is made', 'compared to the previous radiograph', 'unchanged from prior exams', and 'as in the previous examination' are consistently used across examples with higher activation levels, indicating that reporting on the comparison between current and previous images is a key characteristic.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4685662596110357,0.53,0.5178571428571429,0.87,100.0,100.0
+14140,latent_14140,386,0.000772,0.00065557996,2.4873006,Persistent or worsening pathological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels indicate a pattern where findings or conditions have been compared to prior imaging studies but show either persistence or worsening of certain abnormalities, such as cardiac silhouette enlargement or persistent pulmonary issues. This persistent or worsening pathological finding in comparison to prior studies characterizes the pattern.",0.6381374722838138,0.6458333333333334,0.6666666666666666,0.5217391304347826,23.0,25.0,0.5351415094339622,0.6301369863013698,0.3823529411764705,0.2826086956521739,46.0,100.0
+14141,latent_14141,420,0.00084,0.00072522904,2.5188017,Absence of detailed findings comparison in image reports.,"Examples with low activation levels frequently mention the need to compare current images to prior ones but lack detailed elaboration on findings. This indicates a pattern where documentation of explicit findings in the comparative context is absent, leading to low activation scores, while those with detailed comparison interpretations score higher.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4320175438596491,0.4324324324324324,0.3300970873786408,0.6938775510204082,49.0,99.0
+14142,latent_14142,345,0.00069,0.0006161637,3.2269497,Marked interval changes in resolved pathologies.,"Reports with high activation levels often describe significant interval changes in pathology resolution, usually marking improvements or resolution in a condition such as atelectasis, effusion, or consolidation between compared imaging studies.",0.8178137651821862,0.8222222222222222,0.8333333333333334,0.75,20.0,25.0,0.7238220716481586,0.7816901408450704,0.6571428571428571,0.5476190476190477,42.0,100.0
+14143,latent_14143,445,0.00089,0.0008440851,4.9495068,Mildly enlarged cardiac silhouette and tortuous aorta.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly describe the cardiac silhouette as either top-normal or mildly enlarged, often in combination with tortuosity or calcification of the aorta. This suggests a specific pattern recognized by the model in interpreting abnormalities associated with complex thoracic anatomical features.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5778508771929824,0.6753246753246753,0.5769230769230769,0.2777777777777778,54.0,100.0
+14144,latent_14144,416,0.000832,0.00078750105,3.976546,Reporting detailed findings even without prior image comparisons.,The examples with high activation focus on providing detailed findings from current images without reliance on comparison data. They emphasize detailed analysis even when no prior images are available for comparison or comparison is stated as 'None'. This suggests that the pattern of interest is reporting comprehensive findings without pre-existing comparison data.,0.6524822695035462,0.6530612244897959,0.6521739130434783,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6396525391370753,0.6688741721854304,0.5087719298245614,0.5686274509803921,51.0,100.0
+14145,latent_14145,5450,0.0109,0.003840411,1.1994163,Comparative assessment of imaging for interval changes.,"High activation samples either describe or imply a comparative assessment between current and prior imaging findings, with emphasis on the identification of interval changes noted by radiologists, such as stable or changing conditions. They often mention specific anatomical changes compared across studies.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14146,latent_14146,544,0.001088,0.00078284694,3.6380587,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve detailed comparison of findings between current and prior imaging, indicating interval improvement, worsening, or stability of specific clinical features like effusions, opacities, or consolidation. Emphasis is placed on interval changes.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.495140858385328,0.5325443786982249,0.4074074074074074,0.3188405797101449,69.0,100.0
+14147,latent_14147,3129,0.006258,0.0024007312,1.6869227,Comparative analysis using both frontal and lateral chest images.,"The consistent elements in examples with high activation involve making comparisons between different views—specifically frontal and lateral views—alongside references to previous imaging exams. Focus is on detailed comparative analysis across multiple angles, which is typical in comprehensive radiology evaluations.",0.5083612040133779,0.5102040816326531,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.4194775297767991,0.42,0.4245283018867924,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14148,latent_14148,4751,0.009502,0.0033783398,1.51626,Explicit comparison of imaging findings indicating interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels make explicit descriptions of how current imaging findings compare to prior ones, particularly highlighting interval changes or the stability of a condition over time. This includes phrases like 'as compared to prior', 'unchanged since prior', and noting new developments or removals (e.g., tubes, effusions) from previous studies. These explicit comparisons in the findings or impressions sections seem to be the pattern exhibiting high activation.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.5847404627892432,0.585,0.580952380952381,0.61,100.0,100.0
+14149,latent_14149,442,0.000884,0.00069286046,2.573218,Comparative radiological assessment focused on changes in findings or post-traumatic/postoperative changes.,"Highly activated examples frequently employ prior imaging comparisons to highlight changes in findings, and often address traumatic injuries or postoperative changes. These examples request detailed descriptions of findings against prior imaging.",0.5775862068965517,0.5918367346938775,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.4257108363515257,0.4258064516129032,0.3333333333333333,0.6181818181818182,55.0,100.0
+14150,latent_14150,2734,0.005468,0.0021936805,2.0198352,Changes in devices or intervention results on imaging.,"Examples with higher activation include observations or changes in imaging findings explicitly made in comparison to prior images. These examples specifically call out actions such as removal or insertion of lines, tubes, changes in pneumothorax, or effusion in association with procedural interventions, and all report these changes compared explicitly with the previous radiographs.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6153846153846154,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14151,latent_14151,339,0.000678,0.0006083573,2.8441434,Attention on tangible tenderness/injury or trauma assessment.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on identifying or assessing tangible physical tenderness or suspected physical injuries (e.g., fractures) in the report, often suggested around the words 'tenderness' or 'injury' or evaluating traumatic impacts like fractures, which distinguishes these examples from those with lower activations where such descriptors are absent.",0.6459770114942529,0.6818181818181818,0.7272727272727273,0.4210526315789473,19.0,25.0,0.5016783643576442,0.676056338028169,0.375,0.1428571428571428,42.0,100.0
+14152,latent_14152,256,0.000512,0.00055755686,3.0367966,Detailed correlation between current frontal and lateral images with prior images.,"In each case with high activation, there is a consistent mention of creating a detailed description based on current and prior images, specifically referencing frontal and lateral view correlations. These examples indicate a pattern of assessing interval changes through specific imaging points using multiple perspectives.",0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.3888888888888889,0.4666666666666667,15.0,25.0,0.5227272727272727,0.5757575757575758,0.2857142857142857,0.5,32.0,100.0
+14153,latent_14153,2894,0.005788,0.0023433107,1.704836,Comparison of current images to prior studies with noted changes or stability.,"Examples with activations demonstrate the use of comparison to prior radiographs or CT scans, often explicitly pointing out changes in findings or stating stability, such as 'improved', 'unchanged', 'increased', or providing a specific date for the previous image. This pattern is noted consistently across high activation examples.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4697879151660664,0.47,0.4711538461538461,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14154,latent_14154,4716,0.009432,0.0033660282,1.5550237,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve findings that describe no significant interval change, stability of pathologies, or stability of monitoring/support devices. These statements often use terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant change', indicating that the main pattern focuses on stable clinical findings over time in comparison with prior reports.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14155,latent_14155,2535,0.00507,0.002019577,2.4414973,Detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies or reports.,"Positive activation is associated with cases in which findings from the current radiology study are compared with findings in a prior study, either affirming the previous findings or noting changes. This comparative statement should specifically refer to prior images, studies, or reports and not merely note the presence or absence of changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14156,latent_14156,5919,0.011838,0.004190174,1.1846884,"Report includes findings compared to prior imaging, noting changes or significance of unchanged conditions.","Examples with high activation levels contain either notable changes or findings when compared to prior images, or identify unchanged conditions that were previously significant. Note the use of phrases like 'unchanged', 'interval progression', 'compared to prior', particularly for conditions such as opacities, effusions, atelectasis, or other notable lung findings.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5469055710019566,0.56,0.5447761194029851,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14157,latent_14157,2481,0.004962,0.002075222,1.7308017,"Comparison of current with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The pattern observed in the activation data is that reports with increased activation levels typically describe comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability in radiological findings over time. References to changes, stability, or intervals of comparison for specific findings like effusions, opacities, tubes, or devices versus prior images signify the data pattern.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5111111111111111,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14158,latent_14158,348,0.000696,0.00070326106,3.0824468,Stable findings or no significant change in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to the comparison of current imaging with previous studies, showcasing stable or unchanged medical conditions over time. This indicates a pattern where the model perceives stability or lack of significant change in imaging findings as highly representative. In contrast, examples that only describe current findings without comparison show low activation, highlighting this differentiation.",0.6037940379403794,0.6046511627906976,0.5217391304347826,0.6666666666666666,18.0,25.0,0.5375,0.5540540540540541,0.375,0.5625,48.0,100.0
+14159,latent_14159,6281,0.012562,0.0045209317,1.8019173,Comparative analysis of stability or change in radiological findings.,"These examples often involve an analysis of current radiological findings in conjunction with previous imaging studies, indicating an emphasis on identifying changes, stability, or progressions of conditions over time. Patterns suggest comparisons are centered on revealing stability or interval change, especially concerning pulmonary and cardiomediastinal features.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14160,latent_14160,4411,0.008822,0.0031150302,1.3804194,Use of comparative analysis in assessing radiographic changes with current findings.,"Despite examples mentioning past comparisons in radiology, the pattern focuses more on usage of comparison terms with current radiographic findings in context of other diagnostics. Higher activation occurs when analysis includes such comparisons along with diagnostic changes, e.g., tube placements or opacities evaluated against older images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4353472614342179,0.475,0.4836601307189542,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14161,latent_14161,7248,0.014496,0.005110437,1.5484139,In-depth comparison and identification of interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently have specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, whereas examples with lower activation often lack prior comparisons or contain minimal change suggestions, which impacts whether substantive findings can be drawn from comparisons.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5849782366636299,0.59,0.5737704918032787,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14162,latent_14162,875,0.00175,0.0011116007,2.7407775,Presence or comparison of thoracic abnormalities like opacities or medical device positions.,"The examples with higher activation levels include findings or comparisons of abnormalities seen in thoracic images, specifically noting changes or the presence of abnormalities like opacities, effusions, and tube positions. This contrasts evaluations without such abnormalities or changes, suggesting that the pattern emphasizes radiological abnormalities within the chest, particularly opacities in lung fields unrelated to normal anatomical structures.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4076171004691882,0.435,0.4545454545454545,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14163,latent_14163,8764,0.017528,0.0061704377,1.3439085,Significant interval change in current imaging compared to prior.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature new findings or changes from prior studies that are indicative of significant progression or alteration in patient condition. This includes interval development or removal of opacities, tubes, or other significant changes between comparative studies, highlighting the radiological evolution that prompts high activation.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.576271186440678,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14164,latent_14164,3513,0.007026,0.0026082338,1.46255,High activation when detailed comparison with previous images is provided.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently contain evaluations that include both current and prior imaging data, with clear detailed analysis and changes over the time frame the comparison image covers. The activated examples are consistent in detailing interval changes, explicitly compared to preceding radiographic data, and describing any alterations or stability in previous conditions.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14165,latent_14165,485,0.00097,0.0009217751,4.080796,Presence of pulmonary or pleural opacities and effusions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to significant findings of pulmonary or pleural opacities and effusions, notable mediastinal changes, or cardiomediastinal contour distortions, often indicating chronic or acute lung pathology. Such findings contrast with normal or unchanged findings around cardiomediastinal regions in non-activated examples. The presence of opacities, effusions, or notable changes in the lung structure correlates with high activation levels.",0.8376623376623377,0.84,0.7741935483870968,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7299737038345304,0.73125,0.5955056179775281,0.8833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+14166,latent_14166,6932,0.013864,0.004871948,1.1978321,"Analysis of findings by comparison to prior studies, describing interval changes.","This pattern highlights cases where findings are analyzed and described by comparison to previous studies, regardless of their nature (image or report), thereby focusing on interval changes or stability over time. This specific context, especially the description of stability or change, triggers higher activation levels.",0.6048387096774194,0.6326530612244898,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,24.0,0.5569249573476611,0.565,0.5511811023622047,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14167,latent_14167,355,0.00071,0.0007172978,4.928647,Stable findings consistently noted in comparison to prior studies.,"Reports with higher activation levels consistently refer to stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior studies, focusing on features such as stable pleural effusions, unchanged scar formations, or consistent abnormalities over time. This highlights the identification of temporal stability in pathologies, potentially indicating chronic conditions or resolved acute findings as the pattern of interest.",0.660633484162896,0.6666666666666666,0.631578947368421,0.6,20.0,25.0,0.5992772108843537,0.6413793103448275,0.4339622641509434,0.5111111111111111,45.0,100.0
+14168,latent_14168,816,0.001632,0.0012059952,4.1721373,Presence of suture material or surgical changes in lung fields.,"Examples with activation levels of 5.0 or higher involve descriptions of surgical history, indicated by the presence of chain sutures or other surgical materials within the lungs. This pattern stands out as these patients have undergone surgical interventions such as lobectomy, resection, or biopsy, and the text explicitly mentions suture lines or materials on the imaging.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8696741854636592,0.87,0.8363636363636363,0.92,100.0,100.0
+14169,latent_14169,328,0.000656,0.00070603966,3.0262654,Focus on cardiac silhouette size and mild/moderate enlargement.,"The highly activated examples demonstrate repeated mention of cardiac silhouette size, highlighting it with modifiers like 'mild enlargement', 'top normal', or 'moderate enlargement'. This indicates a focus on assessing changes in heart size or its specific characterization in the imaging studies.",0.6312178387650085,0.6511627906976745,0.6,0.5,18.0,25.0,0.473225404732254,0.5957446808510638,0.25,0.1951219512195122,41.0,100.0
+14170,latent_14170,3760,0.00752,0.0027669328,2.2596464,Comparisons in radiographic findings over time that involve interval changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation involve descriptions of findings comparing the current radiographic images to prior images, and highlight changes or the stability of specific features like pleural effusions, atelectasis, or consolidations in the lung or mediastinal structures. These examples likely include a detailed pattern recognition aspect to assess interval changes.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14171,latent_14171,1512,0.003024,0.0014090588,2.2510624,Assessment and placement of medical devices or lines in chest imaging.,"Highly activated examples often involve scenarios where the descriptions focus on positions, changes, or recommendations concerning medical devices or lines such as endotracheal tubes, feeding tubes, or catheters. These frequently highlight the need for adjustment or confirm placements, reflecting a focus on medical interventions seen in the imaging.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.530765155528646,0.535,0.5432098765432098,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14172,latent_14172,1492,0.002984,0.0013692405,2.0598907,Low lung volumes emphasizing bronchovascular markings or lung base opacities.,"The highest activation examples involve descriptions of radiological studies where lung volumes are described as low, often leading to accentuated bronchovascular markings or specific considerations about opacities in the lung bases. This pattern reflects a common radiological observation that requires expertise to differentiate many potential causes in initial image interpretations.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6028368794326241,0.615,0.676923076923077,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14173,latent_14173,753,0.001506,0.00093128014,3.648759,Normal cardiac and mediastinal contours alongside other findings.,"The pattern observed involves the presence of stable cardiac and mediastinal contours or normal heart size. This finding is consistent across examples with varied other pathological findings, indicating the model activates when reports emphasize non-cardiac observations alongside unchanged or normal cardiac structures.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5483741469289443,0.55,0.5568181818181818,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14174,latent_14174,617,0.001234,0.00091274356,4.0391865,"Discussion of changes compared to prior images, regardless of comparison availability.","Examples with high activation often include direct comparisons to prior imaging studies, even when no prior image is available, suggesting an emphasis on examining changes over time in radiological findings.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4489501271146543,0.4640883977900552,0.4384615384615384,0.7037037037037037,81.0,100.0
+14175,latent_14175,2547,0.005094,0.0020027752,1.7901008,Multiple view imaging analysis and comparison with prior studies.,"These examples generally involve comparison across multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) alongside a prior image, often with prior reports explicitly mentioned and requested comparisons given specific historical or clinical contexts. This pattern highlights the use of comprehensive imaging analysis in evaluating changes over time, particularly for managing chronic conditions or after interventions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,100.0,100.0
+14176,latent_14176,4560,0.00912,0.0033050256,1.555988,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior radiographs.,"Examples with activation levels demonstrate radiological findings that compare current images against prior ones, focusing on fact that overall findings remain stable or unchanged as compared to the previous exams. This stability is often emphasized in radiology reports when assessing ongoing treatments or progression of chronic conditions, as seen in phrases like 'unchanged in position' or 'stable since prior examination.'",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14177,latent_14177,348,0.000696,0.00067287235,2.6300619,Comparison with prior imaging and consistency of reporting style.,"Examples with high activation levels involve explicit directive to provide comparison analysis between current and prior radiological images, specifically focusing on changes or stability of findings like nodules, cardiomediastinal contours, or pleural conditions. These exemplars typically have a structured template prompting analysis against prior reports or images.",0.5135746606334841,0.5348837209302325,0.4848484848484848,0.8421052631578947,19.0,24.0,0.4287925696594427,0.4305555555555556,0.324074074074074,0.7954545454545454,44.0,100.0
+14178,latent_14178,2301,0.004602,0.0018297482,1.8395522,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"Highly activated samples describe findings as unchanged, stable, or without significant change on comparison with prior studies, highlighting consistency over time. These reports state unchanged size, location, or absence of new pathological findings explicitly.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14179,latent_14179,1760,0.00352,0.0014870904,2.0820725,"Detailed comparison between multiple views or images, indicating complex assessments.","The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed descriptions of comparison across different viewpoints or images, often involving both frontal and lateral views or changes noted over time, which require complex analysis of the image data and previous records. This complexity in imaging interpretation appears to be the pattern triggering higher activation levels.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.439071059736311,0.465,0.4755244755244755,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14180,latent_14180,943,0.001886,0.001014337,2.7465224,Discrepancy about comparison availability in image reports.,"The examples all instruct to compare images, suggesting prior imaging is available, yet this is sometimes contradicted with statements of 'no comparison' or 'no prior', indicating confusion or ambiguity in determining the availability of prior comparisons. This inconsistency is crucial to note for understanding the activation pattern of the described condition in radiology reports.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5112781954887218,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14181,latent_14181,1797,0.003594,0.0014913671,2.248025,Comparison with prior frontal image changes or stable findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe comparisons between current and prior radiographs, particularly noting changes or stability in findings over time. This aligns with the repeated pattern of analyzing differences or confirmations of diagnoses based on previous imaging, highlighted by wording focused on stable or changed states, device positions, and similar comparisons.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14182,latent_14182,3140,0.00628,0.002359871,1.3735486,"Comprehensive comparison with prior findings, indicating stability or change.","Activation levels are high when reports include comparative language to previous imaging findings, which often indicates stability or change in specific medical devices or anatomical structures over time. These reports typically detail differences or confirm lack of change, which are crucial in medical follow-ups and evaluations.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4845083299471759,0.4874371859296482,0.4912280701754385,0.56,100.0,99.0
+14183,latent_14183,4793,0.009586,0.0034222952,1.3967807,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The activation levels are higher when the reports involve descriptions that include a comparison to prior studies to assess changes, especially when there are explicit statements indicating stability or interval change of observed features like lesions, opacities, tubes, or structural positions. Lower activations are seen when there is no comparison, or changes are not highlighted as significant.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4461025516926138,0.485,0.4901960784313725,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14184,latent_14184,2131,0.004262,0.0017966094,1.9415058,"Reports focus on the position or alignment of tubes, lines, or catheters.","Examples with high activation levels mention the position or status of medical devices such as tubes, lines, or catheters (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube) in a radiology report. This is a common focus in radiological assessments, particularly in monitoring the correct placement of such devices for patient management.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5166666666666667,0.31,100.0,100.0
+14185,latent_14185,2346,0.004692,0.001751521,1.4684391,Interval change description between current and prior imaging.,"These high activation examples contain explicit mentions of comparisons between current and prior imaging, often specifying dates or instances of imaging that are compared for interval change. This pattern highlights the focus on monitoring changes over time, a common practice in radiology to assess progress or stability of conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5145631067961165,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14186,latent_14186,628,0.001256,0.00083119795,3.2221296,"Focus on comparing imaging findings to prior studies, noting subtle changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels often report on the presence of detailed comparative imaging findings, especially noting stable conditions or subtle changes against prior imaging studies, while ensuring that the cardiomediastinal silhouette is evaluated as stable or similar in these comparisons.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4800766283524904,0.480225988700565,0.4271844660194174,0.5714285714285714,77.0,100.0
+14187,latent_14187,3931,0.007862,0.0029365032,1.88956,"Explicit mention of stability, changes, or comparisons to prior imaging.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss the findings in relation to the presence or absence of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, lasting impact of previous procedures, and include identifying any stable or unchanged conditions since prior imaging. These descriptions assess interval changes explicitly, particularly comparing them to prior radiological exams.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14188,latent_14188,932,0.001864,0.00093042693,2.7230177,Comparison with prior imaging and mention of findings stability or change.,"The prompts that lead to high activations are those that mention both a current image and prior image comparison, and contain phrases or placeholders indicating reference to the previous report or findings, demonstrating a linguistic structure that emphasizes evaluation over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4242947610823258,0.425,0.4193548387096774,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14189,latent_14189,3060,0.00612,0.0023631852,2.8470511,"Findings compared to prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability or changes.","The examples marked with higher activations discuss descriptions of imaging findings throughout the report, often emphasizing comparison to prior imaging. These descriptions relate to changes or stability of abnormalities over time, which is a key diagnostic practice in radiology.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14190,latent_14190,486,0.000972,0.00085800886,3.30756,Comparison to prior radiological images and assessment of changes.,"The examples with high activation describe the findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, indicating whether there are 'no changes', 'stable findings', or new observations. This pattern is typical in longitudinal patient care where tracking disease progression or stability over time is crucial.",0.4480600750938673,0.4489795918367347,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.4049679487179487,0.4050632911392405,0.3235294117647059,0.5689655172413793,58.0,100.0
+14191,latent_14191,2108,0.004216,0.0017635757,1.5596602,Comparative analysis with prior imaging indicates resolution or change in status.,"Highly activated examples include descriptions of radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging, often using language indicating change or stability in lung conditions, cardiac silhouette, or other intrathoracic structures.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5921052631578947,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14192,latent_14192,2259,0.004518,0.0018048569,1.4101949,"Comparative findings in current vs. prior imaging, assessing changes or stabilities.","The highly activated examples heavily incorporate interlocutory cross-referencing and comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. These tasks typically analyze variations and constancy between new and previous images, often while identifying specific changes or stabilities of medical conditions. Such comparisons are documented frequently in radiological reports, emphasizing evaluations and reevaluations against earlier images.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14193,latent_14193,464,0.000928,0.0008375074,2.4625742,Findings are stable or improved compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels consistently describe findings in the radiology study, focusing on unchanged findings or improvements when compared to prior imaging. They emphasize stable conditions or resolution of previous pathologies without identifying new concerning features, using terms like 'unchanged', 'resolved', or 'stable'.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4675596126775583,0.5,0.3278688524590163,0.3448275862068966,58.0,100.0
+14194,latent_14194,1004,0.002008,0.0011640068,2.2720826,Focus on tube placement or position comparison.,"The pattern involves descriptions of interventions such as placement and/or positioning of tubes. Regardless of the presence of other findings, these examples focus on the unchanged or slightly modified status of tubes, like OG tubes, endotracheal tubes, or thoracostomy tubes, in relation to prior imagery. The focus remains on tube placement compared to previous studies.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5802469135802469,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14195,latent_14195,1328,0.002656,0.0016119079,2.983575,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels involve comparisons between current and prior imaging, where changes over time, such as resolution, improvement, or worsening of findings, are emphasized. This pattern suggests a focus on assessing longitudinal changes in patient condition based on imaging.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.51,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14196,latent_14196,2248,0.004496,0.0016949032,1.7546749,Comparisons to a single prior frontal image.,"The specific linguistic pattern identified across examples with high activation levels involves descriptions of findings that are framed in relation to a single prior frontal image. The pattern focuses on explicit comparative descriptions to detect changes over time, using phrases like ""as compared to the previous radiograph"" or ""compared to the prior exam,"" specifically in terms of findings such as opacities, effusions, or device placement made in comparison to this singular prior image.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14197,latent_14197,562,0.001124,0.00077991467,2.0962703,Explicit comparisons with prior radiographic studies.,"The examples with high activation levels contain phrases explicitly comparing current radiographic findings with prior examinations, often indicating continuity or change in observations. This pattern is central to radiological analysis where comparative evaluations with previous studies are crucial to assess progression or stability of findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4778571428571428,0.4941176470588235,0.4384615384615384,0.8142857142857143,70.0,100.0
+14198,latent_14198,905,0.00181,0.0010270725,2.0191724,Use of multiple views and comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to multiple views, such as 'frontal' and 'lateral', and previous imaging for comparison, as an integral aspect of the process of interpreting current diagnostic findings within the context of a patient's medical history.",0.3333333333333333,0.44,0.4666666666666667,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4040693549760208,0.475,0.4852071005917159,0.82,100.0,100.0
+14199,latent_14199,692,0.001384,0.0009204942,3.1671672,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels feature detailed descriptions that compare current radiological findings to previous images. These descriptions often identify changes or the lack thereof in recognized abnormalities, such as catheters or lesion size, using specific descriptions and medical terminology to juxtapose observations across different imaging times.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5459331880900509,0.5519125683060109,0.5063291139240507,0.4819277108433735,83.0,100.0
+14200,latent_14200,356,0.000712,0.0008269139,2.884284,Interpretation of chest images requires analysis of both current and prior views for comparison.,"The high activation examples consistently require examination of both current and prior images of the chest, both frontal and lateral views, to identify changes or stability over time. Reports are required to compare findings against prior studies, which emphasizes the necessity of comparison in diagnostic radiology practice, even if explicitly stated comparison is lacking, the process itself is inherently comparative.",0.3382352941176471,0.3777777777777777,0.3888888888888889,0.7,20.0,25.0,0.3263646922183507,0.3379310344827586,0.2857142857142857,0.7555555555555555,45.0,100.0
+14201,latent_14201,1192,0.002384,0.0011889568,2.322164,Emphasis on evaluative comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activations often contain descriptions that highlight the evaluation of changes in images by comparing current findings with prior imaging, despite sometimes also including a mention of no prior comparisons. This indicates a pattern focused on assessing change or status stability, where descriptions include specific terms of comparison regardless of prior availability.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14202,latent_14202,3216,0.006432,0.0022959672,1.3785142,"Comparison of findings against prior radiology studies, noting changes or stability.","The data indicates a focus on descriptions comparing current and prior radiographic studies. Examples with higher activation often explicitly compare findings, note stability or improvement, and identify or rule out new pathologies.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14203,latent_14203,936,0.001872,0.0010399286,2.0248275,Comparisons or findings based on prior image comparisons.,"Activations tend to be higher when the task requires comparing current imaging to prior studies, often with specific instructions or findings concerning the comparison. The pattern recognizes the inclusion of prior image comparisons and specifies documentation of changes or findings based on those comparisons.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5544022437157611,0.575,0.5524475524475524,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14204,latent_14204,1610,0.00322,0.0013289197,2.5627613,Evaluations showing stable findings over time.,The high activation examples share a common feature in which comparisons between current and prior medical imaging are made without focusing on indications of acute pathology. The reports provide evaluations of stability or changes over time rather than immediate pathological concerns.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5303030303030303,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14205,latent_14205,1238,0.002476,0.001193523,1.8251251,Comparison of medical device position in imaging studies.,"This pattern shows changes in medical devices, specifically chest tubes or catheters, being assessed through comparison with previous studies. The reports highlight the presence, position, or any alteration in these devices relative to prior imaging.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4897959183673469,0.24,100.0,100.0
+14206,latent_14206,582,0.001164,0.0008404665,2.7376263,Comparison to prior images with assessment of interval changes.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels consistently reference the comparison of findings with a prior radiograph, evaluating any interval changes, often indicating persistence, slight change, or improvement in certain conditions like opacification, atelectasis, or device positioning. The inclusion of specific updates or stability in findings compared to prior records is the common pattern triggering higher activation in these examples.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.522972749793559,0.5229885057471264,0.4545454545454545,0.6081081081081081,74.0,100.0
+14207,latent_14207,1283,0.002566,0.0013157568,3.8211288,Identification of stable anatomical variants or features.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the recognition of anatomical variants, such as an 'azygos fissure' or 'calcified granuloma', which are typically noted as incidental stable findings in radiology reports. These reports emphasize the presence of stable anatomical variants in comparison to previous studies.",0.6933667083854819,0.6938775510204082,0.6666666666666666,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.6379624014554275,0.6381909547738693,0.6285714285714286,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+14208,latent_14208,2197,0.004394,0.0018182879,1.7145387,Detailed interval changes in medical imaging compared to prior studies.,"Patterns with higher activation levels correlate with reports that include a detailed comparison of new findings against previous studies, often including specifics of how certain features have changed, such as size or position of abnormalities or medical devices, thereby indicating interval changes requiring clinical attention.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14209,latent_14209,2858,0.005716,0.0021478916,2.0148256,Emphasis on interval changes using prior imaging for comparison.,"These examples heavily feature the term 'comparison', usually followed by references to specific prior studies. The structure and content of the reports emphasize evaluating for interval changes or stability using prior imaging as a basis for comparison. This is consistent with radiological practices of comparing current findings against previous images, using language indicative of temporal evaluation.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5309734513274337,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14210,latent_14210,2488,0.004976,0.002022204,3.0493054,Observed significant changes compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples show comparisons between current and prior imaging studies focused on detecting changes or stability in pleural or lung conditions, especially associated with treatment or interventions like tube placements or surgical changes. The activation pattern highlights significant changes in the lungs, pleura, or other areas compared to previous images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5961538461538461,0.31,100.0,100.0
+14211,latent_14211,297,0.000594,0.0005375365,3.7392771,Detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in comparison with prior imaging studies, noting detailed changes or stability over time. This pattern indicates that the model strongly associates providing a comparative analysis with prior images as significant, especially when specific changes are detailed.",0.4974358974358974,0.5,0.4285714285714285,0.7058823529411765,17.0,25.0,0.4352941176470588,0.4705882352941176,0.2272727272727272,0.4166666666666667,36.0,100.0
+14212,latent_14212,964,0.001928,0.0011670123,4.8148236,"Presence and evaluation of orthopedic hardware along with assessment for pneumothorax, effusion, or consolidation.","Highly activated examples consistently describe the presence or evaluation of orthopedic hardware alongside inquiries for pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or airspace consolidation, irrespective of other findings. Hardware imaging and these diagnostic assessments often appear together in radiology due to overlapping concerns in traumatic or post-surgery cases.",0.8397435897435898,0.84,0.8148148148148148,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.7894736842105263,0.79,0.8222222222222222,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14213,latent_14213,1296,0.002592,0.0015659166,3.0688665,Description based on comparison with a single prior frontal image without extensive prior history.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently describe findings in the radiology study while referencing prior frontal images as part of a comparison, without listing multiple other prior studies or dates. This suggests a consistent pattern in descriptions where specific comparisons are clearly made to a single previous frontal image.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3820066906713654,0.395,0.4186046511627907,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14214,latent_14214,505,0.00101,0.0007671945,2.5926316,Descriptions of interval change or stability compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently contain descriptions of interval changes or stability compared to prior studies, using phrases such as 'decreased', 'improved from prior', 'largely unchanged', and 'interval change'. These demonstrate significant findings in follow-up examinations relevant to medical management.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5059523809523809,0.5060240963855421,0.4183673469387755,0.6212121212121212,66.0,100.0
+14215,latent_14215,3070,0.00614,0.0023160977,1.5863413,Comparative diagnostic analysis between current and prior images.,"Activation levels are higher when reports combine both a current and prior imaging comparison within the given prompt context, as noted in entries mentioning 'comparison to prior image' or 'unchanged from' and involving analysis beyond merely reporting unchanged findings. Entries with more focus on diagnostic comparison statements, despite the presence of prior imaging context, and not just noting absence or stability of findings, show a higher activation, indicating the pattern is associated with comparative diagnostic analysis.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5334201388888888,0.57,0.5448717948717948,0.85,100.0,100.0
+14216,latent_14216,5569,0.011138,0.0039677494,1.5167549,Unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels often reference unchanged findings or stable conditions compared to prior imaging. This stability across images is highlighted using terms like 'unchanged,' 'stable appearance,' and 'no significant change,' reflecting a consistency or lack of progression in the findings which likely triggers the recognition pattern for the model.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5487804878048781,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14217,latent_14217,2186,0.004372,0.0017289898,2.0354147,Includes explicit comparative analysis with prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently include specific references to comparisons with prior imaging to describe changes in patient status or indicate stability of conditions. This suggests a focus on monitoring changes between scans rather than standalone analysis.,0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14218,latent_14218,654,0.001308,0.00081597985,3.0129669,"Findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or changes.","The examples with the highest activation levels describe findings by explicitly referencing prior images for comparison, particularly noting changes or stability over time. This comparison-based language is a reliable pattern in radiology reports to assess developments in a patient's condition.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3843929808490539,0.3850267379679144,0.351063829787234,0.3793103448275862,87.0,100.0
+14219,latent_14219,659,0.001318,0.0008383905,2.2842577,Comparative changes or stability in imaging findings over time.,"Activation levels are high in examples where the findings illustrate changes or comparative assessments of progression or stability in current imaging findings, typically in response to prior therapeutic interventions or evaluations of suspected diseases. Comparisons explore either improvements, exacerbations, or unchanged statuses from previous exams, focusing on interval changes.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3181818181818182,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.3241554207046463,0.3241758241758242,0.297029702970297,0.3658536585365853,82.0,100.0
+14220,latent_14220,758,0.001516,0.0008949465,3.4312487,Detailed findings with explicit prior imaging comparisons.,"Highly activated entries consistently describe specific findings, using a pattern that involves extensive description of the identified findings along with a request or suggestion for further comparative analysis. The text demonstrates a clear focus on describing observed changes over previous imaging in a detailed manner, often consulting prior or comparative metrics for specific aspects like presence, placement, or changes in opacities or structures.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.3243507286493527,0.3316062176165803,0.2784810126582278,0.2340425531914893,94.0,99.0
+14221,latent_14221,3989,0.007978,0.002921886,1.6619638,Comparison of current and prior images for specific changes or placements.,"The examples with higher activations consistently discuss changes between the current and prior imaging studies, indicating active monitoring or evaluation of specific medical interventions or placements, such as tubes or lines, for change, position improvement, or clinical relevance.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14222,latent_14222,760,0.00152,0.0009197539,2.5377357,Changes in pulmonary opacities or pleural effusions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently report changes or comparisons of pulmonary opacities or pleural effusions with specific mention of prior imaging studies. This suggests a focus on interval changes in lung pathology, particularly related to opacities or effusions when compared to previous imaging.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6094688776736361,0.6153846153846154,0.631578947368421,0.5052631578947369,95.0,100.0
+14223,latent_14223,542,0.001084,0.0008377042,3.5208826,No relevant change compared to a prior radiograph.,"Examples with high activation focus on comparisons made to previous images and the relative positioning or stability of significant findings, such as monitoring devices, parenchymal opacities, or structural changes over time. The examples repeatedly describe 'as compared to previous radiograph' to ensure a comparison, whether changes were significant or not, indicate a recognized pattern or continuous monitoring aspect.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.605152027027027,0.611764705882353,0.5256410256410257,0.5857142857142857,70.0,100.0
+14224,latent_14224,288,0.000576,0.0006519763,4.63659,"Instructions to compare current findings with prior images, focusing on stability or change.","These examples encompass radiological findings detailed with instructions to compare with previous images, indicating stable conditions or changes. While the examples describe specific findings, those without direct numerical measurements or definitive conclusions (e.g., stating a stable dilation without precise size change) received lower activations, emphasizing the linguistic pattern of comparison and explicit description of changes or stabilities.",0.5116279069767442,0.5116279069767442,0.44,0.6111111111111112,18.0,25.0,0.3133049645390071,0.3157894736842105,0.1847826086956521,0.5151515151515151,33.0,100.0
+14225,latent_14225,254,0.000508,0.0006640311,3.375763,Stable findings with focus on absence of acute changes.,"The examples with activation levels close to 10 describe reports where findings are focused on the presence or absence of notable changes, usually indicating stability and lack of acute abnormality, often in cases of chest pain or dyspnea. They note normal heart size and clear lungs with requests to compare against prior images but often find no significant change or acute pathology.",0.3308167467398765,0.358974358974359,0.1764705882352941,0.2142857142857142,14.0,25.0,0.4655870445344129,0.5075757575757576,0.238095238095238,0.46875,32.0,100.0
+14226,latent_14226,5652,0.011304,0.0039920867,1.4177991,Detailed comparative description of imaging findings.,"The pattern in the highly activated examples involves an emphasis on describing current findings in relation to prior imaging, even when there may be no previous comparison available or non-specific changes like positioning noted. This implies an emphasis on assessment through detailed comparative analysis.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5338983050847458,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14227,latent_14227,894,0.001788,0.0009297626,3.90946,Detection of significant findings compared with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations often involve findings on initial or follow-up imaging such as masses, effusions, or similar that corroborate or refute prior assessments, partially relying on contextual knowledge from prior imaging. The scenario relies on the model discerning the importance of identifying significant radiologic elements from prior images to inform current interpretations.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5303030303030303,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14228,latent_14228,1944,0.003888,0.0015224934,2.1333435,Significant interval changes or medical device repositioning on follow-up imaging.,"Examples with a positive activation often describe specific changes or adjustments related to medical devices (such as tubes) or significant developments, like new findings indicating physical changes, in comparison to previous imaging studies. These examples often emphasize dynamic changes in patient status, as opposed to those with unchanged observations or no prior comparison which have lower activations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.557203171661003,0.57,0.6060606060606061,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14229,latent_14229,1312,0.002624,0.0013191322,2.7343788,Emphasis on comparison with prior radiology images and findings stability.,"Examples with high activation levels describe the process of comparing current radiological findings with prior images, often noting specific changes or stability relative to past reports, indicative of an analysis pattern where the focus is on identifying changes or maintenance of previous findings over time.",0.310064935064935,0.32,0.3548387096774194,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4887218045112781,0.49,0.4909090909090909,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14230,latent_14230,4723,0.009446,0.003418304,1.3087205,Comparison of tube or line placements with prior imaging.,"The pattern exemplifies radiological reports referring to imaging findings compared to previous studies, often noting changes in the positioning of medical devices and anatomical structures like tubes, lines, or catheters, or describing stable findings over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5633802816901409,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14231,latent_14231,466,0.000932,0.0007939224,4.7554755,Findings comparisons made to prior frontal images in the context of acute clinical indications.,"The completion is most representative when the task instructs the description of findings to be made in direct relation to a prior frontal image, often with explicit absence of prior comparison or insufficient patient background, emphasizing the necessity for comparative analysis in contexts of acute or significant clinical indications.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4491685033059507,0.4493670886075949,0.3592233009708738,0.6379310344827587,58.0,100.0
+14232,latent_14232,642,0.001284,0.0007695448,2.6103473,Unchanged tube or line placement in imaging comparisons.,"Examples with the highest activations often involve situations where a tube or line placement is unchanged upon comparison with prior imaging. These examples typically highlight the absence of movement or interval changes in the positioning of medical devices, which is a key feature recognized by the model.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4934025366424212,0.5722222222222222,0.5517241379310345,0.2,80.0,100.0
+14233,latent_14233,3156,0.006312,0.002387879,1.7887583,Comparison with prior imaging detailing interval changes or stability.,"Highly activated examples consistently include a detailed comparison with prior imaging and describe changes or stability in key findings. This pattern emphasizes identifying modifications or persistence in clinical features over time, often specifying interval changes or stable findings across exams.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14234,latent_14234,1040,0.00208,0.0009581929,2.1344845,Stable or unchanged findings when compared with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation typically reference findings that are either unchanged or stable when compared to previous examinations, particularly involving the heart and mediastinal contours. This persistence of specific findings over time seems to be indicative of the pattern.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14235,latent_14235,608,0.001216,0.0008961906,3.7852428,Comparison of findings to prior radiological images or reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels include descriptions where the findings are compared to previous radiological images or reports. This is a recurring and significant pattern in radiological assessments to understand progression of disease or response to treatment, and such comparisons are integral to radiological reporting.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4052188039394863,0.4195402298850574,0.3937007874015748,0.6756756756756757,74.0,100.0
+14236,latent_14236,495,0.00099,0.00075120357,2.2539308,Detailed assessment of frontal and lateral chest images with prior comparison.,"Most examples with high activation levels involve detailed analysis of frontal and lateral chest radiographs, integrating findings on cardiomediastinal silhouettes, lung conditions, and presence of previous reports or comparisons. These detailed, methodical descriptions usually contrast with prior examinations or address specific pathologies.",0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4276282376841036,0.4347826086956521,0.3728813559322034,0.7213114754098361,61.0,100.0
+14237,latent_14237,1706,0.003412,0.0015387713,2.0096288,"Comparison of changes in radiological images, especially regarding devices or baseline status.","Exemplars with high activation levels frequently mention findings that build comparisons between radiological images, specifically interpreting changes or stability in medical conditions or devices across time or tests. Reports often emphasize the presence and location of medical instruments or devices, such as catheters or lines, within the context of radiological comparison.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4702187239839551,0.475,0.4789915966386555,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14238,latent_14238,2209,0.004418,0.001798286,2.5070477,Comparison of current to previous radiological findings.,"The key distinguishing factor in these examples is that the descriptions often explicitly involve the comparison of current radiology findings with previous images, including the description of changes or stability over time. The pattern emphasizes the assessment of dynamic changes rather than static findings, which include terms like 'unchanged', 'increased', 'stable', or explicit mention of timeframe comparisons in the reports.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+14239,latent_14239,528,0.001056,0.00076022965,2.3445146,Comparison to prior imaging highlighting stable findings or known changes.,"Descriptions that compare current and prior imaging, indicating stability or change in findings, are given high activation. Highlighted comparisons include phrasing like 'compared to prior', 'since previous study', or explicit notes on previous conditions without introducing entirely new significant findings. These examples document follow-ups or stability in conditions, indicating consistent surveillance rather than major diagnostic shifts.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5030493371800022,0.5178571428571429,0.4084507042253521,0.4264705882352941,68.0,100.0
+14240,latent_14240,415,0.00083,0.000710125,2.5964746,Interval placement of medical devices or tubes in chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention the interval placement of medical devices or tubes, indicating changed positioning or new placement, as evidenced by terms like 'interval placement' in the reports.",0.8507936507936508,0.851063829787234,0.8260869565217391,0.8636363636363636,22.0,25.0,0.5932507711431334,0.632258064516129,0.4807692307692308,0.4545454545454545,55.0,100.0
+14241,latent_14241,2127,0.004254,0.001802524,2.677042,Attention to tube placement and its comparison with prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are observed in examples where the presence and path of devices such as feeding or intubation tubes are noted, especially when the passage or position of these devices is stated to be incorrect or has changed since the prior imagined assessment. This pattern captures attention due to the critical nature of assessing tube placement accurately in radiology.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5081670161269447,0.525,0.5396825396825397,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14242,latent_14242,1006,0.002012,0.0011385905,2.7902403,Comparison highlights unchanged cardiac and mediastinal contours.,"The data suggests a common pattern noted in samples with higher activation: when both current and prior images are presented, and the comparison specifically highlights the cardiac silhouette and mediastinal and hilar contours, indicating no mortality significant changes or abnormalities. This is indicated through repetition of normal findings when comparison is made.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5476190476190477,0.23,100.0,100.0
+14243,latent_14243,503,0.001006,0.0007370012,2.9598725,Evaluation of cardiac device positioning using past images for comparison.,The highly activated examples consistently reference implanted cardiac devices such as pacemakers and their expected lead positions within the heart chambers (like the right atrium and right ventricle). These examples demonstrate a pattern of evaluating positioning of cardiac devices relative to previous images.,0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5931879543094496,0.6445783132530121,0.5853658536585366,0.3636363636363636,66.0,100.0
+14244,latent_14244,1624,0.003248,0.0013858696,1.5568151,Comparison of current and previous images to describe interval changes.,High activation levels are seen in examples where a current radiological image is compared with a prior exam to assess interval changes; the task explicitly involves describing radiological findings relative to previous imaging studies and often notes the comparison in the findings.,0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14245,latent_14245,5465,0.01093,0.003939693,1.8243504,Interval changes in pulmonary or pleural pathology compared to previous images.,"Examples with higher activation levels mention specific anatomical changes or conditions, such as pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, atelectasis, or pneumothorax, coupled with comparative analysis of these findings to previous images. This suggests the pattern is focusing on descriptions of interval changes in pathology compared to prior images.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5087719298245614,0.29,100.0,100.0
+14246,latent_14246,1206,0.002412,0.0012181812,3.584229,Comparison to prior images noting change or stability.,"These examples often involve descriptions that note the changes or stability in findings when current images are compared with prior images. They include explicit mentions of stability or change over time, particularly regarding new or resolved clinical features. Phrases like 'stable from prior', 'no change', 'significant improvement', and 'new since prior' illustrate this pattern.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5719070282793182,0.575,0.5641025641025641,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14247,latent_14247,4136,0.008272,0.0030749012,1.4827894,Explicit comparisons made to prior images in findings.,These examples consistently describe findings observed in radiological images where a comparison to previous imaging is explicitly mentioned as a part of evaluating for changes over time. Comparison to prior images is a common practice in radiology to assess progression or stability of findings.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14248,latent_14248,1426,0.002852,0.0012351641,3.416716,Description and evaluation of monitoring or support devices' positions.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of monitoring or support devices, tubes, or line placements, often with detail about their positions and changes from previous images. Such information is crucial in a clinical setting to monitor interventions and procedures, contributing to higher importance in radiology reports.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.6086956521739131,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14249,latent_14249,2162,0.004324,0.001673753,2.0237234,Identification of interval changes or new detailed findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently include novel and detailed observations about the patient's condition or changes over time that are explicitly mentioned in the findings, particularly when there are multiple imaging views being compared and specific changes identified. This pattern indicates that the findings are key in determining an interval change or new observation compared to prior imaging.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5257731958762887,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14250,latent_14250,429,0.000858,0.0007302242,3.197758,Chronic or stable findings on comparison of radiology images.,"These examples involve descriptions of chronic or stable recurrent findings across radiographic images, not demonstrating acute changes. The focus is on comparing persistent or recurring radiological signs, such as chronic deformities or unchanged features, implying monitoring of non-acute conditions.",0.7482517482517483,0.75,0.6896551724137931,0.8695652173913043,23.0,25.0,0.6904761904761905,0.6923076923076923,0.5454545454545454,0.8571428571428571,56.0,100.0
+14251,latent_14251,539,0.001078,0.0007488027,2.7265985,Temporal changes or stability in radiographic findings compared to prior images are detailed.,"These examples focus on changes observed in radiographic studies over time, highlighting interval development or stability of specific features like pleural effusions, rib fractures, effusions, or cardiomediastinal changes. Activation is high when descriptions detail either stable or notable changes in radiographic findings compared to prior images, indicating temporal assessment.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3652276959539529,0.3662790697674418,0.3271028037383177,0.4861111111111111,72.0,100.0
+14252,latent_14252,449,0.000898,0.0008396499,4.4316053,Comparison with prior image findings for interval changes.,"These examples consistently highlight a pattern of evaluating changes or stability in radiographic findings by making explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, highlighted by instructions to provide a description based on comparison with prior images, regardless of specific findings in the current images.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4283361469098694,0.4294871794871794,0.3225806451612903,0.5357142857142857,56.0,100.0
+14253,latent_14253,1802,0.003604,0.0025370724,3.5520394,Stable pleural or lung conditions in comparison to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve references to changes in pleura or lungs in relation to prior reports, with mention of stable or unchanged conditions, particularly focusing on statements about pleural effusions, pleural thickening, or lung changes such as scarring or opacities, commonly as comparisons to prior images for cases with ongoing or recurring issues.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+14254,latent_14254,3053,0.006106,0.0023260338,1.8829991,Focus on direct comparisons between current and previous imaging studies.,"Examples showing increased activation levels mainly include a clear structure or statement indicating a comparison between current imaging findings and a specific 'prior' imaging reference, often resulting in an interpretation or mention of a consistent change or stability in findings. This involves explicit mention of findings and the comparative assessment based on a previous study, which is intrinsic to radiological practice for tracking changes over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14255,latent_14255,1030,0.00206,0.0011095961,2.5272715,Tortuous or dilated thoracic aorta evaluated via comparison with previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include findings related to the thoracic aorta's tortuosity or dilation, and these often involve comparison with prior radiography reports which assess stability or changes.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4569031273836766,0.555,0.8666666666666667,0.13,100.0,100.0
+14256,latent_14256,256,0.000512,0.00051917916,3.6592026,Comparative analysis showing change between current and prior imaging.,"Activation levels are highest when there is a direct reference to a comparison between the current and prior imaging studies, with an emphasis on specific changes in devices, opacities, or other features. This pattern highlights the importance of comparisons showing changes that could impact clinical decisions, rather than unchanged or stable findings.",0.4376321353065539,0.4473684210526316,0.3666666666666666,0.8461538461538461,13.0,25.0,0.5239385727190605,0.5441176470588235,0.3194444444444444,0.6388888888888888,36.0,100.0
+14257,latent_14257,2306,0.004612,0.0017456613,2.2332182,Unchanged findings when compared with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve descriptions of stable findings or unchanged conditions when compared to prior imaging, often suggesting stability in the patient's condition. These examples include terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'persistent', or 'constant', indicating ongoing observation without new pathological developments.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5702621400945423,0.575,0.5949367088607594,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14258,latent_14258,877,0.001754,0.0009462192,2.4479809,Evaluation and comparison of current to prior images.,"Highly activated examples focus on evaluating changes in patient condition over time, specifically referencing the comparison between current and prior images or radiographs. Less activated examples either lack such comparison or do not emphasize changes.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4192799070847851,0.45,0.4657534246575342,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14259,latent_14259,1283,0.002566,0.0011905454,2.346346,"References to changes in current imaging compared to prior studies, specifically regarding intervention or pathology resolution.","Higher activation levels are observed in examples that explicitly involve a comparison with prior images, specifically referencing changes such as tube placement or interval changes in pathology. This suggests the model is activated when tasked with detecting differences compared to prior imaging.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5084745762711864,0.3,100.0,100.0
+14260,latent_14260,2673,0.005346,0.00204638,1.945092,Use of prior radiograph for comparison of current changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation exhibit descriptions that compare current chest imaging findings with prior imaging, identifying changes in specific radiological features such as tubes, lines, and opacities. This pattern focuses on interval changes seen in serial imaging, which is crucial for patient monitoring and management.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5670995670995671,0.59,0.5616438356164384,0.82,100.0,100.0
+14261,latent_14261,6809,0.013618,0.0047862465,1.4965063,Comparison of imaging with prior studies highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with notable activations involve the presence of comparison between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on changes or stability in findings. Higher activations are noted when changes over time are explicitly discussed or significant features are being evaluated in relation to past states.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,100.0,100.0
+14262,latent_14262,1419,0.002838,0.0013977655,2.4574177,Description of findings comparing unusual or minor changes to prior images.,"Samples with high activation consistently describe the sidestep comparison between the current and prior radiographs, emphasizing findings like mild tortuosity or lengths not previously specified, or changes which could be attributed to conditions like amiodarone lung toxicity and features like pacemaker or scar. Additionally, the presence of unusual findings such as pacemaker and changes in cardiac size serve as a comparing baseline for new descriptions, thus creating a reference model for some stepwise comparison.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14263,latent_14263,241,0.000482,0.0005079684,3.8433895,Comparisons made to prior frontal image despite initially unclear prompts.,"The activation levels indicate instances where comparisons to prior frontal images have been explicitly made despite the prompts or available views not initially indicating comparison, showing attentive communication about potential changes in the images that could correspond to updates in patient's clinical condition.",0.4914207275223061,0.5128205128205128,0.4242424242424242,1.0,14.0,25.0,0.3686330253494432,0.3692307692307692,0.25,0.8666666666666667,30.0,100.0
+14264,latent_14264,835,0.00167,0.0010204584,2.5028367,Presence of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently mention comparing current imaging findings to prior images, including descriptions of changes or stability in findings over time. These examples specifically reference a comparison point or describe changes/stability in findings from prior reports.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4868021844660194,0.4874371859296482,0.4859813084112149,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+14265,latent_14265,710,0.00142,0.000873374,5.6572757,Radiologic findings compared to previous images with explicit stability or changes mentioned.,"Higher activation levels correlate with examples that explicitly reference comparison to previous radiographs and identify changes or stability in the current findings. Mentioning conditions or devices significantly unchanged from prior images appears to elevate activation levels. Details of unchanged findings, comparison points, and explicit statements about stability or interval change characterize these examples.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5670788912579957,0.5691489361702128,0.5309734513274337,0.6818181818181818,88.0,100.0
+14266,latent_14266,5711,0.011422,0.0040826173,1.2261211,"Significant findings from comparing current and prior frontal images, often regarding lung,
+pleural conditions, or medical devices.","Highly activated examples consistently mention changes in or significant findings from the current frontal image in comparison to the prior frontal image, focusing especially on changes in lung or pleural conditions and devices like tubes or catheters, such as new opacities or stable appearances.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.591304347826087,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14267,latent_14267,1073,0.002146,0.0014437168,3.304884,"Comparison of clear, unremarkable images without significant new findings.","Examples with higher activation focus on descriptions of clear pulmonary structures, unremarkable findings like normal cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours, and comparison usage with current and prior images, without highlighting acute or significant findings. Examples with activations zero often mention no prior comparisons or focus on acute changes.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5941782108770259,0.595,0.6043956043956044,0.55,100.0,100.0
+14268,latent_14268,3234,0.006468,0.002454133,1.5300452,Short-term changes in radiological findings between imaging.,"The examples exhibiting strong activation typically describe changes or stability since previous imaging, particularly with a focus on tube placements, pneumothorax, or effusion changes noted over short intervals, like hours or days. This pattern indicates the model's sensitivity to nuanced differences monitored in acute settings.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14269,latent_14269,2244,0.004488,0.003005132,2.7853217,Reports emphasizing stable or unchanged findings across imaging comparisons.,"Samples with higher activation focus on descriptions indicating stable or unchanged findings over time or subtle changes observed across imaging studies, often without major new developments or findings. These examples describe observations of imaging studies with regard to comparison with prior findings and often emphasize stability or marginal changes.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5394736842105263,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14270,latent_14270,535,0.00107,0.00062969094,2.1357245,Detailed imaging comparison requested or lengthy procedural descriptions.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently include complex phrasing with procedural or technical jargon such as 'provide a description', mixed with the presence or absence of comparison radiographs. This suggests the pattern targets cases requiring detailed reporting, potentially with multiple imaging modalities, and often includes phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study'.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4196030158485921,0.4390243902439024,0.3923076923076923,0.796875,64.0,100.0
+14271,latent_14271,774,0.001548,0.0007951734,1.9600034,Radiological comparison between current and prior images.,"These examples are focused on providing descriptions of radiological findings based on the comparison between current images and prior images, whether the comparison was explicitly made or noted to be unavailable. The descriptions often involve comparisons of tube placements, pulmonary findings, or changes in opacities or effusions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4282701007465793,0.485,0.4907975460122699,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14272,latent_14272,465,0.00093,0.0007606366,3.7886624,Comparison with prior imaging and technical imaging details.,"The high activation examples consistently mention both a comparison to previous images and technical details about image acquisition, such as using frontal, lateral, or both views, in assessing findings. This suggests a pattern centered on detailed image analysis involving reference to previous studies and technical imaging aspects.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3524549660841831,0.4,0.3661971830985915,0.9454545454545454,55.0,100.0
+14273,latent_14273,1072,0.002144,0.0010294497,1.9024256,Presence of current frontal and lateral chest images for comparison.,"The activating examples clearly mention the presence of both frontal and lateral views from chest imaging, allowing a more detailed comparison to previous frontal images. Requests for descriptions based on two different angles is indicative of thorough analysis.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4503550923784386,0.495,0.4968152866242038,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14274,latent_14274,3690,0.00738,0.0027091336,1.749212,Requests for detailed comparison to prior images with noted interval changes in findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include requests for detailed comparison of the given chest images to prior studies, and they specify findings in the context of changes observed from previous images. This pattern of reporting indicates attention to interval changes in radiologic findings.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5934065934065934,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14275,latent_14275,977,0.001954,0.0009628354,2.848553,Explicit evaluation of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples show descriptions where impressions or findings are explicitly compared to prior images, highlighting changes or stability in conditions like lung opacities, pleural effusions, or cardiomegaly. The pattern involves direct comparison to evaluate interval changes.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14276,latent_14276,2320,0.00464,0.0024894704,2.3835528,"Focus on comparison between current and prior images, noting specific changes or stabilities.","The examples with higher activation levels focus on providing a comparison of the findings against the prior imaging, indicating changes or stabilities in specific features such as opacities, effusions, or heart size. Conversely, examples with lower activation levels tend to lack direct observations of change or specific comparisons.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4649122807017544,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14277,latent_14277,592,0.001184,0.0007404446,3.2626565,"Describing radiology findings with direct comparison to previous images, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation involve the detailed comparison of current radiological findings to prior images, especially noting changes or stability over time. This is fundamental in diagnostics for assessing lesion progression, intervention efficacy, or stability of findings.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4574712643678161,0.4576271186440678,0.4020618556701031,0.5064935064935064,77.0,100.0
+14278,latent_14278,542,0.001084,0.0008059344,3.4380345,Interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Many examples refer to the comparison of current studies and previous studies, often highlighted by changes in findings such as new or resolving consolidations, suggesting a focus on identifying interval changes in radiological images.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4818621293441437,0.4939024390243902,0.3733333333333333,0.4375,64.0,100.0
+14279,latent_14279,940,0.00188,0.00087620923,2.4971788,Descriptions of interval changes between compared images.,"The notable pattern in these examples is the presence of interval changes between compared images or examinations. Reports describe changes such as improvement, resolution, or progression in comparison to previous images, which signifies a particular focus on monitoring changes over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4656719427361629,0.47,0.4634146341463415,0.38,100.0,100.0
+14280,latent_14280,580,0.00116,0.0007349219,3.1074831,Reports include findings requiring urgent communication or action.,"Several examples involve findings such as pneumothorax, line placements, fractures, or other acute changes often requiring urgent communication or action. These reports frequently include detailed discussions about the findings, implications, recommended actions, or discussions with other medical staff, resulting in higher activation levels.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4401386748844376,0.4911242603550296,0.3265306122448979,0.2318840579710145,69.0,100.0
+14281,latent_14281,1425,0.00285,0.001325557,2.1399388,Focus on assessment of interval change or stability in findings.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the presence of detailed descriptions of findings in relation to previous imaging, particularly highlighting interval changes or persistent findings. Phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph', 'interval placement' or 'unchanged' are frequent, indicating a focus on longitudinal assessment of conditions that remain stable or slightly change over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14282,latent_14282,1463,0.002926,0.0013034823,2.073344,Significant interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"For the examples with high activation, there are explicit observations comparing the current examination against prior ones to assess changes, particularly focusing on stability, improvement, or specific interval changes in conditions like effusions, atelectasis, or pneumothorax. These comparisons are essential in radiology for follow-up evaluations, hence showing higher activation due to their detailed comparative nature.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5793269230769231,0.58,0.5869565217391305,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14283,latent_14283,1158,0.002316,0.001124216,2.3815577,Comparison to prior radiological images.,"The pattern in these examples is the examination of current radiological images in comparison to prior images. The focus is on the consistency and changes in various clinical findings between two or more imaging sets, which is a key aspect of monitoring patient progress or disease progression in medical imaging.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.457259158751696,0.52,0.5119047619047619,0.86,100.0,100.0
+14284,latent_14284,324,0.000648,0.0006532029,3.749221,Reports emphasizing stability or interval change compared to prior imaging.,Examples with activations generally include specific references to comparison with previous imaging studies and identify some interval changes or stable findings in the given context. This reflects radiological patterns where reports include comparative analysis to document stability or change over time.,0.6177777777777778,0.627906976744186,0.5555555555555556,0.5555555555555556,18.0,25.0,0.3537384346086522,0.3591549295774648,0.2183908045977011,0.4523809523809524,42.0,100.0
+14285,latent_14285,1844,0.003688,0.0015693611,1.770823,Comparison to prior imaging reveals findings or stability.,The examples with high activation mention making direct comparisons of radiological findings to prior imaging studies. This pattern involves monitoring changes over time and using dates or specific imaging references to show stability or change in medical findings.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4565217391304348,0.46,0.4655172413793103,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14286,latent_14286,572,0.001144,0.0009414336,2.9223142,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"The pattern involves comparing current imaging findings with previous or prior imaging studies to assess for changes, interval development, or stability of conditions. Reports detailing comparisons and indicating no significant change or the stable appearance of findings show higher activation.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4999834847233691,0.5,0.4343434343434343,0.581081081081081,74.0,100.0
+14287,latent_14287,4192,0.008384,0.0030034925,1.2493256,Assessment of interval changes on comparison with prior images.,"These examples consistently describe scenarios where current radiographs are explicitly compared to prior images to assess for interval changes. This usually involves descriptions of stability or change in specific findings such as masses, opacities, or pleural effusions, with notable findings often being unchanged or having specific interval changes. This way, it's clear that interval changes (or lack thereof) are the primary point of interest.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14288,latent_14288,2749,0.005498,0.0021680347,2.088078,Comparative descriptions with prior images.,"Examples with activations described report changes or comparisons between current and prior images, indicating new findings or resolutions. These references are to note all observations stably present over time, often using descriptors like 'compared to prior' to relate changes in a patient's condition or findings.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3521611499139589,0.36,0.3852459016393442,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14289,latent_14289,3237,0.006474,0.0023697708,2.4107258,Description of interval changes compared to prior images.,"This set of examples demonstrates comparative analysis of current radiological information against prior images, indicating changes (or lack thereof) in the patient's condition. The activation levels suggest focus on clear references to changes (or stability) observed in sequential imagery, particularly regarding characteristics such as size, position, or appearance of anatomical or pathological findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14290,latent_14290,374,0.000748,0.00061524624,2.917078,Comparison of medical device placement across exams.,"The examples associated with higher activation levels frequently mention analysis related to the positioning and status of medical tubes and devices such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, pacemakers, and surgical hardware. This pattern of describing medical device status suggests a focus on device placement and its comparison across examinations.",0.7222222222222222,0.7333333333333333,0.75,0.6,20.0,25.0,0.6320643642072215,0.6666666666666666,0.5,0.54,50.0,100.0
+14291,latent_14291,794,0.001588,0.00088611414,2.7705252,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings indicating changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels predominantly focus on analyzing and comparing multiple current and/or prior images to provide a detailed interpretation of changes over time, particularly in lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, and other significant findings. These reports highlight the comparison between current and past images, often with phrases like 'as compared to previous radiograph', 'interval change', or noting changes.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5229357798165137,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14292,latent_14292,1112,0.002224,0.0011370687,1.8950875,Comparisons to previous imaging studies in chest radiograph findings.,"Most descriptions are comparing findings to prior images using phrases like ""comparison to prior"", ""compared to previous"", or specifying particular previous dates or images. This indicates a pattern of formulating reports around changes or stability concerning historical imaging.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14293,latent_14293,912,0.001824,0.0010677369,2.2770166,Descriptive analysis of interval changes compared to prior images.,"Samples with high activation feature detailed changes or assessments of new pathologies in comparison to prior imaging, underscoring the importance of detecting interval pa",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14294,latent_14294,5129,0.010258,0.0036748499,1.5771923,Detailed comparison of changes between current and prior images.,"The given examples demonstrate a pattern of comparison between current and previous imaging studies, particularly focusing on changes or stability of findings. The activating reports highlight changes such as worsening or improvement of conditions, prominence of structures, or new intervention results, often technically detailed and consistent across examples.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14295,latent_14295,325,0.00065,0.0005757707,3.4867241,"Enlargement or change in cardiac silhouette, often viewed as stable or progressive.","The pattern across the examples with high activation levels shows a focus on enlargements and mild changes, particularly related to the cardiac silhouette or heart size, often noted as 'moderate' or 'substantial'. These entries frequently highlight the enlargement as stable, unchanged, or progressive compared to previous images.",0.7555555555555555,0.7555555555555555,0.68,0.85,20.0,25.0,0.7604166666666666,0.7971014492753623,0.6086956521739131,0.7368421052631579,38.0,100.0
+14296,latent_14296,988,0.001976,0.0010544595,2.9165895,"Detailed current study findings provided, regardless of prior image comparison.","Highly activated examples focus on the radiologist's role in providing concise descriptions of current imaging findings to compare them with prior ones—even when no previous study is available, outlining findings despite lack of comparison. This reflects a task-oriented pattern that emphasizes providing detailed observations regardless of prior images.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14297,latent_14297,3337,0.006674,0.0023650622,1.0317743,Comparison focusing on changes or stability in imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels contain detailed comparison between current and prior images focusing on specific changes or stability in findings. Descriptions often include unchanged positioning of lines or tubes, stability in existing conditions, or specific changes from the prior exam, suggesting the importance of assessing changes or stability in radiological findings between exams.",0.493103448275862,0.5102040816326531,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5365853658536586,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14298,latent_14298,5032,0.010064,0.003605041,1.3665698,Mention of interval change or stability when compared to prior imaging.,"Instances with higher activation values involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging which demonstrates interval changes or the stability of features such as cardiopulmonary silhouettes, effusions, or monitoring devices. This pattern often reflects continued monitoring or assessment of disease progression or resolution.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14299,latent_14299,2938,0.005876,0.0023077829,1.9972205,Detailed comparison of findings with prior or concurrent CT imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports that mention comparisons among multiple modalities or between current findings and previous or concurrent CT findings. There is a consistent emphasis on image comparison, including changes observed over time or comparison across imaging techniques. This pattern emphasizes detailed evaluation of changes observed over time or across image types.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.509090909090909,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14300,latent_14300,489,0.000978,0.00057514734,3.3750384,Heart size described as mildly enlarged or top-normal.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to specific heart size descriptions, indicating either mild enlargement or top-normal limits. This is a common pattern in radiology reports when describing impressions of cardiac size in relation to findings of lung conditions or other thoracic pathologies.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4601010803542449,0.5670731707317073,0.3703703703703703,0.15625,64.0,100.0
+14301,latent_14301,2200,0.0044,0.0018554132,3.2375517,Interval change in medical device placement or removal.,"Higher activations correlate with findings that indicate interval changes, such as the removal, replacement, or insertion of lines or tubes, in comparison with prior images or reports. These changes in the patient’s medical devices are the predominant elements noted in these examples.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5543293718166383,0.58,0.6538461538461539,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14302,latent_14302,1933,0.003866,0.002629883,3.2335634,Significant interval changes or interventions detected in imaging.,"The consistent factor in the examples with higher activation levels is the presence of specific changes or interventions identified through imaging, often with detailed comparison to prior images. This includes repositioning of lines or tubes, new findings such as airspace opacities or pleural effusion changes, or changes in conditions like congestion or edema that are noted as interval changes. These comparisons show the model's focus on changes or interventions as a significant pattern within the data.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.689875950380152,0.69,0.6979166666666666,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14303,latent_14303,3650,0.0073,0.0027481343,2.1606302,Assessment using comparison to prior images.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels consistently refer to scenarios where the cardiac, mediastinal, or lung conditions are compared to a prior examination, indicating interval changes or stability in findings like effusions or cardiomegaly. This pattern reflects the importance of comparison with previous studies to assess changes over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4654811992273293,0.495,0.4965986394557823,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14304,latent_14304,1946,0.003892,0.0015869408,1.9129903,Focus on interval changes and updates in condition or device status through comparative imaging.,"This pattern identifies descriptions that focus on interval changes, new findings, or updates in the state of the patient’s condition by continuously comparing the current imaging study with previous ones. The comparison elements highlight stability or changes in specific conditions or devices over time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14305,latent_14305,413,0.000826,0.0006738738,3.3982656,Evaluation and comparison of current and prior imaging studies for interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention analyzing the current images in direct comparison with previous studies. This mirrors the pattern where the focus is on explicit comparisons to past images, either to track changes or affirm stability in pathological findings. The technique and imagery requirements like 'current frontal' and 'prior frontal' often emphasize cases evaluated for changes over time, a common diagnostic practice.",0.2835622507753655,0.3265306122448979,0.3783783783783784,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.3752280108555412,0.3841059602649007,0.3220338983050847,0.7450980392156863,51.0,100.0
+14306,latent_14306,1513,0.003026,0.001383236,2.8331587,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The samples with higher activation levels consistently focus on evaluating changes or the stability of findings in comparison to prior imaging. These outputs often discuss parameters such as changes in the size of effusions, consistency of previously noted conditions, or stability/improvement of abnormalities in relation to prior images. This suggests that the pattern is associated with reporting changes compared to prior imaging rather than focusing on new findings or initial diagnostics.",0.493103448275862,0.5102040816326531,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4949873746843671,0.495,0.495049504950495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14307,latent_14307,625,0.00125,0.0008413509,2.497382,Sarcoidosis evaluation or findings in imaging.,"The examples with highest activation often include indications or findings related to sarcoidosis, suggesting that this is a key clinical condition being monitored in the radiology study comparisons. Sarcoidosis often involves lung nodules and interstitial changes, which are tracked over multiple imaging studies for stability or progression.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.424293053757153,0.5698324022346368,0.6,0.0759493670886076,79.0,100.0
+14308,latent_14308,3728,0.007456,0.0027746137,1.3544973,Detailed assessments of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples focus on providing detailed descriptions of radiological changes, improvements, or lack thereof, when contrasted with prior imaging studies. These examples highlight interval changes, stability, or improvements in specific pathologies and devices in relation to previous imaging.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.53125,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14309,latent_14309,3287,0.006574,0.002468008,1.9124193,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging with noted changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently make specific reference to past imaging reports and note interval findings or improvements, indicating a pattern where previous imaging is explicitly used to evaluate current status.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4945054945054945,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14310,latent_14310,418,0.000836,0.0007248371,2.710917,Identification of 'new' findings or changes in imaging.,"Most examples with higher activation scores mention 'new' findings in relation to a radiological change, particularly in regards to new or modified diagnostic features like opacities, device placements, or effusions. The focus is on identifying and emphasizing novel aspects in medical imaging compared to prior evaluations, marked grammatically by 'new' or indicating a change since the last observation.",0.746031746031746,0.75,0.7894736842105263,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.6911764705882353,0.7254901960784313,0.6122448979591837,0.5660377358490566,53.0,100.0
+14311,latent_14311,1237,0.002474,0.0012051939,3.142303,Explicit comparisons to prior imaging and resolution or change in medical conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels include specific references to historical medical information, such as changes over time or resolution of a condition that are being explicitly compared to prior studies. This pattern includes explicit dates, specific medical conditions, and changes between the current and previous states. These reports also frequently involve more detailed clinical contexts, such as progression or resolution of conditions in relation to prior medical history.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14312,latent_14312,1437,0.002874,0.0017086479,4.10884,Identification of surgical artifacts or findings on chest imaging.,"These examples typically highlight findings related to surgical history, such as sutures, wires, and other surgical artifacts noted on imaging. This includes mentions of specific terms like 'chain sutures', 'surgical clips', 'anchors', and 'prosthesis', indicating prior surgical interventions or procedures as seen on imaging.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.6388888888888888,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7260551948051948,0.73,0.6854838709677419,0.85,100.0,100.0
+14313,latent_14313,1452,0.002904,0.0012450718,2.1501982,Stable heart and mediastinal silhouette despite atelectasis or compression.,"These are cases where lungs show signs of atelectasis or compression issues while maintaining relatively stable heart and mediastinal silhouettes. This pattern reflects consistent findings related to lung capacity or compression, often in chronic or non-acute contexts.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.484375,0.31,100.0,100.0
+14314,latent_14314,4495,0.00899,0.0031898369,1.1827538,Changes in lung pathology or device placement compared to prior study.,"The examples with significant activation levels consistently include references to lung abnormality findings such as pneumonia, effusion, consolidation, atelectasis, or presence of invasive devices (NG tubes, chest tubes) obscuring visibility along with comparison to prior studies. These elements frequently appear in narratives discussing changes in radiological assessments over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.5405405405405406,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14315,latent_14315,6210,0.01242,0.004424861,1.3671842,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting changes or stability in pleural effusion or opacities.","Examples with higher activation consistently involve changes or stability assessments based on comparisons to prior imaging, particularly focusing on effusions, opacity changes, or catheter positions. These reports use explicit language to describe findings as compared to prior images, often noting increased, unchanged, or improved conditions based on past imaging.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5223186925434117,0.5276381909547738,0.5384615384615384,0.42,100.0,99.0
+14316,latent_14316,1114,0.002228,0.0011286052,2.8057423,"Comparison of current radiographic findings with prior images, noting changes or stability.","The pattern found in the examples with high activation levels involves assessing current imaging findings in direct comparison with previous studies, specifically identifying changes, stability, or progression of disease. This often includes descriptions of changes in cardiac silhouette size or lung volume and the placement of medical devices, indicating attention to changes over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14317,latent_14317,404,0.000808,0.00075109204,2.6567228,Comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies for indications like pneumonia.,"Examples that have high activations focus on the interpretation of current images in comparison to prior images. They often include indications like cough, fever, and assessment for pneumonia, but crucially, they emphasize the comparison with previous imaging to note changes over time.",0.4039855072463768,0.4042553191489361,0.375,0.4090909090909091,22.0,25.0,0.4769162011173184,0.4934210526315789,0.3287671232876712,0.4615384615384615,52.0,100.0
+14318,latent_14318,2850,0.0057,0.002178087,1.8466964,Detection of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference the detection of clinical findings that are stable or unchanged compared to prior studies. This stability in radiological abnormalities or positioning of medical support devices is frequently highlighted, indicating their importance in the medical evaluation process.",0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14319,latent_14319,432,0.000864,0.0007188151,3.1238036,"Request for findings in comparison to prior, focusing on cardiac silhouette and normal findings.","Examples with high activation levels specifically request findings in comparison to prior frontal images and give detailed descriptions about normal findings, stability, and absence of acute issues like consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, often focusing on the cardiac silhouette and other normal assessments.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5702247191011236,0.5816993464052288,0.4266666666666667,0.6037735849056604,53.0,100.0
+14320,latent_14320,4140,0.00828,0.003090144,1.6237549,"Comparisons to prior images, noting changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels include specific analyses that involve comparisons with prior images, suggesting changes or stability over time. This pattern is found in follow-up imaging assessments where radiologists compare current findings with previous studies to evaluate progress or stability.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.5597014925373134,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14321,latent_14321,377,0.000754,0.00054599304,3.3923433,Use of comparison to prior images with specific findings changes.,"In these examples, the activation pattern correlates with explicit language describing findings as compared to prior radiographic images, typically characterized by specific imaging comparisons indicating changes or stability in pathology, particularly highlighting the evolution or resolution of certain findings since the last examination.",0.4888888888888889,0.4888888888888889,0.44,0.55,20.0,25.0,0.5242682982512215,0.543046357615894,0.3714285714285714,0.5098039215686274,51.0,100.0
+14322,latent_14322,3877,0.007754,0.0041315244,3.1945944,Reports with references to pneumonia or suggestive opacities.,"Entries with higher activation levels consistently discuss findings of pneumonia or potential pneumonia, emphasizing significant changes in lung consolidation or opacities typically associated with this condition. Additionally, there are requests for follow-up imaging or clinical correlation to confirm pneumonia resolution, reflecting a focus on cases involving pneumonia evaluation or progression.",0.7916666666666667,0.8,0.7142857142857143,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.8087761674718197,0.81,0.7672413793103449,0.89,100.0,100.0
+14323,latent_14323,2512,0.005024,0.001966106,2.0406919,Descriptive assessment of radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations detail descriptions of findings in current radiology studies that are explicitly assessed through comparison with prior images. These reports often illustrate interval changes or the stability of findings, highlighting a systematic approach to interpret changes over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3848105279847788,0.592964824120603,0.5683453237410072,0.797979797979798,99.0,100.0
+14324,latent_14324,685,0.00137,0.0009967674,5.520939,Stable cardiomediastinal contours and unremarkable heart/lung findings with comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation primarily show reference to stable cardiomediastinal contours, unremarkable heart/lung findings, and sometimes minor findings like opacities or enlargements being compared to prior images. These reports predominantly emphasize stability or lack of change from previous assessments.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5455907021327582,0.5567567567567567,0.5211267605633803,0.4352941176470588,85.0,100.0
+14325,latent_14325,1185,0.00237,0.0011213085,2.661785,Focus on fiducial markers and changes in equipment placement between images.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve phrases that describe the comparison between current and prior images, specifically noting changes in position or presence of fiducial markers or demonstrable change in medical equipment placement. The pattern signifies how such markers or positional changes are frequently emphasized in radiological assessments to track or confirm medical interventions.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5132204889921451,0.56,0.6578947368421053,0.25,100.0,100.0
+14326,latent_14326,1670,0.00334,0.0015125907,2.6042635,Emphasis on instructions for image comparison descriptions.,"Examples with higher activation primarily emphasize instructions to provide descriptions or comparisons of findings with prior images using placeholder text, which shows a focus on assessment or change over time based on previous records rather than the findings themselves. This reflects a pattern of structured reporting where the act of comparison is focal rather than specific abnormalities.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4582815762349023,0.4824120603015075,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,99.0
+14327,latent_14327,3208,0.006416,0.0024195337,2.1964226,Significant absence or missing details in image data or comparison context.,"Samples with high activation levels often include situations where the current or prior image explicitly lacks certain usual data or information, emphasizing a significant absence in the imaging process. It highlights missing comparative historical context or important descriptions that should normally precede or accompany the imaging examination report.",0.3243243243243243,0.48,0.4897959183673469,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3427579365079365,0.47,0.4840425531914893,0.91,100.0,100.0
+14328,latent_14328,370,0.00074,0.0007582616,5.794487,Post-intervention changes identified in imaging comparisons.,"The highly activated examples indicate changes or findings on the current image that are associated with a medical intervention or procedure, like drainage tubes, thoracentesis, or surgery. The pattern involves a comparison of current findings to understand the effectiveness or status post-procedural changes.",0.4629905613512171,0.5106382978723404,0.4545454545454545,0.2272727272727272,22.0,25.0,0.4911616161616161,0.5664335664335665,0.2888888888888888,0.3023255813953488,43.0,100.0
+14329,latent_14329,387,0.000774,0.0007125345,2.9859338,Comparison with prior imaging showing no acute changes or stability.,"Examples that focus on comparing current imaging with prior studies and emphasize changes or stability without acute or new findings, suggesting ongoing monitoring or stability rather than direct diagnosis, are highly activated. Reports that explicitly contrast findings with prior imaging or emphasize unchanged status align with this pattern.",0.50682261208577,0.5217391304347826,0.4705882352941176,0.3809523809523809,21.0,25.0,0.514762516046213,0.58,0.3636363636363636,0.3137254901960784,51.0,99.0
+14330,latent_14330,4614,0.009228,0.00323192,1.4597383,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with activation levels greater than 0 generally feature descriptions of interval changes or stable findings from prior imaging, suggesting the model is detecting reports that make comparisons between the current and previous imaging studies as a feature to focus on, even when lacking explicit date references.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5038291446445906,0.54,0.525974025974026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+14331,latent_14331,1385,0.00277,0.0012130762,3.177295,Explicit comparisons with prior images and findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe explicit findings in the present context compared to a prior study or image, highlighting changes or stability. This comparative aspect is explicitly requested in the task descriptions, making it distinctively relevant and necessary for the provided findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14332,latent_14332,2573,0.005146,0.0019906033,2.0328653,Reports highlight interval changes in comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with increased activation often involve descriptions where some change or interval alteration is noted in the findings when compared to a previous imaging study. The focus is on whether findings are stable, improved, or worsened, with specific attention to any notable differences from prior imaging included in the assistant's response.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4971700020214271,0.4974874371859296,0.4952380952380952,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+14333,latent_14333,1345,0.00269,0.0013066373,2.744723,Current and lateral images compared with prior frontal images showing stable or unchanged chest structures.,"The most representative examples describe current and lateral images in comparison to prior frontal images, providing findings without significant sxmall amounts of consolidation or effusion and often highlight the lungs, cardiac silhouette, and mediastinal contours as either stable or normal. The descriptions focus on the current state of these structures with little change from previous examinations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5784126984126984,0.585,0.6133333333333333,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14334,latent_14334,4289,0.008578,0.0030962122,2.0129907,Comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the comparison of findings in the current images to prior images, often noting changes or stability in structural or pathological elements. This reflects a common practice in radiological evaluations where comparing current findings with prior imaging is crucial for assessing progress or stability.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.535031847133758,0.84,100.0,100.0
+14335,latent_14335,4472,0.008944,0.0032519405,1.5764412,Emphasis on findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples focus on descriptions where images are compared to prior studies, highlighting differences or similarities. Many examples have phrases like ""as compared to previous radiograph"" and detail any interval changes or stable findings between current and prior imaging. The presence of ""comparison"" is a key factor, as these reports often lack explicit dates but emphasize the assessment of change over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14336,latent_14336,1331,0.002662,0.0010255938,1.573078,Attention to interval changes in radiology comparisons.,"Highly activated examples emphasize changes in findings when images were compared with prior studies or other images. This focus is evident when describing interval changes such as increased pulmonary nodules or atelectasis and small effusions, suggesting importance on identifying any developments.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4848484848484848,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14337,latent_14337,1488,0.002976,0.0010504124,1.0865747,Explicit description of changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe the findings of current images in explicit comparison to prior images, indicating the model assigns higher activation when there is an analysis of change or stability in medical conditions over time across imaging examinations.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5889724310776943,0.59,0.5818181818181818,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14338,latent_14338,1047,0.002094,0.0008742493,1.5253197,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently include descriptions referencing the intentional comparison between current and previous imaging for evaluating identity or changes in radiological findings, even if the finding is unchanged or no new abnormalities were found.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14339,latent_14339,2635,0.00527,0.0018958813,1.1246285,Significant changes or interval changes observable in radiological comparisons.,"The examples that show higher activation levels describe radiological findings in explicit comparison to prior images and focus on significant changes such as progression of disease, interval decrease in effusion, and positioning of new devices. This emphasis on comparisons suggests that assessing significant changes from previous images is a key trigger for high activation.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6112531969309463,0.62,0.6714285714285714,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14340,latent_14340,806,0.001612,0.0008048909,1.7312918,Descriptions of medical device placement in the chest.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the description of medical devices or interventions related to the chest region, such as catheters, tubes, and cardiac devices, especially in relation to their placement. This pattern consistently uses ""placement"", ""position"", or similar terms concerning medical devices, indicating an importance of precise localization and changes in their positioning in follow-up radiographs.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5799401886358408,0.5808080808080808,0.5824175824175825,0.5408163265306123,98.0,100.0
+14341,latent_14341,1927,0.003854,0.0014676077,1.8143905,"Evaluation of medical device placement or change, often compared to prior imaging.","These examples reflect a pattern of evaluating the placement or change of medical devices within the chest, such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, or catheters, often depicted through a comparison with previous imaging studies.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5975609756097561,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14342,latent_14342,1612,0.003224,0.001234601,1.4813175,Comparative diagnostic analysis between current and prior images.,"The high activation examples frequently include explicit diagnostic comparisons between the current and prior imaging findings, showcasing both similarities and differences. These examples utilize comparative language to discuss changes or stability in imaging findings over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4010088272383354,0.43,0.4513888888888889,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14343,latent_14343,1035,0.00207,0.0009013166,1.5866089,High activation when interpretation includes prior comparison and lateral views.,"Examples with high activation levels feature interpretation based on images including lateral and frontal views and/or prior comparisons. Reports provide a comparison analysis, connecting current imaging with prior or lateral views offering depth in the interpretation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14344,latent_14344,3164,0.006328,0.0022930994,1.6451138,Tracking interval changes in specific pathologies between imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe observed changes or the consistency of findings over time in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern highlights the emphasis on tracking specific findings such as atelectasis, pulmonary effusion, or opacification between examinations, often suggesting stability, improvement, or concern for conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4774394533212742,0.48,0.4824561403508772,0.55,100.0,100.0
+14345,latent_14345,2096,0.004192,0.0015118673,1.3877243,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to previous imaging.,"The pattern involves descriptions of current radiology findings followed by comparisons to prior imaging reports. Specifically, examples with higher activations focus on intervals without significant change or stable findings, suggesting consistency or lack of progression of previous conditions. This is typical for assessing stability or improvement in medical imaging contexts.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5476190476190477,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14346,latent_14346,492,0.000984,0.00059863465,2.8168032,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples show reports with substantial comparison to prior imaging, detailing interval changes in condition or stability over time, such as lung expansion, pleural effusions, consolidation, and post-operative changes. They often include quantitative comparisons, levels of increase, or unchanged specifics.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6184636348151933,0.65,0.5370370370370371,0.4833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+14347,latent_14347,233,0.000466,0.00040570364,2.831308,Non-reactive examples using images show no pattern activation.,"Upon reviewing contrasted examples with image inputs, no notable pattern occurs showing consistent activation with image data. Most examples provided show complete inactivation, hinting that mere reference to images, past reports, or conditions without further correlation to the textual element of evaluative descriptions or comparative expression fails to activate the model's pattern recognition.",0.4317048853439681,0.6052631578947368,0.25,0.0769230769230769,13.0,25.0,0.545653123634775,0.7538461538461538,0.4545454545454545,0.1612903225806451,31.0,99.0
+14348,latent_14348,2423,0.004846,0.0017645154,1.3576051,Comparison of current and prior images to assess changes or stability in condition.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current images with previous studies to identify stability or changes in a patient's condition, particularly focusing on lung and heart assessments. This is a common practice in medical imaging reports where changes or stability over time are significant indicators of patient status.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14349,latent_14349,435,0.00087,0.00053357915,2.3068085,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging reports.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on providing a description of the findings in the current radiology study in direct comparison to the previous imaging, with emphases on identifying changes, similarities, or clarifications from the past report, especially when the comparison is detailed regarding prior conditions.",0.3098039215686274,0.3125,0.2727272727272727,0.2608695652173913,23.0,25.0,0.4699440052700922,0.4777070063694267,0.345679012345679,0.4912280701754385,57.0,100.0
+14350,latent_14350,633,0.001266,0.0005859785,2.3363922,Radiological comparison with prior images assessing changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include assessments of radiographic changes compared to previous images, highlighting differences or similarities in clinical findings over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3455882352941176,0.3595505617977528,0.3571428571428571,0.5769230769230769,78.0,100.0
+14351,latent_14351,845,0.00169,0.00079308776,1.8821656,Persistent or stable findings over multiple imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activations often emphasize persistent or stable findings observed over multiple imaging comparisons, along with descriptions using terms like 'unchanged', 'again noted', or 'sustained'. This indicates the model likely activates more with recurring radiological patterns across comparative studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5047619047619047,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14352,latent_14352,1733,0.003466,0.0013237003,2.4594226,Focus on changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with activations describe a noticeable change or stability assessed through comparison with prior imaging studies, specifically focused on features like cardiomegaly, changes in pulmonary status, or the stability of known lesions or devices.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14353,latent_14353,1805,0.00361,0.0013060345,1.5413015,Detection of stable or changed features in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiographic findings that are compared to previous imaging, with a focus on describing the stability or change of specific features or pathologies over time. This suggests the pattern involves detecting and analyzing interval changes in imaging findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4812739910779127,0.5,0.5,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14354,latent_14354,690,0.00138,0.0006705855,1.5059438,"Atelectasis, opacities, or unchanged support devices compared to prior studies.","Common findings are references to atelectasis, pleural effusion, pulmonary opacities, or pneumothorax in the presence of comparison to prior studies. The lung volumes and cardiomediastinal features are relatively stable, and there are mentions of support devices or their positions being unchanged compared to prior studies.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.7,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.558911662471533,0.5652173913043478,0.5163934426229508,0.75,84.0,100.0
+14355,latent_14355,707,0.001414,0.0006711978,1.8521849,Use of both frontal and lateral imaging perspectives with prior comparison.,"The examples with higher activations detail findings based on frontal and lateral imaging perspectives in conjunction with prior imaging. These examples often specify using lateral imaging to validate or provide clarity on findings noted in the frontal view or vice versa, and they emphasize comparison with previous studies.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4792399718508093,0.4810810810810811,0.4382022471910112,0.4588235294117647,85.0,100.0
+14356,latent_14356,1618,0.003236,0.0011664529,1.1149224,Comparison with prior imaging with an emphasis on interval change or stability.,"The pattern seen here is the comparison with prior imaging reports, especially focusing on the changes or lack of change noted in the findings. Each example which activated focused on changes over time or stability in conditions, which is often a primary concern in radiology reports where monitoring of treatment progress or disease development is required.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6181288312732389,0.62,0.6052631578947368,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14357,latent_14357,2394,0.004788,0.0017011744,1.1895623,Provision of findings comparison with prior images showing minimal interval change.,"The pattern identified is detailed comparison between the current imaging findings and prior images, with focus on minimal or no significant interval change, which indicates a stable condition or similar findings over time. The pattern involves consistent, direct comparison to prior examinations to establish continuity or stability in the findings.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.4864864864864865,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14358,latent_14358,1060,0.00212,0.00086515327,1.7747844,Explicit descriptions of changes compared to prior radiographic findings.,"The pattern that appears in highly activated examples is the explicit comparison between current radiological findings and prior studies, focusing on changes or stability of findings such as opacities, consolidation, and lung volumes. The explicitness of the comparison and the details about changes are key factors in higher activation levels.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14359,latent_14359,1710,0.00342,0.001335692,2.1681004,Stable findings compared to prior images.,Examples with high activation levels consistently describe chest radiographs with stable findings when compared to prior examinations. This stability or lack of change is emphasized and is central to the comparative analysis within radiology reports.,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14360,latent_14360,446,0.000892,0.0005696348,3.429042,Evaluating findings in current imaging compared to prior for suspicious changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve a description of the current status in comparison to prior imaging, particularly focusing on suspicious findings like effusions, pneumothoraces, or masses, and often asking for evaluations for change. Explicit requests are often for evaluating new developments or changes, which is commonly seen in follow-up imaging observations for specific suspicious pathologies.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3818100558659217,0.4013157894736842,0.2328767123287671,0.3269230769230769,52.0,100.0
+14361,latent_14361,312,0.000624,0.00049432146,2.6232147,Detailed comparison and monitoring of current imaging against prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the requirement for comparison between current and prior imaging findings, using prompts that explicitly mention the procedure and technique details. The prompts often involve reviewing images in a sequence or comparing intervals of time, which aligns with monitoring progress or changes in medical conditions.",0.3707317073170731,0.3720930232558139,0.3333333333333333,0.5,18.0,25.0,0.3735219594594594,0.3768115942028985,0.2333333333333333,0.5526315789473685,38.0,100.0
+14362,latent_14362,1374,0.002748,0.0010608436,1.6872314,Comparison involving both current frontal and lateral images with prior images.,The samples that have a higher activation level consistently include both frontal and lateral images from the current examination along with a prior examination for comparison. This suggests a pattern where detailed comparison using multiple current perspectives is highlighted.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4603068541029529,0.475,0.4626865671641791,0.31,100.0,100.0
+14363,latent_14363,3523,0.007046,0.0024725585,1.2331687,Complexity and subtle findings require multi-view or prior image comparison.,The examples consistently include detailed and complex multi-image descriptions requiring comparison to previous images or between different current views. The activation pattern indicates identification of more subtle findings potentially requiring multi-view or multi-temporal assessment in radiology.,0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4050509956289461,0.51,0.5054347826086957,0.93,100.0,100.0
+14364,latent_14364,2603,0.005206,0.0018802932,1.4481852,Interval changes in pathologies compared to prior image findings.,"The examples with higher activation describe instances where the findings from current images are explicitly compared to prior or recent images, particularly noting changes such as improvement, stability, or increase in pathologic findings such as effusions, atelectasis, or pulmonary edema. This suggests a pattern where interval changes in pathologies compared to prior images are highlighted in the text.",0.7159090909090908,0.72,0.7894736842105263,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14365,latent_14365,580,0.00116,0.0006411564,2.432124,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels all focus on comparing the findings of a current image with a prior image to assess changes. This involves analyzing intervals, stability, or changes in conditions such as catheter placement or pulmonary findings between the current and previous examinations.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6066078116639915,0.6069364161849711,0.5263157894736842,0.684931506849315,73.0,100.0
+14366,latent_14366,387,0.000774,0.0005508502,2.4008477,"Assessment or adjustment of medical device placement in images, compared against prior imaging.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed evaluation of medical devices (e.g., catheters, pacemakers) within the body often compared to prior imaging, with specific positions mentioned for these devices. Details about device placement or adjustment, such as PICC lines and Swan-Ganz catheter tips, are given.",0.4521091811414392,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.1739130434782608,23.0,25.0,0.4515278945892907,0.541095890410959,0.25,0.2127659574468085,47.0,99.0
+14367,latent_14367,537,0.001074,0.00060243066,3.478604,Worsening or newly developed findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation show changes or worsening findings compared to prior radiographs, indicating updates in a patient's condition, while non-activated examples tend to have findings described as unchanged or normal, where the report makes little or no reference to changes in previous images.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.875,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4903503116269073,0.5748502994011976,0.4375,0.208955223880597,67.0,100.0
+14368,latent_14368,892,0.001784,0.0008067346,1.8742409,Emphasis on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"In highly activated examples, there are noticeable interval changes such as alterations in opacities or catheter positions between current and prior frontal images. These examples emphasize specific changes over time, either indicating improvement or progression, which are crucial for clinical decisions.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4666767799352751,0.4673366834170854,0.4623655913978494,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+14369,latent_14369,365,0.00073,0.0004707721,2.602909,Unchanged or stable radiographic findings compared to prior images.,"Patterns with high activation consistently reference changes or stability over time by comparing the current image to prior studies, emphasizing unchanged findings or interval progression.",0.509090909090909,0.5333333333333333,0.4666666666666667,0.35,20.0,25.0,0.4617152017098583,0.5273972602739726,0.2653061224489796,0.2826086956521739,46.0,100.0
+14370,latent_14370,672,0.001344,0.000691078,2.3559816,Higher activations with prior image study comparison.,"The model exhibits higher activation levels when the prompt includes a comparison between current and prior imaging studies. This highlights an emphasis on assessing changes or stability in radiological findings over time, which is a common practice in interpreting radiographs to evaluate patient progress or response to treatment.",0.2869875222816399,0.36,0.4146341463414634,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4135995009357455,0.4414893617021276,0.4397163120567376,0.7045454545454546,88.0,100.0
+14371,latent_14371,446,0.000892,0.00056322955,2.9539535,Detailed comparisons with prior studies emphasizing stability or changes.,"Examples with high activations focus on detailed comparisons to prior configurations of conditions, particularly ones that mention stable or unchanged appearances, the presence of medical devices, and interval changes, which might infer detailed analysis and monitoring of evolving clinical conditions.",0.4638047138047138,0.4693877551020408,0.4666666666666667,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4726473526473526,0.4779874213836478,0.3571428571428571,0.5084745762711864,59.0,100.0
+14372,latent_14372,494,0.000988,0.0005335796,1.961401,"Comparison to prior imaging, even when prior marked N/A.","Examples with high activation levels consistently request a description of current radiographic findings in comparison to a prior study, emphasizing analysis of interval changes or stability of specific findings, even if 'comparison' is marked 'N/A', which may indicate real or hypothesized prior study as context. This pattern reflects the radiological process of evaluating progressive disease or stability over time using past imaging as a reference point.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3936698717948718,0.4161490683229814,0.3740458015267175,0.8032786885245902,61.0,100.0
+14373,latent_14373,462,0.000924,0.00057980866,2.746176,Reports emphasize absence of acute pathologies in chest imaging.,"The examples highly activated in this pattern predominantly describe the absence of acute changes or pathologies in the context of chest imaging, with reports of 'normal', 'clear', or 'no acute cardiopulmonary process' appearing repeatedly in these highest activation examples. The consistent element is the lack of acute findings despite detailed examination.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5273619530702297,0.535031847133758,0.4,0.5614035087719298,57.0,100.0
+14374,latent_14374,319,0.000638,0.00040117488,2.4675028,Comparison of imaging findings to prior observations or studies.,"High activation examples consistently included a clearly defined comparison or change from previous imaging findings, often accompanied by observations or instructions within the context of a clinical assessment. This denotes a pattern focused on the interpretation and evolution of imaging observations across different time frames in relation to prior studies, particularly emphasizing communication of consistent radiological findings or updates within a stable or changing disease context.",0.4649321266968326,0.4883720930232558,0.4411764705882353,0.8333333333333334,18.0,25.0,0.4046826169373431,0.4071428571428571,0.3027522935779816,0.825,40.0,100.0
+14375,latent_14375,1622,0.003244,0.0012767467,2.2365606,Descriptions of findings with limited reliance on prior reports.,"This dataset highlights instances where detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons are given without any significant use of a prior report for context. Examples with low activation levels tend to rely on context given by previous reports, while the high activation level example focuses on providing required descriptions with only a current and prior image for reference, suggesting limited verbal context or comparison is a more recognizable pattern.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5200636288998358,0.5276381909547738,0.5333333333333333,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+14376,latent_14376,2676,0.005352,0.0018855623,1.051119,Focuses on changes or equivalence in medical interventions or anatomical features between current and prior images.,"The key insight from the activation levels is the importance of providing comparative analysis between current and prior chest images. The comparison element often focuses on changes in medical interventions such as tube placements or anatomical changes that bear clinical significance, especially when devices are mentioned specifically in the comparisons. Examples with high activation (e.g., Examples 8, 20, 48) are those where detailed evaluation, shift, or stability of lines, tubes, or pathologies is emphasized clearly in the context of before-after imaging, suggesting key diagnostic information encoded in differences between the studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14377,latent_14377,691,0.001382,0.00066092727,2.1441908,Relatively low lung volumes in the imaging report.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently identify relatively low lung volumes within the radiology findings. This is described with phrases like 'relatively low lung volumes', 'low lung volumes resulting in accentuation', etc. which indicate a reduction in lung volume visible through imaging.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5772727272727273,0.6129032258064516,0.6521739130434783,0.3488372093023256,86.0,100.0
+14378,latent_14378,2361,0.004722,0.0017036158,1.3216277,Inferring and describing changes by comparing current images to prior ones is central.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve the evaluation of radiological findings compared specifically to prior studies despite lacking explicit comparison as part of the prompt. These examples demonstrate the ability to infer changes or lack thereof within context, suggesting a nuanced understanding of the historical comparison as an implied task, even when not clearly stated.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14379,latent_14379,992,0.001984,0.0008350009,1.7557217,Detailed observations and modifications of medical devices or anatomical features.,"In the highly activated examples, there are consistent mentions of detailed observations or interventions concerning medical devices or anatomical features, particularly focusing on their positioning, changes, or stability across comparative studies. These examples include specific technical terms and detailed observational notes, often linked with direct instruction for modifying or evaluating medical equipment or conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14380,latent_14380,1783,0.003566,0.0013723059,1.3965793,Evaluation of radiological changes compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves analyzing findings based on comparisons with prior imaging studies, especially assessing discrepancies or consistencies in medical conditions like cardiac enlargement, vascular abnormalities, or pleural effusions. Often, physicians note alterations over time or persistent findings despite new symptoms indicating disease progress or stability.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.4469696969696969,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14381,latent_14381,665,0.00133,0.00072028174,1.729502,Emphasis on detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"The higher activated examples focus on providing detailed comparative analysis of changes between the current and prior radiographs, emphasizing any stability, interval changes, or identifying recurrence of findings. This attention to comparison reflects an important aspect of radiological evaluation, where noting similarities or differences between studies is critical for patient management and diagnosis improvement.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4990530303030303,0.5,0.4629629629629629,0.5952380952380952,84.0,100.0
+14382,latent_14382,1507,0.003014,0.0010910033,1.5532463,Detailed assessment of tube/catheter positions in chest images.,"High activation levels are observed in examples where specific descriptions of tube positions (e.g., endotracheal, enteric, PICC) in chest imaging are provided along with a focus on whether these are in adequate or recommended positions, often in conjunction with a change or comparison to prior images.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.53125,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14383,latent_14383,508,0.001016,0.0005767463,3.7777004,Comparison of current and prior images for acute lung or heart changes.,"This dataset captures medical imaging reports that involve both current and prior images for comparison but focus specifically on acute changes or stability in lung pathologies like pneumonia, heart contour, vascular changes, or masses. The given reports clearly distinguish current issues relative to prior imaging, highlighting improvements, deteriorations, or stability in findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4698795180722891,0.4698795180722891,0.39,0.5909090909090909,66.0,100.0
+14384,latent_14384,1080,0.00216,0.0009596025,2.2265534,Noting changes or stability relative to prior imaging.,"Most examples provided involve a comparison of current imaging with a reference to a prior imaging study, noting changes or stability in specific features, despite explicit mention of missing or absent prior images in some cases. This emphasizes the frequent practice in radiology of highlighting differences or stability over time.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14385,latent_14385,1777,0.003554,0.0013261354,1.6049283,Focus on medical device placement and changes.,"Highly activated examples often reference the evaluation of medical devices, particularly the assessment of correct placement and changes related to medical interventions such as pacemakers, defibrillators, or lines. These examples highlight such procedural or intervention-related aspects.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4945054945054945,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14386,latent_14386,2225,0.00445,0.0016877116,1.3151559,Emphasis on comparison with prior images revealing unchanged findings or lack of progression in context.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently reference comparisons with a prior study and describe changes or lack of changes in findings between the current and prior images. These reports often highlight stability or changes in specific clinical findings, indicating the significance of interpretation in the context of temporal comparison. Phrases highlighting unchanged findings or lack of progression emphasize monitoring entail in the reports.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14387,latent_14387,3165,0.00633,0.0022207643,1.2809427,Descriptions of positional changes of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,These examples highlight positional changes of medical devices such as tubes or medical artifacts upon comparison with prior imaging studies. This pattern reflects how radiological evaluations often focus on minor developments that are not diseases but provide insight into patient treatment progress and device adjustments.,0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4285714285714285,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4424262904452141,0.505,0.5151515151515151,0.17,100.0,100.0
+14388,latent_14388,4093,0.008186,0.0028710172,1.1870685,Focus on unchanged abnormal lung or cardiac appearances.,"Examples with higher activations focus on descriptions and comparisons related to abnormal lung or cardiac appearances despite being stable or unchanged between consecutive studies. This includes repeated accounts of abnormal configurations like lung opacities and cardiomegaly, emphasis on interstitial patterns, or specific placements of tubes or devices derived directly from prior reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5638297872340425,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14389,latent_14389,2426,0.004852,0.0017781315,2.4576979,Stability of major internal lines or devices in chest radiograph comparisons.,"Examples with lower activations lack any reference to findings related to major internal lines or devices, while examples with higher activations consistently mention stable or removed significant internal devices such as PACs, PICC lines, or other access ports, usually in the context of evaluating placement or change over time.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.3125,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5238095238095238,0.33,100.0,100.0
+14390,latent_14390,2796,0.005592,0.0019503097,0.9148743,Detailed analysis comparing current and prior images of the chest.,"The highly activated examples involve reports where there is a clear comparison with prior imaging, noting either stability, interval changes, or adjustments in medical devices with specific interpretation instructions for comparing the current image with past findings. This comparison framework is indicative of monitoring progress or stability of findings over time.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.513307205614898,0.525,0.5190839694656488,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14391,latent_14391,1119,0.002238,0.0009031705,1.9986612,Significant interval changes or comparisons in radiological findings.,"Highly activated examples frequently mention changes in imaging findings, often indicating either new developments or significant comparisons to previous images, such as removal or presence of tubes, changes in pleural effusion, or resolution/worsening of pathologies. These variations are key observations that prompt further clinical consideration.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6338925248877856,0.635,0.6216216216216216,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14392,latent_14392,1442,0.002884,0.001136215,2.0166407,Descriptions focus on cardiac silhouette or thoracic hardware.,"The presence of detailed comparisons or evaluations of the cardiomediastinal silhouettes often yield high activations. This is paired with analyses regarding hardware placements or intervals, such as pacemakers or chest tubes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.472846368642188,0.495,0.4964539007092198,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14393,latent_14393,2614,0.005228,0.0018256861,1.0296196,Comparison focuses on interval changes related to medical interventions or devices.,"The pattern in these examples is the emphasis on description of findings using previous studies as a reference point, indicative of interval changes which often includes assessments about devices or interventions, such as PICC lines, tubes, or other medical devices. These examples highlight consistent interest in positioning or changes related to medical interventions in context of imaging studies.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5725958516656191,0.575,0.5882352941176471,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14394,latent_14394,260,0.00052,0.0004163256,2.0157208,Requests for comparison and description between current and prior images with ellipses or bracketed text.,"Examples with an activation of 8 or above all involve giving detailed comparisons to frontal and lateral chest images, where certain cardiopulmonary and structural textual descriptions are replaced or partially occluded. This pattern suggests specific attention to areas where assistants are designed to modify or complete medical descriptions. The explicit 'Provide a description' phrasing without additional data suggests this specific prompt structure and comparison approach activates the model strongly.",0.5873015873015873,0.5897435897435898,0.4545454545454545,0.7142857142857143,14.0,25.0,0.3667756553662594,0.3759398496240601,0.2023809523809523,0.5151515151515151,33.0,100.0
+14395,latent_14395,1806,0.003612,0.0013269745,1.3480551,Evaluate tube or device placement in radiology studies.,"The pattern centers around radiological studies requested for evaluating changes, placement, or adjustments of various tubes or support devices, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or catheters, rather than diagnosing or assessing other conditions. They emphasize device positioning or alteration as the main focus of the findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6323436831104732,0.635,0.6626506024096386,0.55,100.0,100.0
+14396,latent_14396,2340,0.00468,0.0016797936,1.4093204,Comparison highlights changes or stability in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on cases where comparison to prior imaging reveals changes or stability in pathology. The pattern of interest seems to involve describing whether findings have changed or remained stable over time, using phrases like 'unchanged', 'increased', or specifying differences from earlier scans.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4867256637168141,0.55,100.0,100.0
+14397,latent_14397,1022,0.002044,0.0009087701,1.6147656,Changes in imaging findings across different studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels tend to describe specific radiological changes occurring between current and past images. This includes changes such as pleural effusion, opacity shifts, pacemaker positioning, and device placements. These differences are highlighted with explicit comparison to prior imaging.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5885714285714285,0.595,0.576,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14398,latent_14398,2501,0.005002,0.0018052688,1.2430389,Attention to interval changes in device position or pathology relative to prior imaging.,"Higher activations are associated with changes in medical devices or conditions between current and prior images, indicating a focus on assessing stability or progression. This includes phrasing like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'interval placement', or 'previously noted'. The comparison highlights attention to device position and pathological changes over time.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5505392716660322,0.5527638190954773,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,99.0
+14399,latent_14399,360,0.00072,0.00047924847,2.9151914,Changes in Swan-Ganz catheter placement and position.,"Highly activated examples consistently discuss Swan-Ganz catheters, their positions and modifications in placement over time. This reflects significance of noticing line placements and changes in intervening periods as highlighted in reports containing such catheter descriptions.",0.886977886977887,0.8913043478260869,1.0,0.7619047619047619,21.0,25.0,0.8769230769230769,0.9027777777777778,0.9411764705882352,0.7272727272727273,44.0,100.0
+14400,latent_14400,1633,0.003266,0.0011702587,1.7827253,Descriptions of interval changes or resolution of conditions in comparison to prior images.,"Examples that exhibit high activation levels include comparisons or changes observed over time, with conditions noted as 'unchanged', 'interval removal', or 'resolved', often indicating stability or positive progression of a medical condition seen in radiology images.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14401,latent_14401,2076,0.004152,0.0014939791,1.2237846,Stable or resolved findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings that remain unchanged or note improvements in comparison to the prior radiographs, showing resolution or stability of medical features. This pattern is not about identifying new pathologies but rather observing stability or improvement in a condition.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14402,latent_14402,662,0.001324,0.0006158151,1.8042781,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation discuss findings in the context of previous imaging, focusing on changes or stability over time. These often explicitly compare to 'prior' images, highlighting continuity or change, which aligns with the model's response pattern of interest.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4562647754137116,0.4565217391304347,0.4166666666666667,0.4761904761904761,84.0,100.0
+14403,latent_14403,1671,0.003342,0.0012565573,1.1833447,Descriptive reports on interval changes or positioning issues in imaging.,"Model activations are higher for cases involving specific radiological findings requiring detailed description or follow-up. These often include changes detectable across multiple images, such as interval changes in pulmonary findings or shifts in the position of medical devices. Additionally, when reports include potential serious pathology or require further assessment, models could activate higher.",0.517757809157039,0.5306122448979592,0.53125,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4914047401078222,0.5,0.5,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14404,latent_14404,2360,0.00472,0.0017263311,1.7199547,Analysis involving simultaneous comparison of multiple views/images.,"In the provided examples, activation levels are higher in instances that involve multiple views, particularly when both current and prior images are analyzed simultaneously. These examples consistently ask for comparisons between images, indicating that this model is likely activated by tasks involving comparisons or multiple overlapping data points.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.452574823943662,0.4974874371859296,0.4968152866242038,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+14405,latent_14405,458,0.000916,0.0005754647,3.0488815,Interval development or significant changes in current findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with activated levels show changes or developments related to ongoing issues like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or lesions in comparison to previous images. This indicates the model's pattern for detecting interval developments or significant changes.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5636856368563685,0.5962732919254659,0.4642857142857143,0.4262295081967213,61.0,100.0
+14406,latent_14406,2551,0.005102,0.0018123059,1.4117221,Pattern: Descriptions involve comparison of current images with prior to assess changes.,"The pattern evident here involves descriptive language comparing current imaging results with previous imaging studies, looking for changes or stability over time. This context of comparison is key to monitoring progressions of noted conditions or the impact of interventions.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14407,latent_14407,2520,0.00504,0.001794257,1.1396365,"Comparison with prior imaging focusing on tubes, pneumothorax, or pleural changes.","Examples show comparisons with prior imaging studies related to the status of findings such as tube placements, lung or pleural conditions, or trauma-related changes. These cases are likely marked with activation due to the focus on changes or stability in examined regions when evaluated against previous image results.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5172413793103449,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14408,latent_14408,2405,0.00481,0.0017409998,1.3352705,Comparison focused on line/tube placement or changes in complex cases.,The pattern explores comparisons of frontal radiographs with prior images focusing on intensive line and tube placements or changes in patients with complex medical histories.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5144051463042227,0.515,0.5161290322580645,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14409,latent_14409,345,0.00069,0.0004873971,3.2481902,Explicit comparison and direction of change in findings against prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently provide a direction or relationship of change in imaging findings compared to prior studies. Specifically, they include terminology indicating explicit changes in current images relative to prior ones, such as ""unchanged"", ""improvement"", or ""increased"".",0.3688311688311688,0.4,0.2666666666666666,0.2,20.0,25.0,0.4235042735042734,0.4647887323943662,0.2258064516129032,0.3333333333333333,42.0,100.0
+14410,latent_14410,1069,0.002138,0.0010129543,4.035935,Presence of stable or unchanged pathology or device positioning.,"High activation is observed when the description includes specific abnormalities, devices, or findings such as pneumonia or tube positioning despite lack of explicit comparison to prior imaging. The model likely associates these findings with the pattern of reporting unchanged or stable pathology over time, which often appears after comparison to a prior study.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.537396401859713,0.5376884422110553,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,99.0
+14411,latent_14411,1079,0.002158,0.00091535324,1.8974389,Complex or serious medical history context for evaluation.,"Most activated examples involve complex medical histories or multi-faceted indications for imaging such as malignancy, pleural effusions, pneumonia history, or evaluation post-surgery. The pattern involves evaluating radiological findings in context of intricate, often serious, medical backgrounds, rather than simple or routine presentations.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3838638949793233,0.445,0.4662576687116564,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14412,latent_14412,1048,0.002096,0.00087548513,1.8857417,Interval evaluation of findings against previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation involve descriptions of specific findings in images, often related to conditions like pneumonia or atelectasis, that are directly compared and evaluated against previous imaging, suggesting interval change or stability. The comparison highlights changes or stability, which is a key diagnostic practice in radiology.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14413,latent_14413,524,0.001048,0.0005900878,1.922054,"Details on lines, stents, or precise organ locational changes compared to previous exams.","The examples with high activation levels show distinct references to findings or devices like PICC lines, stents, or tubes with precise locations (e.g., 'brachiocephalic vein', 'SVC', 'lung volumes') often with changes noted compared to prior studies. These reports have detailed anatomical descriptions and highlight changes or stability in these features.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4557377049180328,0.4939759036144578,0.3392857142857143,0.2878787878787879,66.0,100.0
+14414,latent_14414,4584,0.009168,0.0032026845,1.3244413,Observation of position or status of medical devices across imaging studies.,"These examples consistently involve a comparison of current imaging findings with prior ones, explicitly noting changes (or stability) in medical devices such as catheters, chest tubes, PICCs, etc., highlighting the interest in tracking the repositioning or status of such devices over time.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6107080563209384,0.615,0.6455696202531646,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14415,latent_14415,661,0.001322,0.00062448654,1.9312838,Findings compared with prior radiographs indicating interval change or stability.,"The activated examples consistently involve changes or lack of changes over time visualized in chest imaging, often describing alterations with reference to prior reports. This explains the pattern's focus on monitoring stability or changes in clinical status through imaging comparison.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4583440878717485,0.4598930481283422,0.4363636363636363,0.5517241379310345,87.0,100.0
+14416,latent_14416,1094,0.002188,0.00089123356,1.9583303,Assessment changes vs prior imaging for clinical implications.,"Examples mainly focus on providing an assessment of radiological reports by analyzing a present study against a prior one. High activation is present where such comparisons explicitly lead to further conclusions like underlying etiologies or stability of conditions, such as unchanged fluid levels or nodular sizes despite given historical data or patient indicators.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.4509803921568627,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14417,latent_14417,621,0.001242,0.0009552381,2.1222067,Evaluation of pneumonia via comparison with prior chest imaging.,The common element in these prompts is that they all involve evaluating chest radiographs specifically for pneumonia and make comparisons to prior imaging. These cases often explicitly mention observing the lung condition and variations that may suggest pneumonia or related pathological conditions. This close examination of pneumonia-related changes in the lungs forms the pattern.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4863697705802969,0.4913294797687861,0.4096385542168674,0.4657534246575342,73.0,100.0
+14418,latent_14418,1173,0.002346,0.0009611467,1.613467,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging results.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention findings in the context of comparing current imaging to prior images. This trend aligns with radiological practice where current clinical status and radiographical findings are cross-referenced with prior imagery to assess for changes over time, particularly for monitoring conditions or responses to treatment.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4887218045112781,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14419,latent_14419,1907,0.003814,0.0013347236,1.2297294,Features of pneumo-/pleural pathologies or device positions.,"The report presents a synthesis from multiple imaging studies, indicating a right pneumothorax, and stable or minimal changes in other abnormalities such as effusions or atelectasis. Low activations often lack such significant findings. The pattern focuses on pneumo- or pleural pathologies with descriptors like 'pneumothorax,' 'pleural effusion,' 'opacification,' 'atelectasis,' or medical device positioning impacting the thoracic region.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14420,latent_14420,451,0.000902,0.0006316901,2.4463162,Comparison of medical device positions between current and prior images.,"These examples highlight radiology reports that involve descriptions of interval changes in relation to medical devices, such as nasogastric tubes, central lines, esophageal stents, etc. The reports focus on positions, adjustments, or stability of these devices as compared to prior images, demonstrating their relevance to activation rather than other radiological findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5695260477869174,0.643312101910828,0.5142857142857142,0.3157894736842105,57.0,100.0
+14421,latent_14421,892,0.001784,0.00082419696,1.9621445,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Reports consistently exhibit a pattern where the cardiomediastinal and hilar contours are described as 'within normal limits' or 'normal size', confirming no acute changes in these regions, amidst potentially other findings.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14422,latent_14422,513,0.001026,0.0005795858,1.879946,Descriptive imaging findings of medical device placement.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently address the correctness or specifics of tube or line placements, particularly via phrases emphasizing positions like 'terminates 3 cm above the carina' or 'projects to the stomach'. This linguistic pattern of providing detailed positional information for medical devices within the body likely triggers high activation.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5008912655971479,0.5238095238095238,0.40625,0.3823529411764705,68.0,100.0
+14423,latent_14423,1713,0.003426,0.0012893046,1.32708,Detailed findings from comparison between current and previous images.,"The highly representative examples consistently include detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic images, highlighting interval changes, ongoing stability, or removal/addition of medical devices. The consistent presence of language indicating side-by-side comparison of image findings is evident in these descriptions, guiding the interpretation process in a comparison context.",0.3506493506493506,0.36,0.3157894736842105,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4549863746593665,0.455,0.4545454545454545,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14424,latent_14424,770,0.00154,0.000682312,2.4747784,Emphasis on comparing multiple prior imaging studies for interval changes.,"Samples with non-zero activation levels mention the comparison with prior imaging multiple times, explicitly denoting either findings similar to prior radiographs or changes based on multiple prior exams. This repetition and explicit reference to comparison suggests detailed emphasis on interval changes against historical exams.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4795856982188162,0.4873096446700508,0.4736842105263157,0.3711340206185567,97.0,100.0
+14425,latent_14425,5033,0.010066,0.0034638026,1.2363719,Comparison and evaluation of findings over time.,"The highly activated examples describe evaluating changes or stability in findings by comparing one or more current images with previous ones, with a direct focus on the longitudinal aspect of patient imaging. They consistently involve references to change, such as ""no interval change,"" ""stable,"" or specific improvements or deteriorations, indicating a pattern of tracking progression or regression between imaging studies.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5320855614973261,0.58,0.5487804878048781,0.9,100.0,100.0
+14426,latent_14426,3347,0.006694,0.0023398953,1.042304,Evaluation or description of medical device placements in the chest.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels include specific language focusing on the presence or assessment of medical devices, tubes, or lines such as endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, or PICC lines, and their positions within the thoracic cavity. These descriptions are distinct from findings like consolidation or pneumonia, focusing on procedural evaluations as opposed to purely pathological findings.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5753424657534246,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14427,latent_14427,443,0.000886,0.0006084715,2.2746685,Retrocardiac opacification or atelectasis indicating volume loss or infection.,"The pattern involves descriptions of retrocardiac opacifications or atelectasis often seen as volume loss or infections, correlating with moderate to severe pulmonary conditions like edema, pleural effusions, or underlying heart enlargement, frequently compared to prior imaging for interval change.",0.8549682875264271,0.8571428571428571,0.7741935483870968,1.0,24.0,25.0,0.8562448304383788,0.8607594936708861,0.75,0.9310344827586208,58.0,100.0
+14428,latent_14428,986,0.001972,0.0008480042,1.4908257,Description of findings with comparative assessments against prior imaging studies.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve evaluations of current findings by utilizing prior imaging and making comparative assessments. The use of comparative language suggests that the reports are focused more on assessing changes rather than simply descriptive findings.,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4149776086562605,0.435,0.4525547445255474,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14429,latent_14429,327,0.000654,0.0004191535,2.7584734,References to renal status or related conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels often mention underlying conditions related to renal issues, such as end-stage renal disease, or mention a comparison with prior studies in the context of renal health. This suggests the model pattern recognizes context where renal disease implications are being analyzed or considered alongside other radiological findings.",0.8464285714285715,0.8604651162790697,1.0,0.6666666666666666,18.0,25.0,0.6470056497175142,0.7676056338028169,0.7647058823529411,0.3095238095238095,42.0,100.0
+14430,latent_14430,1700,0.0034,0.0012258112,1.4399025,"Findings related to tube placements or changes, requiring comparison.",The high activation examples often involve description or changes in endotracheal or enteric tube placements. These reports contain specific instructions to compare current placement with previous radiological images or provide detailed annotations on the position and implications of these devices.,0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.75,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14431,latent_14431,1229,0.002458,0.0009942515,1.8476912,Emphasis on detailed description of changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently mention detailed comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies, even when noting minimal changes or stating stability in findings. This aligns with the linguistic pattern of specifically discussing any changes observed or confirming that there are no changes when prior images are available. These examples provide comprehensive descriptions with references to prior images, indicating a pattern focusing on the comparison process itself rather than the specific findings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14432,latent_14432,716,0.001432,0.0007509476,1.8580108,Focus on stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior radiology studies.,"The examples with high activation involve using the current and prior imaging to assess stability or stability-related language in radiology reports. They often note similarities or lack of change in the cardiomediastinal silhouette and other elements across multiple comparisons, indicating a focus on stability or unchanged findings within radiological comparisons.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4827777777777777,0.4842105263157895,0.4555555555555555,0.4555555555555555,90.0,100.0
+14433,latent_14433,3422,0.006844,0.0024667191,1.58332,Comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies.,"The data points with high activation values consistently involve descriptions of findings in current imaging studies compared to prior studies. The task often involves identifying changes in the medical condition or stability, hence prompting the need for detailed comparative analyses between current and past images or reports.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5047753802617616,0.545,0.5286624203821656,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14434,latent_14434,2054,0.004108,0.00153188,1.7670078,Reports focus on interval changes in imaging findings or device placement.,"These examples frequently highlight description patterns comparing changes over time in imaging studies, evaluating for stability or change in conditions or devices. Commonly associated with these examples is monitoring of medical devices and patients' post-operative statuses. The pattern focuses on identifying interval changes or stability in imaging findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5278946965638631,0.5326633165829145,0.5294117647058824,0.63,100.0,99.0
+14435,latent_14435,1466,0.002932,0.0010507083,1.0791168,Comparison or detected change with prior imaging in the report.,The examples with high activation levels all include a clear description of the findings in relation to a comparison with prior imaging or indicate a specific change from a previous state. This consistent reference to comparison or change detection between current and prior images is a notable pattern across these specific examples.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14436,latent_14436,1460,0.00292,0.0010336646,1.0082533,Detection of interval change or new findings in comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with high activations often describe findings from new radiological exams using comparative terms like 'new', 'interval', or 'increased', indicating a change in the patient's condition or findings from prior studies. This highlights a common pattern in radiology reports where emphasis is placed on changes detected in recent imaging.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.6206896551724138,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14437,latent_14437,1683,0.003366,0.0013047463,1.7473819,Descriptive comparisons to prior imaging with noted changes.,"The reports with higher activation consistently exhibit clear comparisons between current and prior imaging, particularly noting changes or stability in specific pathological findings such as consolidations or effusions. These comparisons are direct and emphasize alterations in pathological features rather than simply mentioning prior images without specific changes.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4568250809928318,0.4623115577889447,0.4556962025316455,0.36,100.0,99.0
+14438,latent_14438,2711,0.005422,0.0019311535,1.9999355,Comparison with previous images denoting unchanged or interval findings.,The examples with higher activation levels are generally related to two specific aspects: either clear articulations of interval findings comparing to previous radiographs or descriptions emphasizing unchanged conditions. This indicates systematic examination of change over time and often stating stability or no further progression in findings compared to prior. These form the central theme of the reports.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5585585585585585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14439,latent_14439,2137,0.004274,0.0015123361,1.1227344,Report contains unresolved findings or ambiguity requiring follow-up with prior images.,The highly activated examples are those containing either ambiguity in report or request for further clinical clarification and rulings out of complexity that are less defined or have non-conclusive findings requiring additional analysis or follow-up study. This involves comparing with prior imaging.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4471084585305618,0.457286432160804,0.4645669291338583,0.5959595959595959,99.0,100.0
+14440,latent_14440,1460,0.00292,0.0011195325,2.4940581,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The prominent pattern is the evaluation of chest images with a description focused on a lack of acute or new findings along with an indication of comparison with prior imaging studies that confirm stability or resolution of conditions. Reports such as 'lungs are clear', 'cardiomediastinal silhouette is unremarkable' etc., without new pathologies identified, occur when nothing acute or significantly different from prior imaging is found.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5714285714285714,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14441,latent_14441,1038,0.002076,0.0009004609,1.7186044,Emphasis on changes or stability in pathological features relative to prior images.,"The pattern focuses on the comparison of the current image to a prior image. Examples with high activation involve changes or stability in specific medical conditions, suggesting the model is recognizing changes or the lack thereof in specific medical conditions resulting in the persistence or alteration of specific pathological features relative to prior comparative studies.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.586622351474865,0.5979899497487438,0.5757575757575758,0.76,100.0,99.0
+14442,latent_14442,2259,0.004518,0.0016348601,1.2508628,Inclusion of comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve references to changes over time, comparing current imaging with prior ones to assess changes or stability in medical conditions. This pattern reflects the model's attention to the temporal aspect of radiological findings and medical histories in images.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4998790029845931,0.535,0.5228758169934641,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14443,latent_14443,1661,0.003322,0.0012855637,1.9202455,Changes in imaging findings affecting patient management or requiring follow-up.,"The examples with activation generally involve situations where there is new or significantly altered information related to the management of the patient. This often includes changes in the location or presence of medical devices (e.g., tubes), new findings suggesting follow-up (e.g., nodules, opacities), or comparisons showing stable findings when such monitoring is relevant. These situations are critical for determining whether further action is needed.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5592076787942053,0.5628140703517588,0.5802469135802469,0.47,100.0,99.0
+14444,latent_14444,1378,0.002756,0.0010172733,2.0202637,Comparison with prior images to evaluate changes in findings.,"Activations are high when the task involves comparing current images to prior images to assess changes over time, with specific reference to the stability or alteration of medical devices or pathologies. The examples emphasize descriptors like 'unchanged', 'stable', or direct comparison with prior studies, which is associated with tracking consistency or adjustments in medical situations.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5362318840579711,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14445,latent_14445,2144,0.004288,0.001531305,1.5581528,Expressing stability or lack of change in findings over time.,"Examples consistently utilize specific terms to express presence or absence of pertinent observations like 'unchanged', 'same', 'similar', 'stable', which likely correlate with longitudinal monitoring or comparison in imaging studies. Additionally, referencing previous imaging studies or comparisons, even if no changes are evident, emphasizes the temporal context specific to these analyses.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5274725274725275,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14446,latent_14446,623,0.001246,0.00063960586,1.9131494,Requests for descriptive comparison to prior frontal image.,"The commonality among the high activation examples is the specific phrase 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image', which suggests requests for detailed descriptions of changes compared to previous images. This pattern emphasizes updates or changes noted between image studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4272727272727272,0.4555555555555555,0.4357142857142857,0.7625,80.0,100.0
+14447,latent_14447,2904,0.005808,0.002023758,1.0393085,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing unchanged findings or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging, emphasizing unchanged findings or stability in specific features such as cardiomediastinal silhouettes, pulmonary nodules, or deployment of medical devices. The focus is on precise interpretation relative to historical imaging, highlighting changes (or the lack thereof) in specific observations.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.6060606060606061,0.61,0.6375,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14448,latent_14448,2043,0.004086,0.0015049108,1.2877487,Low lung volumes noted in comparison to prior images.,"The examples exhibiting high activations consistently involve descriptions of low lung volumes, often accompanied by other indicative terms such as atelectasis or opacities. These examples frequently compare current findings with prior images, noting changes or stability in lung volumes, and often include interpretations or recommendations based on these observations.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4456893501592169,0.53,0.6363636363636364,0.14,100.0,100.0
+14449,latent_14449,393,0.000786,0.00048236817,2.2187805,Analysis of radiology findings in comparison to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include terms such as 'comparison' or 'compared to' that indicate an analysis of the current study with prior images to assess changes over time, especially looking for stability or changes in conditions such as atelectasis or note improved aeration.",0.5271929824561403,0.5510204081632653,0.5277777777777778,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4040816326530612,0.4041095890410959,0.2929292929292929,0.6304347826086957,46.0,100.0
+14450,latent_14450,489,0.000978,0.000517612,3.225212,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on identifying changes over time in radiological findings when comparing current images to prior imaging, specifically noting stable or unchanged conditions. Words like 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'as compared to prior' appear frequently in these examples.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4924145640370488,0.5214723926380368,0.3770491803278688,0.365079365079365,63.0,100.0
+14451,latent_14451,1512,0.003024,0.0011869139,1.8893604,Comparison of medical device or tube placement on imaging.,"These examples emphasize the identification, placement, or change in medical devices or tubes in imaging, comparing to previous examinations when applicable. This pattern is notable in radiology reports where assessments often focus on the position and configuration of medical hardware like tubes or catheters.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5436731290389827,0.5577889447236181,0.59375,0.38,100.0,99.0
+14452,latent_14452,4410,0.00882,0.0030848433,1.606473,Explicit comparison with prior radiology studies describing interval changes.,"This pattern focuses on providing descriptions that include comparison of current imaging with prior studies, emphasizing changes seen in the interval between the studies. Examples with higher activations explicitly describe the interval changes using phrases like 'interval improvement', 'no substantial change', or 'new findings since'. This specificity in describing interval change by comparison with prior reports distinguishes them from others.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.534365826500658,0.54,0.5327868852459017,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14453,latent_14453,2397,0.004794,0.0017524976,1.235502,Comparison to prior radiology studies highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation often mention specific comparisons to prior studies in the context of identifying changes or stability in specific findings, using structured examination reports. This could indicate that the model is emphasizing the use of comparative analysis to identify differences in radiological studies. Terms such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'compared to' often indicate the model's attention to changes relative to previous findings.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5284552845528455,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14454,latent_14454,666,0.001332,0.0006826238,2.5505078,Identification of significant changes in new images versus prior comparisons.,"The given pattern involves identifying significant changes or new findings in radiological images when compared to prior images. Examples with high activation mention notable changes, such as new line placements or changed conditions in patient status, indicating the pattern focuses on identifying any modifications between the current and previous images.",0.4842105263157894,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.2916666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.4261671938020486,0.4635416666666667,0.392156862745098,0.217391304347826,92.0,100.0
+14455,latent_14455,1023,0.002046,0.0009202695,2.7784584,Detection of cardiomegaly or significant interval change in cardiopulmonary status.,"Activation levels are higher when the findings indicate abnormalities or significant changes compared to prior imaging, especially related to cardiopulmonary processes. Increased heart size and changes in pulmonary or pleural conditions are key factors that trigger higher activation levels.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3838638949793233,0.445,0.3513513513513513,0.13,100.0,100.0
+14456,latent_14456,2518,0.005036,0.0017933142,1.1688403,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies over time.,"These examples consistently involve the examination of medical imaging over time, often comparing current images with prior images to assess for stability or changes in medical conditions. Key phrases related to temporal image analysis and assessment of previous versus current pathologies feature prominently, indicating an emphasis on longitudinal view rather than acute descriptions.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14457,latent_14457,2268,0.004536,0.0016362278,1.2078031,Detailed comparison of current and previous imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve detailed comparisons between the current and prior imaging to assess changes over time. Such reports often emphasize changes or stability in observed conditions, be it cardiopulmonary features, device placements, or other pathologies.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14458,latent_14458,3274,0.006548,0.0023161892,1.2663931,Temporal evaluation and interval change assessment in imaging reports.,"The pattern identified in this set of examples is the use of imaging findings to monitor for changes over time, particularly to assess interval changes. The examples show descriptions of changes or stability between current and prior imaging, highlighting this temporal aspect of the radiological evaluation.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4726763065138353,0.525,0.5153374233128835,0.84,100.0,100.0
+14459,latent_14459,2605,0.00521,0.0018285944,0.97430027,Interval changes in clinical findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples illustrate reports that emphasize comparisons with prior imaging studies and describe changes or lack thereof in findings over time. The pattern involves identifying interval changes in clinical conditions, devices, or findings and often includes specific mentions of previous dates or studies for comparison.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5544542064028435,0.555,0.5514018691588785,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14460,latent_14460,1304,0.002608,0.0010846009,1.7311882,Comparisons focusing on pulmonary changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels commonly compare current imaging findings to those noted in prior reports, with a specific focus on pulmonary processes like pneumonia, atelectasis, emphysema, interstitial changes, consolidations, or pleural abnormalities, rather than examining heart-related or non-pulmonary findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4619736015084852,0.465,0.4695652173913043,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14461,latent_14461,906,0.001812,0.00080602407,1.5533224,Comparisons to prior imaging studies in complex cases.,"Activated samples often include explicit or implied past comparisons between the current examination findings and one or more previous radiological studies, utilizing historical change documentation despite differing conditions and structures in the chest. They frequently feature diverse conditions and complexities involving various apparatus like Port-A-Caths or tubes, highlighting stability or changes over time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14462,latent_14462,1599,0.003198,0.001272748,2.4637878,Detailed description of medical device positioning relative to anatomical landmarks.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention changes or stability in medical devices like endotracheal or nasogastric tubes in precise terms, often specifying measurements regarding their position relative to anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina). This pattern indicates an emphasis on device placement and associated technical details in comparison with previous studies.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.6212121212121212,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14463,latent_14463,2323,0.004646,0.001695108,1.3281965,Comparison and interval change assessment in radiological images.,"These examples consistently involve radiology reports comparing current imaging to prior images and highlight cases where changes or stability from a previous study are noted. These findings often include descriptors of tube placement, opacities, and other interval changes observed in the images.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14464,latent_14464,323,0.000646,0.0004550074,3.2472775,Execution of image-based comparison instructions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently work with explicit directives to analyze images and generate comparison descriptions, regardless of the ambiguity or lack of completeness in the presented textual information, suggesting an emphasis on the instruction-compliance capability of the model rather than on the radiological content itself.",0.45,0.4545454545454545,0.4137931034482758,0.631578947368421,19.0,25.0,0.438733552631579,0.4428571428571428,0.2840909090909091,0.625,40.0,100.0
+14465,latent_14465,1330,0.00266,0.0010768301,1.5495887,"Radiology findings explicitly compared to prior images, noting no change or stability.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports that include description of findings in the current study explicitly compared to prior imaging, often noting stability or resolution of findings.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.2775510204081632,0.445,0.4074074074074074,0.22,100.0,100.0
+14466,latent_14466,366,0.000732,0.0004926134,2.675656,"Focus on detailed comparisons to prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The samples with high activation levels focus on comparing present radiological findings to prior images, specifically highlighting changes such as interval changes, new findings, or stability over time. These reports consistently feature detailed comparative phrases and findings, often indicating stability, new developments, or resolution of prior conditions.",0.4680851063829787,0.4680851063829787,0.44,0.5,22.0,25.0,0.4227742861384668,0.4375,0.2597402597402597,0.4545454545454545,44.0,100.0
+14467,latent_14467,1614,0.003228,0.0011870095,1.7982237,"Stable cardiac, mediastinal, or aortic silhouette in imaging reports.","The presence of a consistent topic can be seen in examples exhibiting activation, which often describe the heart, mediastinal structures, or aorta's appearance as being normal or unchanged despite the examination of potential pathologies. Reports contain phrases such as ""stable cardiomediastinal silhouette"" or ""cardiac silhouette unchanged,"" showing a pattern where these features remain stable in the context of thorough assessments.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.431803896920176,0.435,0.4235294117647059,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14468,latent_14468,4220,0.00844,0.002974677,0.9370415,Comparative analysis with previous imaging studies or temporal changes.,"Examples with higher activation consistently include comparisons to prior imaging or explicit references to temporal change or stability. The pattern supports evaluations of variations across time, as indicated by terms like 'compared to', 'since prior study', or specifying stable vs new findings.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3712324420985838,0.455,0.4739884393063583,0.82,100.0,100.0
+14469,latent_14469,660,0.00132,0.0005971777,1.7215457,Intubation or surgical placement actions documented.,"These examples highlight cases where intubation or surgical placement actions such as tube or catheter positioning are documented, often with specific measurements or changes in position noted since a prior image. The examples emphasize tube placements and transformations relative to previous procedures, exhibiting unique linguistic patterns around device positioning and comparison to prior studies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4518255578093306,0.4891304347826087,0.4038461538461538,0.25,84.0,100.0
+14470,latent_14470,992,0.001984,0.000892859,1.820118,Explicit noting of interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern identified in high-activation examples corresponds to instances where changes or stability in pulmonary, cardiac, or other thoracic structures are explicitly noted in comparison with previous imaging studies. In contrast to examples with low activation, these reports frequently discuss changes or lack thereof over time, indicating a focus on tracking progression or resolution of specific conditions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14471,latent_14471,3134,0.006268,0.0022014035,1.3517067,Findings described in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the interpretation of current images in the context of a comparison with prior images. The necessity to compare with previous results is often explicitly mentioned, and findings are described in relation to earlier imaging.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5939451568965075,0.605,0.5789473684210527,0.77,100.0,100.0
+14472,latent_14472,754,0.001508,0.00073786284,2.5517185,Comparative radiological evaluation with emphasis on stability or minor changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve findings predominantly described in comparison to prior imaging or explicitly include instructions for generating descriptions based on such comparisons, often indicating areas of stability or changes observed over time in chest radiographs, without specific acute process or findings.",0.299719887955182,0.3,0.3076923076923077,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4999855470443706,0.5,0.4646464646464646,0.5348837209302325,86.0,100.0
+14473,latent_14473,1610,0.00322,0.0013025928,1.7806848,Minimal or incomplete details provided for comparison in radiology prompts.,"The most representative samples have incomplete or minimal information provided for comparison, indicating the pattern is related to using less detailed histories or technique descriptions when prompting for radiological findings.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3765550384767466,0.4824120603015075,0.4917127071823204,0.89,100.0,99.0
+14474,latent_14474,475,0.00095,0.00055779266,4.6807904,Reports focusing on changes or stability relative to prior imaging.,"All examples with high activation involve comparing current imaging to prior studies to assess changes, typically noting the persistence, reduction, or alteration of findings like opacities or device placements, which are central to tracking disease progression or resolution. These examples frequently describe 'interval changes' or 'compared to previous', and detailed assessments of similarities or differences against prior exams are emphasized.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4563933357774247,0.4585987261146497,0.3727272727272727,0.7192982456140351,57.0,100.0
+14475,latent_14475,2174,0.004348,0.001671988,1.541536,Comparisons between current and prior imaging studies.,This dataset shows higher activations for examples where the model is tasked with comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. Each high-activation example involves generating a report comparing any differences or confirming stability as seen in the prior imaging.,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4650070968446337,0.51,0.5063291139240507,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14476,latent_14476,1831,0.003662,0.0014062577,1.4587946,Unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior imaging.,"Examples exhibiting the pattern explicitly reference a comparison with a prior image, while also noting stable or unchanged cardiac features or silhouettes despite changes or findings elsewhere in the chest.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.2222222222222222,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5319148936170213,0.25,100.0,100.0
+14477,latent_14477,3377,0.006754,0.002337008,1.2056019,Evaluation based on comparison to prior images.,The examples with higher activation often describe a consistent pattern of evaluation based on the comparison of current imaging findings with prior images. This is common in radiology where the stability or progression of specific abnormalities is assessed by comparing recent images to previous ones.,0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5033868092691622,0.542713567839196,0.5256410256410257,0.8282828282828283,99.0,100.0
+14478,latent_14478,1858,0.003716,0.0013331295,1.880723,Evaluation of interval change or stability of findings compared to prior imaging.,"The consistent theme across highly activated examples is the comparative analysis of patient images determining stability or changes over time with explicit reference to past imaging. They often emphasize tracking specific findings such as effusions, atelectasis, heart size, and pulmonological changes over time and confirming whether there are interval changes or stability.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.55,0.77,100.0,100.0
+14479,latent_14479,537,0.001074,0.00072145514,3.24037,Removal or repositioning of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels repeatedly note the removal or changes in position of tubes, lines, or catheters compared to prior imaging. These references to changes in medical devices appear to trigger the observed activation pattern.",0.84,0.84,0.84,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.7952904238618524,0.803680981595092,0.7313432835820896,0.7777777777777778,63.0,100.0
+14480,latent_14480,567,0.001134,0.0006516914,1.968121,"""Mildly enlarged"" heart size without significant acute changes.","Several examples demonstrate a pattern where heart size is described as 'mildly enlarged', often in contexts where no direct comparison to prior images is available or relevant additional findings are absent. Such reports typically mention normal mediastinal contours or lack of major changes in other findings.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5284552845528455,0.6091954022988506,0.6071428571428571,0.2297297297297297,74.0,100.0
+14481,latent_14481,2264,0.004528,0.0016291422,1.3291332,Comparison of findings in current images to prior studies.,"Examples showing activation 4.0 and above refer to radiological findings being compared to previous studies, highlighting evaluation for changes in specific aspects such as lung volumes, presence of opacities, pleural effusion, atelectasis and pneumonia. This consistent reference to previous imaging results for comparison appears to trigger higher activation.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14482,latent_14482,530,0.00106,0.0005626135,1.8391414,Stability or minor changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in the current radiology study in comparison to prior imaging while explicitly addressing the concept of stable findings without significant interval changes or minor adjustments in observations. This reflects a pattern of focusing on the stability of conditions over time using various descriptive terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', and 'persistent'.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5318668922729837,0.5481927710843374,0.4411764705882353,0.4477611940298507,67.0,99.0
+14483,latent_14483,3535,0.00707,0.0024603002,1.4574887,Stability or change in comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve requests to compare current radiological findings to prior imaging studies to evaluate changes over time. This implies that the comparison, progression, and stability or change of findings play a critical role in determining activation.",0.2921492921492921,0.34,0.3947368421052631,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5084745762711864,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14484,latent_14484,1639,0.003278,0.0012528545,1.7991953,Use of frontal and lateral views with emphasis on comparison descriptions.,"These examples are centered around the inclusion of both frontal and lateral radiographic views and mention comparison with prior images. Notably, the pattern arises when a specific description of findings across both views, with an emphasis on stability or subtle changes, is provided, especially where complex or multifocal findings exist.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.3940074065761418,0.46,0.4759036144578313,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14485,latent_14485,802,0.001604,0.00076032,1.8256762,Presence of low lung volumes or reduced lung capacity.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently demonstrate mentions of low lung volumes or reduced inspiratory effort. This pattern recurs in the assessments provided by the assistant in these samples, indicating it is a salient feature of interest.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4160153412557748,0.4924623115577889,0.4642857142857143,0.1313131313131313,99.0,100.0
+14486,latent_14486,2467,0.004934,0.001757751,1.4284496,Description of radiological findings through comparison with prior images and radiographs.,"The pattern of requesting description of findings based on images provided, particularly in comparison to prior studies, highlights an emphasis on utilizing both current and past imaging to track changes over time, even when minimal or subtle, unless no comparison is available, which tends to exhibit higher activation. This practice helps in monitoring the status of existing conditions or the stability of medical devices such as tubes and catheters, plus residual pathologies.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14487,latent_14487,1620,0.00324,0.0012524686,1.7183442,Description of radiological findings in comparison to prior images.,"Many examples with high activation involve providing specific text descriptions of radiological findings based on current image prompts, and as compared to prior imaging. There is a focus on using previously provided prompts to articulate changes, if any, within a specified clinical context.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4439295644114921,0.46,0.4701492537313433,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14488,latent_14488,2846,0.005692,0.0020052101,0.9601108,Evaluation of device/tube placement with comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation examples focus on descriptions that involve recognition and analysis of radiographic images with pacemakers, tubes, or devices, and evaluate their placement and comparison with previous images. Terms like 'lead', 'position', 'comparison to prior', 'unchanged position' are consistently present.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4935064935064935,0.38,100.0,100.0
+14489,latent_14489,854,0.001708,0.00080189324,3.2070036,Exploration of stability or change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern exhibits references to comparisons with prior imaging and notable observations of stability or change, often using past studies to assess current findings. Reports with differences or specific changes since prior reports tend to have higher activations.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.5144927536231884,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14490,latent_14490,1012,0.002024,0.0008985395,1.9607509,Emphasis on interval changes or stability of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern of high activation examples indicates that there is a focus on explicit observations of changes or stability in the patient's condition over time, using language that emphasizes a comparison to past images. The specific mention of stability or changes in the patient's condition against prior imaging is a common pattern in radiology reports when monitoring disease progression or resolution.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14491,latent_14491,1500,0.003,0.0011900573,1.8316144,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging for consistency or changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels (e.g., 6.0) often include detailed observations of stability or changes in radiological findings, particularly where multiple comparisons with previous images or examinations are stressed. These entries focus on consistency with prior findings or slight variations while evaluating the current images and include descriptions of medical devices, opacities, or certain patterns like tortuosity or effusion backgrounded by anchor phrases such as 'unchanged', 'stable', or with regard to previous dates.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4928644240570846,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.59,100.0,99.0
+14492,latent_14492,2929,0.005858,0.0020641075,1.733176,Significant changes in lung opacities or effusions in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples showing activation focus on notable changes in lung opacities, nodules, or effusions when comparing with previous images, which indicates significant findings or variations that are notable for diagnostic purposes.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5691467002942412,0.59,0.6607142857142857,0.37,100.0,100.0
+14493,latent_14493,2199,0.004398,0.0015799708,1.3710142,Consistency in describing findings by comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples involve comparison to a prior imaging study, whether stated or indicated by the lack of significant interval change. Such comparisons are fundamental in assessing progress or resolution of findings, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', and 'stable', essential for radiological assessments.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14494,latent_14494,592,0.001184,0.0005893162,2.5121124,Presence of nipple shadows.,"The response identifies and highlights the incidental note of nipple shadows across various radiological examples as a distinct feature that leads to higher activation values. This pattern is seen in examples with notable activation, describing the presence of nipple shadows in clear or otherwise normal contexts without significant pathology.",0.7453310696095077,0.76,1.0,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6275801493192797,0.6988636363636364,1.0,0.3026315789473684,76.0,100.0
+14495,latent_14495,1369,0.002738,0.0010958961,1.6783412,Description of medical devices or tubes as part of imaging findings.,"The examples consistently refer to evaluation of findings or devices such as chest tubes, feeding tubes, or catheters as part of the radiological interpretation. These examples stress the presence, placement, or description of these objects within the image, which is typical in radiology reports when focusing on intervention or support devices.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4714285714285714,0.33,100.0,100.0
+14496,latent_14496,1696,0.003392,0.0012752238,1.7045268,Analysis of changes in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations involve the task of making comparisons to previous imaging or focus on descriptions that specifically guide the assistant to analyze changes from prior studies against current, indicating engagement with the task as stated or compared formats.",0.3875,0.3877551020408163,0.375,0.375,24.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14497,latent_14497,1553,0.003106,0.0011780584,1.6264546,Detection of differences in medical device positioning or status compared to prior imaging.,"Samples that involve comparing findings between current and prior images often have an activation level >0, but higher activations specifically involve detecting changes in line placements or other interventional procedures. These reports often involve detailed updates on medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) due to their clinical significance in follow-up imaging.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.6166666666666667,0.37,100.0,100.0
+14498,latent_14498,1289,0.002578,0.0010383299,2.05855,Primary focus on findings without direct comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on findings primarily related to current imaging without comparison to prior images. These cases emphasize immediate observations, rather than historical comparison of changes over time.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4650537634408602,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.25,100.0,99.0
+14499,latent_14499,2260,0.00452,0.0015985505,1.9449646,Stability or resolution of abnormalities on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings where comparisons to previous imaging studies explicitly indicate stability or resolution of previously identified abnormalities. This pattern focuses on tracking changes with an emphasis on the lack of concerning progress, often suggesting benign or resolved conditions.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14500,latent_14500,796,0.001592,0.0007401131,2.3273373,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"High activation samples reference providing a description of radiologic findings in comparison to prior studies, reinforcing that a retrospective analysis of current and previous radiological images is the pattern being activated.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14501,latent_14501,1946,0.003892,0.0014515137,1.5820448,Stability or minimal changes in findings compared to prior studies.,"The pattern involves evaluating current radiological findings against prior studies, focusing on any interval changes, stability, or new findings. The statement that there is no significant interval change or consistent references to unchanged cardiac or mediastinal contours, lung conditions, or monitoring devices implies minimal changes over time, characteristic of stable findings in radiological comparisons.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5174782784400889,0.5175879396984925,0.5154639175257731,0.5050505050505051,99.0,100.0
+14502,latent_14502,1896,0.003792,0.0013739615,1.5368321,Presence of explicit comparison to prior imaging studies.,"Samples demonstrate a tendency for higher activation levels when there is an explicit statement regarding comparison to previous imaging, even when comparison details are missing or insufficiently elaborated.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14503,latent_14503,2274,0.004548,0.0017064846,2.3882039,Comparison of findings with prior imaging focusing on changes or stability over time.,"Examples with increased activation levels involve a description of findings that compare current imaging with previous studies, focusing on changes or lack of changes over time between the images, often using specific terms like 'interval development', 'unchanged', 'removed', 'placement'. This pattern highlights updates or stability in patient condition as seen through radiology imaging.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14504,latent_14504,2099,0.004198,0.0015214419,1.2819105,Studies describing detailed comparison of current versus prior imaging findings.,"Examples activate highly when associated with a radiology study and requiring comparative analysis of current imaging against previous imaging, focusing on detailed temporal changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.52995299529953,0.53,0.5294117647058824,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14505,latent_14505,1559,0.003118,0.0012487206,2.5964015,Changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,Examples with substantial activation levels show radiological findings described as having notable changes or monitoring stability in those findings from previous comparisons. These comparisons indicate progression or regression of certain medical conditions in the images.,0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4971428571428571,0.505,0.504,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14506,latent_14506,2475,0.00495,0.0017822781,1.6073527,Comparison of findings using frontal and lateral chest views.,"These examples consist of radiology reports comparing the findings from multiple image views, emphasizing frontal and lateral chest views. The examples contain side-by-side examination of anatomical structures from different perspectives, underscoring the comprehensive assessment using multiple imaging angles or views.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5719070282793182,0.575,0.5903614457831325,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14507,latent_14507,1434,0.002868,0.0010700906,1.3774009,Explicit instruction to compare current findings with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation have explicit instructions to describe findings in comparison to prior images, indicating a pattern of providing comparative analysis of current radiological findings against previous ones. The prompt requests explicitly contrastive descriptions by referencing changes or consistencies with prior studies.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.530338789493719,0.5326633165829145,0.5263157894736842,0.6060606060606061,99.0,100.0
+14508,latent_14508,1129,0.002258,0.0009358814,1.993049,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging and identified changes or stability in findings.,"Higher activation levels are consistently observed in examples where a comparison to prior imaging is explicitly mentioned, showing interval changes or stability of findings like ""unchanged position"" or ""noted again"". This indicates that mentions of previous examinations and ongoing evaluations add significant value to understanding patterns and changes in medical imaging findings.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.4210526315789473,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14509,latent_14509,1070,0.00214,0.00093786436,2.0847688,Comparison of current and prior images with focus on regional changes.,"These examples frequently involve interpreting current images in comparison to prior examinations, highlighting changes or stability in conditions like effusions, overlaps, or physical structurations. These examples also include technical terms like 'focal' to suggest specific regions of interest in the images.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.492063492063492,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14510,latent_14510,1327,0.002654,0.0011070861,2.610036,Demand for detailed comparative assessment with prior radiographs using current imaging.,"Highly activated examples generally include both frontal and prior images for comparison, alongside specific detailed descriptions comparing current and prior images. They highlight changes such as interval improvement, worsening, or stability across a wide range of clinical scenarios, indicating engagement with historical image data to assess changes.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14511,latent_14511,1900,0.0038,0.0014762082,1.6601466,Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior images.,"These examples focus on comparing current radiological findings with prior studies, and they frequently mention interval changes or stability in conditions, including references to previous hardware or pathological findings. The activation is higher when detailed descriptions of changes over time or stability are noted, emphasizing trends over serial imaging.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14512,latent_14512,723,0.001446,0.0007333798,1.8776971,Mention of interval change or comparison indicating stability/alteration.,"These examples consistently feature comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, but the activation pattern specifically highlights when notable differences or interval changes are identified, often using explicit terminology like 'as compared to prior' or 'unchanged since prior'.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4018484806049572,0.4021164021164021,0.3883495145631068,0.4444444444444444,90.0,99.0
+14513,latent_14513,511,0.001022,0.000615498,2.2576816,"Comparative analysis with prior chest images, focusing on cardiopulmonary changes.","High activation examples consistently involve comparative analysis using frontal and lateral chest images with specific report of cardiopulmonary features or changes relative to prior images. These examples feature conditions like pleural effusion, mediastinal contour, pulmonary congestion, or atelectasis.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3929251700680272,0.3975155279503105,0.3421052631578947,0.639344262295082,61.0,100.0
+14514,latent_14514,1534,0.003068,0.0011299762,1.2719911,Comparative findings in imaging focusing on cardiopulmonary assessments.,"Examples with high activation levels involve evaluations of current imaging against prior records, often identifying subtle changes or stability, using comparative phrases such as 'compared to', 'since prior', or noting 'interval' changes, focusing on cardiovascular and respiratory findings.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14515,latent_14515,1407,0.002814,0.001125373,1.9295304,Low lung volumes with resultant bronchovascular crowding.,"The examples with higher activations focus on observations of low lung volumes leading to bronchovascular crowding or changes in heart/perihilar structures, often mentioned explicitly in the assistant's response. These are specific linguistic markers for assessing lung inflation and the resulting impacts on structures in radiology reports.",0.5863970588235294,0.64,1.0,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4608246545021141,0.525,0.5806451612903226,0.18,100.0,100.0
+14516,latent_14516,2990,0.00598,0.0021167886,1.247542,Focus on interval change description in findings.,"Examples with a focus on changes in radiological findings use specific language like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'progressed', 'resolved', 'improved', or descriptions of minimal changes and comparisons with prior imaging. These descriptors signal attention to changes from previous states or study comparisons, crucial to tracking disease progression or resolution.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5276262626262627,0.5276381909547738,0.5306122448979592,0.52,100.0,99.0
+14517,latent_14517,1240,0.00248,0.0010137259,1.7140938,"Findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or change.","Several examples highlight the use of comparison with prior imaging, specifically involving observations of changes in findings. This approach is key in radiological assessments for documenting stability, improvement, or progression of abnormalities, using explicit comparisons against previous studies or records.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4372424881921415,0.44,0.4473684210526316,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14518,latent_14518,2101,0.004202,0.0015672822,1.5258697,Imaging findings described in comparison to previous studies or interventions.,"These examples consistently involve comparison of current findings against prior imaging results. They often discuss pulmonary conditions or interventions like intubation, which are common contexts for radiographic comparison, using terms such as 'compared to', 'prior chest', or 'comparison made with'.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14519,latent_14519,923,0.001846,0.0008551533,1.9751134,"Changes or confirmation of catheter placement, especially PICC lines.","These examples primarily focus on PICC line or other catheter placement, changes, or positioning over time, which are procedural findings requiring confirmation in radiographic follow-up studies. Such reports often describe locations like the SVC or RA junction and note unchanged positions compared to prior images.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.9166666666666666,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6202256944444444,0.65,0.8409090909090909,0.37,100.0,100.0
+14520,latent_14520,1458,0.002916,0.0011803653,1.591061,High activation when explicitly comparing current imaging to prior studies.,"The activation tends to be high when the prompt explicitly requests findings from current images and comparisons against prior images are made using phrases such as 'as compared to', 'in comparison with', indicating instructions to compare current imaging against historical studies.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14521,latent_14521,2160,0.00432,0.0015668082,1.6680325,"Comparison with prior imaging, especially highlighting significant changes.","Examples with activations close to the pattern have a common theme of considering interval changes or comparisons to prior images to detect significant changes. Particularly, they highlight changes in acute or high-risk conditions that may demand immediate attention, like fluid shifts or tube placements, which are critical in clinical decision-making. Lower activations tend to lack significant changes or findings requiring immediate follow-up.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5585585585585585,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14522,latent_14522,3793,0.007586,0.0026480872,1.2092822,Explicit absence of prior report for comparison or detailed specifications of current procedural findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often contain explicit instructions or context asking for an evaluation or comparison against former imaging when none is available, or provide such comparisons in the context of evaluating current procedural details or anatomical positions (e.g., ETT placement, tube positions) in acute or chronic conditions. These reports emphasize the importance of directly comparing current imaging results with prior data when no prior report is available, often accompanied by indications or details suggesting acute monitoring or intervention. This reinforces a macronarrative of contextual situational analysis crucial for patient management.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14523,latent_14523,3327,0.006654,0.0023351288,1.7548879,Focus on support device positioning and interaction.,"In these examples, a moderate level of activation accompanies descriptions of interactions with support devices. The findings often focus on their positioning and stability, particularly for items like tubes and lines, while other aspects of the chest or lungs are less emphasized. This pattern indicates a specific context where monitoring the placement or status of medical devices is primary.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5931237920862578,0.6,0.6351351351351351,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14524,latent_14524,1069,0.002138,0.0009187944,1.4147316,Presence of current and prior frontal images for comparison.,"Examples with activation levels > 5.0 typically reference the presence of a current and a prior frontal image as this compares changes over time, specific for dynamic conditions or interval changes like progression of a condition, tube placement, or disease resolution. These examples often describe clinically relevant comparisons, unlike lower-activated examples that either don’t provide prior imaging or don't have a direct comparison focus.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.3940074065761418,0.46,0.4759036144578313,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14525,latent_14525,1540,0.00308,0.0012117723,1.6430033,Descriptions based on image-to-image comparison without prior report findings.,Examples with high activation levels typically involve the task of providing findings by comparing current images to prior images without inclusion of explicit or older findings. This provides new analysis based on visual inspection rather than drawing from text comparison.,0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14526,latent_14526,4317,0.008634,0.0029509293,0.86668897,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"These examples predominantly involve imaging studies being compared to prior images to evaluate for interval changes or stability. The focus is on identifying new developments, stability, or resolving previous issues regarding anatomical or device positioning. The pattern indicates systematic evaluation with consistent references to previous images for comparison.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14527,latent_14527,1443,0.002886,0.0011101534,1.4686062,Focus on comparison of medical device placement over time.,"Reports with higher activation levels refer to changes or stability in medical devices (such as tubes, lines, or catheters) compared to prior images. This pattern is consistent in contexts involving careful tracking of external conduits and their positions over time while comparing with previous radiographic evaluations.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5217391304347826,0.24,100.0,100.0
+14528,latent_14528,2930,0.00586,0.0021500357,1.4794981,Presence of frontal and lateral chest radiographs without comparison to prior imaging.,The presence of both frontal (AP or PA) and lateral chest radiographs without prior images for comparison generally leads to high activation levels in these examples. This clearly suggests that the activation pattern is associated more with the absence of comparison with prior imaging.,0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.375,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3983957219251337,0.46,0.3888888888888889,0.14,100.0,100.0
+14529,latent_14529,1508,0.003016,0.0011045414,1.2916825,Comparison of imaging findings relative to time intervals or prior conditions.,"The examples show a pattern where changes in imaging findings are described using comparative references, especially concerning intervals of time or prior conditions, such as stability, worsening, or improvement relative to previous exams. This comparative language is crucial for monitoring patient changes over time and assessing the effect of interventions or disease progression.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14530,latent_14530,1947,0.003894,0.0013973474,1.3763415,Evaluations of interval changes in conditions or findings.,"The examples showing higher activation levels emphasize changes in or evaluations comparing current findings to previous findings, especially related to changes in pleural effusion, lung consolidation, or pulmonary opacities. The pattern focuses on evaluating interval changes or stability in specific conditions, rather than static descriptions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14531,latent_14531,1270,0.00254,0.0010105297,1.9541136,Evaluation of interval change between current and prior images.,"The examples describe radiological findings emphasizing changes or stability over time by comparing current images to prior ones. The notable pattern involves frequent references to changes or lack thereof ('minimal change', 'unchanged', 'increased', etc.), highlighting an evaluation for interval change. This often occurs through qualifying descriptions of findings (e.g., 'increased transparency', 'placement of devices') or lack of significant differences ('no significant interval change').",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14532,latent_14532,752,0.001504,0.000657587,1.9495399,Evaluations of interval change versus prior imaging.,"The data examples consistently describe comparisons with prior images and note any interval change, focusing particularly on the aspects or the amounts of change noted between current and prior images. This is typical of follow-up radiological reports to monitor conditions over time by noting similarities or changes.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5444536935098413,0.5538461538461539,0.53125,0.7157894736842105,95.0,100.0
+14533,latent_14533,1255,0.00251,0.0010178253,1.7441627,Current frontal and lateral images indicating no acute changes or findings.,The examples with high activation levels generally involve current images that include both frontal and lateral views compared against prior imaging or lack thereof. The reports often conclude with a reassurance of no acute findings or significant changes. This pattern highlights the expectation of radiological stability or normalcy in follow-up imaging comparisons.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.5853658536585366,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14534,latent_14534,1717,0.003434,0.0018375639,2.9888268,Interval change evaluation in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples that do show the pattern describe radiological findings in terms of interval changes, or lack thereof, compared to prior images. Activation levels appear high when the reports explicitly mention changes (or stability) in findings relative to prior exams. This suggests the reports focus on detecting or evaluating specific changes over time, which triggers the pattern of interest.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5901197281846619,0.62,0.577922077922078,0.89,100.0,100.0
+14535,latent_14535,4352,0.008704,0.0030062199,1.1547985,Detailed verification of findings or treatment effects using prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation focus on identifying specific changes or confirmations from prior imaging. They often involve precision in monitoring objects like tubes, vascular lines, or subtle changes in pulmonary or cardiac condition, particularly in complex clinical scenarios demanding close observation.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14536,latent_14536,2869,0.005738,0.0020415138,1.1865718,Comparative analysis of current versus prior imaging emphasizing interval changes or resolution.,"Examples with high activation levels involve references to either comparisons between current and prior imaging or specific findings that suggest a change in patient management or condition based on that comparison. This includes observed interval changes, such as resolution of atelectasis, alterations in tube placement, or evaluation after procedures that indicate a direct comparative analysis was executed.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.56,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14537,latent_14537,499,0.000998,0.0005996687,2.0783875,Comparative evaluation of radiography findings across multiple views or imaging sessions.,"These examples highlight changes or stability in findings across radiological studies which often target specific structural or pathological abnormalities, with emphasis on presenting descriptive details of measured intervals or observable alterations.",0.4895833333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5238095238095238,0.9166666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.3713915400023566,0.4121212121212121,0.3873239436619718,0.8461538461538461,65.0,100.0
+14538,latent_14538,506,0.001012,0.00059700856,2.5885038,Presence of comparative analysis with prior images.,"The highly activated examples feature evaluations that consistently include a comparison with a prior image, assessing for changes or stabilities in findings such as lung consolidation, effusions, or other anomalies. These examples involve systematic identification of matching or altered features over time.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3861892583120204,0.4,0.3577235772357723,0.7213114754098361,61.0,99.0
+14539,latent_14539,936,0.001872,0.00085485395,2.2417974,Comparison to prior imaging studies with unchanged or resolved findings.,Examples with high activation consistently involve comparison with prior imaging studies despite how well one lungs are aerated. They often describe unchanged or resolved findings in relation to previously identified conditions.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4565079365079365,0.465,0.4533333333333333,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14540,latent_14540,1542,0.003084,0.0011857811,1.4336708,Evaluations of tube placement and positioning in radiographs.,"Images and reports with a high activation level typically involve explicit mentions of positions of interpretive radiographic examination for placement of medical tubes, specifically Dobbhoff, NG, or other catheters. This often includes terms like ""Dobbhoff placement"" or detailed mentions of the catheter locations, suggesting the feature is sensitive to reports regarding tube placement evaluation and interval change or commentary on placement accuracy.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5098039215686274,0.26,100.0,100.0
+14541,latent_14541,551,0.001102,0.0007705933,2.2623951,"Comparative analysis with prior imaging studies, highlighting unchanged conditions or progressions.","The high activation examples consistently involve descriptions of changes or stability in patient conditions based on comparisons with prior imaging studies. These examples focus on observations such as the unchanged status of medical devices, persistent or improved pathologies, and unwarranted new findings based on prior examinations. This signifies a pattern of emphasizing longitudinal analysis in radiology interpretations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4501910828025477,0.4518072289156626,0.3626373626373626,0.5,66.0,100.0
+14542,latent_14542,1070,0.00214,0.00078803196,1.4432995,Comparisons emphasize changes against prior imaging to determine stabilities or interventions.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on comparison against prior imaging findings, explicitly mentioning changes, stabilities, or further evaluations based on previous reports. These comparisons may show stability or changes against expectations from prior observations.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14543,latent_14543,1499,0.002998,0.0011923466,1.7239052,Comparisons to prior imaging assessing interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe radiological changes, evaluations, or findings made by comparing current and prior images, with specific IDs, dates, or comparative states highlighted. The pattern focuses on identifying and highlighting intervals or changes between imaging studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14544,latent_14544,2308,0.004616,0.0016207133,1.0601699,Comparison findings involving devices or significant radiological changes.,"Examples with high activation levels involve clear, specific changes or observations in medical apparatus (like tubes, catheters, drains) or notable variances in findings such as pneumothorax resolution or a new line insertion when compared to previous imaging, emphasizing the dynamic or altered state of patients.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14545,latent_14545,1625,0.00325,0.001262689,1.774324,Presence of both current and prior images for comparison in reports.,"Examples with higher activations involve the assessment of images with both current and previous imaging for comparison or a detailed description of findings, often to evaluate changes over time. These reports provide a detailed evaluation about the current state in regard to past baselines or known conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4615747550720213,0.515,0.50920245398773,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14546,latent_14546,676,0.001352,0.0006948953,1.8129942,Comparison of findings with prior imaging to assess interval changes in reported conditions.,"The activations indicate a pattern where reports compare current imaging to prior studies, specifically detailing changes such as stable conditions or new findings. Reports often include terms like 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', 'persistent', or 'resolved', analyzing the interval change in the patient's condition or findings.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5044147054299338,0.5082872928176796,0.4655172413793103,0.6666666666666666,81.0,100.0
+14547,latent_14547,2928,0.005856,0.002130104,1.1386119,Presence of left-sided pleural effusion or cardiopulmonary changes.,"The highly activated examples consistently feature descriptions of left-sided pleural effusions or cardiopulmonary developments specifically related to left-sided findings, such as pleural effusions or atelectasis. These findings appear frequently in clinical situations often involving interval changes or follow-up evaluations on the left side, particularly when noted as comparisons.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5016292888633315,0.545,0.6097560975609756,0.25,100.0,100.0
+14548,latent_14548,1354,0.002708,0.0010932348,1.6061497,Measurement or description of stability in imaging findings over time with comparisons.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions of observations and changes in the radiographic images compared to previous images. Additionally, these findings tend to focus on stable or unchanged observations regarding specific thoracic structures and medical devices noted in comparisons, indicating a focus on stability and comparison within radiological assessments.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14549,latent_14549,2031,0.004062,0.0014986891,1.3721383,Emphasis on unchanged findings in serial imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve providing descriptions that emphasize detailed comparison with prior imaging findings, even when unchanged, instead of suggesting new findings as the primary task. This precision in detailing the status quo is the target pattern, indicated by maintaining focus on direct comparisons multiple times within the reports.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5193181818181818,0.5252525252525253,0.5324675324675324,0.4141414141414141,99.0,99.0
+14550,latent_14550,1600,0.0032,0.0011143863,1.1886531,Comparison with prior imaging and assessment of changes over time.,"The examples with high activation levels feature the use of multiple imaging views (frontal, lateral) or dynamic changes noted over time in patient condition or medical devices, as described by terms like ""unchanged,"" ""progression,"" or ""removal."" These aspects involve comparison with prior images and assessments of changes, indicating an interest in temporal dynamics in imaging data.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14551,latent_14551,289,0.000578,0.000550874,2.6622906,Mentions comparisons with prior imaging or reference to unchanged findings.,"The examples with high activation frequently describe findings in relation to past imaging studies, especially noting stability or changes, including date references and descriptions like 'again noted' or 'unchanged.' This pattern of comparing to past images is prevalent in radiological evaluations that monitor for changes over time, ensuring consistency in the findings.",0.4553140096618358,0.4634146341463415,0.4,0.75,16.0,25.0,0.406025824964132,0.4130434782608695,0.2470588235294117,0.5526315789473685,38.0,100.0
+14552,latent_14552,1766,0.003532,0.0013792702,2.2617822,Comparison to prior imaging to assess changes in findings.,"The pattern in these examples involves a comparison between current and previous imaging studies to identify changes in findings or the stability of previous conditions. This pattern is common in follow-up studies where interval changes, or lack thereof, are examined to assess patient progress or treatment efficacy.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4519689971032646,0.475,0.4822695035460992,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14553,latent_14553,2018,0.004036,0.0014248816,1.21521,Emphasis on comparison with prior radiographs to highlight stable or improved conditions.,"High activation examples include detailed descriptions of changes or comparisons to prior images, specifically identifying stable findings or improvements in conditions such as cardiomegaly, pleural effusion, or pulmonary conditions. These examples focus on changes over time in conjunction with prior status using specific radiological terms.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5135284234810301,0.515,0.5168539325842697,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14554,latent_14554,547,0.001094,0.00054047536,2.727207,Structured comparison with prior image reports and findings.,"Examples with higher activation explicitly mention the analysis of images (frontal and lateral) in direct comparison to previous studies to evaluate stability or changes. This involves structured report elements like prior reports, findings, and conclusions based on comparative assessment.",0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.3993384241827075,0.4023668639053254,0.3571428571428571,0.5797101449275363,69.0,100.0
+14555,latent_14555,2075,0.00415,0.0014868209,1.2658062,Precise comparison of tube or device position with prior imaging in critical contexts.,"The high activation examples contain detailed descriptions comparing current imaging findings (e.g., positional correctness of medical tubes or devices) with those seen in prior images, where no 'N/A' or indefinite comparisons are cited. These entries show specifics about positional changes of tubes or medical devices, often in urgent or critical contexts like intubation or device placement, where precise comparison is critical.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4545454545454545,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5536554542765723,0.585,0.6808510638297872,0.32,100.0,100.0
+14556,latent_14556,1431,0.002862,0.0011311687,1.9296503,Interpreting stability or changes from current to prior radiographic images.,"This dataset appears to consist of examples where there's a focus on comparing current and previous radiological images. The activation levels seem higher when the comparison focuses on detecting changes, especially in clinical indications, or stability of previous findings compared to new findings. The key pattern involves interpretation of changes or stability in monitored or problematic conditions based on prior images, which may be routine in medical imaging reports but represented with distinctive language patterns here.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4961240310077519,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14557,latent_14557,622,0.001244,0.00067049,2.9643438,Focus on interval changes between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples discuss interval changes based on the comparison of current and previous radiographic images, with a key focus on findings that indicate a change in condition. This often involves identifying any significant alterations or stability in the radiological report.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5016429353778751,0.5054945054945055,0.4655172413793103,0.6585365853658537,82.0,100.0
+14558,latent_14558,2049,0.004098,0.0014885725,1.0748621,Comparative analysis with prior imaging studies.,"In all these examples, there is a clear mention of a prior examination or image that is explicitly referenced for direct comparison. The task involves analyzing recent imaging findings in light of changes or consistency with previous results, and any intervals or changes noted from past imaging data.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5702932877740674,0.585,0.5620437956204379,0.77,100.0,100.0
+14559,latent_14559,2407,0.004814,0.0017943956,1.6692302,"Comparison with prior images to describe interval changes, especially involving anatomical findings or device placements.","The examples with higher activations consistently describe the comparison of current findings with prior imaging to identify interval changes. Examples heavily involve the tracking of the status of medical devices, tube placements, anatomical changes, or resolution/improvement of pathological findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14560,latent_14560,2246,0.004492,0.0015698011,0.99247336,Consistent descriptions of findings in comparison to prior images.,"All high activation examples include references to both current and prior imaging studies within the context of comparison, with a notable focus on describing changes or stability in specific details. Such comparisons often require ensuring consistency in findings with a previous baseline, emphasizing the need for careful imaging comparisons.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14561,latent_14561,3554,0.007108,0.0024777935,1.1019666,Change in pathology or device placement compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples mention either significant changes in pathology captured by chest radiographs, presence of specific medical devices, or persistent pathologies noted in comparison to previous examinations. They utilize patterns consistent with changes over time like resolutions or interval decreases in pathologies, stable abnormalities, unchanged devices, or newly noted opacities. Wordings describing contrasts to prior studies are pivotal.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5693108974358975,0.57,0.5648148148148148,0.61,100.0,100.0
+14562,latent_14562,1468,0.002936,0.0011158205,1.4888542,Focus on significant current findings over comparison with prior images.,"Highly activated examples involve significant findings in imaging (e.g., new/worsened pathologies, tube placements) often paired with lack of prior comparison or no acute changes. The pattern revolves around descriptions of imaging findings rather than explicit comparisons indicating stability over time, suggesting focus on impact of current rather than historical imaging.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14563,latent_14563,387,0.000774,0.0005661494,2.3478072,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The pattern in these examples involves radiological descriptions that reference prior imaging studies for comparison, where explicit findings describe any observed interval changes in anatomy or pathology. This includes the use of terms like ""compared to previous exam"".",0.4337568058076225,0.4583333333333333,0.4571428571428571,0.6956521739130435,23.0,25.0,0.3129251700680272,0.3129251700680272,0.23,0.4893617021276595,47.0,100.0
+14564,latent_14564,3706,0.007412,0.0026280377,1.2200341,Presence of both frontal and lateral images without prior comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels generally describe findings where there is use of both frontal and lateral view images for evaluation and there is no prior comparison available, which indicates a pattern in the way these radiological studies are described or reported.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.446512623020967,0.4773869346733668,0.4615384615384615,0.24,100.0,99.0
+14565,latent_14565,2588,0.005176,0.0018663388,1.4226329,Stable findings or disease processes on sequential imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include specific patterns like the mention of aortic tortuosity, changes in findings from initial to follow-up imaging, or findings that indicate a relatively stable condition over multiple evaluations. Consistent references to static or comparative language suggest stability or manageable clinical conditions rather than acute changes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5454545454545454,0.55,0.5625,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14566,latent_14566,2555,0.00511,0.0018535566,1.4226465,Instruct to describe findings compared to prior frontal image.,Examples with higher activation levels consistently instruct the assistant to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to a prior frontal image. This action captures the essence of the pattern which often relates to providing concise summaries post-imaging examination.,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4026666666666667,0.44,0.46,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14567,latent_14567,648,0.001296,0.00071779167,3.2690938,Stable or unchanged elevated hemidiaphragm compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently highlight findings related to an elevated hemidiaphragm that is stated to be stable, unchanged, or chronic when compared to prior imaging. The repeated references to unchanged diaphragm status or longstanding elevation across highly activated examples suggest that the pattern focuses on recognizing stability and chronicity in diaphragm elevation over time.",0.898989898989899,0.9,1.0,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.7850574712643679,0.8068181818181818,0.9772727272727272,0.5657894736842105,76.0,100.0
+14568,latent_14568,1468,0.002936,0.0012094763,1.5271071,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging or reports.,"These examples consistently discuss radiographic findings in relation to previous imaging, often indicating changes over time or stability of specific features. Key phrases indicating this pattern are ""in comparison to prior,"" ""unchanged from previous,"" and references to specific prior imaging dates or descriptions.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5157232704402516,0.82,100.0,100.0
+14569,latent_14569,452,0.000904,0.00055140204,2.9035425,"Stable cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours with comparison to prior images.","These examples all emphasize the stability or change of the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours, heart size, and lack of pleural effusion or pneumothorax. The common aspect seems to be the highlighted comparison of these features and explicit indication of their status across different views, whenever there is a comparison with prior imaging.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6757270323859881,0.6815286624203821,0.5443037974683544,0.7543859649122807,57.0,100.0
+14570,latent_14570,2238,0.004476,0.0015910477,1.7265426,Explicit description of findings in comparison with prior imaging.,The pattern involves radiological reports that provide descriptions of findings explicitly in relation to prior or previous examinations. The activations reflect the presence or absence of explicit change description language or direct comparisons to interpret findings based on historical data.,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14571,latent_14571,2710,0.00542,0.0019769901,1.6312711,Unchanged findings or unchanged medical device positions.,"There are multiple instances where radiological findings, such as positions of medical devices like tubes and catheters, or comparisons to previous states (e.g., opacities, effusions) are unchanged from prior observations. These unchanged findings often reflect stability in the patient's condition or treatment setup, which is a common aspect noted in radiology reports to determine if any new interventions are required or if the current treatment path is effective.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.47,0.47,0.47,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14572,latent_14572,2412,0.004824,0.001768878,1.4323599,Detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies and interpretation of changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiological findings in relation to prior imaging, focusing particularly on changes or stability, and often include interpretations of complex conditions or differential diagnosis alongside comparisons.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5841579197875699,0.585,0.5934065934065934,0.54,100.0,100.0
+14573,latent_14573,786,0.001572,0.0010113765,3.542583,Stable scarring or atelectasis findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings of scarring and atelectasis, often mentioning how these findings remain unchanged with comparison to previous imaging studies. This consistent pattern of accounting for known scarring or unchanged atelectasis alongside details in the absence of focal consolidation or other acute changes is prominent in highly activated samples.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7539604830408475,0.755,0.7931034482758621,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14574,latent_14574,494,0.000988,0.0006132927,2.2483528,Increased interstitial markings in the lungs.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activation levels is a focus on increased interstitial markings within the lungs, which are described in various contexts such as bilateral, particularly at the bases, or suggestive of chronic interstitial processes. These findings are frequently highlighted in radiology reports.",0.8798076923076923,0.88,0.9130434782608696,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.8139516908212561,0.8253012048192772,0.8135593220338984,0.7272727272727273,66.0,100.0
+14575,latent_14575,1584,0.003168,0.0012535828,1.7557383,Reports describing comparative analysis with prior images.,"The examples that show non-zero activation levels explicitly perform or suggest a comparison between the current and prior imaging studies or reference changes over time, often for monitoring purposes or assessing stability. The language involves comparative terminology like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'consistent with', or 'in comparison with'.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14576,latent_14576,1772,0.003544,0.0013215096,1.5773631,Description of interval changes in imaging findings or devices.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference prior imaging reports and describe interval changes in the findings, focusing on specific changes in medical devices, aortic structures, mediastinal contours, or resolving/concerning pathologies. The lower activation examples either do not reference prior images meaningfully or describe stable findings, rather than changes.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5049876246906173,0.505,0.5050505050505051,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14577,latent_14577,2573,0.005146,0.0017871475,1.2143594,Descriptive comparison of changes against previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently incorporate changes in imaging findings in the form of interval improvements or worsening of specific conditions, comparing them explicitly to prior images. Specific descriptors such as 'interval development', 'new airspace opacity', 'appearance improved', or 'unchanged position' are prominently used.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5826524198617222,0.585,0.5739130434782609,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14578,latent_14578,647,0.001294,0.0006852466,2.0246058,Direct comparison to prior imaging studies highlighting stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels include direct comparisons to prior imaging studies, notably using details from prior findings and offering specific evaluations of stability or changes over time (e.g., 'compared to the study of _', 'unchanged from prior chest CT'). This direct comparison feature seems to be the primary pattern for these activations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.49708853238265,0.5,0.4649122807017544,0.6309523809523809,84.0,100.0
+14579,latent_14579,4832,0.009664,0.005462879,2.6530418,Comparison of current and prior images focusing on changes in devices or anatomy.,"These examples consistently involve comparison between current and prior radiological images or reports, with a focus on evaluating changes in medical devices, significant changes in anatomy, or stability in cardiac or pulmonary conditions. The reports often highlight improvements, deterioration, or stability in specific conditions or findings, with repeated emphasis on assessments like evaluating for pneumothorax or the precise positioning of tubes or catheters.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14580,latent_14580,859,0.001718,0.0007648061,2.0119412,Comparison to prior frontal image focusing on changes or stability.,"These examples emphasize the description of findings on radiographic examination in comparison to prior frontal images, specifically focusing on areas of improvement, resolution of conditions, or the persistence or stability of identified abnormalities. The pattern highlights changes in patient conditions as documented through sequential imaging.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4584139264990329,0.475,0.4814814814814814,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14581,latent_14581,961,0.001922,0.0007690346,1.8175621,Comparison with both frontal and lateral images elevates activation.,"These examples show a pattern where an additional lateral view image is provided for comparison with a prior image, which frequently correlates with higher activation levels. This suggests that the availability of diverse perspectives enhances the model’s ability to recognize stability or changes in findings, thus increasing activation.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4591346153846154,0.46,0.4629629629629629,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14582,latent_14582,898,0.001796,0.0007899105,2.3892179,Reports describing stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation include references to unchanged findings, or stable conditions based on comparisons to previous images. These also often lack specific acute findings requiring immediate action, such as ""no new findings"" or ""stable cardiomediastinal contours."" These descriptions emphasize stability over the need for action.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.6235294117647059,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14583,latent_14583,1007,0.002014,0.00090865104,2.0883183,Emphasis on acute or notable changes and procedural aspects in imaging.,"The examples with high activation refer to scenarios involving specific interventions, acute findings, or changes observed on imaging that require immediate or ongoing clinical attention. These patterns often include increased heart size, changes in vascularity, or procedural notes about devices like tubes and catheters.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14584,latent_14584,747,0.001494,0.0006378493,1.5184427,Comparison between current and prior radiographic findings with focus on identifying changes.,"A high activation pattern is seen when the task involves comparison between current and prior radiographic images, with a focus on identifying significant changes or stability over time. Phrases like 'no significant change', 'as compared to prior', and 'similar to previous' are indicative of this pattern, suggesting the model is tuned to recognize and emphasize the importance of such comparative analyses.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4646103896103896,0.4742268041237113,0.4682539682539682,0.6276595744680851,94.0,100.0
+14585,latent_14585,1777,0.003554,0.0013676669,2.3806047,Monitoring or support devices in stable or unchanged position in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels involve findings related to indwelling devices, their positions, and changes over time compared to prior images. These entries discuss previously placed devices, stable positions, or notable changes in their placement, which may include notifications or recommendations.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.6923076923076923,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5703732605020159,0.5829145728643216,0.6307692307692307,0.41,100.0,99.0
+14586,latent_14586,533,0.001066,0.0008968318,3.496928,Presence of plate-like or linear atelectasis.,Examples with high activation levels consistently highlight the presence of plate-like atelectasis or similar linear atelectasis in the lungs.,0.9194847020933976,0.92,0.8620689655172413,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.9389619883040936,0.940119760479042,0.8701298701298701,1.0,67.0,100.0
+14587,latent_14587,3008,0.006016,0.002098433,1.2881418,Low lung volumes mentioned in findings or comparisons.,"Examples with high activation often involve low lung volumes noted in the findings or comparisons, which indicates that the system recognizes this particular feature as significant. Low lung volumes can affect radiographic interpretations, especially in detecting congestive patterns or pulmonary abnormalities.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4450642180840413,0.515,0.5517241379310345,0.16,100.0,100.0
+14588,latent_14588,2098,0.004196,0.00160974,2.3092566,Comparison with prior radiographs focusing on interval changes.,"The instances that are most activated consistently involve descriptions of the current study in comparison to prior radiographs. This includes evaluating interval changes rather than focusing solely on acute findings. The pattern focuses on the stability or change in findings, highlighting this aspect in the reports.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14589,latent_14589,1760,0.00352,0.0013552038,1.666346,Review and interval comparison of current and prior radiographic images for stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels often mention both the review of the current and prior radiographic images to assess stability or changes in conditions such as lung consolidation, atelectasis, or cardiac silhouette without effusion in sequential imaging. The reference to both current and prior images highlights interval changes or persistent findings in the areas described.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3943383805134957,0.425,0.4482758620689655,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14590,latent_14590,1215,0.00243,0.0010070943,2.185451,Comparison of current and prior images to assess interval changes.,"The samples describe radiological findings by comparing current images against prior images, seeking interval changes in conditions like pleural effusion, pneumothorax, pneumonia, pulmonary edema, cardiomegaly, or lung volumes. They emphasize evaluating radiographic changes over time to determine stability or progression.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14591,latent_14591,346,0.000692,0.0005603362,3.011929,Normal cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours in findings.,"The examples with high activations predominantly describe normal cardiac silhouette and mediastinal contours, indicating that these phrases or assessments are significant in patterns the model recognizes as relevant in chest imaging reports.",0.782608695652174,0.782608695652174,0.72,0.8571428571428571,21.0,25.0,0.6529819694868239,0.6762589928057554,0.453125,0.7435897435897436,39.0,100.0
+14592,latent_14592,803,0.001606,0.0007896105,2.4830296,Findings related to sarcoidosis or similar chronic respiratory conditions.,"The examples with higher activations focus on findings related to known or suspected cases of sarcoidosis, worsening lung conditions, or related processes, often with consistent findings over time or mild progression indicated. The observations in these reports often relate to hallmark signs of sarcoidosis, such as pulmonary or hilar changes, fibrotic lung disease, or lymphadenopathy, and emphasize stability or slight changes in these conditions over time.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4324942791762013,0.535,0.7333333333333333,0.11,100.0,100.0
+14593,latent_14593,798,0.001596,0.0007630764,2.3598673,Comparison with prior images to identify changes in device positions or lung conditions.,"The examples with high activation levels reference current and prior images in the context of identifying changes or stability, often linked to the positions of medical devices or changes in lung conditions. Terms like 'as compared to the previous', 'there is no significant interval change', or descriptions of device positions and parenchymal changes are indicative phrases contributing to the pattern's representation.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.403030303030303,0.4111675126903553,0.4227642276422764,0.5360824742268041,97.0,100.0
+14594,latent_14594,1430,0.00286,0.0010754954,1.485571,Detection of anatomical or device changes in comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently reference findings related to relative or absolute changes in medical devices or anatomical features when compared with previous imagery, such as positioning or stability of tubes and catheters, changes in opacities, or resolution of previous conditions. These are recurrent themes within detection of changes using imaging comparisons, specifically noted in comparison descriptions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4858352656517794,0.49,0.4915254237288136,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14595,latent_14595,896,0.001792,0.0008641635,2.1358364,Cross-referencing current and prior imaging with stable findings.,Examples with higher activations incorporate the observation of a feature or condition from current radiographic images cross-examined with prior ones without focusing primarily on acute changes or severe pathologies. These examples tend to highlight descriptions regarding unchanged or stable findings from previous evaluations.,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5333333333333333,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14596,latent_14596,2480,0.00496,0.0017853633,1.5265888,Stability or no significant interval change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels involve stable findings over time or no significant interval change compared to prior imaging studies. These findings often highlight changes over time, or specifically note stability in findings such as effusions, pleural-based masses, or cardiac silhouette size, thereby highlighting continuity in the patient's condition.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5642373187005694,0.5728643216080402,0.6056338028169014,0.43,100.0,99.0
+14597,latent_14597,1432,0.002864,0.0010027465,1.4711127,Comparative findings or status updates on medical devices.,"The examples with high activation typically provide a comparative analysis of radiological findings with prior studies, particularly focusing on changes over time, and often denote specific medical devices' status or changes, such as PICC lines or fluid drains, rather than congenital or static findings.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14598,latent_14598,2643,0.005286,0.0018687061,1.3347749,Comparative language in imaging reports referencing prior studies.,"The pattern in the dataset does not strongly correlate with certain specific conditions or pathologies but remains heavily focused on comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. The use of comparative terminology such as 'increased since', 'interval improvement', 'unchanged', and references to specific previous examination dates contributes significantly to the activation level.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5602745602745602,0.59,0.5592105263157895,0.85,100.0,100.0
+14599,latent_14599,3048,0.006096,0.0021735162,1.1274971,Detailed assessment of device placements or changes over successive images.,"Highly activated examples typically involve detailed evaluations of device placements, changes, or stability over successive imaging studies, often with specific mentions of unchanged or changed positioning and implications for treatment plans.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5857142857142857,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14600,latent_14600,2283,0.004566,0.0016621184,1.9667889,Stable or changed findings noted between current and prior images.,The activation levels are high when there is either no significant interval change in findings or when improvements or worsening are explicitly noted between the current and prior image. This indicates that stable findings or notable changes in comparison to previous images activate the pattern.,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14601,latent_14601,1039,0.002078,0.0011850847,2.9821076,"Focus on positioning and comparison of medical devices (tubes, lines) in images.","The higher activated examples primarily focus on the presence and positioning of various lines, tubes, and catheters within the thoracic cavity, as well as their intervals of change between imaging studies. This includes verification of their positioning, such as the endotracheal tube's distance from the carina. This precise information about medical devices is critical in patient management, and comparison with prior imaging establishes the context of change or stability.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5342465753424658,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14602,latent_14602,1657,0.003314,0.0012803873,1.727629,Routine mention of comparison with prior imaging for temporal evaluation.,"The examples frequently highlight usage of phrases like 'comparison to prior', 'interval change', or descriptions that highlight stability/changes from previous examinations. These descriptions require the corresponding current and prior images to discern differences over time, thus making temporal evaluation a key pattern.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5045838759927475,0.515,0.5116279069767442,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14603,latent_14603,1415,0.00283,0.0010501039,1.435902,"Findings described relative to previous imaging, indicating changes or stability.","The examples that show pattern activation often include references to changes, such as worsening or improvement, from previous radiological assessments, and describe the findings explicitly in relation to a prior image, often indicating stability, worsening, or an interval change. This shows a focus on understanding medical progression or regression over time via radiological comparison.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14604,latent_14604,750,0.0015,0.00068004825,2.289412,Focus on interval changes when comparing images.,"The samples showing high activation levels consistently involve instructions for comparative analysis between the current image and a prior image, explicitly stating a comparison task related to interval changes, which suggests a linguistic pattern emphasizing changes over time.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5196078431372548,0.5204081632653061,0.5108695652173914,0.4895833333333333,96.0,100.0
+14605,latent_14605,2328,0.004656,0.0017135075,1.5688896,Evaluating interval changes or stability compared with prior imaging.,"The higher activation examples discuss findings that represent interval changes or stability when compared to prior imaging. Common phrases indicating comparison, change over time, and stability are used, indicating analysis of changes to anatomical structures or conditions in follow-up radiological evaluation.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5354239256678281,0.56,0.541095890410959,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14606,latent_14606,3350,0.0067,0.0023628063,1.2378922,Detection of interval change or stability compared to prior studies.,"The examples that trigger higher activation contain radiological findings explicitly described in comparison to prior exams. This highlights the model's focus on recognizing the use of comparison and tracking interval changes. Reports with findings such as 'no significant change', 'compared to prior', and descriptions focused on the stability or changes in medical findings relative to previous images are consistently activated.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5151515151515151,0.52,0.5166666666666667,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14607,latent_14607,1451,0.002902,0.0010935889,1.5210131,Comparative evaluation with prior imaging studies indicating stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation often contain comparisons with prior imaging studies and observations that highlight changes or the lack thereof in relation to those previous studies. This includes references to specific changes, stability from a prior state, and evaluations based on prior imaging insights.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5803736191511413,0.585,0.5702479338842975,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14608,latent_14608,1916,0.003832,0.0014603917,1.6377552,"Emphasis on findings compared to prior imaging, noting stability or specific changes.","The activation levels are higher when the reports describe changes or comparisons with previous imaging studies, particularly if they note stability or specific alterations in clinical context, as these details stress the interpretation aspect in the diagnostic process.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.46,0.46,0.46,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14609,latent_14609,571,0.001142,0.00073808816,2.8864946,Emphasizing normal or clear findings without acute issues.,"The examples showing high activation levels consistently describe clear or unremarkable findings in the heart, lungs, and bony structures, emphasizing the normality and absence of acute issues. They often include routine checks for pneumonia, effusion, pneumothorax and report them as absent, suggesting the importance of baseline 'clear' or 'normal' findings along with a lack of acute conditions as the trigger for activation.",0.797077922077922,0.8,0.7419354838709677,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.6672292545710268,0.6686390532544378,0.5585585585585585,0.8985507246376812,69.0,100.0
+14610,latent_14610,2562,0.005124,0.001850682,1.5791936,Explicit reference to interval changes compared to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation demonstrate that mentions of previous imaging referenced explicitly alongside identification of interval changes are the pattern identified. This includes evaluating findings like stability, increase, or decrease compared to a prior imaging study.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5212765957446809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14611,latent_14611,656,0.001312,0.0006688154,2.582388,Reports emphasize unchanged findings from prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently mention comparisons between the current and prior frontal images using terms like 'unchanged,' 'normal,' and 'no focal consolidation.' This suggests a pattern of reporting stability or absence of significant change in the examined area when compared to past images.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4902177805267098,0.5166666666666667,0.4406779661016949,0.325,80.0,100.0
+14612,latent_14612,1241,0.002482,0.0009859869,1.3347771,Detailed report on changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies. They emphasize changes (or lack thereof) in medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathological features, using specific terminology that indicates direct relative analysis, such as 'unchanged', 'remains', 'compared to prior', or explicit mentions of position stability of lines or tubes. This pattern distinguishes high activation examples from low activation ones, which either lack these specific comparative elements or do not emphasize them.",0.358974358974359,0.36,0.3478260869565217,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4757281553398058,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14613,latent_14613,747,0.001494,0.00072459405,2.4080458,Provide findings compared to prior imaging studies.,The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions requiring comparison against prior frontal or other imaging studies. They ask for descriptive reporting in terms of changes or stability based on historical imaging. This indicates activation in contexts where explicit comparative analysis from prior reports is required.,0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4200985221674876,0.4232804232804232,0.4122807017543859,0.5280898876404494,89.0,100.0
+14614,latent_14614,1161,0.002322,0.0010147437,2.1240969,Focus on description and position of medical devices (lines/tubes) in chest radiographs.,"The consistent pattern among these samples is the recurring identification and description of medical devices, especially lines and tubes, within the chest. These descriptions often note the position of devices like PICC lines, pacemakers, central lines, or endotracheal tubes, typically comparing their position to previous studies, indicating a focus on the placement and changes related to such devices.",0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.75,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14615,latent_14615,1138,0.002276,0.0008727504,1.8586419,Comparison to prior imaging showing stable or unchanged findings.,"Examples with high activations compare current imaging to previous studies, specifically noting differences or similarities. The main pattern is contrasting findings across multiple studies, suggesting no significant new developments unless specified. The examples are focused on interval changes detected between imaging exams, particularly noting lack of major changes except where specific conditions persist or improve.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.3636363636363636,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4464285714285714,0.25,100.0,100.0
+14616,latent_14616,4214,0.008428,0.00290455,1.1361332,Mentions of line or catheter placements and evaluations.,"The highly activated examples consistently describe findings of line or catheter placements, indicating a characteristic associated with the pattern the model is activated by. This can include mentioning the presence or checking the placement of lines like central venous catheters or PICCs.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.496071009006657,0.5125628140703518,0.5238095238095238,0.33,100.0,99.0
+14617,latent_14617,1499,0.002998,0.0011796983,1.9098146,Description emphasizing stability or comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples commonly involve a detailed comparison with prior imaging, particularly emphasizing findings that are stable, unchanged, or have minor progression/regression. This suggests that the pattern focuses more on evaluating and documenting the interval stability or slight changes in radiologic findings relative to prior images.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14618,latent_14618,1341,0.002682,0.0011322357,2.3294437,Detailed radiographic findings without explicit changes from prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation often include descriptions of radiographic findings or patient situations where observations are detailed, but notably lack explicit comparisons, suggestions, or conclusions about changes from previous imaging, which seems counterintuitive for the task. This negative space emphasizes imaging findings without explicit comparisons or significant impressions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14619,latent_14619,993,0.001986,0.0009080568,2.6768603,Focus on stability or minor change compared to previous radiographs.,"These examples focus on the comparative evaluation of radiographic findings, emphasizing stable conditions or minor changes when compared to prior studies. Many examples mention 'as compared to' prior studies, 'no relevant change', or evaluate findings like 'stable' cardiovascular silhouette.",0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.464665415884928,0.465,0.4666666666666667,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14620,latent_14620,314,0.000628,0.00044838522,3.3255339,Comparative analysis with detailed prior image findings.,"Activation levels are higher when there is explicit comparison between current and prior images, even when multiple views or reports are referenced. These examples include direct statements analyzing changes or lack thereof over time using past studies. The process of comparing and noting interval changes or stability between current and prior imaging studies defines the pattern.",0.4041666666666667,0.4090909090909091,0.3333333333333333,0.3684210526315789,19.0,25.0,0.4558598028477547,0.4782608695652174,0.2638888888888889,0.5,38.0,100.0
+14621,latent_14621,2168,0.004336,0.0016212603,1.5827689,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette amidst lung or pleural changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize the presence of a stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in the context of chest radiographic reports. They highlight conditions or changes observed in the lungs or pleural space, but with specific note that the cardiomediastinal silhouette remains normal or unchanged.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5096838099210177,0.5202020202020202,0.5362318840579711,0.37,100.0,98.0
+14622,latent_14622,1763,0.003526,0.0013089173,2.1119072,Stable findings on imaging with no new acute changes.,"These examples primarily detail findings that provide a status update on previously noted conditions, such as pleural effusions, atelectasis, or placement of tubes (e.g., endotracheal tube, PICC line), but do not present changes or new acute findings. This indicates a pattern where the findings are generally unchanged since prior assessments.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4945054945054945,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14623,latent_14623,1338,0.002676,0.0010691398,1.8487808,Interval change in pulmonary or cardiac status compared to prior image.,"Samples with high activation levels include findings or indications that involve active pulmonary processes such as pneumonia, consolidation, or worsening cardiac status, coupled with explicit comparison to prior imaging to establish change. The pattern involves detecting an interval change in the condition of the lungs or mediastinal structures when compared to prior imaging.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.382528596011742,0.39,0.358974358974359,0.28,100.0,100.0
+14624,latent_14624,1893,0.003786,0.0014267698,1.3680379,Emphasis on comparison with prior images to detect changes.,"The active examples consistently involve the use of ‘comparison’ terminology pointing to changes or stability in findings between current and prior radiological images. This action of comparing images and looking for interval changes is central to understanding the progression, stability, or resolution of medical conditions. The model identifies the utility and emphasis radiologists place on such comparative analyses in determining clinical relevance.",0.3484657419083649,0.38,0.4166666666666667,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5185936443542934,0.555,0.535483870967742,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14625,latent_14625,88,0.000176,0.00023814835,3.4672897,Outlier activations; low activations have detailed comparative analyses.,"The high activation examples have very little consistent patterning compared to low activation examples, which consistently involve extensive text with detailed comparative analysis of multiple images, specific past and current conditions, and broader interpretations. The high activations are much shorter and lack depth, indicating these are outliers or incomplete.",0.5972222222222222,0.6551724137931034,0.2857142857142857,1.0,4.0,25.0,0.3673557278208441,0.5398230088495575,0.024390243902439,0.0769230769230769,13.0,100.0
+14626,latent_14626,358,0.000716,0.00045690424,2.2785456,"Use of qualifiers on atelectasis, effusions, or lung consolidations.","The examples with high activation involve specific terms like 'atelectasis', 'consolidation', 'effusion', and their surrounding narratives. This suggests the pattern relates to narratives describing lung abnormalities, where there is minimal focal change noted compared to prior evaluations, including qualifiers like 'unchanged,' 'stable,' or indications like resolving conditions.",0.6302600472813239,0.6304347826086957,0.5833333333333334,0.6666666666666666,21.0,25.0,0.5685601331668747,0.5944055944055944,0.3846153846153846,0.5813953488372093,43.0,100.0
+14627,latent_14627,1618,0.003236,0.001207421,1.5523458,Description of current findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation scores consistently discuss details about a radiological image and compare these findings with a prior image. These descriptions often highlight changes or lack thereof since the prior image, indicating either stability or progression of a condition or no new findings compared to a prior study. This pattern involves expressing findings in relation to previous examinations, suggesting reliability and continuity in the assessment.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14628,latent_14628,1476,0.002952,0.0011056227,1.3615543,Evaluation of change in tube/device placement from prior image.,"These examples describe changes or comparisons with prior images in terms of tube placement, size, position or the presence of devices. The radiology report evaluates for interval change, presence, and position of tubes or devices by comparing them to previous studies or noting if they are unchanged, using terms like 'unchanged', 'terminates', 'unchanged from', or 'new placement'.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5235533697072159,0.535,0.5507246376811594,0.38,100.0,100.0
+14629,latent_14629,1084,0.002168,0.0008529783,1.4653828,Significant acute or new changes in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels (e.g., 10.0 for a significant mediastinal shift) emphasize the importance of identifying and describing acute or significant changes in the radiology report. These often involve notable alterations in structures or the identification of key medical devices and conditions that may require urgent attention, such as a mediastinal shift or specific device placements, distinguishing acute abnormalities from stable findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4346666666666666,0.47,0.44,0.22,100.0,100.0
+14630,latent_14630,3851,0.007702,0.0026588328,0.9507752,In-depth comparison to prior images highlighting changes or stability.,"Samples with high activation levels show descriptions involving the comparison of radiological findings to previous imaging, with a focus on describing changes or stability. The pattern includes details on device placements, opacities, pleural effusions, and other specific findings that involve comparative language, such as 'interval change', 'compared to prior', and 'as compared to previous radiograph'.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6212409592691284,0.6231155778894473,0.6106194690265486,0.69,100.0,99.0
+14631,latent_14631,1155,0.00231,0.0008798668,1.5511327,Description and comparison of current and prior radiology images without relying on prior reports.,"The examples with high activation involve providing descriptions and comparisons of current radiology findings with prior images. Specifically, they task the assistant with comparing new findings to previous radiographs and detailing changes over time, often responding to the absence of prior reports or explicit instructions based on past findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4430432955023119,0.47,0.4791666666666667,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14632,latent_14632,528,0.001056,0.00060439244,3.1840158,Use of frontal and lateral views alongside prior for comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels often involve the usage of multiple views (front and lateral) of the current image alongside prior images, thereby signaling a comparison approach used in radiological evaluations to assess changes over time. This multi-view approach is integral in providing a comprehensive comparative analysis for diagnosis.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5304703476482617,0.5304878048780488,0.4343434343434343,0.671875,64.0,100.0
+14633,latent_14633,2843,0.005686,0.0019940324,1.1158928,Emphasis on changes or stability in radiographic findings over time.,"Examples exhibiting high activation predominantly feature descriptions of chest radiographs and other imaging studies comparing current images to prior ones, but also emphasize findings that have changed or remained stable. These descriptions help in assessing the progress of chronic conditions, stability post-intervention, or progression in the context of new symptoms.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14634,latent_14634,989,0.001978,0.00089514715,2.786061,Reports emphasizing stability or change in imaging findings compared to previous images.,Examples with notable activation levels consistently have reports that mention a stable appearance or compare current findings against prior images. This signifies the presence of a pattern where reports focus on the interpretation of images over time for progression or stability.,0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4100294985250737,0.42,0.4365079365079365,0.55,100.0,100.0
+14635,latent_14635,599,0.001198,0.00057448173,2.5890357,Comparative evaluation with prior imaging and interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly mention comparison to prior studies, particularly addressing changes or stability in findings. The model likely associates the presence of comparative analysis and explicit evaluation of changes with significant information relevance.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4828605200945626,0.4857142857142857,0.4336283185840708,0.6533333333333333,75.0,100.0
+14636,latent_14636,3625,0.00725,0.002529239,1.2804906,Use of given images with detailed descriptions and comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the use of given images in conjunction with comparisons to prior images. They rely heavily on analyzing changes or lack thereof in specific chest features or devices, often structured with detailed visual analyses and technical terms.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14637,latent_14637,1098,0.002196,0.0008652771,2.3585382,Thoracic aorta elongation or tortuosity in imaging comparisons.,"The most significant examples describe changes or consistencies found in the thoracic aorta, referencing terms like elongation, tortuosity, or PACS status such as 'unchanged' or 'increased.' These descriptions often relate to prior reports, suggesting a focus on these structures.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3427579365079365,0.47,0.25,0.03,100.0,100.0
+14638,latent_14638,732,0.001464,0.00062136835,2.1308079,Comparison made with prior images indicating stability or change.,"The examples with high activation show radiological reports that make comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, specifically noting 'stable', 'unchanged', 'improvement', or 'resolved' conditions. The linguistic pattern of reference to prior radiographs and description of changes or stability is emphasized in these examples.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.53125,0.5089285714285714,0.6195652173913043,92.0,100.0
+14639,latent_14639,2429,0.004858,0.0017446143,1.4344009,Emphasis on comparative findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activations contain phrases or instructions asking to specifically compare findings from the current imaging with prior images, even directly prompting for such comparative descriptions. They emphasize providing descriptions relative to prior imaging, even in cases without explicit clinical conclusions about changes or stability, which suggests a focus on assessing the significance or impact of observed changes over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14640,latent_14640,550,0.0011,0.00059348583,2.767535,Detailed documentation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes from a prior imaging study or explicit comparisons with prior images. This includes documenting significant changes over time, stability of previous findings, or correlation of old and new observations on imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5851626702690532,0.593939393939394,0.4868421052631579,0.5692307692307692,65.0,100.0
+14641,latent_14641,1965,0.00393,0.001500322,2.1418996,Detailed instructions for image comparison focusing on specific changes.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently include direct instructions to compare current images with prior ones and explicitly mark the areas of evaluation or change, such as effusions, opacities, or tubes. This pertains to detailed comparison tasks of specific changes over time, often using terms like 'as compared to' and describing specific interval changes.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5684464070654356,0.57,0.5795454545454546,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14642,latent_14642,3182,0.006364,0.002297788,1.5433617,Evaluation of interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Highly activating examples consistently describe findings in terms of a change or unchanged status compared to previous imaging studies. This relates to assessments of stability or interval changes over time, which is a key aspect in monitoring patient progress or diagnosing new developments.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14643,latent_14643,686,0.001372,0.0006540374,2.2966535,Complex scenarios or cases involving multiple views with prior image comparisons and warnings.,"The activation levels are high when complex or warning-indicated cases involve frontal and lateral views paired with prior image comparisons, suggesting a pattern where detailed comparison across multiple views is emphasized, especially in complex scenarios or overlapping patient data.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4758925285241074,0.4943181818181818,0.4511278195488721,0.7894736842105263,76.0,100.0
+14644,latent_14644,1658,0.003316,0.0012031413,1.0905949,Detailed image comparison with prior findings.,"The key feature consistently present in highly activated examples is the emphasis on detailed image comparison, specifically between current and prior radiographs, to identify changes or stability of pathology. This involves noting changes over time or lack thereof, consistent language patterns include 'comparison to prior', 'unchanged since', or specific intervals mentioned for comparative insights.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5302750410509032,0.5376884422110553,0.528,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+14645,latent_14645,2223,0.004446,0.0016632355,1.2359434,Reports on position stability of support devices in serial imaging.,"These examples include a specific reference to the positioning and stability of various support devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, central venous catheters, pacemakers) in chest radiographs. The pattern is the commentary on device positioning with respect to previous studies, indicating stability or changes in placement.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5602745602745602,0.59,0.6875,0.33,100.0,100.0
+14646,latent_14646,793,0.001586,0.0007413275,2.0964637,Comparisons to prior images in radiology reports to assess changes over time.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons of current imaging with previous reports, specifically highlighting changes or stability in findings such as medical devices, lung opacities, or consolidations. The consistent element is the use of historical context to interpret or confirm findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4438524909691,0.465,0.4748201438848921,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14647,latent_14647,1928,0.003856,0.0013928949,1.5723441,Detailed analysis involving interval change or medical devices.,"The commonality amidst examples with high activations is a detailed interaction of multiple variables related to radiological findings, such as indications of interval change, presence or removal of medical devices, and specific assessments of progression or stability in comparison to prior studies. These reports often mention more complex clinical scenarios or changes, such as stable features amid complexities, differentiating them from simpler, unchanged findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5481940144478844,0.5577889447236181,0.546875,0.7,100.0,99.0
+14648,latent_14648,989,0.001978,0.00082527346,2.09848,No prior comparison available and unremarkable findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often note that there is no available prior comparison (e.g., no previous images to reference) and report unremarkable or normal findings. In this context, the mention of no prior comparison is significant, indicating that the findings may be evaluated based on current images alone, which could impact interpretation difficulty or certainty.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5696729957805907,0.5879396984924623,0.6440677966101694,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+14649,latent_14649,440,0.00088,0.000535471,2.4085891,Distance of tubes above the carina is noted.,These examples predominantly describe the measured distance of tubes above the carina. This precise measurement is vital in radiology to ensure proper placement of tubes and catheters and often indicates correct or incorrect positioning that demands clinical attention or adjustment.,0.898989898989899,0.9,1.0,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.8097356066221892,0.8376623376623377,0.8536585365853658,0.6481481481481481,54.0,100.0
+14650,latent_14650,3966,0.007932,0.0027390756,0.9802892,Description of findings relative to a prior image study.,These examples indicate changes or stability over time by specifically referring to prior imaging as a comparison criteria. High activation levels are linked to reports that emphasize observed stability or change in findings relating specifically to prior imaging.,0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14651,latent_14651,1260,0.00252,0.0010304836,1.676163,Comparisons to prior images to assess changes or stability.,"The pattern involves comparing current radiology findings with prior imaging, using 'comparison' to assess interval changes or stability, a common radiological practice to track disease progression or treatment effectiveness.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.5472972972972973,0.81,100.0,100.0
+14652,latent_14652,2315,0.00463,0.001686872,1.5944036,"Comparison of current and prior imaging findings, focusing on device stability or changes.","The pattern in these examples is the presence of specific comparisons between current imaging findings and those seen on prior studies, with a notable focus on stability or changes in medical devices, abnormalities, or specific lesions. Activation levels align with the clarity and detail of these comparisons.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4768253968253968,0.485,0.48,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14653,latent_14653,2158,0.004316,0.0015622851,1.2648562,Comparison to prior imaging studies impacts report structure.,"The pattern involves radiology reports that make direct comparison to a prior imaging reference, either explicitly stated or by implicit indications in the report structure. This linguistic pattern is evident when radiologists describe findings, stability, changes, or follow-up recommendations in specific relation to previous imaging studies.",0.5045955882352942,0.5510204081632653,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,24.0,0.4645030425963489,0.505,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14654,latent_14654,750,0.0015,0.0006976521,2.4866476,Emphasis on unchanged findings or explicit comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include reports in which comparisons with prior imaging or absence of available prior comparisons are explicitly stated, and findings show stability or no significant changes. The language emphasizes stability across images or mentions such comparisons explicitly.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4317307692307692,0.4517766497461929,0.4598540145985401,0.6494845360824743,97.0,100.0
+14655,latent_14655,1282,0.002564,0.0009971919,1.74206,Presence or evaluation of medical tubes/lines in radiology findings.,"The pattern involves the presence or evaluation of medical tubes or lines, such as an endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube, or central venous line, in the context of radiological chest examinations. These examples consistently highlight tubes as a key finding or subject of comparison, often with details about their placement or impact on imaging findings.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.7857142857142857,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5897435897435898,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14656,latent_14656,2228,0.004456,0.0016216957,1.4097168,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging findings, especially mentioning lungs and cardiac silhouette.","The examples show higher activation levels when there is explicit reference to the lungs, cardiomediastinal silhouettes, determinable changes like low lung volumes or specific findings within comparison statements against prior imaging. Higher activation is associated with more thorough descriptions that include comparison and context, while lack of comparison context results in lower activation.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14657,latent_14657,2485,0.00497,0.0018295099,1.6859329,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette in comparison to previous imaging.,"These examples focus on assessing the heart, lungs, and mediastinal structures' consistency or change using imaging comparisons. Findings indicating normalcy and unchanged conditions in cardiopulmonary structures (particularly cardiomediastinal) are common in the high activation examples, suggesting stability without acute changes.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4233378561736771,0.49,0.46875,0.15,100.0,100.0
+14658,latent_14658,2891,0.005782,0.0020333356,1.0708783,Comparison of interval changes in findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels describe scenarios where findings are compared with previous imaging studies to evaluate interval changes, such as growth or stability of nodules, infiltrates, or other abnormalities. This explicitly involves identifying changes or stability over time compared to prior assessments.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14659,latent_14659,1748,0.003496,0.0012497408,1.5512615,Comparison with prior radiological findings is emphasized.,All examples with higher activation levels involve findings that require comparison with prior imaging.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4733902497406846,0.505,0.5033557046979866,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14660,latent_14660,2337,0.004674,0.0016629219,1.2002097,Description highlighting changes in features compared to prior imaging.,"Radiology findings in the examples often refer to comparison with previous studies, but the emphasis is on identifying and describing changes or stability in specific abnormal features like airway tubings, pulmonary opacities, or other relevant structures, which are frequently flagged for interval changes.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.55311189776807,0.555,0.5486725663716814,0.62,100.0,100.0
+14661,latent_14661,1391,0.002782,0.001015458,1.3619149,Comparison with prior imaging findings is emphasized.,"The highly activated examples describe findings while comparing current imaging with prior studies. These mentions use terms like 'as compared to', 'unchanged from prior', or provide dates, demonstrating a frequent practice in radiology where baseline improvements, deteriorations, or consistency in pathology are assessed.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5390625,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14662,latent_14662,2678,0.005356,0.0019233447,1.6576468,Acute changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,The provided examples that exhibit activation are focused on cases where there is mention of acute changes or new findings compared to previous studies. This pattern indicates an emphasis on detecting interval changes which could indicate an onset or progression of a pathological condition.,0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.3333333333333333,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5469055710019566,0.56,0.5909090909090909,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14663,latent_14663,327,0.000654,0.00055043923,2.6563418,Significant interval changes or stable findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples all involve making comparisons between current and prior imaging studies but focus on differing or unusual findings compared to expected intervals, using terms like 'no marked interval change' or 'apparent decrease'. This pattern highlights findings that are significant in their difference from expected progression.",0.4090909090909091,0.4090909090909091,0.36,0.4736842105263157,19.0,25.0,0.4515989628349179,0.4893617021276595,0.2539682539682539,0.3902439024390244,41.0,100.0
+14664,latent_14664,2146,0.004292,0.0015797071,2.3207774,Comparison with prior imaging studies is central to the analysis.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention the comparison of current imaging results with previous studies, using phrases like 'compared to', 'comparison made', or citing specific previous studies or dates. This emphasizes a recurring theme of evaluation based on changes or consistency over time.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+14665,latent_14665,2480,0.00496,0.0017767729,1.2410182,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging and findings status (stable, unchanged, interval change).","The examples with higher activation levels often include descriptions of findings using specific phrase templates or structured comparison reports, particularly focusing on changes or comparisons with prior exams. Indicators of status like unchanged findings, interval changes, and stability of previous conditions are emphasized throughout the reports, which suggest the importance of the comparison component.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6041985019664822,0.605,0.6153846153846154,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14666,latent_14666,3089,0.006178,0.0022487326,1.3827784,Descriptions related to interval changes in fluid or mediastinal structures.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings related to changes in the patient's condition, specifically concerning fluid presence or absence in cardiac structures. These include descriptions of pleural effusions, atelectasis, or changes in mediastinal structures, which are common patterns in longitudinal radiology observations monitoring pathologies.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.4722222222222222,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14667,latent_14667,899,0.001798,0.00078872626,3.270839,Identification of interval changes or stability in comparison with previous images.,"The pattern is based on radiological comparisons involving changes or stability of specific features in sequential imaging studies, often with context-specific descriptions like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'new', or 'resolved'. These linguistic patterns occur frequently when analyzing medical images over time, looking for any interval change in the radiographic findings.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4748818484158936,0.475,0.4757281553398058,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14668,latent_14668,361,0.000722,0.0005241149,2.826348,High activation with findings provided without prior comparison.,The examples from this batch show high activation levels specifically when findings are described without making any comparison to a previous imaging study. They are either performed with no comparison being available or requested which demonstrates standard phrasing rather than variability introduced by comparison reports.,0.56875,0.6086956521739131,0.6363636363636364,0.3333333333333333,21.0,25.0,0.4980769230769231,0.5972222222222222,0.3055555555555556,0.25,44.0,100.0
+14669,latent_14669,2026,0.004052,0.001412118,1.2091793,Frequent comparison with prior imaging studies.,The pattern evident in these examples is the frequent mention of comparison with prior studies. Each high activation example refers back to previous images to assess changes over time. This highlights the critical function of serial imaging in radiology for monitoring conditions and treatment outcomes.,0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.52,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14670,latent_14670,1381,0.002762,0.0010501404,1.2951047,Descriptions include comparisons with prior images using frontal and lateral views.,"Examples with high activation are characterized by analysis of multiple images (frontal and lateral) as well as comparisons with prior images to refine findings and confirm stability in conditions. The pattern includes detailed comparison to track changes, crucial for conditions like effusion or changes in lung opacification.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14671,latent_14671,1077,0.002154,0.0008799458,2.0317864,Multi-view thoracic imaging comparison with detailed structural analysis.,"These examples exhibit patterns of analyzing current chest radiographs using both frontal and lateral views, often combined with prior views for comparison. The diagnostic approach includes identifying cardiomediastinal abnormalities, pulmonary opacities, and vascular markings. High activation levels suggest this thorough multi-view comparison and detailed examination of thoracic structures.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14672,latent_14672,1521,0.003042,0.0011527049,1.470161,Detailed evaluation of support and monitoring device positioning.,"The pattern emphasizes details concerning support devices such as tubes and their positioning. Reports with high activation specifically describe changes or evaluations of medical devices' positioning, indicating their significance in the findings. Examples of such devices include endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and gastric tubes among others.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4815662745717218,0.5025125628140703,0.5084745762711864,0.3,100.0,99.0
+14673,latent_14673,1052,0.002104,0.0009827089,1.9735053,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison with previous imaging.,"The observed pattern across these examples is the frequent presence of a stable finding or unchanged condition compared to previous imaging studies, as indicated by terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'no significant change'. These descriptions explicitly note that certain conditions have not progressed or that previous changes have not been significant, which is crucial in medical imaging for tracking the state of a patient's condition.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4882755811289049,0.4924623115577889,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,99.0
+14674,latent_14674,1811,0.003622,0.0013617116,1.4939777,Comparison with prior image focused on changes.,"Higher activations are observed when the task involves comparison between current and prior images, especially when assessing changes in cardiopulmonary findings or medical devices placement. This pattern highlights the importance of interval change detection in radiological analysis.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.482814892922598,0.485,0.4827586206896552,0.42,100.0,100.0
+14675,latent_14675,208,0.000416,0.00037921662,3.8207192,Retrocardiac opacity associated with potential lung pathologies such as pneumonia or atelectasis.,"Highly active examples often note retrocardiac opacities, which are frequently associated with conditions like pneumonia or atelectasis, especially when seen with additional lung pathologies. This descriptor specifically mentions the 'retrocardiac' region consistently across several examples, and denotes a frequent area for assessing specific lung conditions.",0.9407051282051282,0.945945945945946,0.8571428571428571,1.0,12.0,25.0,0.7306034482758621,0.808,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,100.0
+14676,latent_14676,770,0.00154,0.00080226734,2.0193539,"Normal cardiac silhouette, mediastinal, and hilar contours despite other findings.","The pattern common among these examples is the detailed evaluation of cardiac silhouette, mediastinal, and hilar contours within normal limits, despite various other findings reported. This focus on cardiac aspects being unchanged, normal, or stable is prevalent in examples with higher activation scores.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5571835571835572,0.5572916666666666,0.5392156862745098,0.5913978494623656,93.0,99.0
+14677,latent_14677,452,0.000904,0.0006367205,4.7407565,Focus on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The identified pattern in these examples includes descriptions of the findings being contextualized in the presence of comparison to prior imaging, particularly with a focus on interval changes such as stability or resolution. The examples with higher activation consistently detail changes (e.g., improvement, stability, etc.) in findings over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4265791297965176,0.4367088607594936,0.3037974683544304,0.4137931034482758,58.0,100.0
+14678,latent_14678,3886,0.007772,0.0027077016,1.1282061,Frontal and lateral chest views with interval comparison to prior images.,"These examples consistently include both frontal and lateral views of chest imaging along with comparisons to prior studies, with detailed descriptions of any interval changes or stability of conditions over time. The focus is on changes or stability in findings between current and prior images, particularly concerning consolidation, opacities, and effusions.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4766009852216748,0.49,0.4924242424242424,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14679,latent_14679,2878,0.005756,0.0020147138,1.1210866,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"This dataset features descriptions of chest X-ray findings often compared to prior imaging studies. High activation is linked to reports where findings specifically highlight changes or stability compared to earlier images, thus emphasizing longitudinal image analysis. The presence of commands that ask for a comparison, alongside specific changes noted, suggests that such comparative analyses yield high activation values.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14680,latent_14680,2048,0.004096,0.0014972619,1.2770994,Comparison of radiological findings with prior images to assess changes or stability.,Examples showing activation indicate descriptions where findings are compared between current and prior images. These references include identifying changes or noting stability relative to prior imaging results.,0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4206529397948798,0.445,0.4609929078014184,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14681,latent_14681,533,0.001066,0.00078716665,4.5593905,Unchanged cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours from prior imaging.,"This set of examples focuses on identifying unchanged or stable findings from previous images or studies, especially regarding cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours as indicative of the lack of acute changes over time. This stability is characteristic of chronic conditions or non-acute presentations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5538057742782152,0.5823529411764706,0.4912280701754385,0.4,70.0,100.0
+14682,latent_14682,1885,0.00377,0.0014117575,1.4790694,Comparisons show stability or improvement in findings.,"These examples activate on explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies where either stability or improvement is noted, especially for devices or specific pathologies. Reports repeatedly reference unchanged positions or findings, reflecting a pattern of stability or improvement over time.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5694444444444444,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14683,latent_14683,1804,0.003608,0.0013531962,1.5361652,Focus on changes in medical device positioning or anatomical structures between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently focus on the comparison between current and previous imaging to identify changes in medical devices (like catheters or tubes) or anatomical structures, indicating a focus on interval changes in equipment placement or structural changes rather than overall findings.",0.4889445139758031,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14684,latent_14684,689,0.001378,0.0006839156,1.91178,Current radiology study analysis without prior image comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently feature an analysis of current radiographic images without appropriate prior image comparisons. This lack of explicit, provided prior comparison data (e.g., specific mention of not having prior images or stating 'None') contrasts with the norm of making detailed prior study comparisons in order to assess changes over time, which is common practice in radiology reports.",0.6435601198117245,0.6530612244897959,0.7058823529411765,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.4825417891111321,0.5163043478260869,0.4615384615384615,0.2823529411764706,85.0,99.0
+14685,latent_14685,1272,0.002544,0.0009494115,1.4189771,Comparison to prior imaging studies in reports.,"The pattern involves making a description of radiological findings in comparison to a prior study or image, which is an essential part of follow-up examinations to assess changes or stability in patient condition.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4269949066213922,0.46,0.4729729729729729,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14686,latent_14686,358,0.000716,0.000542778,3.7110126,Pigtail catheter placement or related pleural findings.,"High activation is associated with descriptions involving changes or stability of conditions related to pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or use of pigtail catheters, as these reports focus upon follow-up evaluations indicating interval changes or stability.",0.9781680113906028,0.9782608695652174,0.9545454545454546,1.0,21.0,25.0,0.8148148148148149,0.8611111111111112,0.9285714285714286,0.5909090909090909,44.0,100.0
+14687,latent_14687,1950,0.0039,0.0014838361,1.4925199,Focus on interval changes and clinical indications tied to image comparisons.,"Examples with high activation involve prompting for changes over time by comparing current images to prior ones, often in relation to specific medical indications and findings such as improvement or deterioration in medical conditions. These examples indicate a focus on evaluating and describing interval changes in images and patient conditions based on clinical indications.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4875082968272932,0.5125628140703518,0.5104895104895105,0.73,100.0,99.0
+14688,latent_14688,2463,0.004926,0.0018599107,1.5904875,"Comparison of radiological findings between current and prior images, noting diagnostic changes.","The examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiology reports that include comparison and analysis of changes across different imaging modalities, views (frontal and lateral), or prior reports, particularly focusing on diagnostic observations like pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, or devices. The descriptions often include references to potential changes or stability in these findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14689,latent_14689,715,0.00143,0.0007618731,2.3140683,Comparisons indicating changes in radiological findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently use a structure that includes imaging comparisons with mentions of potential or definite change in specific findings, particularly in the context of monitoring conditions like pneumonia, heart size, or other significant pathologies. These comparisons are often mentioned explicitly, with prior study dates or explicit mentions of stability or change over time.",0.5493311036789297,0.5510204081632653,0.5454545454545454,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.4755003450655624,0.483695652173913,0.4285714285714285,0.3928571428571428,84.0,100.0
+14690,latent_14690,3463,0.006926,0.0024161953,1.9529674,Comparison with prior imaging and noted interval changes.,"Highly activated examples frequently reference a comparison with prior imaging studies, accompanied by detailed observations about changes or stability in radiological findings. The pattern reflects the use of prior comparisons as a significant contextual basis for evaluating current radiologic status.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5398230088495575,0.61,100.0,100.0
+14691,latent_14691,1715,0.00343,0.001231736,1.8460739,Complex medical history and multiple prior interventions.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where patients have undergone multiple complex medical interventions and is representative of cases where changes in conditions are monitored over time, often involving complex medical histories; these involve adjusting or evaluating multiple prior interventions, like pleural effusions, previous surgical changes, or other medical device placements. This aligns with complex cross-relational patterns expected to exhibit the desired activations.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14692,latent_14692,539,0.001078,0.00060675835,2.3298929,Tube positioning and comparison to previous studies.,"The pattern observed is a focus on positioning and description of various tubes (such as ET or Dobhoff tubes) within the body, especially in relation to the carina or stomach, or their positioning following a change or procedure. This would often involve comments on the stability or change in the positions of tubes between images.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5594575926127895,0.5602409638554217,0.4623655913978494,0.6515151515151515,66.0,100.0
+14693,latent_14693,1717,0.003434,0.0013130401,1.6607128,Comparison with prior imaging and clinical context.,"The examples indicate a likely pattern in which findings are described with comparison to prior imaging and involve changes or stability in anatomical or pathological features. The activation is high when additional significant clinical information regarding the disease or condition is provided or implied, especially any interval changes or unique procedural notes.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4899328859060403,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14694,latent_14694,618,0.001236,0.0004949843,2.3679786,"Comparison of current findings to prior images, emphasizing stability or improvement without acute changes.","The pattern involves evaluating current findings in the radiology study to assess for changes compared to prior images. This often includes describing the heart and lungs as clear or unchanged without acute findings. The focus is on stability or improvement in prior conditions rather than acute changes, which is why the examples with unchanged or improved findings were activated more strongly.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5078625509609784,0.5266272189349113,0.417910447761194,0.4057971014492754,69.0,100.0
+14695,latent_14695,3559,0.007118,0.0024529272,1.1094759,Explicit comparison with prior radiological images.,"This data suggests that the presence of phrasing related to comparison with a ""prior frontal image"" or equivalent not only indicates a comparison with prior imagery but doesn't consistently activate. Consequently, a pattern involving both the existence of technical description and comparative analysis may result, conditional on explicit discrepancy observation in essential elements such as effusion or pleural alterations.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14696,latent_14696,2855,0.00571,0.0020145804,1.1034282,Emphasis on describing changes or stability by comparing current and prior images.,"The high activation examples consistently provide 'comparison' with prior imaging, detailing changes or stability of findings. These reports often use explicit instructions to describe findings in relation to previous images.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.46,0.4710144927536231,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14697,latent_14697,3049,0.006098,0.002182654,1.2469107,"Detailed comparisons to prior imaging findings, highlighting stability or changes.","Examples with high activation levels frequently describe the findings in radiology studies that include a detailed comparison to prior images. These cases emphasize comparisons to previous imaging studies using characteristics such as 'consistent with', 'unchanged', 'stable', and 'when compared to'. The language also notes specifics about the positioning of medical devices or anatomical conditions.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5388471177944862,0.54,0.5363636363636364,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14698,latent_14698,609,0.001218,0.0006222094,2.3240619,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the comparison of current findings to previous imaging, often including explicit mentions of 'comparison' or 'evaluation' phrases. The discussion of changes or stability in specific findings from past to current imaging leads to higher activation.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4727728411938938,0.4887640449438202,0.4503816793893129,0.7564102564102564,78.0,100.0
+14699,latent_14699,633,0.001266,0.0007587704,2.9458961,Observations related to changes or interventions in thoracic devices or conditions.,"Examples with high activation indicate changes or observations made with reference to a prior thoracic condition or intervention, such as tube insertion or removal, repositioning of medical devices (like PICC lines or chest tubes), and changes in lung or pleura conditions (e.g., pneumothorax, pleural effusion).",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5039052658100277,0.5083798882681564,0.4457831325301205,0.4683544303797468,79.0,100.0
+14700,latent_14700,669,0.001338,0.0005821372,2.8714395,Detailed evaluation against prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve detailed descriptions and evaluations of current radiological findings against prior imaging, regardless of explicit comparison statements. They notably include assessments of stability, changes, or specific descriptions of unchanged features from prior images, rather than absence of comparison as in less activated examples.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5199254910815082,0.5238095238095238,0.4957264957264957,0.651685393258427,89.0,100.0
+14701,latent_14701,1659,0.003318,0.0012536347,1.3087864,Detailed comparison of current radiology findings to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation scores consistently describe detailed analysis of current imaging findings while comparing them against prior imaging studies. This often includes the use of specific phrasing that reflects close evaluation of changes or stability between the current and past scans, such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph' and reference to specific findings.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5599695005718643,0.5628140703517588,0.5517241379310345,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+14702,latent_14702,2110,0.00422,0.0015190956,1.354552,Findings include comparisons to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples describe comparisons, typically with prior images, indicating changes or the stability of certain findings over time. Phrases like 'as compared to', 'stable', or 'interval change' are used, focusing on radiological follow-up or monitoring progression.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14703,latent_14703,996,0.001992,0.00085428846,1.3699197,Detailed comparison of interval changes in imaging findings against prior studies.,"The most representative examples heavily involve thorough descriptions of new findings or changes in specific medical conditions compared to prior imaging studies. The comparison emphasizes identifying any developments, stability, or changes in findings, indicating a diagnostic process focused on monitoring progression or resolution of a condition over time by assessing sequential images against a previous baseline.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4823529411764706,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14704,latent_14704,607,0.001214,0.0006588612,1.8437536,Comparison between current and prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly involve mentioning findings or changes observed when comparing current imaging with prior studies. This includes terms like 'compared to previous', 'interval change', 'new finding', and explicit references to comparative dates indicating stable or changing conditions based on past and present images.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4798625214810186,0.4804469273743016,0.4339622641509434,0.5822784810126582,79.0,100.0
+14705,latent_14705,1313,0.002626,0.0010387201,1.8365276,Comparison of current to prior imaging focusing on medical devices.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve instructions to compare findings between current and prior frontal and/or lateral chest images. Specifically, they seem to arise in contexts where new medical devices (like central venous catheters or surgical devices) are mentioned or there are explicit instructions to assess changes in such interventions. These observations suggest that the presence and positioning of medical devices relative to previous imaging studies are influential factors in elevated activation.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5540540540540541,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14706,latent_14706,359,0.000718,0.00053962227,2.9186983,Analysis of post-procedural changes.,"Examples with activation levels above 5 predominantly focus on following post-procedural changes in patients, such as tube placements or assessments related to their position in comparison to prior images. This includes chest tubes, PICC lines, and other indwelling instruments, emphasizing stabilization, removal, or alteration over time.",0.4946236559139785,0.5531914893617021,0.5555555555555556,0.2272727272727272,22.0,25.0,0.4879101389299438,0.5704225352112676,0.2790697674418604,0.2857142857142857,42.0,100.0
+14707,latent_14707,2047,0.004094,0.0014693725,1.386638,Reports include device placements and changes over time from prior imaging.,"The pattern revolves around scenarios where a comparison is possible and evaluations focus predominantly on changes or placements in medical device positions or anatomical changes across time points. These reports often detail intervals of change in devices or anatomical features, signaling their importance in the activation pattern.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5428571428571428,0.38,100.0,100.0
+14708,latent_14708,262,0.000524,0.00047596017,2.693849,Stable normal cardiac and mediastinal contours; absence of acute pathology.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently include normal cardiac and mediastinal contours or silhouettes, no pleural effusions, pneumothorax or focal opacities, which suggests that the pattern identifies normal cardiopulmonary findings despite a variety of contexts or underlying conditions. Other features such as hyperinflation, absence of significant change, or normal lung appearances are mentioned alongside the stable cardiomediastinal contour, which aligns with the lack of identified acute issues but still maintains attention in reports.",0.67987987987988,0.6829268292682927,0.5714285714285714,0.75,16.0,25.0,0.6577847439916404,0.6946564885496184,0.4210526315789473,0.7741935483870968,31.0,100.0
+14709,latent_14709,1653,0.003306,0.0012130912,1.594427,Description of findings in comparison to previous imaging studies.,"Examples showing activation levels >0 all involve descriptions of imaging findings either in direct comparison to previous studies or asking for such comparisons, indicating a focus on assessing changes over time and whether findings persist or resolve.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4463492063492064,0.455,0.464,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14710,latent_14710,1988,0.003976,0.0014030678,1.160079,Detailed comparison with prior imaging noting specific stability or change.,"Examples with activation levels 5.0 typically provide a detailed comparison of current imaging findings to prior ones, noting specific changes or the lack thereof. They often describe subtle changes or stability in medical conditions over time through direct comparative language.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5046904315196998,0.505,0.5052631578947369,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14711,latent_14711,2470,0.00494,0.0017994745,1.8141797,Evaluation against prior imaging to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference prior radiological comparisons and findings, suggesting a pattern that emphasizes evaluating current images against previous ones to assess changes or stability over time.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14712,latent_14712,759,0.001518,0.0007030519,2.7265584,Instructions emphasize comparison with prior images to assess interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently call for a comparison of current imaging findings with prior studies, specifically indicating the presence or absence of interval changes or improvements in the condition being evaluated. This focus on monitoring changes over time in medical imaging often reflects key diagnostic insights especially in conditions requiring continuous observation.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5477592977592978,0.5706806282722513,0.5352112676056338,0.8260869565217391,92.0,99.0
+14713,latent_14713,1100,0.0022,0.00096678,1.8287607,Radiological studies showing clear lungs and the absence of acute cardiopulmonary issues.,"Examples with high activation values consistently describe clear lungs and lack of notable markers like consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, indicating normal appearance or absence of acute pathologies in the lungs, heart, and mediastinal structures.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6749268585431722,0.675,0.6804123711340206,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14714,latent_14714,2306,0.004612,0.0016636498,1.4770846,Current and prior imaging compared with both frontal and lateral views.,"The pattern denotes cases where detailed comparison between current and past imaging exists, especially when both lateral and frontal views are available. Higher activations correlate with the presence of both these perspectives, suggesting that extensive detail or enhanced diagnostics is achieved by using multiple perspectives in comparison.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5212765957446809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14715,latent_14715,2041,0.004082,0.0015615142,1.5103238,Direct comparison of imaging findings with prior studies.,Highly representative samples explicitly reference the comparison of current findings with previous studies or multiple prior studies. This pattern emphasizes the importance of directly linking current imaging findings to known previous states for evaluation.,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5469055710019566,0.56,0.5447761194029851,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14716,latent_14716,961,0.001922,0.00085611566,1.7158983,Emphasis on stable/unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"High activation instances consistently involve descriptions of stable or unchanged findings when comparing current imaging studies to prior ones. The reports reflect a focus on looking for changes over time, often noting stability or absence of significant changes.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4635084522724972,0.47,0.4615384615384615,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14717,latent_14717,1262,0.002524,0.0010377784,2.4441733,Stable findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples primarily exhibiting the pattern involve comparisons against prior images, but with a specific focus on stable findings, including unchanged mediastinal and hilar contours, stable cardiac size, and unchanged pathologies like opacities or pleural effusions. This implies an analysis where detecting no significant change against previous studies is key.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4552533222591362,0.4646464646464646,0.4520547945205479,0.3333333333333333,99.0,99.0
+14718,latent_14718,624,0.001248,0.0010469358,3.254072,Description of unchanged normal cardiothoracic features comparing current to prior imaging.,"The activated examples consistently describe normal radiological findings after examining current imaging compared to prior imaging studies, focusing on unchanged or normal status of the cardiomediastinal silhouette and other structures like lungs and hila. This reflects a pattern of identifying unchanged normal features across radiology examinations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4847308488612836,0.5138121546961326,0.4385964912280701,0.3086419753086419,81.0,100.0
+14719,latent_14719,1917,0.003834,0.001387186,1.362609,Unchanged or persistent findings relative to prior imaging.,"Examples showing stabilizing or new abnormalities identified based on prior imaging comparisons had lower activation levels, while those mentioning unchanged normal features or negative findings (e.g., 'no pneumothorax', 'normal heart size') relative to prior reports show higher activations.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14720,latent_14720,3068,0.006136,0.0022121256,1.3347782,Presence of change compared to prior imaging studies.,"Knowledge of the comparison to prior imaging study is critical to note any changes or stability in the radiology findings, and prompts with clear comparisons and analyses for change are activated strongly. The comparison serves as a key factor for clinical decision-making.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5555555555555556,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14721,latent_14721,465,0.00093,0.00055108016,2.080497,Increased interstitial markings or opacity in lung fields.,"Higher activation examples consistently include descriptions of increased interstitial markings or opacity, often in the context of underlying conditions like edema or chronic lung disease. This pattern appears to reflect consistent findings related to increased interstitial changes across various contexts.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5869565217391304,0.6052631578947368,0.4411764705882353,0.5769230769230769,52.0,100.0
+14722,latent_14722,1832,0.003664,0.0013912925,1.6526889,Use of comparison to evaluate interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently describe direct comparisons between current and prior radiological exams, noting changes or stability in specific findings. They emphasize checking for any interval changes or stability of findings over time, which is crucial in follow-up imaging courses to determine progress or stagnation of a condition.",0.6427070197562001,0.66,0.6111111111111112,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5524361712948835,0.56,0.5476190476190477,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14723,latent_14723,382,0.000764,0.00048451097,2.5428078,Comparison to prior images highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels often describe findings in comparison to prior studies, indicating interval changes or stability in specific conditions. This pattern emphasizes the importance of temporal analysis and pattern recognition over time in radiology reports.",0.5457892314772204,0.5531914893617021,0.5161290322580645,0.7272727272727273,22.0,25.0,0.4768397374099068,0.4797297297297297,0.3370786516853932,0.625,48.0,100.0
+14724,latent_14724,632,0.001264,0.0006555045,1.81773,Use of 'comparison to prior' in image descriptions.,"These activations suggest that explicit mention of comparison to previous images is present. The examples consistently refer to evaluations of current images in relation to prior images, highlighting any interval changes or stability in findings.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4788203249741711,0.4804469273743016,0.4363636363636363,0.6075949367088608,79.0,100.0
+14725,latent_14725,330,0.00066,0.0004293213,2.9996057,Identifying 'no significant change' or stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation involve explicit reference to prior imaging and an assessment stating 'no significant change' or stable findings in successive imaging studies. This is a linguistic pattern indicative of clinicians' focus on monitoring stability or progress through comparison, often when no acute change is necessary.",0.5763546798029556,0.627906976744186,0.6,0.3333333333333333,18.0,25.0,0.4402288467329118,0.5454545454545454,0.2105263157894736,0.1860465116279069,43.0,100.0
+14726,latent_14726,1891,0.003782,0.0014390919,1.4888914,Imbalance in pairing current observations with comparison to prior images.,"The highest activation levels are seen in cases reporting changes or features of major concern related to new or persistent conditions, as well as those comparing with prior imagery. However, examples with low activations do not focus on subjective or observational comparisons to previous studies, indicating differing focus on diagnostic changes or pathologies.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3975205654037771,0.48,0.4885057471264368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+14727,latent_14727,3873,0.007746,0.002749732,1.3997524,Focus on interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activations highlight specific interval changes observed on comparative radiographs, such as the presence, removal, or adjustment of medical devices or changes in pathology, indicating their clinical significance. These reports often emphasize findings in detailed direct comparison to prior images, highlighting the evolution of medical conditions or interventions over time.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14728,latent_14728,2250,0.0045,0.0015835633,1.2831708,Interval changes or stability findings compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently mention new or interval changes compared to prior imaging, even if no acute findings are noted. These reports focus on any change, emphasizing intervals of stability or minor variations, which are typical markers of monitoring in radiology.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5461627162075593,0.5527638190954773,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,99.0
+14729,latent_14729,1418,0.002836,0.0011389067,1.93009,Explicit mention of findings in comparative context to prior imaging.,"Higher activations are observed in examples where there is a clear reference to stating radiology findings in comparative context, specifically with explicit indications of differences or stabilities from prior examinations. This includes mentioning changes such as stability or interval changes, suggesting the relevance of observed changes or absence thereof, emphasized by clinical significance in follow-up assessment.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5203252032520326,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14730,latent_14730,781,0.001562,0.0007551427,1.6214248,Presence of an instruction to compare with prior image but stating 'comparison: None'.,"The examples show a pattern where the activation is higher when there is explicit instruction to compare current imaging with prior imaging, despite stating that no actual comparison exists or was made. This creates an apparent contradiction: a task of comparison without prior data.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4716798970178073,0.4923857868020304,0.4754098360655737,0.2989690721649484,97.0,100.0
+14731,latent_14731,2025,0.00405,0.0015340085,1.4472197,Indications of stability or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations commonly include phrases that indicate stability or unchanged findings compared to prior studies. Such language usage is typical in medical imaging reports where stability over time is a significant finding, regularly indicating benign or known conditions without progression.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14732,latent_14732,748,0.001496,0.000773942,2.1196432,Evaluation of medical devices or tubes in portable chest radiographs.,"A relatively high activation level is associated with cases that involve portable chest radiograph findings and evaluation of medical devices such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or other catheters. These items are routinely reported in portable radiograph results, where assessing the position and any relevant changes from previous images is crucial.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.409954233409611,0.4345549738219895,0.360655737704918,0.2417582417582417,91.0,100.0
+14733,latent_14733,2182,0.004364,0.0015820209,1.397978,Comparison of lung pathology status like effusions or opacities with previous imaging studies.,"The examples consistently exhibit radiological reports where changes in lung conditions involving pleural effusion, consolidation, or atelectasis are described in comparison to previous imaging studies. The examples focus on pathology related to the lung parenchyma or pleural space, including mentions of haziness, opacity, effusion, and pneumothorax.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5048885999349854,0.505,0.5048543689320388,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14734,latent_14734,1466,0.002932,0.0012108156,1.9076501,Emphasis on interval changes or stability when compared to prior images.,The examples with higher activation involve descriptions of radiographic findings that are explicitly compared to prior images or involve reports of changes/unexpected stability in abnormalities over time. This pattern reflects close monitoring and importance of interval changes in the clinical context of imaging studies.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4199419941994199,0.42,0.4183673469387755,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14735,latent_14735,1659,0.003318,0.0012602063,1.6141493,Reports emphasizing stability or absence of change upon comparison with prior images.,"These examples focus on descriptions of findings in radiology reports, often noting 'no pneumothorax', 'no effusion', and 'no significant change' or 'adequate position' when comparing with prior images, indicating an emphasis on stability or lack of acute changes in clinical states. They frequently make qualitative comparisons to prior exams, highlighting stability and unchanged conditions.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14736,latent_14736,1116,0.002232,0.00094752526,1.9539862,Unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouette in comparison studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe stable cardiomediastinal silhouettes or unchanged cardiac silhouette alongside descriptions of other thoracic findings or procedures. These examples use terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'compatible' with prior to indicate comparisons without significant change in the cardiac area.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5483870967741935,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14737,latent_14737,1391,0.002782,0.0010512463,1.6982569,Clear temporal comparison with prior radiological findings affecting conclusions.,"The activation levels imply that instances with lower levels exhibit well-specified current observations from imaging but involve less comparison with past observations and trends across multiple prior images, while higher activation levels include explicit references to comparisons or changes over time and context-sensitive interpretations.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4364886731391586,0.4371859296482412,0.4392523364485981,0.4747474747474747,99.0,100.0
+14738,latent_14738,2819,0.005638,0.002032674,1.190944,Detailed comparison of findings with prior imaging.,"The pattern observed indicates that chest radiographs with descriptions comparing current and previous images, often noting detailed changes or stability in clinical findings, are associated with higher activations. This involves explicit comparison with prior imaging, implying significant clinical review or changes from previous states.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14739,latent_14739,273,0.000546,0.00044844748,2.2476392,Volume overload assessment in chest imaging.,"These examples highlight the presence of ""volume overload"" most notably in the context of patients with a history of heart failure, fluid retention symptoms, or related conditions. This is a frequent radiological query where one is assessing for vascular congestion or cardiac silhouette changes, often using terms like 'volume overload', 'cardiomegaly', or 'pulmonary edema'.",0.6703772418058133,0.6829268292682927,0.5882352941176471,0.625,16.0,25.0,0.6264363908342966,0.6940298507462687,0.4186046511627907,0.5294117647058824,34.0,100.0
+14740,latent_14740,847,0.001694,0.0011918338,2.7984257,Atelectasis or pleural effusion comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples highlight the presence of atelectasis or pleural effusion, often mentioned in conjunction with comparisons to prior imaging to assess change in lung opacification or volume.",0.8181818181818181,0.82,0.7666666666666667,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.7399739973997399,0.74,0.7352941176470589,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14741,latent_14741,1525,0.00305,0.0011137099,1.3096033,Comparison with or reference to prior thoracic imaging or findings.,"These examples typically involve a description of radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, often focusing on thoracic anatomical features such as lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, or medical devices (e.g., tubes, lines). The comparison with prior data or the lack thereof is a central theme in radiology reports, providing context for changes or stability in medical conditions.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4086339444115908,0.475,0.4850299401197604,0.81,100.0,100.0
+14742,latent_14742,388,0.000776,0.00056486565,2.218476,"Detailed radiological report comparison with prior images, highlighting stability or change.","These examples indicate the pattern of descriptions that compare current state of radiological findings to prior imaging or reports, focusing on interval changes or stability. This includes observations of unchanged features over time, details of typical structures, and mentions of devices or treatments (like chest tubes) showing stability or change since prior assessments.",0.5384615384615384,0.5416666666666666,0.5172413793103449,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.5514592933947773,0.5616438356164384,0.3846153846153846,0.6521739130434783,46.0,100.0
+14743,latent_14743,1021,0.002042,0.0007612169,2.0810308,Comparison with previous imaging to assess interval changes or stability.,"The activation levels are higher for examples where the instructions clearly specify a comparison should be made between current and prior images, suggesting a significance to the pattern of evaluating interval change or stability in findings when radiological studies are conducted.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14744,latent_14744,1350,0.0027,0.0010754339,2.3018336,Stable findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The activated examples describe stability or no significant change in findings upon comparison with prior imaging. They contain phrases like 'stable appearance', 'unchanged', 'no new findings', and the use of previous dates to emphasize continuity and absence of change.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14745,latent_14745,878,0.001756,0.00076782366,2.3316536,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples exhibit a pattern of providing a description of current findings in the radiography study and explicitly comparing them to prior frontal image findings using phrases like 'comparison to prior', 'no significant change compared to', and timestamps of previous studies or descriptions of stability/change over time. These indications of active comparison with prior imagery differentiate them from less activated examples that lack such details.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5509472993768763,0.555,0.5462184873949579,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14746,latent_14746,796,0.001592,0.00073765824,2.7890224,Comparison with prior images or examinations.,Examples with high activation levels ask for a comparison or description of findings in the current radiology study against prior images or examinations. This reflects a specific linguistic pattern in radiology for tracking changes over time.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4231918708906156,0.4559585492227979,0.4589041095890411,0.7204301075268817,93.0,100.0
+14747,latent_14747,2863,0.005726,0.0020714963,1.6013867,Complex analysis of imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The high activation examples often involve detailed comparisons of current and prior imaging, specifically highlighting interventions, catheter positions, and changes in opacities. These details require the model to assess placement and interval changes accurately, involving complex analysis related to device management or clinical states like pneumothorax or effusions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14748,latent_14748,3509,0.007018,0.0024583326,1.3101275,Descriptive comparison of imaging focused on changes in medical devices or specific clinical findings.,"The examples with the highest activations consistently describe the presence of a prior study and then provide a clear comparison, often noting changes in medical devices or other clinical findings that would be important for continuity of care in these situations. The activations suggest particular significance in recognizing and describing these changes or the addition/removal of devices.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5985547972701726,0.6,0.5892857142857143,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14749,latent_14749,2619,0.005238,0.0018771377,1.2393295,Focus on tube placement and positioning in serial chest imaging.,"These examples with high activation levels all involve monitoring the presence or condition of tubes and catheters in chest radiographs, such as Dobbhoff tubes, NG tubes, or central lines. The reports focus on tube placements, changes from prior exams, and ensuring positions remain appropriate without complications like pneumothorax.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,100.0,100.0
+14750,latent_14750,2381,0.004762,0.0017164728,1.520164,Stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples highlight descriptions of unchanged or stable findings when comparing current and previous imaging studies. This emphasis on stability or lack of change, despite the presentation of medical concerns, is crucial in radiological assessments over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6096486838154338,0.61,0.6170212765957447,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14751,latent_14751,400,0.0008,0.00058180786,2.4425285,Findings describe normal features without acute abnormality.,"The examples with higher activation levels contain patterns where the findings indicate no acute abnormalities or pathologies despite a detailed diagnostic process or series of images being examined. This involves descriptions of normal structures and absence of concerning issues, showing the clear 'normal' state of health in images examined.",0.5957446808510638,0.5957446808510638,0.56,0.6363636363636364,22.0,25.0,0.5797161361444123,0.5933333333333334,0.4246575342465753,0.62,50.0,100.0
+14752,latent_14752,980,0.00196,0.00085061893,1.7039517,Findings are stable or improved compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings as stable or improved compared to prior imaging studies. This alignment with stable or improving clinical outcomes often signals decreased concern from previous evaluations, thus triggering higher representation of the pattern.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4918283963227783,0.4974874371859296,0.4936708860759494,0.3939393939393939,99.0,100.0
+14753,latent_14753,1661,0.003322,0.0012437875,1.6456536,Explicit comparative analysis to prior imaging studies with detail on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to findings observed in previous or other comparable studies, with specifics denoting the nature and impact of prior changes. Reports often explicitly mention earlier conditions and existing abnormalities or treatments, providing context to current diagnoses or assessments.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5649891247281182,0.565,0.5656565656565656,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14754,latent_14754,1105,0.00221,0.0008433962,1.5439782,Observation of stability or change compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently describe changes or lack thereof in the patient's condition compared to previous imaging studies. This suggests a pattern where the model detects interest in observing stability or change in medical conditions over time, especially in relation to follow-up or prior examinations.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5084745762711864,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14755,latent_14755,2380,0.00476,0.0017604943,2.1972933,Focus on findings that are unchanged from prior exams.,"This pattern suggests focus on detailed ongoing assessment through comparison of current and prior imaging studies, specifically highlighting unchanged or stable findings over time, described in terms like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', and stability of specific findings (e.g., effusions remaining the same). This indicates a focus on consistent, unchanged radiological findings across images.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.7272727272727273,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5802469135802469,0.47,100.0,100.0
+14756,latent_14756,1168,0.002336,0.00091686595,1.8304571,Comparison across both frontal and lateral images.,"Examples with high activation levels refer to protocols or reports that make comparative analyses using current imaging alongside both 'prior frontal' and 'current' lateral images, emphasizing the assessment of consistency or progression with multiple imaging angles.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14757,latent_14757,874,0.001748,0.00085295434,1.8996,Stable or slightly changed findings in comparison to prior images without acute changes.,"The highly activated examples mainly focus on comparing current imaging to prior images to determine changes, specifically when there is a stability or minimal change in the findings relevant to the clinical condition (excluding significant acute pathology developments). These comparisons are particularly highlighted in reports when the expected changes are minimal or indicative of stable conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.5508474576271186,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14758,latent_14758,1418,0.002836,0.0011883868,2.023556,Emphasis on changes compared to prior imaging.,"All examples with relatively high activation scores (activation >= 4) involve specific references to changes, or lack thereof, in the findings compared to prior imaging examinations. These reports highlight the comparison to previous images to assess for stability or change.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14759,latent_14759,406,0.000812,0.0005141776,1.9832544,Description format consistent with prior image comparison.,"Examples showing high activation levels often describe findings using a predetermined template or structure, which usually mentions comparing the current image to a prior image or references an observation template. Lower-activation examples do not strictly follow this template or relate to comparison findings in a structured way.",0.3049583150504607,0.3125,0.3333333333333333,0.4347826086956521,23.0,25.0,0.2833444222665779,0.2913907284768212,0.1666666666666666,0.2745098039215686,51.0,100.0
+14760,latent_14760,2175,0.00435,0.0016381139,1.3301983,Reports mentioning comparison with prior imaging studies.,Samples with high activation levels reference the comparison between current imaging and prior imaging studies. This consistency in mention of comparative analysis of radiographic images is the pattern observed.,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14761,latent_14761,2481,0.004962,0.0017807684,1.3836079,Findings described with explicit comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation describe the evaluation of imaging findings by comparing them to a prior study, explicitly noted in the reports. This involves assessing interval changes or stability of abnormalities, consistent with the radiological pattern of evaluating disease progression or resolution.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14762,latent_14762,3940,0.00788,0.002754722,1.3852227,Focus on interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the analysis of changes or stability over time, as noted in descriptions comparing current imaging to prior studies. This pattern focuses on how radiological findings have evolved, whether showing stability, improvement, or deterioration.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5976674900053474,0.605,0.5826771653543307,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14763,latent_14763,1551,0.003102,0.0011225241,1.4397153,Comparison of interval changes in cardiopulmonary status on serial imaging.,"Examples with high activation frequently describe changes over time addressing stabilization or changes in specific features compared to prior imaging, particularly focusing on cardiomediastinal and lung findings, more so than equipment (e.g. tubes/catheters) positions alone.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14764,latent_14764,421,0.000842,0.0005869085,3.4555357,Description of interval changes or stability in the position of medical devices from prior imaging.,"The pattern is evident across examples detailing changes in medical devices, such as lines or tubes, in comparison to prior imaging, often describing intervals or positioning relative to anatomical landmarks. These reports emphasize the relational stability or changes of these devices between scans.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5261099963986212,0.5960264900662252,0.3809523809523809,0.3137254901960784,51.0,100.0
+14765,latent_14765,1367,0.002734,0.001081521,1.4854064,Prompt explicitly instructs to compare findings with prior images.,"The pattern is identified by observing that activations are highest when there are explicit instructions to ""provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image,"" even when multiple images are mentioned. These examples consistently include this specific phrasing, highlighting comparison as an integral part of the task, regardless of actual comparisons performed.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4417099525013194,0.4924623115577889,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,99.0
+14766,latent_14766,2654,0.005308,0.001915979,1.8220873,Findings are stable or unchanged from prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve comparison with prior studies, especially when specific findings are either stable or unchanged. This pattern reflects radiological documentation practices that emphasize stable findings over time.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14767,latent_14767,1555,0.00311,0.0012026695,1.4078372,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"Highly representative samples make explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, often noting changes like improved or worsened lung conditions, changes in medical device placement, or stable findings, indicated by frequent usage of terms like ""compared to previous"" or ""interval changes"". For less representative samples, such comparative language is absent or minimal.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14768,latent_14768,2190,0.00438,0.0015663168,1.4610856,Examine for interval change or stability in findings compared to prior images.,The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on identifying interval changes or stability in findings between the current and prior images. These reports emphasize the comparison between the current assessment and previous or baseline studies to evaluate for any change in clinical condition or detection of new findings.,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14769,latent_14769,1520,0.00304,0.0012010913,2.2635987,"Stable, clear lung fields with normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours across imaging views.","Highly activated examples consistently describe clear and stable findings across imaging views and maintaining a focus on normal cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar structures, indicating the importance of this gestalt across observations. No significant abnormalities or changes are emphasized in each case, often specifying the lack of consolidations, pleural effusions, or pneumothoraces.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4315744315744316,0.47,0.4375,0.21,100.0,100.0
+14770,latent_14770,450,0.0009,0.0005500916,2.8949609,Assessment of changes by comparison with prior images focusing on device/tube positioning.,"These examples exhibit reports where patient history, techniques, or current radiography findings are compared with past images or examinations, using references to procedures, medical devices, or tubes that are assessed over time for changes or stabilities in positioning, size, or presence. The consistency in referring to previous studies for comparative analysis is a distinctive pattern.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.4166666666666667,24.0,25.0,0.5467032967032968,0.5875,0.4423076923076923,0.3833333333333333,60.0,100.0
+14771,latent_14771,1998,0.003996,0.0014895485,1.5571524,"Changes in findings compared to prior imaging study, often involving device placement.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve instructions to compare findings on current imaging with prior images, and often involve changes such as advancements or removals of medical devices (like tubes or catheters). These reports explicitly provide changes or lack thereof compared to a prior study, focusing on interval changes.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6088888888888889,0.615,0.6533333333333333,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14772,latent_14772,981,0.001962,0.0008420412,1.9907801,Patterns describe findings from frontal and lateral views combined.,"The examples with activations above 3.0 usually involve findings describing both frontal and lateral views, highlighting specific radiological findings or changes, whereas lower activations often lack findings or comparisons. Lateral images often provide additional detail, impacting activation significantly.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5555555555555556,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14773,latent_14773,1279,0.002558,0.0010234641,2.6188033,"Changes in tube or line positioning, or intervals with pulmonary abnormalities like pneumothorax or atelectasis.","Examples with the highest activation levels frequently involve evaluating pulmonary or cardiac conditions, using terms such as 'pneumothorax', 'atelectasis', or 'pleural effusion'. Additionally, they describe changes in structures like PICC lines or tubes, indicating alterations in positioning or presence related to treatment or evaluation of medical devices.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5899589958995899,0.59,0.5918367346938775,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14774,latent_14774,1920,0.00384,0.0014314407,1.222603,Device status or findings unchanged since previous imaging comparison.,"Samples with high activation consistently involve descriptions that compare current findings to the prior imaging, with specific mention of concurrent findings or devices (like chest tubes, NG tubes, etc.) that remain unchanged.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4428571428571428,0.31,100.0,100.0
+14775,latent_14775,2880,0.00576,0.002006769,1.2027464,Detailed comparison with prior imaging identifying interval changes.,"Examples with high activation focus on the interpretation and comparison between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting interval changes such as stability, improvement, or worsening of specific conditions. This includes detailed mentions of imaging comparisons and noting changes or lack thereof in specific findings like opacities, edema, or the positions of devices.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14776,latent_14776,3569,0.007138,0.0025594302,1.1358318,Assessment of interval changes using comparison images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe the use of images for comparison, often relating current findings to previous exams to assess changes or stability, which is a common practice in radiology reports, especially involving monitoring of a patient's condition over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.5144927536231884,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14777,latent_14777,1246,0.002492,0.0010609576,1.7467862,Active comparison of current and prior images indicating interval change or stability.,Instances with higher activation emphasize a clinical context where prior imaging is directly used for comparison. These reports consistently indicate interval changes or stability across multiple views and often cite specific previous dates. The phrasing suggests an active diagnostic process assessing progress or treatment outcomes.,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.416952919781774,0.4170854271356783,0.4215686274509804,0.43,100.0,99.0
+14778,latent_14778,2419,0.004838,0.00175227,1.1687196,Mentions stability or change in reference to prior imaging studies.,"These examples describe intervals of change or stability in imaging findings when compared with prior studies. The reports often mention terms like 'no change', 'compared to previous', or 'interval', to describe stability or improvement in previously noted conditions.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14779,latent_14779,2122,0.004244,0.0014733613,1.3049886,Comparison to prior chest imaging over multiple time points or explicit reference to historical imagery.,"The pattern in the data seems to revolve around assessing and reporting the subject's radiological findings with explicit comparisons over multiple time points or historical imagery. Reports frequently note stability, change, or improvement explicitly in findings when compared to prior imagery, indicating progression or resolution of identified pathologies.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14780,latent_14780,1670,0.00334,0.0012127726,1.1901449,In-depth comparison of current images to prior ones with a focus on changes in findings or device positions.,"Examples with higher activation scores consistently involve the detailed comparison of current imaging findings with prior images, emphasizing changes or stability over time. They often specifically evaluate devices or tubes' positions and changes in pulmonary features.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5490196078431373,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14781,latent_14781,2199,0.004398,0.0016112232,1.9493407,Inconsistent detail level and focus on interval change findings in radiology reports.,"These examples often include detailed descriptions of radiologic findings, focusing on both the current status and interval changes compared to prior imaging. However, they are less focused on using a systematic templated approach often found in highly activated reporting. The included findings and impression sections do not consistently align with a fixed format or use repeated structural phrases aligned with a single presenting complaint or indication, resulting in varied activation levels. This shows a struggle with systematic report interpretation or comprehension.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.515527950310559,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14782,latent_14782,3022,0.006044,0.0021287815,1.0717973,Comparison between current and prior images emphasizing unchanged findings.,"The examples with high activation levels generally include findings that are described as 'new', 'unchanged', 'unchanged from prior examinations', or involve some progression compared to a prior image. The reports emphasize comparisons and stability or change in conditions over time, which aligns with the pattern seen.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5303030303030303,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14783,latent_14783,3075,0.00615,0.0021904,1.5300437,Presence of explicit comparison with prior imaging data.,"Examples with activation levels above 0 often involve the evaluation of current radiology findings in direct comparison with previous exams, usually referenced in the data provided, emphasizing changes or stability in findings. This indicates that the presence of explicit prior exam data for direct comparison is a key element that drives activation.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5710848415106182,0.59,0.5633802816901409,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14784,latent_14784,643,0.001286,0.00078060356,3.6751149,Lung changes indicating progression or improvement.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate interval changes in the appearance of the lungs or specific findings (like opacities or effusions), indicating some sort of progression or improvement in lung conditions as opposed to descriptions where there is no noted change.",0.8164014687882497,0.82,0.75,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.7527397880626754,0.7527472527472527,0.6831683168316832,0.8414634146341463,82.0,100.0
+14785,latent_14785,2100,0.0042,0.0015336998,1.3377228,Complexity in comparing current and previous imaging findings.,"The examples primarily correspond to situations where prior imaging exists but have some inconsistencies or additional complexities in their indications, comparisons, or findings. High activation levels are distributed to examples involving the presence of prior reports, where explicit details from prior studies are drawn into descriptions of current findings, illustrating detailed physical changes or stability.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4941164137641848,0.5125628140703518,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,99.0
+14786,latent_14786,237,0.000474,0.00039596233,2.8408303,Mentions of tortuous thoracic aorta.,"High activations are associated with descriptions of a tortuous aorta, which is consistently noted in these reports. This feature may be indicative of certain systemic diseases or age-related changes and seems to be the pattern the model is detecting.",0.672156862745098,0.7105263157894737,0.5833333333333334,0.5384615384615384,13.0,25.0,0.7194858804765926,0.823076923076923,0.7,0.4516129032258064,31.0,99.0
+14787,latent_14787,1600,0.0032,0.0011767576,1.1545596,"Evaluation of interval changes in tubes, lines, and catheter positions.","These examples tend to describe observations in imaging findings compared to prior examinations, with an emphasis on the evaluation of the placement or changes of tubes, lines, and catheters (e.g., endotracheal tube, nasogastric tube) in relation to past positions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5675007723200495,0.58,0.6212121212121212,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14788,latent_14788,521,0.001042,0.0006202713,2.2806845,Comparison to prior imaging or reports indicating changes.,"The examples with higher activations involve scenarios where a current radiological image is compared against a prior image or report, indicating changes or stability of findings over time. This comparison to a previous state provides a context for assessing progress or stability in medical conditions, which is a key radiology practice.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4407603890362511,0.4424242424242424,0.3761467889908257,0.6307692307692307,65.0,100.0
+14789,latent_14789,783,0.001566,0.0006791545,1.7860922,"Comparative findings between current and prior images, focusing on changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation levels often mention specific findings in conjunction with previous comparisons. This pattern indicates that discussing interval changes or stability between the given and prior radiographic images tends to increase the activation level, while the presence of surgical history, specific interventions, or new finding details tends to elevate it further.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4288045695634435,0.44,0.453125,0.58,100.0,100.0
+14790,latent_14790,2670,0.00534,0.0019060222,1.5508162,Stable or improved findings compared to previous imaging.,"Samples with positive activations highlight findings or changes in chest images compared to prior studies but focus largely on stability or resolution, using terms indicating no new concerning issues.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.3485761550277679,0.525,0.5365853658536586,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14791,latent_14791,1043,0.002086,0.00089379586,1.9411938,Descriptions involving specific comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve descriptions of the findings that specifically compare the current images with prior studies, whether by noting changes, lack of changes, or specific adjustments in positioning of medical devices. This pattern suggests the model is particularly focused on the comparative analysis aspect within radiological interpretations.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.518796992481203,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14792,latent_14792,1148,0.002296,0.0008950751,1.3939762,Direct comparison to prior imaging with emphasis on change or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently emphasize the presence of a direct comparison between 'current' studied images and 'prior' images, with explicit references to the comparison process and often include identification of new, changed, or unchanged findings between the images.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4407989671147566,0.4422110552763819,0.4495412844036697,0.49,100.0,99.0
+14793,latent_14793,1543,0.003086,0.0011404625,2.4427838,Complications or errors in support device/tube positioning on imaging.,"These examples describe unclear or abnormal positioning of various support devices or tubes, such as an NG tube, pacemaker, or Dobbhoff tube, based on imaging. This pattern signifies technical or procedural complications requiring further clinical correlation or intervention.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4652553819013754,0.515,0.5384615384615384,0.21,100.0,100.0
+14794,latent_14794,2208,0.004416,0.0015554897,1.1726125,Findings are unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe findings that remain unchanged or stable compared to prior studies. This pattern is typical in radiology when comparing current imaging with previous studies to assess for changes or stability of conditions, often indicating a chronic or non-progressive state.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4540890269151139,0.4673366834170854,0.4492753623188406,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+14795,latent_14795,724,0.001448,0.0007017454,1.7214413,Changes in lung findings or device/tube positioning.,"Examples with high activations consistently contain either changes in lung findings or changes in device/tube placement, indicating the significance of interval changes or findings in imaging related to tubes or medical devices.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5277472527472528,0.5287958115183246,0.5045871559633027,0.6043956043956044,91.0,100.0
+14796,latent_14796,2407,0.004814,0.0017428711,1.2588458,Comparison indicating new or persisting changes in imaging findings.,"Examples with activation values greater than zero refer to radiography findings that compare the current radiographic image with a prior frontal image and note some interval change, such as new or persistent pathologies or changes in devices. Comparisons without significant interval changes were typically associated with lower activation values.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4946841776110069,0.495,0.4952380952380952,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14797,latent_14797,360,0.00072,0.00056329125,4.166561,Notable findings or changes in lateral chest radiograph views.,"The high activation examples consistently involve the description of findings in chest radiographs that are specifically associated with changes noted in the lateral views compared to frontal images. This indicates a focus on significant details unique to or better visualized in lateral views, such as spine signs, retrocardiac opacities, or changes in mediastinal structures.",0.8071135430916552,0.8085106382978723,0.8095238095238095,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.7706488443330548,0.795774647887324,0.6226415094339622,0.7857142857142857,42.0,100.0
+14798,latent_14798,300,0.0006,0.00059217867,2.9711764,Findings of cardiac and mediastinal stability in chest imaging.,"High activation examples consistently describe or include findings related to notable aspects of the cardiac silhouette, mediastinal structures, or lung fields without acute changes. The examples also commonly describe techniques such as producing frontal and lateral chest views, suggest a standard evaluation or comparison to prior examinations, and commonly identify abnormalities compared to a previous study, focusing on unchanged conditions.",0.6095238095238096,0.6097560975609756,0.5,0.75,16.0,25.0,0.6127146510778225,0.6214285714285714,0.4177215189873418,0.825,40.0,100.0
+14799,latent_14799,2153,0.004306,0.001577963,1.458689,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, noting changes or stability.","Each example with high activation level describes findings in chest radiographs explicitly detailing changes from prior imaging related to this date or noting specific procedural changes, like insertion or removal of a device, using terms 'in comparison to the previous radiograph', 'unchanged', or 'removal'. These key comparative phrases help identify the pattern of change or stability across imaging dates.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5711294432251066,0.575,0.5630252100840336,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14800,latent_14800,1658,0.003316,0.0011899486,1.5783626,Comparison of current findings to prior radiology studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels often reference comparison to prior images or studies, noting changes or stability in findings. This focus on comparative analysis indicates a pattern where the task is centered on evaluating interval changes in the radiological findings between the current and prior studies.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14801,latent_14801,721,0.001442,0.00070568547,2.2207205,Findings of mild to moderate vascular congestion or engorgement.,"This pattern highlights radiological findings that demonstrate mild to moderate vascular congestion or engorgement, which is frequently linked with mild cardiac or pulmonary conditions. While being a subtle finding, it is a common motif in radiology reports that review images for cardiopulmonary concerns.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5886703433325895,0.6310160427807486,0.725,0.3333333333333333,87.0,100.0
+14802,latent_14802,2972,0.005944,0.0021317431,1.5072683,Comparative analysis across different views revealing stability or changes.,"Many examples describe comparisons made with prior imaging, indicating stability, resolution, or changes in findings. This comparative aspect, combined with the evaluation of multiple views (frontal, lateral) of the chest, suggests a pattern focused on assessing changes over time, particularly noting stability or interval changes in conditions such as effusions, pneumonia, or edema.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14803,latent_14803,1771,0.003542,0.001324272,1.4652656,Presence of medical devices or accessories in the findings.,"Examples with higher activation often contain references to medical devices or interventions in the patient, such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, sternotomy wires, and cardiomegaly findings. These references suggest a pattern where descriptive details about medical accessories or specific procedures are noted in radiology reports.",0.5916666666666667,0.5918367346938775,0.6,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5996396757081373,0.6,0.6063829787234043,0.57,100.0,100.0
+14804,latent_14804,2611,0.005222,0.0018668707,1.1920267,Presence and position of medical tubes or lines compared to prior images.,"In radiology reports, specific attention to lines, tubes, or devices is made when their presence is noted to ensure positions are appropriate and stable. Many high-activation cases explicitly mention lines or tubes (e.g., chest tubes, central lines) and their placement or changes when compared to previous images.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5686274509803921,0.29,100.0,100.0
+14805,latent_14805,3683,0.007366,0.0025678382,0.982783,Descriptive comparison of current imaging with prior studies focusing on stability or change.,"Examples with higher activation levels compare current imaging findings to prior images, highlighting either stability or changes in existing conditions. The focus is on documented comparisons where there are detailed descriptions of anatomical or pathological changes against prior studies.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.5508474576271186,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14806,latent_14806,2345,0.00469,0.0017571414,1.8801421,Description of changes or stability relative to previous images.,"Instances with higher activation levels often include specific wording that highlights a comparison or change from prior imaging studies. These examples emphasize terms indicating an evaluation against previous imaging, often discussing stability, improvement, or worsening of specific conditions or features such as effusions, masses, structures, or devices.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14807,latent_14807,1198,0.002396,0.001074066,1.7858559,Reports indicating no acute process or change compared to prior.,"The commonality among these examples is the absence of acute findings or changes in the clinical context provided, often resulting in 'no acute process' or 'no relevant change' statements in the reports. Activation is not related to any specific radiographic finding but to the documentation of stability or absence of significant findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14808,latent_14808,1111,0.002222,0.0008545445,1.4234606,Analysis based on comparison with prior imaging results.,"Examples exhibiting the pattern provide reports that analyze imaging studies by comparing current findings to prior imaging results. These examples refer extensively to previous images in assessing changes in findings over time, using comparison statements to make conclusions about stability or changes in findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5224957555178268,0.55,0.5337837837837838,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14809,latent_14809,1796,0.003592,0.0013380521,1.5381206,Details about changes in medical devices or tubes since prior examinations.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight changes since prior examinations, specifically noting interventions like tube or catheter placements and their positions relative to standard anatomical points such as the carina. These reports describe technical details about the intervention's correctness or stability, demonstrating an emphasis on ensuring proper placement or identifying changes due to the intervention.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.603448275862069,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14810,latent_14810,816,0.001632,0.000809313,2.5154054,Structured instructions for findings comparison with prior images.,"The examples with activation level greater than zero consistently contain explicit instructions to produce descriptions of radiological findings using a template or structure that includes reference to current and prior imaging, indications, and comparisons. The high scores correlate with these structured instructions being clearly articulated in the PROMPTS provided, indicating that this methodical approach is what the pattern is capturing.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5012273584661895,0.5125628140703518,0.5076923076923077,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+14811,latent_14811,2420,0.00484,0.001696056,1.1675332,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples discuss changes or stability in imaging findings, comparing the current image to a prior one and noting significant but often subtle changes listed in relation to prior examinations. They often describe changes or stabilities related to devices, opacities, effusions, etc., regardless of specific diagnoses, capturing interval change.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14812,latent_14812,1806,0.003612,0.0013850228,1.4343438,Comparative analysis in imaging reports enhances activation.,"The samples with high activation focus on descriptions derived from comparing current and prior images. When comparison studies are available or utilized, the reports consistently mention changes or stability in specific findings, which enhances the activation level. Less-activated samples often lack comparisons or have few changes noted, demonstrating a consistent thematic focus on comparative evaluation in generating higher activation.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4597285067873303,0.5025125628140703,0.5032258064516129,0.78,100.0,99.0
+14813,latent_14813,727,0.001454,0.00075633166,2.9264326,Comparisons of tube placement or repositioning to prior images.,"These examples consistently refer to changes or evaluations related to the placement or repositioning of medical tubes, such as Dobbhoff, nasogastric, or enteric tubes, in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern indicates focused evaluation on the positioning of such tubes and associated devices within the patient.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5744422822009758,0.5863874345549738,0.5882352941176471,0.4395604395604395,91.0,100.0
+14814,latent_14814,2402,0.004804,0.0017354843,1.445817,Comparisons to prior imaging observations with nuanced syntactic details.,"The samples with higher activations often indicate the presence of comparisons with previous or current imaging while integrating nuanced syntactic structures for medical observations. These samples frequently emphasize changes or stabilities in medical conditions, drawing conclusions based on imaging comparisons.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4956649326397225,0.5226130653266332,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,99.0
+14815,latent_14815,1017,0.002034,0.00083446904,2.641484,Changes or stability in imaging findings in comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve the description of imaging findings in comparison to prior studies, focusing on changes or stability in findings such as heart size, pleural effusions, or atelectasis. Language is used to highlight these observations across both current and previous images.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14816,latent_14816,3769,0.007538,0.0026117153,1.7856765,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Most heavily activated examples involve a stable or unchanged radiological finding when compared to prior imaging studies. These findings often reconstruct a status quo without new pathology, described as 'no significant change', 'stable', or 'unchanged'. These examples predominantly focus on comparisons rather than current acute pathologies.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,100.0
+14817,latent_14817,1083,0.002166,0.0009197835,2.3903596,Comparative analysis with specific clinical relevance in imaging findings.,"Higher activations are given to examples that involve comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging with specific reference to pulmonary or cardiac status. These examples often make specific observations about changes or stability in imaging related to clinical presentations like pulmonary nodules or cardiac conditions, which are common recurrent themes in radiologic pattern recognition.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14818,latent_14818,1519,0.003038,0.0010874395,1.8270698,Radiological findings unchanged compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels often demonstrate descriptions where the findings are stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging. This is a common pattern in radiology interpretations, indicating no progression of disease or new findings since the last examination.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3901442680593619,0.595,0.6515151515151515,0.43,100.0,100.0
+14819,latent_14819,255,0.00051,0.0004022722,3.4110708,Increased size of pleural effusion.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions of pleural effusions, which are accumulations of fluid in the pleural cavity. This finding often leads to further implications for patient management, indicating its importance in the context of the study.",0.5632183908045977,0.6842105263157895,0.6,0.2307692307692307,13.0,25.0,0.48,0.7111111111111111,0.3,0.0857142857142857,35.0,100.0
+14820,latent_14820,2557,0.005114,0.0017886807,1.3261163,"Unchanged findings upon comparison with prior images (e.g., device position, effusion stability).","In these examples, the findings highlight unchanged conditions or positions of specific features such as tubes, catheters, or existing conditions when compared with previous imaging. This pattern emphasizes stability or lack of significant change in the specified factors of medical imaging reports.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5368421052631579,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14821,latent_14821,490,0.00098,0.0006505762,3.8008475,Radiological findings are unchanged from prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels specifically reference the comparison to prior imaging studies and indicate no change or stability in radiological findings, often noting terms like 'no relevant change' or 'unchanged' which emphasize stability over time.",0.898989898989899,0.9,0.8333333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.7606676113997796,0.7625,0.627906976744186,0.9,60.0,100.0
+14822,latent_14822,3673,0.007346,0.0025967767,1.3769686,Descriptions explicitly comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"The pattern emerges from examples that provide a direct description or instruction focusing specifically on comparing the current findings to prior imaging, followed by an indication of any changes, which is a common task in radiological evaluations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14823,latent_14823,3433,0.006866,0.0024150908,1.2450356,Providing findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently compare current imaging findings directly with previous studies. Text segments in these examples explicitly instruct comparing findings between current and prior images, typically addressing interval changes, stability, or progression of specific conditions.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4270833333333333,0.45,0.4642857142857143,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14824,latent_14824,2748,0.005496,0.0019372285,1.2721317,Focus on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels show detailed descriptions of either stable or unchanged findings over time, often making explicit references to a prior examination or report. These reports emphasize comparison of current imaging with prior studies to assess changes, or lack thereof, in the patient's condition.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5741376286981137,0.575,0.5824175824175825,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14825,latent_14825,527,0.001054,0.0005402569,2.2716146,"Comparison of imaging findings over time, highlighting changes or stability.","The examples describe observed changes or stability in imaging findings compared to earlier studies, often highlighting important new developments or stability such as new opacities, pleural effusions, or unchanged conditions. The key terms 'new', 'unchanged', or 'improved' are frequently used to denote the comparison, highlighting pathological changes or stability between studies, which is a common practice in radiological interpretations.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.502104377104377,0.5029585798816568,0.4299065420560747,0.6666666666666666,69.0,100.0
+14826,latent_14826,2120,0.00424,0.0015924814,2.660437,Comparison to prior imaging showing new or changed findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings compared to prior imaging studies, showing an interval change (
+
+Example 2: 'Retrocardiac consolidation on the left is new compared to yesterday's study.'
+Example 4: 'Analysis is performed in direct comparison with the next preceding chest examination of _.'), and tend to describe new findings or changes over time compared to earlier exams. This signifies that the pattern is triggered when there is an emphasis on new changes or updates in findings between current and prior images, reflecting a dynamic assessment in the reports.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5545380545380545,0.5577889447236181,0.573170731707317,0.47,100.0,99.0
+14827,latent_14827,282,0.000564,0.0005070094,2.5563345,Presence of prior image comparison with unchanged or stable radiographic findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of radiographic findings compared to particular views or images identified as prior, often denoted as 'current frontal', 'lateral', and 'prior'. These examples consistently highlight static or unchanged conditions in radiographic findings not requiring intervention.",0.4217948717948717,0.4634146341463415,0.2857142857142857,0.25,16.0,25.0,0.5278219395866455,0.5925925925925926,0.3,0.4285714285714285,35.0,100.0
+14828,latent_14828,2326,0.004652,0.0017118426,1.4607013,Findings are compared to prior imaging and describe changes or stability in pulmonary or cardiac pathology or devices.,"These examples consistently describe the presence of some cardiopulmonary pathology or device, and the reports are framed in the context of changes or stability based on specific descriptions such as heart size, effusions, pneumothorax, etc. The pattern here is that comparisons are often being made to prior imaging studies, which affects interpretation, and that higher activations often involve significant pulmonary or cardiac findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5057151683657708,0.52,0.5149253731343284,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14829,latent_14829,1599,0.003198,0.001213614,2.426466,Reports with direct comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stability or unchanged findings.,"The observed pattern involves providing descriptions of findings while making direct comparisons to prior imaging. These reports use terms related to stability or lack of change, suggesting evaluation in context of prior imaging findings. This is common in longitudinal comparative studies, particularly when evaluating changes or stability in clinical context.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4404761904761904,0.37,100.0,100.0
+14830,latent_14830,1562,0.003124,0.00117534,2.0840418,"Use of multiple imaging views (e.g., frontal and lateral) with prior comparisons.","The examples with higher activations consistently reference the use of multiple imaging views (typically both frontal and lateral) in conjunction with prior studies to provide a comprehensive comparison of findings. When a lateral view is mentioned, it implies additional complexity or detail in the examination process, which aligns with the pattern of interest.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.39324197091746,0.42,0.4436619718309859,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14831,latent_14831,3663,0.007326,0.0025615483,1.0020021,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, focusing on device/tube placement changes.","Examples with high activation levels often contain detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes in physical positioning or conditions, or describing the placement and positioning of tubes, catheters, or devices. Descriptions often include terms like 'comparison', 'since the last', 'in comparison with', or specific changes in medical equipment positioning.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5833333333333334,0.35,100.0,100.0
+14832,latent_14832,485,0.00097,0.00068805367,2.811084,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size with atelectasis or minor findings.,"Examples showing high activation contain descriptions or assessments involving cardiomediastinal silhouette or heart size, often alongside atelectasis or other minor findings. The pattern emphasizes stability in cardiac size or silhouette with comparison highlighting other findings like atelectasis, pleural effects, or vascular prominence.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.601953601953602,0.6073619631901841,0.4938271604938271,0.6349206349206349,63.0,100.0
+14833,latent_14833,572,0.001144,0.0006600423,2.5810082,Statements of procedural changes or therapeutic interventions since prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels tend to include situations where the clinician is assessing interval changes using a combination of words like \'has been\' or \'been extubated\', indicating actions that have taken place between the compared studies, or when specific treatments/devices changes are described, like repositioning of tubes or changes in pathological states.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6299376299376299,0.6404494382022472,0.6,0.5384615384615384,78.0,100.0
+14834,latent_14834,2035,0.00407,0.0014969738,1.490815,Analysis of medical device placement or repositioning.,"These examples frequently mention findings related to medical device placement, repositioning of tubes, or catheters such as endotracheal tubes or Dobbhoff catheters. The focus on positioning changes and necessity for repositioning signifies a radiological pattern of monitoring interventions, adjustments, or complications related to medical devices.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5342465753424658,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14835,latent_14835,421,0.000842,0.0005927952,3.4932208,Comparison of current with prior imaging for interval changes or stability.,"The entries with higher activation levels consistently describe radiological findings by comparing current images to previous ones, indicating interval changes or stability. This pattern parallels the previously noted data characteristic where stability or changes in medical imaging relative to previous exams is emphasized.",0.5038520801232665,0.5434782608695652,0.5,0.9047619047619048,21.0,25.0,0.4781225788035721,0.4873417721518987,0.4049586776859504,0.8448275862068966,58.0,100.0
+14836,latent_14836,851,0.001702,0.0007756677,1.918113,Focus on changes between current and prior frontal images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently mention comparing current imaging findings with prior frontal images to describe changes or stability in conditions. Reports emphasize descriptions like 'compared to the previous image,' 'increased,' 'decreased,' or 'unchanged' in findings across current and prior images.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14837,latent_14837,362,0.000724,0.00055887026,2.916604,"Comparison to prior imaging, especially assessing for pneumonia.","High activation examples consistently include both a comparison with images from prior studies and a clinical indication questioning or assessing for pneumonia. This combination seems to trigger the model's interest, likely due to patterns observed in training data where certain findings linked to pneumonia prompt close comparison with prior imaging.",0.5769421078673924,0.5777777777777777,0.5185185185185185,0.7,20.0,25.0,0.4790742526518804,0.4931506849315068,0.3157894736842105,0.5217391304347826,46.0,100.0
+14838,latent_14838,2229,0.004458,0.0015895276,1.1698195,Comparison of images from different time intervals.,"These examples are more focused on a comparison of images from different time points, usually emphasizing changes or stability. When examination findings are explicitly interpreted in comparison with previous images filmed or captured earlier, even within short time intervals, that indicates the model's pattern recognizers are more active, highlighting observed intervals for change or stability in patient conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14839,latent_14839,361,0.000722,0.00060030975,4.304365,Provision of explicit prior comparison even when not specified.,"The pattern of provided examples with higher activation shows frequent specification of imaging comparisons with prior images, often despite the 'COMPARISON' field indicating 'None'. Models might emphasize explicitly detailing comparisons even when the prompt suggests no prior imaging is available.",0.4433448787728847,0.4444444444444444,0.4074074074074074,0.55,20.0,25.0,0.3870459599703484,0.3877551020408163,0.2736842105263158,0.5531914893617021,47.0,100.0
+14840,latent_14840,2143,0.004286,0.0015037768,1.0362552,Use of AP chest imaging technique suggesting portable setup or supine positioning.,"There is mention of AP imaging technique, often indicating a supine or portable setup, commonly used in certain clinical settings or for specific patient conditions. Also, differences in technical execution like patient positioning and projection are often considered when generating reports.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5873590982286634,0.59,0.6071428571428571,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14841,latent_14841,2199,0.004398,0.001587475,1.2920603,"Chest radiograph evaluation using frontal, lateral views comparison with prior images.","These examples demonstrate a pattern of evaluating chest radiographs with special attention to both frontal and lateral views and incorporating comparison with prior images, if available, to assess findings. The highly representative samples emphasize evaluating changes based on these multiple perspectives.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5103448275862069,0.74,100.0,100.0
+14842,latent_14842,3696,0.007392,0.0025835796,1.1940664,Detailed comparison of abnormalities to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels often make explicit mentions of comparing specific features or findings in the current imaging study to prior imaging findings, focusing on changes or stability of abnormalities or pathologies found, such as pulmonary opacities, effusions, or consolidation, rather than just mentioning comparisons in general.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5333333333333333,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14843,latent_14843,557,0.001114,0.0006620959,2.143934,Comparison to prior imaging indicating unchanged findings.,"Observations frequently describe changes or lack thereof seen in radiology images with a comparison to prior images, especially noting situations where little to no change is seen from a specified previous examination. This provides context and continuity in patient imaging follow-ups.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.448076923076923,0.4878048780487805,0.3214285714285714,0.28125,64.0,100.0
+14844,latent_14844,3346,0.006692,0.0024081657,1.8320626,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,Examples with higher activation levels report a lack of significant change or stability in radiological findings when comparing current images with previously examined ones. These examples consistently highlight stability or no progression as a key observation.,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4928644240570846,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.4,100.0,99.0
+14845,latent_14845,328,0.000656,0.0004879077,4.582335,Comparison of current images to prior studies emphasizing medical devices or interventions.,"Higher activations are observed when prior studies are available for comparison and the findings describe notable changes, interventions, or medical devices (like central lines, PICC lines, etc.) in the context of patient history, even when the overall findings may not indicate a significant pathological change (e.g., stable versus new positioning of devices). This pattern highlights the model's focus on the presence and comparison of technical apparatus within the radiological context.",0.5851851851851853,0.6190476190476191,0.5384615384615384,0.4117647058823529,17.0,25.0,0.515625,0.5694444444444444,0.3269230769230769,0.3863636363636363,44.0,100.0
+14846,latent_14846,3222,0.006444,0.0023112523,1.3620977,Low lung volumes affecting radiographic interpretation.,"These examples focus on repeatedly mentioning low lung volumes, which is a condition that affects the visibility of certain chest structures such as the heart and can impact diagnoses. This pattern stands out in how it consistently emphasizes the difficulty or impact low lung volumes have on interpreting the chest radiograph findings.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,100.0,100.0
+14847,latent_14847,1134,0.002268,0.00098373,1.7888322,Radiological comparison with a prior study.,"These examples describe the review or interpretation of radiological images based explicitly on a current image while comparing to a prior image, which is a fundamental radiological process for assessing changes or stability in medical conditions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14848,latent_14848,1646,0.003292,0.0011872412,1.2497752,Reports of changes or stability in medical device placement.,"The dataset indicates a pattern when reports describe changes in medical device placement or stabilization, such as chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, and so on. These elements are key features significantly affecting activation, implying a focus on device positioning changes or confirmations around them.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5833333333333334,0.49,100.0,100.0
+14849,latent_14849,629,0.001258,0.0006708894,3.34598,Direct comparison of current findings with prior images.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve a request for description of current findings in direct comparison with prior images, emphasizing specific comparisons or changes over time, which suggests the added value of identifying patterns over time. Meanwhile, examples consistently show linguistic structure that explicitly mentions earlier assessments.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4739441195581546,0.4772727272727273,0.4298245614035088,0.6447368421052632,76.0,100.0
+14850,latent_14850,2437,0.004874,0.0017778893,1.4263783,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings and interpret them in context by making specific comparisons with prior imaging. These comparisons are used to determine change or stability in diagnosed conditions, a key part of radiology report interpretation. This process helps in tracking progression or regression of pathologies.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14851,latent_14851,1882,0.003764,0.0013058209,1.16855,Comparative evaluations of changes in multiple thoracic structures or medical devices.,"The pattern seen in examples with high activation involves description of changes in multiple thoracic structures or devices between current and prior images, including tubes, cardiomediastinal structures, pleural effusions, and lung conditions. These representations show monitoring and comparative evaluations of stability or change in complex medical scenarios.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6271610613141296,0.635,0.6046511627906976,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14852,latent_14852,2626,0.005252,0.0018514141,1.1809285,Explicit comparison with prior imaging results.,"The higher activation levels are consistent in examples where the findings explicitly compare the current imaging results to prior studies. This comparison often includes evaluation of changes or stability over time, which is a specific focus highlighted in the outputs with high activation levels. Notably, the explicit mention of 'comparison to previous or prior studies' and well-defined descriptions of stability or changes in condition are frequent in these outputs.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4962962962962963,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14853,latent_14853,259,0.000518,0.0004405651,3.340846,Detailed positioning of tubes or devices with specific measurements.,"The pattern in the high activation examples focuses on the specific positioning of tubes or devices, frequently referencing measurements such as centimeters from the carina. These reports consistently detail the exact placement of medical devices like endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes, which is crucial for patient care and safety.",0.9736668861092824,0.975,0.9375,1.0,15.0,25.0,0.8201247938033421,0.8560606060606061,0.6585365853658537,0.84375,32.0,100.0
+14854,latent_14854,3031,0.006062,0.0021580006,1.2966392,Stability or change in findings on comparison with prior chest radiograph.,"The examples exhibit the use of chest radiographs to compare findings with prior studies. Consistently, they describe both current observations and their stability or changes relative to previous imaging. This pattern involves noting details such as tube positioning, cardiac size, and the presence or absence of pulmonary abnormalities or parenchymal changes, along with frequent comparisons to past imaging studies.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4354269583627382,0.44,0.4491525423728814,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14855,latent_14855,500,0.001,0.0005688034,3.5348074,Comparison of current imaging study with prior images.,"These example descriptions refer to comparing the current imaging results with previous imaging studies, indicating a focus on stability or change over time. This pattern emerges from the use of specific phrases like 'in comparison to the prior frontal image', 'unchanged', 'compared to prior', etc.",0.2765605622157916,0.3,0.3529411764705882,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.398461126210619,0.4012345679012346,0.3423423423423423,0.6129032258064516,62.0,100.0
+14856,latent_14856,1820,0.00364,0.0014010519,1.8245342,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,Examples with higher activations consistently involve comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. These reports reference previous studies and describe changes or stability of findings. This pattern highlights radiological practices focusing on the assessment of changes over time to monitor progression or improvement of patient conditions.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14857,latent_14857,1082,0.002164,0.0008526492,1.9027796,Direct comparison to prior imaging with immediate discussion of findings.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels emphasize comparison to prior imaging and often involve technical aspects of radiography, adjustments, or the involvement of medical personnel in discussing or interpreting changes indicated within a short timeframe post-assessment. This tends to involve direct phone or in-person discussions to establish or confirm impressions based on observed differences compared to prior studies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5837776866283839,0.5858585858585859,0.5701754385964912,0.6632653061224489,98.0,100.0
+14858,latent_14858,816,0.001632,0.00080491195,2.5392241,Explicit imaging comparisons to prior reports or radiographs.,Examples that have high activations involve explicit comparisons to previous radiograph images or reports. This pattern indicates that making direct comparisons to identify stability or change in conditions over time is a key characteristic driving activation.,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4008602150537634,0.4371859296482412,0.4563758389261745,0.6868686868686869,99.0,100.0
+14859,latent_14859,1330,0.00266,0.0010136003,1.4639691,Radiology reports emphasizing temporal changes through comparison with prior images.,"The samples with higher activation levels often describe radiological changes over time by comparing current imaging findings to previous ones. These samples explicitly highlight differences, sometimes mentioning stability or interval change, which is a critical aspect in monitoring and evaluating the progress or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5133559720848151,0.545,0.5298013245033113,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14860,latent_14860,865,0.00173,0.00082161196,1.6529614,Detailed frontal and lateral view comparisons with prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels demonstrate a pattern of a thorough description comparing both frontal and lateral chest views with prior frontal images, often including changes or stability of different anatomical features or pathologies. Language indicating comparison to prior images, often involving detailed PA and lateral descriptions, is consistently present.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14861,latent_14861,2106,0.004212,0.0015311372,1.3064641,Comparison with prior images and stable findings noted.,"Examples with high activations emphasize the presence of descriptions regarding the findings where comparisons were made with prior images, even if the comparison resulted in identifying no significant change or interval progression. This contrasts with examples that only report current findings without direct comparison. The comparison serves to validate stability or change in prior findings, influencing the activation levels.",0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.2,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4228657524451594,0.435,0.4084507042253521,0.29,100.0,100.0
+14862,latent_14862,1534,0.003068,0.0012150643,1.521818,Distinctive findings or device changes in lung imaging as compared with prior images.,"High activation levels correlate with cases where findings explicitly involve changes in lung opacification or presence of medical devices, particularly when these are compared to prior imaging and show substantial findings such as improvement, worsening, or stable pathologies (like pneumothorax, PICC lines, pleural effusion). Lower activation cases describe findings that are unchanged or stable without emphasis on device positioning.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14863,latent_14863,1325,0.00265,0.0010125482,1.6611365,Requests for detailed comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve explicit instructions for a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging studies. These often include terms like 'provide a description' or 'compare with prior', directing the assistant to assess changes over time rather than simply noting findings in isolation.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14864,latent_14864,980,0.00196,0.0007940569,2.1169753,Comparative analysis for stability or change in imaging findings.,"The pattern here indicates situations where there is an explicit comparison between current images and previous studies, resulting in findings of 'no significant change' or evaluation for an interval change. This is typical for follow-up monitoring scenarios, where stability or slight progression of a condition is evaluated over time, often expressed using explicit temporal references in prior reports.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14865,latent_14865,1351,0.002702,0.0011063787,1.6590247,Interval changes or stability comparison with prior images in findings.,"Descriptions with higher activations involve comparisons to prior imaging within the context of current findings, especially highlighting changes or stability in specific features or abnormalities. These examples focus on reporting interval changes or stability in medical devices, opacities, heart size, pleural effusions, and nodules.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5227720717916796,0.54,0.5289855072463768,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14866,latent_14866,1499,0.002998,0.0012078629,1.607523,Descriptive comparison to prior imaging studies beyond current findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions that include comparisons to prior images, despite some not having specific prior imaging dates. This shows the model may find the structure of language concerning interval change and stability across serial studies relevant for understanding the focus of a follow-up or tracking condition progression over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4695225703132819,0.47,0.4716981132075472,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14867,latent_14867,2756,0.005512,0.001927767,1.6925313,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These samples describe detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, focusing on reporting intervals or stability of findings, suggesting a pattern of interest in tracking changes or lack thereof over time.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+14868,latent_14868,1063,0.002126,0.00089889904,2.743301,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation showcase descriptions of findings in relation to a prior image, with explicit comparisons to detect changes or confirmations of stability in radiographs. The use of language elements like 'interval', 'unchanged', 'new', and referencing dates of prior exams are indicative of this pattern.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14869,latent_14869,4848,0.009696,0.0033666408,1.1140418,Detection of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"These examples highlight the importance of analyzing current imaging in the context of previous studies to identify changes over time. The comparison of current and previous images reveals interval changes like new insertion or removal of medical devices, changes in effusion, consolidation, or pneumothorax, reflecting either resolution, progression, or new onset of a condition.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5888888888888889,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14870,latent_14870,486,0.000972,0.0006960986,3.8682785,Presence of surgical clips in thoracic imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels describe the presence of surgical clips in the chest region, often in the right axilla or over the heart. This pattern of recognizing surgical clips or similar post-surgical findings appears to trigger significant recognition.",0.8139727159983464,0.82,1.0,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.8087883802169517,0.8375,0.9473684210526316,0.6,60.0,100.0
+14871,latent_14871,915,0.00183,0.00081016816,2.0054216,Repeated emphasis on comparative evaluation between current and prior images.,"This pattern involves repetitive reference to comparison between current and previous or prior images, seeking either consistent or new changes, usually in the context of evaluating clinical progression or stability. It focuses on the consistent use of comparative reports across radiology exams with varying contexts including tubes, infiltrates, or device placements.",0.5833333333333334,0.5918367346938775,0.5625,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.6230758970254768,0.6432160804020101,0.6,0.87,100.0,99.0
+14872,latent_14872,624,0.001248,0.0005911496,2.0947812,"Comparison of current radiology findings with prior studies, noting stability, change, or resolution.","The examples with high activation feature descriptions requiring radiological comparison between a current image/view and previous studies/findings. They expressly state some form of change, stability, or interval resolution of findings, which are typical tasks in radiology that leverage past data for assessment.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4388869320183163,0.4406779661016949,0.4,0.5714285714285714,77.0,100.0
+14873,latent_14873,171,0.000342,0.0004076775,3.2904015,Comparative evaluation using current frontal and lateral images with prior frontal images.,"High activation examples consistently mention both current frontal and lateral chest images alongside prior frontal images, suggesting an importance of comprehensive multi-view analysis in conjunction with historical data for a more thorough comparative evaluation.",0.3709150326797386,0.3714285714285714,0.25,0.6,10.0,25.0,0.44377990430622,0.4833333333333333,0.1911764705882352,0.65,20.0,100.0
+14874,latent_14874,956,0.001912,0.0008017275,1.9988626,Explicit diagnostic comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"Comparisons to prior imaging studies are indicated most explicitly when there is mention of specific changes over time or stability, but with contextual emphasis on the actual comparison rather than solely on technical description or procedural elements. Higher activations arise when there is explicit focus on diagnostic changes noted between current and prior images.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5505777310924369,0.5678391959798995,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,99.0
+14875,latent_14875,912,0.001824,0.0008011357,2.5891016,Retrocardiac/basilar lung opacities.,"The examples show relevant findings of lung opacities or consolidation, particularly in the retrocardiac or basilar regions. These locational descriptors are indicative of potential lung pathology and are often monitored through imaging for changes that could suggest conditions like pneumonia or atelectasis.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6485956558274554,0.655,0.7123287671232876,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14876,latent_14876,1712,0.003424,0.0012904669,1.7204138,Descriptive comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe comparison observations between the current radiographic findings and prior radiographic findings, which suggest either stability or change in a particular finding over time, often indicating follow-up or evaluation for changes. Clear descriptions of comparative changes or lacks thereof are a central pattern.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.6363636363636364,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14877,latent_14877,1589,0.003178,0.0011612525,1.3012006,Explicit prompt instructions for comparison with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels refer to both current and prior studies directly in the prompt format. These examples are consistent with the explicit need for a visual comparison between current and previous imaging studies, which seems to be a significant contextual trigger for activation in the model.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4359100742079466,0.485,0.490566037735849,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14878,latent_14878,883,0.001766,0.0007734292,2.3036563,Emphasis on interval changes or stability using current and prior images.,"The examples showing higher activations consistently describe findings that emphasize changes from prior imaging, mentioning specific comparisons between current and previous radiological images, often noting stability, interval resolution, or change in noted conditions, while differentiating from less acute findings.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14879,latent_14879,3637,0.007274,0.0025244493,0.9799959,Frequent and explicit reference to interval changes or stability based on comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation are concentrated on descriptions explicitly addressing the comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies. These are often given a detailed narrative on changes or stability, emphasizing the radiologist's concern or satisfaction about stability or interval change in specific clinical contexts. Reports with no comparison reference or where no interval change is noted tend to have low activation.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14880,latent_14880,2052,0.004104,0.0015610704,2.2337632,Comparison of frontal and lateral images.,"The prompt does not directly correlate with higher activation levels, but some examples demonstrate the significance of comparing different images, particularly frontal and lateral views, to identify or rule out radiological changes. These examples reflect the importance of image comparison in radiological assessments, enhancing diagnostic accuracy.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+14881,latent_14881,492,0.000984,0.0005279053,2.4326115,Evaluation of medical tube positions or changes.,"The examples with high activation levels contain descriptions or evaluations relating to the positions or changes of medical tubes (e.g., nasogastric or enteric tubes). This pattern indicates a focus on assessing the status of inserted medical devices within the image.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6770569948186529,0.6918238993710691,0.5757575757575758,0.6440677966101694,59.0,100.0
+14882,latent_14882,175,0.00035,0.00038143658,3.297298,Reports with hemoptysis and detailed comparison evaluations.,"Examples with high activation use multiple variables like multiple images (frontal and lateral), specific findings, and phrases that highlight significant changes or evaluations (e.g., hemoptysis, interval changes). The consistent triggers for high activation are comparisons suggesting critical changes, significant conditions like hemoptysis, and detailed imaging assessments.",0.7777777777777777,0.8333333333333334,0.8571428571428571,0.5454545454545454,11.0,25.0,0.6117900790797988,0.85,0.6666666666666666,0.2,20.0,100.0
+14883,latent_14883,1579,0.003158,0.0012019072,1.7407417,Significant interval change or device management findings.,"Examples demonstrate findings where comparative analysis against prior images is specified with a focus on intervals or stability. High activation examples highlight significant findings or changes in specific features such as airway management devices or lung pathology between current and prior studies, indicating interventional changes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5952380952380952,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14884,latent_14884,1232,0.002464,0.00095683534,1.3049957,"Comparison of lung, heart, or device findings with prior imaging studies.","Each sample with high activation level involves findings that explicitly detail descriptions or conditions of pulmonary processes, devices, or structures compared with prior imaging, often utilizing comparisons for chronic or baseline conditions. The pattern identified involves analysis focused on lung and heart findings as stable compared to prior studies, but often noting devices and their placement or stability across examinations.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14885,latent_14885,513,0.001026,0.0005677283,2.047259,Explicit comparison of current findings with prior imaging studies.,"All the high activation examples involve descriptions of findings on current images that are explicitly compared to a prior examination, with observations on any changes or stability noted, often referencing a prior report. This suggests the model is trained to highlight discussions focused on changes over time, which are a critical aspect of tracking disease or condition progression.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4213507625272331,0.4216867469879518,0.34375,0.5,66.0,100.0
+14886,latent_14886,2678,0.005356,0.0018607912,1.2674295,Presence of 'PRIOR_REPORT' or explicit 'COMPARISON' in the context of imaging.,"The pattern recognizes the contextual element of radiology reports labeled 'PRIOR_REPORT' or 'COMPARISON', indicating a process of comparison between current and previous imaging studies, which often gives context to the state of a patient's condition by assessing changes over time.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,100.0,100.0
+14887,latent_14887,990,0.00198,0.0007874996,2.5171452,Reference to recent interventions or acute illnesses.,"The examples with higher activation levels include specific references regarding the patient's recent medical or surgical interventions, or ongoing acute illnesses that might affect or are being assessed in radiographic interpretation. These contexts often influence radiologists' descriptive focus during comparative analysis to prior exams.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.551209269772144,0.5628140703517588,0.549618320610687,0.72,100.0,99.0
+14888,latent_14888,1346,0.002692,0.001077519,1.6889656,Comparison with prior imaging identifying changes in pathology or device placement.,"The activations indicate a focus on cases that include comparisons with prior radiological imaging, particularly when there are notable changes in pathology or findings. The pattern hinges on identifying intervals or changes in imaging, which are highlighted by descriptions of the findings in context with previous examinations.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4991987179487179,0.5,0.5,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14889,latent_14889,369,0.000738,0.0005415421,3.3079185,Instructions to provide descriptions comparing current to prior images.,Examples with activations greater than zero include interactions with instructions such as providing descriptions in comparison to prior images. This indicates these examples trigger the model's process of assisting with comparative analysis.,0.4500239120038259,0.4565217391304347,0.4333333333333333,0.6190476190476191,21.0,25.0,0.3242017759304742,0.3287671232876712,0.2678571428571428,0.6521739130434783,46.0,100.0
+14890,latent_14890,515,0.00103,0.0005939092,1.6744907,Detailed measurements of tube positions in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples focus on specific technical details of tube positions such as endotracheal tube (ETT) or PICC line location in chest radiographs, particularly the distance from known anatomical landmasses like the carina. These descriptions use explicit measurements conveying precision in reporting these medical devices' locations relative to prior imaging or absence of change.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4509207938494546,0.5542168674698795,0.3571428571428571,0.1515151515151515,66.0,100.0
+14891,latent_14891,1873,0.003746,0.0013894108,2.0359662,Reference to changes in fluid-related pathologies like effusions or congestion compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation all contain references to increased or changing fluid-related pathologies such as pleural effusions or pulmonary vascular congestion, often noted with terms like 'new', 'interval increase', or 'worsening'. These terms imply a notable progression or monitoring of fluid-related changes that trigger higher model sensitivity.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4212305611899932,0.465,0.4222222222222222,0.19,100.0,100.0
+14892,latent_14892,3247,0.006494,0.0022682864,0.9659485,Comparison to prior imaging focusing on interval changes.,"The examples with high activation frequently refer to comparative assessments from prior images, focusing on changes or stability in pathologies or medical devices over time. The examples consistently show the inclusion of specific indications or findings linked to ongoing evaluation or reassessment in chronic conditions or following procedural interventions, often mentioning the techniques used and changes or consistencies observed in lung volumes or devices.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5727272727272728,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14893,latent_14893,2646,0.005292,0.001870743,1.3677474,Instructions for detailed evaluation with comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels describe situations that involve evaluating radiology images by comparing them to prior studies to assess changes, often with specific directions to provide detailed descriptions of findings based on these comparisons.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14894,latent_14894,301,0.000602,0.00044225567,1.9196235,References to unchanged or increased cardiomegaly in comparison reports.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention either an unchanged or increased enlargement of the cardiac or mediastinal silhouette when comparing current and prior images. This particular detail seems to be the linguistic or clinical feature the model is sensitive to, especially when followed by a specific mentioned change in condition or feature, like pulmonary changes or device positions.",0.6888888888888889,0.7142857142857143,0.6923076923076923,0.5294117647058824,17.0,25.0,0.5789181692094314,0.6811594202898551,0.40625,0.3421052631578947,38.0,100.0
+14895,latent_14895,2782,0.005564,0.0019944555,1.3564821,Comparison to prior imaging with evaluation of interval change.,"These examples involve chest imaging, where findings are directly compared to prior imaging, often noting stability or changes like worsening effusions or atelectasis. Consistently, these involve an assessment of interval changes from previous studies, a common practice in radiology to monitor progression or stability of conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14896,latent_14896,1955,0.00391,0.0013763831,1.2958525,Mention of findings from both frontal and lateral imaging views in chest reports.,Highly activated samples illustrate radiology reports describing findings in both frontal and lateral chest imaging views. This inclusion of lateral imaging aids in evaluating structures not easily discernible in frontal views alone.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+14897,latent_14897,2428,0.004856,0.0017614517,1.6139604,Clear lungs and stable mediastinal/hilar contours in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention clear lungs without acute pathology, such as consolidation, effusion, or pneumothorax, in context of the radiological assessment intended to rule out or evaluate existing conditions. They also frequently note stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, indicating no immediate changes in these areas.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5333333333333333,0.24,100.0,100.0
+14898,latent_14898,1867,0.003734,0.0014381253,2.07788,Linguistically complete and stable clinical findings present.,"Highly activated examples often have linguistically complete sentences with clear findings or stable follow-ups described. These passages emphasize detailed findings, stable narratives, or specific assessments such as stable comparisons or lack of acute findings. Linguistic completeness with stable and detailed assessment separated activated from low activation examples where the narrative continuity is often cut, fragmented, or lacks detail.",0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.4455486975625065,0.47,0.4482758620689655,0.26,100.0,100.0
+14899,latent_14899,935,0.00187,0.0008010383,2.4345129,Explicit directive to compare current and prior radiological findings.,"Examples showing high activation typically include a request to provide a description of radiological findings in comparison with prior images. Although many examples include a prior image reference, high activation is especially associated with explicit, directive requests for these comparisons in the narrative.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4825687133379441,0.495,0.4961832061068702,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14900,latent_14900,452,0.000904,0.000569264,2.0963128,"Absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary edema.","The examples with high activation levels consistently describe the absence of focal consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary edema. This pattern often indicates clear, stable lung and cardiac conditions without acute abnormalities. Such language is indicative of normal radiological findings in chest imaging.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.559455469903231,0.569620253164557,0.4342105263157895,0.5689655172413793,58.0,100.0
+14901,latent_14901,3004,0.006008,0.002145379,1.1225436,Comparison of current and prior images for changes or stability in findings.,"These examples discuss the process of evaluating and comparing current imaging against previous studies, specifically focusing on serial observations over time, changes or stability of findings, and relating clinical history to imaging. The pattern involves not only the current findings but also comparisons with past imaging, emphasizing any changes or the lack thereof, particularly in relation to pulmonary, cardiac, or mediastinal structures.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5289883834775476,0.555,0.5374149659863946,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14902,latent_14902,531,0.001062,0.0006508627,2.2936978,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples often include detailed observations and comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, highlighting interval changes, stability, and any new developments. Specifically, the pattern emphasizes the description and assessment of interval changes between the images, given in the context of specific indications and findings.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5230114392125564,0.5276073619631901,0.4166666666666667,0.5555555555555556,63.0,100.0
+14903,latent_14903,754,0.001508,0.0006980171,3.0346122,Importance of comparison to prior imaging studies in findings.,"Samples with higher activation levels consistently include findings described in relation to prior imaging studies, emphasizing the importance of comparison to track stability or change. This pattern is absent in samples with low activation levels.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5049307314166542,0.5445026178010471,0.512987012987013,0.8681318681318682,91.0,100.0
+14904,latent_14904,1470,0.00294,0.0011167392,2.0874872,Explicit mention and analysis of changes or stability from prior imaging results in reports.,"Activation levels are higher in examples where the radiology reports explicitly involve comparisons with prior imaging, specifically focusing on changes or stability in findings over time. Reports that lack comparison or emphasize the absence of significant changes get lower activations.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5425458096682172,0.555,0.5413533834586466,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14905,latent_14905,415,0.00083,0.0005857989,3.6647573,Intact median sternotomy wires noted in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions referencing sternotomy wires, which are frequently observed in radiological studies following cardiac surgery such as CABG. The pattern is the recognition and reporting of intact median sternotomy wires as indicative of no change in status post cardiac surgery.",0.9599358974358976,0.96,1.0,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.8544580419580419,0.8783783783783784,0.875,0.7291666666666666,48.0,100.0
+14906,latent_14906,525,0.00105,0.00060261803,2.310038,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging for changes or stability.,"The samples with high activation exhibit a pattern focusing on comparing current and prior imaging studies to identify changes or stabilities concerning specific findings. This is typical in radiology reports where there is a focus on evaluating progression, regression, or stability of clinical findings over time using phrases like 'compared to prior', or 'no interval change'.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4836116264687693,0.4910179640718562,0.425,0.7611940298507462,67.0,100.0
+14907,latent_14907,1386,0.002772,0.0011362372,1.6112704,Comparison to prior imaging; often includes frontal and lateral views.,These examples often include both frontal and lateral views for analysis and emphasize comparisons to prior imaging studies. The focus is on assessing changes or stability over time with explicit radiographic technique descriptions or imaging evaluation for medical devices.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4948794093974633,0.545,0.5276073619631901,0.86,100.0,100.0
+14908,latent_14908,1008,0.002016,0.00081178127,1.5034939,High activation when indicated comparison is missing.,"The activation levels suggest that the model is sensitive to instructions indicating comparison with previous images, and whether a clear comparison is explicitly instructed and present. High activation occurs when comparisons are not available and lower activation when explicit comparisons are included, highlighting the model's differentiation between the presence or absence of comparative analysis within radiological assessments.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4229070114101417,0.4623115577889447,0.4736842105263157,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+14909,latent_14909,1923,0.003846,0.001428531,1.1714091,Detailed comparison with prior imaging for progression or stability.,"The explained samples frequently mention comparing findings with prior images, highlighting changes or stability in specific radiological features, such as lung opacities, pleural effusions, or other abnormalities identified by comparison, particularly when referencing historical data or prior reports. This sets previous and current studies in context, helping gauge progression or stability of conditions.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5376344086021505,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14910,latent_14910,1664,0.003328,0.00128394,1.7275705,"Use of current frontal, lateral, and prior images for comparison.","The higher activations correlate with the inclusion of both current frontal and lateral images alongside prior images for comparative analysis. It appears the pattern emphasizes the ability to compare images across different views and studies sequentially, using integration of data from multiple perspectives.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4835164835164834,0.53,0.51875,0.83,100.0,100.0
+14911,latent_14911,1101,0.002202,0.000938825,1.9383873,Focus on stability or unchanged findings over time in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activations consistently focus on the comparison between current and prior images, particularly highlighting the stable or unchanged nature of various findings such as the positioning of medical devices, lung and cardiac structures, or pathologies, and verifying whether there is any change or stability over time. This suggests an emphasis on describing the temporal stability rather than acute findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5287356321839081,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14912,latent_14912,1785,0.00357,0.0013578774,1.5073818,Comparison of chest images to prior studies highlighting unchanged findings.,"These examples refer to the comparison of images using explicit linguistic phrases such as 'comparison to prior' or mention of previous studies, alongside detailed descriptions of findings. Patterns include unchanged findings or similar conditions across time, indicating stability or lack of significant change in the patient's condition compared to historical records, which are usually of interest to practitioners monitoring disease progression or regression.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+14913,latent_14913,297,0.000594,0.00047233506,3.120468,"Presence of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or mediastinal shift.","Examples with high activation levels consistently include findings of pneumothorax, moderate-sized pleural effusion, or substantial changes like shifts in mediastinal structures. These kinds of findings are typically more significant and noteworthy in radiology, potentially affecting management of the patient, hence more representative of the pattern the model is recognizing for high activation.",0.6916712630998345,0.6976744186046512,0.631578947368421,0.6666666666666666,18.0,25.0,0.6203763789746918,0.7111111111111111,0.4411764705882353,0.4285714285714285,35.0,100.0
+14914,latent_14914,2812,0.005624,0.0019725126,1.2263154,Comparison with prior imaging and noting changes over time.,"Examples with high activations frequently involve either descriptions of comparisons with previous studies or explicit requests to note specific changes over time, affecting the finding's description and language used by the assistant.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14915,latent_14915,1649,0.003298,0.0012254525,1.6429188,Explicit comparison of findings to prior imaging studies.,"The higher activation examples show reports where a prior image is explicitly used as a baseline to describe changes or consistencies in the findings. These reports often detail stable conditions or changes from previously noted abnormalities. When the word 'comparison' is used extensively to indicate assessing against prior studies, and descriptions derive their context from this comparison, the activation is higher.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+14916,latent_14916,1239,0.002478,0.0009739404,2.2714264,Stability or no change of findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples demonstrate consistency in radiological findings between current and prior imaging studies, often noting the stability of specific conditions or devices across time, which typically suggests no acute changes or worsening. Examples with high activation levels often describe explicit comparisons with phrases like 'unchanged', 'same', or 'stable', underscoring the focus on longitudinal stability in findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4457831325301205,0.37,100.0,100.0
+14917,latent_14917,605,0.00121,0.0006351886,1.9822872,Enlarged cardiac silhouette.,The pattern involves documentation of the cardiac silhouette being enlarged often accompanied by other stable findings or changes in comparison to previous studies. Describing the heart as 'enlarged' and stable or unchanged is a consistent feature across high-activation examples.,0.7398959583833533,0.74,0.7307692307692307,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.7522039875220399,0.7586206896551724,0.7222222222222222,0.7027027027027027,74.0,100.0
+14918,latent_14918,823,0.001646,0.00076263427,1.5394038,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activations consistently compare the current imaging findings against previous studies. This comparison is a key factor in the reports, helping to determine changes, stability, or progression of conditions, which is crucial in radiological evaluations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14919,latent_14919,2135,0.00427,0.001516761,1.2860237,Comparisons to prior imaging emphasize interval change in devices or lung findings.,"The examples indicate cases where radiological findings are compared to previous imaging studies to assess interval change, particularly related to medical devices or significant findings like lung opacities or infiltrates. These comparisons often detail stability, improvement, or worsening of conditions and include explicit mention of devices such as tubes or catheters.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6521739130434783,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4943806162549122,0.495,0.4946236559139785,0.46,100.0,100.0
+14920,latent_14920,753,0.001506,0.00069543015,2.3376455,Evaluating interval changes in thoracic conditions using prior imaging.,"The high activation examples emphasize descriptions related to evaluation of interval changes in thoracic conditions, notably involving comparisons with prior imaging. Activation is higher in reports that concentrate on comparing current imaging with previous findings, showing specific changes due to procedures or disease progression.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5544460823853364,0.5699481865284974,0.5367647058823529,0.7849462365591398,93.0,100.0
+14921,latent_14921,270,0.00054,0.00046230323,3.014092,Descriptive comparison of current and prior radiological images.,"These examples consistently involve analyzing images and providing radiological descriptions that include comparisons to previous images or other imaging modalities. This suggests that the activation pattern is geared towards examining changes over time or changes due to different imaging perspectives, reflecting temporal analysis and multi-view synthesis in radiology workflows.",0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.3636363636363636,0.5333333333333333,15.0,25.0,0.385,0.3925925925925926,0.2235294117647059,0.5428571428571428,35.0,100.0
+14922,latent_14922,488,0.000976,0.0005499466,3.096608,Presence or stable positioning of pacemaker or cardiac devices.,"Pacemaker-related phrases such as 'dual-lead left-sided pacemaker' and AICD devices are frequently mentioned in high activation examples. They are characterized by consistent references to pacemaker devices, whether in stable position or showing patient status post-procedure.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,1.0,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5983859134262656,0.6832298136645962,0.6923076923076923,0.2950819672131147,61.0,100.0
+14923,latent_14923,2003,0.004006,0.001451314,1.7751815,"Explicit comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing stability or no change.","Highly activated examples mention specific comparison to prior studies and explicitly describe no significant differences or stable findings over time, often including descriptors such as 'unchanged' or 'persistent'. Such comparisons are featured in routine radiological evaluations to track progression or stability of findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5392570487754682,0.5477386934673367,0.5616438356164384,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+14924,latent_14924,1253,0.002506,0.001035858,2.3575351,Focus on medical device placement and changes.,"Highly activated examples are those indicating changes in the state of medical devices or treatment measures, often related to clinical interventions, such as endotracheal tube placements, PICC lines, and nasogastric tubes. Descriptive terms like 'intubated', 'position', 'placement', and 'disposition of medical devices' are recurrently associated with higher activation.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4803097959080703,0.485,0.4814814814814814,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14925,latent_14925,385,0.00077,0.00045438285,1.9111751,Normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours or clear lungs in radiology findings.,"This set of examples highlights cases that describe normal cardiomediastinal and hilar contours or normal clear lungs in the analysis of radiological images even when requested to compare with prior images. The high activation samples contrast with those having significant findings, indicating this is the pattern identified.",0.6660069272637308,0.6666666666666666,0.5925925925925926,0.8,20.0,25.0,0.3520634036097954,0.5620915032679739,0.3793103448275862,0.4150943396226415,53.0,100.0
+14926,latent_14926,3021,0.006042,0.0021400566,1.2317133,Comparison of current and prior images to note changes in conditions or positions of medical devices.,"The pattern involves comparing current imaging findings with one or more prior images, but with an observed change or stability in specific conditions, such as tubes, lines, or any newly identified or resolving conditions. The examples focus on interval changes in clinical features or devices, suggestive of assessing progression or resolution of a condition.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5104895104895105,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14927,latent_14927,559,0.001118,0.000678308,2.3958728,Focus on comparing current images with prior studies.,"Prompts with higher activation levels focus on comparisons with prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability, changes, or unresolved issues identified from an earlier state, often indicating clinical assessment of disease progression or resolution. This pattern reflects the importance of historical imaging comparisons in radiological interpretations.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4261620732208967,0.4363636363636363,0.3852459016393442,0.7230769230769231,65.0,100.0
+14928,latent_14928,898,0.001796,0.0008195024,2.3472788,Explicit request for comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with zero activation generally do not ask for a comparison to prior imaging, while those with higher activation specify a change in the image or findings in comparison to prior imaging, typically indicated by the words 'comparison', 'as compared to', or discussion of stability/change.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4704361710216184,0.4723618090452261,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,99.0
+14929,latent_14929,621,0.001242,0.0007289317,2.0681264,Interval changes or resolution of pulmonary pathology.,"Images with effective comparison between current and previous studies show significant changes or resolutions in pulmonary conditions like edema, consolidation, or effusions. This pattern of interval changes or resolutions typically indicates the patient recovery, progression, or changes in disease state.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.478370020010915,0.5423728813559322,0.4473684210526316,0.2207792207792207,77.0,100.0
+14930,latent_14930,1582,0.003164,0.0011717819,2.5073137,Effectiveness in integrating prior image comparisons for current findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on explicit collaborative cooperation between the AI assistant and the human radiologist, particularly emphasizing the necessity or utility of prior radiological images in generating a more comprehensive interpretation. These examples show a mix of both unchanged findings and new developments as compared to previous studies.",0.5050505050505051,0.5102040816326531,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.5332792207792207,0.54,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,100.0
+14931,latent_14931,2227,0.004454,0.001602607,1.4240994,Stable findings in comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The dataset includes descriptions comparing current and previous imaging studies, highlighting unchanged or stable findings. The phrasing emphasizes intervals with minimal change, using expressions like 'unchanged', 'no new findings' and stability over time, interpreted as less significant clinical changes between imaging exams.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5205479452054794,0.38,100.0,100.0
+14932,latent_14932,199,0.000398,0.0003643168,3.2752676,Comparison of changes/stability with prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing findings from current imaging to previous studies, specifically calling attention to stable, unchanged, or improved conditions. The focus is primarily on the consistency or resolution of findings compared to prior results, reinforcing the pattern of considering historical context in report assessment.",0.45906432748538,0.4594594594594595,0.3333333333333333,0.6666666666666666,12.0,25.0,0.3534499966730987,0.3577235772357723,0.1888888888888888,0.7391304347826086,23.0,100.0
+14933,latent_14933,411,0.000822,0.0004575559,2.8854253,Requests for comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels are focused on achieving a specific task of comparing current imaging findings with prior images. The presence of the word 'comparison' coupled with specific ask patterns to describe findings with respect to previous images is the shared factor amongst these examples, regardless of the content of those findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.3944457301550567,0.3945578231292517,0.2857142857142857,0.5957446808510638,47.0,100.0
+14934,latent_14934,1711,0.003422,0.0013439858,2.355539,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging in the context of radiological interpretation.,"The representative examples describe radiology cases in which there is a focus on both the current patient's images and their comparison with prior images, accompanied by a clinical context. The low-activation examples lack either the pattern of direct comparison with previous images or a clear context related to evaluating changes over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5131578947368421,0.78,100.0,100.0
+14935,latent_14935,4443,0.008886,0.0031334702,1.4326665,Interval changes in pleural effusion status compared to prior imaging.,"Several examples involve changes or stability in pleural effusion status noted over time, and this variability in pleural fluid accumulation is a common observation in follow-up studies in patients with underlying conditions affecting pleural fluid dynamics.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3897923516691844,0.485,0.4285714285714285,0.09,100.0,100.0
+14936,latent_14936,1299,0.002598,0.001061752,1.9774314,Focus on interval changes or new findings compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings that are evaluated in the context of previous imaging while specifically seeking to identify or rule out significant interval changes, such as the resolution or development of conditions, rather than unchanged findings. The pattern emphasizes identifying changes over merely reiterating stability.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4943806162549122,0.495,0.4953271028037383,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14937,latent_14937,768,0.001536,0.00070646266,1.8110337,Focus on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation consistently describe evaluations in comparison with prior imaging studies. Despite not always specifying a prior comparison date, the format highlights a detailed comparison-focused approach using phrases that describe stable or interval changes relative to prior imaging.",0.4412280701754386,0.4693877551020408,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5122378100473104,0.5357142857142857,0.5174825174825175,0.7708333333333334,96.0,100.0
+14938,latent_14938,1799,0.003598,0.0013368811,1.5033935,Existence of prior image for direct comparison.,"The pattern observed involves references to the presence of prior images for comparison, particularly when there are findings of changes or stability. Reports often explore findings in light of earlier exams, highlighting interval changes. Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention previous radiological studies used for direct comparison.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+14939,latent_14939,702,0.001404,0.0009031176,3.9699893,Evaluating stable conditions using multiple views and prior images.,"The examples linked to higher activation levels feature multiple views in imaging studies (frontal and lateral), where there is also a prior image provided that enables comparison. Typically, these examples reflect stability in known conditions or incidental findings rather than revealing new or acute abnormalities.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4526846544013926,0.4840425531914893,0.4689655172413793,0.7727272727272727,88.0,100.0
+14940,latent_14940,1159,0.002318,0.0010221329,2.2351997,Evaluation of tube or line placement in radiology reports.,"The most representational examples of the pattern all feature assessments of device placement, particularly nasogastric tubes and other lines, evident from phrases such as 'evaluate for proper NGT placement' and descriptions of line positions in relation to anatomical markers. These evaluations are often critical and thus scored with high activation, indicating a common radiological task.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14941,latent_14941,1743,0.003486,0.0013756856,1.3340021,Explicit intervals or comparisons highlighting change or stability in radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation levels feature clear comparisons or intervals indicating change or stability in radiological findings between current and previous images. These notably describe changes or stability of conditions like pulmonary edema, nodules, pleural effusion, etc., which are meticulously documented.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5227720717916796,0.54,0.5289855072463768,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14942,latent_14942,643,0.001286,0.0006186958,2.0822825,Explicit request for comparative interpretation with prior frontal images.,"High activation levels are associated with explicit instructions to compare the current images to prior frontal images, especially using text prompts like 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image'. These examples emphasize and specifically request a comparative analysis, driving the activation.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4976744186046511,0.5166666666666667,0.4740740740740741,0.8,80.0,100.0
+14943,latent_14943,2679,0.005358,0.0018985714,1.1797968,Detailed pathological findings and comparisons made to prior images.,"The highly activated examples typically include specific, detailed findings after comparing current imaging results with prior studies, even in the absence of a prior comparator. They articulate nuanced changes or stability in the images observed, with an emphasis on detailed description of any diagnosed anatomical or pathological conditions, often mentioning various clinical indications such as atelectasis, atelectasis/scarring, or opacities.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5117062013312431,0.525,0.518796992481203,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14944,latent_14944,3470,0.00694,0.0024282811,1.2115695,Comparisons to note unchanged or interval changes in imaging.,"Reports with high activation show either interval changes or observations that have remained unchanged between current and prior imaging studies. These examples focus on comparisons indicating status quo or interval modifications, a common narrative in follow-up radiology reports.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.555601488218272,0.57,0.5514705882352942,0.75,100.0,100.0
+14945,latent_14945,190,0.00038,0.000377009,3.5862525,"Requests for comparison with prior images, independent of true prior data availability.","Samples with high activation involve generating comparative descriptions of radiologic findings, even when no baseline for comparison is provided. They often prompt comparison to prior images lacking specific date or reference, demonstrating model's understanding of comparative inquiry cues regardless of actual availability of previous study references.",0.6792750197005516,0.7027027027027027,0.5333333333333333,0.6666666666666666,12.0,25.0,0.4390804597701149,0.5409836065573771,0.1458333333333333,0.3181818181818182,22.0,100.0
+14946,latent_14946,3433,0.006866,0.002458044,1.2595159,Radiological comparison analysis relative to prior images.,"These examples employ images in a current context while indicating the use of comparison with a prior image. The focus is on the ability to describe radiological findings relative to previous observations. Descriptive analysis in these samples is frequently predicated upon actively comparing current to previous sizes, positions, opacities, or placements in the images.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5361881134721174,0.57,0.5454545454545454,0.84,100.0,100.0
+14947,latent_14947,2389,0.004778,0.001756259,1.1944214,Explicit directive for providing findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation consistently include a directive of providing a description of findings through the explicit comparison with prior radiographic images, regardless of technique specifics or patient condition. The correlation centers on the repeated theme of assessed changes or comparisons to previous images, which is a common procedural aspect in medical imaging report analysis.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14948,latent_14948,2203,0.004406,0.0016276793,1.5115826,Use of phrase 'upper limits of normal' in descriptions.,"The high activation level examples frequently make use of the phrase ""upper limits of normal"" when describing the heart size or similar measurements in the context of chest imaging. This particular way of phrasing seems to be a strong indicator of the observed pattern.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,1.0,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3687703318152244,0.5050505050505051,0.6666666666666666,0.04,100.0,98.0
+14949,latent_14949,429,0.000858,0.0005898001,2.3148668,Concern for supervening pneumonia in comparative radiology findings.,"These examples focus on identifying changes between current and prior chest images with a specific emphasis on findings that suggest potential pneumonia, such as opacification or volume loss, usually accompanied by the consideration ""supervening pneumonia"" in the appropriate clinical setting. This phrase repeated across examples is indicative of the observation or concern for pneumonia given other signs.",0.6848659003831418,0.7021276595744681,0.7857142857142857,0.5,22.0,25.0,0.5962196827233714,0.6645569620253164,0.5714285714285714,0.3448275862068966,58.0,100.0
+14950,latent_14950,3464,0.006928,0.002469904,1.1146636,Description of findings involves direct comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve cases where findings on current radiological images are interpreted in direct comparison with prior imaging studies. This pattern likely reflects a focus on evaluating changes over time, which is key in clinical radiology assessments.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.5144927536231884,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14951,latent_14951,1226,0.002452,0.0009871033,2.0737767,High activation involves lack of prior imaging comparison and indication of significant clinical events.,"The highly activated examples differentiate themselves by referencing medical procedures or injury events and frequently lack a provided comparator for the prior report, which suggests such cases involve a novel or change in important clinical condition without previous baselines to compare.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+14952,latent_14952,1473,0.002946,0.0011512483,1.5028907,"Explicit comparisons of current to prior imaging, noting changes or stabilities.","The examples that show higher activation levels involve direct comparisons between current and previous radiographic findings, noting changes or stability in specific observations like effusion, airspace opacities, or other notable features over time. These comparisons indicate explicit tracking of progression or regression of certain pulmonary or cardiac conditions, which is a common focus in radiology follow-up assessments.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4918283963227783,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.6,100.0,99.0
+14953,latent_14953,1035,0.00207,0.00087341794,1.8668541,"Findings compared to prior images, noting stability or changes.","Activation levels are high when a comparative analysis with prior findings is available or referenced, with emphasis on stability or changes in current imaging compared to previous ones. This pattern is crucial for assessing progression or stability of medical conditions via radiological imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14954,latent_14954,1299,0.002598,0.0010525037,2.200244,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"In these examples, the pattern focuses on the comparison of findings with prior imaging studies, particularly highlighting any changes or lack thereof. The description refers to changes in imaging findings over time, a key element to radiological reports, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or 'interval change'. This pattern is distinct due to its emphasis on temporal comparison against previous radiographs.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5230769230769231,0.68,100.0,100.0
+14955,latent_14955,303,0.000606,0.0005561343,2.0301118,Identification of interval changes in radiological findings.,"The pattern seen in the high activation samples involves detailed descriptions of changes in imaging findings over a specified interval when compared to prior images. Specifically, there is a focus on identifying any notable interval changes in the radiological findings between the current and prior images.",0.6759878419452887,0.6829268292682927,0.5789473684210527,0.6875,16.0,25.0,0.5372074253430186,0.5673758865248227,0.34375,0.5365853658536586,41.0,100.0
+14956,latent_14956,1197,0.002394,0.0009240044,2.104289,Observation of healed or chronic rib fractures.,"Examples with high activation describe healed or chronic bone fractures, specifically focusing on rib fractures demonstrated as callus formations or chronic fractures seen on the radiograph.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3967398280066743,0.53,1.0,0.06,100.0,100.0
+14957,latent_14957,686,0.001372,0.0009394262,3.243432,Use of prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve the use of prior imaging for comparison, enhancing the diagnostic evaluation mentioned in the findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3904265516415049,0.4054054054054054,0.4031007751937984,0.611764705882353,85.0,100.0
+14958,latent_14958,1487,0.002974,0.0010643369,1.4641166,Significant interval changes or new findings in images.,"Many highly activated examples focus on comparison and substantial changes or new findings, especially changes in line placements, fluid collections, or object positions, emphasizing the need to detect significant sudden alterations or additions in a clinical image which could suggest an emergent condition or response to treatment.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5625,0.58,0.6333333333333333,0.38,100.0,100.0
+14959,latent_14959,2981,0.005962,0.0021590008,1.3659331,Descriptions of interval changes or ongoing stability between current and prior imaging studies.,"The analysis reveals that reports showing interval or ongoing changes in radiographic findings across studies tend to have high activation levels. This is demonstrated in multiple examples, where descriptions detail differences or stability over time between current and prior images. Such comparative statements are indicative of follow-up evaluations, ascribing importance to changes detected over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4522935779816514,0.457286432160804,0.4661016949152542,0.55,100.0,99.0
+14960,latent_14960,2849,0.005698,0.002021286,1.1805397,Detailed interpretation of changes compared to prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently emphasize specific interpretation of comparison with prior images, particularly focusing on whether changes in imaging studies are significant or merely represent expected variations. This contrasts with less relevant examples that lack detailed analysis or impart more general or unchanged findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5646621896621897,0.5678391959798995,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,99.0
+14961,latent_14961,2199,0.004398,0.0015842858,1.4286567,Comparative imaging with noted changes or stability in relevant clinical findings.,"The high activation examples typically include findings described in comparison to previous images, with noted changes or stabilities in a specific condition, such as positioning of tubes, presence of effusion, or variations in opacities. These comparisons and noted changes or stabilities are often essential to monitor patient condition and treatment responses.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+14962,latent_14962,919,0.001838,0.00090022583,2.3436718,Unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with clear lungs and no acute pathology.,"In these examples, the reports generally describe non-acute findings with normal or unremarkable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, combined with the absence of significant acute pathology such as pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or focal consolidation. Phrases like 'cardiac and mediastinal silhouettes are normal/unremarkable', 'lungs are clear', and 'no focal consolidation' recur frequently, indicating this pattern.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6190476190476191,0.625,0.6666666666666666,0.5,100.0,100.0
+14963,latent_14963,301,0.000602,0.00046768718,3.6296806,Comparison of current and prior images to note interval changes.,"High activation examples are associated with descriptions that compare current and prior images to note stability or changes in patient's conditions. This often involves language detailing comparisons such as 'compared to prior', 'unchanged', or 'similar', indicating a focus on interval changes in imaging interpretations.",0.5542825968357883,0.5581395348837209,0.4827586206896552,0.7777777777777778,18.0,25.0,0.4337929170045959,0.4338235294117647,0.2929292929292929,0.8055555555555556,36.0,100.0
+14964,latent_14964,1877,0.003754,0.0013076704,1.3254951,Comparison made to prior imaging with focus on changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently mention a comparison between the current and prior imaging studies, with a focus on the description of changes in findings over time (e.g., interval changes, stability, or improvement). This pattern in radiology emphasizes tracking changes or lack thereof in patient conditions across sequential imaging studies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.528767956221023,0.535,0.5284552845528455,0.65,100.0,100.0
+14965,latent_14965,2926,0.005852,0.0020464375,1.5026181,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing medical device position or stability in findings.,"All examples focus on findings where changes are compared with prior imaging studies, and the outcomes often revolve around assessing stability or changes in medical devices, lines, or tubes in addition to pathological or structural findings. Those with lower activation levels include descriptions lacking emphasis on stability versus change, whereas high activation levels repeatedly highlight detailed evaluations of positions of medical devices or subtle changes over successive images.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+14966,latent_14966,803,0.001606,0.00078340824,2.4481614,Persistent pleural effusion and atelectasis in comparison reports.,"The highly activated examples primarily describe radiological comparisons between current imaging and previous studies, particularly noting stability, persistence, or slight changes in pleural effusions and accompanying atelectasis. When the report demonstrates that these findings are stable or show mild changes from previous reports, it matches a pattern of interest in radiology focused on monitoring conditions over time.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.7222222222222222,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5548098434004474,0.5829145728643216,0.66,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+14967,latent_14967,2335,0.00467,0.0016834828,1.4635006,Descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe interval changes or evaluations for interval changes between current imaging and prior imaging, reflecting a focus on assessing differences over time.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14968,latent_14968,2058,0.004116,0.0014980071,1.3627615,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation focus on descriptions where prior imaging, given either directly or implied, is used for comparative assessment to note changes, or lack thereof, in current findings. This often involves detecting stability or changes in existing conditions, and considerable detail is given about prior findings.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4836858243572608,0.5025125628140703,0.5036496350364964,0.69,100.0,99.0
+14969,latent_14969,1774,0.003548,0.0013294765,1.3163307,Changes or stability noted in comparison with prior images.,"The higher activation examples consistently involve descriptions of findings where changes or stability in the imaging over time are noted, typically when findings are compared to prior imaging results. This pattern corresponds to the presence of comparisons made between current and previous imaging, and the stability or progression of noted pathologies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.5538461538461539,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14970,latent_14970,2059,0.004118,0.0014954907,1.1784651,"Structured comparison with prior imaging findings, noting changes or stable conditions.","Highly activated examples focus on clear delineation and interpretation of findings based on comparison with prior imaging studies, indicating the presence or absence of changes or stable findings over time. These examples involve thorough and structured comparison, often denoting improvement or worsening conditions and making recommendations based on observed changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.498302119777732,0.507537688442211,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,99.0
+14971,latent_14971,2121,0.004242,0.0015212238,1.2982289,"Presence of edema, cardiomegaly, or cardiac devices in chest imaging.","Reports with high activations consistently reference specific findings or features in chest radiographs that prominently involve the heart, associated edema, cardiomegaly, or the presence of cardiothoracic devices. These examples focus on cardiovascular-related conditions or interventions, particularly edema, heart enlargement, or thoracic surgical equipment, reflecting priority in consistent evaluations or areas of concern across these reports.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14972,latent_14972,1357,0.002714,0.0010496426,1.5428964,Explicit comparison of current findings to prior images for pathology tracking.,"The highly activated examples involve cases where explicit comparison is made to a prior radiograph with a focus on the presence or absence of specific pathologies, modifications, or findings such as opacifications and masses. This pattern captures the essence of radiological reporting, which often entails direct comparison to prior imaging to track the progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5682539682539682,0.575,0.56,0.7,100.0,100.0
+14973,latent_14973,608,0.001216,0.0005812267,1.625016,Explicit comparison in findings description between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels include cases where both current and prior image observations are highlighted, particularly noting changes or comparisons in findings, even when some comparison results may be incomplete or need clarifications. This indicates the relevance of articulating findings that require specific attention despite already known contexts.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5105672969966629,0.5111111111111111,0.4622641509433962,0.6125,80.0,100.0
+14974,latent_14974,682,0.001364,0.0006162057,2.6060946,Findings compared to previous examination imaging.,"The pattern with highest activation involves descriptions of findings compared to previous examinations, often using the phrase 'compared to previous exam'. These reports typically reference changes between current and prior images, such as stability, improvement, or new abnormalities.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5278371320037987,0.5351351351351351,0.4959349593495935,0.7176470588235294,85.0,100.0
+14975,latent_14975,1568,0.003136,0.0011195843,1.6025174,Findings compared or tracked over time with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve direct comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing stability, changes, or the resolution of thoracic findings. This pattern is prevalent in radiological assessments to determine changes over time, signifying monitoring of ongoing conditions.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5414346544382574,0.58,0.5506329113924051,0.87,100.0,100.0
+14976,latent_14976,1583,0.003166,0.0012097001,1.3992252,Frequent evaluation of interval changes relative to previous exams.,"This set of examples highlights radiology reports that prominently describe findings with clear comparisons to past studies, focusing on interval changes or stabilities in conditions. The consistent pattern involves examining intervals or unchanged states, despite varied findings like pneumothorax, pulmonary edema, or other pathologies. This pattern aids continuity in monitoring patient conditions across multiple studies.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+14977,latent_14977,2945,0.00589,0.0020830154,1.3936857,Detailed comparison with prior imaging to highlight stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels describe detailed findings when comparing current and prior imaging studies. These differences or changelessness are highlighted, often noting stability or changes in pathological conditions across the images. Comparisons explicitly made are to prior studies, often also referring to specific dates or conditions from previous exams.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5323695788812068,0.535,0.5304347826086957,0.61,100.0,100.0
+14978,latent_14978,2129,0.004258,0.0015799837,1.3806559,Detailed descriptions with specific comparative language.,"Examples with higher activation levels often provide more detailed descriptions, using comparative language or specific terminology to assess the evolution or stability of findings across imaging studies. This indicates that detailed descriptions and specific language usage are key factors for higher activations.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,100.0,100.0
+14979,latent_14979,2516,0.005032,0.0018376943,1.5329944,Use of image comparison to previous studies to note changes or stability.,"Higher activation is seen in examples where radiology studies employ comparisons of current images with prior images to assess for interval changes or the stability of findings. Phrases like 'in comparison to previous study', 'unchanged since prior', 'from the previous exam', and explicit mentions of dates indicate this pattern.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5104895104895105,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14980,latent_14980,2979,0.005958,0.0020827034,1.3450184,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability.","The examples with higher activation consistently describe findings in current images with explicit or implicit comparisons to prior images or reports, showing an emphasis on assessing changes or stability over time. They frequently highlight stability or changes in certain features such as pneumomediastinum or signs of prior procedures.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4798041615667074,0.49,0.4921875,0.63,100.0,100.0
+14981,latent_14981,1327,0.002654,0.0010926739,2.3680909,Consistent or unchanged findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations consistently include descriptions of specific changes or details upon comparison with prior imaging, indicating the presence of consistent or stable features over time. These reports focus on comparing new images with previous ones and providing specific findings or confirmations of stabilities, such as unchanged features or devices, or consistent cardiopulmonary appearances, even when no significant change is noted.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4751470886589571,0.4773869346733668,0.4767441860465116,0.41,100.0,99.0
+14982,latent_14982,1625,0.00325,0.0011642781,1.3939893,Emphasis on stable findings or no change from prior imaging studies.,The activation levels are higher when there is a clear comparison with prior imaging studies specifically emphasizing stable findings or unchanged conditions in complex cases. This is evident in multiple examples where unchanged or consistent findings from prior images are highlighted as significant information.,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.484368351230257,0.485,0.4838709677419355,0.45,100.0,100.0
+14983,latent_14983,407,0.000814,0.0005358804,1.982906,"Detailed comparison to prior imaging, highlighting specific changes or stable observation.","Examples with positive activation levels relate findings to previous studies and notably describe changes in specific indicators such as lung volumes, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or tube positioning. The complexity of interpretations over time, with comments on such intervals, is key.",0.5903010033444815,0.5918367346938775,0.5714285714285714,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5206801470588236,0.5302013422818792,0.3717948717948718,0.58,50.0,99.0
+14984,latent_14984,2371,0.004742,0.0016689177,1.009127,Noting changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Analyzing the given examples, the activation is high when the report describes changes in anatomical structures, medical devices, or conditions compared to prior imaging. Often, this involves noting stability or change in conditions or devices in contrast to previous examinations. This pattern reflects the model's focus on evaluating longitudinal data changes.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5390625,0.69,100.0,100.0
+14985,latent_14985,1284,0.002568,0.0010522439,2.3333108,"Stable or unchanged cardiomegaly with pulmonary congestion, effusion, or edema.","These examples highlight radiological findings of stable or unchanged cardiomegaly, often accompanied by secondary findings such as pulmonary vascular congestion, pleural effusion, or edema. Reports frequently mention these findings in comparison to prior studies, emphasizing the stability of cardiomegaly and associated changes.",0.7126436781609196,0.72,0.8235294117647058,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5963408560719248,0.615,0.7017543859649122,0.4,100.0,100.0
+14986,latent_14986,2069,0.004138,0.0015805115,1.5806847,Explicit instruction to compare current findings with prior imaging.,"These examples with high activation levels focus on the phrase structure that explicitly prompts the assistant to provide findings from the study compared to a prior image, which is a distinctive linguistic requirement common in follow-up imaging studies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,100.0,100.0
+14987,latent_14987,2644,0.005288,0.0018832041,1.81169,Detailed comparison with prior imaging focused on changes or stability in findings.,"Examples with higher activation involve descriptions of radiological findings and interpretations. Specifically, they compare the current imaging findings with prior images, frequently noting changes, consistencies, or unchanged aspects in the context of a clinical scenario. This reflects the typical structure of radiological comparisons that focus heavily on describing interval findings or stability between exams.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5315315315315315,0.59,100.0,100.0
+14988,latent_14988,1081,0.002162,0.0009839578,2.931701,Detailed analysis of current vs. prior imaging changes.,"The examples with high activation levels compare current imaging findings with prior ones, emphasizing changes or persistence of findings such as opacities, effusions, or effusions and lung volumes. The language reflects the analysis of changes over time as a prominent feature.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5347719974309569,0.542713567839196,0.5317460317460317,0.6767676767676768,99.0,100.0
+14989,latent_14989,2698,0.005396,0.0018795459,0.98908836,Findings described as unchanged from prior imaging.,"The examples show radiological findings being described as unchanged or stable over time. This stable appearance in comparison to prior exams is a common pattern in sequential radiology reporting, pointing toward non-progressive conditions or normal findings that do not pose immediate concern.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4920396831662325,0.5125628140703518,0.5166666666666667,0.3131313131313131,99.0,100.0
+14990,latent_14990,485,0.00097,0.00066845637,2.3826733,Comparison to prior images revealing changes or stability in clinical findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently detail changes in findings when comparing current to prior images. These details often note minor changes, stability, or previous indications which require monitoring, emphasizing dynamic assessment over simple static observation.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4500934436858766,0.4506172839506173,0.3578947368421052,0.5483870967741935,62.0,100.0
+14991,latent_14991,2118,0.004236,0.001521533,1.6416975,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting stability or minimal change.","High activation levels are associated with radiology reports that explicitly compare current and previous imaging studies, often noting stable or unchanged conditions, alongside established findings or interventions. Lower activation corresponds to no such mention or detailed clinical context.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5636801324005115,0.565,0.5730337078651685,0.51,100.0,100.0
+14992,latent_14992,1189,0.002378,0.0009773639,2.349113,Use of comprehensive image comparisons referencing prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation scores predominantly involve detailed descriptions of current findings, relate these findings to historical images, and particularly emphasize comparisons between prior and current images without explicit absence of comparison or prior reports. This type of comparative analysis is crucial in radiological evaluations for identifying changes over time.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+14993,latent_14993,865,0.00173,0.0008594813,2.1997342,Focus on detailed changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate a comparison between current and prior imaging. The key pattern is the detection and description of specific changes in imaging studies over time. Examples highlight recognizable changes like opacities, effusion sizes, tube removals, and cardiomediastinal alterations versus prior images, indicating substantial change evaluation.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+14994,latent_14994,762,0.001524,0.00076983025,3.455675,"Contact with prior images focused on interval changes in specific findings (effusions, pneumonia, etc.).","These examples focus on stability or change in radiological findings compared to prior images, discussing changes (or the lack thereof) in conditions like pleural effusion, pneumonia, and cardiomediastinal contour. Examples with lower activation often reference absence of a significant interval change.",0.36,0.36,0.36,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4145658263305322,0.4210526315789473,0.379746835443038,0.3296703296703296,91.0,99.0
+14995,latent_14995,1194,0.002388,0.0010031416,1.7717667,Comparison to prior radiographic images showing stability or specific changes.,"The examples with higher activations frequently reference 'comparison to prior radiographs' or 'in comparison with the study of _', often noting minimal to no change in findings or specific changes. This contrasts lower activation examples where comparison might be absent. This pattern indicates the importance of direct comparison to prior images in identifying stability or changes in radiographic findings as a key aspect in these samples, thereby highlighting an interest in tracking changes over time.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5840097402597402,0.59,0.5725806451612904,0.71,100.0,100.0
+14996,latent_14996,980,0.00196,0.0008601599,2.0955107,Unchanged cardiac silhouette despite varying pathologies.,"Examples with pattern show the presence of aortic pathology or unusual cardiac silhouettes as opposed to normal findings or lack of significant change, which are often not the focus of radiology reviews, hence activating the model at a lower level. Examples cited with abnormal heart contours or comparisons in cardiac structure activate highly, even when not mentioning pleural effusions or cough, highlighting pathology outside of expected parameters.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4150246305418719,0.43,0.3970588235294117,0.27,100.0,100.0
+14997,latent_14997,1853,0.003706,0.0013966012,1.5673009,In-depth comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The activations are higher in text passages that provide a detailed description of findings on current imaging compared to prior imaging. This includes consistent evaluations about the cardiac silhouette and other thoracic elements like pleural effusions or devices. It seems that this model activation is triggered when comparing current findings with previous ones and emphasizing detailed observations, especially those that may signify changes in the medical status.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5607476635514018,0.6,100.0,100.0
+14998,latent_14998,364,0.000728,0.0004525052,2.405243,Instructions for comparison with prior images.,These examples contain instructions that explicitly ask for evaluations based on prior images for comparison. Evaluators describe findings as stable or note differences from prior imaging. Such comparative evaluations are crucial in radiology to assess changes over time.,0.4782608695652174,0.4782608695652174,0.44,0.5238095238095238,21.0,25.0,0.4276152227959456,0.4383561643835616,0.275,0.4782608695652174,46.0,100.0
+14999,latent_14999,4950,0.0099,0.003469026,1.2356056,Focus on devices or procedural outcomes rather than disease processes.,"The pattern evident in the high activation examples involves references to changes or stability of specific medical devices like pacemakers or catheters, rather than focusing on disease processes or anatomical abnormalities. These findings emphasize technical and procedural evaluations.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5876288659793815,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15000,latent_15000,2464,0.004928,0.0017775377,1.9771523,Pneumothorax identification or evaluation.,"Observations with lower activation often report lung and heart findings with references to comparison, but rarely significant change or emphasis on pneumothorax. Examples with higher activation values include mentions of pneumothorax or pneumothorax-related evaluations, suggesting it is the key th:",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.3529411764705882,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.467390212038991,0.47,0.4651162790697674,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15001,latent_15001,2343,0.004686,0.0016425498,1.2797419,Technical and positioning details of tubes or lines.,"The higher activation levels correspond to findings that describe technical positioning changes or challenges, as well as abnormalities detected post-procedure or post-therapy which are related to incorrect or altered positioning of medical devices, lines, or tubes, such as ""rotated positioning"" or positioning changes of a tube or line. These specifics about positioning are crucial in interpreting radiological images and often correlate with procedure-related adjustments.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15002,latent_15002,3379,0.006758,0.0023832906,1.715224,Comparison of current findings to changes noted from prior imaging.,"High activation levels correlate with descriptive findings in radiology studies and their comparisons to prior imaging. Low activation is seen when comparisons are requested but no prior images or specific change indicators are provided, limiting the model's ability to fulfill the task.",0.3376154154957848,0.34,0.3571428571428571,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5459171690284192,0.565,0.5460992907801419,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15003,latent_15003,1128,0.002256,0.0009306118,1.6145523,Reports detailing changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports that describe changes or comparisons between current and prior images, often mentioning findings or alterations explicitly noted over time. This suggests a focus on assessing changes over time rather than initial findings.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4489243914153542,0.455,0.4628099173553719,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15004,latent_15004,1829,0.003658,0.0013360428,1.4796345,Stability or mild changes seen in comparison with previous imaging.,"The pattern observed here is focused on the comparison between current radiographic images and prior imaging studies. This is emphasized by ongoing stability or slight interval changes from previous examinations, using descriptors such as 'unchanged,' 'similar,' and 'stable,' suggesting that the activation levels highlight consistency or mild progression without significant new findings.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15005,latent_15005,1975,0.00395,0.0014360296,1.4919937,COMPARISON in imaging descriptions often highlights changes or stability in findings.,The pattern is related to providing descriptions of findings based on the comparison of current images with prior imaging studies. Higher activations correlate with descriptions of changes or stabilities noted upon comparison.,0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15006,latent_15006,360,0.00072,0.0005555654,2.5772574,"Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison to prior radiographs, often involving device positioning.","The highly activated examples focus on evaluating changes or stability by comparing the current radiographic images to prior ones within the context of complex clinical scenarios, often with some form of device changes or interval cardiac/pulmonary updates, indicating its importance. Examples highlight the importance of interval assessments in radiographic analysis of medical conditions, particularly focusing on status or positioning of catheters or other medical devices in context to the patient's current status and prior updates.",0.6363636363636364,0.6363636363636364,0.56,0.7368421052631579,19.0,25.0,0.4409434309931822,0.4459459459459459,0.3023255813953488,0.5416666666666666,48.0,100.0
+15007,latent_15007,789,0.001578,0.00080308126,1.6907003,Studies describing interval change or stability compared to past images.,"The examples that receive higher activation levels refer to changes in the patient's condition over time or between examinations, explicitly noting differences or stability compared to prior imaging studies. This involves making direct comparisons to assess for interval changes, stability, or progression of findings, particularly focusing on aspects like effusion, opacities or other radiographic features.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15008,latent_15008,388,0.000776,0.0005500647,3.530475,Absence of prior comparison imaging in acute evaluations.,"These examples frequently involve a lack of comparative imaging available while assessing an acute condition. The reports emphasize clear lungs or normal cardiac silhouette, particularly when no immediate acute comparison is possible, reflecting a methodological pattern of reporting in acute evaluations.",0.7863636363636364,0.7872340425531915,0.7727272727272727,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.6889070442992011,0.6912751677852349,0.5172413793103449,0.9183673469387756,49.0,100.0
+15009,latent_15009,2308,0.004616,0.001694597,1.5369698,Detailed findings and comprehensive comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples show higher activation for clear and complete descriptions that accurately capture imaging details and significant changes as compared to prior evaluations, demonstrating a comprehensive analysis in radiology.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5059967915255532,0.515,0.5118110236220472,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15010,latent_15010,358,0.000716,0.000495402,2.9784703,Interval changes in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation values are associated with reports indicating interval changes between the current state and previous imaging or states, with a focus on describing alterations in opacities, effusions, or anatomical features using phrases like 'decreased', 'unchanged', or 'improved'. Detailed comparisons are specified, highlighting changes or stability explicitly.",0.7767857142857142,0.7777777777777778,0.6785714285714286,0.95,20.0,25.0,0.5509097948122338,0.5586206896551724,0.382716049382716,0.6888888888888889,45.0,100.0
+15011,latent_15011,2999,0.005998,0.0021624402,1.2925526,Stable or slightly improved findings compared to previous imaging.,"The highly activated examples mention findings with little or no change compared to prior imaging, indicating a stable or slightly improved condition. This vocabulary is typical in follow-up examinations to ensure no new pathologies have developed or existing ones have resolved.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15012,latent_15012,1799,0.003598,0.0012864599,1.3564736,Radiology findings compared to prior studies highlighting interval stability or changes.,"Highly representative samples describe findings in terms of comparison with previous studies, focusing on interval changes, stability or resolving pathologies. This pattern emphasizes the importance of comparing current images with prior ones and noting any changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.496,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15013,latent_15013,566,0.001132,0.00063966255,3.0881348,Stable radiologic findings or support devices compared to prior imaging.,The examples show a pattern where there is a detailed parsing and description of imaging findings with an emphasis on the stability or change in specific radiologic features compared to previous reports or exams. References to stability or unchanged conditions frequently appear alongside details of unchanged support devices or anatomical structures.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5052503898804367,0.5174418604651163,0.4246575342465753,0.4305555555555556,72.0,100.0
+15014,latent_15014,346,0.000692,0.0005062462,2.737447,"Focus on detailed description of stable thoracic structures, emphasizing absence of critical changes.","The highly activated examples consistently focus on descriptions of the lungs, heart, and overall chest findings, without notable acute abnormalities or critical conditions, explicitly emphasizing stable or unchanged findings associated with significant or potentially serious past medical events. The reports contrast current images with prior ones using the phrase 'are unchanged' or similar, indicating stability, while noting date comparisons when relevant.",0.3752860411899313,0.3809523809523809,0.3448275862068966,0.5882352941176471,17.0,25.0,0.5400432900432901,0.5466666666666666,0.3902439024390244,0.64,50.0,100.0
+15015,latent_15015,2623,0.005246,0.0018754561,1.1559112,Significant interval changes identified in comparison imaging.,"The common feature in highly activated examples is significant changes in findings over time, such as effusions increasing or pneumothorax developing or resolving. These examples evaluate interval changes using the present imagery compared to prior images, indicating this model focuses on appreciating and documenting those changes in diagnostic reports.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.7058823529411765,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5019762845849802,0.5404040404040404,0.5777777777777777,0.2653061224489796,98.0,100.0
+15016,latent_15016,2071,0.004142,0.0015380541,1.1897138,Presence/assessment of chest or medical devices on imaging.,"The distinguishing feature with high activation examples is their focus on the verification or evaluation of medical devices or tubes (such as chest tubes or endotracheal tubes), consistent with a pattern where the model detects significant medical interventions, typically changes or assessments of devices in radiological findings.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5641173376086576,0.565,0.5714285714285714,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15017,latent_15017,216,0.000432,0.00034980904,3.0876045,Detailed description of radiological techniques or views.,"The examples with high activation levels all have clearly described radiological techniques or views, specifically detailing the orientation or approach (like 'frontal image', 'lateral view', 'PA and lateral'). This specificity in description is emphasized, while examples with generic terms or absent technique details have low activation levels.",0.4492753623188406,0.4736842105263157,0.3939393939393939,1.0,13.0,25.0,0.3801035077630822,0.3888888888888889,0.2,0.6538461538461539,26.0,100.0
+15018,latent_15018,668,0.001336,0.00065398676,2.293322,Detailed comparison leading to specific noted changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently show a detailed comparison between current and prior imaging which results in a specific noted change, improvement, or stability of findings, indicating continuous monitoring or progression in the context of related clinical history. This pattern highlights discrepancies or evaluations against previous images.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5208004212743549,0.532967032967033,0.4857142857142857,0.4096385542168674,83.0,99.0
+15019,latent_15019,1285,0.00257,0.001037888,1.6901271,Direct comparison or reference to prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation all describe findings in the context of a direct ""comparison"" section or reference to prior imaging, indicating that direct comparison to previous images is a key component of these analyses, leading to thorough documentation and evaluation of changes over time.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5126582278481012,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15020,latent_15020,3100,0.0062,0.0021980158,1.0967563,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiological findings.,"Prompts with high activation levels focus on descriptions that compare current radiological findings to prior imaging, often noting stability or changes in existing conditions, and typically involve cases where precise comparison to prior tests is critical. Higher activations are associated with comparisons that indicate either significant change or stability in conditions that are monitored over time, often with specific medical history or indications.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4568578419510096,0.495,0.4967320261437908,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15021,latent_15021,3411,0.006822,0.002365011,1.1240158,Finding interval changes or no significant interval change from prior images.,"Highly activated examples highlight findings involving the presence of interval change, especially when prior imaging shows stable findings or when a certain condition is unchanged despite a known pathology. This focus allows radiologists to evaluate changes specifically, which are crucial for diagnosis or progress assessment.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5477841422972565,0.55,0.543859649122807,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15022,latent_15022,1401,0.002802,0.0011423334,1.6303744,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing stable findings or subtle changes.,"These examples frequently demonstrate comparison between current findings and a prior imaging study, focusing on detecting changes or lack thereof in pathologies. The activation reflects the emphasis on stable conditions or slight changes over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4615384615384615,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15023,latent_15023,694,0.001388,0.00067152997,1.9884816,Presence and positioning of lines or tubes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples consistently refer to specific lines or tubes mentioned in radiology reports, with particular attention to changes in tube position between current and prior studies. The pattern often involves the presence and position of devices like endotracheal tubes or nasogastric tubes.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3969802698613641,0.4354838709677419,0.320754716981132,0.1976744186046511,86.0,100.0
+15024,latent_15024,883,0.001766,0.0007144238,1.9730027,Attempt to discuss or communicate imaging findings with a healthcare provider.,"These examples often involve descriptions of notifications, consultations, or discussion of imaging findings with clinicians. Activation is higher when the report concludes with notification or collaboration with a healthcare provider, such as 'referring physician paged' or 'findings were discussed'.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.8461538461538461,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5203836930455635,0.565,0.6666666666666666,0.26,100.0,100.0
+15025,latent_15025,1411,0.002822,0.0010929407,1.4485873,Localized opacities or changes indicating pathology in chest imaging.,"The common feature among high activation examples appears to be the presence of specific types of opacities or localized changes described in the chest imaging reports, often involving pleural effusions, atelectasis, cardiomegaly, or consolidations, but not routine checks like tube placements. These findings frequently suggest underlying pathology indicating disease progression or management.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4956521739130435,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15026,latent_15026,1373,0.002746,0.0010908201,1.3537291,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The pattern here is the comparison of current imaging with previous studies, with examples including phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from previous study', and specific reference to previous images. The comparisons often have implications for stability, change, or progression of findings.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.488,0.52,0.5133333333333333,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15027,latent_15027,1711,0.003422,0.0012982327,1.6716185,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting interval changes or stable findings.,"The samples with high activation levels commonly involve instances where findings are compared with prior imaging, and there is a specific observation or interval change identified since the previous study, suggesting continued monitoring or notable development.",0.6115978306216103,0.6122448979591837,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,24.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15028,latent_15028,2273,0.004546,0.0016679865,1.5503728,"Comparison of support device placement, particularly tubes, between current and prior images.","In the data, activations are higher for examples where there is a focus on comparing the position, status, or need for adjustment of support devices like tubes or catheters in current and prior images. This involves both the identification and stability/unity positions of tubes or catheters, and the changes or actions taken concerning their placement across images.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.7368421052631579,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.6346153846153846,0.33,100.0,100.0
+15029,latent_15029,292,0.000584,0.00046028465,2.2684982,Focus on resolution or stability of lung opacities or conditions.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that describe changes (or specifically, resolution or lack of change) in lung opacities or conditions from previous images. The radiology findings tend to focus on whether opacities, atelectasis, or other pulmonary conditions have resolved, improved, or remained stable, particularly in cases related to infection or lung consolidation.",0.4398178269355888,0.4878048780487805,0.3333333333333333,0.2352941176470588,17.0,24.0,0.4559110893991206,0.5111111111111111,0.2280701754385964,0.3714285714285714,35.0,100.0
+15030,latent_15030,881,0.001762,0.0008250883,2.2509453,Frontal and lateral views combined in comparative imaging.,"Different prompt configurations (frontal vs. lateral view combinations) in the examples likely lead to variations in activation levels, with certain combination instructions receiving higher activations. This aligns with common patterns where comprehensive multi-view imaging is emphasized for detailed comparative analysis.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4146341463414634,0.415,0.419047619047619,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15031,latent_15031,498,0.000996,0.00065752683,2.9083107,Assessments of tube and line positions across sequential imaging.,"The examples highlight imaging studies that specifically compare current findings to prior studies, particularly for critically positioned medical devices like endotracheal tubes, Swan-Ganz catheters, or central lines. This focus on tube and line placement adjustments indicates a primary concern with accurately reporting the positioning or suggested repositioning of these devices across sequential imaging. High activations involve more explicit descriptions of correct or incorrect placements of these tubes and lines compared to prior reports.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.7407407407407407,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.6445320197044335,0.6646341463414634,0.5737704918032787,0.546875,64.0,100.0
+15032,latent_15032,1589,0.003178,0.0011994811,1.5355195,Normal cardiac silhouette amidst abnormal findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels include reports with indications of heart size being normal or unremarkable, while identifying other faults like tortuosity or effusions. The unifying description focuses on when the cardiac silhouette isn't highlighted as problematic despite other findings.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5555555555555556,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15033,latent_15033,1678,0.003356,0.0021054097,1.9989523,"Identification of findings related to medical devices or pleural issues, involving interval changes.","Examples with higher activation levels involve identifying specific findings in relation to prior imaging while recognizing notable changes or lack thereof, particularly concerning medical devices like tubes or signs of pleural effusion and lung conditions in the context of severe cases such as respiratory failure or critical post-surgery states.",0.7342511472674176,0.7346938775510204,0.7037037037037037,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.742677665935064,0.745,0.7058823529411765,0.84,100.0,100.0
+15034,latent_15034,1133,0.002266,0.00085077155,1.9898173,Changes in findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels specifically describe findings or changes in the thoracic imaging in relation to prior images, highlighting areas requiring attention, suggesting that the pattern is linked to changes in the findings seen between the current and prior images.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4487179487179487,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15035,latent_15035,1110,0.00222,0.000894062,1.4648267,Emphasis on change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"The consistent element in high activation examples is the availability of prior imaging for comparison. These cases predominantly focus on evaluating current findings in the context of changes or stability from previous studies, highlighting the importance of temporal changes in radiological assessments.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15036,latent_15036,3478,0.006956,0.0024422163,1.39752,Focus on changes or stability compared to prior imaging studies.,"Higher activation levels are associated with comparison of current images to prior ones, especially for identifying changes and evaluating new versus existing findings. Instances where prior images are not available or do not show changes yield lower activation levels, indicating importance in comparison-based evaluation.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15037,latent_15037,1585,0.00317,0.0012769958,1.6133809,"Findings of cardiomegaly, fluid overload, pneumothorax, or significant tube placement changes when compared to previous imaging.","Examples with high activation levels contain findings of cardiomegaly, fluid overload, pneumothorax, or descriptions of tube placements in the context of comparison to prior imaging reports. These findings may represent substantial changes or specific clinical concerns requiring close monitoring or intervention.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.489137590520079,0.515,0.5272727272727272,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15038,latent_15038,2268,0.004536,0.0015833789,1.0243133,Comparison of device positions and interval changes on imaging.,The examples with high activation levels consistently compare the current imaging findings to previous studies and specifically analyze placement and intervals of medical devices or features. This suggests a pattern tied to device-related evaluations or interval changes.,0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5241656491656491,0.5276381909547738,0.5301204819277109,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+15039,latent_15039,1117,0.002234,0.00095466065,1.6286986,Comparison with prior showing specific radiological changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels describe comparative evaluations noting specific changes or improvements from previous radiological studies. These examples mention a notable change or stability in observed findings compared with prior images, emphasizing detected differences or resolutions in conditions.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5244174113288779,0.525,0.5233644859813084,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15040,latent_15040,1267,0.002534,0.0010752137,2.0002904,Unusual placement or misplacement of medical devices detected in images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently involve unusual placements or misplacements of medical devices as detected in radiological imaging, such as nasogastric tubes extending into bronchial spaces or abnormal densities in the mediastinum or anterior views. This type of finding is likely to stand out in diagnostic reports due to its unexpected nature and potential for immediate clinical intervention, hence the higher activation levels.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.3958810068649885,0.505,0.5333333333333333,0.08,100.0,100.0
+15041,latent_15041,554,0.001108,0.000586448,1.9671748,Detailed lung pathology assessment compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels include detailed descriptions of changes or stability in lung pathology over time, particularly when specifically instructed to compare to prior imaging. These examples often mention assessment of specific lung pathologies and may involve detailed descriptions of minor changes or stability in previously identified findings, such as effusions, consolidations, or other pulmonary issues.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5098330503678551,0.514792899408284,0.4216867469879518,0.5072463768115942,69.0,100.0
+15042,latent_15042,1260,0.00252,0.0010543423,2.1058044,Descriptions of findings using both frontal and lateral chest views.,"The pattern observed is related to the technical aspect of having both frontal and lateral views of the chest provided, which enhances the detail and accuracy of the findings in the radiology study. This often relates to reports emphasizing specific lung features or pathologies that are difficult to capture with only a single projection.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4798375840629362,0.4824120603015075,0.4824561403508772,0.5555555555555556,99.0,100.0
+15043,latent_15043,1022,0.002044,0.00091427355,2.0380356,Findings and assessments based on current images without historical comparison.,"Examples with higher activation focus on evaluating current images without prior image comparison to assist in assessment. The pattern reflects findings based purely on current images often aimed at assessing apparent conditions directly, particularly in acute scenarios.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15044,latent_15044,988,0.001976,0.0008526205,2.3638377,Detailed descriptions with comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations focus on providing comprehensive details about both current findings and their comparison with previous studies, including findings like opacities, cardiomegaly, pleural changes, and consolidations, while reference to previous studies seems noted but less actively described in lower activation examples.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15045,latent_15045,311,0.000622,0.00039413647,2.8852315,Comparison of current and prior radiological images for evaluation of changes.,"This pattern involves the use of current and prior images to provide a comparative evaluation, with an observed pattern of emphasizing the need for follow-up or the stability or change of notable findings. This aligns with how medical conditions are monitored via imaging over time.",0.3425287356321839,0.4090909090909091,0.4102564102564102,0.8421052631578947,19.0,25.0,0.3257779485209373,0.3259259259259259,0.2254901960784313,0.6571428571428571,35.0,100.0
+15046,latent_15046,3983,0.007966,0.002799981,1.119616,Monitoring changes in findings compared to previous imaging.,"High activation examples consistently show explicit or implied references to changes in findings or stability compared to previous imaging studies, indicating a focus on monitoring or evaluating changes over time. This includes descriptions of improvement, worsening, unchanged findings, or stability over a period or after treatment.",0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5584127398511944,0.5728643216080402,0.5555555555555556,0.75,100.0,99.0
+15047,latent_15047,2220,0.00444,0.0016038184,1.3213797,Comparison to previous imaging with a focus on changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature phrases that involve comparing current imaging findings to prior studies, with a focus on changes or stability since previous exams. These descriptions of interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging appear to be a critical part of the pattern being identified.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15048,latent_15048,2062,0.004124,0.0014740799,1.7464604,Radiologic comparison to evaluate changes from previous studies.,"The dataset predominantly emphasizes performing radiological analyses based on current and prior imaging studies, specifying explicit comparison to assess changes, stability, or resolution of findings. Phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'similar to the prior exam', and 'stable since prior evaluation' are frequent indicators within highly activated examples, manifesting a pattern where reference to previous imaging studies guides the interpretation of new findings.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15049,latent_15049,1877,0.003754,0.001444975,2.140182,Stable or unchanged radiological findings compared to prior.,"These examples describe stable or unchanged findings when comparing current radiological studies to prior images. This pattern is present in radiology reports when abnormalities or placements of medical devices are consistent with previous examinations, with emphasis on findings being unchanged or stable.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.6046511627906976,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15050,latent_15050,3716,0.007432,0.0026015549,1.1482197,Focus on interval changes or stability between prior and current images.,"The examples with high activations consistently highlight changes or comparisons between current and prior radiological findings. This involves evaluating changes over time, suggesting the pattern is focused on diagnostic value derived from comparing sequential imaging results, particularly in clinical contexts where interval changes guide management (e.g., assessing lesion stability, effusion progression).",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5176518883415435,0.53,0.5227272727272727,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15051,latent_15051,2220,0.00444,0.0016749582,2.4271986,Recognition of low lung volumes without acute findings.,"In these examples, lungs are being described in terms of low lung volumes or decreased aeration, with no acute cardiopulmonary issues identified. This indicates a pattern where lung volumes are noted, but not accompanied by acute findings.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.3333333333333333,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3715632364493323,0.44,0.3235294117647059,0.11,100.0,100.0
+15052,latent_15052,1252,0.002504,0.0010897764,2.1386158,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging for interval changes.,"Examples with higher activations show radiology findings explicitly compared to prior reports or images, often focusing on interval changes or stability. Phrases like 'in comparison with', 'no interval change', or 'as compared to' frequently appear in examples with high activations, focusing on change detection.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15053,latent_15053,1038,0.002076,0.0008810501,1.8789879,Concurrent use of frontal and lateral images compared to a prior study.,The pattern identified involves examining both frontal and lateral images whenever they are available and then comparing these findings to prior frontal images. Higher activations indicate reports with comprehensive evaluations of multiple views in comparison with prior studies.,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15054,latent_15054,1384,0.002768,0.0011223552,2.3220274,Comparison of chest imaging findings with prior images to assess changes.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve assessment of chest imaging in comparison with prior images, with a focus on evaluating changes, especially involving the cardiac silhouette, lung conditions, or presence of effusion. Distinctive terminology entails stable or interval changes noted in these critical areas.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4501504305425874,0.47,0.4782608695652174,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15055,latent_15055,526,0.001052,0.00057171244,2.633621,"Descriptive findings compared to prior imaging studies, focusing on interval changes.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference detailed findings and descriptions of changes based on the comparison with prior images. This includes terms like ""unchanged,"" ""increased,"" ""decreased,"" or specific descriptions indicating stability or change in radiographic findings, particularly focusing on stability or interval change of identified issues.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4961206896551724,0.497005988023952,0.4086021505376344,0.5671641791044776,67.0,100.0
+15056,latent_15056,1554,0.003108,0.0011818919,2.0042098,Reports highlighting unchanged findings upon comparison to prior images.,"The pattern across these examples is that they involve descriptions where findings are compared to prior images to assess changes, specifically focusing on stable or unchanged findings. Activation levels are higher when descriptions explicitly note no significant interval changes or stable findings over time.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.2307692307692307,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.532258064516129,0.33,100.0,100.0
+15057,latent_15057,1355,0.00271,0.0010966631,1.6457752,"Presence of low lung volumes, stable atelectasis, or unchanged mediastinal contours.","Examples with high activation levels focus on radiation findings related to lung volumes, atelectasis, or stable mediastinal structures, suggesting no acute changes or severe findings, often in the context of prior images. It indicates these findings denote a benign course, contrasting with acute or newly changed findings in non-activated examples.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15058,latent_15058,900,0.0018,0.000841532,2.5726986,Comparison to prior imaging reveals interval change in lung findings.,"High activation levels are observed in instances where descriptions of findings explicitly compare current images to prior studies and identify changes in lung condition, particularly when worsening of conditions like pulmonary edema or effusions are highlighted. There's frequent mention of intervals and stability or worsening in specific lung findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5614035087719298,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15059,latent_15059,2756,0.005512,0.0020012849,1.316859,Specific abnormalities compared with prior imaging study for clinical significance.,"The samples with higher activation levels often include not only a comparison with prior images but also specific abnormalities or changes described that may indicate clinical significance or notable progression, such as stable cardiomegaly, pleural effusions, or consolidations. Statements specifically indicating no changes or absence of pathology tend to have lower activation levels.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,24.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5978260869565217,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15060,latent_15060,1238,0.002476,0.00089675066,1.4126583,Detailed comparative findings and observations in chest radiographs.,"High activation examples consist of richly detailed descriptions of the chest radiographs that make comparative assessments of findings based on prior images and provide specific observations, recommendations or notifications. These descriptions are characteristic of radiology studies where comparisons to prior imaging and detailed observational reporting substantially inform diagnosis.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5791933167993735,0.592964824120603,0.5661764705882353,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+15061,latent_15061,1715,0.00343,0.0018218764,2.5834992,Reports that describe radiology findings without explicit previous comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in radiology reports without making explicit comparisons to previous imaging studies. In contrast, other examples either lack findings outright or explicitly mention prior comparisons and changes observed.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6286631874749097,0.63,0.6477272727272727,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15062,latent_15062,2621,0.005242,0.001844695,1.4443922,Mentions of medical support device placement or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve distinct medical support devices or tubes such as central venous catheters, endotracheal tubes, chest tubes, or nasogastric tubes mentioned in the findings. These are explicitly described in relation to their placement or stability, emphasizing their importance in the interpretation of the images and patient management.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4975379358858406,0.5,0.5,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15063,latent_15063,948,0.001896,0.0008347003,2.2254806,Chest imaging reports without comparison to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels often lack prior study comparisons, which suggests that the pattern lies in radiological reports where findings are interpreted without previous imaging reference, emphasizing a standalone assessment.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5523370638578011,0.575,0.6363636363636364,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15064,latent_15064,2150,0.0043,0.0015894161,1.6747663,Explicit instructions to compare current findings with prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions explicitly instructing an assistant to compare new findings with previous imaging results, and detailing the findings. Such specific task requests for detailed comparisons highlight the pattern observed in prompts.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5339805825242718,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15065,latent_15065,3801,0.007602,0.0026688138,1.1418424,"Comparison to prior findings, noting changes or stability in clinical conditions.","The examples with higher activations include comparisons to prior studies, showing either stability, changes, or new findings in conditions such as effusions, opacities, or devices placement. Lower activations often lack such prior comparisons or detail changes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15066,latent_15066,1920,0.00384,0.0014696487,2.1725562,Interval change or stability characterized via prior imaging comparisons.,"There is a clear mention of comparing radiographic findings between current and prior images, even when multiple images exist, highlighting changes in the radiological features. The consistent aspect across activated examples is the explicit comparison of findings to prior imaging, emphasizing changes or stability over time.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15067,latent_15067,815,0.00163,0.000787201,2.1157236,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging in radiology reports.,"These examples all compare the findings from the current imaging to prior images, specifically noting stability or unchanged abnormalities. This highlights a pattern where radiology reports focus on the absence of progression or stability of previously identified conditions, using terms like 'unchanged', 'no interval change', and 'stable'.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4833333333333333,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15068,latent_15068,2588,0.005176,0.0018556315,1.1099743,Instruction to compare current findings to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include instructions or indications for providing a comparison of radiology findings to a prior image, which is a distinct linguistic pattern in radiology reporting for tracking changes over time or assessing stability.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.397832195905259,0.4,0.4107142857142857,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15069,latent_15069,1667,0.003334,0.0011997812,1.3678644,Comparison to previous imaging findings with equipment status.,Exam examples with higher activation levels frequently lack the prior report (PRIOR_REPORT: N/A) and often have explicit mentions of the comparative analysis between current and prior imaging findings by the assistant. They also describe previous status of medical devices which provide explicit comparison point to assess stability or change.,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4825487012987013,0.49,0.4868421052631579,0.37,100.0,100.0
+15070,latent_15070,1133,0.002266,0.00093587325,1.6331203,Stable findings over time referencing prior imaging despite chronic conditions or procedural status.,"Examples show comparisons with prior imaging where findings remain unchanged over time or stable despite underlying chronic conditions or treatments. This could indicate consistent tracking of chronic conditions, hardware, or procedural outcomes over time without acute change.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5244174113288779,0.525,0.5268817204301075,0.49,100.0,100.0
+15071,latent_15071,427,0.000854,0.0004901829,2.3015828,Explicit request for findings comparison with prior images in patient-specific context.,"Examples with high activation levels explicitly instruct the assistant to provide descriptions of findings in comparison to specified prior images, often mentioning 'PRIOR_REPORT' or specific instructions to reference prior imaging. They emphasize detailed reviews in context of patient history and prior findings, even if the comparison date is unspecified.",0.4250325945241199,0.4489795918367347,0.4571428571428571,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4022468142186451,0.4064516129032258,0.336283185840708,0.6909090909090909,55.0,100.0
+15072,latent_15072,2673,0.005346,0.0019450983,1.3480831,Comparison of current and prior images.,"Highly representative samples consistently involve a current frontal or lateral image being compared with a prior frontal image. This setup indicates temporal comparison, emphasizing assessment of changes over time which is fundamental in tracking the progression or resolution of clinical conditions in radiologic studies.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4578164790930748,0.505,0.5031446540880503,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15073,latent_15073,2421,0.004842,0.0017261421,1.7715834,Integration of frontal and lateral views with findings contextualized by prior comparisons.,"The model shows higher activation for descriptions that incorporate both frontal and lateral views, particularly when there are notable changes or findings that are contextualized through comparison with prior imaging. These reports often have detailed technical descriptions and findings that require integration of multiple imaging planes, indicative of complex changes or confirmations that utilize more than the standard PA view.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5263103696838636,0.54,0.5298507462686567,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15074,latent_15074,687,0.001374,0.00066122663,2.4439368,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging studies to assess changes or stability.,"The higher activation examples consistently reference comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, evaluating changes or stability in findings over time, notably with explicit instructions to provide descriptions of such comparisons. This pattern illustrates how changes or consistencies in the imaging are central to the activation pattern.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5281182408074981,0.5508021390374331,0.5106382978723404,0.8275862068965517,87.0,100.0
+15075,latent_15075,1563,0.003126,0.0012080339,1.751278,Explicit comparison to prior imaging and assessment of changes.,Examples with higher activation often involve describing the findings of a current radiological examination by explicitly comparing it to prior imaging studies. These comparisons focus on identifying stable or unchanged conditions or noting specific interval developments. The importance is on the language and format used to highlight these comparisons.,0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3461538461538461,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4633767145615486,0.465,0.4684684684684684,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15076,latent_15076,2372,0.004744,0.0017194962,1.491872,Use of comparative analysis with current and prior images for radiological assessment.,"The examples with higher activation consistently utilize both current and comparisons with prior imaging to evaluate and describe notable changes or stabilities in conditions. These descriptions involve language like 'as compared to the prior' or 'similar to prior,' highlighting the use of direct comparisons to establish stability or change in findings.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4177029196484449,0.465,0.4777070063694267,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15077,latent_15077,1002,0.002004,0.00085227157,2.204523,Radiological findings revealing new features or changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently demonstrate a specific finding or a notable change, such as newly identified features (e.g., pneumothorax, tubes placements) or resolution of findings observed in previous examinations. Lower activation examples tend to describe stability with no significant new findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5494505494505495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15078,latent_15078,2905,0.00581,0.0020664409,1.6685925,"Mention of comparison with prior imaging, contrasting current and previous findings.","Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention 'comparison' to previous scans, where there is a change or exploration of differences between them, even when no previous scan is present. This suggests the pattern involves some form of comparative analysis, recognizing and documenting differences between current and prior images.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5523645114040594,0.5678391959798995,0.5474452554744526,0.7575757575757576,99.0,100.0
+15079,latent_15079,445,0.00089,0.0005771605,1.7759615,"Evaluation of lung condition comparing to prior image, checking for specific conditions like pneumonia without thorough comparison.","The examples with high activation levels often include specific indications or queries for evaluating certain conditions like pneumonia and pulmonary edema, but are missing key comparison phrases or elements that ensure diagnostic differences are managed or identified well for those conditions.",0.5457892314772204,0.5531914893617021,0.5263157894736842,0.4545454545454545,22.0,25.0,0.3914529914529914,0.4294871794871794,0.2295081967213114,0.25,56.0,100.0
+15080,latent_15080,3610,0.00722,0.0025211994,1.5798526,Evaluation of interval changes in pathological findings.,"Examples such as these focus on the identification and evaluation of changes or intervals in pathological findings between the current and prior imaging studies. The pattern is centered around the evaluation for interval changes, progression or stability of found abnormalities over time, as well as the stability of cardiomediastinal contours and other related elements.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15081,latent_15081,483,0.000966,0.0005781867,2.360396,Detailed evaluation of thoracic pathologies with specific patient indications.,"A high activation occurs in examples where there's an explicit focus on evaluating the thoracic region, specifically the presence or absence of cardiopulmonary pathologies, typically in combination with a detailed 'INDICATION' section that includes specific patient symptoms and conditions. This specificity in evaluation, coupled with detailed imaging techniques and thorough discussions in the indication, often yields high activation.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5110316040548598,0.5121951219512195,0.4259259259259259,0.71875,64.0,100.0
+15082,latent_15082,849,0.001698,0.00076511415,2.2582686,Descriptions of radiological findings include comparisons to prior images with reported changes or stability.,"Activation levels are higher for reports that involve describing the current findings in direct comparison to prior images, often detailing changes or stability in conditions, indicating a clear emphasis on longitudinal assessment.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4653465346534653,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15083,latent_15083,3119,0.006238,0.0021873028,1.5172281,Mention of specific interval changes compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation demonstrate comparison to prior radiographs with documented changes about current findings. This indicates a pattern of noting specific interval changes seen in radiological examination, such as improvement, unchanged appearance, or worsening of conditions and device positions.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5595238095238095,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15084,latent_15084,460,0.00092,0.00061846036,3.367012,Normal or unchanged cardiac and mediastinal contours/silhouettes.,"In these examples, the cardiac and mediastinal contours or silhouettes are frequently described as normal or unchanged, indicating the model activates highly when there is a particular emphasis on stable and unremarkable cardiac or mediastinal findings despite other potential processes being discussed.",0.727428326914848,0.7346938775510204,0.6666666666666666,0.9166666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.6175398722520475,0.61875,0.5,0.7377049180327869,61.0,99.0
+15085,latent_15085,2187,0.004374,0.0015507119,1.38989,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently emphasize comparison assessments between current and previous imaging studies. They document specific findings or changes over time, indicating stability, improvement, or worsening conditions across assessments.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5172413793103449,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15086,latent_15086,332,0.000664,0.00048210556,1.8625026,Comparison of thoracic images with detailed cardiac silhouette analysis.,"The pattern observed consistently in highly activated examples is the mention of reviewing multiple imaging views and detailed comparison or change in pulmonary findings, often involving descriptors of the cardiac or mediastinal silhouette being top normal to mildly enlarged. This suggests a systematic approach to analyzing subtle changes in thoracic images, looking at heart size, and changes in both frontal and lateral views.",0.4989878542510121,0.5111111111111111,0.4444444444444444,0.4,20.0,25.0,0.566221621317109,0.6071428571428571,0.3684210526315789,0.525,40.0,100.0
+15087,latent_15087,3405,0.00681,0.0023976616,1.1844525,References noting unchanged findings relative to prior chest imaging.,"The pattern reflected in most 
+  examples is the presence of references to 'comparison' with prior imaging or similarity to previous findings, particularly focusing on unchanged aspects of cardiac or mediastinal contours where specific intervals or prior dates are often mentioned.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15088,latent_15088,2203,0.004406,0.0016075915,1.5850471,Comparison with prior images and multiple views provided.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples containing descriptions of multiple imaging views (often frontal and lateral) and explicit comparison to prior studies. Additionally, the pattern shows the importance of changes or stability over time as deduced from these comparisons.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5189873417721519,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15089,latent_15089,1874,0.003748,0.0014270145,1.5307657,References to stability or interval change assessment in conditions or device placements.,"Examples with higher activations frequently involve situations requiring follow-up or monitoring changes over time, such as stable conditions or interval assessments of abnormalities like effusions, consolidations, or the placement of devices.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15090,latent_15090,331,0.000662,0.00042060795,2.9907846,Evaluation of medical device placement or change related to prior exams.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve detailed process evaluations of medical devices or catheters (e.g., endotracheal tubes, central lines) in relation to prior positioning or status. This includes explicit comparisons against previous placements, changes observed, and the functionality of these devices as highlighted, reflecting a core pattern of assessing interval procedural outcomes or status updates.",0.5851922164214522,0.5869565217391305,0.5454545454545454,0.5714285714285714,21.0,25.0,0.5132506261284874,0.5547445255474452,0.3,0.4864864864864865,37.0,100.0
+15091,latent_15091,708,0.001416,0.00070251024,2.3658829,Comparison of imaging studies to track changes or stability.,"The examples focus on the comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess any changes or stability. This involves comparing radiological features across different time points to track progression, improvement, or stability in the clinical context, often with reference to dates, positioning of devices, or findings like pleural effusions.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4716257889731101,0.4867724867724867,0.4696969696969697,0.6966292134831461,89.0,100.0
+15092,latent_15092,2404,0.004808,0.0017312693,1.1366192,Concise findings including interval change or stability in comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on concise summaries, either indicating slight changes like 'unchanged heart size' or focusing on specific findings without excess details. They also explicitly note findings in relation to prior studies, which appears to be a pattern recognized by high activation correlated examples.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5423728813559322,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15093,latent_15093,1480,0.00296,0.0011703531,1.7583601,Focus on stable findings and incremental changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of small changes or stability in conditions revealed by the current radiology studies in comparison to previous ones. The pattern involves using detailed descriptions of the comparison often focusing on the stability or improvement of conditions, devices, or complications in imaging studies.",0.4405919661733615,0.4489795918367347,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.5293305728088337,0.5303030303030303,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,98.0
+15094,latent_15094,3132,0.006264,0.0022333195,1.350946,Explicit comparative analysis with prior radiological imaging.,"The examples with the highest activation levels consistently include the presence of comments or requests for comparison in the reports, specifically highlighting that findings are described in comparison to prior images, observing changes or confirmations of stability. These patterns are reflected in the narrative style making explicit reference to prior imaging and noting changes or lack thereof.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.5609756097560976,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15095,latent_15095,4228,0.008456,0.0029615418,1.0204668,Observation of interval changes in medical device placement or associated findings.,"The pattern in these examples involves the description of changes or stability in various findings, particularly emphasizing the presence, placement, or conditions of medical devices (e.g., catheters, pacemakers, tubes) in comparison to previous medical imaging. These reports are looking for interval changes but show specific focus on observing any alterations potentially attributed to these devices or conditions requiring monitoring.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.6029411764705882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15096,latent_15096,2231,0.004462,0.0015813279,1.231242,Explicit tracking and description of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples prominently focus on comparison with prior imaging studies while explicitly noting changes such as stability, improvement, or deterioration in specific lesions or pathologies. This corresponds to tracking interval changes, a fundamental aspect in follow-up radiological assessments.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5252525252525253,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15097,latent_15097,1096,0.002192,0.00093758205,1.7645355,Explicit interval comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples prominently involve direct comparisons between current and prior imaging, often noting interval changes or stability in findings. This pattern is typical in radiological assessments where evaluating changes over time is crucial to diagnosis, especially when assessing for disease progression, improvement, or stability.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5108695652173914,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15098,latent_15098,456,0.000912,0.00062986376,4.122002,Interval change in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"These examples focus on the interval development or changes in specific radiological findings, such as pleural effusions or tube placements, comparing them to prior imaging studies. The reports emphasize progression, stability, or resolution of specific findings, indicating a concentrated evaluation of changes over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5294705294705294,0.5414012738853503,0.4,0.5263157894736842,57.0,100.0
+15099,latent_15099,376,0.000752,0.0005291579,2.2880716,Low lung volumes causing bronchovascular crowding.,Examples with low lung volumes and crowding of bronchovascular structures are often found to have higher activation levels. This indicates that these specific findings are particularly noteworthy to the model in these comparisons.,0.8633603238866396,0.8666666666666667,0.8888888888888888,0.8,20.0,25.0,0.7797837566004526,0.8079470198675497,0.7391304347826086,0.6666666666666666,51.0,100.0
+15100,latent_15100,2418,0.004836,0.0017412996,1.2388432,Compare current findings with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels require generating a description that involves comparing current imaging findings to previous or ""prior"" images. This comparison aspect is often requested in radiological evaluations to assess changes in the patient's condition.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4384876600978636,0.475,0.4834437086092715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15101,latent_15101,1227,0.002454,0.0009905681,1.9232411,Presence of pathological changes upon imaging comparison without high-level diagnostic conclusions.,"The high activation examples often involve a description of existing conditions or interventional findings, frequently including comparisons to prior imaging when available. However, unlike the 0 activation examples, the focus often involves complex or pathological changes noted upon comparison, but without the high-level diagnostic inferences or nurse notifications present in lower activation reports.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5092147435897436,0.51,0.5092592592592593,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15102,latent_15102,1808,0.003616,0.0013409843,1.3355561,"Evaluation of stability or changes in findings using prior images, often post-procedural.","In these examples, the key pattern is the explicit mention of analyzing findings in comparison to a prior image, with a focus on changes or stability in the context of specific clinical indications or post-procedural checks, such as after thoracentesis or line placement. Mentions of lines, tubes, or devices (e.g., PICC lines) or the absence or stability of findings like pneumothorax are indicators of this pattern.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15103,latent_15103,2039,0.004078,0.0015705703,1.5500603,Descriptions comparing current and previous imaging for stability or change.,"The examples with noticeable activations refer specifically to detailed descriptions of images compared to prior imaging reports. They highlight interval changes, stability, or detailed comparisons between current and previous imaging with some focus on findings remaining unchanged, suggesting the pattern lies in descriptions of stability or absence of progression in findings.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15104,latent_15104,1251,0.002502,0.0010407938,2.1346135,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette compared to prior imaging.,The presence of explicit descriptions of cardiomediastinal silhouette being normal or within normal limits when compared to previous imaging is a recurring theme in the highly activated examples. Reports consistently assure that such contours were unchanged or normal.,0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.525,0.21,100.0,100.0
+15105,latent_15105,645,0.00129,0.0006492453,1.928472,Emphasis on interval change or stability from prior imaging.,"The pattern in these samples highlights findings based on comparisons between current and prior radiological images. Significant activations are linked to detailed descriptions emphasizing interval changes or stability in conditions, often involving medical devices, pleural effusions, emphysema, or other chest pathologies. Reports noting the 'interval change' or explicit comparisons to prior studies are emphasized, consistent with the pattern observed.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4996051675668846,0.5,0.4476190476190476,0.6025641025641025,78.0,100.0
+15106,latent_15106,1018,0.002036,0.00083827844,1.7696071,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging with focus on devices and pathology modifications.,"These examples emphasize changes in findings when comparing a current radiographic image to previous images, particularly noting differences in the placement and condition of medical devices (such as tubes and catheters) and changes in pathologies like effusions or pneumothorax.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15107,latent_15107,576,0.001152,0.0007268382,2.3980927,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings despite potential clinical concerns.,"High activation levels coincide with reports that consistently make explicit descriptions of physiological changes or assessments based on comparison to prior images, particularly identifying ""no significant interval change"" or highlighting stability in findings despite potential patient condition shifts. These assessments often reaffirm constancy against expectations of progression or concern.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4266777133388567,0.4450867052023121,0.3333333333333333,0.3150684931506849,73.0,100.0
+15108,latent_15108,2724,0.005448,0.0019032055,1.3698583,Interpretation involving both frontal and lateral image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve a description of findings derived from multiple images, such as both frontal and lateral chest views, to provide a comprehensive evaluation while often noting comparison to prior studies. This includes immediate evaluations where multiple images are referenced for a detailed diagnostic view.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4199419941994199,0.42,0.4183673469387755,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15109,latent_15109,718,0.001436,0.0007006394,2.7054229,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, emphasizing specific findings or changes.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on providing detailed descriptions or instructions to compare current imaging to previous studies. They often include specific directions for finding changes, stability, or evaluating for any interval changes. ",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5351071692535108,0.5405405405405406,0.5,0.4705882352941176,85.0,100.0
+15110,latent_15110,1559,0.003118,0.0011962043,1.2154359,"Findings compared to prior imaging, focus on stable cardiomediastinal contour.","The presence of comparison with prior imaging studies, the absence of focal pathologies, and the description focusing on cardiomediastinal contour suggest stable findings.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4753211629479378,0.515,0.5333333333333333,0.24,100.0,100.0
+15111,latent_15111,1052,0.002104,0.00089695165,1.3998907,Comparison of present and prior images for interval changes.,"All examples provide a description of the findings in comparison with a prior image or series of images, which seems key to radiological analysis or interpretation when assessing interval changes or stability of certain conditions.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15112,latent_15112,1831,0.003662,0.0013934411,2.031672,Activated by detailed findings involving medical device changes or monitoring.,"The activation levels are higher when reports mention details of changes or monitoring involving medical devices, enhancing the focus in the reports. Examples like 'new devices', comparisons to check device positions, or changes in condition post-device placements or removals tend to have higher activation levels. These were the cases where the reports detailed specific findings related to medical devices such as chest tubes, pacemakers, or cath. placements with inter-comparison.
+",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4729729729729729,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15113,latent_15113,2028,0.004056,0.0014895034,1.5149114,Focus on interval changes and comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Examples with a prior image and substantial mentions of changes between the current and past radiographic findings, particularly referring to previous reports and observations, have higher activation. This highlights a focus on comparative analysis with discussion on interval changes. Examples with direct requests for comparisons without prior results or informative analysis have low activation, suggesting that mere requests for comparison without substantial follow-up aren't as activating.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.575166034793364,0.605,0.5686274509803921,0.87,100.0,100.0
+15114,latent_15114,1021,0.002042,0.0008283919,1.4622076,Reference to imaging findings as compared to prior studies indicating changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve imaging comparisons that show significant changes or describe stable/unchanged findings explicitly mentioned in the context of a prior comparison. The contrast with previous findings, particularly when pointing out stability or resolution of certain features, is central to the high activation scores.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4768253968253968,0.485,0.488,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15115,latent_15115,1415,0.00283,0.0010306446,1.8786167,Focus on stable or low lung volumes and unchanged cardiac silhouette.,"This data set specifically exhibits a pattern of analyzing and describing lung volumes or cardiac structures with respect to changes or comparisons over time. Statements such as 'low lung volumes', 'stable heart size' and comparisons to prior images suggest consistent tracking of cardiac silhouette and lung volumes.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4807692307692308,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15116,latent_15116,688,0.001376,0.0007123121,2.266467,Comparison of current findings with prior images noting changes.,"The high activation examples consistently involve requests for comparing current radiological findings to prior images where specific changes are noted between the current and prior findings. These examples include phrases like 'new from prior', 'compared to prior', 'remains unchanged', 'interval change', and focus on changes or lack thereof.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4915204678362573,0.4918918918918919,0.4571428571428571,0.5647058823529412,85.0,100.0
+15117,latent_15117,2454,0.004908,0.0018069161,1.6830221,Focus on device changes or placement in radiological comparisons.,"The examples with higher activations consistently reference changes in medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, including their placement, adjustment, or presence. These examples emphasize the importance of noting device-related changes or complications in radiological comparisons.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15118,latent_15118,2023,0.004046,0.0014576839,1.3933105,Description of interval changes between current and prior images.,"The highly representative examples in this data set consistently show that the task involves making descriptive comparisons between current and prior images, emphasizing interval changes or stability of findings. These reports often highlight whether features such as consolidations or effusions have changed or remained constant over time, signifying the importance of temporal change in diagnostic interpretation.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5899589958995899,0.59,0.5882352941176471,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15119,latent_15119,620,0.00124,0.0007162139,2.482499,Comparison of current findings with prior radiological studies.,"The pattern involves the explicit comparison of current radiological findings with previous studies, often indicating changes, stability, or improvement of specific findings over time as described in the reports. This is a standard practice in radiology to assess progression or resolution of findings, using terms like 'compared to the prior', 'interval change', 'as compared', or specific dating.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5441558441558442,0.5666666666666667,0.5071428571428571,0.8875,80.0,100.0
+15120,latent_15120,2056,0.004112,0.0014284889,0.95547324,Explicit comparison to stable or changing findings from prior imaging.,"These examples often involve explicit mentions of comparison to prior imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability over time using language that emphasizes interval changes, stability, improvements, or use of past dates. Reports with high activations commonly provide detailed analysis of changes from prior images.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15121,latent_15121,1777,0.003554,0.0013531336,1.4228903,Use of prior imaging reports for detailed interval comparison.,"The higher activation levels are seen in examples that use past imaging for detailed comparison of intervals, even if discrepancies or changes are noted. When specific devices or procedural history are mentioned and these include consistent references to past images for comparison, activation is notably higher.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15122,latent_15122,1940,0.00388,0.0013665035,1.1836466,Comparison with prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation mention a direct comparison with previous imaging studies, where changes or lack thereof are explicitly noted. The process of documenting changes through comparisons, regardless of the areas referenced, is a recurring linguistic pattern observed in radiology reports. These examples mention specific alterations or stability in clinical features like effusion size, opacity, device position, and progress of disease, as seen in side-by-side evaluations with prior images.",0.3221131369798972,0.42,0.4545454545454545,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15123,latent_15123,2568,0.005136,0.0017944245,1.041029,Emphasis on stability or change in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples that have a higher activation level consistently reference comparisons between current and prior imaging to identify stability or change in conditions. Often, they use language like 'compared to', 'as compared to', 'since previous radiograph', while mentioning specific alterations or stability in findings over time.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15124,latent_15124,1828,0.003656,0.0013820815,2.1296139,Focus on interval changes or stability in radiological findings.,"Representative examples consistently involve describing current chest imaging and providing explicit comparisons to prior imaging findings, showcasing either interval changes or stability. Such comparisons are elaborated in the assistant's descriptions and impressions, aligning with a pattern of continuity or deviations in radiological assessments.",0.6063424947145877,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.6208195353775374,0.625,0.6033057851239669,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15125,latent_15125,1062,0.002124,0.0008700584,1.3074466,Comparative analysis of medical imaging and description completion.,"Examples with high activation levels tend to describe specific changes over time when current and prior images are compared, particularly noting the presence and progression of medical devices like tubes or catheters as well as changes in pulmonary conditions. The presence of instructions like 'Provide a description of the findings' is also a commonality, suggesting these examples might be used for training in comparative analysis or report completion tasks.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15126,latent_15126,2088,0.004176,0.0015819122,1.2930702,Examination findings compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation samples include reports that require comparison between current and prior images. These examples specifically prompt the assistant to describe changes or stability in findings based on previous imaging studies, highlighting a common radiological practice of documenting interval changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5357142857142857,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15127,latent_15127,249,0.000498,0.0004256324,1.9850078,Clear lungs without focal consolidation or acute changes.,"These examples with high activation levels feature clear lungs without any focal consolidation or other acute findings, suggesting no immediate pathology, which is a common pattern in radiology reports where a chest examination shows no acute changes.",0.7840909090909092,0.7894736842105263,0.631578947368421,0.9230769230769232,13.0,25.0,0.5616858237547893,0.6060606060606061,0.3333333333333333,0.5757575757575758,33.0,99.0
+15128,latent_15128,1097,0.002194,0.0009171806,2.0706284,Prior comparison or explicit mention of changes over time in imaging findings.,"All examples with non-zero activation levels include at least a frontal chest image and some direct or implied mention of comparison with prior imaging (even when 'none' is specified), particularly focusing on documentation of changes, abnormalities, or the normalcy of findings over time. This emphasis on capturing temporal changes indicates a potential focus on follow-up imaging analysis.",0.3592393551054155,0.38,0.4117647058823529,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.3788981967170333,0.405,0.4326241134751773,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15129,latent_15129,3058,0.006116,0.002169228,1.4085456,"Descriptions of stable, unchanged, or minimally changed findings compared to prior imaging.",The activation levels are higher in examples where language focuses on describing stability or minimal change in findings when compared to previous images. This suggests a pattern emphasizing continuity and comparison relative to prior studies.,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5430694685044313,0.545,0.5517241379310345,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15130,latent_15130,636,0.001272,0.0006148608,2.4413877,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently compare current imaging findings to prior imaging studies, specifically noting any stable or unchanged conditions, slight progressions, or interval changes of various clinical relevance. This emphasis on longitudinal comparison seems to trigger the pattern of activation being observed.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4433503716014926,0.4699453551912568,0.45,0.7590361445783133,83.0,100.0
+15131,latent_15131,335,0.00067,0.0004582143,2.374829,Observations on interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around descriptions of longitudinal evaluations, particularly emphasizing any changes or stability in findings compared to prior examinations. This involves specific indications of 'interval change', 'comparison to prior', and observations about stability or progression, commonly seen in follow-up radiological assessments where change detection is crucial.",0.4415584415584415,0.4418604651162791,0.375,0.5,18.0,25.0,0.5022713806043847,0.5138888888888888,0.3333333333333333,0.5909090909090909,44.0,100.0
+15132,latent_15132,789,0.001578,0.0007371386,2.6113553,Asymmetric pulmonary findings or opacities.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe or imply an asymmetric pulmonary finding, often associated with descriptors like 'asymmetric edema', 'asymmetric opacities', and localized comparisons in opacity or abnormaility between areas or lobes in the lungs. These descriptions suggest observation of unequal appearance or condition of lungs which is often a notable finding in radiology reports and is consistently present in high activation examples.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7089522280208751,0.71,0.7386363636363636,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15133,latent_15133,2255,0.00451,0.0016810661,1.6562359,"Comparison with prior films highlights stable or changed cardiomediastinal, pleural, or pulmonary findings.","The comparison with prior imaging alongside specific radiological findings like 'cardiomegaly', 'atelectasis', or 'effusion' is crucial in these examples. Reports repeatedly mention 'unchanged' cardiomediastinal silhouette, findings 'similar to prior', or interval changes 'compared to previous films', highlighting both continuity and change relative to earlier studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5408562274527612,0.545,0.5378151260504201,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15134,latent_15134,1039,0.002078,0.00087795616,1.8538878,Comparison to previous imaging emphasizing interval stability or change.,"Examples with higher activation levels extensively use language comparing current imaging findings with previous images or studies. This pattern is typical for radiology reports, emphasizing stability or change over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5104039167686658,0.52,0.515625,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15135,latent_15135,441,0.000882,0.0004326194,2.4710338,Comparison of medical device placement between prior and current images.,"The examples include situations where a current image is being compared to a prior image or report. Several of these involve documentation of changes in medical devices like tubes or catheter placements (either new positions or confirmations of position), rather than changes or stability in pathological findings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4887505460899957,0.5894039735099338,0.3333333333333333,0.2156862745098039,51.0,100.0
+15136,latent_15136,569,0.001138,0.0006123718,2.737744,Explicit request to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently have explicit requests to provide descriptions of findings in the radiology study, specifically in comparison to prior images. Phrases like 'Provide a description of the findings' and regular mentions of 'comparison to prior frontal image' are prevalent in high activation examples, emphasizing a focus on detailed comparative analysis as the pattern. Examples with lower activation lack this explicit request for comparative descriptions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4786023835319609,0.4971428571428571,0.4511278195488721,0.8,75.0,100.0
+15137,latent_15137,3343,0.006686,0.0023941668,1.6403408,Lack of significant change noted in comparison to prior imaging.,"These examples describe situations where it is explicitly stated that comparisons are made with prior studies, yet the model does not exhibit any activation. This suggests that focus is on the absence of prior chronic changes or acute differences between exams without significant findings highlighted in the reports.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.6052232007288187,0.61,0.6410256410256411,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15138,latent_15138,1563,0.003126,0.0012088427,1.9453895,Multiple views compared to prior images for detailed assessment.,"Examples with activations indicate situations where multiple types of images (frontal and lateral) are available and detailed findings focus on comparisons to a prior frontal image, emphasizing changes or consistencies with prior reports. This pattern suggests a comprehensive assessment of multiple views for detecting subtle or significant changes compared to previous images.",0.3208828522920204,0.36,0.4054054054054054,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15139,latent_15139,456,0.000912,0.00051841734,2.4374216,Changes in cardiac silhouette size or pleural effusion across time.,"Highly activated examples prominently discuss variations in cardiac silhouette sizes and changes in pleural effusion presence or size across temporally separated radiographs. This includes phrases like 'unchanged moderate cardiac contour', 'enlargement of the cardiac silhouette', and evaluation of pleural effusions, indicating frequent changes or evaluations noted over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4625784645098986,0.5157232704402516,0.32,0.2711864406779661,59.0,100.0
+15140,latent_15140,625,0.00125,0.0007938702,2.7733858,Explicit documentation of interval changes or progression in imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently feature explicit references to interval changes in radiological findings, often in the context of ongoing treatment or monitoring after surgical interventions, such as increased or decreased effusions, appearance of new opacities, or resolution of previous findings. These terms indicate careful observation over time, crucial for treatment adjustments.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6602617655249234,0.6611111111111111,0.6043956043956044,0.6875,80.0,100.0
+15141,latent_15141,642,0.001284,0.0007076686,2.0866356,Detailed analysis of support and monitoring devices in comparison studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels often provide detailed comparisons between current and previous imaging studies, explicitly listing changes in medical devices' positions (like tubes or catheters) or changes in pathological findings. This linguistic focus on specific interval changes, especially related to support and monitoring devices, appears to be highly representative of the activation pattern.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5257818557766865,0.5418994413407822,0.4776119402985074,0.4050632911392405,79.0,100.0
+15142,latent_15142,3133,0.006266,0.002175014,0.8670145,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging compared to prior studies.,"Most examples describe changes or consistencies noticed by comparing current imaging with prior studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability of pathologies like opacities, pleural effusions, or pneumothorax. This pattern reflects the clinical practice of analyzing radiological data to track progress or regression.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5538956323270048,0.57,0.5507246376811594,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15143,latent_15143,670,0.00134,0.0006875625,1.9542558,Radiological comparison highlighting interval changes in devices or pathology.,"Reports with significant interval changes in devices (like lines, tubes) or pathology (like effusions, opacities) identified across radiographs, or follow-ups to evaluate same, exhibit higher activations. These examples contain intervals where such changes are explicitly discussed, indicating a pattern of imaging comparisons for interval changes.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4837268314210061,0.4869109947643979,0.4588235294117647,0.4285714285714285,91.0,100.0
+15144,latent_15144,1574,0.003148,0.0012080575,1.4747597,Emphasis on marked interval changes from previous imaging studies.,"The highly activated examples stress a marked change, such as interval growth or resolution of existing conditions (e.g., masses, opacities, effusions, etc.), as compared to prior imaging records. This pattern is prevalent in reports with focused comparisons on significant interval changes between studies.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.625,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5609756097560976,0.23,100.0,100.0
+15145,latent_15145,2044,0.004088,0.001474457,1.3857398,Comparison to prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"High activation examples frequently mention comparison to prior imaging with a description of changes or similarities. Key terms include 'compared to previous', 'since prior', 'prediction about stability', and they specify changes, or lack thereof, like 'no change' or 'unchanged'. These examples systematically evaluate interval changes, specifically looking for any modifications in findings compared to previous examinations.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15146,latent_15146,1184,0.002368,0.0009574323,1.6272871,Changes or stability in medical devices between current and prior images.,"These examples focus on descriptions of changes or stability in medical devices or tubes between the current and prior imaging studies, such as endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, PICC lines, or monitoring devices. This highlights a specific consideration in interpreting follow-up radiology studies when interventions are being monitored.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4575378538512179,0.485,0.4727272727272727,0.26,100.0,100.0
+15147,latent_15147,275,0.00055,0.0004010912,3.4058237,Stable cardiomediastinal contour and lung clarity in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels tend to mention no changes in the cardiomediastinal contour or the lungs, indicating stabilization or normal findings. The pattern also includes a focus on providing a comparative analysis of the current imaging against prior data to affirm stability or normalcy, particularly highlighting normal heart and lung conditions.",0.68,0.725,0.7,0.4666666666666667,15.0,25.0,0.5915915915915916,0.6764705882352942,0.3947368421052631,0.4166666666666667,36.0,100.0
+15148,latent_15148,1057,0.002114,0.0009783326,2.0868769,Comparison of medical device position changes using prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit higher activation predominantly focus on comparisons of clinical devices and interventions within the current and previous radiological images, particularly the placement and change in positioning of lines or tubes like PICC lines, nasogastric tubes, and central venous lines. They emphasize changes in medical devices or their appropriate placement over time as seen in radiographic comparisons.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5668333377897805,0.595,0.6938775510204082,0.34,100.0,100.0
+15149,latent_15149,1170,0.00234,0.00096942333,1.7303174,Evaluation for pneumonia but normal findings.,"Highly activated examples include those stating an indication for evaluating pneumonia, with or without comparison images, but typically include observations indicating normality like clear lungs or unremarkable cardiomediastinal silhouette, rather than confirming pneumonia.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4812328349099786,0.49,0.4864864864864865,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15150,latent_15150,3548,0.007096,0.0025062512,1.2653036,Evaluation of current radiology findings against prior images.,"Most examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of imaging findings with specific reference to comparison between the current and prior studies, indicating stability, change, or the characteristics of certain findings such as effusion, edema, or devices. These are common in follow-up or diagnostic assessments to understand progression or stability of conditions over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15151,latent_15151,948,0.001896,0.00085004914,2.2039711,New or persistent lung abnormalities detected through imaging changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention an ongoing issue with resolving or new parenchymal lung changes, such as consolidation, scarring, or pleural abnormalities. These findings are notable for their need for further clinical attention or monitoring, in contrast to examples with lower activation which mention unchanged states or no clear pulmonary issues.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5238095238095238,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.3854166666666666,0.41,0.35,0.21,100.0,100.0
+15152,latent_15152,3412,0.006824,0.0023797676,1.0925511,Emphasis on interval or comparison changes in radiograph findings.,"The pattern consists of descriptions where there is a scrutiny of interval changes in radiographs, especially identifying areas where prior opacities or other findings have resolved, worsened, or remained unchanged. Many examples specified radiographic findings supported by prior comparison studies and noted changes as a key comparison metric.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15153,latent_15153,2574,0.005148,0.0018447981,1.815196,Structured use of technique headers in radiology reports.,"Examples with higher activation often contain a clear sequence or description that employs structured technique headers (""EXAMINATION:"", ""INDICATION:""), particularly when such details precede a description that specifies methodological details like views (e.g., ""PA and lateral views of the chest""). These examples consistently emphasize structured and detailed organization in templates with technique and indication sections followed by findings.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4415954415954416,0.51,0.5058823529411764,0.86,100.0,100.0
+15154,latent_15154,2157,0.004314,0.0015635927,1.2764616,Comparative assessment of current vs. prior images highlighting interval changes or stability.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels emphasize changes or stabilities compared to previous imaging, with particular attention to interval improvements, resolution, or lack of new findings. These examples often provide a comparative analysis between current and prior images to identify changes or stability in the patient's condition.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5467393241832395,0.555,0.5433070866141733,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15155,latent_15155,2550,0.0051,0.0018471752,1.4532425,"Combination of comparative assessments with noted changes, often involving opacities.","Balanced activation examples indicate a mix of image descriptors and comparative assessments in the reports. Highly activated examples consistently include explicit comparisons to previous images while noting findings like opacities or volume changes, but with minimal or unchanged findings elsewhere. Reports that only present new findings without comparison or have more negative or unchanged descriptors have low activation.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15156,latent_15156,1926,0.003852,0.0014711971,1.5830026,Positioning and course of medical tubes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation describe positioning and course of medical tubes (like endotracheal, nasogastric, or feeding tubes). These descriptions typically indicate whether the position has changed compared to prior imaging, focusing on correct placement or potential migration, which is critical for patient management.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15157,latent_15157,2297,0.004594,0.001630057,1.2459923,Stable or improved radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Most examples have low activations as they frequently involve standard diagnostic descriptions and don't exhibit a significant change or concern for the patient's condition. Examples with higher activations often describe a stability or notable improvement compared to previous images, indicating progress or managed conditions.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5819798040845106,0.585,0.6024096385542169,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15158,latent_15158,259,0.000518,0.00043146432,2.3790958,Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison with previous imaging.,"The highly activated examples prominently feature 'comparisons with prior imaging', employing changes in acute conditions or new interventions as the point of comparison, which suggests the model recognizes significant interval changes or unchanged findings in serial imaging as a key pattern.",0.5,0.5,0.4,0.6666666666666666,15.0,25.0,0.5118012422360249,0.5190839694656488,0.3095238095238095,0.8387096774193549,31.0,100.0
+15159,latent_15159,3595,0.00719,0.0025147654,1.064542,Evaluation of interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"These examples emphasize the aspect of comparison with prior imaging, explicitly focusing on interval changes, or the lack thereof, in the findings. The pattern includes references to previous images to highlight changes or stability in pathologies, using terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged',' compared to prior', or 'again seen', thereby informing the clinical assessment.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15160,latent_15160,1418,0.002836,0.001109268,1.4291837,Detailed and differential diagnostic commentary.,"Examples with higher activation values contain exhaustive descriptions of findings with considerations for various differential diagnoses or diagnostic implications even when reported as normal. This approach engages with diagnostic reasoning and alternative explanations for radiological findings, going beyond just stating simple normal findings.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5095932657549483,0.515,0.5189873417721519,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15161,latent_15161,617,0.001234,0.0006715026,1.682003,"Acute changes or tube positioning in lung pathology, compared to prior imaging.","Examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions focusing on acute changes or findings in lung pathology, often involving conditions such as lung volume loss, pleural effusions, pneumonia, or nasogastric and endotracheal tube positions. The instruction to provide a description of findings compared to prior imaging is crucial for highlighting these changes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5083333333333333,0.5254237288135594,0.4477611940298507,0.3896103896103896,77.0,100.0
+15162,latent_15162,3273,0.006546,0.0022767931,0.91899794,Comparison of radiologic findings to previous images.,"These examples involve descriptions of radiographic findings that are compared against previous images, with a focus on evaluating for stability or change in known conditions or abnormalities. The pattern involves noting whether there is significant interval change, no change, or new findings for comparison to a prior examination.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4721232075317678,0.515,0.5095541401273885,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15163,latent_15163,2251,0.004502,0.0016975026,1.6812958,Comparison of current radiological findings with prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference comparing current findings to prior radiological images or studies. They emphasized changes or lack thereof in findings over time, a common element in radiology reports that focus on monitoring patient progress or disease stability over time.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5184038527691779,0.545,0.5306122448979592,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15164,latent_15164,2298,0.004596,0.0016099617,1.1898521,Physical positioning changes of medical devices or interval changes in pathology compared to prior imaging.,"Most examples mention comparison with prior imaging, but the key pattern involves changes in device positioning (like endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or pleural effusion drainage) or changes in pulmonary or cardiac pathology between current and previous images.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4820867379006914,0.485,0.4869565217391304,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15165,latent_15165,598,0.001196,0.00060787797,2.0243964,Use of frontal and lateral images for comprehensive comparison with prior frontal images.,"These examples describe the use of both frontal and lateral chest radiographs, along with previous frontal images. This pattern indicates a comprehensive examination where both views are crucial for thorough evaluation and comparison between current and past images.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.516750714675746,0.519774011299435,0.4649122807017544,0.6883116883116883,77.0,100.0
+15166,latent_15166,1027,0.002054,0.00092715793,1.5490144,Explicit comparison between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently involve instructions that specify an examination of the relationship between prior and current images. This pattern shows attention towards comparative analysis between images, especially to note changes over time or provide a detailed comparison.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4522529971062422,0.47,0.4779411764705882,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15167,latent_15167,742,0.001484,0.0007176645,2.3098147,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include a detailed comparison to prior imaging studies, often explicitly citing previous findings. This indicates that the pattern is closely tied to analyzing changes over time through detailed comparison against previous exams.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5236895161290323,0.5238095238095238,0.4951456310679611,0.5730337078651685,89.0,100.0
+15168,latent_15168,193,0.000386,0.00035539336,3.8397405,Using keywords for interval changes observed between current and prior images.,"Highly activated examples involve descriptions of interval changes when comparing current and prior imaging studies, using terms like 'minimally decreased/increased' or 'unchanged', specifically regarding positions or conditions (e.g., tubes, opacities, effusions). These phrases indicate a particular focus on subtle changes over time, which is crucial in ongoing patient management.",0.5996732026143792,0.6,0.4166666666666667,1.0,10.0,25.0,0.5120192307692307,0.5396825396825397,0.2714285714285714,0.7307692307692307,26.0,100.0
+15169,latent_15169,813,0.001626,0.0007516338,2.2324927,"Comparative analysis with prior images indicating new, persistent, or unchanged radiological findings.","The activation level is influenced by clear comparisons to prior images and the presence of new or unchanged findings such as positioning of tubes, lines, or any persistent or resolved conditions noted in the current versus prior imaging studies.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6032956972841013,0.61,0.5873015873015873,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15170,latent_15170,301,0.000602,0.00044434745,2.7675188,Use of prior reports for comparison in radiological assessments.,"The presence of a prior report or explicit comparison to a previous or prior image in radiology findings are indicative patterns. The use of prior reports and comparisons highlights changes or confirmations of stability in current images compared to past ones, which is consistent with a detailed radiological assessment approach.",0.436734693877551,0.4523809523809524,0.40625,0.7647058823529411,17.0,25.0,0.4160272804774083,0.4160583941605839,0.2871287128712871,0.7837837837837838,37.0,100.0
+15171,latent_15171,1856,0.003712,0.0013422589,1.8643541,Radiology findings in comparative context with prior images to assess stability or change.,"The pattern reflects situations where the report uses comparisons to prior imaging as a basis for interpreting current findings, especially highlighting stability or changes in medical devices placement, anatomical changes, or disease process. This pattern is reflective of comparative analysis in follow-up assessments of a medical condition, device position, or postoperative changes.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15172,latent_15172,3382,0.006764,0.002326536,1.1385903,Assessment of interval change or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention findings in the context of comparisons with prior imaging studies, indicating that reports focusing on interval changes or stability compared to prior images are represented. These comparisons are explicitly mentioned, suggesting that noticing the change or confirming stability with prior imaging contributes to the activation pattern.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5396825396825397,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15173,latent_15173,2323,0.004646,0.0016648861,1.183991,Interpretations comparing sequential imaging for interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve interpretations based on serial comparison of imaging results, where physical changes are identified or confirmed over time. They often involve specific references to measurements, stability, or changes in medical devices or physical conditions compared to prior observations.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.5531914893617021,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15174,latent_15174,1632,0.003264,0.0013170141,1.5789739,Comparison to prior imaging for assessing interval changes.,"The highly activated examples focus on interpreting radiology images in direct comparison to previous images for noting interval changes. These reports highlight changes, stability, or resolutions of pathologies over time, using terms like 'compared to prior', 'since prior', or explicit references to past imaging tests.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15175,latent_15175,3948,0.007896,0.002755936,1.2881079,Emphasizes comparison to prior images with focus on stability or resolution of findings.,"The highly activated examples focus on descriptions of lung or pleural changes, usually improvements or resolutions, compared to prior readings. They explicitly refer to comparison with previous imaging results and emphasize stability or changes in findings, like described enhancements of lung fields or resolution of prior abnormalities.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5876794016575702,0.5879396984924623,0.5957446808510638,0.56,100.0,99.0
+15176,latent_15176,3529,0.007058,0.00245116,1.0908556,Structured comparison reporting with or without explicit changes.,"The pattern evident in examples with high activation involves radiology reports that are structured to incorporate comparisons with prior imaging, even when the images themselves are not stating changes or comparisons explicitly. This involves using descriptive language to detail the current state of medical findings alongside prior images, often emphasizing stability or lack of interval change.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.526583153807282,0.555,0.5369127516778524,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15177,latent_15177,752,0.001504,0.00074433006,2.2238092,Description involves comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activations consistently focus on providing descriptions based on examinations made in direct comparison to prior images, emphasizing highlighting similarities or differences in findings over time, which is integral in radiological reports for monitoring patient progress or stability.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4691526970007982,0.4842105263157895,0.4696969696969697,0.6888888888888889,90.0,100.0
+15178,latent_15178,2203,0.004406,0.001626417,1.3076308,Detailed interval changes in pulmonary findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations often involve radiological reports that provide a thorough comparison to prior images, detailing interval changes, especially focusing on specific changes in pulmonary status or significant developments. These often include elaborate language about the evolution of findings such as development of opacities or evaluating for pneumonia, with references to technical differences or clinical indications.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4696969696969697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+15179,latent_15179,1308,0.002616,0.0011943553,2.8229835,Normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs without effusion.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe a normal cardiomediastinal silhouette and clear lungs without pleural effusion or pneumothorax. This description is repeated in radiology studies, often indicating stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging, particularly when evaluating for acute cardiopulmonary processes.",0.7596153846153846,0.76,0.782608695652174,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6828644501278772,0.69,0.7714285714285715,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15180,latent_15180,1986,0.003972,0.0014414875,1.0730232,Emphasis on comparing findings across series of radiographic images.,"The distinguished samples exhibit a common theme of identifying changes observed between the current and prior radiology images, with a focus on mentioning specific conditions such as atelectasis, pneumothorax, or consolidation changes. This reflects the pattern of analyzing and comparing new findings against historical data for clinical assessment.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15181,latent_15181,2694,0.005388,0.0020055396,1.6922317,"Use of frontal, lateral, and prior images with direct comparison to prior studies in reports.","The highlighted examples are characterized by both the technical inclusion (frontal, lateral, and prior images) and the cross-reference to previous observations, specifically noting comparisons with prior examinations rather than standalone findings. This identifies the differences or consistencies over time, as specified in interpretation based on comparison to previous images.",0.2957746478873239,0.42,0.4565217391304347,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4206928513497856,0.5,0.5,0.87,100.0,100.0
+15182,latent_15182,1543,0.003086,0.001180056,1.707727,Comparison of findings with prior imaging indicating stability or change.,"Examples focus largely on changes observed over time by comparing current and prior imaging, with descriptions quantifying incremental or no change. These compare findings like pulmonary opacities or support devices as improved, stable, or slightly different, indicating an examination of progress or lack thereof from previous states.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15183,latent_15183,1427,0.002854,0.0011381911,1.6233578,Descriptive interval changes in abnormalities on imaging comparisons.,"These examples regularly incorporate descriptions of both current images and their comparison to prior studies, with special notice on changes and stability of observed features. However, instances with the highest activation levels focus more on detailed interval changes and characterizations of the abnormalities, such as presence or evolution of effusions, atelectasis, or consolidations.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.539585627064358,0.54,0.5425531914893617,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15184,latent_15184,3016,0.006032,0.002122214,0.96360254,Focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples specifically mention changes when comparing current to prior imaging, particularly focusing on interval changes, new developments, or stability over time, demonstrating careful temporal evaluation of the patient's condition.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6027655562539284,0.605,0.591304347826087,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15185,latent_15185,3627,0.007254,0.0025336286,1.5379498,Higher activation with significant interval changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples include a direct comparison between current and prior images, but the activation is low when prior findings are explicitly unchanged or not significantly altered. The pattern indicates modifications or changes in the radiological findings compared to prior reports signify a higher activation, as they require detailed analysis.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5645380260764876,0.575,0.6086956521739131,0.42,100.0,100.0
+15186,latent_15186,2678,0.005356,0.0018987299,1.2376037,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples typically highlight changes between the current and prior imaging studies, specifically noting any new or unchanged findings. Reports indicating 'comparison' frequently discuss changes such as worsening of conditions, resolution, or stability of features previously noted. The pattern is the focus on assessing these differences between current and earlier studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15187,latent_15187,3019,0.006038,0.0021240257,1.2181194,Assessment of medical line/tube placement or adjustments.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve descriptions of the positions or adjustments of various medical lines or tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, central venous lines, or PICC lines. These details are consistently marked in the findings and compared with previous imaging to assess placement and positioning changes.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5584415584415584,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15188,latent_15188,1707,0.003414,0.0012843874,1.3512359,Emphasis on interval changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention comparison between current and prior imaging relative to size, change, or stability of findings in lung and heart regions, particularly in context of pleural effusions, opacities, or cardiac contours.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4882318664335842,0.495,0.4959349593495935,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15189,latent_15189,289,0.000578,0.00044982778,2.7535977,Utilizes multiple images and detailed comparative analysis.,"Examples showing high activation levels often reference the use of multiple images (current frontal, lateral, prior frontal) in making comparative analysis along with detailed descriptor use by the assistant. These elements suggest that the pattern emphasizes thorough image-based language description and comparative assessment.",0.2995974698102358,0.3095238095238095,0.3,0.5294117647058824,17.0,25.0,0.2800593765462642,0.2814814814814815,0.2075471698113207,0.6285714285714286,35.0,100.0
+15190,latent_15190,345,0.00069,0.00057581154,2.7862496,Comparison to prior imaging.,"The text includes multiple references to previous imaging studies for comparison, with specific mentions of comparison to previous exams, highlighting changes in findings over time or stating stability of conditions.",0.3382352941176471,0.3777777777777777,0.3888888888888889,0.7,20.0,25.0,0.3575938354461844,0.3591549295774648,0.2710280373831775,0.6904761904761905,42.0,100.0
+15191,latent_15191,2616,0.005232,0.0018444385,1.3406721,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples highlight unchanged or stable findings in successive imaging studies, especially in interventions like catheter placement or stable lesions/abnormalities. Such descriptions are crucial in radiology to indicate no change or progression in the patient's condition upon comparison to prior imaging studies.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5148313693620479,0.5175879396984925,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,99.0
+15192,latent_15192,427,0.000854,0.0005384002,3.0162947,Concise radiological summary without unnecessary details.,"Higher activations correspond to instances where the radiological assistant successfully provides a concise summary of the current findings without significant deviation from the expected structured description. The context appears to emphasize clear expressions of chest radiographic results without unnecessary elaboration, focusing on pertinent clinical details or comparison when such information is available. This reflects consistency and clarity in report formatting.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5082352941176471,0.5657894736842105,0.3541666666666667,0.3269230769230769,52.0,100.0
+15193,latent_15193,1050,0.0021,0.000883049,2.0485113,Comparison with prior imaging showing new or unchanged findings.,"The pattern observed is examples that describe findings in radiological images compared to prior studies, with particular mentions of changes like new or stable findings. Higher activation examples often detail differences from prior studies, highlighting new pathological findings or confirming stability of previously noted abnormalities.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4786967418546366,0.48,0.4818181818181818,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15194,latent_15194,2075,0.00415,0.0015178126,1.8487728,Comparison with prior imaging identifying changes or stable findings.,"Higher activation examples consistently report a comparison to previous imaging studies, specifically indicating changes or persistences of a past finding with phrases like 'unchanged', 'again noted', or 'compared to prior study'. These comparisons provide continuity in patient monitoring and emphasize whether particular findings have altered over time, which is important in assessing patient progress or stability.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15195,latent_15195,883,0.001766,0.0007960188,2.2871552,Descriptions of interval change.,"Examples that show the presence of interval change often involve a comparison with prior studies in the context of monitoring disease progression or response to interventions, especially in acute or chronic conditions requiring ongoing evaluations. This is found in the more highly activated examples, indicating a focus on interval change (e.g., worsening, improvement).",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4242424242424242,0.43,0.4125,0.33,100.0,100.0
+15196,latent_15196,4324,0.008648,0.0030114537,1.0687982,"New or changed pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or medical devices in imaging comparison.","The activation results suggest a pattern where reports indicate changes in the presence of tubes or catheters, pneumothorax, or effusions, particularly when these are new or have changed from prior imaging studies. Additional common elements are the presence of surgical interventions, such as thoracostomies or other tube placements, and assessment of interval changes related to these conditions.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5614035087719298,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15197,latent_15197,2390,0.00478,0.0017679436,1.4768804,Specific tasks or instructions for analysis related to image data.,"The examples show that the presence of explicit instructions or tasks in the prompt, signaling the assistant to perform specific evaluations or comparisons using provided image data, correlates with higher activation. These directives guide the model towards processing as intended for the analysis task.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+15198,latent_15198,1575,0.00315,0.0012445905,1.724584,Low lung volumes accentuating heart size or mediastinal structures.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions where low lung volumes accentuate cardiac size or mediastinal structures, highlighting a specific imaging observation related to lung volumes. This descriptive pattern is distinct in these radiology reports.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5125824913058956,0.555,0.6341463414634146,0.26,100.0,100.0
+15199,latent_15199,274,0.000548,0.0004893982,3.171135,Significant or alarming findings persisting post-comparison.,"The pattern in these examples involves the presence of significant and worrisome findings such as pneumothorax or persistent/unresolved symptoms despite previous evaluation. Highly activated examples often mention serious conditions or potential negative developments that need immediate attention, while low activation examples indicate no significant findings or changes.",0.2825,0.3170731707317073,0.125,0.125,16.0,25.0,0.4394062078272605,0.5373134328358209,0.1818181818181818,0.2352941176470588,34.0,100.0
+15200,latent_15200,396,0.000792,0.0005444516,1.8154027,Comparison of radiology findings with prior imaging studies or relevant data.,"The pattern in these examples revolves around the explicit process of comparing current radiology findings with prior imaging or other relevant references. This comparison is highlighted with cues like changes or stability in findings, use of the word 'comparison', and mentioning of prior study dates or results. The descriptions frequently involve evaluating medical devices or anatomical changes in relation to previous data.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.4864864864864865,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.4430892394631505,0.4452054794520548,0.3394495412844037,0.8043478260869565,46.0,100.0
+15201,latent_15201,3114,0.006228,0.0022288205,1.3289801,Significant interval changes involving medical devices compared to prior images.,"Higher activation levels correlate with cases where the description includes mentions of new or altering findings concerning medical devices (e.g., pigtail, PICC lines) which represent a significant interval change compared to prior images. This is indicative of the model focusing on device positions and related changes across radiographic studies.",0.6263736263736264,0.66,0.9,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4253384282709796,0.515,0.5714285714285714,0.12,100.0,100.0
+15202,latent_15202,1248,0.002496,0.0010290568,1.6932917,Detailed comparison with prior images in findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize detailed analysis and reporting of current findings with direct comparisons to previous or prior imaging. The prompt structure requires a comparison to identify changes, often indicated in phrases like 'compared to the prior', 'no significant change', or 'since prior study', making this aspect stand out as the core pattern.",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3333333333333333,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4349858746468661,0.435,0.4356435643564356,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15203,latent_15203,3810,0.00762,0.0026647695,1.2655776,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in comparison to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include specific descriptions of change from previous imaging, such as interval placements, changes in medical devices, or resolving conditions. These examples highlight alterations or reaffirm stability of specific elements between compared radiographs, indicating the importance of documenting change over time.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5893429487179487,0.59,0.5833333333333334,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15204,latent_15204,528,0.001056,0.0004885775,2.3407865,Absence of prior imaging data for comparison.,High activation levels are observed in examples where frontal and lateral images are provided without a prior comparison available. This indicates a pattern of emphasizing detailed descriptive imaging in the absence of prior images for relative comparison. This lack of prior imaging data necessitates a comprehensive examination of the current images alone.,0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5722222222222222,0.5757575757575758,0.4761904761904761,0.6060606060606061,66.0,99.0
+15205,latent_15205,3878,0.007756,0.0026855473,1.0471448,Emphasis on changes from prior imaging in descriptions.,"Examples with activations closer to 5.0 frequently include descriptions of specific changes such as progression or stability of findings when comparing current and prior imaging, specifically noting intervals and changes in pleural effusions, opacities, or device positions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15206,latent_15206,1752,0.003504,0.0013648223,1.2454982,Comparison with prior images noting interval changes or stability.,Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to findings in current imaging compared to prior studies where there is a noted interval change or stability in features evaluated between the two images.,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4611064944222004,0.465,0.4700854700854701,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15207,latent_15207,4731,0.009462,0.0032918977,1.5687261,Comparison with prior imaging is highlighted.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include phrases indicating a comparison with a prior study, suggesting change or stability in radiological findings over time. This comparison with previous imaging is a notable aspect of radiology reports that influences activation levels.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15208,latent_15208,1976,0.003952,0.0014075657,1.1689684,Evaluation post intervention with comparison to prior imaging assessment.,"The pattern exhibited in highly activated examples shows explicit descriptions of interval changes in conditions or positioning post intervention compared with prior imaging. Common phrases are 'no significant interval change' or descriptions of devices/tubes post positioning and movements, reflecting evaluation post procedures or treatments.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5129421807135146,0.515,0.5132743362831859,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15209,latent_15209,169,0.000338,0.00035545175,2.895368,Documentation of interval change in findings compared to prior image.,"The highly activated examples feature a variation of radiological findings over time, indicating either stability, progression, or resolution of a condition. These highlight changes such as 'interval change', 'stable appearance', or specific updates from previous findings.",0.5584524810765349,0.5714285714285714,0.3684210526315789,0.7,10.0,25.0,0.469955829652471,0.5583333333333333,0.1764705882352941,0.45,20.0,100.0
+15210,latent_15210,1274,0.002548,0.0010771076,1.4906583,Description of interval changes in radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples consistently highlight the presence of interval changes in radiological findings between current and prior images. This pattern is identifiable by descriptions of new, persistent, increased, decreased, or unchanged conditions when compared with previously documented images, clarified in narratives of radiology reports.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4799479947994799,0.48,0.4795918367346938,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15211,latent_15211,2449,0.004898,0.0017304587,1.026783,Comparison of current radiology findings to prior images.,"The high activation examples all involve the analysis and description of radiological findings in direct comparison to previous imaging studies. This pattern emphasizes the focus on identifying changes or stability in findings in comparison to earlier studies, which is a critical aspect of radiological assessments.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+15212,latent_15212,455,0.00091,0.00065522414,4.989511,"No acute change or findings, results consistent with prior imaging.","Examples with higher activation levels often provide a detailed ""impression"" that summarizes the findings without acute changes or new pathological evidence, especially highlighting no significant change since prior comparisons. The pattern reflects a consistency of findings over time, especially in the absence of any active disease processes or 'no evidence of acute cardiopulmonary disease' in the findings.",0.6487455197132617,0.673469387755102,0.6052631578947368,0.9583333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.614773078110528,0.6149068322981367,0.4948453608247423,0.7868852459016393,61.0,100.0
+15213,latent_15213,2325,0.00465,0.0016847322,1.6135404,"Comparison with previous imaging showing stability, change, or resolution.","Examples contain descriptions that mention comparison with prior imaging and detail findings that highlight changes, stability, or resolution of previously noted abnormalities across radiographic studies. This reflects a common pattern in serial radiology interpretation focusing on longitudinal assessment of changes in the image findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5042016806722689,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15214,latent_15214,4616,0.009232,0.003194546,1.0347573,"Detailed findings with unchanged conditions from prior images, emphasizing interval changes or consistency.","Examples with high activation levels involve thorough image evaluations where findings are consistently detailed with comparisons to prior exams, suggesting the identification and reporting of subtle changes or consistent conditions are valued and significant, especially when interval changes are noted or stability is confirmed.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5198079231692677,0.52,0.5192307692307693,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15215,latent_15215,2209,0.004418,0.0015757186,1.3131047,Focus on current findings and tube placements in context of prior imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve aspects of the comparison between current chest imaging findings and previous or prior imaging results, along with updates on tube placements seen across the series of images, such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, and descriptions often indicating changes in findings or tube positions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5520833333333334,0.57,0.55,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15216,latent_15216,1144,0.002288,0.00092101307,2.1778512,Comparison of current findings with prior imaging for changes.,"Examples with activation levels highlight descriptions comparing current and prior studies, even when phrasing is inconsistent. References to previously described abnormalities indicate an ongoing evaluation of change or stability, as noted in examples listing interval improvements or the persistence of findings. ",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.450717119316448,0.46,0.4682539682539682,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15217,latent_15217,1575,0.00315,0.0011524615,1.628833,Limited or absent comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Notably representative examples are observations made from images which are currently available but the comparison with any previous imaging studies is absent or not emphasized. These examples focus on current findings without making comparisons to prior studies, leaving out historical context which may impact activation levels.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5023114816218265,0.5025125628140703,0.5048543689320388,0.52,100.0,99.0
+15218,latent_15218,622,0.001244,0.0005425608,2.2840395,Chronic interstitial lung disease and associated radiological findings.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently emphasize the presence of chronic interstitial lung disease (ILD) characterized by interstitial markings or opacities. This specific pattern seems to be the focus and likely target within the context of the model's activation patterns, noting changes over time or highlighting its chronic nature.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5873015873015873,0.6483516483516484,0.8,0.2926829268292683,82.0,100.0
+15219,latent_15219,837,0.001674,0.0008052351,2.4313993,Comparisons with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The examples contain explicit language indicating a direct comparison between current and prior imaging studies, often used to assess changes in radiological findings over time. This involves evaluating interval changes, stability, or progression of conditions, with frequent utilization of past studies for reference.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15220,latent_15220,2625,0.00525,0.0018825689,1.2086583,"Differences or confirmations in position or condition from prior images, or mention of support devices.","The examples with high activation consistently describe observations that include references to changes or comparisons from prior imagery, as well as explicit mention of positioning or assessment confirmations related to devices or anatomical features (PICC lines, tubes, catheters, etc.).",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15221,latent_15221,2601,0.005202,0.0018340157,1.1182559,Evaluation of changes in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels are distinguished by changes or findings reported in a radiography study that are directly compared to prior studies. This suggests a focus on observing interval changes or stability over time as a key feature. Not all comparisons yield significant changes, but examples like those highlighted show noteworthy assessments that are directly tied to previous data.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5850303542611235,0.595,0.5725190839694656,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15222,latent_15222,1259,0.002518,0.0010822624,2.1660829,Focus on analysis of tube placement in radiography.,"The analysis and instructions frequently include detailed evaluations of tube placements, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or chest tubes, often noting their position relative to the carina, stomach, or other anatomical landmarks. Proper tube positioning is critically evaluated in these examples, indicating a prominent pattern in the data inputs with high activations.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5495845305583599,0.565,0.6031746031746031,0.38,100.0,100.0
+15223,latent_15223,386,0.000772,0.0005410093,2.878731,Importance of comparing current to prior imaging to assess changes.,"Instances with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons to prior imaging studies, indicating that observing changes over time is significant. These reports typically include phrases that describe changes or stability in radiographic findings in relation to earlier images.",0.4289044289044289,0.4897959183673469,0.4878048780487805,0.8333333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4652519893899204,0.4652777777777778,0.3333333333333333,0.75,44.0,100.0
+15224,latent_15224,1296,0.002592,0.0010539412,1.7610438,Detailed comparison with prior images to assess changes or stability in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels all emphasize changes, stability, or comparisons between multiple imaging studies, referencing specific findings that either remain unchanged or have developed over time. These patterns indicate significant emphasis on longitudinal tracking in radiology reports, common practice for monitoring ongoing conditions or assessing treatment efficacy.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4464573268921095,0.45,0.4568965517241379,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15225,latent_15225,1053,0.002106,0.00090614846,2.791417,Presence of a 'PRIOR_REPORT' field in radiology studies.,"The high activation examples consistently include the presence of a prior report, specifically labeled with the field or tag 'PRIOR_REPORT'. This indicates a structured approach to report writing which ensures that comparison with prior studies is systematically noted or integrated into the report.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4615384615384615,0.51,0.50625,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15226,latent_15226,697,0.001394,0.00068303844,2.0649638,Cardiac structural abnormalities or anomalies in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with activations typically describe cardiac abnormalities such as cardiomegaly, an enlarged heart silhouette, tortuosity of the aorta, calcifications of cardiac structures, or any combination of these findings, compared to prior imaging. While some examples include notable changes, others merely note the presence of these features.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.7142857142857143,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5004011581260683,0.5860215053763441,0.6956521739130435,0.1860465116279069,86.0,100.0
+15227,latent_15227,3415,0.00683,0.0023649342,1.045043,Descriptive evaluation of current vs prior imaging findings.,"Reports with high activation levels describe detailed observations comparing current radiological findings with prior reports, often to deduce changes or stability in the condition being evaluated.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15228,latent_15228,2364,0.004728,0.001709169,1.5098525,"Description of stability or interval changes in lung opacity, effusion, or edema.","The pattern appears to be related to the explicit references to small changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging, specifically focusing on the pleural effusion, pulmonary edema, or lung opacities. The activation cases often involve descriptions of interval changes or lack thereof.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5844910014768091,0.585,0.5794392523364486,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15229,latent_15229,339,0.000678,0.00048563263,2.288207,Comparison to prior imaging studies with noted stability or change.,"Examples with high activation often describe a pattern of findings being compared to previous radiological reports. This involves evaluating current imaging in relation to prior images and indicating stability, interval change, or improvements of certain radiological findings.",0.5542825968357883,0.5581395348837209,0.4761904761904761,0.5555555555555556,18.0,25.0,0.4074074074074074,0.4444444444444444,0.21875,0.3181818181818182,44.0,100.0
+15230,latent_15230,1240,0.00248,0.0009803785,2.04529,Stable or unchanged findings upon comparison with prior images.,"Comparative studies often highlight changes or stability between serial imaging, but only mentions of unchanged findings or stability in various medical contexts achieve higher activations. Multiple examples describe unchanged findings rather than significant changes, which correlates with higher activation values.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4865841073271413,0.4974874371859296,0.4929577464788732,0.3535353535353535,99.0,100.0
+15231,latent_15231,698,0.001396,0.0006837827,2.3739698,Detailed comparison with prior imaging mentions.,"The highly activated examples include explicit descriptions of the findings by comparing with prior imaging, emphasizing stability or changes over time, while less activated examples lack such detailed comparative assessment. This context of stability or change is crucial in radiological analysis, particularly for follow-up on known conditions.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5742296918767507,0.5789473684210527,0.5416666666666666,0.7222222222222222,90.0,100.0
+15232,latent_15232,755,0.00151,0.00068585464,2.189971,Comparison to prior imaging showing stable or unchanged findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently mention interval comparisons with prior imaging studies, focusing on the lack of significant changes or stability in findings such as lesions, devices, or lung and cardiac structures. This pattern indicates the importance of stability or unchanged findings in certain medical contexts where unchanged results are reassuring or indicative of non-progression.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4061947151161158,0.4381443298969072,0.3636363636363636,0.2127659574468085,94.0,100.0
+15233,latent_15233,1746,0.003492,0.001335839,1.3397504,Temporal comparison of device placement or anatomical findings.,"These examples have higher activation scores when they involve explicit temporal comparisons of current and prior imaging findings, specifically involving statements about changes or consistency in device placement (e.g., tubes, catheters) or stability of observed conditions. These descriptions are focused on monitoring consistency or change in medical devices or anatomical features over time.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.4594594594594595,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15234,latent_15234,1838,0.003676,0.0013691322,1.2230937,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizes changes or stability.,"Many of the examples involve description of changes, stability, or improvement from prior studies, which is emphasized in comparative radiology studies.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15235,latent_15235,1213,0.002426,0.0010664791,2.5216901,Description of interval change or stability comparing current to prior images.,"Examples with high activation values show radiological descriptions that specifically incorporate an interval change or stability check in comparison with previous images, using explicit comparative language or changes in patient condition or treatment outcomes.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4499449944994499,0.45,0.4489795918367347,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15236,latent_15236,1763,0.003526,0.00127497,1.1067226,Focus on comparison between current and previous images highlighting changes.,"The data shows a prevalence of references to specific comparisons or changes between current and prior images, often mentioning specific aspects like opacification, position of tubes, and indications of unchanged chirurgical implants. This indicates the focus of interest in these reports is the serial observation of changes over time, rather than a broad survey of image findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.48562552519671,0.495,0.4960629921259842,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15237,latent_15237,413,0.000826,0.0005795999,1.9043465,Detailed evaluation of interval changes in acute conditions.,"The examples with high activations often describe interval changes in conditions like pneumothorax, pleural effusions, or consolidation, emphasizing stability or change in the context of acute evaluations. Lower activation values generally lack such detailed descriptions of interval changes and focus more on routine findings or stable conditions.",0.5189542483660131,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.4782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.3952153110047847,0.4802631578947368,0.1860465116279069,0.1538461538461538,52.0,100.0
+15238,latent_15238,370,0.00074,0.0005124045,3.1905723,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or changes in known conditions.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on evaluation for change or stability, and specific findings that involve changes in masses or opacities, stable conditions, or fixed abnormalities indicating chronic conditions unchanged from previous imaging studies.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5294117647058824,0.9,20.0,25.0,0.4434048798385617,0.4459459459459459,0.3454545454545454,0.7916666666666666,48.0,100.0
+15239,latent_15239,3965,0.00793,0.0027450172,1.1441963,Finding comparison with prior images focusing on pulmonary changes.,"These examples predominantly focus on describing findings related to pulmonary structures or pathologies, such as opacities, pneumothorax, or pulmonary changes, and frequently include a dialogue or comparison with previous imaging. The requested analysis often involves a comparison or evaluation indicating stability or change, typical in follow-up imaging studies.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.492411041240498,0.4924623115577889,0.4948453608247423,0.48,100.0,99.0
+15240,latent_15240,5579,0.011158,0.003813122,0.8964381,"Detailed comparative findings with focus on changes in pulmonary, pleural, or mediastinal opacities.","The examples with activation levels 6-7 consistently involve way in which findings compare to prior imaging, often stressing notable changes or lack thereof, observations involving the cardiovascular structures, air-space opacity changes, and pulmonary features such as effusions or atelectasis, with a clear emphasis on detailed observations of changes. In these examples, changes in opacities or alterations in structures are observed and noted over time, which may signify progression or stability of a condition.",0.6794871794871795,0.68,0.6956521739130435,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15241,latent_15241,2105,0.00421,0.0016414295,2.1727989,Comparison of images or findings with prior studies.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention a direct comparison with a prior imaging study and highlight a status or comparison over time regarding the patient's condition or features on the imaging.,0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5203836930455635,0.565,0.5403726708074534,0.87,100.0,100.0
+15242,latent_15242,2413,0.004826,0.0017064475,1.9455315,Description of findings compared to prior frontal images.,"Instances with higher activation levels consistently involve providing a description of the findings in the current radiological images as compared to previous or prior frontal images, often indicating interval changes or stability in pathology. Exceptions with zero activation lack significant comparative analysis or detail on findings related to the comparison.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5025130917607432,0.5226130653266332,0.5142857142857142,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+15243,latent_15243,746,0.001492,0.00075580156,2.3220887,Emphasis on comparison or change over time in radiology findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently require descriptions of chest imaging findings with explicit requests to compare with prior images. This suggests that the pattern involves reports that emphasize changes in findings or stability over time, as derived from prior comparisons.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.3811451706188548,0.4368421052631579,0.445859872611465,0.7777777777777778,90.0,100.0
+15244,latent_15244,1658,0.003316,0.00129166,1.4162039,Explicit tasks or comparisons in radiology report instructions.,"Examples with higher activation levels include explicit instructions or report structure templates for comparing current and prior imaging findings, which often involve directives for describing findings in comparison with previous images. These instructions or tasks indicate a focus on learning how to perform radiological comparisons, rather than just describing findings. This is contrasted with situations where reports are straightforward or comparisons are not the main focus.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4540811834111121,0.535,0.519774011299435,0.92,100.0,100.0
+15245,latent_15245,3763,0.007526,0.002631485,1.4810288,Changes in lung findings or interventions compared to prior images.,"The pattern in examples with high activation suggests a focus on evaluations where changes in lung volume or findings are noted in comparison to prior images, including new intubation status, tube placements, and detection of stable or unstable chest conditions.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5087719298245614,0.51,0.509090909090909,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15246,latent_15246,2064,0.004128,0.001513545,1.3212689,Findings explicitly compared to previous imaging results.,"The examples with high activations consistently include comparison of current imaging findings to prior reports, and specifically note new or stable conditions based on comparison, often using language related to changes or stability over time (e.g., stable, unchanged, no new lesions, etc.). This indicates that the model is recognizing patterns where previous comparator images or reports impact the findings' assessment.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5471014492753623,0.55,0.5431034482758621,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15247,latent_15247,2256,0.004512,0.0015917205,1.26831,Descriptions focus on the positioning of medical devices in imaging.,"The prominent pattern here is that activations are higher when there are descriptions indicating status or positions of invasive devices or drains within patients. Such specific attention to device placement is critical in radiologic assessments, presented in language that contrasts with the focus on pathology findings in lower activation examples.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4504383730594954,0.4824120603015075,0.4705882352941176,0.24,100.0,99.0
+15248,latent_15248,1214,0.002428,0.0009935534,1.7553391,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,Examples with strong activations focus on comparative evaluations where a current radiological study is extensively compared with prior imaging. This often involves noting stability or changes over time and mentioning previous conditions in relation to current ones. High activation is linked to this comparative and evaluative approach.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15249,latent_15249,3556,0.007112,0.002477442,1.1810192,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging for interval changes.,"Examples with high activation often involve detailed comparisons with past studies, indicating changes or stability in imaging findings over time. The context of previous medical interventions or conditions is used to inform the current findings.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15250,latent_15250,823,0.001646,0.0014820554,3.3636043,Active comparison with prior images to assess interval changes or stability.,"The dataset comprises radiology reports analyzing current imaging findings by actively comparing them to prior images. Reports with higher activation levels frequently reference changes, intervals, or stability in conditions from previous imaging, underlining the importance of longitudinal assessment.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6166883963494133,0.6326530612244898,0.5857142857142857,0.8541666666666666,96.0,100.0
+15251,latent_15251,2787,0.005574,0.0020448384,1.2407404,Evaluating change or stability across imaging studies.,"Activated examples focus on the comparison insights between current and prior imaging studies, detailing changes or stability over time. The context of change, whether improvement, worsening, or stability, as evidenced by comparative radiography, informs the activation.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15252,latent_15252,901,0.001802,0.0007478103,2.1454191,Descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"The examples with activation focus on detailed comparisons of findings between current and prior radiological images, often involving complex and ongoing medical conditions. They also tend to describe specific interval changes, including stability, improvement, or worsening of conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5749043534795328,0.575,0.5728155339805825,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15253,latent_15253,399,0.000798,0.0005231393,2.5303795,Prompt to compare current and prior images.,The examples with high activation frequently include a directive to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior image' and involve explicit comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. This pattern reflects an emphasis on evaluating changes over time when reading the images.,0.4874348032242769,0.5106382978723404,0.4857142857142857,0.7727272727272727,22.0,25.0,0.4054855120548551,0.4105960264900662,0.3333333333333333,0.7450980392156863,51.0,100.0
+15254,latent_15254,2702,0.005404,0.0019032862,1.4447129,Comparisons indicating changes or stability in findings relative to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels conclude comparisons with past images by distinctly noting changes or the lack thereof, emphasizing intervals of stability, improvement, deterioration, or evaluating positions of devices like endotracheal tubes. These language patterns highlight specific changes relative to prior assessments.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.3608724388631857,0.545,0.5371900826446281,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15255,latent_15255,1967,0.003934,0.0014764905,1.3777245,Assessment of medical device positioning or change.,"These examples consistently involve the evaluation of medical imaging reports where the focus is on the placement or status of medical devices (like tubes, lines, or catheters) in relation to the prior state, and there is often additional information related to whether any complications, such as pneumothorax, are present. The model shows high activation when the task involves identifying or describing changes or stability in device positioning in the body from one imaging study to another.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15256,latent_15256,1662,0.003324,0.0012351872,1.3739048,"Comparison between current and prior image findings, highlighting changes or stability over time.","These examples are characterized by the presence of comparison between current and prior images, often highlighted with specific radiological terminology, and assessment of various devices or conditions over time. The presence of phrases that analyze images in light of prior studies highlights this pattern.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15257,latent_15257,1094,0.002188,0.0009030055,1.8386719,Descriptions emphasize changes or stability by comparing with prior images.,"Activation levels are high when reports emphasize the presence or absence of changes by comparing with prior imaging studies, particularly noting unchanged or stable findings, and any interval changes in conditions. The comparison underscores the importance of tracking progress or stability in radiological findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15258,latent_15258,2647,0.005294,0.0018693507,1.2803122,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to previous imaging.,The examples with higher activations generally involve descriptions of radiological findings with a focus on stability or change in the interval since prior imaging. They often explicitly discuss interval changes or stability of specific features or findings in the images compared to previous studies.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5390625,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15259,latent_15259,2403,0.004806,0.0017010744,1.0597882,Findings based on comparison between current and prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize the use of both current and prior frontal images for comparison and analysis in terms of identifying interval changes, with 'comparison' clearly defined against previous radiographs or CTs. Comparison-based language is a consistent style throughout the highly activated samples, which outlines variations or stabilities in findings over time.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.4864864864864865,0.75,24.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15260,latent_15260,1606,0.003212,0.0011845935,1.4140472,Detailed comparison to prior imaging assessing devices or changes.,"The examples provided with higher activations involve detailed comparisons with prior imagings, especially assessing devices or anatomical features for changes. They include patterns where specific support devices or pathological changes are compared for interval changes or stability, often using explicit terms like 'unchanged', 'no significant interval change', and 'consistent with previous exams'.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5540970465192014,0.555,0.5504587155963303,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15261,latent_15261,709,0.001418,0.0006178405,1.5971669,Comparative assessment with prior imaging studies detailing interval changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve a detailed comparison of current and prior imaging studies, often revealing unchanged conditions, interval changes, or stability in pathologies. Furthermore, there is frequent mention of techniques and indications, emphasizing comparative analysis to assess progression or stability of conditions.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5336117252108409,0.5364583333333334,0.5130434782608696,0.6413043478260869,92.0,100.0
+15262,latent_15262,707,0.001414,0.00078528,2.7811592,References to absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax.,"The consistent pattern in these examples is the explicit reference to detection of absence of pleural effusion or pneumothorax, often highlighted using phrases like 'no pleural effusion or pneumothorax.' This common finding in reports is consistently referenced when describing stable or unchanged imaging findings, whether or not other abnormalities are present.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.6764842300556586,0.6774193548387096,0.6181818181818182,0.7906976744186046,86.0,100.0
+15263,latent_15263,892,0.001784,0.0007831406,1.955652,Focus on detailed changes observed between current and prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels emphasize changes and comparisons made to previous imaging. They specifically reference detail changes such as lung volume differences, device placements, or pathology resolution when comparing current and past imaging studies.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15264,latent_15264,713,0.001426,0.00064809783,2.5594423,Comparison between current and prior images is emphasized.,"The activation levels are notably higher when the data contains references to comparisons between current and prior images, particularly when these comparisons are used to detect changes over time by examining similar datasets, which indicates their importance in context.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4564705882352942,0.4761904761904761,0.4632352941176471,0.7078651685393258,89.0,100.0
+15265,latent_15265,1863,0.003726,0.0013748305,1.316015,Discussion of image findings in direct image-to-image comparison task.,High activation examples consistently include directives to provide findings comparing the current to prior images. This indicates the model is identifying instances where the primary task is direct comparative analysis of images for changes.,0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4401925930073062,0.4898989898989899,0.4936708860759494,0.7878787878787878,99.0,99.0
+15266,latent_15266,576,0.001152,0.0006216682,1.9152874,Comparison of radiologic findings with prior images.,"High activation examples contain instructions to compare current chest radiograph findings with prior images. These comparisons often mention change or stability, typically using explicit phrases about comparison such as 'compared to prior', 'interval change', 'no change' and specific references to conditions, enhancing the relevance of the reports.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4604556014007835,0.4678362573099415,0.4166666666666667,0.704225352112676,71.0,100.0
+15267,latent_15267,1244,0.002488,0.0010123744,1.5732392,Explicit comparison between current and prior imaging studies.,"The pattern consistent across these examples is the explicit mention of comparison between current and prior imaging studies, indicating changes or stability in findings over time. This type of language is standard in radiology reports when evaluating the development, resolution, or persistence of abnormalities. The pattern involves references to 'Comparison', 'compared to prior', or similar phrasing to highlight this aspect.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4253319872641142,0.445,0.4598540145985401,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15268,latent_15268,1084,0.002168,0.0009009704,1.6070379,Interval changes compared to prior radiographs.,"These examples describe cases where the findings involve interval changes between radiographs. Each activated example indicates alterations like resolution, worsening, or new presence of pathology compared to prior studies, emphasizing temporal changes in lung or chest conditions.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5454545454545454,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15269,latent_15269,1384,0.002768,0.0011516917,2.0728638,Comparison focusing on positioning/condition of medical devices compared to prior images.,"Examples show persistent emphases or changes in the positioning and conditions of medical devices or anatomical structures, compared directly with previous images. This includes unchanged or newly placed instruments like catheters, tubes, and pacemakers, evaluated in the context of stability or changes over time.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.6363636363636364,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5079365079365079,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15270,latent_15270,2325,0.00465,0.0016350041,1.2359724,Findings compared to prior images showing interval changes in medical device positions or anatomical stability.,"Higher activation is associated with findings that involve interval change or comparison with a prior study, emphasizing alterations in the positioning of medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters, lines) or stability of anatomical findings which were previously abnormal.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5360824742268041,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15271,latent_15271,539,0.001078,0.0007371181,3.598389,Evaluation of image findings related to clinical indications like chest pain or respiratory symptoms.,"Examples with high activation frequently mention an INDICATION correlating respiratory symptoms or chest pain with the request for imaging. These examples need a description of findings that explain or evaluate underlying causes of symptoms, distinguishing them from findings,""explanation"":""Evaluation of image findings related to clinical indications like chest pain or respiratory symptoms.""}]} json {and los to rule out acute processes.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5280075952800759,0.5402298850574713,0.4765625,0.8243243243243243,74.0,100.0
+15272,latent_15272,2160,0.00432,0.0015037212,1.163796,Emphasis on providing or requesting comparison with prior images for evaluation despite limited available data.,Examples with moderate to high activation levels emphasize the need for and provision of a comparative description between the current and prior imagery despite often lacking prior data or having limited prior context. They focus on detailing changes or stability when comparisons are made available or requested.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15273,latent_15273,791,0.001582,0.0005498989,1.2959447,"Comparison of current imaging with prior exams, detailing changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels focus on interpreting the differences or stability between the current and prior radiological images, emphasizing changes or the lack thereof. These descriptions require knowledge of medical history, findings in initial examination, and detailed comparison with previous images.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4827217125382263,0.4874371859296482,0.4873949579831932,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+15274,latent_15274,808,0.001616,0.0007339995,2.1471684,Explicit request for assistance marked with 'ASSISTANT' terms.,"Higher activation examples often have clear requests for assistance marked with terms like 'ASSISTANT' followed by an explicit request or description of findings regarding the images, indicating a pattern of direct interaction or input from the assistant.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4246404002501563,0.425,0.4210526315789473,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15275,latent_15275,3458,0.006916,0.0024240694,1.3467817,Stable findings with no significant interval changes from prior imaging.,"Most examples discuss unchanged or stable imaging findings without significant changes in pathology, often used in clinical settings to express no new growth or significant improvement or deterioration. This is reflected in the clinical language emphasizing normalcy or stability, such as 'unchanged,' 'normal,' or 'top normal.'",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15276,latent_15276,1625,0.00325,0.001258206,1.8572793,Comparative image description tasks with unclear relevance.,"Many examples involve repetitive instructions or structures involving descriptions of images, including frontal, lateral, and prior images. High activation levels do not consistently align with a particular medical finding or structure, indicating variability in task clarity or completeness.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4784445870774497,0.507537688442211,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,99.0
+15277,latent_15277,188,0.000376,0.00046115986,2.9432907,'COMPARISON: None' paired with detailed findings.,"The pattern is reflected in reports where no prior imaging days or dates are specified in the 'COMPARISON' section despite references to previous imaging in the findings. These examples show usage of 'COMPARISON: None' or similar calls for no specific prior comparison info, which likely causes higher activation.",0.8365384615384616,0.8823529411764706,0.8571428571428571,0.6666666666666666,9.0,25.0,0.6814381270903009,0.8110236220472441,0.5789473684210527,0.4074074074074074,27.0,100.0
+15278,latent_15278,1055,0.00211,0.00089133123,2.576992,Limited comparison with prior imaging in unclear historical context.,"These examples are marked by radiology reports that involve comparisons with previous images but lack detailed prior context or have unclear comparisons stated as 'N/A' or 'none available'. Despite these limitations, they provide or attempt to provide interpretations of stability or changes based on the current and available past imaging, matching stable findings or few evident changes that might not require advanced prior info.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4306008042029879,0.515,0.5084745762711864,0.9,100.0,100.0
+15279,latent_15279,401,0.000802,0.00051929307,2.0481358,Comparison of medical device positioning changes between radiographs.,"Examples with higher activations frequently reference positional changes or specific adjustments of medical devices (like ET tubes, PICC lines, nasogastric tubes) or specific findings of interest in successive radiograph comparisons. This recurring theme highlights the importance of tracking such alterations and their clinical implications.",0.6701786532295007,0.6875,0.7857142857142857,0.4782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.466484268125855,0.5666666666666667,0.2857142857142857,0.2,50.0,100.0
+15280,latent_15280,287,0.000574,0.0004995084,3.6653278,Significant changes in pulmonary findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels highlight changes in pulmonary findings between current and prior imaging, particularly focusing on descriptions of pulmonary opacities or edema. Such comparative observations are essential for assessing progression or resolution of respiratory conditions and are explicitly mentioned across these examples.",0.6746031746031746,0.7073170731707317,0.6666666666666666,0.5,16.0,25.0,0.5807699875385322,0.6544117647058824,0.3720930232558139,0.4444444444444444,36.0,100.0
+15281,latent_15281,510,0.00102,0.0005946063,2.6943681,Recurrent findings with stable or unchanged conditions over comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels suggest a pattern of reports featuring recurring or persistent findings, where there's an ongoing observation of unchanged or stable conditions, possibly accompanied by a stable pattern description. This involves comparing current images with prior reports, noting stability or lack of significant change in the condition being observed over multiple exams.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6003149488208166,0.6036585365853658,0.4941176470588235,0.65625,64.0,100.0
+15282,latent_15282,2201,0.004402,0.0015657839,1.1859955,Comparison indicating stability or minimal change in findings.,"The highly activated examples all involve comparisons to prior imaging and consistently include findings that indicate stability, minimal change, or unchanged conditions between images. This comparison is essential in monitoring ongoing health issues or tracking disease progress over time without new emergent findings warranting immediate concern.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5288220551378446,0.53,0.5333333333333333,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15283,latent_15283,2277,0.004554,0.0016611641,1.310143,Radiology reports regularly compare current and prior images for evaluation.,"The pattern found in these examples is the use of image comparisons as a regular feature in radiology examinations, where both current images and prior images (frontal or lateral) are evaluated, regardless of the presence or absence of additional text. This comparison is typically used to identify changes over time, supporting clinical diagnoses.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5195982094115078,0.56,0.5379746835443038,0.85,100.0,100.0
+15284,latent_15284,881,0.001762,0.00087433535,2.1062279,Direct comparison of heart-related findings with prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels often exhibit clear, unambiguous comparisons made between images related to identifying significant cardiovascular findings such as catheter placements or cardiomegaly status. The pattern focuses on diagnostic evaluations that reveal stable findings concerning heart-related structures and devices upon comparison with previous images.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5784126984126984,0.585,0.6133333333333333,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15285,latent_15285,1462,0.002924,0.0011431447,1.8139246,Explicit request to compare findings with prior imaging studies and discuss interval changes.,"High activation examples consistently contain clear instructions to compare findings with prior imaging studies, even when there's no specified previous study available for comparison. The framing involves discussing updates or interval changes in a particular condition based on this comparison, often with legal or organizational language indicating that the findings have been entered into critical systems or discussed with physicians.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4649866246656166,0.465,0.4653465346534653,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15286,latent_15286,2311,0.004622,0.0016762982,1.7927896,Comparison of current and prior images for change in findings.,"The data examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios of comparing current radiological images explicitly with prior images to assess findings, particularly cases where stability or change is documented. This suggests an emphasis on comparative analysis in these cases.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15287,latent_15287,1081,0.002162,0.0011736371,3.216804,Comparison of cardiopulmonary features with prior imaging.,"These examples have relatively high activation values when they involve radiology reports that include assessments of both the lungs and the heart, or notable absence of acute cardiopulmonary changes, alongside comparisons with prior imaging—indicative of monitoring stability or changes in specific conditions.",0.493103448275862,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5213895835013848,0.555,0.5359477124183006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15288,latent_15288,415,0.00083,0.00057137565,2.2029717,Clinical suspicion of pneumonia.,"This pattern appears in radiology reports where the patient presents with respiratory symptoms, like dyspnea or cough, and there is a specific suspicion of pneumonia as indicated by the repeated use of 'question pneumonia' as a part of the clinical history or indication.",0.6862745098039216,0.6875,0.6818181818181818,0.6521739130434783,23.0,25.0,0.6542744252873564,0.6753246753246753,0.532258064516129,0.6111111111111112,54.0,100.0
+15289,latent_15289,1801,0.003602,0.0013769196,1.7069412,Descriptive comparisons to prior images in radiology reports.,The pattern across examples with higher activations (above 0.0) is the presence of explicit descriptive comparisons between current imaging and prior studies. These descriptions often involve changes or stability in conditions rather than substantive descriptions of standalone findings in the current image. This emphasizes a focus on longitudinal assessment in radiological reporting.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5454545454545454,0.55,0.5416666666666666,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15290,latent_15290,357,0.000714,0.0004394424,2.4660406,Focus on comparisons and differences from prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on assessing differences and comparisons in sequential and prior imaging, often explicitly instructed as part of the radiology report task. They usually contain clues or directives to compare current images with prior ones or provide evidence of progression, regression, or stability in certain medical conditions, particularly relating to the thoracic aorta or lung fields.",0.4135297326786689,0.4186046511627907,0.3793103448275862,0.6111111111111112,18.0,25.0,0.360806863818912,0.3691275167785235,0.3076923076923077,0.7346938775510204,49.0,100.0
+15291,latent_15291,318,0.000636,0.0004514016,3.030126,Significant interval change or resolution in radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels describe changes in radiologic findings compared to prior studies, using phrases like 'interval development', 'significant interval change', and 'since prior exam'. However, emphasis is especially on findings that have significantly changed or are explicitly marked as important, such as worsening conditions or resolution of previous pathologies, rather than simple comparisons or unchanged findings.",0.6916712630998345,0.6976744186046512,0.631578947368421,0.6666666666666666,18.0,25.0,0.7339712918660287,0.7697841726618705,0.5714285714285714,0.717948717948718,39.0,100.0
+15292,latent_15292,976,0.001952,0.000815395,2.749987,Comparison of tube/line positions with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels emphasize the presence and positioning of tubes or lines in relation to the anatomy shown in the images, particularly when compared to prior images, indicating their correct placement or changes over time.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.6140350877192983,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15293,latent_15293,4617,0.009234,0.0032109895,1.394664,Radiological evaluation in direct comparison to prior studies to assess change or stability.,"These examples consistently involve descriptions of cases where radiological findings are compared to previous examinations to highlight changes, intervals, or stable conditions in the pathological features. This pattern is indicative of an evaluation approach that stresses on change detection in high acuity settings.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15294,latent_15294,1217,0.002434,0.0010148586,1.4948021,Image-based comparison or lack thereof in radiology reports.,"The examples either provide a comparison with a prior radiological image or state no comparison available. They engage in descriptions based on images available or lack thereof. Several indicate a change between exams when previous images are available for comparison, highlighting stability or change in findings.",0.3315508021390374,0.4,0.4390243902439024,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.3959149496097371,0.495,0.4972375690607735,0.9,100.0,100.0
+15295,latent_15295,1785,0.00357,0.0013565161,1.8446647,Observations on the positioning or adjustment of medical devices.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include interpreting chest images with observations on the position and stability of medical devices like pacemakers, chest tubes, PICC lines or specifics about their positioning or adjustment. This indicates a high activation with device positioning.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5633802816901409,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15296,latent_15296,838,0.001676,0.00079127995,2.1984353,Review and compare frontal images with prior studies for positional or pathological changes.,"The examples with high activation levels typically involve cases with single or multiple frontal images compared directly with prior studies, often specifying positional changes or stability of devices or structures, and the presence or regression of specific pathologies. This highlights a pattern associated with monitoring changes over time or maintaining vigilance on particular features or conditions, which likely stimulate attention in the model.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4270833333333333,0.45,0.4642857142857143,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15297,latent_15297,961,0.001922,0.00090052007,2.1134808,Cardiac enlargement indicating pulmonary edema or fluid overload.,"The examples consistently describe a combination of findings related to cardiac silhouette 'enlargement', 'increased size', or 'moderate enlargement' compared to prior imaging. These reports often highlight cardiac changes indicating fluid overload or pulmonary edema, using terms like 'cardiomegaly', 'enlarged heart', and 'increased over baseline'.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3992963185445808,0.475,0.4137931034482758,0.12,100.0,100.0
+15298,latent_15298,1057,0.002114,0.00089369365,1.9508631,"Comparison of current imaging findings to previous studies, focusing on changes or stability.","The examples with high activation focus on comparing findings to previous images, particularly noting changes or stability in findings over time. Phrases like 'in comparison', 'slightly decreased', and 'remains unchanged' are prevalent in high activation examples, indicating that changes compared to priors are of primary interest.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5869570787956437,0.592964824120603,0.5725806451612904,0.7171717171717171,99.0,100.0
+15299,latent_15299,2311,0.004622,0.0016864737,1.2161058,Comparison with prior studies affecting findings interpretation.,"The commonality in high activation samples seems to be related to instances where a change in position or comparison with a previous study affects the assessment, particularly regarding the pulmonary or cardiac features.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15300,latent_15300,1100,0.0022,0.00092968886,1.6201321,References to stability or interval change in comparison to prior imaging.,"The data indicates that references to specific changes or descriptions comparing with prior imaging, particularly when indicating stability or intervals, are associated with high activation levels. This includes terms like 'unchanged', 'residual', 'improved', and specific mention of changes such as resolution or persistence. These comparative descriptors are central to the pattern as they evaluate chronicity or progression of conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5098039215686274,0.51,0.5096153846153846,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15301,latent_15301,1495,0.00299,0.0011821425,2.0354173,Comparison with prior imaging for pulmonary findings.,"This series predominantly features examples that involve a focus on comparing findings with prior imaging specifically noting changes or stability of pulmonary conditions like emphysema, pneumothorax, or pleural effusions. Stability or changes in these elements seem to be a focal point for activation, suggesting the pattern involves explicit mentions of prior studies and pulmonary findings.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5307692307692308,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15302,latent_15302,536,0.001072,0.0010639763,4.193788,"Normal lung, heart, and mediastinal findings without prior image comparison.","This pattern emerges because the unavailability of prior comparison is stated and no significant abnormalities are found in terms of lung condition, effusion, pneumothorax, and heart size. The reports heavily emphasize normalcy in these conditions when there are no other comparisons available.",0.8357963875205254,0.84,1.0,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.7640558698727016,0.7834394904458599,0.7090909090909091,0.6842105263157895,57.0,100.0
+15303,latent_15303,2155,0.00431,0.0015445643,1.5061646,Findings are described with emphasis on comparison to prior imaging studies for changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels often relate to findings described in comparison with prior imaging where abnormalities are noted as persistent or slightly changed, using language to confirm or deny progression of these findings, often involving common chest pathologies such as atelectasis, pulmonary edema, or pneumonia.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4687298517085751,0.485,0.4888888888888889,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15304,latent_15304,1857,0.003714,0.0013565322,1.4686525,Absence of acute abnormalities with unclear prior comparison.,"The high-activation examples feature descriptions where findings either describe states of normalcy or require minimal interpretation beyond descriptive findings, lacking acute abnormalities or dramatic changes, particularly when there is an explicit absence of prior comparison data (e.g., 'COMPARISON: None').",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+15305,latent_15305,980,0.00196,0.00085892895,1.9007254,Emphasis on comparison of findings with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activations consistently emphasize the evaluation of current findings by comparing them to prior imaging studies, especially when there are notable changes or stabilities in the condition. These texts often detail the technical aspects of the radiology study like imaging techniques and specific anatomical features examined. High activation appears when a comparison is involved, highlighting either change or stability concerning the prior study.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.442866801893171,0.485,0.4903225806451612,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15306,latent_15306,670,0.00134,0.00064727105,2.3568425,Detailed comparison with prior images emphasizing changes or stability.,"These examples mention the use of images and comparisons with prior exams to describe radiological findings and provide an impression. While many cases engage in comparisons with previous imaging, the activation seems related to descriptions where there is a notable change or distinct aspect, such as slight reduction, stability concerns like tortuosity, new opacities, or status of devices, focusing on detailed changes over time or with specific attention to structural/cardiopulmonary aspects.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5977822580645161,0.5978835978835979,0.5670103092783505,0.6179775280898876,89.0,100.0
+15307,latent_15307,4108,0.008216,0.0028746964,1.1476526,Evaluating interval changes with structured comparative analysis.,"High activation levels are consistently associated with examples that include a detailed comparison with previous imaging studies or clear reference points for evaluating interval changes. The absence of such structured comparative analysis leads to lower activation levels, indicating the pattern's emphasis on detailed change evaluations.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15308,latent_15308,568,0.001136,0.0006341861,2.066399,Comparison not available; findings requested from a single image.,"This pattern is seen in examples where findings are requested on images without direct comparison available, emphasizing the role of description in absence of historical data.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5868116200320799,0.5892857142857143,0.4942528735632184,0.6323529411764706,68.0,100.0
+15309,latent_15309,566,0.001132,0.0005760626,1.7175932,Presence or absence of a 'Comparison' section indicating image comparison.,"Examples with 0 activation involve descriptions that either don't mention or explicitly state 'None' under the 'Comparison' section, indicating that no meaningful prior image comparison is included. Those with higher activations notably have comparison sections either documented or implicating previous examinations, stressing longitudinal observation in radiologic assessments of changes.",0.4900437105390966,0.58,0.5434782608695652,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.346941083342757,0.4342857142857143,0.4268292682926829,0.9333333333333332,75.0,100.0
+15310,latent_15310,1528,0.003056,0.0012221471,1.7251726,Emphasis on comparison with prior images and changes over time.,"Higher activation levels are associated with samples containing explicit references to comparison with prior imaging studies, consistent patterns in reviewing changes over time, or ascertainment of stability and significant developments in the radiological findings compared to previous examinations.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5667945405673426,0.585,0.5602836879432624,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15311,latent_15311,2105,0.00421,0.0015182353,1.3338892,Descriptive changes in lung volumes affecting cardiac or mediastinal appearance.,"These examples describe radiological findings in terms of deviations from normal or expected anatomy, particularly focusing on alterations in lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, and mediastinal contours. The recurrent mention of lung volumes being 'low', 'well-expanded', or leading to changes in cardiac or mediastinal appearance is central to the observed activations.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5833333333333334,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4377820760799484,0.455,0.4307692307692308,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15312,latent_15312,2198,0.004396,0.0015789365,1.30587,Focus on interval changes compared with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently focus on changes observed by comparing the current and prior imaging studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability of findings. This often involves detailing differences or stability in various features such as opacities, effusions, or catheter placements, indicative of a pattern focusing on interval changes or lack thereof based on comparison studies.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4819082859785912,0.5,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,98.0
+15313,latent_15313,3836,0.007672,0.002655739,1.0735936,Interpretation based on specific pulmonary features and changes across comparative studies.,"These examples highlight the comparison of lung features in multiple views and the presence of specific lung conditions like mild scarring or edema, changes in tube or catheter positions, and improvement or worsening of specific pulmonary features across studies. These comparisons use language indicating changes or consistency across imaging, such as 'increased', 'persistent', 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'worsens'.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15314,latent_15314,981,0.001962,0.00085806416,1.8745656,Detailed comparison with prior images highlighting changes or similarities.,"The pattern indicates higher activation levels when there is a detailed comparison across different images or time-points explicitly provided, often focusing on specific changes or lack thereof. Less activation corresponds to vague or explicit articulations, or when details about image comparisons are limited or absent.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5278946965638631,0.5326633165829145,0.525,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+15315,latent_15315,433,0.000866,0.00080424163,2.7959843,Requests for comparison with prior images for evaluation.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include instructions to perform a comparison with prior images, either explicitly or implicitly. This indicates an emphasis on comparing current imaging with past images for evaluating changes, which is a critical component of radiological assessments.",0.5767195767195767,0.5833333333333334,0.5789473684210527,0.4782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.4681923331130204,0.4777070063694267,0.3417721518987341,0.4736842105263157,57.0,100.0
+15316,latent_15316,374,0.000748,0.00051036366,2.6817513,Patterns of radiological analysis instructions or image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe a radiological analysis or specific findings regarding image comparisons or changes, often including instructions or requests for comparison of findings. This creates a pattern in language specific to follow-up examinations or comparative analysis reports typically found in clinical radiology documentation.",0.326036866359447,0.4222222222222222,0.4285714285714285,0.9,20.0,25.0,0.2839667977282656,0.3355704697986577,0.3214285714285714,0.9183673469387756,49.0,100.0
+15317,latent_15317,2137,0.004274,0.0015988185,1.7067893,"Comparison of current image findings against earlier images, highlighting changes or stability.","The samples with higher activations prominently focus on changes or stability in findings when comparing current radiological images to prior ones, particularly noting specifics such as resolution, worsening, or stability of pathologies like pulmonary opacities or effusions.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15318,latent_15318,1550,0.0031,0.0012224138,1.6403434,Descriptions of interval changes or stability in findings compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently detail changes or comparisons with prior radiological studies. Despite the mention of current frontal and lateral images, the emphasis on how findings have evolved, remained stable, or the introduction of devices compared to prior imaging prompts higher activation.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5420560747663551,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15319,latent_15319,616,0.001232,0.00066910265,2.0144265,Evaluations concerning potential pneumonia (PNA) or related infections.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently contain terms concerning pneumonia or using shorthand references like ""PNA"". This is contrasted by a general reference to diagnostic evaluations for pneumonia or infections as per the indication, which suggests a consistent pattern trigger when pneumonia is being evaluated or discussed.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4230769230769231,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4241452991452991,0.4431818181818182,0.3382352941176471,0.3026315789473684,76.0,100.0
+15320,latent_15320,2481,0.004962,0.0018218673,1.3883121,Interval changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activations describe changes or comparisons in imaging findings over time, typically mentioning changes in the condition of lines, tubes, anomalies, or lung conditions compared to previous images. This pattern of highlighting interval changes or stability relative to prior studies is common in longitudinal radiographic assessments.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5268148528844918,0.5303030303030303,0.5258620689655172,0.6161616161616161,99.0,99.0
+15321,latent_15321,2301,0.004602,0.0016642073,1.5343759,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging to assess changes over time.,"The pattern in these radiology report examples is frequent references to comparison between current imaging and prior studies, where observations are made about interval changes or stability over time. These comparisons are used to note changes, reassure stability, or indicate progression or improvement of specific findings.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15322,latent_15322,1631,0.003262,0.0012322366,1.6569138,Presence and assessment of medical devices within thoracic images.,"The observed pattern shows a common element of involvement of medical devices such as pacemakers, endotracheal tubes, or lines within the thoracic images, often accompanied by changes in or assessments of their positions. This pattern highlights specific radiological observations involving these devices, whether unchanged, stable, or adjusted, thus reflecting evaluations of procedural outcomes or positioning.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5369908775536426,0.5404040404040404,0.5487804878048781,0.4545454545454545,99.0,99.0
+15323,latent_15323,1406,0.002812,0.0011037441,2.5930285,Finding related to aortic contour or dimension change.,"The highly activated examples mention the size or contour of the thoracic aorta, such as 
+'aorta is unfolded', 'tortuous', or 'elongated'. These observations are detailed and specific to the anatomy of the aorta, which is a unique aspect of comparison across studies.",0.4543650793650793,0.56,1.0,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4080854309687262,0.515,0.6,0.09,100.0,100.0
+15324,latent_15324,553,0.001106,0.0005312945,2.343951,Stable findings compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve comparison with prior imaging studies and emphasize findings that are either unchanged, stable, or comparable to previous images. They frequently begin with an analytical framework of current and prior data, suggesting that the pattern involves evaluating stability or lack of change over time in radiological findings, typically signifying non-progression of certain conditions or pathologies.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.2955542264752791,0.4733727810650887,0.3448275862068966,0.2857142857142857,70.0,99.0
+15325,latent_15325,404,0.000808,0.0005520435,2.9628735,Identification of subtle opacities indicative of possible early pneumonia.,"The examples with higher activations all suggest the presence of early-stage pneumonia or possible pneumonia among other differentials. This pattern is characterized by the identification of opacities that may indicate early pneumonia, often with language cautiously suggesting pneumonia as a differential diagnosis.",0.7112794612794613,0.7142857142857143,0.75,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.4829059829059829,0.7635135135135135,0.6511627906976745,0.5833333333333334,48.0,100.0
+15326,latent_15326,1640,0.00328,0.0012071937,1.3178227,Detailed temporal changes or assessments compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation close to zero do not use specific language indicating assessment against previous imaging or changes over time, but instead focus more on description observations. Higher activations are present when the findings mention interval changes, comparisons related to specific conditions (e.g., unchanged positions of devices, improvement or worsening of conditions) as these represent distinct mentions of temporal change or stability aligned to specific expertise needed in interpretation of comparisons.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5479365079365079,0.555,0.544,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15327,latent_15327,942,0.001884,0.0008332859,2.9866126,Evaluation or description of changes compared to prior images.,"The examples showing higher activation levels frequently mention changes or evaluations compared to prior images. This pattern illustrates the model's focus on evaluating changes or describing stability over time, particularly noting whether findings are unchanged or have progressed as compared to previous imaging.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15328,latent_15328,2031,0.004062,0.0015319146,1.4392798,"Mentions of pacemakers, ICDs, or other implanted devices in chest images.","The examples with high activation levels involve mentions of medical devices, such as pacemakers, ICDs (implantable cardioverter-defibrillators), or other similar equipment being described or evaluated within the X-ray findings. These refer to specific implanted devices in the chest that need regular monitoring to ensure correct placement and operation.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,100.0,100.0
+15329,latent_15329,843,0.001686,0.0007420393,2.3673859,Tasks focused on comparing current and prior radiological images.,"The pattern here involves the requirement to compare current radiological findings with prior imaging to assess for changes, as indicated in the prompt by specific instructions. This task appears specific to segments providing directions to compare and evaluate images, highlighting the relationship between current and previous studies.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5157232704402516,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15330,latent_15330,931,0.001862,0.00082468585,1.7889758,Emphasis on positioning or change in medical device placement.,"Activation levels are higher for examples that explicitly reference device positioning, placement, or removal in relation to anatomical landmarks on chest imaging. This pattern is notable as it emphasizes the critical monitoring of medical devices in radiological assessments.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6180387563341907,0.625,0.6712328767123288,0.49,100.0,100.0
+15331,latent_15331,1011,0.002022,0.0008498936,1.921721,Significant changes in findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"These examples demonstrate references to substantial changes, particularly in pathological findings like opacities or lines, compared with prior imaging studies, often leading to notable clinical implications. The details include changes in opacities or device placements that are significant against previous conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4191351351351351,0.457286432160804,0.4166666666666667,0.2,100.0,99.0
+15332,latent_15332,1435,0.00287,0.0010258406,1.2048028,Detailed comparison with multiple prior imaging studies.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently include descriptions of multiple prior imaging studies or specific comparisons over time, indicating a pattern of detailed longitudinal assessment and evaluation for changes in the context of radiological findings. This pattern is evident in the combination of sequential imaging comparisons and specific changes noted over time, whether in pathological features or medical devices.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5932816148226256,0.595,0.6091954022988506,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15333,latent_15333,364,0.000728,0.0004837943,2.6405976,Emphasis on comparison across different radiological exams.,The examples tend to highlight the degree of comparison between new radiological findings and previous ones. Higher activation often results when there are specific references to noticeable changes or stability over time in the evaluated chest radiographs or when detailing comparisons of device placements or observed medical conditions.,0.2698412698412698,0.3043478260869565,0.3428571428571428,0.5714285714285714,21.0,25.0,0.4229153589879774,0.4236111111111111,0.3142857142857143,0.75,44.0,100.0
+15334,latent_15334,2395,0.00479,0.0016971658,1.3129,Comparison or changes noted compared to prior imaging.,"Analysis and comparison against prior imaging is a common practice in radiology to assess changes or stability in findings. The examples with activations highlight differences, noting changes such as new devices, changes in opacifications, or stable conditions compared to previous imaging.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.5481481481481482,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15335,latent_15335,1113,0.002226,0.0009180795,1.570727,Direct comparisons of findings from current to prior images.,"Examples with high activation mention descriptions comparing current imaging findings to previous ones under controlled clinical contexts, without unrelated medical devices or acute processes. This reflects a consistent comparison of sequential findings without external interference, focusing purely on radiological changes.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4397759103641456,0.44,0.4423076923076923,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15336,latent_15336,2582,0.005164,0.0017985181,1.3349147,Normal or unchanged cardiomediastinal and hilar contours.,"Highly activated examples involve typical or normal findings on radiology studies, where the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours appear unremarkable or unchanged compared to previous images, and there are no acute or significant abnormalities noted.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.469150641025641,0.47,0.4673913043478261,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15337,latent_15337,472,0.000944,0.00049674977,2.1052785,Frequent comparison of findings to previous imaging results.,"These examples often reference the comparison of chest imaging findings to prior studies, frequently noting changes in lines, tubes, or the status of prior conditions like effusions. Descriptions typically follow a structured format, focusing on technical aspects and key changes between the current and previous radiologic evaluations.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4227941176470588,0.4267515923566879,0.3539823008849557,0.7017543859649122,57.0,100.0
+15338,latent_15338,485,0.00097,0.00055106555,2.4969163,Findings described without comparison to previous imaging.,"These examples do not contain any comparisons to prior studies, nor do they provide any interval or temporal changes. Instead, they describe findings in present radiographs only, without comparison, focusing on the current state and pathological absence.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.565695437053326,0.620253164556962,0.4772727272727273,0.3620689655172414,58.0,100.0
+15339,latent_15339,1029,0.002058,0.00091193884,1.8487895,"Comparisons made to prior imaging, assessing changes.","Lots of these examples discuss changes from prior imaging tests. Reports mention various medical conditions and procedural reasons for comparison, including pacer, pneumonia, anemia surgery, cardiac issues, and generally indicate comparing current conditions and techniques with previous studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15340,latent_15340,817,0.001634,0.0006852477,1.8146658,Detailed comparison of findings with previous images and incorporation of patient history.,"Examples showing activations have explicit references to patient history or treatment (e.g., status post surgical intervention, past medical conditions) and radiological findings in comparison to prior imaging. They often conclude with detailed radiological descriptions linked to patient history or recent medical procedures.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15341,latent_15341,676,0.001352,0.00068476796,2.4383585,Thorough comparison with prior imaging indicating changes or stability.,"The data show a pattern of high activation levels in reports that contain explicit comparisons with prior imaging, noted with phrases like 'compared to previous', as well as specific references to the presence or absence of new or progressing conditions such as lesions, infiltrations, or effusions. These comprehensive descriptions suggest a thorough evaluation against prior data is key to the pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4383830455259027,0.4391534391534391,0.4086021505376344,0.4269662921348314,89.0,100.0
+15342,latent_15342,3626,0.007252,0.002507834,1.087286,Change in medical condition when comparing current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activations consistently show a pattern of reporting improvement or worsening of medical conditions over time by explicitly comparing changes between current and prior imaging results. They frequently mention changes such as improvement, decrease, or worsening in various medical parameters observed in the images.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6107080563209384,0.615,0.6455696202531646,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15343,latent_15343,1991,0.003982,0.0014747104,1.89122,Interval stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that are representative of the pattern frequently contain reference to findings being unchanged when compared to a prior imaging. The descriptions or findings revolve around structural abnormalities, intervals observed, and stability or lack of interval or significant changes in imaging findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4545454545454545,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15344,latent_15344,1581,0.003162,0.0012155316,1.8359206,Description involving interval change or comparison for progressing disease or interventions.,"The examples show descriptions that involve comparing current imaging study with prior images, highlighting changes such as interval placement or removal of devices, or stable versus changing anatomical findings, to assess the status and progression of disease or treatment, revealing a pattern where comparison is integral to the explanation of findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5050505050505051,0.51,0.5083333333333333,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15345,latent_15345,282,0.000564,0.00047040233,2.5062242,Multiple image views included in the analysis.,"The examples with high activation contain references to multiple images, including current and prior images, indicating a focus on thorough examination using both frontal and lateral views for detailed evaluation. They appear to involve comprehensive comparison or assessment of the images provided, with an emphasis on unchanged/incidental findings across various views or imaging sessions.",0.5980392156862745,0.6097560975609756,0.5,1.0,16.0,25.0,0.3897790521167145,0.3955223880597014,0.2920353982300885,0.9705882352941176,34.0,100.0
+15346,latent_15346,2106,0.004212,0.0015488567,1.3788832,Evaluation and positioning of medical tubes and catheters.,"Examples with high activations describe findings related to medical tubes, catheters, or other foreign devices and their positions within the body. Typical references include ETT (endotracheal tube) or NG (nasogastric tube), their positioning, and comparison to previous placements or changes in positioning.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5665598975016015,0.5728643216080402,0.5921052631578947,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+15347,latent_15347,3114,0.006228,0.002193063,1.3810654,Comparison of current imaging findings with prior image for changes in pathology.,"The pattern involves identifying radiological findings and describing them in the context of prior images, while highlighting changes in specific anatomical features such as pneumothorax, cardiac silhouette, endotracheal tube positioning, or presence of hernias. The examples often assess progression, stability, or improvement of specified pathologies with references to prior studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5160802500252042,0.52,0.5169491525423728,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15348,latent_15348,1918,0.003836,0.0014287679,1.4346318,Comparison reveals interventions or tube placements.,"The summary highlights reports where the comparison with prior images reveals either new placements or changes in various tubes, catheters, or similar devices, often noting unchanged stable appearances or describing procedural progress, which is a recurrent element in radiology interpretations related to intervention monitoring.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5671105905120827,0.575,0.6027397260273972,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15349,latent_15349,440,0.00088,0.0005711375,2.3333545,Comparison with prior imaging studies indicating stability or changes.,"Highly activated examples involve comparison between current imaging findings and previous imaging studies, with explicit identification of findings from prior images and assessment of changes or stability in those findings. These examples often show continuity or court substantive changes between timepoints, highlighting radiologists’ use of prior studies in current assessments.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4848172928461142,0.4935064935064935,0.35,0.5185185185185185,54.0,100.0
+15350,latent_15350,398,0.000796,0.0005046732,2.302427,Comparative analysis despite missing explicit comparison.,High activation examples consistently request comparisons to prior chest radiographs even when the specific prior report is unavailable or the study is meant to establish a baseline. This implies that the necessity of a comparative analysis even without explicit comparison information increases the activation level.,0.3738191632928475,0.3958333333333333,0.4117647058823529,0.6086956521739131,23.0,25.0,0.4489795918367347,0.4489795918367347,0.3333333333333333,0.6875,48.0,99.0
+15351,latent_15351,1521,0.003042,0.001168044,1.5178608,Multiple view evaluations with explicit comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe studies with multiple views, especially frontal and lateral, and often mention comparisons with prior images explicitly in the context of detecting changes or evaluating specific conditions (e.g., pneumonia, atelectasis). Moreover, the reports often suggest consultation or recommend further action based on identified changes from prior exams.",0.3064312736443884,0.34,0.3888888888888889,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15352,latent_15352,3910,0.00782,0.002746908,1.0470266,Explicit mention of findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Highly activated examples consistently reference changes or comparisons with prior imaging findings, indicating a pattern where recent changes or stability over time are explicitly stated after evaluating the current study against previous studies. This aligns with a radiological practice of tracking progression or regression of conditions.",0.5528031290743155,0.5714285714285714,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.5895720909021813,0.595,0.5772357723577236,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15353,latent_15353,969,0.001938,0.00084012497,2.3815699,Documentation of significant interval changes in health status compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of changes in findings compared to prior images, as well as direct statements about improving or worsening conditions related to pulmonary or cardiac health. This pattern indicates that when there is significant interval change of a notable condition compared to prior imaging, it leads to higher activation levels.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15354,latent_15354,1951,0.003902,0.0014919251,2.0525107,Comparison of current imaging to previous imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe an analysis of imaging findings in comparison to a 'prior frontal image' or previous exams, highlighting changes or stability in conditions. This reflects a pattern of emphasizing comparative analysis to detect changes.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5100671140939598,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15355,latent_15355,1381,0.002762,0.0010550377,1.4045244,References to chest hardware or devices and their status.,"Highly activated samples consistently focus on the presence and stability of hardware, catheters, tubes, or devices placed within the chest, as well as changes to these structures. These examples use specific terminology to describe medical devices and their positioning, which seems to drive high activation due to their clinical significance and distinct place in radiology reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4918178027934126,0.507537688442211,0.5076923076923077,0.3333333333333333,99.0,100.0
+15356,latent_15356,3774,0.007548,0.0026236058,1.2184426,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize findings that are described as stable, unchanged, or only minimally changed compared to previous reports. This pattern involves the use of comparative language to indicate that there have been no significant alterations in identified pathologies, treatment outcomes, or anatomical structures.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15357,latent_15357,2196,0.004392,0.0015980134,1.6084597,Absence of prior imaging for comparison in a comparison-oriented prompt structure.,"The more highly activated examples frequently reference the lack or absence of a comparison with a prior image, even though the template suggests a comparison is expected. This likely triggers the model's pattern recognition as it deviates from the usual complete comparison protocols.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.50306104152258,0.515,0.5114503816793893,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15358,latent_15358,1984,0.003968,0.0015081973,1.6200775,Detailed findings with specific comparisons to prior imaging.,"High activations imply a detailed comparison with prior imaging, often including reference to changes or stability in findings. Examples 5, 22, and 35 specifically mention stable or changing findings compared to earlier images, marked by terminologies like 'interval change', 'stable', or references to specific prior dates, which align with the pattern.",0.297470895222802,0.3,0.2727272727272727,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4326027466044036,0.435,0.4424778761061947,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15359,latent_15359,489,0.000978,0.0005941915,2.410717,Comparing current imaging with prior studies indicates no significant change or unremarkable findings.,"These examples commonly involve descriptions of imaging studies for comparison, often emphasizing unremarkable findings or lack of significant interval change. This highlights reliance on reference to previous images and describing stability or no abnormalities in several areas. It is a pattern in routine radiological examinations where comparisons confirm unchanged conditions.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5530452245780713,0.5644171779141104,0.4459459459459459,0.5238095238095238,63.0,100.0
+15360,latent_15360,1964,0.003928,0.001328093,0.8750595,Description of radiology findings includes comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently include a description of findings in comparison to a prior imaging study. This comparison helps track changes or stability in medical conditions over time, which is a common practice in radiological assessments. Thus, references to comparative imaging are central to identifying significant patterns in the data.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4612391499551033,0.505,0.5031847133757962,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15361,latent_15361,1216,0.002432,0.0008465381,0.9879054,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging to note interval changes.,"The examples describe findings with an emphasis on comparison to current or earlier images, focusing on consistent, changed, or unchanged findings related to prior exams. High activations reflect the importance of noting interval changes or stability between imaging sessions, as an integral part of radiology reporting that guides clinical decision-making.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15362,latent_15362,1863,0.003726,0.0012958815,1.0729495,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to previous findings.,"Examples with high activation often involve a description of radiological findings alongside thorough comparison to prior images, marked by explicit comparison phrases. High activation examples frequently feature terms like ""comparison to previous"" or ""interval change"". The focus is on describing findings relative to previous studies, highlighting any notable changes or stability.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15363,latent_15363,1304,0.002608,0.00089696486,1.18426,Documentation of interval changes in radiological findings.,"The examples with higher activations focus on descriptions of changes observed in radiological findings compared to previous exams. Specifically, the pattern involves noting improvements, deteriorations, or stabilizations in conditions like opacities, effusions, or device placements over time.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5727272727272728,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15364,latent_15364,1651,0.003302,0.0011541374,1.2083393,Detailed comparison to prior imaging studies.,"These examples include detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies, with explicit mention of structures or conditions that are 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'worsened' compared to prior exams. The presence of comparison in these contexts suggests the pattern emphasizes evaluating changes over time via imaging comparisons to ascertain progression or stability of findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5779318661441061,0.58,0.5701754385964912,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15365,latent_15365,1162,0.002324,0.0008251201,1.0567117,Detailed tracking and comparison of non-acute thoracic imaging findings over time.,"The examples that activate represent radiology reports which provide a detailed description of findings from the current and prior imaging studies especially when examining the updates to the cardiac silhouette, detection of lung-related changes, or adjustments to non-acute cardiopulmonary findings over time. Phrases indicating comparison and tracking changes, particularly around lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, and other thoracic structures are central to understanding these results.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15366,latent_15366,1552,0.003104,0.0010630095,0.97964776,Persistence of pathological findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with activation levels indicating a pattern involve findings where a notable chest pathology is compared to previous imaging, but specifically identifying stable, unchanged, or persistent pathologies or anatomical features, despite prior concerns or suspicions expressed in the radiological history or indications.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5444419413781882,0.545,0.5483870967741935,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15367,latent_15367,1429,0.002858,0.0009863946,1.1172825,"Evaluation of medical device positioning (e.g., tubes, lines) relative to prior imaging.","Examples with higher activations focus on descriptions relating to the evaluation of tubes, such as nasogastric (NG) tubes and their placement or other medical devices. The focus is on medical device positioning and whether or not it has changed or is appropriate in radiological studies. This detailed evaluation of line and tube positions in context with prior imaging is a key component of these reports.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4901960784313725,0.25,100.0,100.0
+15368,latent_15368,1790,0.00358,0.00123,0.921372,"Emphasis on detailed positional assessments of tubes, lines, and devices.","The examples with high activation levels feature thorough descriptions that emphasize spatial and positional assessments, particularly concerning various tubes, lines, and devices, even when explicitly seeking interval changes. These reports detail placement precision and changes in line and tube placements, verifying positions against expected anatomical landmarks.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.484375,0.31,100.0,100.0
+15369,latent_15369,1206,0.002412,0.0008568051,1.07072,Explicit mention of comparison to prior images with available details.,"The common element in the examples with high activation is that they entail a comparison between the current imaging findings and a prior one, typically highlighting if any significant changes or stabilities have occurred. The inclusion or exclusion of 'comparison' instructions in the prompt also tends to affect the activation level, with explicit instructions to compare often leading to higher activation when a prior image is available for actual comparison.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15370,latent_15370,1021,0.002042,0.00076367054,1.5265803,Changes in the positioning of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on comparisons of current imaging with prior imaging to assess interval changes, particularly in medical devices such as central lines, NG tubes, or other monitoring/support devices. High activation levels occur when there are descriptions of significant updates in the positioning or findings related to these medical devices compared to prior studies.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.6666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5106342932429888,0.545,0.5957446808510638,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15371,latent_15371,1276,0.002552,0.00088758965,1.0854684,Stable or normal cardiomediastinal or mediastinal-hilar contours.,"The samples with higher activations frequently describe radiographic findings that are consistent with normal or stable cardiomediastinal or mediastinal-hilar contours or silhouette. The findings are often stable when previous images are available for comparison, either explicitly stating no change or noting unchanged or normal appearances, often despite other findings like effusions or edema. This pattern likely indicates that the focus on these reports is on cases that do not show progression of certain serious conditions related to mediastinal structure.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5384615384615384,0.49,100.0,100.0
+15372,latent_15372,1423,0.002846,0.0009909727,0.9618385,Findings are unchanged or stable compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern here reflects a common radiological reporting technique where the current findings are described as 'unchanged' or 'stable' in comparison to prior exams, primarily focusing on the lack of significant changes in conditions that might otherwise require intervention.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15373,latent_15373,953,0.001906,0.0006963139,1.2283102,Inclusion of comparisons or interval changes to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently utilize explicit comparison with prior imaging to describe findings, emphasizing changes such as intervals, unchanged findings, and descriptions related to previous images or reports.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15374,latent_15374,1085,0.00217,0.0007828266,1.1966581,Focus on detailed analysis of tube or catheter positioning.,"Examples with high activations consistently involve the positioning, particularly of tubes (like Dobbhoff or endotracheal tubes) and devices (like PICC lines or catheters), in relation to the anatomy, often evaluated against prior studies. These reports emphasize the precise anatomical location or potential changes over time, especially related to medical equipment placement.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5523645114040594,0.5678391959798995,0.6031746031746031,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+15375,latent_15375,1151,0.002302,0.0008421446,1.1585586,Use of detailed comparison with prior imaging to detect interval changes.,"The pattern revolves around including comparisons with prior studies, particularly focusing on interval changes, unchanged findings, or the resolution of previously noted anomalies. This linguistic structure is indicative of radiological evaluations where findings are reported as stable, evolving, or resolved based on comparison.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4797919167667067,0.48,0.4807692307692308,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15376,latent_15376,1144,0.002288,0.0008459128,1.2106271,"Focus on interval changes or stability in comparison images, especially for new procedures or fluid changes.","These examples often describe changes or stabilities in radiological findings in relation to previous imaging studies, with an emphasis on interval change or lack thereof. Common features include descriptions of new conditions, such as effusions or catheter placements, and their comparison to previous exams, often highlighting new procedures or interventions (e.g., catheter or chest tube placements) and pleural or pulmonary changes.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5904850982077403,0.595,0.5785123966942148,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15377,latent_15377,1469,0.002938,0.0010171155,1.3955636,Detailed imaging findings in comparison to prior studies.,"Activated examples primarily include evaluations or descriptions of radiological findings compared to previous or prior imaging studies, often using exhaustive comparison details. This pattern involves providing a detailed comparative analysis, noting any changes or stabilities between images from different times.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.5669291338582677,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15378,latent_15378,2127,0.004254,0.0014616067,1.0483432,Descriptions of stability or improvement in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation values involve descriptions of interval changes and comparisons between current and prior imaging, often showing stability or resolution of specific findings. The highlighted pattern focuses on evaluating radiological stability or improvement over time through comparison with prior images.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5449886247156179,0.545,0.5445544554455446,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15379,latent_15379,1645,0.00329,0.0011378448,1.1939864,Describing interval changes or stability in comparative imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels reference changes observed in comparative imaging. Prominent phrases include ""compared to previous"", ""unchanged from prior"", ""stable"", or ""resolved"" indicating a focus on interval changes or stability in imaging findings.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5537206931702344,0.5577889447236181,0.5462184873949579,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+15380,latent_15380,1432,0.002864,0.0010061882,1.1696193,"Detailed analysis of interval changes, device placement, or significant pathologies.","This selection of examples shows high activation scores in cases where there is detailed analysis of significant changes, position of devices, or progression of pathologies, especially when post-operative comparisons or potential acute changes are noted, like changes in opacity suggesting edema, effusion, or pneumonia.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.5158730158730159,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15381,latent_15381,2202,0.004404,0.001524891,1.0598625,Descriptions of interval changes or stability between current and prior radiographic images.,"The examples provided emphasize a pattern wherein a detailed comparison between current and prior radiographs—often with noted interval changes or lack thereof—is detailed. This linguistic pattern is part of assessing changes over time, crucial in radiology for monitoring treatment efficacy or progression of a disease.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15382,latent_15382,1689,0.003378,0.0011766161,1.430295,Reports including lateral views and comparison with prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are related to the inclusion of lateral images and explicit reference to comparison with prior imaging, suggesting that lateral views and specific comparisons are important features in identifying the pattern.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4586466165413534,0.46,0.4636363636363636,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15383,latent_15383,1220,0.00244,0.0008659937,1.1395172,Explicit descriptive comparison to prior imaging studies focusing on interval changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing changes over time. In cases with no or low activation, the text describes the process of making these comparisons in more general terms rather than specific changes or descriptions of change.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.5803571428571429,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15384,latent_15384,952,0.001904,0.0007052672,1.1210144,Stable or unchanged findings when comparing current to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve radiology reports that utilize comparisons between the current and prior imaging studies. They emphasize stable findings, improvements, or lack of adverse changes, which are key points when evaluating progression or stability of a condition over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5276856597326902,0.53,0.5348837209302325,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15385,latent_15385,1448,0.002896,0.0010133462,1.2358108,Descriptive comparison to prior studies highlighting stability or progression.,"The examples exhibit a focus on comparison with prior imaging studies to highlight stability or changes in findings, indicating monitoring or evaluation of radio-graphic progression or treatment effects. Emphasis is on continuity of observation over time using past studies as reference, seen in language like 'same as prior', 'similar to previous', 'compared to' as key indicators of importance in the reports.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.5277777777777778,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15386,latent_15386,1468,0.002936,0.0010214592,0.9580059,Comparison with prior imaging highlighting interval changes.,"These examples consistently emphasize the interval changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies, specifically citing cardiac silhouette changes or shifts in pulmonary and pleural conditions from past examinations. This is typical in follow-up radiological assessments where descriptions focus on what has changed or remained stable.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5074257425742574,0.507537688442211,0.5048543689320388,0.5252525252525253,99.0,100.0
+15387,latent_15387,1128,0.002256,0.0007724284,1.0679197,Significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently include specific and meaningful comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often detailing changes or stability of various findings such as effusions, opacities, cardiac devices, or other anatomical structures, which are crucial for assessing disease progression or treatment response.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.625,0.3,100.0,100.0
+15388,latent_15388,1530,0.00306,0.0010479923,0.8366486,"Focus on comparative analysis with prior images, noting changes or stability.","Examples with high activation levels all emphasize comparing current imaging findings with prior images, often noting changes or stability. This reflects a focus on the progression or change in patient condition rather than just current findings. Examples tend to elaborate on similarities or differences between current and previous images, and this comparison is a key pattern that correlates with higher activations in these instances.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15389,latent_15389,626,0.001252,0.00048569104,1.7619393,Descriptions of notable changes in lung or mediastinal findings compared to prior exams.,"Highly activated examples involve descriptions of new or changed findings compared to prior imaging specific to changes in the lungs or mediastinum. This includes identifying consolations, opacifications, and other cardiopulmonary conditions.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5106763840941055,0.5168539325842697,0.45,0.4615384615384615,78.0,100.0
+15390,latent_15390,1613,0.003226,0.0010973823,0.93064654,Change or intervention involving chest tubes or catheters.,"The highly activated examples all emphasize changes or interventions involving chest tubes, catheters, or other support/monitoring devices and their positional differences across studies. This pattern of referencing interval changes in devices is typical in follow-up reports where device positioning or functionality is critical.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5437181663837012,0.57,0.6346153846153846,0.33,100.0,100.0
+15391,latent_15391,1057,0.002114,0.0007547295,1.051449,Description of tube placements and changes between current and prior images.,"The examples exhibiting high activation focus on describing changes or findings related to specific tube placements such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, and central venous catheters, noting their positions or adjustments in comparison with prior images.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5637175324675325,0.57,0.5921052631578947,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15392,latent_15392,981,0.001962,0.00073169224,1.0980512,Request for comparative description of findings despite limitations.,"Each example with a high activation score contains a request for the assistant to provide a description of findings in comparison to prior images, despite potential limitations of the current study. This pattern involves synthesizing information that incorporates previous exams to evaluate changes or stability, yet requiring input to focus on comparative observations.",0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5179856115107914,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15393,latent_15393,1161,0.002322,0.00081885164,1.0477034,Comparison with prior images noting changes in lung or cardiopulmonary findings.,"Examples with high activation frequently mention comparisons to prior images and note changes (or stability) in lung opacities, pleural effusions, and cardiomediastinal contours based on both frontal and lateral images. These reports emphasize interval changes or stability, showing a focus on evaluating progression or resolution of conditions over time.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15394,latent_15394,1119,0.002238,0.0007897775,0.99502265,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging.,"High activation examples frequently include specific 'comparison' information regarding prior imaging studies, often indicating that the findings should be contrasted with earlier examinations or reports. Instructions for comparative analysis are detailed, indicating a focus on evaluation changes or stability between images.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4924722336487042,0.5326633165829145,0.5225806451612903,0.81,100.0,99.0
+15395,latent_15395,1305,0.00261,0.0009162772,0.99267226,Procedural updates involving chest tubes or central lines with image comparison.,"The highly activated samples consistently mention specific procedural elements such as removal or placement of tubes and lines in the chest and the notable comparison of current and prior radiographs. This indicates a pattern of reports involving detailed procedural updates with emphasis on lung changes, typically post-surgical or involving intensive care.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.6,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4969574036511156,0.535,0.5777777777777777,0.26,100.0,100.0
+15396,latent_15396,1259,0.002518,0.0008777084,0.93872035,Detailed comparative analysis of current vs prior imaging findings.,The consistent pattern across activated examples involves providing a comparative analysis of the current and prior imaging findings. This is a common radiological reporting practice to identify changes or continuity of conditions across time.,0.5493311036789297,0.5510204081632653,0.5357142857142857,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15397,latent_15397,581,0.001162,0.00047217825,1.8946555,Narrative of stable findings or equipment positioning in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activations consistently highlight stability or no change of findings between current and prior radiographic studies, focusing on aspects like cardiomediastinal contours or medical devices' positions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4748313440581214,0.4772727272727273,0.4285714285714285,0.631578947368421,76.0,100.0
+15398,latent_15398,1780,0.00356,0.0012144867,0.902534,Descriptions emphasize changes or stability in serial imaging comparisons.,"Highly activated examples consistently demonstrate descriptions of both the current radiographic findings and their comparison to prior studies, emphasizing either interval changes or stability of medical devices, lung appearance, pleural effusions, atelectasis, and other radiographic features over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5570910973084886,0.5678391959798995,0.549618320610687,0.7272727272727273,99.0,100.0
+15399,latent_15399,1436,0.002872,0.0009999485,1.272853,Description of interval changes or sustained findings with prior comparison.,"Examples with higher activation involve changes, elaborations, or findings made in context with prior imaging studies and show notable pathologies like effusions, masses, or pneumothorax. Detailed descriptions of interval changes or sustained pathologies often increase activation.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5858562029828838,0.605,0.5734265734265734,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15400,latent_15400,1158,0.002316,0.00085994415,1.8431032,Comparison or changes relative to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently describe radiological findings in relation to a prior exam, indicating changes or stability. This involves a detailed comparison of current imaging with previous studies, emphasizing interval changes or constancy of findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5123456790123457,0.83,100.0,100.0
+15401,latent_15401,1590,0.00318,0.0011282538,1.3294643,Comparative analysis of imaging studies with notable change detection.,"Highly activated examples involve comparing current findings with prior imaging, with explicit attention to specific chest abnormalities, device positioning, or notable changes from previous radiological studies. The prompt consistently asks for descriptions relative to previous images, but differentiating examples also describe the outcomes of these comparisons when notable changes, pathologies, or abnormalities are present.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4936708860759494,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15402,latent_15402,1083,0.002166,0.00076582516,0.7984154,Evaluation of respiratory support device positions.,"Many of these examples discuss findings related to respiratory tubes or support devices, such as endotracheal (ET) tubes and nasogastric (NG) tubes, including their position and adequacy, often in comparison to previous images. These types of descriptions are characteristic of radiology reports evaluating device placement in medical imaging.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.27,100.0,100.0
+15403,latent_15403,1150,0.0023,0.0008548638,1.5816606,Focus on radiological findings compared to prior imaging.,"The descriptions focus on comparing current radiological findings with those from previous imaging. They often mention stability or change of specific conditions, use specific terms related to image comparison such as 'unchanged', 'as compared to', or provide historical context, which indicate a reliance on temporal comparisons to interpret findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4334572104264663,0.455,0.4676258992805755,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15404,latent_15404,1005,0.00201,0.0007352468,1.5481938,Focus on small lung changes and medical device positioning.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention findings of small opacities or residual changes in the lungs (e.g., streaky opacity, atelectasis) with associated medical devices or procedures, such as tubes or catheters and sometimes pleural effusions or consolidation. The pattern involves tracking small changes or devices in the images but no major acute or significant new findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5252525252525253,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15405,latent_15405,1681,0.003362,0.0011558195,1.0692949,"Comparison of current and prior imaging of invasive device positioning (e.g., endotracheal tubes).","Patterns with high activation levels show descriptions of the findings in current radiographic images compared to prior images, involving specifics about tubes or catheters like endotracheal positions. The high activation samples highlight detailed comparisons with specific intervals or changes noted in tube positioning or condition changes, typifying stability or repositioning scenarios involving invasive devices.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4840288305540041,0.515,0.5294117647058824,0.27,100.0,100.0
+15406,latent_15406,1024,0.002048,0.0007259701,1.0509572,Emphasis on changes or stability in radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with activation levels indicate a focus on describing changes or stability in radiological findings when comparing current images to prior images. This common pattern involves explicitly stating changes, stability, or lack of significant findings in radiological comparisons, often with explicit descriptions like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'no significant interval change'.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5089514066496164,0.52,0.5153846153846153,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15407,latent_15407,1348,0.002696,0.0009507897,1.1418706,"Detailed comparison of current images with prior images, noting stability or changes.","The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe findings in comparison to prior imaging, particularly noting specific changes or stability, such as no significant interval changes or alterations in anatomical or pathological markers since the previous study. This indicates the pattern relates to the detailed comparative analysis with past images.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5675675675675675,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15408,latent_15408,1042,0.002084,0.0007719612,1.2094464,Stable cardiomediastinal/hilar contours or heart size in comparison to prior imaging.,"The samples share a consistent reference to previous imaging for comparison, with notable details of stability or improvement in conditions such as cardiomediastinal and hilar contours, heart size, and absence of new focal consolidations. These aspects are typically assessed to verify any changes over time between the current and prior exams.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4744297719087635,0.5025125628140703,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,99.0
+15409,latent_15409,1601,0.003202,0.0011127617,0.9179991,Emphasis on multi-view imaging or detailed comparisons between images.,The examples with high activation levels consistently highlight details regarding multiple-view imaging and provide specific details or comparisons of findings based on two or more views or prior images. This implies that the pattern is most activated when detailed multi-view comparison or analysis is required.,0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4111152005888848,0.52,0.510752688172043,0.95,100.0,100.0
+15410,latent_15410,1778,0.003556,0.001245588,1.0341735,Comparative assessment of current and prior images with a focus on new or unchanged findings.,"The examples predominantly feature reports that provide a comparative analysis of the current imaging findings with previous studies, especially highlighting any changes that have occurred over time. The structure of these excerpted reports usually includes a specific indication for the comparison and an assistant-generated summary of findings consistent with professional radiological assessments.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15411,latent_15411,1080,0.00216,0.0008084606,1.2617311,Summarize imaging findings with emphasis on stability or changes.,"Samples with higher activation consistently involve summarizing radiological findings from recent imaging, focusing on changes and stability compared to prior exams. This involves indicating unchanged anatomical aspects or conditions, resolutions, or shifts in pathology signs related to pulmonary systems. Common mentions include evaluation against known baselines like normal heart silhouette or stable cardiomediastinal contours with or without specifying new or persisting abnormalities.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5302750410509032,0.5376884422110553,0.532258064516129,0.66,100.0,99.0
+15412,latent_15412,895,0.00179,0.0006259148,1.0500444,Comparisons to prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve comparisons to prior images, suggesting the model activates on the instruction or request to compare current imaging findings with those in previous images. This aligns with typical radiological practice where stability or change in imaging findings between studies is critical.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15413,latent_15413,1179,0.002358,0.0008391724,1.1635535,Comprehensive comparison between current and prior images with detailed findings.,"All highly activated examples include a detailed comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies. The reports frequently include specifics about positional changes or stability of medical devices, lung changes, or other significant findings in comparison to previous imagery. This is a common pattern in radiology when monitoring or determining the progress or change in patient condition over time.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15414,latent_15414,1425,0.00285,0.0010178529,1.3685012,Findings are described in comparison to prior images for tracking changes or stability.,"The high activation examples uniformly reference the comparison of current image findings to a prior image or study. This involves evaluating current changes in a patient's radiological status by leveraging comparative analysis, specifically for tracking stability or changes in condition. The assistant responses sometimes clarify stable findings or interval changes, aligning with the concept of longitudinal comparison in radiology.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15415,latent_15415,1267,0.002534,0.0009005376,1.3226545,Importance of radiological technique and positioning in interpretation.,"The examples showing higher activation include complex and nuanced assessments that relate findings to technique, positioning, or patient-specific variables that might affect radiological interpretation. Terms like 'limited evaluation', 'may be due to technique', 'projection', and 'patient positioning' are prominent in these samples.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5065316869903111,0.5125628140703518,0.512396694214876,0.62,100.0,99.0
+15416,latent_15416,935,0.00187,0.00064388494,0.86504316,Focus on removal or movement of devices between imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels mention findings or medical devices which have been removed or have moved compared to prior imaging. This typically indicates a focus on tracking changes in medical device positioning or anatomical changes post-procedure, often a primary goal in interventional follow-ups or post-operative evaluations.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5146154675870995,0.55,0.6086956521739131,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15417,latent_15417,1632,0.003264,0.0011547428,1.0526886,Descriptions of radiological findings in relation to prior reports or detected changes between exams.,"The examples with higher activation often explicitly involve evaluation in relation to a prior report, where changes between current and previous imaging (progressions or improvements) are highlighted. Language describing interval changes or stable conditions compared to previous examinations is a key feature.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4434479989291928,0.4696969696969697,0.4755244755244755,0.6938775510204082,98.0,100.0
+15418,latent_15418,1392,0.002784,0.0009681009,1.1103612,Comparison to previous images.,These examples specify the task is to compare findings with prior images. This pattern often appears in radiology reports where the purpose is to track changes over time or validate consistency against previous studies.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15419,latent_15419,565,0.00113,0.0004717172,1.2589473,Changes in respiratory support or devices between radiographs.,"Reports with high activation frequently include references to extubation or changes in support devices (e.g., catheters or tubes) related to comparison with prior imaging. The change in medical devices or extubation between study intervals is emphasized in these examples, usually indicating a change in patient status or interventions reflected in the imaging.",0.696969696969697,0.7,0.75,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5048152295632699,0.593939393939394,0.4666666666666667,0.2153846153846154,65.0,100.0
+15420,latent_15420,1815,0.00363,0.0012361754,0.9350078,"Emphasis on comparison findings, highlighting stability or change.","The highly activated examples show a pattern where changes in the condition, particularly clear interval change or stability of specific abnormalities such as effusions, pneumothorax, or atelectasis, are emphasized in relation to prior images. These examples contain more detailed descriptions of changes between current and prior findings, especially emphasizing stability, minimal change, or worsening of conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.6128221244500314,0.615,0.6,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15421,latent_15421,1320,0.00264,0.00090378977,0.9751998,"Description of findings compared to prior imaging studies, emphasizing changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels prominently involve a process of providing a comparison of current radiological images with prior images, specifically relating to changes or stability in identified abnormalities such as pulmonary processes, presence or changes in effusions, tube placements, and changes in lung and heart pathology. The pattern is characterized by this comparative evaluation against prior examinations.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15422,latent_15422,901,0.001802,0.0006838496,1.2253234,Position and changes of medical devices in chest studies.,"The highly activated examples clearly emphasize aspects related to medical devices in the chest, such as enteric tubes, endotracheal tubes, catheters, and other tubing, in conjunction with changes over time or in device positions. Reports often stress these devices' positions and potential implications for patient condition, signaling that this pattern strongly activates the model.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15423,latent_15423,897,0.001794,0.000712875,1.502883,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation (4.0 and above) consistently mention ""comparison"" with a prior imaging study, often providing specific changes or continuity in the findings. This indicates that the pattern the model is recognizing heavily relies on explicit comparisons to determine any change or stability in the patient’s condition based on imaging results.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4458128078817733,0.46,0.4696969696969697,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15424,latent_15424,1594,0.003188,0.0011204785,1.3139852,"Evaluation of tube, catheter, or medical device placement compared to prior imaging.","Examples with higher activation tend to describe changes, positioning, or proper placement of tubes or catheters in relation to prior reports. This includes descriptions of endotracheal tubes, NG tubes, and catheters, indicating a focus on evaluating medical device positioning and related changes over time.",0.7373737373737375,0.74,0.8,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5570910973084886,0.5678391959798995,0.5942028985507246,0.4141414141414141,99.0,100.0
+15425,latent_15425,1105,0.00221,0.000786383,0.9353279,Focus on comparative changes and stability in images.,"This set of examples focuses on descriptive analysis and comparisons between current imaging and prior studies, which includes the observation of changes, stability, or status quo in conditions. What stands out is the detailed comparison of changes over time or stability rather than merely the presence or absence of disease.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4854336131396346,0.505,0.5035971223021583,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15426,latent_15426,1404,0.002808,0.0009710386,0.80821866,Comparative imaging assessment for interval changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently describe findings relative to previous imaging, highlighting any interval changes or stability, using terms like 'no change', 'compared to prior', or specific dates, focusing on changes such as line placement or lesion stability, often in contexts of post-operative or monitoring scenarios.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15427,latent_15427,1477,0.002954,0.0010188359,0.86510473,Comparisons with previous imaging studies focusing on changes or stability in findings.,"In the examples with higher activation levels, observations are frequently compared or contrasted with an existing reference frame, notably a previous image or report. This involves a direct, detailed evaluation of findings relative to past imaging, focusing on changes or stability in pathology like consolidation, effusions, and cardiomediastinal contours. Such descriptions underscore the use of comparison, as evidenced by repeated mentions of ""compared to prior"" or similar phrasing, marking this as the key differentiator and pattern.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15428,latent_15428,1377,0.002754,0.0009498212,0.88097316,Comparative imaging analysis highlighting changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels discuss the comparison between current and prior radiographic images, emphasizing changes in findings or stable conditions over time. This suggests that the identification and detailed description of changes or stability between sequential imaging studies is central to the pattern, particularly when interventions like tube placements or medical procedures have occurred.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15429,latent_15429,1611,0.003222,0.001114977,0.9615172,High activation correlates with descriptive comparisons to both prior and current images.,"The consistent feature across highly activated samples is the presence of comparisons to both prior images and current images, indicating that a critical comparison technique involves analysis of current observations against previous studies. The higher activation levels correlate with clear mentions of changes or stability relative to past imaging findings.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4850777637662883,0.51,0.5069444444444444,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15430,latent_15430,1587,0.003174,0.0011077916,1.0373353,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging reports, noting interval changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels focus on comparing imaging findings with prior studies, highlighting any changes or stability in findings. Comparison is explicitly mentioned or performed by the assistant, showing a clear pattern of assessment over time to ensure thorough evaluation.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5434782608695652,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15431,latent_15431,1104,0.002208,0.000806895,1.0723304,Explicit temporal comparison in radiology findings.,"The examples with higher activation consistently compare current imaging findings explicitly with previous studies, especially when providing a detailed analysis of changes over time. The examples mention explicit findings in terms of resolution or persistence of radiological signs using specific comparison phrases such as 'in comparison to', 'compared to prior', indicating an emphasis on temporal comparison similar to the earlier set with comparisons.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4938728323699422,0.5025125628140703,0.504,0.63,100.0,99.0
+15432,latent_15432,940,0.00188,0.0007002311,1.363405,"Absence of pneumonia, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax.","The most representative examples contain descriptions of radiology findings where potential pathologies are ruled out due to absence of specific signs such as consolidation, pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or abnormal cardiomediastinal contours. They clearly state that significant anomalies typically indicative of pneumonia or edema and various pleural conditions are not present.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4090909090909091,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15433,latent_15433,1388,0.002776,0.0009670898,1.3006095,Description of findings compared to previous imaging studies.,"The examples consistently refer to changes or comparisons in imaging findings relative to earlier studies. Common phrases include 'compared to previous', 'since prior', 'unchanged', and explicit mentions of comparison with previous exams. This pattern shows the interest in tracking stability or changes in radiological findings over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15434,latent_15434,1119,0.002238,0.00077727996,0.8512741,"Comparison of findings with prior imaging, focusing on changes in medical devices or intervention.","Many examples with high activation levels describe findings in relation to prior changes in medical devices or interventions observed between the current and previous images. They describe changes such as placement or removal of tubes, or stability and re-demonstration of medical devices.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.534950145409223,0.5477386934673367,0.5671641791044776,0.3838383838383838,99.0,100.0
+15435,latent_15435,1451,0.002902,0.0010300156,1.4161527,Explicit comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Higher activations in these examples are characterized by direct side-by-side assessment of current image findings with prior imaging, often using explicit comparison to prior reports or images, indicating a focus on tracking changes or stability over time. Many examples include detailed comparisons to prior exams, specific documentation of stability or changes, and references to previous findings.",0.3842364532019704,0.4,0.4242424242424242,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.498302119777732,0.507537688442211,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,99.0
+15436,latent_15436,1532,0.003064,0.001045347,1.0705063,Detailed descriptions of findings compared to prior images or device placements.,"Radiology reports with activations highlight changes in findings relative to prior imaging or detail placement of tubes or catheters with interval changes mentioned like 'unchanged', 'new', or 'compared to the prior'. They emphasize device placements, inflammation resolutions, or emergence of new opacities, reflecting key comparative details.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15437,latent_15437,1413,0.002826,0.0010121954,1.1339309,Comparison of current images with previous for interval change.,"Examples tend to have higher activation levels when the findings reported are in comparison to previous images or involve a change from prior states, particularly when multiple sets of images (frontal and lateral) are scrutinized together, or when a specific clinical history or change is linked to detailed comparison analysis in the assistant's report.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5146011117200344,0.535,0.524822695035461,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15438,latent_15438,993,0.001986,0.000718698,1.5007571,Comparative descriptions with prior imaging studies.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently include prior imaging studies for comparative analysis. This pattern shows a focus on assessments that rely on noting any changes from earlier imaging.,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4900662251655629,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15439,latent_15439,1490,0.00298,0.0010193622,1.0817779,"Explicit request for comparison with prior imaging studies, even if prior report is not available.","The examples with high activation levels consistently include explicit directives to provide a comparison with a prior imaging study, even if the prior report is labeled 'N/A'. These comparisons highlight a recurring need for evaluating changes relative to earlier imaging results, demonstrating this linguistic pattern.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15440,latent_15440,1139,0.002278,0.0008043004,1.0122148,Detection of significant interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"The examples that exhibit a pattern have prior radiology findings that include significant interval changes or new findings compared to previous studies, as highlighted in the reports. This includes new pathologies like pneumothorax, new effusions, or change in the size of lesions/nodules. These changes are particularly emphasized and marked for further investigation or management.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5512035903712771,0.56,0.5833333333333334,0.42,100.0,100.0
+15441,latent_15441,1475,0.00295,0.0010228644,0.92590654,Detailed comparison to previous imaging findings.,"These examples highlight the analysis and description of new or stable findings in relation to previous imaging studies, often including explicit comparisons with past examinations and using specific illustrative terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'now', or 'compared to'. Activation is higher when explicit change or stability over time is a focal point of the report.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4680851063829787,0.47,0.4732142857142857,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15442,latent_15442,1258,0.002516,0.0008927683,1.0604644,Detailed impression based on the comparison of images despite technical differences or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels describe findings in imaging while comparing them to previous studies even if the comparison is hindered by differences in technique, while others provide detailed impressions based on current indicator findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15443,latent_15443,1315,0.00263,0.00093332306,1.0327947,Description includes direct comparison and findings relative to prior imaging.,"These examples show findings described in the context of a comparison to prior imaging studies, include specific findings or interval changes, and may mention recommendations based on these comparisons. The use of specific contrast with previous studies is a common pattern in radiology reports.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5836652874508493,0.595,0.5714285714285714,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15444,latent_15444,1436,0.002872,0.0010176417,1.222983,Reference to interval changes or comparison with prior images.,"The key pattern in activated examples is the description of interval changes or comparisons with prior images. These examples refer to unchanged, improved, or worsened findings as compared to previous exams, focusing on the temporal stability or changes in conditions like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, edema, or pulmonary opacities.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4983323685878883,0.545,0.5279503105590062,0.85,100.0,100.0
+15445,latent_15445,1046,0.002092,0.0008320478,2.2239861,Reports emphasize that lung fields are clear regardless of other findings.,"Highly representative examples consistently mention clear lung fields with phrases like 'lungs are clear', 'lungs appear clear', and 'lungs remain clear'. This pattern is observed regardless of other findings or techniques, highlighting an emphasis on the clear status of lungs.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5901639344262295,0.61,0.6964285714285714,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15446,latent_15446,1449,0.002898,0.0010173628,1.1414882,Focus on device placement or post-surgical changes.,"Examples with high activation levels discuss specific indications or findings related to lines, tubes, or post-operative statuses, suggesting detailed comparison and assessment of these devices or post-surgery changes. This pattern explains a focus on device placement or surgical outcomes in these reports.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5463252343986289,0.55,0.5609756097560976,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15447,latent_15447,1361,0.002722,0.00095044135,0.9786535,Focus on unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the comparison between current and prior imaging, particularly focusing on unchanged or stable findings. This suggests that detecting stability or lack of significant change over time is what activates the pattern strongly.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.54995499549955,0.55,0.5510204081632653,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15448,latent_15448,1188,0.002376,0.000814951,0.7797171,"Description includes detailed comparison with prior images, noting changes or stability.","The high activation levels are observed in examples where current and prior images are compared, specifically noting changes over time and describing interval changes or stability in conditions. Most examples involve a detailed examination of changes in imaging findings between current scans and previous records, demonstrating an explicit comparison process.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5547217010631644,0.555,0.5578947368421052,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15449,latent_15449,1422,0.002844,0.0010296273,1.5982103,Comparison of device positioning between current and prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples focus on detailed comparisons between the current radiological imaging and prior imaging, emphasizing positioning changes or stability of support and monitoring devices (e.g., ET tubes, NG tubes, central lines). This pattern is specifically about the evaluation and documentation of medical device positioning in repeated radiological exams.",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5805626598465473,0.59,0.6285714285714286,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15450,latent_15450,1607,0.003214,0.0011023215,0.88026965,Emphasis on interval change or stability in pulmonary or mediastinal findings.,"Examples with high activation consistently refer to diagnostic findings of change or stability in conditions such as effusion, opacity, consolidation, atelectasis, or any other pulmonary or mediastinal changes based on the comparison of current and previous images. This suggests a focus on evaluating interval changes in pathology as being key to the pattern, reflecting the clinical importance of monitoring these issues over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6072368421052632,0.6080402010050251,0.5963302752293578,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+15451,latent_15451,1121,0.002242,0.00075301324,0.71786743,Focus on device positioning or change in sequential imaging.,"Examples with higher activations emphasize detailed observations on the positioning, movement, or change of medical devices or structures (e.g., nasogastric tubes, chest drains) across different imaging instances, often comparing their current and previous positions. These reports focus on close monitoring of device placement over time and its potential complications.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5744787364521539,0.575,0.5806451612903226,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15452,latent_15452,642,0.001284,0.00045544555,1.2051535,Highlight changes detected through comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize ""comparison with prior imaging"" in radiology reporting, indicating reliable detection of changes in radiological features over time. This identification relates to the pattern's significance.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4735767326732673,0.4806629834254143,0.4177215189873418,0.4074074074074074,81.0,100.0
+15453,latent_15453,1142,0.002284,0.0007807458,1.1307398,"Description of findings in comparison to prior imaging, focusing on interval changes.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention providing comparisons to prior imaging in order to describe changes or stability in findings. Reports are focused on changes between current and previous images, indicating an emphasis on interval changes.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5056179775280899,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15454,latent_15454,1141,0.002282,0.0008021612,1.3803465,Changes or placements involving medical devices in imaging comparison reports.,"The examples with higher activation focus on radiological observations that involve the positioning and placement of tubes, catheters, or other medical devices within the body, often noting changes or stability from previous studies.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.7142857142857143,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5591700235616022,0.565,0.5844155844155844,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15455,latent_15455,1501,0.003002,0.0010642238,1.2706139,Low lung volumes compared to previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels show analysis of current frontal and lateral images compared with prior frontals, often focusing on changes or stability in lung volumes, cardiac silhouette, and identification of secondary conditions or devices, while low activation includes more normal findings or lack of comparison.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5714285714285714,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4173805197427244,0.495,0.4814814814814814,0.13,100.0,100.0
+15456,latent_15456,1242,0.002484,0.000897497,1.3282369,Evaluation of medical device placement in imaging.,"These examples involve situations where radiological examinations reference additional medical devices such as central lines, catheters, or tubes and evaluate their placements. This focuses on tracking the correct positioning of such devices, often highlighting abnormal placements or ensuring appropriate adjustments, though it is less about general medical findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.464524765729585,0.48,0.4696969696969697,0.31,100.0,100.0
+15457,latent_15457,1809,0.003618,0.0012634876,0.9754487,Comparison of current images to prior ones for changes or stability.,"The highly activated examples consistently reference comparisons between current and prior images, specifically indicating changes or stability in findings over time.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5240514452258082,0.555,0.5364238410596026,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15458,latent_15458,1400,0.0028,0.0009558417,0.90800405,Comparison of current findings to prior studies without significant new acute abnormalities.,"Examples show findings compared with prior radiographs or other studies, with emphasis on interval changes, consistent language, and comparison details. They mention normal findings or minor variations when comparing the current images to prior studies of the same patient and frequently highlight PICC line or tube positions, cardiac/mediastinal contours, and effusions or pneumothorax.",0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4795315784205785,0.48,0.4787234042553192,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15459,latent_15459,1437,0.002874,0.0009935573,1.191701,Comparison highlighting interval change or stability in findings.,"Examples with an activation level indicate findings that involve an evolving change in a specific aspect of the patient’s condition when comparing current images to prior images. These examples consistently emphasize not specific pathologies, but general changes or stabilities observed over time, specifically changes or stabilities which are notable even amidst varied patient histories and apparent unrelated imaging features.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15460,latent_15460,973,0.001946,0.00071663444,1.0604615,Reports emphasizing comparison with prior imaging and noting changes or stability.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently use a specific linguistic format to describe radiological findings in relation to previous examinations. The focus is on describing changes or stability of findings compared to previous studies, often employing terms such as 'unchanged', 'interval', and dates of prior exams.",0.3268053855569155,0.34,0.375,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5536497906166152,0.555,0.5495495495495496,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15461,latent_15461,1237,0.002474,0.0008512698,0.8965621,Comparative analysis with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiology reports where the findings are systematically compared against prior imaging. The pattern includes descriptions of interval changes or stability in specific pathologies (e.g., pleural effusion reaccumulation, tube insertion, atelectasis), indicating significant value is placed on sequential observation to assess progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15462,latent_15462,1259,0.002518,0.0008752928,1.1440364,Reports involve both current and prior image analysis with interval or unchanged findings.,"These examples showcase an evaluation process that assesses findings using both current and prior images, highlighting stable, unchanged, or interval changes. The presence of multiple views (frontal and lateral) or the ability to compare with previous data plays a role in the high activation levels. The process accommodates the assessment of changes or consistency over time, crucial in tracking disease progression.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15463,latent_15463,1582,0.003164,0.0011557275,1.2292695,Detailed comparison with prior radiological findings.,"The pattern discerned through the given data is the focus on providing a detailed comparison of current chest radiograph findings against a documented prior report. These detailed comparisons often mention changes or stability in specific medical conditions, and devices noted in radiographs, providing an analysis of medical stability or changes over time, especially concerning devices and specific medical conditions or symptoms.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5444139194139195,0.5477386934673367,0.5384615384615384,0.6363636363636364,99.0,100.0
+15464,latent_15464,1579,0.003158,0.0010908198,1.0550003,Emphasis on comparison with prior images in explaining current findings.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize findings that are compared with prior images, noting changes (or lack thereof) in those images with explicit comparative language. This specific pattern is common in radiology reviews where stability, improvement, or progression of a condition is marked against previous evaluations.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4914943251815156,0.515,0.5104895104895105,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15465,latent_15465,1242,0.002484,0.0008662735,0.84437835,Detailed interval changes or reassessment in findings compared to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels are those that describe specific changes or detailed analysis of the radiographic findings in comparison to prior examinations. This suggests that the pattern is about noting interval changes or stability in findings over time, and how devices or pathological features like tubes, opacities, or effusions are reassessed over consecutive images.",0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5217391304347826,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15466,latent_15466,1953,0.003906,0.0013208535,0.8306307,Comparison in imaging highlighting interval changes.,"All highly activated examples include a comparison between current and prior imaging that acknowledges interval changes, often focusing on stability, worsening or improvement of specific findings.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.5945945945945946,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5161824246899748,0.525,0.5196850393700787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15467,latent_15467,1367,0.002734,0.0009644056,1.1609206,Focus on evaluating interval changes or progression of findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels all contain phrases that indicate ""evaluation for interval changes,"" which highlight a focus on assessing changes or progression when comparing current radiology findings with a prior study. These reports often stress the differences or developments noticed between two points in time.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5271122320302648,0.55,0.5347222222222222,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15468,latent_15468,1093,0.002186,0.00075338053,0.8269596,Emphasis on changes observed compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation levels involve detailing radiological changes through comparison with prior images. Identifying changes such as development of new findings or resolution of previous conditions is emphasized, using phrases like 'since prior', 'compared to', 'have increased/decreased'.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5794380684553216,0.585,0.5691056910569106,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15469,latent_15469,1335,0.00267,0.0009623658,1.2666111,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples with high activation all mention a comparison to previous imaging and specifically describe findings that have changed or remained stable over time. This pattern reflects an emphasis on using past reports to discern changes, improvements, or stability in patient condition.",0.6899545266639107,0.7,0.6470588235294118,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15470,latent_15470,1736,0.003472,0.001206017,1.0584974,Presence or changes in medical devices or interventions.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve procedures or changes related to medical devices, such as the placement of tubes, catheters, or drainage devices, which are critical in assessing radiographic images. They reflect precise information and interval changes from a prior study focusing on such interventions.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6049901247531189,0.605,0.6039603960396039,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15471,latent_15471,1570,0.00314,0.0011069778,0.9814783,References to prior imaging for comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparison to prior imaging, utilizing phrases or annotations indicating evaluation of changes or stability over time, such as 'compared to prior', 'previous study', or explicit dates of earlier examinations. This pattern is identifiable by its specific emphasis on assessing progress or comparisons.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4395604395604395,0.49,0.49375,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15472,latent_15472,914,0.001828,0.0006791629,1.5694345,References to cardiomegaly or pulmonary vascular congestion.,"These examples often reference changes, or continued states, relating to cardiomegaly (enlarged heart), central pulmonary vascular congestion, peribronchial cuffing, or cardiac silhouette size in the impression or findings sections. This pattern suggests that changes relating to heart conditions and pulmonary vascular congestion are key considerations.",0.6179966044142615,0.64,0.7692307692307693,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4651162790697674,0.2,100.0,100.0
+15473,latent_15473,1958,0.003916,0.0013627897,1.284548,Comparison with prior imaging to assess radiological findings over time.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involve descriptions and comparisons of the current radiological image against previous images, focusing on changes or stability in lung conditions or other observations such as interstitial abnormalities, lung opacities, hypodense lesions, or device positioning. The model is activated by patterns indicating continuity or change in pathologies over time via prior comparisons.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4966887417218543,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15474,latent_15474,1470,0.00294,0.0010202746,1.1748021,Detailed comparative analysis with prior images.,"These higher activation examples consistently entail providing findings or interpretations based on current imaging while often directly referencing prior images for thorough comparison. Additionally, they frequently incorporate a specified examination history or detailed technique, with identified changes over time.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5631067961165048,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15475,latent_15475,1018,0.002036,0.00075132697,2.3996966,Assigned task of comparing current images to prior report regardless of change.,"These examples contain references to a prior report, prompting a description in comparison to previous imaging regardless of substantial changes or similarity in findings to the previous assessments.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4276736617663562,0.49,0.4939759036144578,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15476,latent_15476,1432,0.002864,0.0009908094,1.0758071,Reports emphasizing interval changes or assessment of progression.,"Examples with higher activation levels often mention a qualitative assessment of interval changes, such as improvement, worsening, or stability, which prompts a deeper analysis and confirmation of findings over time. These reports include specific references to ongoing conditions or treatments, influencing activation.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6200722394220846,0.628140703517588,0.6015625,0.77,100.0,99.0
+15477,latent_15477,1257,0.002514,0.00089743384,1.5390198,Device placement and comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with significant activation mention either the observation of support devices, their motion, or changes in implanted devices like tubes and catheters, often with specific comparisons to prior images. These device-centered observations are crucial in tracking procedural outcomes or patient status, thus correlating closely with the model's perceptual task associated with these activation levels.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5474530018192845,0.5477386934673367,0.5428571428571428,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+15478,latent_15478,1476,0.002952,0.0010372407,0.99249387,Comparisons between current and prior images in radiology reports.,"These examples emphasize the use of image comparisons, specifically between new and prior images, which is a core aspect of radiology assessments to track changes, stability, or progression of observed conditions. The well-represented examples focus on noting changes or the lack thereof, a signature approach in radiology to compare recent findings to established baselines.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4315744315744316,0.47,0.4802631578947368,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15479,latent_15479,1525,0.00305,0.0010404292,0.9184525,Comparison with prior imaging for interval changes in pathology.,"In these examples, there are multiple references to comparing current imaging results to prior imaging studies focusing on identifying any interval changes. The emphasis is on the status quo, progression, or improvement of clinical findings over time, often related to conditions like pleural effusions, atelectasis, and pneumothorax.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15480,latent_15480,1312,0.002624,0.00093772163,1.192185,Comparative descriptions of stability or change in serial radiological studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings such as changes to medical devices, interval changes or stability in the appearance of notable prior findings, or describe stable images in context to pathology, emphasizing the relationship between current and prior observations. Unchanged findings often reflect stability of a condition or ongoing treatment which is regularly monitored in medical imaging.",0.609375,0.64,0.5897435897435898,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5498721227621484,0.56,0.5461538461538461,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15481,latent_15481,1376,0.002752,0.00095278403,0.8771709,Focus on changes in tube placements or device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern highlights the focus on changes related to tube placements or medical devices within the thoracic cavity, often compared explicitly to previous studies for interval changes or positioning adjustments. These findings are typically discussed in radiology reports during follow-up exams after procedures.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.58,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15482,latent_15482,996,0.001992,0.0007299089,1.1761549,Cardiac enlargement with tortuous aorta.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe the heart as either enlarged or at the upper limits of normal size, along with tortuosity of the aorta. This suggests a pattern where cardiac enlargement is associated with concurrent aortic tortuosity, as both features are mentioned together in these specific cases.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.75,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4324942791762013,0.535,0.7333333333333333,0.11,100.0,100.0
+15483,latent_15483,1146,0.002292,0.00081975426,1.6169571,Focus on cardiac or thorax surgical/interventional findings.,"The examples that show activation levels of 3.0 or higher tend to have more detailed descriptions focusing on complex cardiac findings like pacemaker or sternotomy wire placements. Additionally, they include more anatomical and surgical descriptions such as 'dual lead', 'sternotomy', or 'mediastinal clips', which are absent or not recurrent in examples with lower activation levels, signifying that the pattern involves complex cardiothoracic surgical or interventional findings.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4851994851994852,0.52,0.5416666666666666,0.26,100.0,100.0
+15484,latent_15484,1583,0.003166,0.0010938736,1.0235621,Assessments emphasize stability or changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples describe radiological findings in detailed comparison with prior imaging studies, emphasizing stability or changes in the clinical scenario. Specific conditions such as pneumonia, edema, or surgical changes are reassessed alongside comparison with past images.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15485,latent_15485,1644,0.003288,0.0011228925,0.8550289,Comparison across multiple imaging studies to assess changes.,"Many of the highly activated examples contain specific findings and further analysis based on prior imaging or comparative elements between images. These reports note changes, similar observations, or stable findings subjected to more detailed contextual interpretation from previous studies.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.5416666666666666,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15486,latent_15486,989,0.001978,0.00071380776,1.5366166,Comparison with prior imaging studies and presence of prior reports.,The common element among examples with non-zero activation is the presence of prior reports and comparison with previous studies. This suggests that the model attends to the presence of historical data and the context provided by comparison over time to identify patterns or changes.,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15487,latent_15487,1602,0.003204,0.0011084531,1.000039,Interval changes or stability assessment via comparison to prior images.,"The active examples consistently involve instructions to describe radiological findings in comparison to prior images. These typically focus on assessing interval changes or stability of certain conditions, making use of specific terminology describing new, stable, or changed findings related to pathologies and device placements.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15488,latent_15488,1270,0.00254,0.0009296771,1.559454,Adherence to the structure and language of radiological comparison reports.,"Higher activation levels consistently occur in examples where the text involves specific language or structures used for writing radiological comparisons, such as 'findings', 'comparison', 'indication', and comparing current to prior images using specific medical and technical details. Examples where this language isn't effectively used typically have lower activation levels.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15489,latent_15489,1699,0.003398,0.0011674692,0.97458994,Emphasis on comparing the current image to a prior image for interval changes.,"Prompts with a comparison to a prior imaging study, particularly those that note interval changes or stability, receive higher activation. The context involves not only identifying current findings but emphasizing the comparison to prior images, indicating a focus on the monitoring of changes over time.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15490,latent_15490,1961,0.003922,0.0013325728,0.9599366,Evaluation for interval changes compared to prior radiographs.,"The examples consistently compare current findings with prior imaging to assess stability or changes in specific medical conditions, such as pneumothorax, pneumonia, or device positioning. This pattern is indicated by explicit comparison of images in relation to prior studies and evaluation of interval changes, with priority given to cases documenting changes.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15491,latent_15491,1188,0.002376,0.0008603418,1.2251027,Comparative evaluation with prior chest images for changes or stability.,"The examples consistently involve evaluations of chest imaging that describe new or existing findings in direct comparison with previous images, using terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', 'increased', or by mentioning images for contextual changes. The language specifically emphasizes detecting changes over time.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15492,latent_15492,1211,0.002422,0.0008244877,0.8701536,Comparison of current and prior images to evaluate findings.,"These examples consistently involve the use of both current and prior images to assess for changes, especially comparing different angles or previous data cases to aid diagnostic evaluation and pattern recognition. The emphasis is on reviewing images utilizing given indications and techniques whilst mentioning comparison parameters.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15493,latent_15493,1339,0.002678,0.000948252,1.040926,Current imaging comparison against prior studies under specific acute indications.,"Highly activated examples tend to include evaluations of current imaging in comparison to past imaging under specific conditions, often in the presence of some acute indication like pain or fever. They usually request specific comparisons, highlighting the need for checking previous images against current ones for immediate changes.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5223880597014925,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15494,latent_15494,1286,0.002572,0.0009367784,1.5501091,Explicit comparisons with prior imaging focusing on specific changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe detailed findings by comparing current imaging studies (frontal and lateral or just frontal) with specific prior imaging, using explicit references to notable changes or stability over time. These reports often highlight differences, intervals or stability in lung, cardiac, or pleural findings.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4895833333333333,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15495,latent_15495,1267,0.002534,0.00089223846,1.115329,Comparison to previous imaging with significant clinical context.,"Examples with higher activation prominently involve comparative evaluations between current and prior imaging, accompanied by the context of specific indications or histories that necessitate monitoring for changes, particularly significant interval changes or acute findings.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5772962236765042,0.585,0.5669291338582677,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15496,latent_15496,1503,0.003006,0.001036057,0.9100906,Complex findings with change or stability assessment over time compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly involve either imaging that has undergone notable changes over time, finding intervals, or containing complex findings such as pulmonary nodules, pleural conditions, cardiac changes, or post-surgical outcomes. Key patterns include complex descriptive terminology used for changes or stability over time, indicating relevance.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15497,latent_15497,1494,0.002988,0.0010441068,0.91328657,Active comparison with prior imaging studies noted.,"The data demonstrates that high activation levels are associated with descriptions of findings in radiology that compare the current study with prior imaging and specifically note changes or stability of findings. These examples prominently include technical details and explicit instructions for comparing current images to prior ones, which is central to the task of continuous monitoring in medical imaging.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15498,latent_15498,1432,0.002864,0.00097645837,0.7801107,Comparison with prior images highlighting interval changes or findings.,"Activation levels increase when there is a reference to both current and prior frontal or lateral images, and an active description is expected for comparisons, including interval changes. There is a focus on detailed changes and reporting them as compared to prior exams where specific changes are noted.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5279146141215106,0.54,0.5303030303030303,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15499,latent_15499,1325,0.00265,0.00092390424,1.066653,Detailed directional comparisons or changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting specific changes or intervals. They focus on the use of directional changes ('improvement', 'increase', 'removal') compared to prior imaging and often provide specific measurements or detailed descriptions of findings relative to past images.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15500,latent_15500,1139,0.002278,0.00082176225,1.5223459,Emphasis on stability and unchanged status of medical devices.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the stability or description of medical devices or interventions and their unchanged state. These examples emphasize unchanged or minimally changed statuses in complex clinical contexts, often requiring careful monitoring post-procedure, which contrasts with examples describing more fluid clinical states or new pathologies.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15501,latent_15501,1474,0.002948,0.001053367,1.0586911,Descriptors of medical device placement with comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation involve references to specific medical interventions or devices, such as lines, tubes, or surgical procedures, in combination with radiological comparisons to prior imaging. These often detail specific paths or placements of these interventions and evaluate consistency over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15502,latent_15502,1625,0.00325,0.0011090871,0.899314,Comparisons highlighting procedural interventions or changes in findings after intervention.,"The higher activation levels are associated with comparisons to prior images showing changes or stability following an intervention like intubation, line placement, or other procedural changes. This delineates significant observation related to procedural interventions or their consequences.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15503,latent_15503,726,0.001452,0.00054498145,1.2687535,Emphasis on lack of prior imaging for comparison.,"These examples generally contain explicit instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior studies. However, highly activated samples tend to emphasize or clarify the absence of prior comparisons, which creates a notable contrast in the provided information.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4930012610340479,0.5401069518716578,0.5116279069767442,0.2528735632183908,87.0,100.0
+15504,latent_15504,1087,0.002174,0.00076494913,1.1667747,Comparison reveals interval changes indicating progression or worsening.,"The pattern observed across examples with high activation involves changes in findings based on comparisons with previous images or reports, particularly when new findings indicate worsening of a condition or are deemed clinically significant after evaluation of imaging.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4689832089552239,0.5353535353535354,0.6206896551724138,0.1818181818181818,99.0,99.0
+15505,latent_15505,1115,0.00223,0.0008015058,1.2504052,Focus on comparison of findings with prior imaging.,"The pattern seems to center around reports that focus on changes in findings between current and prior imaging, especially when the changes are compared using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'unchanged from previous', or 'interval change'. This often involves identifying stability, progression, or improvement of conditions shown in the images.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5060949978982766,0.53,0.5208333333333334,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15506,latent_15506,1890,0.00378,0.0012927473,0.87831396,"Description of findings in comparison to prior images, indicating interval changes.","Examples with high activation levels involve a clear description of findings in ""comparison to the prior frontal image."" This pattern indicates a focus on interval changes between current and prior imaging, emphasizing radiological progression or stability in conditions. These reports highlight changes using descriptors such as ""stable"", ""improved"", or ""unchanged"" to indicate findings relative to past studies.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4910714285714285,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15507,latent_15507,907,0.001814,0.0006314362,0.9712964,Emphasis on detailed interval change comparison with prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently emphasize the comparison between current radiological findings and prior imaging, often highlighting changes such as stability or progression in specific conditions such as atelectasis, effusion, or device positions like tubes or catheters. These comparisons often involve technical details and demonstrate skill in identifying interval changes.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5249881247031176,0.525,0.5247524752475248,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15508,latent_15508,623,0.001246,0.0005489827,1.3197631,"Focus on lung volume, diaphragm, or mediastinal changes in comparison.","The high activation examples consistently discuss changes or comparisons in the volume or shape of lungs, mediastinal shift, diaphragm elevation, or specific opacities without significant new findings elsewhere, indicating a focus on detailed and nuanced changes visible in cross-comparative imagery rather than novel acute pathology.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5923107998922703,0.5953757225433526,0.5176470588235295,0.6027397260273972,73.0,100.0
+15509,latent_15509,2553,0.005106,0.0017647621,1.0905671,Interval changes or stability on comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern indicates descriptions involving comparisons to previous imaging studies, where any interval changes in findings, whether it be stability or progression, are detailed. Distinctive remarks about changes, however subtle, paired with phrases expressing comparison such as 'since prior', 'unchanged', 'interval improvement', or explicitly noting previous studies, are highlighted.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15510,latent_15510,1237,0.002474,0.0008668458,0.88039666,Detailed comparison and stability notes from prior imaging.,"The activation level is highest where the current findings in the imaging are compared in detail to findings from a prior study, and include suggestions about monitoring, stable conditions, or updates compared to the previous state. The explanations are also detailed and clear about the findings, making such examples highly activated.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15511,latent_15511,1498,0.002996,0.0010471772,0.9999219,Descriptive comparison based on previous imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently reference explicit comparison to previous imaging, and utilize a descriptive tone to convey interval changes. Examples with low activation either lack such references or are performed without comparison to previous studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4615140956604371,0.49,0.4931506849315068,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15512,latent_15512,1107,0.002214,0.00081796036,1.3631797,Detailed comparative analysis of images involving assistant guidance.,"Most examples tagged with high activation levels involve direct consultations and interactions with the radiology assistant, specifically requesting detailed comparisons and interpretations, often without pre-existing historical reports, hence requiring active assistance.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15513,latent_15513,1077,0.002154,0.0007590865,1.1939771,Detailed thoracic changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with an activation level above 4.0 often provide specific findings related to the heart, lungs, and mediastinal structures, usually in context with a reference to prior studies or changes compared to previous imaging. This likely indicates a focus on detailed, comparative analysis of thoracic changes rather than acute findings lacking historical context.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5727272727272728,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15514,latent_15514,820,0.00164,0.0006173981,1.3318983,Reports compare current images either against prior studies or highlight findings in the absence of prior comparatives.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve cases where findings on current imaging are described with reference to changes or continuation of previous observations, often noting stability or improvement. These examples typically specify if prior comparisons exist or not. Reports often highlight normal anatomical structures unless they directly relate to the clinical query.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4078770298154849,0.505,0.5027624309392266,0.91,100.0,100.0
+15515,latent_15515,847,0.001694,0.0006322638,1.403113,Comparison of current and prior images for changes over time.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve comparing current images with prior ones, often noting changes over time in findings or positioning of medical devices, and typically include lung or cardiac assessments. These comparisons are specific and expected in radiological follow-ups to assess progression or stability.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15516,latent_15516,1372,0.002744,0.0009849451,0.996319,Comparison to prior imaging with noted interval change or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels include a comparison between current and prior imaging, specifically focusing on identifying changes, including any stability or progression, as opposed to missing or unavailable prior images, which characterize examples with low activation.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15517,latent_15517,1558,0.003116,0.0011017218,1.3181031,Comparison of current imaging with previous studies highlighting interval changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports that include a comparison of the current imaging findings to prior reports, especially noting any interval changes such as new findings, stability, or resolution of previous abnormalities. This pattern is key in monitoring ongoing conditions or treatment responses.",0.5775862068965517,0.5918367346938775,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15518,latent_15518,2127,0.004254,0.0014408844,1.0234601,"Focus on interval changes in findings, particularly medical devices and anatomical conditions.","The examples with higher activations focus on differences in findings between the current and prior images, emphasizing specific changes in medical devices (like tubes or catheters) or anatomical conditions (such as opacities or pneumothorax). They frequently use terms like 'interval', 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'resolved', indicating close attention to how conditions have evolved over time as seen in the images.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15519,latent_15519,1201,0.002402,0.0008723003,1.1536931,Interval changes or new findings compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activations consistently involve comparisons with prior imaging and detection of new or changing findings, particularly related to conditions such as pneumothorax, effusion, or consolidation. This pattern emerges because the presence of interval changes or new findings compared to a prior often suggests clinical significance, triggering high activations. Examples without new findings or no comparison context have lower activations.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5783132530120482,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15520,latent_15520,2116,0.004232,0.0014459479,0.996157,Detailed descriptions of comparative changes with prior imaging.,"High activation levels are consistently associated with extensive descriptions of changes identified in radiology studies when compared to previous imaging. This suggests that the pattern is focused on complex, detailed comparative analysis rather than simple terms or stable findings.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.550561797752809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+15521,latent_15521,1211,0.002422,0.0008285607,0.9020707,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging revealing change or stability.,"High activation levels correspond to examples where there is a mention of changes or stability observed by comparing with a previous imaging study. This pattern in radiology reports emphasizes comparison with prior studies, often leading to conclusions about the condition's progress or stability.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.537037037037037,0.54,0.5344827586206896,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15522,latent_15522,1386,0.002772,0.0010012452,1.1358504,Focus on current image findings without previous comparison.,"The activation levels are high when the example lacks prior imaging studies for comparison, forcing the focus solely on the description of findings in the provided images. This emphasizes the interpretation of the current image independently of historical changes.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4032118055555556,0.45,0.3863636363636363,0.17,100.0,100.0
+15523,latent_15523,1187,0.002374,0.00083170825,0.8579704,Stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on instances where radiological findings are stable compared to prior studies, or show no significant interval change. They often include phrases like 'unchanged', 'stable appearance', 'again raises concern', or 'no significant interval change', indicating that the focus is on the stability or lack of change of findings from previous imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4533859702399028,0.46,0.4487179487179487,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15524,latent_15524,1186,0.002372,0.0008375324,1.1490474,Comparison to prior images with stable findings or no acute changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve phrasing indicating a comparison to previous imaging, with a reduction or absence of acute abnormalities noted across evaluations—often highlighting the stability of cardiopulmonary findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5783132530120482,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15525,latent_15525,1838,0.003676,0.0012539997,1.1217517,"Comparison to prior imaging or presence of foreign body (e.g., lines, tubes) indicating intervention or follow-up.","Examples with activation levels above 0.0 include diverse findings such as central venous lines, PICC lines, or changes over time (e.g., post-surgical alterations, interval changes). These involve comparisons to previous imaging or placement of foreign bodies, often reflecting clinical interventions or longitudinal follow-up of diseases, distinguishing them from less complex findings not indicating activation.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3943064809206542,0.475,0.4855491329479768,0.84,100.0,100.0
+15526,latent_15526,1495,0.00299,0.0010417817,1.04467,Focus on the stability or changes over time in follow-up chest imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve explicit comparisons of images over time, highlighting assessing changes or stability of conditions like pacemaker stability, cardiomegaly, or pulmonary edema. This pattern focuses on identifying stability or instability of prominent features across different timepoints in follow-up imaging.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4857067510548523,0.507537688442211,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,99.0
+15527,latent_15527,892,0.001784,0.00065536227,1.3775595,Descriptive comparison with previous images emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on providing detailed assessments of current images compared to prior images, often using terms like 'interval change', 'improvement', 'persistent', or 'unchanged'. These comparative terms are essential in evaluating the stable or changing nature of clinical findings over time.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5392628205128205,0.54,0.5370370370370371,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15528,latent_15528,1579,0.003158,0.0010778909,0.9360771,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern relates to examples where there are descriptions of the findings moving from one imaging modality or view to another or changing across time by referring specifically to differences spotted in the current images versus prior images. The examples with high activation tend to describe how findings or anomalies have changed recently, how devices are located or have moved, or how particular results correspond with prior results. These are marked by explicit comparative analysis.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.564886896804802,0.585,0.5594405594405595,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15529,latent_15529,1093,0.002186,0.00073941064,0.8412575,Comparison with prior imaging showing stable or changed findings.,"Examples with high activation levels include descriptions of a comparison between current imaging and prior imaging studies, often indicating a stable or changed finding, which is a common theme in medical imaging reports.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5188679245283019,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15530,latent_15530,1655,0.00331,0.0011593014,1.0955483,Evaluation or change in positioning of medical devices or anatomical structures.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve changes or evaluations in the positioning of medical devices or specific anatomical structures, such as tubes, catheters, or nodules, in comparison to prior images. This pattern reflects a focus on assessing interval changes in specific layout or insertion of medical interventions, making them central to the analysis.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5309734513274337,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15531,latent_15531,764,0.001528,0.00064107106,1.9382117,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiology images.,"These examples all contain directives to 'provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This suggests that the task requires assessment of current images against prior ones, focusing on changes noted between the different time points, which activates highly when there are explicit interactive cues about comparison.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5061375789985416,0.544973544973545,0.5098039215686274,0.8764044943820225,89.0,100.0
+15532,latent_15532,1519,0.003038,0.0010627601,1.4450663,"Reports comparing current radiological findings with prior imaging, emphasizing medical device placement or changes.","The examples with higher activation levels tend to involve detailed descriptions of prior comparisons along with evaluations of current and previous interventions or changes, such as placement or adjustment of medical devices like tubes or catheters, often with descriptions of subtle changes over time.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5443037974683544,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15533,latent_15533,907,0.001814,0.0007135879,1.9541689,Normal description of cardiac and mediastinal structures.,"The highest activation examples tend to describe normal cardiomediastinal and pulmonary structures. Critical to these examples is the use of terms like ""normal,"" ""unremarkable,"" or ""within normal limits"" with respect to the heart, lungs, and mediastinal contours. The absence of acute pathology appears to trigger high activation levels.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5617072985494038,0.5628140703517588,0.5596330275229358,0.61,100.0,99.0
+15534,latent_15534,1382,0.002764,0.00094085414,0.89488775,Comparison between current and prior images showing changes in findings or devices.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention changes or comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, indicating alterations in medical devices, anatomical structures, or pathologies. These changes necessitate precise documentation for clinical assessment and follow-up.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.5882352941176471,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15535,latent_15535,2338,0.004676,0.0015931611,0.8992597,Detailed longitudinal comparison with previous radiological studies identifying changes or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels reference detailed comparisons between current imaging and prior studies. These reports often identify specific changes in pathology over time such as 'interval increase', 'unchanged', or 'resolved', emphasizing comparative analysis to assess progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5462962962962963,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15536,latent_15536,1311,0.002622,0.0009186707,2.0310624,Immediate attention needed when documenting critical or urgent status.,"Examples with activations of 3.0 or larger use 'critical' or urgent conditions and require immediate attention, as indicated by phrases like 's/p intubation', 'unresolved', 'close monitoring', or significant findings like PICC lines and endotracheal tubes.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.75,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4613399169565705,0.52,0.5588235294117647,0.19,100.0,100.0
+15537,latent_15537,1705,0.00341,0.0011521848,0.78640294,Narratives highlighting unchanged findings or consistent appearances across imaging comparisons.,"The highly activated examples provide descriptions of current imaging findings in comparison to prior images, specifically mentioning consistency or lack of significant change despite prior interventions or identified conditions. These reports often highlight unchanged medical devices or no significant progression in described conditions, suggesting stability rather than acute findings.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5154639175257731,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15538,latent_15538,1181,0.002362,0.0007948694,0.86859787,Detection of rapid changes between sequential or same-day images.,"Activation examples consistently describe findings that change over short periods, such as improvements or worsening of radiographic evidence, often within same-day imaging. The focus is on detection of rapid changes, including worsening conditions or improvement in areas like pulmonary opacities, tube placements, internal effusions or edema, suggesting the model tracks dynamic shifts in health status during acute evaluations.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15539,latent_15539,940,0.00188,0.00074341294,1.9696069,Interpretation of current imaging with emphasis on medical device placement or anatomical change compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve interpretations of current imaging compared to prior images, with a notable emphasis on interpreting the placement or status of medical devices, and complications related to these placements or other anatomical changes detected over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4796747967479675,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15540,latent_15540,1501,0.003002,0.001049119,1.1163491,Comparison of findings to prior imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The higher activation examples consistently involve descriptions of findings or changes in comparison to prior imaging studies, with explicit or implicit references to abnormalities indicated by changes over time.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5491803278688525,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15541,latent_15541,2098,0.004196,0.001430031,0.89492327,Comparison of findings between current and prior images assessing for interval changes.,"These examples show a focus on descriptions of radiological findings with comparison to prior imaging, assessing for interval changes. This comparison is often used to highlight changes in medical conditions over time, utilizing prior and current studies.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15542,latent_15542,1475,0.00295,0.0010124166,0.8647328,Comparisons with prior image findings to assess temporal change or stability.,"These samples emphasize the interpretation and comparison of current radiographic findings with prior imaging reports to detect changes or stability over time, often concerning improvements, stability, or worsening in various thoracic conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5466730239457512,0.5678391959798995,0.5454545454545454,0.7878787878787878,99.0,100.0
+15543,latent_15543,808,0.001616,0.0005859054,1.205605,Comparison with prior images identifying new or significant changes.,"The examples with high activation involve comparing current and prior imaging but recognize distinct changes or features such as new findings, updates, or significant pathologies when images are juxtaposed. These comparisons often result in updating the diagnoses or clinical impressions based on observed changes, reflecting a procedural pattern in medical reporting where such comparative assessments determine clinical decisions.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.3333333333333333,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15544,latent_15544,928,0.001856,0.00069944654,1.6340737,Changes or new developments identified in imaging compared to prior.,"The highest activations often describe new findings or changes in the imaging, especially when detailing developments like placement of tubes or opacities indicating potential pathology. Examples with lower activations lack significant changes or new findings in comparison to prior studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4679638215398647,0.475,0.4675324675324675,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15545,latent_15545,1141,0.002282,0.0008447437,1.3688889,Detailed comparison to prior images emphasizing interval change.,"Examples with higher activation levels emphasize the comparison of current imaging findings to prior images, noting interval changes or stable findings over time. Simultaneous use of comparisons among frontal and lateral images helps delineate the degree of interval change, producing more detailed evaluations relevant for clinical follow-up.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5269726247987118,0.53,0.5357142857142857,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15546,latent_15546,1173,0.002346,0.0008104103,0.8880647,Comparison reports with stable or unchanged findings.,These examples consistently show reports where previous image findings are compared but result in insignificant changes or the absence of acute pathology. The activation pattern emerges from noting the stability or slight progression of pre-existing conditions without acute changes.,0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5492957746478874,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15547,latent_15547,1733,0.003466,0.001203281,0.95643353,Presence of airway devices or tubes observed in radiology studies.,"The examples with high activation levels generally mention findings of pulmonary, pleural or mediastinal changes that include an observation of airway devices or tubes such as tracheostomy tubes, endotracheal tubes, and central venous lines.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4117647058823529,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4912280701754385,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15548,latent_15548,934,0.001868,0.00065386674,1.0320373,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"Most examples refer to comparison with prior imaging to evaluate changes over time, which is typical for monitoring interval changes in medical conditions using radiological tools. Tasks could include assessing ongoing conditions, device placement, or changes in pathological findings.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4453333333333333,0.48,0.4866666666666667,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15549,latent_15549,1442,0.002884,0.0009922151,0.81504405,Detailed historical priors with comparisons in imaging reports.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently mention detailed historical prior radiological reports and their specific comparison with current findings, reaffirming previous features, or highlighting unchanged observations particularly regarding devices or chronic conditions. This pattern emphasizes continuity and specific historical context in the medical imaging analysis.",0.4572441293752769,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.72,25.0,24.0,0.5625,0.58,0.5571428571428572,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15550,latent_15550,1732,0.003464,0.0012021187,0.9583649,"Evaluation of imaging findings relative to prior studies, indicating interval changes or stability.",The examples with high activation often reference prior imaging studies and identify either stability or interval changes in imaging findings. This suggests the model associates high relevance with patterns where findings are evaluated against earlier exams for changes or stability.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.525039797489496,0.545,0.5319148936170213,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15551,latent_15551,2072,0.004144,0.0014147182,1.23274,Comparisons noting stability or minor changes without new significant pathology.,"Highly activated examples focus on comparisons between current radiologic findings and prior studies, consistently noting stable, unchanged or slight changes in specific features such as nodules, consolidations, or device placements. Reports highlight stability or minor progression without indicating significant new pathology, suggesting a focus on monitoring rather than diagnosing new conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4939752999824645,0.495,0.4954128440366973,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15552,latent_15552,1528,0.003056,0.0010517413,0.9297743,Stable chronic findings or consistent support device positions versus comparison.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on instances where notable findings from chest radiographs or other related imaging demonstrate interval changes or are consistent with ongoing conditions but are unchanged compared to prior findings. These findings are often adjustments in a treatment-supportive device, stable pathologies, or reinforcing known chronic findings upon repeated imaging.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15553,latent_15553,663,0.001326,0.0005000905,1.8050522,Inclusion of detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies.,"Activations are higher when the report includes a specific written comparison to prior imaging studies, which provides context regarding changes or stability in the findings over time. This suggests a focus on temporal change analysis from image comparisons.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5736559139784947,0.5737704918032787,0.5257731958762887,0.6144578313253012,83.0,100.0
+15554,latent_15554,924,0.001848,0.00070397137,1.7220576,Evaluation of device positions and anatomical features in chest imaging.,"The pattern focuses on the presence and evaluation of changes or stability in thoracic devices or anatomical features, particularly pacemaker leads and catheters, on chest radiographs by comparing them to prior images. Phrases like 'unchanged position', 'stable', and explicit device descriptions denote this recurring theme in reports.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+15555,latent_15555,1905,0.00381,0.0013138105,1.2520921,Explicit descriptions comparing current and prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples all demonstrate a clear and structured comparison between current and previous imaging findings, particularly using detailed terminologies to interpret changes or stability in medical conditions. This indicates the model's pattern of focusing more on descriptive comparison processes.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5444883085332524,0.55,0.5409836065573771,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15556,latent_15556,1256,0.002512,0.0008805232,1.1217514,Mandated task to compare current findings with prior as part of study description.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently reference providing descriptions of findings in radiology studies specifically using language around the priors for comparison in a standardized form. They include certain structured phrases and elements comprising 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to prior', often crafted either as a task for the assistant or part of the findings section.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15557,latent_15557,931,0.001862,0.00064121815,0.9282299,Explicit comparison with prior images in radiological reports.,"The pattern is associated with radiology reports that involve referencing both current imaging and prior imaging for direct comparison. The key is the explicit mention of comparison to prior imaging studies, rather than just describing current imaging findings without comparison. The high-activation examples stress comparison-based analysis by providing a baseline with previous images.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.528169014084507,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15558,latent_15558,1042,0.002084,0.0007483078,0.94481933,Comparison of current findings with prior images.,"The examples consistently describe radiological findings in comparison to prior images. The pattern focuses on identifying similarities or differences in the current study compared to the previous, using phrases like 'in comparison to prior', 'unchanged from prior', or 'similar to prior', often highlighting changes in medical devices or conditions over time.",0.415614773258532,0.5,0.5,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15559,latent_15559,1197,0.002394,0.00086555403,1.1407336,Resolution or improvement of lung opacities compared to prior images.,"Evaluations are focused on lung findings, primarily improving or resolving lung opacifications seen in comparison with prior images, and the resolution of opacities or clearing of the lungs are indicative of improvement or resolution of a lung condition, possibly after intervention or treatment. These cases highlight changes over time that suggest improving lung status.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3799603174603174,0.5,0.5,0.06,100.0,100.0
+15560,latent_15560,1250,0.0025,0.00087649195,1.1095468,Descriptions emphasizing medical device placement or changes.,"These examples include detailed descriptions focusing on the presence, placement, or changes related to medical devices such as central lines, endotracheal tubes, or enteric tube placements, often specifically noting their position in anatomical terms and using direct comparison with prior imaging for confirmation and evaluation.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15561,latent_15561,1602,0.003204,0.0011329616,1.287008,Stable cardiomediastinal contours and clear lungs.,"The prompt indicates a pattern of identifying unchanged or stable cardiomediastinal contours and lung clearances in comparison with prior imaging, even when the lungs are well expanded and without acute findings. This description highlights the pattern in cases like examples 39, 45, and 48 which focus on normal presentations despite the presence of cardiomediastinal contour check.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5062241742249018,0.525,0.5409836065573771,0.33,100.0,100.0
+15562,latent_15562,1293,0.002586,0.0008870709,0.754845,Expectation for comparison without prior available imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels signify instances where the prompt specifies inclusion of a lateral image or questions about prior comparisons, but states no prior comparison is available. The task specifically asks for comparison despite the lack of previous comparison, focusing on evaluating directly from current imaging only.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6538461538461539,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4711792702273929,0.475,0.4698795180722891,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15563,latent_15563,1191,0.002382,0.0008481405,1.1531137,Focus on stability or unchanged findings over prior comparisons.,"The higher activation levels are associated with reports emphasizing 'comparison' terms or phrases and an explicit focus on stability or changes noted in imaging over time. Specifically, these examples underscore stable lesions or unchanged pathologies, focusing on consistency over repeated comparisons or examinations.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4928644240570846,0.4974874371859296,0.4938271604938271,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+15564,latent_15564,940,0.00188,0.00067983137,1.0599251,Comparison or change assessed with prior imaging or reports.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently mention comparison with prior imaging or prior descriptive reports to evaluate changes or stability over time. These references to previous images or conditions highlight a pattern where the focus is on assessing changes or continuity from past medical images or reports.,0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4726763065138353,0.525,0.5153374233128835,0.84,100.0,100.0
+15565,latent_15565,1173,0.002346,0.0008139102,1.2615402,Comparison to prior imaging studies with stable or consistent findings.,"Reports with high activation levels consistently reference previous imaging studies for comparison. This highlights the pattern of evaluating and reporting current findings by referencing their change or consistency compared to past images, especially when describing stable or recurring abnormalities.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4558823529411764,0.31,100.0,100.0
+15566,latent_15566,887,0.001774,0.0006287242,1.2693622,Explicit descriptions of interval changes between current and prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels appear when the report explicitly describes changes over time between the current and previous study, often indicating interval changes in specific pathological findings. This involves clear documentation of whether a condition has improved, worsened, or remained stable.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5977011494252874,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15567,latent_15567,1018,0.002036,0.00072454714,1.1241968,Interval changes in medical device placements or conditions.,"Highly activated examples often describe positions and changes in medical devices like PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, and chest tubes, with an emphasis on interval changes in their positioning or associated conditions. These reports frequently mention removal or alteration of devices and comparison with prior imaging.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.5901639344262295,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15568,latent_15568,1266,0.002532,0.00090935413,1.1897475,Comparison with prior study is included in findings assessment.,"The examples often mention 'comparison' either in their headers or findings sections, showcasing a descriptive pattern of evaluating current images against prior exams to assess changes or stability in imaging findings. This pattern frequently arises in monitoring chronic conditions or post-treatment evaluations.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5234899328859061,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15569,latent_15569,632,0.001264,0.00056011736,2.298815,Describing radiological findings in comparison to prior images.,"High activation samples consistently involve the task of describing findings in context with prior images, often for interval changes or stable findings. The pattern emphasizes radiographic comparisons as a critical component in the assessment.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5142155595761179,0.5307262569832403,0.4812030075187969,0.810126582278481,79.0,100.0
+15570,latent_15570,1399,0.002798,0.0009988642,1.2928466,Limited image findings due to technical factors like rotation or crowding.,"Examples exhibiting this pattern include descriptions of image findings that are limited by technical factors such as rotation, crowding, or reduced respiratory effort. These technical limitations can obscure or complicate the interpretation of radiological details, emphasizing how imaging quality impacts diagnostic clarity.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4759253193580085,0.52,0.5476190476190477,0.23,100.0,100.0
+15571,latent_15571,978,0.001956,0.00070700306,1.3120451,Instruction to describe findings in comparison to prior imaging.,"Reports with higher activation levels include clear instructions to the assistant to provide descriptions of findings based on detailed comparisons with prior imaging studies, using medical and context-specific language. The instruction to ""provide a description"" explicitly prompts the model to compare and analyze the changes between current and prior images.",0.3737373737373737,0.38,0.4,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4393716521883933,0.495,0.4969325153374233,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15572,latent_15572,1067,0.002134,0.0008011853,1.0761473,"Detail on stability/position of lines, tubes, catheters, or unchanged anatomical status on comparison.","The pattern here exhibits a common theme of detailed descriptions focusing on the stability or specific positional attributes of lines, tubes, and catheters, or unchanged status of other anatomical changes upon comparison with prior studies.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.567230273752013,0.57,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15573,latent_15573,845,0.00169,0.00062006287,1.3494269,Stable cardiomediastinal and hilar contours with focus on interval changes in lung or pleura.,"These examples emphasize the evaluation of new radiological findings or changes in comparison with prior images, with specific language highlighting stability or causes for reassessment. They frequently discuss unremarkable cardiomediastinal contours while also noting any changes observed in lung or pleural conditions.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4615384615384615,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4150943396226415,0.22,100.0,100.0
+15574,latent_15574,857,0.001714,0.00063832116,1.1063412,Reports of comparisons indicating significant interval changes or stability.,"Higher activations are associated with comparisons in imaging that include changes in clinical status or alterations in medical devices over time. The changes are often highlighted compared to prior studies, pointing to significant monitoring of interval developments or adjustments.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4608890245142916,0.47,0.4594594594594595,0.34,100.0,100.0
+15575,latent_15575,2404,0.004808,0.001645487,0.9735757,Reports discussing interval changes or recent developments.,"The examples with higher activation levels include reports that explicitly mention recent or interval changes in the patient's condition, reflecting a direct interpretation or comparison of the image findings against prior imaging data.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.569304046008462,0.575,0.5609756097560976,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15576,latent_15576,1145,0.00229,0.0008242573,1.2710719,Post-procedural status and medical device positioning changes.,"Examples with high activation levels mention surgical or procedural changes, status post conditions, or findings associated with a prior intervention or manipulation, such as intubation, PICC line placement, and removal or adjustment of tubes. This pattern suggests interest in specific post-procedural status or changes in medical device positioning.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6429918290383407,0.645,0.6705882352941176,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15577,latent_15577,1724,0.003448,0.001217017,1.2831739,Comparison and mention of specific hardware or device positioning.,"The pattern identifies a focus on the presence of specific hardware like tubes, catheters, and pacemakers or their positioning, which is often a critical aspect of follow-up radiology reports. This is evident when radiologists explicitly mention and compare devices across imaging sessions, often seen in contexts such as post-procedural or intensive care scenarios.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.6296296296296297,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15578,latent_15578,1694,0.003388,0.0011866726,0.9283725,Comparisons with prior images showing stable conditions.,"The examples with higher activations consistently refer to the detailed comparison of the current image findings with prior images, often exposing stable, persistent or unchanged conditions over time. This may be indicative of chronic conditions rather than acute changes.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5166194547675356,0.535,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,100.0
+15579,latent_15579,875,0.00175,0.0006227357,1.2473558,Detailed description of imaging findings in comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with the pattern have complex medical situations or extensive histories with multiple findings across the examples. The notable component in the high activation samples is that they describe specific comparisons or changes with prior imaging or clinical context, frequently detailing slight improvements or resolutions or stability in the condition, reflecting careful monitoring and attention to historical context in ongoing treatment or evaluation screenings.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4995495946351717,0.5,0.5,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15580,latent_15580,1014,0.002028,0.0006960021,1.0878727,Comparison with prior imaging to note changes in devices or conditions.,"The highly activated examples generally involve a comparison with prior imaging to note changes in medical devices, pathologies, or interventions such as exaggerated lung hyperinflation or positions of tubes and devices. This emphasizes the importance of temporal comparison in radiological analysis for evaluating conditions that can appear stable or change over time.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5689655172413793,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15581,latent_15581,2742,0.005484,0.0018768236,0.9643072,Descriptions of interval change or stability in imaging findings.,"Examples with high activations reflect reports emphasizing a change or stability in findings, often comparing current and prior images. This involves specific observations of differences or similarities, which is indicative of monitoring disease progression or resolution.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15582,latent_15582,1575,0.00315,0.0010866603,1.0406189,"Evaluation of interval changes in chest imaging, often with comparison to prior studies.","The most frequently activated examples are those that involve explicit, detailed, and structured references to changes in chest radiography findings over time, indicating a focus on evaluating longitudinal medical imaging differences or changes such as those in cardiothoracic features or pulmonary conditions.",0.5170250896057348,0.5510204081632653,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.5041624259505728,0.525,0.5177304964539007,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15583,latent_15583,1979,0.003958,0.0013442449,0.8317763,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging highlighting changes or stability.,"The examples that show high activation focus on a specific pattern: the presence of detailed comparative descriptions between current and prior similar imaging studies using explicit references to findings, interventions, or situations, alongside healthcare events or interventions such as surgery in the context of chest imaging. The comparison typically highlights changes or stability of abnormalities over time.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5904507100226384,0.5979899497487438,0.5793650793650794,0.73,100.0,99.0
+15584,latent_15584,1216,0.002432,0.0008358603,0.9656555,Comparison with prior imaging indicating stability or normality.,"The highly activated examples emphasize the comparison to prior imaging results and indicate some degree of stable findings over time, often making explicit references to how current findings align with previous ones. They also typically conclude with suggestions or implications of normality or lack of significant change, denoting stability as a critical comparative element.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5180722891566265,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15585,latent_15585,1257,0.002514,0.00085086306,0.85927224,Evaluations of interval change or stability in findings.,"These examples highlight the use of comparative language in radiological assessments, especially focusing on changes in findings such as lessening or increasing conditions in short intervals. These reports frequently assess for interval changes like in pneumothorax size, pleural effusion, or atelectasis when prior imaging is available.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5306666666666666,0.56,0.54,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15586,latent_15586,1202,0.002404,0.00085045607,1.3402803,Resolution or change of findings described through comparison with prior images.,"The activation level increases when a comparison is explicitly drawn between current imaging and prior studies, particularly when describing the resolution, improvement, or stability of findings. The pattern emphasizes detecting changes over time, as seen when describing findings like pneumonia or pleural effusion in relation to previous imaging.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5752212389380531,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15587,latent_15587,1752,0.003504,0.001194084,1.0918951,Comparison to prior imaging with a focus on stability or change.,"Examples with a higher activation level describe specific comparisons to prior imaging studies and focus on explicit changes, stability, or the evolution of specific findings over time. They also frequently contextualize findings using references to medical devices or conditions, like central lines or a history of specific interventions, ensuring detailed continuity of patient care.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.4074074074074074,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5094339622641509,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15588,latent_15588,1532,0.003064,0.0010668196,1.0552021,Changes or evaluations related to indwelling device placement.,"The examples with activation levels reveal changes or considerations arising from device placements and their stability or change compared to previous imaging. They often involve descriptions of devices like catheters, tubes, or pacemakers and the structural effects of such placements as observed in imaging analyses, especially when considering their presence, position, or implications over time.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4542477715117337,0.475,0.4590163934426229,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15589,latent_15589,1146,0.002292,0.0007865473,1.3815656,Radiological findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve indications of comparison with prior imaging, specifically focusing on changes or lack thereof over time. This pattern involves recognizing the progression, stability, or regression of specific radiological findings in comparison to historical data.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4443121378105898,0.475,0.4829931972789115,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15590,latent_15590,1883,0.003766,0.0012901075,0.8905495,References to interval changes compared to prior imaging.,Activation levels closely align with cases where the radiology report references findings by comparing current images directly to prior imaging studies. Apparent patterns involve specific alterations like resolution or worsening of a previously noted condition or notable changes following surgical interventions compared to the last study.,0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5384615384615384,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15591,latent_15591,2142,0.004284,0.0014609987,0.8811304,Comparison and monitoring of ongoing conditions using successive radiological imaging.,"The examples with higher activation often include detailed description and comparison of current imaging findings with prior reports, frequently considering changes in conditions such as fluid levels, line placements, and infiltrates, indicating a focus on monitoring ongoing clinical situations.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5859213250517599,0.615,0.5751633986928104,0.88,100.0,100.0
+15592,latent_15592,1608,0.003216,0.0010991428,0.96918714,Comparison with prior imaging or past conditions showing significant changes.,"The pattern identified involves providing descriptions and making comparisons to prior images or past conditions when the current images exhibit significant changes. The varying degrees of activation correlate with the specificity and degree of change noted in the comparison, affecting the clinical significance of the new findings compared to previous conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.562539283469516,0.565,0.5565217391304348,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15593,latent_15593,1357,0.002714,0.0009361547,1.2173555,Comparison focuses on position or changes of medical devices or implants.,"The position of medical devices such as NG tubes, ETT tubes, catheters, pacemakers or other surgical implants are a key focus in these radiological comparisons. The reports compare the current state of these devices against previous images to check for changes, positioning, and stability, often using language specific to surgical or post-operative evaluations.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5671641791044776,0.38,100.0,100.0
+15594,latent_15594,1532,0.003064,0.0010508114,1.6146756,Detailed assessment from comparison with prior imaging study.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve making radiological assessments based on direct comparisons with prior studies. This suggests that the pattern is the detailed use of previous imaging to specifically note changes in condition and identify stability or progression, using phrases like 'compared to previous' and specifics about status changes, rather than simple description of findings without such direct prior comparison.",0.7348021215830274,0.74,0.6875,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5549888747218681,0.555,0.5544554455445545,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15595,latent_15595,2172,0.004344,0.0014891392,0.9030021,Direct comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Samples with higher activation levels frequently involve descriptions of current imaging findings in direct comparison to prior imaging studies, especially highlighting stability or lack of significant change. This is indicated by references to consistency over time, previous evaluations, or unchanged conditions across sequential imaging reports.",0.493103448275862,0.5102040816326531,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15596,latent_15596,1642,0.003284,0.0011148457,0.87806016,Comparison with prior images and stability or change in findings.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions of findings that include reference to comparison with previous images as part of the provided examples. These descriptions often feature indications of stability or change (e.g., 'unchanged', 'stable', 'slight worsening', 'improved') based on prior imaging studies.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.5486111111111112,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15597,latent_15597,1339,0.002678,0.0009133405,0.8852113,Comparison of interval changes using medical devices and anatomical findings.,"These examples frequently involve comparison with earlier imaging studies to evaluate interval changes, particularly focusing on medical interventions indicated by tubes or other support devices, and anatomical changes suggesting stability or improvement over time.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5028997514498756,0.505,0.504424778761062,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15598,latent_15598,896,0.001792,0.00065519614,1.1291659,Description of interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples focus on describing the stability or interval changes in specific findings compared to prior imaging studies. Phrases like 'no significant interval change', 'stable', and 'new right base region of consolidation' indicate attention to changes over time, which is a critical aspect of monitoring conditions in serial imaging studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15599,latent_15599,161,0.000322,0.00020708363,2.2601545,"Comparison with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The key pattern observed in the high activation examples is the descriptive comparison of radiological findings with prior imaging to note changes or stability. Each high activation example emphasizes the comparison of current images with previous ones to highlight changes, stability, or clinical relevance, often involving tubes, devices, or specific findings like effusions or opacities.",0.5584415584415584,0.5588235294117647,0.375,1.0,9.0,25.0,0.4368063014679555,0.4628099173553719,0.2027027027027027,0.7142857142857143,21.0,100.0
+15600,latent_15600,1195,0.00239,0.0008632255,1.158644,Comparison of interval change with prior radiographs.,"These examples involve comparison of current radiographic findings with previous images. Reports consistently discuss interval changes or stability in pathological findings between the current and prior examinations, employing phrases like 'as compared to the previous radiograph' and specifying changes or consistency in medical conditions or devices positioning.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4680306905370843,0.48,0.4846153846153846,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15601,latent_15601,627,0.001254,0.00048478777,1.2198389,Requests for comparison to prior imaging findings without available prior data.,"The highly activated examples consistently request a comparison to a specific prior frontal image or study, even when prior comparisons might not be available. These prompts involve descriptions and assessments of images to consider any changes compared to a prior study, emphasizing their focus on changes or stability of findings which aligns with common practices in follow-up radiologic assessments.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5217913675547412,0.5245901639344263,0.4824561403508772,0.6626506024096386,83.0,100.0
+15602,latent_15602,1016,0.002032,0.0007558813,1.7497748,Stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels describe findings in the current imaging that are stable or present from prior imaging studies. The references to stability, unchanged conditions, or explicit comparisons to prior findings signal this pattern.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5492788461538461,0.55,0.5543478260869565,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15603,latent_15603,1945,0.00389,0.0013283446,0.8419651,"Comparison shows interval changes in pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or surgical interventions.","The high activation samples involve findings related to pneumothorax, compressive pleural effusion, or surgical interventions such as pacemaker or catheter placement with specific comparison between current and prior imaging. These details suggest evaluation of interval changes potentially indicating alterations in patient's condition or treatment response.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4983323685878883,0.545,0.6153846153846154,0.24,100.0,100.0
+15604,latent_15604,1304,0.002608,0.0009363488,1.3272513,Comparison with prior images for evaluating changes or stability.,"The pattern involves analyzing radiology studies while explicitly comparing current images to prior ones, including descriptions of changes or stability across images, which helps in assessing progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.3994977617643848,0.45,0.4683544303797468,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15605,latent_15605,1607,0.003214,0.001125804,1.1721928,Reference to interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels describe findings from imaging studies in comparison to prior images, specifically indicating changes or stabilities such as development, removal, or improvement of features like tubes, lines, opacities, and cardiomediastinal contours. The presence of explicit comparison phrases and notations of interval changes or stability in these aspects is the pattern.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15606,latent_15606,2319,0.004638,0.0015935065,0.9418421,Focus on assessing changes through prior imaging comparisons and medical device status.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include the requirement of comparing the given current imaging with prior imaging, prominently featuring comparative analysis phrases like 'compared to', 'increased in size', or 'no change' in position of medical devices. This indicates a pattern where the focus is on assessing changes over time in various clinical features through imaging comparisons.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15607,latent_15607,1249,0.002498,0.0008846413,1.016208,Detailed comparison findings and medical device adjustments over time in images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently use radiological phrases to describe findings or changes noted over time with specific references to prior examinations. These descriptions often involve technical terms like placement or retraction of medical devices and specific evaluation phrases indicating interval change, stability, or improvement over time. The pattern involves detailed technical note, specific medical device adjustment, or interventions made since prior examinations.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5125628140703518,0.5125628140703518,0.51,0.5151515151515151,99.0,100.0
+15608,latent_15608,1505,0.00301,0.0010618567,1.274806,Comparison with previous imaging studies.,"Examples with moderate to high activation include references to comparison with prior imaging studies. This pattern involves explicitly noting previous images or reports for evaluating current findings, highlighting changes or stability over time.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4812695526618359,0.515,0.5099337748344371,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15609,latent_15609,635,0.00127,0.00053900963,2.4056752,Presence of pleural effusions with adjacent atelectasis.,"The examples with the highest activation levels frequently mention pleural effusions and associated atelectasis or changes in lung opacities. This pattern involves evaluating chest radiographs in the context of pleural fluid collections and their impact on adjacent lung areas, frequently requiring comparison with prior imaging.",0.84,0.84,0.84,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.6772486772486772,0.6994535519125683,0.7692307692307693,0.4819277108433735,83.0,100.0
+15610,latent_15610,2333,0.004666,0.0015925978,0.94842887,"Comparison of current findings to prior imaging, noting changes.","Examples showing activation levels closer to 5.0 consistently involve descriptions where the findings in the current image are compared with prior images, particularly noting detected changes or stability of specific pathologies or conditions. These examples emphasize systematic comparison to track changes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5206038351693186,0.53,0.5234375,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15611,latent_15611,1096,0.002192,0.0007801785,1.1414477,Multi-view imaging with comparison to prior study for assessing changes.,"The pattern involves multi-view imaging or explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies, drawing attention to differences or stabilities. It is based on the structural feature of providing both current frontal and lateral images along with a prior frontal image, highlighting detailed comparison and evaluation focused on identifying changes or consistencies over time.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.453024453024453,0.49,0.4934210526315789,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15612,latent_15612,1337,0.002674,0.0009453827,0.9420005,Comparison with prior images for assessing clinical progression or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize comparison with prior images, assessing changes over time, stability, or progression of clinical findings. This is a specific task for which prior imaging is consulted to report on the progression or stability of conditions, which aligns with the purpose of radiology reviews to track changes in patient conditions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5019789782705565,0.525,0.5174825174825175,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15613,latent_15613,1592,0.003184,0.001116877,0.9562152,Comparison with prior images is a key evaluative step.,"The examples with higher activation levels include a comparison to prior images as a key evaluative component in the analysis of findings, even in the absence of acute changes. It's the presence or noting of comparison to prior images that indicates a significant pattern captured by the high activation scores.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5102040816326531,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15614,latent_15614,1298,0.002596,0.0009084776,1.4049133,Comparison of current image findings with prior images.,"The pattern involves the comparison of current radiological findings with previous images. The pattern in representative examples includes assessments for changes in conditions, positions of catheters or tubes, or stability of previous findings.",0.3779493779493779,0.42,0.4473684210526316,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15615,latent_15615,863,0.001726,0.0006479178,1.0969571,Presence of patient identification status with specific clinical context.,"The high activation examples prominently feature patient identification status within their indication or comparison sections, commonly appearing as a shorthand initial or abbreviation followed by a specific condition or post-procedural status (e.g., 's/p' for status post). These distinct patient identifiers are related to clinical history or current medical intervention scenarios, which reflect how the model recognizes patterns of personalized, clinically contextualized findings.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5038167938931297,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15616,latent_15616,1193,0.002386,0.0008484406,1.3135217,Instructions emphasize detailed comparison between current and prior images.,"Higher activation levels are present when the task provides explicit instructions to compare radiographs across time, suggesting evaluations of changes or comparisons between current and prior images. This, combined with the explicit mention of prior images, indicates a linguistic pattern focusing on longitudinal analysis.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.4632352941176471,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15617,latent_15617,1673,0.003346,0.001176023,1.0039203,Explicit focus on identifying interval changes compared to prior images.,"The pattern observed is a focus on interval changes when descriptions of images explicitly compare current findings to prior images. These comparisons often materialize in sentences emphasizing changes in size, status, or presence of medical conditions, suggesting the model's activation is triggered by identifying comparisons to previous image states.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15618,latent_15618,758,0.001516,0.00052084116,1.1644526,Instruction for image comparison and description in radiology.,"Examples with high activation levels repeatedly highlight the process of providing descriptions from given images, particularly when the assistant is tasked with comparing the current image to a prior one explicitly for a radiological study. This is indicative of focus on instruction following in image interpretation tasks with a clear requirement of comparison.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.403596770247125,0.4871794871794871,0.4855491329479768,0.8842105263157894,95.0,100.0
+15619,latent_15619,1802,0.003604,0.00123262,1.070277,Focus on stable changes or minimal differences in findings from prior images.,The pattern shows that reports with detailed findings of stable or unchanged conditions in comparison to previous images tend to have a higher activation level. Reports that include direct comparison to prior reports and emphasize stability or minimal changes often align with the context-focused language model's pattern of recognition.,0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5319068214583808,0.5326633165829145,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,99.0
+15620,latent_15620,1893,0.003786,0.0013158309,1.0793293,Descriptions of changes or stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"The pattern across examples with higher activation levels is the presence of findings or impressions in radiology that change in comparison to prior imaging. This includes any form of interval change, resolution, or worsening identified through comparison with previous studies.",0.5298289528577389,0.5306122448979592,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,24.0,0.486863711001642,0.5,0.5,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15621,latent_15621,1350,0.0027,0.0009239267,0.89755034,Emphasis on findings or changes evaluated against prior images.,"The examples with higher activations emphasize specific features noticed through a sequence of imaging, often highlighted by comparison to prior studies. Adjacent to these comparisons, notable findings or changes, particularly related to support devices' positioning or conditions like atelectasis or effusion stability, are usually present.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4938913226850969,0.535,0.5222929936305732,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15622,latent_15622,1155,0.00231,0.0008491283,1.7075565,Instruction to describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with high activation typically include a directive to provide a description of findings in the radiology study based on a comparison to prior images. This directive creates a focus on assessing changes relative to past imaging, which seems to trigger higher activation in the model.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15623,latent_15623,1046,0.002092,0.00078617956,1.2872185,Comparison with prior imaging is referenced for analysis.,"Activation levels are high in cases where findings in the chest radiograph are compared against a prior image. This includes interpretations that describe how current findings differ from or remain the same as the previous study, which is a standard procedure in radiology to assess progression or resolution of conditions.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,100.0,100.0
+15624,latent_15624,1128,0.002256,0.0007904858,1.2325336,Structured comparison with prior imaging emphasized.,"Examples with high activation levels use a structured format to require comparison of current radiological findings with prior images, emphasizing any observed changes or the lack thereof. This pattern is involved in monitoring stability or progression of conditions, distinguishing it from instances not invoking prior comparative measures.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15625,latent_15625,962,0.001924,0.0006907429,1.0616947,Comparison to previous radiological studies for interval change assessment.,"Examples exhibiting high activation levels involve clear comparison between the current radiological study and previous studies or reports. They explicitly provide findings in direct comparison to prior imaging data, showing stability or change. This pattern highlights the practice of referencing previous imaging to assess interval changes, which is a common procedure in radiological evaluations.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4364713627386438,0.465,0.4758620689655172,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15626,latent_15626,1917,0.003834,0.0013019292,0.7211928,Monitor stability or interval change in comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation involve descriptions of current images often in relation to prior images, usually showing interval changes, stability, or lack of new findings, especially regarding lung opacities or devices. These are indicative of follow-up assessments, commonly requested to monitor known conditions or interventions based on prior findings.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5159445729939626,0.545,0.5302013422818792,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15627,latent_15627,1258,0.002516,0.0008809847,1.0991317,Descriptive comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed description of current imaging compared with prior images, especially those illustrating interval changes or stability over time. This emphasizes systematic comparison for the assessment of changes in medical imaging, an essential practice in radiology.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4666666666666667,0.475,0.48,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15628,latent_15628,1569,0.003138,0.0011024463,1.0827949,Comparison of current and prior images to evaluate cardiopulmonary changes or stability.,"These examples generally describe assessments made based on available frontal and lateral images along with prior images. They frequently focus on changes in cardiac silhouette size, mediastinal or hilar contours, and the presence or absence of pulmonary findings like effusions or consolidations, comparing these to previous scans using specific terminology related to imaging changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15629,latent_15629,990,0.00198,0.0007445429,1.6306239,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing interval changes or stability.,"In this scenario, the pattern of interest is the explicit comparison to prior imaging studies, especially the identification of changes, resolution, or stability in findings over time. Activations are high when comparisons are made to previous images, noting alterations like catheter positions, resolution of vascular congestion, or changes in pulmonary opacities, as these are key for diagnostic monitoring over time.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5384615384615384,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15630,latent_15630,1381,0.002762,0.000945421,0.9686041,"Changes in medical devices, placement or image comparison.","The highest activations occur with references indicating comparison of findings against prior examinations. The task appears to focus on comparing new findings with historical data, likely indicating any significant changes or stability. The presence of comparative language, like mentioning changes to devices or positions, seem to trigger higher activations.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4946674113673236,0.525,0.5167785234899329,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15631,latent_15631,1480,0.00296,0.0010220842,0.9510865,Comparison reports highlighting changes in pleural effusion or fluid management.,"The examples with significant activation levels include descriptions of pleural effusion or other fluid accumulation issues in the context of prior imaging studies for comparison. These reports indicate processes related to fluid assessment or change, such as pleural effusion, thoracentesis, or pulmonary edema.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4873067063590507,0.535,0.5897435897435898,0.23,100.0,100.0
+15632,latent_15632,1378,0.002756,0.0009567662,0.92478204,Emphasis on comparative analysis with previous images.,"The common element in highly activated examples is the explicit comparison of the current image to prior images, often emphasizing stability or change in findings over time. This pattern is typical in case discussions where previous imaging is available for direct comparison, which is reflected in the consistent language of 'comparison to prior' or 'as compared to previous exam.'",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5136268343815513,0.565,0.5393939393939394,0.89,100.0,100.0
+15633,latent_15633,1399,0.002798,0.0009657418,0.88707274,"Comparative analysis of previous images, often involving medical device stability.","The examples showing activation involve a clear pattern of findings being described in comparison to previous imaging and include the presence of specific medical devices like pacemakers, catheters, or tubes. These descriptions indicate stability or change over time, often related to device placement or lung condition, which is a common pattern in radiological reports for monitoring device placement and stability.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15634,latent_15634,1920,0.00384,0.0013238462,1.6110449,Complex imaging evaluations with multiple perspectives or detailed positioning challenges.,"Examples with activation levels > 0 involve multiple imaging perspectives or specific technical challenges such as positioning, use of additional or atypical imaging techniques, and evaluation of significant details like tubes, catheters, or specific conditions that require detailed anatomical correlation or careful assessment of changes in medical devices or complex conditions.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3922393641888733,0.48,0.4886363636363636,0.86,100.0,100.0
+15635,latent_15635,1311,0.002622,0.00092536886,1.0563422,Observation of interval changes in radiological findings.,"These examples highlight interval changes in radiological findings, often noting whether specific conditions have improved, worsened, or remained stable when comparing current imaging to prior exams.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15636,latent_15636,573,0.001146,0.00050023035,1.5637026,Comparison of findings with prior radiographic images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiology reports where comparison is made between images from different time points, often noting changes or stability of certain findings related to the respiratory or anatomical status of the patient. There are references to earlier imagery for assessing progress or changes over time.",0.3413978494623655,0.3877551020408163,0.4210526315789473,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4358478401031592,0.4571428571428571,0.4253731343283582,0.76,75.0,100.0
+15637,latent_15637,998,0.001996,0.0007029994,1.0287992,Continuous text with incomplete brackets or placeholders.,"The samples with high activations tend to include cumbersome or continuous text without explicit sentence structure, suggestive of NLP parsing challenges. This makes them stand out compared to more traditional sentence structures in medical reports.",0.3055555555555556,0.44,0.4680851063829787,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3466926702421583,0.4924623115577889,0.4974093264248704,0.96,100.0,99.0
+15638,latent_15638,1266,0.002532,0.00089803996,1.2219799,Stable findings compared to previous imaging with no new changes.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe stable findings compared to prior imaging with no new changes, often using explicit mentions of stability or unchanged status. These descriptions of stability imply reevaluation without change or progression, possibly indicating benign or chronic conditions.",0.375,0.4,0.3333333333333333,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4694397283531409,0.5,0.5,0.26,100.0,100.0
+15639,latent_15639,1635,0.00327,0.0011266232,1.0723925,Comparison reports detailing interval changes and procedural findings.,"The examples with high activation levels involve detailed descriptions comparing current and prior imaging studies, with specific annotations on interval changes, findings, or placements. The inclusion of observations about different elements like tubes, shadows, or contours emphasizes comparison and specific procedural findings which appear to be a distinctive pattern in these reports.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15640,latent_15640,1571,0.003142,0.0011138318,1.4419898,Reference to changes or stability in imaging compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with increased activation typically contain reference to prior imaging, identifying changes in conditions such as lung clearings, persistent lung opacities, or stability of medical device placement compared to previous conditions. These findings often highlight specific evolutions or regressions in observations made possible through comparative assessment of current and prior imaging, which is key in evaluating patient progress or treatment effectiveness.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5444067261387858,0.5628140703517588,0.5467625899280576,0.76,100.0,99.0
+15641,latent_15641,1958,0.003916,0.0013604122,1.1285905,Structured radiological assessment emphasizing comparison with previous imaging and noting interval changes.,"The pattern focuses on providing detailed observations in radiology studies by emphasizing comparisons with prior imagery and indicating changes in patient's status or imaging findings post-intervention or over time. The pattern explicitly mentions prior imaging studies followed by reassessment and possible interventions, using structured phrases that identify comparisons with past images.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15642,latent_15642,1342,0.002684,0.0009403651,1.2421906,Describes findings relative to prior imaging with comparative language.,"Reports that explicitly use comparative descriptions with past imaging findings, emphasizing stability or changes, are highly activating. These examples describe using prior reports to deduce significant findings and suggest clinical implications, thus highly activating when specific comparative language is utilized.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5232243604606229,0.5326633165829145,0.5275590551181102,0.67,100.0,99.0
+15643,latent_15643,2994,0.005988,0.0020506533,0.86112523,Portable AP or supine chest radiography technique.,"High activation levels correspond to examples describing portable radiography, either mentioning the technique explicitly or using terms like 'portable' or referencing AP radiograph views typically indicative of portable procedures. These examples focus on less detailed examinations often performed in intensive care settings where rapid assessment is required.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5384615384615384,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15644,latent_15644,1261,0.002522,0.0008851598,1.0033138,Detailed interval changes and device positioning in chest imaging reports with predictive evaluations.,"Examples with high activation levels are based on chest radiographs that describe specific findings such as positions of medical devices and interval changes, with additional detail or diagnostic evaluation. These reports use an elaborate format and predictive reasoning based on prior imaging, focusing on aspects like unchanged device positioning, interval modifications, and thorough examinations.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5492957746478874,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15645,latent_15645,1449,0.002898,0.0010079994,1.0792652,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior study.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention specific changes or stability compared to prior imaging, indicating the assessment of interval changes. Most examples involve pathways that confirm findings are unchanged or have definitively marked alterations since the prior examination.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15646,latent_15646,1810,0.00362,0.00122365,0.9079807,Assessment of interval change compared to prior images.,"These examples contain language assessing changes in findings across different images, with terms noting interval changes such as 'unchanged', 'improvement', 'increase', 'decrease', 'as compared to prior', 'persistent', and other indications of stability or modification in comparison to previous radiographs or findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15647,latent_15647,675,0.00135,0.00053038774,1.1976844,Frequent assessment and comparison of imaging changes over time.,"Highly activated examples predominantly discuss findings in the current imaging study compared with previous imaging, with notable interval changes or the stability of conditions and devices (like tubes and leads) described. This pattern emphasizes comparison and continuity, focusing on any interval change or absence thereof, with specific observations often communicated with clinical staff.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.3902323516353411,0.4232804232804232,0.4335664335664335,0.6888888888888889,90.0,99.0
+15648,latent_15648,1190,0.00238,0.0008477076,1.1177078,Comparison of imaging for interval changes or stability.,"The high activation examples consistently involve side-by-side evaluations of current images against prior reports, showing specific interval changes or stability in certain conditions, or directly commenting on medical devices and their conditions. These examples particularly note specific changes or stability in complex conditions beyond mere confirmation of normalcy.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5118845500848896,0.54,0.527027027027027,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15649,latent_15649,1951,0.003902,0.001321522,1.0423547,Descriptive comparisons of current and prior study findings.,"These examples consistently involve comparing current imaging findings to previous studies. Often, they highlight changes, or lack thereof, in conditions like effusions, opacities, device positions, and pleural or parenchymal changes by explicitly referencing prior images in a detailed manner.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.6571428571428571,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15650,latent_15650,1255,0.00251,0.00087427965,1.1196948,Detailed descriptions of changes with comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on detailed comparisons or descriptions of findings between the current radiologic image and one or more prior images. The emphasis is on evaluating changes or stability of conditions, thus necessitating prior imaging for effective analysis. This aligns with the context of interval changes or stability in radiologic assessment.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5377349010149733,0.54,0.5350877192982456,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15651,latent_15651,1542,0.003084,0.0010813258,1.0005779,Presence of comparison to prior imaging.,"The key pattern involves the presence of an explicit comparison with prior imaging studies. Phrases such as 'as compared to the previous radiograph,' 'comparison with prior study,' and references to prior imaging dates are indicative of this pattern, highlighting changes, improvements, or consistencies noted through serial imaging.",0.376114081996435,0.44,0.4634146341463415,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15652,latent_15652,1203,0.002406,0.00086731074,1.1981807,Emphasis on findings analysis without reliance on prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently focus on identifying patterns where findings are analyzed for changes, even without prior images available for comparison. This points to a pattern where the lack of prior comparison data doesn't detract from the emphasis on investigative description of current and potential conditions.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5053059921806431,0.535,0.5686274509803921,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15653,latent_15653,831,0.001662,0.00058321154,0.84818935,Stability or minimal change in findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern observed is the existence of a stable condition or minimal change when comparing findings between current and prior images, often highlighting unchanged medical devices or persistent stable pathology. This matches with the repeated references to 'unchanged', 'stable', or comparisons with prior images that denote consistency and stability over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5506978653530378,0.5577889447236181,0.5733333333333334,0.4343434343434343,99.0,100.0
+15654,latent_15654,728,0.001456,0.00055362785,1.2732798,Comparison of multiple current imaging views to prior imaging.,"These examples refer to the presence of multiple imaging views (typically a frontal and a lateral) and the comparison of these current images to a prior frontal view. This highlights the model's activation when recognizing comparisons between current and prior imaging reports across different views (frontal, lateral) for consistent findings.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4165920286609941,0.4404145077720207,0.4460431654676259,0.6666666666666666,93.0,100.0
+15655,latent_15655,1457,0.002914,0.0010011229,0.8168881,"Assessment of changes between current and prior images, often indicating interval improvement or worsening.","These examples mostly focus on observations of changes in the current and prior images, often indicating interval improvement or worsening of specific conditions such as lung consolidations, effusions, or atelectasis. This pattern is common in radiology reports focusing on tracking disease progression or regression over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.563154327031709,0.565,0.5575221238938053,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15656,latent_15656,964,0.001928,0.000678535,1.0992489,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior image.,"This pattern involves using image prompts where the current and prior images are presented, but no significant findings or comparisons are made in the reports. The model shows high activation when comparison leads to descriptions that highlight normal or stable conditions without new findings or changes.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4510337186170079,0.455,0.4457831325301205,0.37,100.0,100.0
+15657,latent_15657,1327,0.002654,0.0009525659,1.120359,Comparison includes evaluation of changes in lung volumes.,"Many examples describe comparison with prior imaging studies and highlight specific changes or stability in lung volumes, which is a recurrent observation especially in cases evaluating for conditions like atelectasis or change in pleural effusion. This pattern is highlighted by frequently mentioning low/high lung volumes and comparing current findings to previous radiological evidence.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5402298850574713,0.575,0.6666666666666666,0.3,100.0,100.0
+15658,latent_15658,1465,0.00293,0.0009929895,0.9306043,Acute or interval changes identified from prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently mention acute processes or findings such as pneumonia, atelectasis, or other responsive changes revealed in imaging, especially when there is comparison to prior imaging studies to highlight these changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.4444444444444444,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5684464070654356,0.57,0.5795454545454546,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15659,latent_15659,1289,0.002578,0.00090369006,1.8648362,Reports identifying interval changes via comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve radiology reports that compare current findings to previous images and explicitly identify changes observed in imaging. They focus on detecting interval changes, particularly when monitoring known medical conditions or post-interventional states.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5997061133490411,0.605,0.5853658536585366,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15660,latent_15660,686,0.001372,0.00048608464,0.97162986,Comparisons evaluating interval changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve situations where a current frontal image is explicitly compared with a prior image to evaluate interval changes. The high activations are found in instances where comparison reveals unchanged, deteriorating or stable conditions from prior assessments, indicating a strong correlation between structured comparative analysis and notable findings.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4594769131417501,0.4677419354838709,0.4471544715447154,0.6395348837209303,86.0,100.0
+15661,latent_15661,1371,0.002742,0.00095029146,1.1882329,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on the comparison between the findings in the current radiographic images and any prior images, while assessing changes in the condition or placement of devices. This emphasizes the evaluation of changes over time, especially those that may be significant for patient management or diagnostic conclusions.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.537620849096259,0.56,0.5416666666666666,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15662,latent_15662,658,0.001316,0.00053112395,1.5917411,Comparison or change in anatomical or device positioning between studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently depict cases where reference is made to apparent changes in imaging position, resolution, or anatomical positioning between studies. This includes mentioning of 'compared to prior', 'unchanged since earlier', or 'interval change' in structures or devices.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4112446958981612,0.4162162162162162,0.4017094017094017,0.5529411764705883,85.0,100.0
+15663,latent_15663,749,0.001498,0.0005234982,1.0331253,Evaluation and description of tube placement or changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently refer to placement, evaluation, or description of medical tubes and devices in comparison to prior imaging, especially focusing on their correctness, position, or changes over time. Tubes like NG tube, endotracheal tube, or central lines are specifically evaluated.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5357624831309042,0.5520833333333334,0.546875,0.3804347826086957,92.0,100.0
+15664,latent_15664,1227,0.002454,0.00087213627,1.378753,Phrase comparisons to prior images to highlight changes.,"These examples consistently include a direct comparison of current images with prior images, often highlighting stability or changes in findings. Notably, they use language to describe comparisons such as 'similar to prior', 'unchanged from prior', or 'compared to prior', focusing on interval changes or lack thereof.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5071207430340557,0.5175879396984925,0.5116279069767442,0.6666666666666666,99.0,100.0
+15665,latent_15665,831,0.001662,0.0006095417,1.0616477,Comparison of current frontal and lateral chest radiographs to document specific findings.,"Highly active examples consistently request comparison of both frontal and lateral chest images to identify changes and document specific findings such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, or changes in tube placements. This specificity and clarity in documenting any new, resolved, or unchanged findings align with a linguistic pattern highlighting comprehensive review.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.4657534246575342,0.34,100.0,100.0
+15666,latent_15666,1249,0.002498,0.0008672184,0.9437518,"Explicit comparison of current with prior imaging findings, noting stability or change.","Highly activated examples consistently include language indicating the comparison between the current and prior imaging findings, typically noting the stability, change, or absence of new developments in particular features. This pattern is evident in phrasing like 'unchanged', 'newly placed', or 'improving', with assessments focusing on intervals between examinations.",0.3466666666666667,0.3469387755102041,0.3333333333333333,0.3333333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5696126513862476,0.57,0.5660377358490566,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15667,latent_15667,1511,0.003022,0.0010382003,0.90696317,Comparison or evaluation of medical device placements or changes.,"These examples often mention findings in relation to the placement or position of medical devices, such as catheters or tubes, along with their changes over time or lack thereof.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4921433060967944,0.495,0.4941176470588235,0.42,100.0,100.0
+15668,latent_15668,1729,0.003458,0.0012036989,1.1587111,Detailed comparison of findings between current and prior images.,"This pattern emerges from the fact that examples exhibiting high activation levels consistently involve substantial descriptions or analysis of image findings in comparison to prior images, emphasizing changes observed across sequential examinations. The mentions of placement and evaluations of devices or pathologies between current and prior images are less prevalent in lower activation examples.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5039955910719206,0.505,0.5045871559633027,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15669,latent_15669,1715,0.00343,0.0012119358,1.3597841,Focus on stability or change in radiological findings over time.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings that highlight stability or interval change, often with references to prior comparisons. This indicates the pattern emphasizes the identification of changes or the absence thereof over time, often tied with evaluating or excluding specific pathologies.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15670,latent_15670,1034,0.002068,0.0007072282,1.1823517,Descriptions of interval changes in current images compared to prior.,"Reports with high activation include descriptions of findings demonstrating interval changes when comparing current images with prior ones, particularly regarding opacification, lung masses, or pleural disorders. Such phrasing is common in evaluating disease progression or improvement.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4953337390951511,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.56,100.0,99.0
+15671,latent_15671,1909,0.003818,0.0013257522,0.9564122,Explicit comparative descriptions and interval change analysis in radiology reports.,"The highly activated examples often explicitly compare current imaging findings against prior reports or images for interval changes, mentioning changes in disease status or procedural aspects. These comparisons might involve technical details, patient history, or specific instructions to evaluate changes, making them comprehensive in their descriptions.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5276190476190477,0.535,0.528,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15672,latent_15672,2043,0.004086,0.0013928023,0.9030056,Interval changes or stability in imaging findings compared to previous images.,"These examples involve explicit comparison with previous imaging studies and highlight interval changes or stability, communicating findings in relation to prior imagery. The pattern is marked by references to direct comparisons, emphasizing changes from previous radiographs and using terminology such as 'compared to prior', 'interval removal', 'unchanged', 'similar position', etc.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5185185185185185,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15673,latent_15673,1319,0.002638,0.0009095088,0.91773516,Description of radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation values consistently exhibit explicit references to comparing current radiological findings with previous imaging reports, often asking for specific descriptions of any changes observed in the patient's condition since the prior examination. This suggests heightened activation when assessing changes or stability over time using comparative imaging.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4994817866983493,0.505,0.5041322314049587,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15674,latent_15674,1051,0.002102,0.0007727814,1.264769,Interval change focused on medical devices or body structure comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve situations where changes in medical devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or body structures are assessed in comparison to previous images. This emphasizes the exploration of interval changes in devices or conditions in the context of previous studies.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.468671679197995,0.47,0.4727272727272727,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15675,latent_15675,818,0.001636,0.000604126,1.2177815,Comparisons indicating stability or minimal change in findings.,"The pattern captured by the model involves detailed comparative descriptions of radiological findings against prior images. Specifically, it identifies narratives that mention stable or unchanged features in comparison to earlier imaging results such as unchanged cardiac silhouette, similar pleural effusions, or similar opacities which aligns with the observed activations in cases where subtle changes are mentioned.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5402298850574713,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15676,latent_15676,954,0.001908,0.000698919,1.2315782,Descriptions of interval changes compared to prior chest imaging.,"Several examples mention a direct comparison to a previous chest radiograph or other modalities, using phrases such as 'compared to', 'since prior study', or dates of comparison studies. These examples consistently reference a change or stability in findings over time, which is typical when analyzing sequential radiographic studies to track changes in clinical findings or patient status.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.494949494949495,0.494949494949495,0.5,0.49,100.0,98.0
+15677,latent_15677,1265,0.00253,0.0009039878,1.5212408,Direct comparison to prior images focusing on changes or stability.,"The pattern in the examples with higher activation scores involves explicit references to ""comparison to prior images"" with a focus on changes or stability, especially when multiple views (frontal and lateral) are described. These examples specifically address what has changed or remained stable, often using phrases like ""as compared to prior"" and detailing specific findings (e.g., opacities, silhouette changes).",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.4848484848484848,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5213675213675214,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15678,latent_15678,897,0.001794,0.00065093255,1.1302973,Evaluation of therapeutic devices' positions or changes using prior imaging comparison.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently mention detailed findings and comparisons with prior studies, highlighting changes or confirmations about medical devices' positions (like tubes, lines, catheters). These descriptions often involve alterations or evaluations of therapeutic devices and their potential impact on diagnosis, signifying diagnostic changes based on intervention status rather than purely anatomical observations.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5584415584415584,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15679,latent_15679,1367,0.002734,0.0009559885,1.0088699,Radiological findings evaluated for interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The consistent pattern here involves the evaluation of radiological images in comparison to prior studies, emphasizing interval changes or stability of certain findings (e.g., tubes placement, pneumothorax resolution, line migration). This is typical in radiological assessments where change over time or lack thereof is crucial for medical decision-making.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4422994422994423,0.48,0.4868421052631579,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15680,latent_15680,2469,0.004938,0.0016714263,1.1392667,Description of findings with unchanged cardiomediastinal contours compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation consistently detail a pattern of findings described in comparison to prior images. This usually involves the assessment of stability or change in pathology, combining elements such as consolidations or opacities with unchanged cardiomediastinal contours.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5670995670995671,0.59,0.6666666666666666,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15681,latent_15681,1304,0.002608,0.0009502314,1.1533972,Explicit radiological findings comparison with assistance instructions.,"Examples with high activation levels primarily involve the requirement of providing detailed, comparative descriptions of radiological findings between current and prior images, following a recognizable pattern with explicit comparisons, assistance instructions, and indications for assistance. These typically highlight nuances such as changes in tube placements, effusions, opacities, and structural changes since the prior image.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5858562029828838,0.605,0.5734265734265734,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15682,latent_15682,912,0.001824,0.00066242827,1.1613771,Descriptions focusing on interval changes compared to prior images.,"These examples describe radiological findings with a focus on interval changes, explicitly comparing current images to prior ones to assess changes such as stabilization, improvement, or progression of conditions. These examples have consistent use of comparison language marking potential changes.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5596036432789511,0.56,0.5566037735849056,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15683,latent_15683,1293,0.002586,0.0009319766,1.2596831,Comparison with prior imaging to assess stability or change.,"The high activation examples involve situations where imaging studies are being compared to prior ones to identify any changes. This comparison involves noting stability or changes in the patient's condition, often in relation to specific medical devices, lung findings, or other thoracic features. This specific pattern of using previous studies to confirm stability or note changes is consistent across these examples.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5035460992907801,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15684,latent_15684,1895,0.00379,0.0013390742,1.0544331,Notable analysis of changes in comparative chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activation involve detailed comparative analyses, often indicating improvements, worsening, or notable stability of certain conditions in the lungs or associated structures when compared to prior studies, documented in the reports.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4848484848484848,0.49,0.4916666666666666,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15685,latent_15685,1147,0.002294,0.00082584115,1.3444474,Detailed lung and pleural region examination with comparison to prior studies.,"The more representative examples emphasize detailed examination of the lungs and pleural areas, especially focusing on conditions like effusion, pneumothorax, and changes in nodules or catheters, often referencing previous states or changes. These details are critical in assessing ongoing pulmonary conditions or interventions.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15686,latent_15686,1917,0.003834,0.0013328412,1.3100045,"Use of 'no change', 'stable', or 'unchanged' relative to prior imaging.","These examples describe findings stabilized or unchanged in relation to prior imaging studies. The use of phrases like 'no change', 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'similar' indicates that the comparison to previous radiographs shows no significant difference in findings, reflecting a pattern of stability over time.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5061728395061729,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15687,latent_15687,913,0.001826,0.00065268046,0.9612319,Requests for comparing imaging findings regardless of lack of prior report.,"The highly activated examples all involve requests to provide findings based on chest imaging in comparison to a prior study, despite no findings being currently described due to the lack of a prior report or study.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5045030726848908,0.5276381909547738,0.5211267605633803,0.74,100.0,99.0
+15688,latent_15688,853,0.001706,0.00060827914,1.5842115,Explicit comparison instructions with prior imaging.,"Patterns in these examples focus on explicit instructions to compare the current imaging study with a prior study. The reports consistently mention comparisons with phrases like 'compared to prior', 'since prior', and 'comparison made with prior', focusing on described changes as pivotal findings in the assessment of the patient.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5372217346206016,0.565,0.5436241610738255,0.81,100.0,100.0
+15689,latent_15689,2073,0.004146,0.0014425264,1.3959422,Resolution or interval change of lung opacities or atelectasis after medical interventions.,"Half of the provided examples (with high activation levels) describe interval changes in chest radiographs, specifically focusing on the resolution or change in lung opacities, atelectasis, or other lung structures after medical interventions, such as bronchoscopy, or as part of ongoing monitoring of lung condition. These descriptions emphasize the stability or improvement of previous findings, typical in radiological follow-up monitoring reports.",0.5091164095371669,0.58,0.8333333333333334,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4389901823281907,0.52,0.5833333333333334,0.14,100.0,100.0
+15690,latent_15690,1885,0.00377,0.0013006857,1.0276073,Evaluation of cardiomediastinal contours and pulmonary conditions with image comparison focus.,"Examples with activation levels close to zero describe findings using specific medical equipment terms and anatomical locations without discussing other medical conditions or changes over time or in imaging comparisons. Examples with higher activation focus on description and comparison of findings related to various pulmonary conditions, potentially congestive heart failure (such as cardiomegaly) or other anatomical abnormalities across the chest. This pattern suggests analysis of cardiomediastinal contours and lung areas with historical or ongoing investigation into pathology development with imaging comparison.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.5365853658536586,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4438651372957942,0.52,0.5114942528735632,0.89,100.0,100.0
+15691,latent_15691,1339,0.002678,0.0008920476,0.9442068,Assessment of the positioning or changes of tubes and catheters.,"These examples emphasize the presence of external tubes, catheters, or interventions visible in the radiology images and their correct positioning. This is evident from terms like 'endotracheal tube', 'nasogastric tube', 'central venous catheter', and 'PICC line', consistently described across cases, reflecting a pattern where radiology reports focus on the verification of the placement and status of such interventions.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5538956323270048,0.57,0.6129032258064516,0.38,100.0,100.0
+15692,latent_15692,1665,0.00333,0.0011544703,1.0099493,Explicit descriptions of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activations often describe with specific details and findings in radiology studies, explicitly highlighting comparisons with prior imaging to evaluate interval changes, using terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'increase', or 'decrease'. This is common practice in radiological assessments to track progression of findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4893703076417502,0.495,0.4936708860759494,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15693,latent_15693,1742,0.003484,0.0012236161,1.302344,Reports with comparison to prior imaging to assess change over time.,"Examples show a higher activation when findings are compared with prior imaging studies to assess changes or stability. This includes terms like 'unchanged', 'no significant change', and specific reference to prior examination dates or studies. There is less emphasis on new findings or dramatic changes that may not require comparison.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15694,latent_15694,1598,0.003196,0.00110742,1.0184301,Changes or comparisons related to tube or device positioning in chest.,"The highly activated examples contain references to prior studies and note any changes or comparisons specifically related to position of tubes or devices in the chest imaging, including practical implications of adjustments or removals.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4996776273372018,0.515,0.5230769230769231,0.34,100.0,100.0
+15695,latent_15695,1174,0.002348,0.00083047245,0.9498167,Regarding comparison to prior imaging in assessing interval changes.,"Examples with high activation levels prominently include references to comparison with prior imaging, focusing on interval change or stability of findings. This forms the key evaluative component unlike low activation examples where such comparison is either absent or vague.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15696,latent_15696,946,0.001892,0.0006819639,1.3541925,Instructions or comments involving AI assistant within findings.,"These examples consistently include instructions or actions labeled with 'ASSISTANT', which indicate a focus on AI interaction or AI-provided comments within the text. These do not chart normal findings in radiology but highlight the use of an AI assistant in the imaging process.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15697,latent_15697,1417,0.002834,0.0010008047,1.3378258,Specific details about medical tubes or line placements and related findings.,"Examples with activation levels show highly specific references to the condition and position of medical tubes or lines within the body, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, central venous lines, and changes in pneumothorax or effusions relative to tube placement. These disclosures are relevant for clinical evaluations and follow-ups.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.6245941558441559,0.63,0.6710526315789473,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15698,latent_15698,1446,0.002892,0.0009825329,0.8309176,Details of medical device positioning and changes.,"Highly activated examples mention changes or abnormalities related to medical devices, such as catheters (e.g., PICC lines, infusion ports) and their positioning compared to previous imaging or immediately post-surgical intervention. This suggests the pattern of interest is the ongoing management and assessment of medical device positioning and related clinical changes.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.6666666666666666,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5197047448115473,0.525,0.5316455696202531,0.42,100.0,100.0
+15699,latent_15699,2093,0.004186,0.0014210633,0.7189431,Comparison of current findings to prior images for interval change.,"Examples with the highest activations consistently reference the presence of prior images to compare for changes or stability of findings, highlighting the use of comparative analysis as a primary focus. These cases emphasize evaluating interval changes against a documented baseline, which is a key pattern in identifying characteristic information relevant to ongoing patient conditions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5315442561205272,0.5477386934673367,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,99.0
+15700,latent_15700,966,0.001932,0.0007115278,1.7196923,Unchanged cardiomediastinal or hilar contours in comparison to prior imaging.,"Higher activation levels are associated with directly mentioning unchanged cardiomediastinal or hilar contours, reflecting an emphasis on these stable anatomical features when providing a comparison to prior imaging. Stability in cardiomediastinal structures is often highlighted in follow-up assessments.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5615731785944552,0.575,0.6153846153846154,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15701,latent_15701,1566,0.003132,0.0011006066,1.0943569,Significant changes in medical devices or anatomical status compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activations involve descriptions of changes in state or position of medical devices and anatomical structures (e.g., catheters, tubes, or organ positions) in comparison to prior images, highlighting the significant change over time or between examinations.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5399277029247453,0.545,0.5569620253164557,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15702,latent_15702,1272,0.002544,0.00088110444,0.9900023,Emphasis on unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,Examples with high activation levels emphasize descriptions where findings are either unchanged or persistently noted as stable compared to prior images. This implies a focus on stability or consistency in findings across imaging studies.,0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15703,latent_15703,1257,0.002514,0.00088580727,1.0132016,Explicit comparison of findings to prior images.,"The examples show situations where radiological findings need to be described with reference to prior imaging. This involves noting what has changed, remained the same, or newly appeared in the current imaging compared to the previous reports. Higher activations are associated with examples where comparisons with prior images are explicitly detailed and changes noted.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15704,latent_15704,1392,0.002784,0.00096638605,1.3225949,Descriptions of stable or minimally changed medical devices or conditions compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation focus on providing more detailed evaluations of specific medical devices or conditions that are stable or show incremental changes compared to prior studies. These examples consistently include descriptions of medical tubes, catheters, specific lung conditions, or cardiac silhouettes that are stable or have minimally changed.",0.5685534591194968,0.5714285714285714,0.5517241379310345,0.6666666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5928003031451308,0.592964824120603,0.5865384615384616,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+15705,latent_15705,1411,0.002822,0.00095692446,0.9639975,Stable findings with no significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently utilize comparison with prior imaging studies where the findings are described as unchanged or stable over time. This pattern indicates that assessments are consistent, reflecting no significant change in findings between the current and prior imaging.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5288082083662193,0.5326633165829145,0.5365853658536586,0.4444444444444444,99.0,100.0
+15706,latent_15706,1115,0.00223,0.00077173,1.0727506,Descriptive findings in specific anatomical locations like mediastinum or basilar lung.,"Highly activated examples refer to findings in frontal images with specific locations like basi-lung or mediastinum, whereas less activated examples do not explicitly describe these targeted locations or comparative changes. Anatomical details or changes in mediastinum or basilar lungs are strongly present in high activations.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5203252032520326,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15707,latent_15707,1678,0.003356,0.001147102,0.9197974,"Change, stability, or improvement in findings compared to prior images.","The representative examples show situations where there are changes, improvements, or stabilities that are explicitly described by comparing findings on current radiographic images to prior ones, often involving procedural or intervention-related outcomes.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5105830116804158,0.515,0.5126050420168067,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15708,latent_15708,1393,0.002786,0.0009597562,1.5076562,Radiological findings compared to prior images with interval change assessment.,"This pattern involves the evaluation of radiological findings in the context of comparison to previous studies, with explicit indications of interval change or stability. Reports describe alterations (like improved, persistent, unchanged, or worsened findings), signifying the sequential progression of conditions over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15709,latent_15709,1279,0.002558,0.00087828824,0.925431,Emphasis on radiographic comparison and stable findings.,"These examples frequently involve instructions to provide additional findings compared to prior images or emphasize stability or changes relative to a previous state. This is a pattern where the focus is on evaluating how current findings relate to past ones, often checking for progression or resolution of conditions.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5082296266559615,0.51,0.5089285714285714,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15710,latent_15710,802,0.001604,0.0006266762,1.1855246,Comparison with prior imaging revealing interval changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation scores often describe findings where there is an interval change or comparison with prior images showing progression or resolution of a condition, marked stability, or new findings. This importance of comparison emphasizes monitoring changes over time in radiological studies.",0.4,0.4,0.4,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4294865378840957,0.43,0.4339622641509434,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15711,latent_15711,1687,0.003374,0.0011494103,0.99227154,Descriptions of interval change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently focus on changes identified in medical devices (such as catheters and tubes) or pathological changes observed using comparative imaging studies over time. The pattern emphasizes interval change, stability, or lack thereof, with descriptions often referencing a prior study.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15712,latent_15712,1513,0.003026,0.0010614011,1.078484,Description of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior scans.,"Examples with moderate to high activation levels typically discuss stable clinical findings compared to prior reports, indicating no significant interval changes, or provide a description of findings that conclude a recipe-like output for unchanged conditions. This pattern is exemplified by discussion of stable, unchanged prior clinical features and/or no interval change without significant new findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15713,latent_15713,1680,0.00336,0.0011503338,0.89489913,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"These examples describe the importance of comparing current imaging with prior studies to detect changes or assess stability in various conditions. This pattern highlights the role of temporal comparison in determining pathological progression or stability, particularly when changes or stability (e.g., improvement, worsening, or unchanging findings) are explicitly mentioned.",0.6753246753246753,0.68,0.6451612903225806,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15714,latent_15714,1598,0.003196,0.0011092921,0.8625888,Emphasis on interval change detection in radiological comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently involve detection of radiographic changes over intervals, particularly when new findings are compared to prior imaging, explicitly mentioning differences or stability of specific conditions such as pneumothorax, effusion, opacities, or structural changes.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4720301697045883,0.475,0.4705882352941176,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15715,latent_15715,455,0.00091,0.00041799655,2.6766927,Comprehensive findings analysis with differential diagnosis consideration.,"Higher activations correlate with descriptions that emphasize multiple parameters of change or stability across detailed observations, such as lung opacities, pleural effusions, and tube placements, often with nuanced interpretations or recommendations for follow-up to exclude differential diagnoses.",0.7078260869565217,0.7083333333333334,0.6666666666666666,0.782608695652174,23.0,25.0,0.7699269609399809,0.7763975155279503,0.6805555555555556,0.7903225806451613,62.0,99.0
+15716,latent_15716,1278,0.002556,0.00090385,1.1614969,Emphasis on interval changes or stability compared to prior images following medical interventions.,"The common pattern involves detailed descriptions of imaging findings compared to prior scans, often highlighting interval changes, stability, or resolution of previously noted pathologies, particularly in context of prior medical interventions.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5348953514540772,0.535,0.5339805825242718,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15717,latent_15717,1411,0.002822,0.0009877331,1.2575631,Evaluations that describe findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with higher activations consistently include analysis based on prior imaging studies to identify new or changed findings. Even cases described as stable or unchanged as compared to prior images fit this pattern, indicating the model identifies and acts on the explicit mention of prior imaging analysis as indicative.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15718,latent_15718,977,0.001954,0.0007436727,1.2569962,Descriptions of change over time in comparison to prior imaging.,"High activation examples consistently involve the description of changes over time when comparing the current chest images to previous ones. Specifically, these descriptions include references to the stability or modification of specific findings such as effusions, pneumothorax, or related thoracic features, rather than merely noting normal findings or lack of change.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5309734513274337,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15719,latent_15719,1790,0.00358,0.0012363383,0.79217964,Comparisons between current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples consistently involve the comparison of findings from current imaging with prior ones, often highlighting changes or lack of changes in pulmonary or mediastinal conditions. The pattern is specifically marked by the inclusion of comparison details or observations of change, which appears to be the model's focus.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5070422535211268,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15720,latent_15720,1371,0.002742,0.0009366381,0.9032829,Comparison findings emphasizing unchanged conditions or device positions.,"The pattern emerging from these examples is the emphasis on specific changes in comparison to previous studies, most notably changed medical devices' positions, persistent anomalies, or absence of significant new findings, often alongside unchanged cardiomediastinal silhouettes.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5822784810126582,0.46,100.0,100.0
+15721,latent_15721,621,0.001242,0.0005165291,2.3942828,Explicit directions to compare current to prior images in structured reports.,"Activation is high when there is explicit instruction or mention in the prompt to compare the current image with a prior one, especially in structured text with sections like ""FINDINGS"" and ""IMPRESSION"" where changes between the current and prior images are discussed.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4417130036094039,0.4519774011299435,0.4193548387096774,0.6753246753246753,77.0,100.0
+15722,latent_15722,1634,0.003268,0.0011133074,0.7989151,Details about specific device positioning in radiographic findings.,Examples with high activation levels consistently report specific measurements or adjustments needed for medical devices like ET tubes or other similar conditions that required comparison.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.5942028985507246,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15723,latent_15723,1337,0.002674,0.0009227148,1.0489036,Comparison with prior imaging to determine changes or stability over time.,"These examples engage with comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, indicating changes or stability in findings over time. The pattern consistently provides follow-up evaluations through explicit references to previous imaging, helping to assess progress or detect new or resolving conditions.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5102040816326531,0.535,0.5241379310344828,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15724,latent_15724,1438,0.002876,0.0009793804,1.0559427,Detailed instructions for describing radiology findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels often include explicit instructions or prompts for the assistant to provide a descriptive analysis of the radiological findings, suggesting a context of generating diagnostic interpretations based on comparison with prior images. Such examples focus on the interpretation and reporting aspect of the radiological assessment, prompting detailed descriptive analysis rather than simple confirmation of findings.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5218403014897437,0.5226130653266332,0.5233644859813084,0.56,100.0,99.0
+15725,latent_15725,1596,0.003192,0.0011115185,1.1340854,Focus on tracking and comparing devices' positions relative to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently involve direct comparisons being made to prior imaging studies, as well as cases where specific monitoring or support devices like PICC lines, endotracheal tubes, or central lines are being evaluated for position or stability relative to previous locations. These scenarios require detailed tracking and affirmations of device positions over time.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.54226426609704,0.55,0.5675675675675675,0.42,100.0,100.0
+15726,latent_15726,197,0.000394,0.0003733655,2.8552594,Structured and coherent report format in comparisons.,"Despite providing image prompts, examples with high activations consistently present clear, systematic, and coherent reports, using structured line formats and without abrupt interruptions or unfinished phrases.",0.4864864864864865,0.4864864864864865,0.36,0.75,12.0,25.0,0.4113489636425416,0.4180327868852459,0.2209302325581395,0.8260869565217391,23.0,99.0
+15727,latent_15727,857,0.001714,0.0005903225,0.9561808,Comparison of current radiology findings to prior images to assess changes.,"The pattern in these high activation examples is the comparison of current radiographs to prior images to identify changes. The focus is on findings such as heart size, pulmonary opacities, atelectasis, and pleural effusions. The comparison provides context specific to the clinical scenario.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15728,latent_15728,1203,0.002406,0.0008248021,0.9009587,Significant change or stability related to the clinical query on comparison.,"Samples assign higher activation to explanations providing comparative updates on the presence, change, or stability of significant clinical findings, such as pneumonia or effusion, whereas routine checks for non-focal, small changes, or no prior for comparison receive lower activation.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5225648407707655,0.5226130653266332,0.5257731958762887,0.51,100.0,99.0
+15729,latent_15729,812,0.001624,0.0005893773,1.163417,Mention of changes in findings between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently describe changes in radiological findings between current and prior images. The emphasis is on identifying alterations, like 'minimal blunting', 'unchanged findings', or 'new opacities', which suggests the importance of observing progression or resolution over time in the reports.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5213675213675214,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15730,latent_15730,1041,0.002082,0.0007627058,0.93047404,Explicit comparison with prior images or reports.,"Examples with high activation involve the task of comparing current radiological images with prior images or reports. This includes explicit directives to compare changes or lack of change, rather than simply identifying abnormalities without reference to prior studies.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4391112069895372,0.48,0.487012987012987,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15731,latent_15731,1567,0.003134,0.0010815331,1.0357232,Stable findings when compared to prior imaging.,"These examples primarily focus on findings reported as stable or unchanged compared to prior imaging, highlighting the continuity and lack of significant change in medical conditions across imaging timelines. This involves comparing current studies to previous radiographs and concluding with stable findings.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4776119402985074,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15732,latent_15732,1674,0.003348,0.0011457026,1.2635838,Analysis involving multiple image views or serial image comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons or descriptions that reference multiple images or reports for analysis, such as a combination of current images from different angles (frontal and lateral) or explicit references to changes over time in serial imaging.",0.3929091792132103,0.5,0.5,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.3869455463397043,0.49,0.4945054945054945,0.9,100.0,100.0
+15733,latent_15733,1835,0.00367,0.0012610429,0.77536076,Comparative analysis with stable findings in prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels involve a comparison of current radiographic findings with those of prior imaging, highlighting changes, or stability of findings, especially involving potential pathologies or procedural follow-ups. The consistent theme in these activate higher when comparisons explicitly indicate stability or continuity with past images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15734,latent_15734,1259,0.002518,0.00087513885,0.97092766,Evaluation of interval changes compared to previous imaging.,"These examples involve evaluating interval changes or stability of conditions over time in a radiological study. They focus specifically on comparing current images to prior images, noting changes like persistence or resolution of conditions such as atelectasis or effusion, or stability of cardiomediastinal silhouette and device placements. This pattern is typical in radiology reports for monitoring disease progression or resolution.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5219204557013528,0.53,0.5238095238095238,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15735,latent_15735,1097,0.002194,0.00078296167,1.4651852,Comparison of imaging results over time.,"These examples exhibit references to intervals of time passed between imaging studies or comparisons of current image findings with prior images. This includes language indicating temporal comparison, such as 'stable appearance', 'improved', 'unchanged', 'newly appeared', and changes referenced against known or prior findings.",0.4944852941176471,0.56,0.5348837209302325,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15736,latent_15736,1151,0.002302,0.0007997963,1.1952225,Observations in comparison to prior studies indicating specific changes or noted conditions.,"Examples with non-zero activation levels frequently involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies. Within these, there are specific anatomical or pathological observations noted, such as atelectasis, pleural effusions, or opacification, rather than stating ""no change"" or similar static descriptions. Reports that only state stability without specific pathological findings have lower activation levels.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15737,latent_15737,1653,0.003306,0.0011518713,1.2312515,Reports focus on interval changes or stability in imaging findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve description of interval changes or stability in pathology location and size between prior and current imaging studies, indicating how the radiological findings evolve over time.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15738,latent_15738,2055,0.00411,0.0014089461,0.95093125,Complex radiological assessment including device positioning or acute changes.,"Examples with high activation discuss intricate changes and observations on chest imaging, often after previous interventions or noted abnormalities, assessing variations over time, and mentioning devices or conditions potentially related to acute or complex cases. These elements indicate a thorough analysis under critical conditions.",0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5337995337995338,0.545,0.5343511450381679,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15739,latent_15739,1065,0.00213,0.0007708472,1.1599213,Comparison between current and prior imaging to identify changes.,"These examples describe the process of comparing current radiological findings to prior imaging studies, highlighting differences or confirming stability in specific pathologies such as cardiomegaly, atelectasis, or tortuous aortic structures. This pattern involves assessing changes over time in the patient’s condition using the phrase 'compared to' or similar wording explicitly.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15740,latent_15740,1476,0.002952,0.0010193066,1.0175093,Evaluation and comparison of tube or catheter placement to prior imaging.,"The common theme among high-activation samples is the presence and changes in tubes or catheters (e.g., endotracheal, nasogastric, PICC lines) identified and compared to prior studies. Reports emphasize positioning or adjustments of these devices, often noting changes or stability relative to past radiographs.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5263680578543963,0.535,0.547945205479452,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15741,latent_15741,1248,0.002496,0.00091261684,1.2531871,Findings reported in direct comparison to prior imaging.,"The common factor between these examples is the mention of a comparison with previous imaging and assessments of interval changes, stability, or lack of significant change since prior imaging. The language consistently refers to changes or stability observed over time, indicating the focus on radiological comparisons to ascertain disease progression or resolution.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5270147353101692,0.545,0.5323741007194245,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15742,latent_15742,1172,0.002344,0.0008574449,1.0900937,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging with focus on changes or stability.,"Activated examples consistently contain systematic observations comparing current findings to prior imaging, with an emphasis on noting any changes, stability, or the resolution of conditions. This pattern represents the common practice in radiology reports where new impressions are specifically contextualized by previous states.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15743,latent_15743,1509,0.003018,0.0010385894,0.939738,Significant changes or stability in findings compared to prior chest imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve the comparison of current chest imaging with prior studies, particularly focusing on significant interval findings such as changes in placement of medical devices, interval changes in pulmonary opacities, fluid levels, or the resolution or appearance of pathologies. Descriptions often include terms like 'as compared to', 'there is increased', or 'no relevant change', emphasizing changes of concern or stability over time.",0.6989160979526294,0.7,0.6785714285714286,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5631067961165048,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15744,latent_15744,1287,0.002574,0.00096449273,1.5560131,Reports where findings are stable or unchanged compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently indicate assessment or evaluation of radiological findings in comparison to prior images, specifically stating that these findings or elements have remained 'stable,' 'unchanged,' or provide explicit comparative statements indicating improvement or resolution despite the prior advice for follow-up or further action left unspecified. Such linguistic features focus on comparisons revealing stability or improvement in patient status.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3636363636363636,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5256410256410257,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15745,latent_15745,1349,0.002698,0.00094176136,0.9308857,Recognition of minimal or unchanged findings compared to prior images.,"The samples with high activation levels consistently involve reports where a direct comparison is made between current and prior radiological studies, and there is an explicit focus on describing minimal or no significant interval change in findings. Terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', and mentions of specific prior findings being similar or steady are highlighted, suggesting the model is detecting language typical of routine follow-up work in radiology reports.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5849066039858968,0.585,0.5876288659793815,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15746,latent_15746,1260,0.00252,0.00088007137,1.2105011,"Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies, focusing on stability or changes.","This pattern relates to the comparison of current findings with prior examinations where there is a specific focus on monitoring changes or stability in the presence of chronic or stable conditions, such as stable adult medical complaints, metastases, or hardware positions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15747,latent_15747,710,0.00142,0.00050053454,1.3136622,Reporting findings in comparison to previous radiological studies.,"Examples with higher activation identify findings in current imaging that have a comparison element. The pattern shows attempts to not just describe findings but also evaluate them relative to previous images, using references to intervals, comparisons, previous states, or unchanged assessments.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4132018609006057,0.450261780104712,0.4527027027027027,0.7362637362637363,91.0,100.0
+15748,latent_15748,1619,0.003238,0.0011349192,1.3040694,Comparison to prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability in conditions like effusions or opacities.,"The examples have higher activation when discussing findings of change or stability between current and prior imaging, particularly when tracking conditions or specific abnormalities like effusions, opacities, pneumothorax, or lung nodules. Reports without comparative evaluations tend to have lower activation.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4791666666666667,0.5,0.5,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15749,latent_15749,1080,0.00216,0.00075742294,0.8954502,Comparison of current image findings with prior images for changes or stability.,"These examples involve an explicit evaluation of current imaging findings in direct comparison to prior imaging studies, particularly with an emphasis on identifying changes or stability over time. The task often involves interpreting the status of medical interventions or ongoing pathological processes.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4891237127261971,0.525,0.5163398692810458,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15750,latent_15750,1609,0.003218,0.0011107783,1.037377,Requests for assessment in comparison with prior imaging or stability of conditions.,"The examples with higher activation involve the request for assessments related to changes, conditions, or abnormalities within the images when compared to a prior imaging or a baseline state. These often describe specific findings whether indicative of stability or change, such as 'unchanged position', 'stable', 'new findings', or 'comparison shows', and relate to evaluating stability or change of a condition.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4835267743125514,0.545,0.5266272189349113,0.89,100.0,100.0
+15751,latent_15751,1658,0.003316,0.0011262326,0.8745521,Description involves detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on comparing current imaging findings with prior studies to identify changes or stability, especially in the context of various medical conditions. These reports often explicitly describe interval changes or stable features between the current and prior images, which is a key pattern for these prompts.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15752,latent_15752,1448,0.002896,0.0010521763,1.5765512,Pleural effusions compared to prior imaging studies.,"The presence of pleural effusions, particularly when they are noted in comparison to prior imaging studies, is a recurring element in the examples with higher activation levels. Reports emphasize stability or changes in the effusions relative to prior studies, as well as distinguishing them from other pathologies.",0.510212950890917,0.5306122448979592,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.4612391499551033,0.505,0.5116279069767442,0.22,100.0,100.0
+15753,latent_15753,1787,0.003574,0.0012320449,1.1382569,"Findings are in comparison to prior images, assessing interval changes.",Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve evaluating the findings of current images in direct comparison to findings from prior images. This pattern is often used to assess changes over time in radiological imaging.,0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5733854180051914,0.585,0.5639097744360902,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15754,latent_15754,1859,0.003718,0.0012637123,0.86721194,Significant changes or stability in findings compared to prior imaging.,The examples that show high activation all focus on comparing changes in imaging with prior reports and explicitly document specific changes in pathology or findings between current and previous images. The phrase ‘in comparison to the prior’ or similar equivalents appears prominently and refers to observable changes or stability in medical imaging.,0.677938808373591,0.68,0.6551724137931034,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5555555555555556,0.56,0.55,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15755,latent_15755,1134,0.002268,0.0008081536,0.8803719,Detailed comparisons between current and prior radiographic images.,"Examples with high activations commonly involved thorough descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging. This indicates a focus on a detailed comparison across multiple views provided: current frontal, lateral, and prior frontal images. The reports are rich in diagnostic detail, particularly for conditions related to heart, lungs, and associated findings.",0.5714285714285714,0.5714285714285714,0.56,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5086206896551724,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15756,latent_15756,1272,0.002544,0.0008876818,0.86464775,Evaluating changes in serial chest X-rays compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels emphasize interpreting current chest radiographs alongside prior imaging or reports, often focusing on identifying changes over time, such as decreased opacities, improved pneumonia, or unchanged assessment of devices and conditions. This consistent element is not strongly emphasized in examples with low activation levels.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15757,latent_15757,1306,0.002612,0.0009497319,1.1530123,Request for comparison absent prior comparison info or explicitly stated absence.,"Examples with high activation levels often include explicit requests to compare current images with prior ones, but without providing any previous comparison information or explicitly stating that there is no prior image to compare against, creating ambiguity or complexity in the task.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4736309343050916,0.48,0.4836065573770491,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15758,latent_15758,1580,0.00316,0.0010917101,1.0663813,Focus on findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Most examples with high activation levels reference both current and prior imaging studies to describe or identify changes over time, with the model's focus being on discerning notable developments or comparisons between findings. This type of comparative analysis often involves using dates, references to 'prior', and changes like 'unchanged from', indicating a pattern of interest in dynamic assessment rather than static findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.51426209177346,0.53,0.5220588235294118,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15759,latent_15759,1472,0.002944,0.0010176547,1.0770398,Explicit comparison of current imaging findings to prior radiographs.,"This category of examples illustrates direct mentions of a previous imaging study for comparison and indications of changes, or lack thereof, based on comparing the current to previous radiographs. Activation levels are higher when comparisons are specified explicitly, showing that identification of interval changes relative to prior imaging is a key pattern in radiological investigations.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.5526315789473685,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.5333333333333333,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15760,latent_15760,828,0.001656,0.0006220429,1.2157229,Comparative reporting of findings relative to prior images.,"Highly activated examples provide comparisons with previous images, emphasizing changes, stability, or persistence of findings relative to prior studies. They focus on analyzing current pathology based on historical context and imaging comparisons, suggesting an inquiry nature interested in evaluating changes over time in radiological findings.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5227720717916796,0.54,0.5289855072463768,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15761,latent_15761,1227,0.002454,0.0008453588,1.2455418,New or changed radiological findings in comparison to prior images.,"Examples with an activation level close to zero typically do not involve changes in radiographic findings or new developments, whereas examples with higher activation levels describe either changes, interval updates, or newly identified changes in comparison with prior studies. The focus is on updates or interval changes in radiological findings when compared with prior images or reports.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.3571428571428571,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5389019786678828,0.545,0.5584415584415584,0.43,100.0,100.0
+15762,latent_15762,1742,0.003484,0.0012383291,1.1215386,Interval comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"These examples emphasize direct comparison of current patient imaging to prior studies to assess interval changes, stability, or improvements in findings. This relational analysis between examinations is frequently used in radiological assessments to identify changes over time.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4460407444798219,0.465,0.4744525547445255,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15763,latent_15763,1410,0.00282,0.0009784288,1.0594423,Interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Activation levels indicate focus on descriptions of interval changes or stability in findings since prior imaging. Reports highlight comparison with past imaging, noting improvements, unchanged conditions, or change in procedural elements such as placements of tubes or catheters.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.595959595959596,0.6,0.5833333333333334,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15764,latent_15764,1553,0.003106,0.0010759489,1.1065638,Detailed analysis over multiple imaging views and prior reports.,"Examples with high activation levels involve complex cases with either multiple modalities for comparison or intricate findings requiring detailed analysis across different views. The emphasis is on comprehensive review and comparison of different imaging views and prior reports, particularly when detailed explanations or findings are necessary to assess continuous pathological scenarios or interventions.",0.4025735294117647,0.48,0.4883720930232558,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4506778868630201,0.53,0.5170454545454546,0.91,100.0,100.0
+15765,latent_15765,803,0.001606,0.00059153937,1.2677989,References to both frontal and lateral chest images.,"Activation levels correlate with descriptions that explicitly reference both frontal and lateral chest radiograph views, indicating comprehensive imaging evaluation as part of the findings. This pattern is used to encompass a broader spectrum of diagnostic capability, potentially identifying pathologies unobservable in a single view.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4477166260307372,0.453125,0.4491525423728814,0.5698924731182796,93.0,99.0
+15766,latent_15766,1435,0.00287,0.00097425503,0.96096265,Detection of interval changes in lung opacities or consolidations.,"In the examples with high activations, there is a focus on detecting interval changes in lung opacities or consolidations that could suggest pneumonia, atelectasis, or pleural effusion. It involves evaluation for changes in existing conditions or new developments, and how these are described in comparison to prior images. This reveals insights into how the model identifies progression or resolution of chest pathologies in radiological studies.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.8333333333333334,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5512572533849129,0.565,0.6,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15767,latent_15767,1578,0.003156,0.0010925016,1.0014741,Explicit requests for detailed comparisons between current and prior chest images with prescribed changes.,"The highly activated examples predominantly involve detailed descriptions of the comparison between current and prior chest images, focusing on changes or stability in findings. These examples include explicit instructions to provide a detailed analysis of how current radiological findings differ from previous exams, often discussing lung, cardiac, and mediastinal structures.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4849871246781169,0.485,0.4851485148514851,0.49,100.0,100.0
+15768,latent_15768,1125,0.00225,0.0007870952,1.1528797,Explicit current versus prior image findings comparison.,"Reports with high activation explicitly compare current and prior imaging in terms of findings or changes, often with detailed alignment between the comparison and current description.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15769,latent_15769,1630,0.00326,0.0011160193,0.9651052,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and noted interval changes or stability.,"Higher activation levels are associated with examples where there is explicit mention or description of changes and comparison to prior imaging, including perceptible differences or implications regarding disease progression, stabilization, or incidental findings from previous studies. These examples emphasize changes or stability over time, making them distinct in radiological evaluation.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5419733414270178,0.542713567839196,0.5494505494505495,0.5,100.0,99.0
+15770,latent_15770,991,0.001982,0.00070473267,1.0905925,Findings described in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated samples often reference findings that explicitly compare current images to prior ones, indicating an interval change or stability in the findings. Phrases such as 'compared to prior', 'as compared to previous', or explicitly dated previous exams underscore this comparison element. The pattern reflects a comparison-focused evaluation.",0.3156199677938808,0.32,0.3448275862068966,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.52,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15771,latent_15771,1174,0.002348,0.0008515562,1.3928509,Monitoring and adjustment of medical device placement across images.,"Examples with significant activation involve reports that describe changes in medical devices (like tubes or catheters) and their positioning as seen across different images, explicitly using comparison phrases. This pattern pertains to the monitoring and adjustment of medical equipment based on imaging results.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5087719298245614,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15772,latent_15772,857,0.001714,0.00065993017,1.9472787,Description of stable or changed medical device placement compared to prior images.,"The pattern of high activation levels is associated with precise descriptions of medical devices, lines, and tubes (such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, or PICC lines) and their positions relative to anatomical landmarks, with explicit comparison to stable or moved positions from prior images.",0.5649048625792812,0.5714285714285714,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15773,latent_15773,1501,0.003002,0.0010417914,0.9952595,Comparison of findings between current and prior imaging.,"The active examples consistently involve explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, indicating variations or constancies in findings. This pattern reflects radiologists' routine practice of tracking changes over time, and the descriptions often highlight changes or established stability of certain findings like effusions, aeration, or positioning of devices.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4763814616755793,0.53,0.5182926829268293,0.85,100.0,100.0
+15774,latent_15774,1883,0.003766,0.001288618,0.84852445,Explicit comparisons of anatomical or pathological changes over time in imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels often include detailed narrative comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, frequently due to a change (or stability) in conditions such as opacities, consolidation, or presence of medical devices. High activations correspond to reports that provide descriptive comparisons of imaging findings over time.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15775,latent_15775,1588,0.003176,0.0010903633,1.1377833,Interval change noticed from previous imaging.,"Most represents changes or findings noted between current and prior radiographic images, especially with respect to the state or position of indwelling medical devices, pulmonary opacities, or pleural effusions. This pattern is indicative of reports that emphasize interval changes",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.568922305764411,0.57,0.5777777777777777,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15776,latent_15776,1850,0.0037,0.0012699189,1.0261433,Comparison of current imaging with prior studies to assess changes.,"The pattern seen across these examples involves referencing current imaging findings in comparison with prior imaging, often using the phrase 'in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This is a standard approach in radiology reports to track changes or stability in a patient’s condition over time, especially when evaluating for issues such as pneumonia, pleural effusions, or other cardiopulmonary conditions.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5374275529917553,0.575,0.5477707006369427,0.86,100.0,100.0
+15777,latent_15777,675,0.00135,0.000605735,1.6479558,Radiological stability compared to previous images.,"These examples frequently involve describing findings based on comparisons to prior imaging, specifically noting minimal or no change in various anatomical or clinical aspects such as the heart size, lung fields, or presence of devices, which often are crucial in radiological comparisons to assess disease progression or stability.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4662754767626955,0.4722222222222222,0.4125,0.4074074074074074,81.0,99.0
+15778,latent_15778,2155,0.00431,0.0014761772,0.9229311,Directive for comparative analysis with prior image.,"Most instances with high activation levels include a directive to describe the findings in comparison with a specific prior image. The model appears to activate strongly when there is explicit instruction or task of comparative analysis related to a prior examination, despite the variable inclusion of clinical history or technique details.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4403970013726111,0.47,0.4794520547945205,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15779,latent_15779,1105,0.00221,0.00076257763,1.0958092,Detail-oriented comparative analysis of radiographic changes over time.,"Examples with high activation levels frequently describe detailed changes or comparisons between current and prior images, often noting specific intervals, newly appeared changes, or stability/alteration of findings from prior reports. These details suggest a focus on professional assessment requiring in-depth image comparison and evaluation of subtle changes, which aligns with needing substantial information for detailed analysis.",0.5775862068965517,0.5918367346938775,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.6014026589974519,0.605,0.5882352941176471,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15780,latent_15780,1431,0.002862,0.0010119043,1.3945659,Direct instructions or focus on comparing current images to previous images.,"Highly activated examples describe findings in the radiology study by comparing the current images to prior ones, often using terms like 'in comparison to', 'compared to prior', 'previous radiograph', and directly asking for comparisons indicating stability or change in medical conditions.",0.4623655913978494,0.54,0.5227272727272727,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4253384282709796,0.515,0.5083798882681564,0.91,100.0,100.0
+15781,latent_15781,1117,0.002234,0.00080404093,1.2157406,Structured report with time-based comparison to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve the evaluation and description of findings on current radiological images with explicit comparisons to prior images, with the text structurally segmenting different parts of the report such as HISTORY, TECHNIQUE, and FINDINGS. These reports often contain detailed narrative changes over time regarding specific clinical conditions or technical changes, not just simple or standard observations.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15782,latent_15782,1441,0.002882,0.0009936204,0.9832551,Detailed analysis emphasizing changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The samples that have high activation levels frequently include direct comparisons with prior imaging studies and emphasize either stability or notable changes in findings. Examples with extensive descriptions focusing on chest imaging findings in context of comparison with prior radiographic images, especially regarding changes or consistencies, tend to have higher activations. This aligns with the importance of monitoring progression or stability in clinical practice.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5915435139573071,0.5979899497487438,0.5806451612903226,0.72,100.0,99.0
+15783,latent_15783,254,0.000508,0.00035843518,2.8251414,Evaluation for acute cardiopulmonary process.,"These examples consistently involve an investigation for potential acute cardiopulmonary processes, which includes evaluating the heart and lungs for issues like pneumonia, pneumothorax, or effusions. The common thread is the indication suggesting the evaluation is focused on ruling out or confirming acute cardiopulmonary problems rather than chronic conditions.",0.4875,0.5121951219512195,0.4411764705882353,0.9375,16.0,25.0,0.4140267350302142,0.4140625,0.2626262626262626,0.9285714285714286,28.0,100.0
+15784,latent_15784,1265,0.00253,0.0009061249,1.3955051,Reports comparing current to prior imaging for changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve direct mentions of the comparison between current and prior imaging, often with explicit changes or stability noted. This aligns with the typical radiological practice of referencing current findings against prior images to note changes, which is a key aspect of follow-up in clinical radiology, particularly when managing chronic conditions or evaluating treatment response.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.502660498943822,0.535,0.5231788079470199,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15785,latent_15785,1484,0.002968,0.001018969,0.8889523,Evaluation of interval changes or stability against prior images.,"Examples with higher activation involve radiological evaluations that compare current images to prior ones, highlighting interval changes or stability. This is a frequent practice in radiology to assess the progression or stability of findings, using direct language to describe changes like improvement, worsening, or stability in relation to previous studies.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5099935525467441,0.525,0.5185185185185185,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15786,latent_15786,1427,0.002854,0.0010208731,1.1652961,Descriptions emphasize changes in interval imaging and device placements.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention the presence of both current and prior images for comparison, often with specific changes or intervals noted, like removals of tubes or catheters, or descriptions of changes in pathological findings. This pattern indicates the focus is on documenting interval changes and stable conditions over time, particularly involving devices and lung pathologies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5546218487394958,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15787,latent_15787,869,0.001738,0.0006207283,1.1818757,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples consistently involve the comparison of a current imaging study with previous ones. The pattern involves identifying the similarities or differences in imaging findings over time, typically highlighting any changes or stability in specific features. This comparison aspect is explicitly described in each example.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4491831332388566,0.485,0.4900662251655629,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15788,latent_15788,931,0.001862,0.00063671515,0.9617991,"Comparison of current and prior images, detailing medical findings and changes.","Examples display a specific format of managing and comparing current and prior examination images and medical reports. The pattern involves providing exam images, history, technique, findings, with a pronounced emphasis on descriptions indicating comparisons or intervals of change, mainly following instructions to annotate and compare findings across examinations, regardless of observed changes. These examples leverage structured observation to facilitate continuity of care and accuracy in diagnosis.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15789,latent_15789,1737,0.003474,0.0011683761,0.81073284,Description of changes or stability relative to prior imaging.,"These examples involve comparison between current and prior radiological images, specifically focusing on descriptions of changes or stability of findings over time. Reports often mention resolved pathologies, intervals of improvement, or stability of various conditions, frequently using temporal terms like 'since prior' or 'compared to'.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15790,latent_15790,1706,0.003412,0.0011697359,1.1979116,Changes or positions of medical devices compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels include radiological comparisons that explicitly detail changes in medical devices, such as endotracheal or nasogastric tubes, from previous images. The examples consistently mention device positions, adjustments, or stable appearances, emphasizing the importance of device management in the radiological assessment.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4873940788785438,0.51,0.5172413793103449,0.3,100.0,100.0
+15791,latent_15791,1473,0.002946,0.0010220648,1.1857601,Interval changes in radiological findings.,"These examples with higher activation levels all describe interval changes, emphasizing terms like 'development', 'improved', or 'worsened'. Such updates indicate dynamic changes in the patient's condition relative to previous examinations, often highlighting progression or resolution of specific findings.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5699569956995699,0.57,0.5686274509803921,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15792,latent_15792,2043,0.004086,0.0013987018,0.9022602,Comparison of medical device or line placement between current and prior images.,"The pattern of positive activation appears in examples that involve explicitly comparing current and previous images, serving an instructional purpose in assisting with interpretation, especially when evaluating changes like catheter, endotracheal tube positions, or line placement. The high activation consistently aligns with situations where explicit instructions or guided comparison is required for medical device positioning or stabilization.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.53125,0.55,0.5833333333333334,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15793,latent_15793,1107,0.002214,0.0007735137,1.0235763,Radiographic comparison yielding detailed changes or information.,The examples with higher activation levels generally describe radiographic findings that provide a substantial amount of information or changes in condition compared to prior radiographic images. This pattern emphasizes thorough interpretation and detailed comparison related to the patient's current condition or history.,0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4734070563454449,0.475,0.4774774774774775,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15794,latent_15794,1195,0.00239,0.000841416,1.2317766,Reports focus on interval change or comparison with prior studies.,"Examples with high activation often include explicit or attempted comparison of current images with prior images, indicating a focus on evaluating changes or stability over time. This includes references to interval placement or removal of devices, effusion changes, or pneumothorax assessment, which suggests monitoring over successive imaging studies.",0.3106617647058823,0.4,0.4418604651162791,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5242836596968692,0.57,0.5432098765432098,0.88,100.0,100.0
+15795,latent_15795,1005,0.00201,0.0006957071,1.3032945,Presence of medical devices or lines in radiology reports.,"These examples consistently mention the presence of medical devices or catheters, often noting their positions, alongside descriptions of findings such as fluid retention or cardiomegaly. This indicates a focus on patients requiring careful monitoring due to severe conditions or ongoing medical interventions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5698924731182796,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15796,latent_15796,1535,0.00307,0.0010614111,1.0097282,Cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours are assessed as stable or unremarkable.,"The examples that exhibit high activation levels consistently focus on the identification and assessment of the cardiac silhouette as normal or stable, often in the context of examining thoracic or pulmonary conditions. These examples describe unchanged cardiac size or mediastinal contours in the setting of other findings, such as opacities, effusions, or devices, suggesting a consistent method of assessing heart stability in imaging.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5340564643402891,0.535,0.5321100917431193,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15797,latent_15797,1643,0.003286,0.0011334331,1.4167392,Assessment of unchanged or stable findings in imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently employ terms indicating stability, such as 'unchanged' or 'stable', regarding specific findings in chest imaging studies. This suggests the model responds strongly to assessments of unchanged or stable radiographic findings over time or across examinations.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5577777777777778,0.5577889447236181,0.5612244897959183,0.55,100.0,99.0
+15798,latent_15798,1042,0.002084,0.0007526606,1.2717085,Descriptions involving both current and prior imaging comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve both current and previous image comparisons being provided. This linguistic pattern mirrors a formulaic description often utilized in radiology, emphasizing identification of changes (or stability) in findings over time using terms like 'compared to' or 'similar to prior'.",0.525101763907734,0.58,0.5476190476190477,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4762186364788375,0.535,0.5209580838323353,0.87,100.0,100.0
+15799,latent_15799,692,0.001384,0.0006197646,2.1735482,Comparison with prior images revealing changes or stability correlated with the medical condition.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently feature descriptions of changes being identified when compared to prior images. They emphasize findings like unchanged or stable conditions, interval progresses, or differences that correlate with medical indications or ongoing conditions.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4458049886621315,0.4468085106382978,0.4130434782608695,0.4318181818181818,88.0,100.0
+15800,latent_15800,1594,0.003188,0.0011172356,0.94574136,Change in findings compared to prior imaging study.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve descriptions of radiological findings based on comparisons with prior imaging but focus specifically on new or resolved conditions such as changes in opacity, effusion, atelectasis, or other abnormalities indicating progression or improvement of a condition. They emphasize change rather than static findings, which contributes to increased relevance in these examples.",0.6532027743778049,0.66,0.625,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5607476635514018,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15801,latent_15801,1070,0.00214,0.00074985065,0.89965963,Description of findings compared to prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently involve descriptions of comparison between current and prior imaging. This pattern emphasizes the identification of changes or stability in findings over time, reflecting a process of tracking patient progress or disease development. Conversely, low activation samples do not effectively demonstrate this comparative analysis.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15802,latent_15802,821,0.001642,0.0005993481,1.6252388,Emphasis on comparing current findings to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve requests or mentions of comparing current findings with those from provided prior images, frequently including instructions to provide descriptions in this comparison context. This highlights the importance of changes over time in diagnostic radiology.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4906760864207673,0.535,0.5220125786163522,0.83,100.0,100.0
+15803,latent_15803,1081,0.002162,0.0007504371,1.0328012,Reports focusing on interval changes in current versus prior images.,"Samples with high activation include directives to compare current imaging findings with previous ones and consistently describe evidence of interval change, improvement, or stability, showing the importance of identifying changes over time in radiology reports.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4600403659143928,0.485,0.4895104895104895,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15804,latent_15804,1130,0.00226,0.0007927846,1.0146146,Detailed description of thoracic findings with minimal acute cardiopulmonary focus.,"The examples show high activation when there's a clear, descriptive finding of some abnormality such as an effusion, atelectasis, or consolidation without an accompanying focus or acute cardiopulmonary process, which typically becomes the center of visual attention in radiological assessments.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.511470373448163,0.515,0.5128205128205128,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15805,latent_15805,1436,0.002872,0.0010328788,1.0112667,Details of stability or changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"This pattern captures reports with explicit references to comparison between current images and prior reports. Most examples highlight stable or unchanged findings, evidence of interval changes, and note continuity or modifications in specific conditions or devices. The explicit involvement of comparison benchmarks is crucial in these examples.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5664885573142454,0.57,0.559322033898305,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15806,latent_15806,1035,0.00207,0.0007502389,1.4662616,Stable cardiomediastinal contour or unchanged position of devices on portable chest X-rays.,The consistently highest activation levels are found in examples discussing portable chest X-rays with stable cardiomediastinal contours or support and monitoring devices unchanged in position. Stability amidst other findings or repeated studies seems to be a focal point for high activation.,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5546107905658468,0.56,0.5769230769230769,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15807,latent_15807,907,0.001814,0.0007078449,1.507679,Comparison findings in relation to prior frontal image.,Examples with high activation levels all request descriptions of image findings that specifically involve comparing a current frontal image with a previous frontal image. Such requests usually explicitly indicate the use of past imaging for comparison purposes and explicitly describe findings in relation to prior images.,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5039272426622571,0.52,0.5147058823529411,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15808,latent_15808,1795,0.00359,0.0012518846,1.333311,Descriptions include interval change/stability in comparison to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activations involve comparing imaging results with prior studies, often noting changes or stability in the medical status since the previous imaging, with a focus on interval changes or stability in pathologies documented in the radiological study.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5434253246753247,0.55,0.5403225806451613,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15809,latent_15809,1677,0.003354,0.0011543218,0.97151154,Significant interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels indicate findings with notable changes compared to prior images. References to 'interval changes', 'increased density', 'stable cardiomegaly', or similar terms showing comparisons to earlier studies, establishing significant differences or stability, are consistent throughout.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5555555555555556,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15810,latent_15810,1223,0.002446,0.0008460683,0.9191017,Text underscores imply missing comparison data in imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples involve specific reference to comparisons with prior imaging findings, often with unstated completion dates or missing details, indicated by underscores or references. This pattern shows a focus on relative changes over time as missing specifics about comparison dates appear often, suggesting temporality is important.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.414091993597294,0.515,0.5081967213114754,0.93,100.0,100.0
+15811,latent_15811,1801,0.003602,0.001252076,0.9471139,Comparison with prior imaging and findings stability or change.,The pattern observed in the examples with higher activation involves the mention of comparison with prior imaging studies and descriptions of findings like stability or change over time. This reflects specific circumstances or follow-up situations where monitoring progression or intervention outcomes is key.,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5702932877740674,0.585,0.5620437956204379,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15812,latent_15812,1675,0.00335,0.0011301873,0.75529677,Focus on comparative analysis with prior images.,"The highly activated examples focus on describing findings by contrasting them with previous images, emphasizing changes or stability over time. Phrases like 'in comparison to prior', 'unchanged', or the description of new findings are pivotal, indicating the importance of comparative analysis in clinical evaluation.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4705250190034337,0.495,0.4965034965034965,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15813,latent_15813,1079,0.002158,0.0007961124,1.1898825,Mentions of pneumothorax presence or absence in radiology reports.,"These examples include references to pneumothorax, which is a common clinical concern in radiology reports. The presence or absence of a pneumothorax is often remarked upon, as it is a critical finding that requires specific management.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5928003031451308,0.592964824120603,0.6,0.57,100.0,99.0
+15814,latent_15814,1570,0.00314,0.0011238047,1.3733085,Use of placeholders [[...]] indicating cut-off or incomplete words.,"Examples with high activation levels include detailed descriptions of radiological findings and comparisons, particularly in complex clinical scenarios. emphasis is also placed on the use of placeholders like '[[' and ']]' which imply missing or cut-off text, indicating potentially incomplete information or focus points.",0.4047619047619047,0.52,0.5106382978723404,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4107382934294459,0.485,0.4912280701754385,0.84,100.0,100.0
+15815,latent_15815,620,0.00124,0.0005527499,1.8140727,Assistant asked to compare current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include the instruction for the assistant to provide a description that involves a comparison to the prior frontal image or study. This reflects a focus on identifying changes or stability over time in chest radiographs, which is a crucial aspect of monitoring patient's progress or response to therapy.",0.3566176470588235,0.44,0.4651162790697674,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4168404170008019,0.4388888888888889,0.4222222222222222,0.7125,80.0,100.0
+15816,latent_15816,1104,0.002208,0.000771161,1.0617558,Explicit comparison to prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit comparisons to prior imaging studies. This pattern highlights the model's focus on detecting mentions of stability or changes in findings through sequential imaging, which is often clinically significant for tracking disease progression or stability.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4748223663886314,0.49,0.4925373134328358,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15817,latent_15817,1344,0.002688,0.0009404261,0.9416896,Detailed device positioning or changes in sequential imaging.,"The examples display higher activation when there is mention of a history or placement of medical devices such as pacemakers, tubes, or leads. The detailed description and comparison of device placement or identification between current and prior images is the key factor, especially in cases where device adjustment is noted.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.461338100102145,0.4673366834170854,0.4615384615384615,0.36,100.0,99.0
+15818,latent_15818,541,0.001082,0.00051107263,1.9522059,Explicit comparison of current and past imaging findings.,"The high activation samples focus on descriptions that contextualize current chest radiograph findings, explicitly relative to prior imaging to highlight stability, changes, or lack thereof. The emphasis is on comparing current and previous images to assess intervals or stability in medical conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4663770509460381,0.467065868263473,0.3962264150943396,0.6268656716417911,67.0,100.0
+15819,latent_15819,2399,0.004798,0.0016709021,1.2695765,Radiology report noting changes or placements of tubes/lines between exams.,"The examples demonstrating activation often include reports where various changes, reallocations, or placements of tubes and lines are noted in comparison to previous imaging. This indicates a pattern focused on tracking modifications of these medical devices to evaluate their status between exams.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5735294117647058,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15820,latent_15820,1314,0.002628,0.0009018421,0.98511994,Comparison of radiological findings to prior studies to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe images of findings compared to previous ones, emphasizing any changes or lack thereof. These comparisons are not always indicative of significant changes but nonetheless provide a context for evaluating the current findings against historical data.",0.6782496782496783,0.7,0.631578947368421,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15821,latent_15821,1231,0.002462,0.0008511033,1.1386282,Focus on comparison with prior imaging to assess changes.,"The model shows high activation in cases where current images are compared with prior imaging studies, highlighting differences or stability in pathological findings, notably changes in opacities, volume, or equipment placement. These reports emphasize comparative analysis, a critical aspect in monitoring disease progression or regression in radiological assessments.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.46875,0.49,0.4928571428571429,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15822,latent_15822,731,0.001462,0.0006038322,1.0931227,"Comparison to prior imaging, focusing on changes or stability.","The examples with high activation levels consistently mention changes or stability in findings when compared with prior imaging. These reports focus on interval changes over time and are less about describing a singular anatomic image, often addition or detailing changes in placement of catheters or appearance of lung opacities or pleural effusions.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5928571428571429,0.5978835978835979,0.5537190082644629,0.7528089887640449,89.0,100.0
+15823,latent_15823,1253,0.002506,0.0008617235,0.99194455,Detailed changes in imaging findings compared to prior exams.,"Examples with activation levels show detailed descriptions and changes in imaging findings upon direct comparison to prior images, often highlighting stable, improving, or new findings in the context of an established diagnosis or treatment response. These examples are precise in noting minor changes, suggesting attention to temporal disease progression or stability.",0.6,0.6,0.6,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.529811924769908,0.53,0.5288461538461539,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15824,latent_15824,983,0.001966,0.000725605,1.3469076,"Comparison with previous imaging, noting interval changes.","This pattern highlights the repeated action of comparing current imaging with previous images, focusing on noted interval changes or the stability of specific pathologies. The text indicates thorough evaluation by directly detailing the timeframes and differences in imaging findings over time, a critical task for tracking disease progression or treatment response in patients.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4848840989222575,0.485,0.4854368932038835,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15825,latent_15825,1227,0.002454,0.0008585283,1.1475732,Assessment of changes in findings compared to the prior radiograph.,"The pattern is identified by referencing changes or stability in radiographic findings using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'interval change' from a prior examination.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4162640901771336,0.42,0.4310344827586206,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15826,latent_15826,1262,0.002524,0.00091867027,1.3170117,Comparative analysis of radiological findings for changes or stability.,"These examples focus on radiological studies that assess stability or changes in various medical devices, opacities, or anatomical changes across time by explicitly comparing current images with prior imaging studies. The use of comparative analysis is a pattern throughout these examples.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.480083857442348,0.535,0.5212121212121212,0.86,100.0,100.0
+15827,latent_15827,1671,0.003342,0.001164422,0.91596544,Emphasis on interval changes between current and previous images.,"The high activation levels are associated with comparisons made between the current and prior radiological images. The comparative statements often discuss changes in findings, such as progression, resolution, or stability of observed conditions across different imaging exams. Essentially, the pattern highlights the emphasis on interval change.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15828,latent_15828,1431,0.002862,0.0009928768,0.9636103,Stability of devices or anatomical features in comparison to prior images.,"The pattern is identified in examples where there is evidence of device or anatomical stability, such as unchanged cardiomediastinal contours, pacemaker lead positioning, or specific tube placements across compared studies. These descriptions are common in reports where stability or lack of change in relation to prior images is emphasized.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4749868746718668,0.475,0.4752475247524752,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15829,latent_15829,938,0.001876,0.00067206396,1.1340879,Request for detailed comparison and description of minimal changes in radiologic findings.,"High-activation examples frequently mention findings or techniques in chest X-ray and CT interpretations that involve reevaluation or reassessment compared to previous studies, despite the changes being minor or non-acute.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5203094777562862,0.535,0.5259259259259259,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15830,latent_15830,1325,0.00265,0.00091427093,1.21492,Notable comparison with prior imaging revealing changes or stability.,"The examples with activations showing the pattern provide a direct or indirect observation of interval changes, new findings, or stability in findings, specifically reflecting a significant or notable comparison with prior imaging. These details are often highlighted in radiology reports for clinical follow-up and accurate diagnosis over time.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5416887008637405,0.545,0.5384615384615384,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15831,latent_15831,468,0.000936,0.00039919835,1.4165434,Identification of significant change or new abnormalities compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation often involve the presence of a significant change or abnormality detected in comparison to prior imaging, such as interval development or resolution of a condition, despite a report of stability in some other structures. Additionally, they often suggest potential future actions (e.g., follow-up or further evaluation). References to prior imaging without change or absence of acute issues tend to have lower activation.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4887157555997798,0.5341614906832298,0.3653846153846153,0.3114754098360656,61.0,100.0
+15832,latent_15832,1134,0.002268,0.00083185657,1.5833759,Comparison of current and prior images to determine interval changes.,"The examples with high activations frequently involve instructions to visually compare the current images with prior imaging to assess for interval change, align with the expected process of analyzing sequential radiological findings to determine stability or progression of conditions. This often includes changes like reduced effusions or stable lesions, consistent with evaluative comparisons.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4375,0.46,0.4714285714285714,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15833,latent_15833,2020,0.00404,0.0013831063,0.8491933,Descriptions of current radiology findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently reference direct comparisons between the current radiological findings and previous images or reports. This comparison is explicitly included in the report, typically involving examining changes in findings over time or confirming the stability or changes in medical devices or conditions.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4320486815415821,0.475,0.4838709677419355,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15834,latent_15834,1308,0.002616,0.0009390097,0.96269506,High activation when current findings are presented with reference to and comparison against prior images.,"The pattern emerges from the prompt structure where the description requires comparison with prior images. The reports without specific prior comparison data or those focusing purely on new findings without mental constructs for change tend to have higher activation. Those with explicit 'no comparison' or focusing mainly on unchanged conditions from prior tend to have lower activation, suggesting a focus on contrast enhancement.",0.3021346469622331,0.32,0.3636363636363636,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4403970013726111,0.47,0.4794520547945205,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15835,latent_15835,1047,0.002094,0.0007700423,1.1775261,Utilization and analysis of prior and current image comparisons.,"High activation levels are associated with the presence of 'comparison' information in the text, including clear description of prior and current images, often indicating 'change', 'improvement', or 'stability' relative to prior imaging. The protocol compares current images with prior images and looks at changes in specific findings or structures (e.g., opacities, tube placements).",0.355877616747182,0.36,0.3793103448275862,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15836,latent_15836,905,0.00181,0.00067299925,1.6928217,Significant interval change or stability between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve scenarios where the comparison of findings from current and prior images highlights specific, clinically significant changes or observations, such as stability, improvement, or progression of certain conditions. This reflects the importance of change detection in radiological assessments.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5412844036697247,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15837,latent_15837,1192,0.002384,0.0008758913,1.6427879,Direct description of radiological findings from a single image without comparative analysis.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe in detail the findings from a single image or set of images, particularly highlighting changes from a prior image. They typically involve a given context or indication for evaluation. Each finding is contrasted or described in terms of its relation to previous images, either directly or indirectly, but still focuses on the single image or direct description of the current status of identified pathologies or physical features.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.2727272727272727,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4650537634408602,0.4974874371859296,0.5,0.25,100.0,99.0
+15838,latent_15838,1971,0.003942,0.0013712901,1.0502487,Observations on placement or change of medical devices in imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels include specific observations about medical devices (e.g., endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, pleural catheters) and interval changes in their positions or presence. This focus on medical hardware and related procedural updates might explain why these particular reports trigger higher activation levels.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5786587076860283,0.5829145728643216,0.6,0.4848484848484848,99.0,100.0
+15839,latent_15839,1077,0.002154,0.000753812,1.0380422,Detailed interval changes in clinical findings via imaging comparisons.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed comparisons to prior imaging studies, describing changes in significant clinical findings like effusions, opacities, or tubes while assessing for interval changes. They incorporate radiological findings that guide clinical management decisions or highlight significant changes over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5832391855589867,0.585,0.5977011494252874,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15840,latent_15840,1218,0.002436,0.0008708725,1.0334954,"High focus on comparison to prior imaging in evaluating changes, especially post-surgery or devices.","The examples with higher activation levels commonly involve descriptions of radiological findings compared to previous studies, especially when assessing changes in medical devices or anatomical structures post-surgery. This comparison is specific to changes from interventions or diseases, often highlighting stability or interval change in devices or pathologies.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5185213947347985,0.535,0.5255474452554745,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15841,latent_15841,1160,0.00232,0.00086750055,1.4747722,Focus on evaluation of procedural changes or device placements.,"These examples highlight comparisons between current and prior imaging with emphasis on changes related to devices, procedures, or secondary findings. They evaluate for stability or interval change, showcasing a pattern of assessing alterations in procedural devices (e.g., tubes, catheters) or secondary pathologies post-intervention.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4666666666666667,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4605263157894737,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15842,latent_15842,1149,0.002298,0.000785469,1.5211943,Comparison emphasizing changes in thoracic features or interventions.,"The examples showing higher activation levels include explicit comparisons to prior imaging and emphasize changes in specific thoracic features like lung opacities, cardiac or mediastinal contour, and interventions like tubes or lines, especially where these details relate to follow-up of known problems.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15843,latent_15843,1185,0.00237,0.0008201233,0.8120576,Explicit comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess stability or change.,"Highly activated examples consistently include explicit statements comparing current images with prior ones, indicating stability or change in specific medical conditions or radiological findings. This pattern is typical in follow-up imaging examinations where the progression or resolution of a condition is being monitored.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15844,latent_15844,1171,0.002342,0.0008100694,0.9245362,Detailed comparison with prior image findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels explicitly include detailed comparison with previous imaging studies, mentioning prior findings and nuances between past and current states for matched tracking of progression or stability. The emphasis is on descriptive updates relative to the prior state.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5741376286981137,0.575,0.5688073394495413,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15845,latent_15845,1065,0.00213,0.0007715262,0.95685434,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions of findings compared to prior images, particularly focusing on changes or stability in pathologies, device positions, or anatomical structures from one examination to the next. These comparisons are a crucial element in tracking progression or stability in clinical conditions, hence the pattern identified.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5034013605442177,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15846,latent_15846,791,0.001582,0.00054689276,1.241073,Detailed pathology evaluation via imaging comparison for diagnostic insight.,"Reports with moderate to higher activation levels often emphasize detailed skeptical evaluation of current pathological states via diagnostic markers visible in the imaging, compared to prior baseline or previous states, identifying new developments or changes in condition. These updates typically relate to current diagnostic challenges or therapeutic implications.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5181818181818182,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15847,latent_15847,1861,0.003722,0.001294189,0.97113883,Analysis of radiology reports for interval changes between current and prior studies.,The examples with high activations contain descriptions that focus on providing a comparative analysis between current and prior imaging studies. The explicit mention of changes or stability between the images is prominent. The pattern is thus related to assessing interval changes through comparative language.,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15848,latent_15848,1385,0.00277,0.00095952174,1.163954,Focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in relation to previous or prior radiological images, specifically referring to interval changes, placement of tubes or catheters, and stable appearances compared to earlier exams. This indicates the pattern focuses on temporal changes in patient status as captured by successive imaging.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5039983804028747,0.51,0.5081967213114754,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15849,latent_15849,1492,0.002984,0.0010311897,0.90425503,Findings analysis prefaced with 'Provide a description of the findings'.,Activated examples consistently involve references to findings documented in prior reports and the stylistic choice to begin the analysis with the phrase 'Provide a description of the findings...'. This suggests a pattern focused on how the reports are structured and the recurring use of this prompt phrase.,0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.468671679197995,0.47,0.4727272727272727,0.52,100.0,100.0
+15850,latent_15850,1074,0.002148,0.00074698345,0.8946906,Emphasis on unchanged findings when compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve documentation of findings that are explicitly compared to prior imaging, especially emphasizing stable or unchanged conditions over time. The comparisons often lead to conclusions about no significant interval change or stability of certain features.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5191815856777494,0.53,0.5428571428571428,0.38,100.0,100.0
+15851,latent_15851,1261,0.002522,0.00087801355,1.3085555,Explicit comparison of images with prior studies.,"The examples consistently describe instructions to compare current radiology images with prior ones, engaging in explicit comparison despite variations in the images provided. These examples often invoke reference to previous examinations to evaluate changes or stability over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15852,latent_15852,947,0.001894,0.00069911627,1.2859163,Focus on changes or stability in imaging findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation explicitly reference comparisons in imaging findings between current and prior images, highlighting changes or stability in clinical features. This pattern focuses on detecting variations over time in the radiology study.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.4963503649635036,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15853,latent_15853,1240,0.00248,0.0008812996,1.5541644,"Report of ""no significant interval change"" with prior imaging comparison.","The identification of no interval change upon comparison with prior imaging suggests stability in findings, which is integral in assessing the progression or resolution of medical conditions. This observation is explicitly noted in these high activation examples.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4608845048727746,0.545,0.7142857142857143,0.15,100.0,100.0
+15854,latent_15854,1242,0.002484,0.00088333385,1.1062704,Direct comparison of current and prior images to assess changes.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve detailed direct comparisons between current and prior imaging to identify changes. They often include explicit references to unresolved issues such as 'no new changes', 'unchanged', 'stable', 'as compared to prior', and observe findings like opacities, enlargements, or other unchanged features. These examples clearly focus on comparative analysis in radiology.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5410036719706243,0.55,0.5390625,0.69,100.0,100.0
+15855,latent_15855,934,0.001868,0.0007445147,1.427081,Presence of templated or dictated-style reporting of findings.,"The examples with higher activation levels indicate references to discussing the findings and providing comparisons with prior reports or images as part of a templated or dictated process, without omitting key details or sections. This likely signifies a structured approach to conveying radiological findings involving templated prompts and scripted interactions.",0.4165398274987316,0.54,0.5208333333333334,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3208191126279863,0.4723618090452261,0.4845360824742268,0.9494949494949496,99.0,100.0
+15856,latent_15856,877,0.001754,0.000629038,1.0000813,Changes in lung pathology findings compared to prior images.,"The radiology reports with high activation levels tend to describe changes in lung findings compared to prior images, indicating worsened or stabilized conditions, often involving opacities or consolidations. Examples that highlight such changes in lung pathology show greater activation.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5060283687943262,0.507537688442211,0.5113636363636364,0.45,100.0,99.0
+15857,latent_15857,1195,0.00239,0.00082466373,0.88157284,Finding comparisons with prior imaging.,"Samples with high activation often involved descriptions of specific radiological findings followed by a comparison to previous images or tests. This pattern is indicative of radiological workflow, wherein changes (or stability) over time are significant markers in assessment. These comparisons include detailed observations of changes in lung volumes, cardiomediastinal silhouette, or any identifiable abnormalities or devices, providing a vital context in monitoring disease progression or recovery.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5093333333333333,0.54,0.5266666666666666,0.79,100.0,100.0
+15858,latent_15858,1995,0.00399,0.0013641038,0.84876496,Detailed comparison of changes or stability between current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels are consistently focusing on the comparative descriptions between current and prior imaging, specifically highlighting differences in findings or stability in those findings. The emphasis is on evaluating changes or lack thereof over time between different radiological examinations, making comparison a central theme.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5488721804511278,0.55,0.5454545454545454,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15859,latent_15859,1391,0.002782,0.0009852354,1.2080946,Comparing changes in imaging findings relative to prior studies.,"Most examples focus on comparing findings in recent imaging to prior studies. Specifically, they mention conditions like hyperinflated lungs, normalization of structures, and comparisons relative to focal issues like pneumothorax, which are highlighted as similar or improved compared to prior imaging. This context is commonly seen in tracking chronic conditions or checking for resolution or progression, making these consistent patterns across the examples.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15860,latent_15860,1060,0.00212,0.0007795122,1.1494653,Explicit comparison with prior imaging in findings.,Examples with high activation involve detailed comparison with prior imaging—including reference to changes or stability—when analyzing the findings. This focus on comparison is essential in radiology for evaluating progression or resolution of conditions.,0.3397358943577431,0.34,0.3333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5252525252525253,0.53,0.525,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15861,latent_15861,1176,0.002352,0.0008236014,1.0014375,Emphasis on comparison of current versus prior imaging findings.,"The provided examples focus on analyzing and comparing current imaging findings with previous radiology reports. High activation examples often involve descriptions of new or stable changes in findings compared to prior images. Reports include detailed descriptions of stability or changes in medical condition, particularly comparing aspects like cardiac silhouette size, consolidation, or device placements over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4114913392479932,0.4723618090452261,0.4846625766871165,0.79,100.0,99.0
+15862,latent_15862,1537,0.003074,0.0010534216,0.85686207,Comparisons and changes noted between current and prior images.,"The examples with significant activation involve detailed comparisons between current and prior medical imaging. Descriptions often include how specific findings have changed or remained stable over time, and consistently mention anatomical or pathological changes in explicit reference to images from prior studies.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5306254029658285,0.545,0.5333333333333333,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15863,latent_15863,1389,0.002778,0.0009726017,1.0159945,Findings compared to prior images emphasizing changes or stability.,"Examples with the highest activations reference descriptions of image findings in the context of comparisons with prior images, focusing specifically on the identification of notable changes or stability in anatomical structures and pulmonary opacities. This particular style of report emphasizes direct comparisons to gauge medical conditions' progress or resolution.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4594043247654019,0.47,0.4765625,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15864,latent_15864,1657,0.003314,0.0011532541,0.95222616,Dynamic interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently refer to specific changes or observations in the imaging findings that show ""interval change"", ""improvement"", or ""worsening"" when comparing the current images to prior studies. This involves detailed and specific descriptions of developments or resolutions over time, indicating the dynamic nature of findings.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5914793319309628,0.592964824120603,0.5803571428571429,0.6565656565656566,99.0,100.0
+15865,latent_15865,1317,0.002634,0.0008901848,1.1308454,Focus on device placement or adjustment in comparison to prior image.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve references to a prior image or examination alongside findings of stability or change, often involving the presence or adjustment of medical devices like catheters, tubes, or lines. These examples include comparisons and discussions about changes related to procedural outcomes or placement adjustments.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5714285714285714,0.44,100.0,100.0
+15866,latent_15866,1219,0.002438,0.0008488583,1.0819578,Low lung volumes with potential associated findings.,"This series of examples predominantly focuses on findings related to low lung volumes, which are frequently mentioned in context with crowding of bronchovascular structures, possible pulmonary edema, or pleural effusion. Reports are assessing changes in imaging over time, but the low lung volume with associated features remains a constant theme.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4598786063798497,0.495,0.4897959183673469,0.24,100.0,100.0
+15867,latent_15867,507,0.001014,0.00048395732,2.3867362,Use of both frontal and lateral images compared to multiple prior radiographs.,"Highly activated examples often specify radiograph views that include both frontal and lateral images, leveraging these additional views to assess changes against prior data. This pattern is distinct because less activated examples either lack lateral views or fail to use them for comparisons. Additionally, more activated examples include comprehensive comparisons across multiple prior studies, highlighting a detailed longitudinal review.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5110718160993449,0.5126582278481012,0.3956043956043956,0.6206896551724138,58.0,100.0
+15868,latent_15868,1206,0.002412,0.00087638857,1.1644293,Comparison with prior imaging described.,"Examples with high activation levels are structured around providing a description of findings from comparison with prior imaging, a consistent pattern in these reports.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15869,latent_15869,1540,0.00308,0.0010867453,1.1682073,Unchanged findings in follow-up radiology studies.,The high activation level examples consistently reference unchanged or unremarkable findings in follow-up radiology studies as compared to previous imaging. This suggests a pattern of stability or no progression in radiological observations that is seen as significant or common.,0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.3888888888888889,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4790457769181173,0.495,0.4923076923076923,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15870,latent_15870,1244,0.002488,0.0008996303,1.1465169,Focus on describing interval changes in imaging compared to previous studies.,"The examples show cases where detailed comparison is made with prior imaging studies, focusing on observed changes. The presence of specific notes (
+'Please provide a description of the findings in the radiology study 
+in comparison with prior images') indicates that the model activates when tasked with comparative evaluations, particularly when describing interval changes.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5298162238681463,0.535,0.5289256198347108,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15871,latent_15871,1678,0.003356,0.001167023,1.0493666,Emphasis on changes or comparisons with prior imaging studies.,"The pattern consists of imaging comparisons specifically noting changes from prior studies. This pattern is evident in the examples with higher activation values, such as changes in opacities, effusions, or structure positioning. These examples focus on the comparison aspect of reports where interval changes are assessed.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5353468304015931,0.58,0.5493827160493827,0.89,100.0,100.0
+15872,latent_15872,717,0.001434,0.00058572297,1.3765031,Comparison with prior images focusing on cardiorespiratory symptoms.,"Examples with higher activations focus on radiological findings and comparisons between current and prior images for patients with chest pain or shortness of breath. Reports compare the lung or cardiac silhouettes in terms of stability, changes, or findings related to cardiorespiratory pathologies, often suggesting what to rule out or confirm.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5017377201112141,0.5080213903743316,0.4793388429752066,0.6666666666666666,87.0,100.0
+15873,latent_15873,1317,0.002634,0.000928466,1.0644914,Comparison to prior images emphasizing change or stability in medical findings.,"These examples show a pattern of examining present findings in relation to prior images, typically identifying changes or stability in medical observations. The language focuses on descriptions that compare current images to previous ones, often providing an assessment of stability or change in conditions, such as effusions, effusion progression, tube placement, or cardiac silhouette size.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5288757733426523,0.545,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15874,latent_15874,1461,0.002922,0.0010490462,1.1017193,Comparison to prior images with focus on stability or slight changes in findings/location.,"The examples with high activation often involve the comparison of the current radiology findings against prior images, specifically with a focus on evaluating changes in conditions or device positions. These examples use language to compare past and present observations, indicative of monitoring stability or minor changes over time.",0.4041928721174004,0.4081632653061224,0.4,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5046728971962616,0.54,100.0,100.0
+15875,latent_15875,1411,0.002822,0.0009834288,1.0508478,Monitoring placement and stability of medical devices relative to anatomical landmarks.,The examples with high activation levels focus on describing the interval changes or stability in the position and placement of medical devices (such as endotracheal tubes or catheters) relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or the superior vena cava. This type of report is commonly seen in radiological studies monitoring the proper placement of devices.,0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4745762711864407,0.28,100.0,100.0
+15876,latent_15876,1255,0.00251,0.0008832963,0.95620346,Comparative assessment highlighting stability or resolution of chronic findings over time.,"The consistent element across examples with high activation levels is the presence of findings being compared to prior imaging, wherein these comparisons often highlight stability or change over time, focusing on unchanged or resolved pathologies like cardiomegaly, opacities, and other chronic findings. Language in these reports typically indicates a resolution or no significant change despite the chronicity of certain conditions.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5223130106851037,0.525,0.5294117647058824,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15877,latent_15877,637,0.001274,0.0004899955,1.542192,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess changes.,"The examples with higher activation consistently include direct or implied comparisons between current and previous imaging studies. This pattern reflects the importance of assessing changes over time, such as improvements, deteriorations, or stability in patient conditions, and is typical of thorough radiological assessments.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4666498549993695,0.4777777777777778,0.4444444444444444,0.7,80.0,100.0
+15878,latent_15878,775,0.00155,0.0005724746,1.0540394,Activation correlates with reports using 'N/A' or 'None' in COMPARISON field.,"The examples with higher activations consistently use either ""N/A"" or ""None"" for the COMPARISON field, indicating that in these instances, no prior images are available for reference, yet the reports still attempt to provide findings based on current images.",0.335049335049335,0.38,0.25,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4158512720156555,0.457286432160804,0.4042553191489361,0.1919191919191919,99.0,100.0
+15879,latent_15879,1408,0.002816,0.0010221871,1.1521149,Indications for specific condition evaluation or follow-up.,"These examples highlight specific indications or follow-ups for evaluation of specific conditions, which include references to previous reports. The pattern involves a focus on changes over time, clinical indications related to outcomes such as image-guided interventions or conditions like pneumonia, pneumothorax, and cardiomegaly and supplying study details like previous indications or findings from the current radiology analysis.",0.4041928721174004,0.4081632653061224,0.4137931034482758,0.5,24.0,25.0,0.5334329375376792,0.555,0.5384615384615384,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15880,latent_15880,1387,0.002774,0.00097454444,1.067661,Comparison of device placement or anatomical changes with prior imaging.,"The pattern here involves the description of findings related to changes between current and prior imaging despite the presence of specific instructions or comparisons stated to be made. The reports frequently mention relative changes in positions of medical devices, lungs, or other structures against a prior state or image.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15881,latent_15881,646,0.001292,0.0005298769,1.3723626,Comparison with previous studies to assess for interval changes.,Examples with high activation levels consistently involve comparing the findings on chest radiographs to previous or prior imaging studies to assess for changes or stability. This highlights the focus on interval change or the lack thereof as a key element leading to high activation levels.,0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.4193548387096774,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4215686274509803,0.4350282485875706,0.4094488188976378,0.6753246753246753,77.0,100.0
+15882,latent_15882,1106,0.002212,0.00078825856,0.9443468,Analysis requests to compare current images with prior images.,"The pattern in highly activated examples consistently involves requests for descriptions comparing a current radiology image to a prior image or the lack of prior comparator images. These examples often include explicit instructions to provide comparison findings, highlighting the importance of comparison in medical imaging analysis when evaluating changes in the patient's condition over time.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+15883,latent_15883,1540,0.00308,0.0010919381,1.5228325,Comparison with prior images showing interval changes or stability in conditions.,"The examples with higher activations consistently reference image comparisons and highlight changes or stability in identified conditions or treatments. These cases specifically mention alterations or the absence thereof in respiratory symptoms, effusions, and other abnormalities in relation to prior radiographs, emphasizing the significance of comparing temporal changes in the patient's condition.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4766355140186916,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15884,latent_15884,1354,0.002708,0.0009369589,0.98137796,"Radiological study findings compared to previous imaging, noting change or stability.","The samples with higher activations consistently describe changes or lack of changes in radiological findings when compared to prior imaging, often emphasizing interval changes such as new findings, resolution, or stability of previously noted issues. This indicates that the model is sensitive to reports emphasizing changes over time.",0.3676050591595267,0.38,0.40625,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4715015321756894,0.4773869346733668,0.4793388429752066,0.5858585858585859,99.0,100.0
+15885,latent_15885,1280,0.00256,0.0008734836,1.5502092,Stable findings compared to prior studies.,"Activation is higher in examples mentioning reports of stable findings, especially stable tube placements, lungs, heart, or opacities compared to previous imaging. Examples emphasize stable status in radiological observations.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5747863247863247,0.5879396984924623,0.640625,0.41,100.0,99.0
+15886,latent_15886,656,0.001312,0.00053321593,1.7809292,Presence of comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with activation levels near zero do not contain explicit comparisons to prior imaging, whereas higher activation examples include detailed comparisons or evaluations in relation to previous imaging findings. The pattern detected relates to whether a comparative element is present between current and prior imaging studies.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.512398753894081,0.5274725274725275,0.4848484848484848,0.7804878048780488,82.0,100.0
+15887,latent_15887,1208,0.002416,0.0008507264,1.1624011,Comparison of findings with prior images highlighting interval changes or stability.,"The pattern is observed in examples that include both current and prior images for direct comparison, specifically those with significant interval or unchanged findings. These descriptions effectively highlight comparisons in structural or pathological changes observed across time, which are underscored by similar phrasing and explicit mentions of stability or interval changes in conditions.",0.5306122448979592,0.5306122448979592,0.52,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5874818568409259,0.595,0.5748031496062992,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15888,latent_15888,996,0.001992,0.0007342929,1.219245,"Comparison of imaging findings with prior, noting device placements and changes.","The prominent pattern across these examples is the emphasis on changes or stability in findings from prior studies, often highlighted in the findings and impression sections, focusing on the placement or adjustments of medical devices such as tubes or lines or comparison of specific pathologies or anatomies compared to prior imaging.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5899589958995899,0.59,0.5918367346938775,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15889,latent_15889,658,0.001316,0.0005553993,1.5985354,Use of comparison descriptors to indicate changes or stability in radiographic findings.,"The examples show descriptions of frontal and lateral radiographic images where the findings are evaluated in comparison to prior images, with particular attention paid to descriptors like 'mild atelectasis', 'cardiomediastinal contour normal', 'lungs clear'. In these cases, there is a focus on the stability or minor changes in radiographic pattern, and comparisons tend to indicate either resolution or new developments in findings like atelectasis or pleural effusion.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5248018523466025,0.5271739130434783,0.4867256637168141,0.6547619047619048,84.0,100.0
+15890,latent_15890,1039,0.002078,0.0007507695,1.2460536,Comparative evaluations of lung volumes and clarity in imaging studies.,"The examples with high activation focus on the evaluation of lung volumes, typically indicating clear lungs or normal lung appearance, often in explicitly stated comparison to a previous image, highlighting changes or stability over time. The pattern seems to identify comparative descriptions of lung appearance and changes in imaging findings, primarily focusing on lung volumes and clarity.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5584102769971899,0.56,0.5535714285714286,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15891,latent_15891,1540,0.00308,0.0010584944,0.91128224,Detailed evaluation of tube or line placement in image comparisons.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention specific anatomical lines or tubes and their positions. Medical emphasis is on the placement, position, trajectory, or movement of these lines when comparing the current and prior images. Contrarily, low activation examples either lack such details or focus more broadly on other findings.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15892,latent_15892,1197,0.002394,0.0008608528,1.4861206,Changes or stability in chest image findings with prior report reference.,"The samples activate highly when a description of a frontal chest image is provided, with a focus on changes or stability in cardiomediastinal and thoracic conditions, particularly if a prior report is referenced, suggesting a significant correlation with the notion of comparing current conditions with historical findings particularly in patients with ongoing or chronic issues.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4978126375190909,0.515,0.5109489051094891,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15893,latent_15893,987,0.001974,0.00073286117,1.3078374,Assessing changes by comparing past and current images in reports.,"The examples reference the presence of comparison between current and previous imaging studies. This pattern indicates that radiological findings often involve assessing changes over time by comparing past and present images, which is crucial for understanding disease progression or stability.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15894,latent_15894,1163,0.002326,0.0009028524,1.5702401,Detailed descriptions of comparisons with prior imaging highlighting specific observed changes.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve reports that specifically request a comparison of the current imaging findings against prior images, but with clear new instructions or annotations to focus on particular improvements, changes, or specific areas of interest. Key indications include terms like 'compared to','uncertain changes', 'interval improvement' and consistent evaluations against prior imaging, often using terms like 'stable', 'as before', or 'interval'.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4587951559934319,0.4673366834170854,0.4533333333333333,0.3434343434343434,99.0,100.0
+15895,latent_15895,1286,0.002572,0.0009001507,1.0835252,Explicit detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation describe findings in comparison to previous state, specifically detailing changes, like improvement or worsening, often using terms like 'interval change', 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'worse from prior'. These highlight a pattern of comparing new findings to previous reports.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5927089880578253,0.595,0.5826086956521739,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15896,latent_15896,1630,0.00326,0.0011231704,0.9821992,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels often involve descriptions that specifically mention comparing current images to prior images regarding anatomical changes, adjustments in medical devices, or pathological progression. Such comparisons are classified by detailed examination of images showing interval changes or stability relative to earlier images, which aligns with high activation, suggesting notable comparisons between imaging sessions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.544897601960441,0.545,0.5436893203883495,0.56,100.0,100.0
+15897,latent_15897,1139,0.002278,0.00078458927,1.6883553,Comparison indicates progression or stability of findings over time.,"Examples with higher activations consistently show descriptions of changes in imaging findings when compared to previous images, often identifying new developments or persistent findings (e.g., size changes in cardiac silhouette, pleural effusions, pneumothorax, vascular congestion) between current and prior comparisons, sometimes in connection with or excluding certain diseases.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5335891070488227,0.535,0.5393258426966292,0.48,100.0,100.0
+15898,latent_15898,1545,0.00309,0.0010706476,1.1529821,Evaluation or confirmation of tube or line placement.,"Examples with high activation indicate a recurring pattern where the report requests the evaluation or confirmation of the placement of various medical tubes or lines, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, Port-A-Cath, etc.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5711206896551724,0.5778894472361809,0.6081081081081081,0.45,100.0,99.0
+15899,latent_15899,731,0.001462,0.00058107165,1.7205005,Comparison of current imaging to prior studies focusing on unchanged or mildly changed findings.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve interpretations of new imaging findings in contrast to prior studies, focusing on specifying any change (or lack thereof) even when the finding itself is not significantly new or acute. These include both stable and possibly worsening findings compared to previous exams, commonly using descriptors of no change, new, or worsened.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.2666666666666666,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.5275842375785266,0.5319148936170213,0.5,0.4659090909090909,88.0,100.0
+15900,latent_15900,1778,0.003556,0.0012430651,1.0524089,Focus on interval changes and device positioning in comparison with prior images.,"High activation examples consistently involve descriptions that focus on both interval changes and repositioning or placement assessments of medical devices like tubes and catheters. This includes evaluation of device position in relation to prior imaging, such as Dobhoff tubes, NG tubes, and catheters.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,100.0,100.0
+15901,latent_15901,862,0.001724,0.00061797025,0.9867859,Focus on comparison with prior imaging findings.,"Patterns near the higher activation levels consistently reference the use of multiple or prior imaging studies for comparison. These examples frequently include phrases like 'in comparison with', 'no interval change', and comparison dates or indicators, suggesting the importance of monitoring changes over time in reports.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4322524293045092,0.48,0.4873417721518987,0.77,100.0,100.0
+15902,latent_15902,1229,0.002458,0.00087702763,1.3208418,Reports emphasize changes or stability in imaging findings over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels explicitly focus on a progression of findings over time, typically assessing trends or changes between pre-existing and current imaging studies. These reports emphasize the evolution of certain conditions as observed across different time points, utilizing phrases like 'improved', 'increased', 'persistent', etc., to denote variations or stability.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5374100158528028,0.555,0.539568345323741,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15903,latent_15903,1117,0.002234,0.00075703714,0.7795156,Reference to changes in findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention findings such as lung abnormalities, changes in cardiomediastinal silhouette, pleural effusions, or device placement in relation to prior studies. These findings often detail significant changes, stability, or specific interventions assessed in comparison to previous images, which indicates the model focuses on the role of temporal changes between consecutive radiographs to determine activation.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5528256791138753,0.565,0.5488721804511278,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15904,latent_15904,1211,0.002422,0.00088174525,1.5780889,Reporting stable findings relative to prior imaging comparison.,"These examples indicate a pattern of comparing radiological findings with previous images, particularly focusing on no significant interval changes or stable conditions. This is a typical method of reporting in medical imaging where existing conditions are assessed against prior exams, and reports express stability or unchanged findings.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5160127690248172,0.53,0.5454545454545454,0.36,100.0,100.0
+15905,latent_15905,934,0.001868,0.0006414165,1.2890973,Detailed comparison between current and prior radiological findings.,"High activation examples focus on direct and detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings, highlighting interval changes or lack thereof. This often includes descriptions of unchanged findings as well as specific interval changes in clinical status or radiological findings, using detailed and structured comparative language.",0.625,0.64,0.6,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5879811074263892,0.59,0.5789473684210527,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15906,latent_15906,1186,0.002372,0.00082739955,1.4806793,Unchanged findings in comparison with previous images.,Examples with higher activation prominently include step-by-step technical descriptions of imaging procedures and reference to comparison with prior images that focus on unchanged findings. Reports detail specific unchanged aspects across current and prior images.,0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.65,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5540540540540541,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15907,latent_15907,1727,0.003454,0.0011906645,1.2173898,Description of imaging findings compared to prior images.,"These examples often contain reference to a current image being compared with a prior image, and the presence of new or unchanged findings is described in relation to a patient's known history or previous radiographic studies, such as unchanged atelectasis, effusions, tube positioning, or unchanged hardware.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15908,latent_15908,973,0.001946,0.00068896706,1.1169053,Interval changes in pneumothorax or chest tube presence.,"Activations are high when reports compare the current imaging findings to prior findings and indicate specific interval changes, such as decreases or increases in pneumothorax size or changes in the presence and effect of medical devices like chest tubes. These reports often document interventions or procedures (e.g., chest tube placement/removal) affecting interval changes.",0.7083333333333334,0.72,0.8666666666666667,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5364088647670737,0.59,0.78125,0.25,100.0,100.0
+15909,latent_15909,1157,0.002314,0.0008764095,1.9074566,"Emphasis on significant changes in radiographic findings when compared to prior images, with detailed patient history.","The examples with higher activation involve a focus on comparisons with prior imaging studies and emphasize the patient's history or specific changes. Often, the comparison indicates some change in the radiographic findings or patient status, which the indications reflect as significant for further analysis or clinical decision-making.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4925373134328358,0.33,100.0,100.0
+15910,latent_15910,1560,0.00312,0.001086109,1.0874324,"Comparison involving positioning or changes in devices, lung or pleura findings.","The high activation levels correspond to examples that compare current and prior images, focusing on findings specifically related to the positioning or changes in medical devices (like tubes or catheters), or lungs and pleura, which are critical in determining the patient's treatment, especially when contrast or invasiveness is involved.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4729226953286482,0.49,0.4926470588235294,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15911,latent_15911,1520,0.00304,0.0010503515,1.0082572,Focus on specific findings and changes compared to previous images.,"The examples with higher activation levels discuss specific findings in imaging studies, often involving the presence, placement, or change of medical devices or anatomical structures, with focus on previous imaging. These reports often note subtle changes or stable conditions, indicating that the pattern involves attending to technical or medical specifics from earlier reports or comparative studies.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15912,latent_15912,2780,0.00556,0.0018986362,1.0523123,Focus on cardiac conditions and structures.,"Examples with higher activations all describe heart conditions, such as moderate cardiomegaly, stable cardiomediastinal contours, or changes related to cardiac devices. This suggests a pattern of focusing on cardiac structures or conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4971264367816091,0.51,0.5147058823529411,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15913,latent_15913,926,0.001852,0.0006313177,1.2804587,Evaluation involving tube or device placement during imaging.,"Examples with activation levels above 3.0 consistently describe the placement or movement of tubes, catheters, or specific findings relevant to consideration for radiological interventions. This reflects a pattern where technical considerations involving placement or evaluation of devices contribute to higher activation levels.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4399455082116097,0.445,0.4320987654320987,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15914,latent_15914,1443,0.002886,0.001008101,1.2254107,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention specific radiographic findings and provide an explicit comparison to prior imaging or examinations, often highlighting changes in condition, position, or stability. This pattern is prevalent in detailed radiology reports where serial imaging is common to track progression or stability of certain conditions.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.6333333333333333,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5188679245283019,0.55,100.0,100.0
+15915,latent_15915,1640,0.00328,0.0011278518,1.0763584,Improvement or change in device positioning compared to prior images.,"These examples involve radiological examinations in which improvements or changes, especially in device positioning like tubes, ETT, or catheters, are detailed in comparison to prior images. The pattern revolves around assessments of interventions or procedural devices using language such as 'has been removed', 'there has been improvement', 'adequately positioned', or 'as compared to prior'.",0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4,0.08,25.0,25.0,0.4003341587850941,0.4924623115577889,0.4545454545454545,0.101010101010101,99.0,100.0
+15916,latent_15916,1032,0.002064,0.00069734576,0.82312644,Emphasis on stability or interval changes compared to prior images.,"The prompts with high activation levels consistently emphasize changes or stability between current and prior imaging in the findings section. The repeated references to ""compared to previous studies,"" intervals mentioned, and detailed change descriptions between consecutive imaging studies are indicative of this pattern.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4476957766461453,0.455,0.4634146341463415,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15917,latent_15917,1362,0.002724,0.0009463482,1.3284962,Comparative analysis with prior radiographic studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels require comparative descriptions between the current radiographic study and prior examinations. The focus is on identifying changes or confirming stability, but the presence of prior images for comparison is a crucial factor.",0.3431855500821018,0.36,0.3939393939393939,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.496551724137931,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15918,latent_15918,1424,0.002848,0.0009791432,1.0012449,Comparison to prior imaging to assess changes over time.,"These examples highlight findings described as comparisons to prior radiological images, specifically focusing on identifying changes over time. This pattern is evidenced by repeated comparisons of findings with previous examinations, often using terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', 'resolved', or identifying new features absent in prior images.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+15919,latent_15919,1551,0.003102,0.0010859658,1.0671053,Reports focusing on changes between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation demonstrate a common characteristic where findings from current images are compared directly to previous images, reflecting specific changes or stability across time. Terms like 'compared with', 'unchanged', or 'interval' clearly indicate a reference to prior images to assess current findings.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4810096720924746,0.505,0.5034965034965035,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15920,latent_15920,1327,0.002654,0.0009258261,0.9390582,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels typically involve descriptions of stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies. In contrast, examples with lower activation involve new or interval changes in findings without emphasizing stability. This pattern reflects a focus on stability or lack of significant change in imaging findings when comparing to previous reports.",0.5274633123689727,0.5306122448979592,0.5238095238095238,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5004919397563006,0.505,0.5061728395061729,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15921,latent_15921,1306,0.002612,0.00089377596,1.0318384,Changes in opacities or foreign bodies compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently contain specific findings that describe changes over time, particularly those involving fluctuations in opacities, pneumothorax, or foreign bodies. These findings are assessed in comparison to prior images to identify and describe new developments, changes, or stabilization in the observed condition.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5998399359743898,0.6,0.6041666666666666,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15922,latent_15922,1122,0.002244,0.00078764884,0.9407034,"Findings described in comparison to prior images, highlighting intervals of change or stability.","The examples with high activation levels involve descriptions of current imaging findings in comparison to prior studies. These descriptions often include changes or stability in anatomical features, medical devices, or disease processes. They highlight stability or change in specific features when compared to previous examinations.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5084999113273035,0.515,0.5121951219512195,0.63,100.0,100.0
+15923,latent_15923,725,0.00145,0.0005805895,1.6983397,Systematic comparison between current and prior images.,"This dataset's high-activation examples consistently demonstrate a comparative analysis of current and prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability, particularly the use of a systematic examination format involving 'Given the current...and prior...' and 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.'",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.4137931034482758,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.402465837299268,0.4052631578947368,0.3982300884955752,0.5,90.0,100.0
+15924,latent_15924,1862,0.003724,0.0012857222,0.88741255,Emphasis on interval changes between current and prior images.,"Many examples describe changes or stability in the findings when compared to prior imaging, with consistent use of phrases like ""in comparison to the previous study,"" ""changes since prior,"" and explicit notations of comparison with past exams. This is a distinct pattern in radiological assessments focused on intervals between consecutive studies.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5646621896621897,0.5678391959798995,0.5603448275862069,0.65,100.0,99.0
+15925,latent_15925,1526,0.003052,0.0010606697,0.94185513,"Reports detailing changes or assessments involving tubes, catheters, or vascular lines.","The examples with high activation levels involve changes or assessments related to tube placements, vascular lines, or catheters. This pattern suggests a focus on interventions and monitoring associated with procedural or post-procedural scenarios, rather than stable conditions without interventions.",0.6998799519807923,0.7,0.7083333333333334,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5148313693620479,0.5175879396984925,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,99.0
+15926,latent_15926,902,0.001804,0.0007234206,1.5317584,Explicit instructions to compare current and prior findings.,"The high-activation examples involve reports with explicit directions to compare current and prior images using language indicating a detailed change evaluation, such as 'provide a description of findings in comparison to prior'. This pattern focuses on reporting changes from a previously established baseline.",0.4583333333333333,0.4693877551020408,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,24.0,0.4652542588678668,0.475,0.4803149606299212,0.61,100.0,100.0
+15927,latent_15927,1793,0.003586,0.0012736658,1.7012045,Stable or unchanged findings in serial chest radiographs.,"The examples with high activation levels describe scenarios where radiological findings are stable or unchanged compared to prior studies, or they specify intervals between current and past imaging studies without significant new findings. These scenarios highlight a pattern of radiologists ensuring that any new issues are contextualized as stable or not significantly changing.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4757536041939711,0.48,0.4756097560975609,0.39,100.0,100.0
+15928,latent_15928,1175,0.00235,0.0008971754,1.6447563,Comparison of current versus prior imaging findings.,"Highly activated examples include both a description of current and previous imaging, emphasizing the instruction to compare and describe findings based on prior images. This involves specific phrases indicating comparison, assurance of stability, or noting subtle changes.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4559999999999999,0.49,0.4933333333333333,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15929,latent_15929,1814,0.003628,0.0012564092,1.133058,Detailed longitudinal comparison between current and prior images.,"The examples with high activation compare current radiological findings with prior images, emphasizing changes or stability over time, which suggests the model attunes to comparative language and temporal references relating to medical imaging. Specific patterns of change or stability between current and prior examinations are highlighted, often with precise details about the timing of the compared images.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5474530018192845,0.5477386934673367,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,99.0
+15930,latent_15930,1283,0.002566,0.00093554496,1.1270151,Comparison of current findings with previous radiological images.,"Examples with significant activation levels include descriptions of the findings from prior imaging studies. This pattern reflects evaluation of radiological findings in context and comparison to earlier exams, specifically noting changes or stability over time.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15931,latent_15931,1275,0.00255,0.0008793432,1.0326662,Comparison between current and prior imaging with focus on implanted medical devices.,Examples with high activation levels involve a detailed analysis comparing current versus prior imaging of patients with implanted medical devices like Port-A-Caths or support lines. This is characteristic of comprehensive radiological evaluations that assess interval changes with respect to the position of such devices or associated complications.,0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15932,latent_15932,1348,0.002696,0.0009035901,0.82615256,Procedural interventions (intubation/tubes) and complications compared in images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently mention imaging findings in the context of procedural interventions, such as intubation or tube placement, correlating these with potential complications like pneumothorax while making comparisons between current and prior images supportive of identifying interval changes.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4901960784313725,0.25,100.0,100.0
+15933,latent_15933,845,0.00169,0.00069078617,1.6377358,Intervals changes or stable findings between current and prior images.,"The activation values appear to correlate with requests for providing a description of findings in a current image compared to a prior image, involving some form of interval change or stability in findings. Examples with changed conditions or improvements in noted pathologies, such as reductions in consolidation or effusion, have higher activations regardless of whether or not explicit past comparisons are made.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5087719298245614,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15934,latent_15934,2093,0.004186,0.0014487581,0.9392351,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and differential considerations without significant new pathological findings.,"Examining the samples, higher activations do not involve specific significant pathological findings or changes, instead, they involve providing a comprehensive description considering various possible differential diagnoses or detailed comparison with prior images. This is exemplified by examples that entail detailed impression and comparison procedures on findings over time or in the context of previous medical history.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15935,latent_15935,1224,0.002448,0.0008661959,1.0486954,Radiological findings compared to prior imaging studies for interval change.,"Each highly activated example shows a pattern where the current imaging findings are evaluated against prior images and presents an interval change or stability of specific anatomical or pathological features. The model is triggered by the focus on longitudinal comparison and status check between current and prior imaging studies, denoting the importance of historical data review.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15936,latent_15936,865,0.00173,0.00062036613,0.82118094,Interval changes or status stability based on prior imaging comparison.,"These examples consistently focus on juxtaposing findings from current imaging with prior imaging, mainly involving various radiological changes or device positions over time. This pattern of linguistic expression underlines assessment criteria based on historical comparisons, reflecting a common protocol in radiological evaluations to determine interval changes or stability.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5618342524741256,0.565,0.5555555555555556,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15937,latent_15937,1376,0.002752,0.0009886272,1.4353278,Complex interpretative comparisons of current versus prior images.,"The primary focus in these examples is on the radiological assistant's role in providing detailed descriptions in the context of changes observed over time in radiographic comparisons. High activations are associated with complex comparative evaluations that synthesize new and prior imaging results, demonstrating clinical reasoning skills in identifying and describing changes or stability in conditions based on imaging comparisons.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5509093322713394,0.5728643216080402,0.5524475524475524,0.79,100.0,99.0
+15938,latent_15938,933,0.001866,0.00069511065,1.2034928,Description of medical interventions or device positions in comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve details about interventions or medical devices in images, including tubes or catheter placements, and changes in conditions requiring specific description of these elements. This indicates a model activation pattern for identifying and assessing medical interventions and treatment progression in imaging.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4313378928763544,0.445,0.4202898550724637,0.29,100.0,100.0
+15939,latent_15939,785,0.00157,0.0006249704,1.7845391,Detailed comparison with prior imaging and technical medical details.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently mention detailed comparison with prior images and include medical equipment or a notable change in patient history. Phrases like ""Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"" are included, indicating that both the comparison and specific changes in image interpretation or patient condition are significant.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4397522522522522,0.4472361809045226,0.4552845528455284,0.5656565656565656,99.0,100.0
+15940,latent_15940,2015,0.00403,0.001365009,1.0158014,Comparison to prior imaging emphasizing change in findings.,"The highly activated examples emphasize comparison of the current radiology findings against prior images, highlighting any changes over time. The language consistently references continuation, resolution, or progression of specific conditions from previous imaging, with attention to changes in abnormal findings.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15941,latent_15941,1435,0.00287,0.0010207526,1.3112602,Descriptive focus on cardiomediastinal silhouette attributes.,"The focus of these examples with higher activations is the presence of cardiomediastinal silhouette definitions, such as any form of enlargement or tortuosity. The activation generally relates to the presence of descriptions indicating abnormalities or prominent features of the cardiac silhouette or mediastinal contours.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4615384615384615,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4217473287240729,0.425,0.4347826086956521,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15942,latent_15942,1350,0.0027,0.00092490495,0.92857647,Detailed comparison with prior images focusing on changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging, often initiating or concluding with explicit requests to compare findings and provide impressions based on previous reports. This pattern of comparison is consistently mentioned in high activation examples.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5949898747468687,0.595,0.5959595959595959,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15943,latent_15943,1164,0.002328,0.00080753275,1.424109,Normal cardiac silhouette with no significant lung findings.,"The pattern indicates that examples focusing on normal cardiomediastinal silhouette, normal cardiac silhouette, or unremarkable heart size in conjunction with clear or unchanged lungs without significant findings like consolidation, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax lead to high activation levels. These pairings suggest a tendency to generate higher activations when mentioned together.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4680710994075049,0.495,0.4909090909090909,0.27,100.0,100.0
+15944,latent_15944,1352,0.002704,0.0009543368,1.257497,Evaluation of interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"This dataset focuses heavily on the evaluation of current radiological findings in comparison to prior studies, with attention to any interval changes or stability. The comparisons typically specify whether there have been changes in identified conditions such as consolidation, effusions, or other abnormalities, indicating the central theme of interval evaluation for change.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4715447154471545,0.58,100.0,100.0
+15945,latent_15945,1484,0.002968,0.0010041405,0.7791813,Emphasis on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples that show activation have descriptions indicating interval changes in conditions or structures within the study compared to a previous examination, using terms like 'unchanged', 'interval increase', or 'stable'. These terms are used to describe how findings have shifted or remained stable from prior imaging, suggesting an emphasis on comparative analysis.",0.4179044560417503,0.42,0.4285714285714285,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5866767983789261,0.5879396984924623,0.5765765765765766,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+15946,latent_15946,1545,0.00309,0.0010762373,1.2753458,Comparison with multiple prior radiographic studies for stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings that have been cross-referenced with previous radiological studies, demonstrating 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'interval change'. This involves comparisons to prior imaging reports to note the progression or stability of findings, indicating a repeating pattern of comparison with multiple prior radiographic studies.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4938271604938271,0.4,100.0,100.0
+15947,latent_15947,1240,0.00248,0.0008735616,1.0782275,"Provide description of findings comparing current and prior images, noting interval changes or stability.","The higher activations consistently involve evaluations that explicitly include a 'given' current image and compare it with prior images, especially focusing on identifying interval changes or stability across multiple prior studies. This repetition in focusing on comparisons between current and prior images appears to trigger higher activations.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5610383713009914,0.565,0.5546218487394958,0.66,100.0,100.0
+15948,latent_15948,1593,0.003186,0.001090335,0.93839955,Stable or unchanged findings in serial imaging comparisons.,"The examples with high activation levels show findings related to comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often noting stability or unchanged conditions, which is common in radiological analysis for diseases with chronic progression or post-surgical assessments.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5334776000206095,0.542713567839196,0.5633802816901409,0.4,100.0,99.0
+15949,latent_15949,1418,0.002836,0.0010080069,1.3713504,Evaluation of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation largely involve cases where there is comparison between current and prior imaging, especially with provided prior report details, and specific assessments for change, such as new opacities, tubes or devices placement, and thoracentesis. These instances typically utilize structured reports including clear historical comparatives and detailed analysis of interval changes between images, showing the model's focus on structured observational descriptions and evaluation for interval changes.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5037037037037037,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15950,latent_15950,1149,0.002298,0.00078866334,0.93025255,Reports referencing comparisons with prior images or reports.,"Patterns across these examples show radiological assessments involving descriptions of findings in comparison to either a prior frontal image or prior report. These reports frequently cite specific changes or stability compared to prior assessments, often noting subtle findings that might have gone unnoticed without side-by-side comparisons.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.55,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4459520578923564,0.51,0.5059523809523809,0.85,100.0,100.0
+15951,latent_15951,891,0.001782,0.00061187235,1.1665524,Detailed description of radiological findings with specific pathology terms.,"Highly activated examples involve mentions of specific radiological terms indicating abnormalities or changes in images, with detailed descriptions of findings such as ""atelectasis,"" ""opacifications,"" or ""nodular opacities,"" often compared to prior reports. Less activated examples lack these specific pathological terms or detailed findings.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5384615384615384,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.5440767554297452,0.545,0.5494505494505495,0.5,100.0,100.0
+15952,latent_15952,959,0.001918,0.00068852684,1.1958435,Structured comparison of current images to prior ones highlighting stability or change.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include descriptions about the evaluator's task of comparing current image findings to a prior one. This structured comparison is highlighted by phrases like 'no relevant change', 'is unchanged', 'slight improvement', or 'worsening', which denotes a shift over time or stability in the patient's condition.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,100.0,100.0
+15953,latent_15953,1087,0.002174,0.00075195706,1.2551444,Reports emphasizing changes or comparisons with previous images.,"Examples with high activation include findings that involve any unusualness or changes compared to prior imaging, leading to a careful comparison being emphasized or asked for in the text. They often focus on issues like cardiopulmonary changes or any borderline diagnostic change, possibly requiring more expert analysis.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5008680555555556,0.54,0.5256410256410257,0.82,100.0,100.0
+15954,latent_15954,1038,0.002076,0.0007270531,1.044488,Comparison of tube or line placement with prior image.,"Highly activated samples consistently refer to image evaluation involving tubes, lines, or devices and their placement or positioning relative to anatomical landmarks in comparison to previous imaging. This involves assessment of interventions like chest tubes, endotracheal tubes, or nasogastric tubes, commonly noted in radiology reports for monitoring therapeutic device placements.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5932203389830508,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15955,latent_15955,568,0.001136,0.00047021228,2.5303657,Reports compare current findings with prior imaging studies.,"All the examples that have higher activation levels involve comparisons with prior imaging. This pattern is indicative of reports highlighting radiological changes over time, which are fundamental in determining the progression or resolution of a condition.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4219718309859155,0.4385964912280701,0.4031007751937984,0.7323943661971831,71.0,100.0
+15956,latent_15956,1372,0.002744,0.0009779842,1.1936488,"Comparison of current and prior image findings, noting changes or stability.","The pattern involves reviewing images and specifically describing comparisons with prior images, highlighting changes or stability in findings such as effusions, tube placements, and structural characteristics over time. This pattern shows tight integration of recognizing changes with references to historical images, a common task in radiological follow-ups.",0.4676227727075185,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.68,25.0,24.0,0.5377777777777777,0.545,0.536,0.67,100.0,100.0
+15957,latent_15957,1219,0.002438,0.00088965625,1.8493421,Presence and assessment of cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours.,"Activation levels in these examples correlate with the presence of a description of the cardiomediastinal silhouette and hilar contours in radiology findings. These descriptions often mention stability, changes, and the cardiomediastinal silhouette's status, indicating that attention to these specific anatomical features aligns with higher activation values in the dataset.",0.7211497211497211,0.74,0.6578947368421053,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.5454545454545454,0.55,0.5416666666666666,0.65,100.0,100.0
+15958,latent_15958,1250,0.0025,0.00091438275,1.1065348,Emphasis on interval change assessment in imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels uniformly make reference to changes observed over time in sequential radiological images. This often involves evaluation of interval changes post-surgical procedures, status post interventions, or monitoring known conditions, hence focusing on the temporal aspect of the radiological findings by comparing current and previous images.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.5714285714285714,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5784126984126984,0.585,0.568,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15959,latent_15959,1325,0.00265,0.00095638563,1.5249659,Descriptions of positioning or changes of medical devices/equipment on imaging.,"These examples focus on descriptions of medical device placements or findings related to tubes, catheters, and other implements, usually noting changes in positions or advising repositioning, compared to prior imaging. The emphasis is on the presence, positioning, and status of devices rather than on anatomical findings alone.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.57995799579958,0.58,0.5784313725490197,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15960,latent_15960,1552,0.003104,0.0010613335,0.92112947,Comparative analysis of imaging for device positioning or anatomical changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference the positioning, changes, or evaluation of devices or anatomical structures via compared frontal (and sometimes lateral) images, particularly in reference to catheters, tubes, opacities, or nodular changes. The pattern highlights the use of comparative imaging to detect or assess changes or positioning of medical devices, nodules, opacities, and other pathologies.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5072463768115942,0.7,100.0,100.0
+15961,latent_15961,1561,0.003122,0.0010969107,1.4678067,Complex evaluations using serial image comparisons.,"The examples with non-zero activation levels describe a process of careful evaluation and monitoring changes using sequential images, typically involving complex scenarios such as tube/line placements and effusions which are compared across multiple image sets. These are particularly characterized by more intricate and detailed changes between the images over time compared to basic descriptions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15962,latent_15962,1374,0.002748,0.0009953788,1.0962064,Specific comparison to prior imaging studies combined with explicit evaluation purposes or history.,"Activation levels are higher for examples that explicitly reference comparison to prior imaging studies or images, or mention specific evaluation purposes, particularly when a detailed history or purpose (i.e., specific indications) for evaluation is given.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4826311899482631,0.51,0.5068493150684932,0.74,100.0,100.0
+15963,latent_15963,1046,0.002092,0.00073857454,1.1994234,Emphasized mild or minimal changes in stable findings.,"These examples involve reports that incorporate findings of mild changes, subtle observations, or minor anomalies in the context of broader stability of radiological findings. Descriptions include terms like 'minimal', 'mild', 'subtle', 'slightly', or observations linked to routine follow-up rather than acute findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5885186672019269,0.59,0.6022727272727273,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15964,latent_15964,1246,0.002492,0.00090247125,1.414351,Comparison of current radiographic findings with prior images.,"Examples with the highest activation levels involve instances where the findings from prior radiographs or imaging are explicitly compared with current images, detailing changes or stabilities over time. This common practice in radiology provides a temporal context for assessing patient conditions, giving insights into progression or resolution.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5254017905296084,0.56,0.538961038961039,0.83,100.0,100.0
+15965,latent_15965,1897,0.003794,0.0013179961,1.0257494,Evaluation of medical tube or line placement within body on imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels describe procedures and findings regarding placement and evaluation of medical tubes, lines, or devices within the body, such as endotracheal tubes, enteric tubes, and PICC lines. The pattern involves checking for placement correctness or interval change in position of such devices using imaging studies.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4557791537667698,0.4673366834170854,0.4571428571428571,0.32,100.0,99.0
+15966,latent_15966,1175,0.00235,0.0008570986,1.5604934,Evaluations based solely on current imaging without prior study comparisons.,"This pattern highlights reports where descriptions focus on the examination of the findings primarily within a single imaging session (""given the current...""), without referencing prior comparison studies to note changes over time, as evidenced by the frequent lack of previous study comparisons.",0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.3,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.52,0.55,0.6,0.3,100.0,100.0
+15967,latent_15967,1251,0.002502,0.00089974096,1.1591761,Comparison of current image with prior images.,"The examples given refer to radiological studies where the current frontal image is compared against the previous images. They encompass various conditions, but the commonality across activations is the detailed directive and integration of comparisons to prior studies. Examples with lower activations often lack explicit previous image comparison directives.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4397471152116368,0.455,0.4661654135338345,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15968,latent_15968,1449,0.002898,0.001015126,0.95369184,Emphasis on stable or unchanged findings from prior imaging.,"This pattern describes references to comparisons made with prior imaging and focuses specifically on the stability or lack of significant change in the findings. The information on stability or lack of major changes in imaging findings offers valuable insights for clinical management, which is a key feature of these reports.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5416666666666666,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5564068958564372,0.56,0.573170731707317,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15969,latent_15969,919,0.001838,0.0007109246,1.3580495,Emphasis on comparing findings with prior imaging reports.,"The pattern in high activation examples involves the model being asked to compare the current imaging findings to prior imaging reports, especially in scenarios where a prior report is provided and the focus is on detecting changes over time. This involves phrases indicating comparison or interval change between studies.",0.4731182795698925,0.5102040816326531,0.5,0.7916666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.4720726428043501,0.5,0.5,0.73,100.0,100.0
+15970,latent_15970,1697,0.003394,0.001165391,1.1157004,Comparison to prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The pattern supports reports that show comparison to prior imaging studies to evaluate any interval change, improvement, or stability in conditions like pneumonia, effusions, or procedural placements, which is common in follow-up radiological assessments.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,100.0,100.0
+15971,latent_15971,1640,0.00328,0.0011151868,1.2059257,Detection of interval change or stability in acute clinical contexts.,"Examples with clear activations describe changes in radiological findings between current and prior images or stability of previous findings after acute changes were expected, particularly when new findings are detected or expected changes are not seen. Reports that only indicate no significant change or those without direct prior comparisons show low activation.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5371156957928802,0.5376884422110553,0.5327102803738317,0.5757575757575758,99.0,100.0
+15972,latent_15972,1194,0.002388,0.0008772635,1.1593375,Comparison to prior imaging to assess for changes or stability.,The prominent pattern in these examples involves frequent comparisons between a current imaging study and prior studies to identify stability or changes in specific conditions or findings. This pattern is very common in radiological practices to monitor progression or resolution of conditions over time.,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4958288936822682,0.515,0.5107913669064749,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15973,latent_15973,677,0.001354,0.0005045126,1.1931372,Description of findings in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels explicitly mention performing comparisons between the current and previous radiological images to report on changes or stability of findings. These descriptions often include terms like 'unchanged', 'since prior', 'similar to prior', or state measurements to describe stability over time. This pattern focuses on the importance of comparative analysis in assessing progressive or recurrent conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5890402552773687,0.5911602209944752,0.5309734513274337,0.7407407407407407,81.0,100.0
+15974,latent_15974,1236,0.002472,0.00085976167,1.4964933,Descriptions include interval changes or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on prompts where a comparison with prior radiographs is provided and specific interval changes or stability in findings across the imaging are noted. This linguistic pattern emphasizes reporting of changes over time in chest X-rays, such as changes in effusions, opacities, or tube placements.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15975,latent_15975,1235,0.00247,0.0008647683,0.92512345,Significant change or stability compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation consistently feature comparative evaluation between current and prior images, and suggest significant changes or improvements (or illustrations of the stable state) between them. Examples with low activation focus on descriptive findings without emphasizing changes over time or lacking specific historic clinical comparison.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.536553691018818,0.545,0.5354330708661418,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15976,latent_15976,1332,0.002664,0.00092205266,0.9169873,Analysis focused on interval changes or stability in comparison to previous imagery.,"The data highlights the examination of radiographic images in comparison to previous studies, with an emphasis on discussing and evaluating interval changes, or lack thereof, in lung opacities, effusions, or consolidations. This focus forms a pattern where continuous monitoring and reporting of changes in imagery findings are central.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,100.0,100.0
+15977,latent_15977,1434,0.002868,0.0010549971,1.4942694,Cases with no prior imaging comparison.,"The pattern involves examinations with no available prior comparison, either due to the absence of prior studies or the prior study not being accessible, which prompts a focus on evaluating the findings in isolation or against written reports.",0.6565656565656566,0.66,0.7,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.492814877430262,0.505,0.5072463768115942,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15978,latent_15978,1240,0.00248,0.0008717739,1.2527733,Descriptive comparison between current and prior radiological images.,"The pattern demonstrated by examples with high activation levels includes the presence of explicit comparative descriptions, particularly highlighting interval changes or stability in radiological findings when compared with previous studies. This often includes references to unchanged conditions or descriptions of minor changes in specific organ/system states.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5381773399014778,0.55,0.5378787878787878,0.71,100.0,100.0
+15979,latent_15979,1529,0.003058,0.0010912805,1.0395038,Explicit requests for comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently ask for ""comparison to the prior frontal image."" This suggests the model activates when explicitly asked to compare findings with prior images, a task frequently encountered in radiology for assessing changes over time.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.4857142857142857,0.51,100.0,100.0
+15980,latent_15980,1266,0.002532,0.0009414657,1.1773356,Reports suggesting new findings or need for further investigation.,"Examples with higher activation levels show scenarios where the findings outlined involve new developments or require active evaluation, often containing statements in the impression or findings sections that predict or suggest further investigation or present clear changes in the patient condition.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4913248218377779,0.495,0.4939759036144578,0.41,100.0,100.0
+15981,latent_15981,849,0.001698,0.00064402894,1.2613266,Presence of cardiac implants or postoperative cardiac status.,"The pattern identified involves descriptions of chest imaging findings often mentioning the presence of cardiac implants, devices, or postoperative statuses, such as sternotomy or graft placements. This is common in patients with histories of cardiac surgeries where radiological reports track the stability and status of these implants over time.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5248653785239151,0.55,0.5925925925925926,0.32,100.0,100.0
+15982,latent_15982,1060,0.00212,0.00074400805,1.2197404,Explicit request for findings comparison with specified comparison context (images/history).,Examples with higher activation levels involve prompts that request interpretation of findings with a specified comparison element (either images or patient history). Lower activation examples either lack specific comparison requests or have comparison elements marked as unavailable or NA.,0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+15983,latent_15983,1798,0.003596,0.0012550955,1.0360554,Focus on positional stability of medical devices between images.,"Examples with activation levels show radiology reports focusing on positional stability of indwelling medical devices or hardware when comparing current and prior imaging. Descriptions include unchanged positions of catheters, tubes, or other devices, focusing on their placement and positional adjustments, often expressed in relation to the carina or SVC.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.7272727272727273,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.660377358490566,0.35,100.0,100.0
+15984,latent_15984,1712,0.003424,0.0011828117,1.2081312,Explicit comparison with prior imaging studies to note changes or stability.,"The common theme among the descriptions with high activation levels is the explicit comparison to prior imaging studies, which involves noting changes, stability, or differences in findings over time. This type of language and structure is typical in follow-up radiological reports assessing progression or resolution of medical conditions.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5254237288135594,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15985,latent_15985,1066,0.002132,0.00077500736,1.3655944,"Interval change in imaging findings, often with focus on tubes or lines.","These examples revolve around the evaluation and comparison of changes in imaging findings over time, with particular attention paid to the conditions of tubes or lines (e.g., ETT, NG tube). They frequently reference interval changes, indicate stability, or describe the adjustment or appropriate placement of such medical devices, which is a key focus in these reports. Activation is higher when such changes or placements are notable or significant in context.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5907928388746804,0.6,0.6428571428571429,0.45,100.0,100.0
+15986,latent_15986,1652,0.003304,0.001124672,0.9338169,Focus on comparison with prior studies indicating change or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently mention comparisons between current and prior images, specifically focusing on changes in conditions such as nodules, pneumothorax, atelectasis, or interstitial markings. The emphasis is on recognizing new findings or stability, indicating the model is activated by updates on patient conditions over time rather than temporary descriptions.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4696042431660546,0.48,0.484375,0.62,100.0,100.0
+15987,latent_15987,772,0.001544,0.0006095382,1.8453851,Use of lateral and frontal images for comparative evaluation against prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve use of lateral and frontal images for comparison with prior imaging to evaluate changes, often stated in terms such as 'comparison', 'compared', and specifically use comparisons to guide clinical understanding of stability or change in clinical conditions.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4622564935064935,0.47,0.4758064516129032,0.59,100.0,100.0
+15988,latent_15988,1491,0.002982,0.0010118884,1.3196645,Detailed comparisons of subtle interval changes or stability in imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation frequently involve detailed comparative descriptions of subtle interval changes or stability in pathological findings, like catheter positions or effusions, across serial imaging, which demand precise observation and comparison, often with unavailable prior reports or descriptions of previous interventions.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4839550088930083,0.485,0.4862385321100917,0.53,100.0,100.0
+15989,latent_15989,1167,0.002334,0.00080418057,0.85872054,Comparison with prior imaging and device or catheter placement changes.,"Examples with activation level above 5 consistently mention prior imaging studies for comparison, use descriptors for interval changes, and frequently specify medical devices like tubes or catheters. These elements reflect an in-depth analysis of changes over time and device monitoring, a common feature in patient management postsurgery or in acute care situations.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.534429676353533,0.535,0.5327102803738317,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15990,latent_15990,1165,0.00233,0.00086458045,1.3649787,Reports emphasize stability or absence of acute findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels all demonstrate a lack of definitive findings despite various indications, terminology, and prior comparisons. This pattern manifests in reports stressing normality or incidental findings without evidence of acute processes or significant abnormal changes.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4573471907799959,0.4673366834170854,0.4724409448818897,0.6060606060606061,99.0,100.0
+15991,latent_15991,1298,0.002596,0.0008841922,0.97159684,"Details and comparison of thoracic structures or devices, indicating minor changes to prior studies.","These examples all involve description and comparison of imaging findings to prior studies. They focus on changes in thoracic or associated structures, like tubes or lines placement, without substantial shifts in diagnostic impression, often noting stability or minor changes in contentious findings, demonstrating thorough analysis with an emphasis on subtle exploratory differences from prior imaging.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5542918619841697,0.565,0.549618320610687,0.72,100.0,100.0
+15992,latent_15992,681,0.001362,0.0005096193,1.3455273,Comparison with prior study without significant interval change.,"The examples with high activations involve a pattern of thoracic findings described with explicit comparison with a prior study, using phrases like 'as compared', and describing the findings relative to previous imaging, which is a common practice in radiological assessments.",0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.375,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.46232205405058,0.526595744680851,0.4857142857142857,0.1931818181818181,88.0,100.0
+15993,latent_15993,1077,0.002154,0.00075178005,0.8943043,"Detailed comparison with prior image, focusing on changes in findings.","The examples with high activation levels focus on specific changes or findings that follow the analysis of comparison between prior and current imaging, emphasizing stability, changes, or follow-ups for certain conditions. This includes detailed narratives of unchanged pathologies, state of devices, or resolution and persistence of health issues compared to prior images.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5947467166979362,0.595,0.6,0.57,100.0,100.0
+15994,latent_15994,1733,0.003466,0.0012006983,1.0417712,Temporal comparison of current and prior images for stability or change in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels include specific language indicating a direct comparison between current imaging findings and prior images, often noting unchanged findings over time. These examples involve evaluating for stability or change in findings like lung nodules, effusions, or placement of devices, providing a temporal context for reading results.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+15995,latent_15995,1136,0.002272,0.00079918286,0.8818578,Stability or no significant change compared to prior imaging studies.,"The most activated examples consistently include documentation of changes assessed in current images by comparison with prior imaging findings. They reference structures or conditions that appear unchanged or stabilized (e.g., catheters, opacities), often using language like ""compared to prior/previous,"" indicating no significant change, stability, or resolution. This emphasizes the role of monitoring disease progression or stability through radiological comparison over time.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5330270392407923,0.535,0.5402298850574713,0.47,100.0,100.0
+15996,latent_15996,547,0.001094,0.00046071116,1.8784368,Stability or no change in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels all describe radiographic findings where there is stability in existing structures, devices, or known conditions when compared to previous images or reports. They typically state no change, stability, or resolution of previous abnormalities, reflecting consistency over time.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4600403210468257,0.4910179640718562,0.35,0.3134328358208955,67.0,100.0
+15997,latent_15997,687,0.001374,0.00054668775,1.6230072,Explicit comparison with prior imaging in findings or impressions.,"The examples show activation when radiology reports make explicit comparisons between current imaging and prior imaging findings, using terms such as 'unchanged', 'new', 'interval progression', 'compared to previous', or when referring to consecutive imaging techniques or different conditions over time. This pattern is central to assessing the evolving status of a patient’s condition in medical imaging contexts.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5179487179487179,0.5319148936170213,0.5,0.75,88.0,100.0
+15998,latent_15998,1431,0.002862,0.0010247597,1.3757386,Detail on specific indications or anatomical insights in radiology reports.,"Example activations are higher when reports include findings with specific indications or commentary within the template that add to the radiological assessment beyond standard procedural or technical descriptions, such as discussions about interval changes, anatomical alterations or clinical correlations.",0.3688639551192146,0.46,0.4772727272727273,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4410270960419917,0.5025125628140703,0.5,0.8383838383838383,99.0,100.0
+15999,latent_15999,1058,0.002116,0.00075096654,1.1980481,Comparisons indicating no significant interval change and constant device positions.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently contain reference to comparisons between multiple imaging studies indicating minimal to no significant change in the findings, or specific device placements that remain constant, which forms a consistent pattern.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4347826086956521,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5186339337741633,0.525,0.5324675324675324,0.41,100.0,100.0
+16000,latent_16000,1204,0.002408,0.0008329651,0.9257429,Correct placement or adjustment of medical devices in radiology comparison studies.,"These examples describe findings in radiology studies in comparison to prior images, specifically noting various medical devices and their correct placement or adjustments. The presence and positional stability or change of devices like pacemakers, catheters, or tubes frequently appears in these examples.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5483870967741935,0.34,100.0,100.0
+16001,latent_16001,1697,0.003394,0.001156759,1.1411672,Complex or notable interval changes with critical findings or interventions.,"The examples with high activation often involve complex, nuanced findings that require thorough analysis of multiple prior images or comparison points. High activation cases often involve clinical contexts with significant changes or specific interventions (like devices or significant pathologies) that require detailed monitoring, whereas low activation cases are often straightforward with comparisons that show no or minimal change, or normal findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16002,latent_16002,1868,0.003736,0.0012719926,0.8768975,Comparison of current radiological findings with prior images focusing on interval changes and stability.,"These examples consistently involve a comparison of current radiological findings to prior images, often emphasizing interval changes or stability in conditions like pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or placement of medical devices. Radiology reports frequently involve such comparisons to assess the progression of the patient's condition or the position of devices.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.483753416337686,0.49,0.4918032786885246,0.6,100.0,100.0
+16003,latent_16003,1288,0.002576,0.0009028011,0.98958373,Presence and location of medical devices with stable imaging findings.,"These examples all focus on describing findings in the presence of or absence of certain devices like catheters, tubes, pacemakers, or surgical implants, along with specifying the unchanged status or normal appearance of these devices, particularly indicating stable findings or unchanged since prior.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4729729729729729,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16004,latent_16004,1477,0.002954,0.0010205255,0.8261278,"Comparative analysis of findings to prior images, noting stability or change.","The highly activated examples frequently have references that compare the current imaging findings with previous studies and highlight unchanged conditions, resolutions, or interval changes in specific findings, such as atelectasis or cardiopulmonary features, supporting the importance of change detection in analysis.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.5833333333333334,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5544022437157611,0.575,0.5524475524475524,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16005,latent_16005,763,0.001526,0.00058287045,1.5802982,Comparison of interval changes on prior and current frontal chest images.,"Examples with activation levels close to 5 describe changes or stability across previous and current frontal chest images, evaluating for intervals of new findings, particularly post-therapy or with procedural interventions. These reports use terms like 'compared to', 'stable', 'no interval change', and 'unchanged.'",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.5806451612903226,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5189542483660131,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.6086956521739131,92.0,100.0
+16006,latent_16006,1956,0.003912,0.0013431766,1.041393,Interval changes or improvements observed in imaging compared to prior images.,"Examples with activations highlighted descriptions of specific changes or interval improvements in pulmonary or thoracic findings based on comparison with prior images, such as changes in opacities, effusions resolution, or atelectasis. Unchanged findings or absence of specific change don't exhibit these distinct alterations in pathology.",0.5941558441558441,0.6,0.631578947368421,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5615262980532442,0.5728643216080402,0.6119402985074627,0.41,100.0,99.0
+16007,latent_16007,1444,0.002888,0.0010385688,1.7896692,Descriptions of placements and interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples feature references to specific comparison points, imaging findings compared to prior images, and descriptions of monitoring and support devices such as tubes and catheters. These details emphasize placement and changes over time, which is typical when evaluating acute conditions or checking device positioning.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16008,latent_16008,1895,0.00379,0.0013134608,1.2950554,Comparison to prior imaging as focus in radiological assessments.,"Prompts demonstrating a focus on comparing current imaging to prior studies tend to have higher activation, indicating this is a consistent element for triggering the model's activity in these cases. Clear instructions for descriptions of differences from earlier imaging also seem to correspond to higher activation scores.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16009,latent_16009,1351,0.002702,0.0009212426,0.96483344,Comparison with prior images to note interval changes.,"These examples consistently consider changes over time by comparing current imaging to previous studies, indicating whether specific findings have changed, improved, or remained stable. The focus is on tracking interval changes using phrases like 'compared to prior', 'since prior', or identifying stability or resolution of conditions over time.",0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16010,latent_16010,1477,0.002954,0.0009948647,0.72269356,"Detailed thoracic findings involving lines, catheters, or pleural changes.","The pattern emerges from descriptions that focus heavily on detailed changes and specific interventions related to the thoracic area, such as line placements, catheters, and specific gradual changes (e.g., effusions, pneumonia) that involve complex cases often requiring precise monitoring and subtle differentiation over time based on image comparisons.",0.6940024479804161,0.7,0.7777777777777778,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.6849921248031201,0.685,0.6868686868686869,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16011,latent_16011,1333,0.002666,0.000950008,1.1266092,Comparison to prior imaging showing interval changes or specific actionable findings.,"Highly activated examples often exhibit comparisons between current and prior images that involve specific findings, substantial interval changes, or the absence of certain pathologies, often with direct recommendations for further evaluation like removal, withdrawal, or repositioning of tubes and assessment for new or increasing opacities.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5195676108497648,0.52,0.5212765957446809,0.49,100.0,100.0
+16012,latent_16012,1860,0.00372,0.0012909923,1.1043613,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels prominently feature descriptions that compare current imaging findings to prior studies, specifically emphasizing changes in patient condition or stability, such as 'unchanged from prior' or 'compared to previous'. This context of change or stability over time, often implying monitoring for disease progression or recovery, is key to understanding the model's focus as demonstrated in the data.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16013,latent_16013,1864,0.003728,0.0012687835,0.8696288,"Detailed comparison of current image with prior images, especially noting changes or interventions.","The high activation examples consistently involve findings or changes noted in the images, either in terms of interventions (e.g., tube insertions) or abnormal findings, coupled with detailed comparisons to prior images. Such descriptions help in assessing progress or stability in the patient's condition.",0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7037037037037037,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16014,latent_16014,1718,0.003436,0.00118396,1.1867415,Stable cardiomediastinal silhouette or hardware with no acute change.,"The majority of the examples describe a stable cardiomediastinal silhouette, often with references to prior imaging, normal heart size, or surgical hardware like sternotomy wires or pacemaker leads, suggesting no acute cardiopulmonary changes. This pattern is common when interpreting chest radiographs that show no progression or significant change from previous findings.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4967793880837359,0.5,0.5,0.42,100.0,100.0
+16015,latent_16015,1606,0.003212,0.0010999168,0.9577549,Comparison to prior images with emphasis on longitudinal assessment.,"High activation occurs when there is reference to past images, particularly when there are comparisons made to a specific prior image, and when there's a requirement to provide a description of findings in relation to the prior image, indicating a focus on longitudinal assessment rather than isolated findings. This pattern emphasizes the importance of the changes or stability over time rather than initial diagnosis from a single exam.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.5280995280995281,0.56,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,100.0
+16016,latent_16016,1231,0.002462,0.0008881137,1.1399379,Emphasis on comparison with prior imaging reports.,Many examples indicate a process of comparing current image findings with prior reports through explicit mention of 'comparison' with prior imagery. This suggests that the model activation is high when reports dedicate significant focus on serial image analysis and updates.,0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+16017,latent_16017,1837,0.003674,0.0012736658,1.2499435,Explicit comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation involve the description of changes (or stability) in radiological findings by comparing current images with prior imaging. These involve recognizing new findings, changes, or stability in conditions over time, typically involving explicit comparison statements and often specific dates or detailed mentions of prior instances.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5582005769380701,0.575,0.5539568345323741,0.77,100.0,100.0
+16018,latent_16018,1194,0.002388,0.000871504,1.5345151,Low lung volumes and associated secondary effects.,"The examples show radiological findings describing low lung volumes and the associated effects, such as vascular crowding, atelectasis, and other changes due to reduced inspiratory effort. This pattern is often noted in cases with low lung volumes, evident in several samples despite differing underlying conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5481294661622531,0.57,0.625,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16019,latent_16019,1040,0.00208,0.00075985736,1.2593966,Comparison with prior imaging is explicitly referenced.,"Activation levels are high for examples where the comparison to prior imaging is explicitly referenced. These examples demonstrate a pattern in radiological assessments where findings are always discussed in relation to previous images, using a comparison framework.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4468632766505107,0.495,0.4968553459119497,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16020,latent_16020,1309,0.002618,0.0009586013,1.3366779,Comparison to prior imaging for evaluating interval stability or change.,"The examples with higher activations commonly include comparison with prior imaging, especially focusing on changes or stability in conditions amidst specific clinical histories or indications, marked by the term 'unchanged', 'interval change', or similar phrases, often in complex medical scenarios.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4884910485933503,0.5,0.5,0.65,100.0,100.0
+16021,latent_16021,1379,0.002758,0.0009739083,1.2189468,Evaluation of conditions with reference to medical procedures or interventions.,"In the representative examples, there is a focus on evaluating medical findings with respect to known conditions or procedures, like thoracentesis, surgical interventions, or monitoring the improvement/worsening of specific pathologies. The combination of patient history and comparison to prior states is an indicative factor in activation levels.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6296667000300271,0.63,0.6226415094339622,0.66,100.0,100.0
+16022,latent_16022,1498,0.002996,0.0010548162,1.2000717,Comparison with prior imaging studies.,"Examples with higher activation feature the comparison between current and prior imaging findings, focusing on stability or changes noted in the radiological assessment. This comparison, as emphasized by the requirement to refer back to previous studies, is consistently highlighted in these examples. Reports stating 'no prior' or having no comparative assessment generally have lower activations.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4277921869568705,0.465,0.4768211920529801,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16023,latent_16023,1436,0.002872,0.0010391502,1.5622487,Comparative imaging analysis with reference to interval changes.,"Examples with higher activation usually involve a comparison with a prior image and descriptions of interval changes or stability, especially concerning medical devices or pathological findings such as consolidation, opacity changes, or device placements (e.g., tubes or lines). These comparisons frequently feature explicit descriptions of changes over time and patient history before and after interventions or procedures, as seen in example 1, 6, and 45.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4620763851533082,0.475,0.4809160305343511,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16024,latent_16024,515,0.00103,0.00048151743,1.5196571,Inclusion of both frontal and lateral chest views with comparison to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide a description of a radiology study that includes both frontal and lateral chest views. They often mention comparison to a prior study even if it is unspecified, implying an assessment for changes. Lower activation examples do not consistently compare frontal and lateral images or lack comprehensive comparisons to previous studies.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.490249719416386,0.4911242603550296,0.4086021505376344,0.5507246376811594,69.0,100.0
+16025,latent_16025,1650,0.0033,0.0011417572,1.0440906,Comparison of findings without available prior images.,"Examples with higher activation frequently involve instances of comparing current radiograph findings with a prior examination but lack a specific previous study image for reference or have some uncertainty in findings, which are left unresolved in some subsequent descriptions. The pattern shows assignment of descriptions based on presumed comparisons even in cases where these comparisons may not be clearly identified or are absent.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5301204819277109,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16026,latent_16026,1258,0.002516,0.0008552968,0.96958894,Reports involving detailed comparison with prior imaging findings.,"The pattern seen across the examples with high activation is the mention of comparisons between current imaging findings and prior reports or images. Such comparisons specifically highlight stability or changes in medical conditions or anatomical features, a common task in medical imaging reports. These reports include noted intervals of no change or explicit mention of stability when describing current images relative to previous ones, which is crucial for tracking disease progression or resolution in patient management.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.5367647058823529,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16027,latent_16027,2091,0.004182,0.0014244254,0.7447366,Low lung volumes or hyperinflation affecting lung structure visualization.,"Examples with high activation levels predominantly feature low lung volumes or hyperinflation, often discussed with an emphasis on how they modify the appearance or evaluation of lung structures (e.g., exaggerating bronchovascular markings, implicating conditions like COPD). This finding is frequently compared to prior radiographs and often a key factor affecting interpretations.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4504732036302073,0.505,0.5135135135135135,0.19,100.0,100.0
+16028,latent_16028,944,0.001888,0.0007198955,1.3530254,Detailed comparison with prior images determining changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation prominently involve detailed guidance to provide a thorough description of findings in comparison to prior images. They emphasize on comparing serial observations to identify changes, improvements, or stability over time, particularly using terms like 'compared to prior', 'no change', or 'interval improvement'.",0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4887218045112781,0.49,0.4909090909090909,0.54,100.0,100.0
+16029,latent_16029,1435,0.00287,0.0010029058,1.0626421,Comparative analysis with prior images to assess changes over time.,High activation levels occur in examples that involve descriptions or evaluations of current chest images in direct comparison with prior images. These examples incorporate explicit patterns of comparison aimed at identifying changes over time. This type of comparative analysis is integral for assessing progression or resolution of medical conditions and is reflected in the specific language used in these examples.,0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+16030,latent_16030,882,0.001764,0.0006353432,1.0714979,Detailed analysis of interval changes or stability in medical devices or specific pathologies on imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently provide comparisons between current and prior images, specifically analyzing changes in medical support devices or anatomical features. These examples bear language relating to noticing changes or confirming stability, often in the context of a medical procedure or an identified medical concern such as an effusion, pneumothorax, or pulmonary edema.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6428571428571429,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5148908504413493,0.515,0.5145631067961165,0.53,100.0,100.0
+16031,latent_16031,1513,0.003026,0.0010570388,0.82361025,Description of interval changes or stability compared to previous imaging.,"The examples describe findings with an emphasis on comparison with prior imaging studies despite missing specific past comparisons in some cases. This pattern highlights frequent changes or stability between current and previous states, suggesting the observation of the interval changes in the conditions.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5920525798897031,0.595,0.5811965811965812,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16032,latent_16032,1113,0.002226,0.00077200966,1.0095847,Assessment involving multiple clinical conditions and instrument placements.,"Higher activation levels correspond to descriptions involving the evaluation of clinical conditions requiring consideration of multiple clinical elements, such as pneumothorax, effusion, pneumonia, atelectasis, and lines placements. These cases usually involve more complex scenarios or have a focus on pathologies that require a more integrative analysis compared with straightforward assessments that result in lower activations.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4814814814814814,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4897959183673469,0.49,0.4903846153846153,0.51,100.0,100.0
+16033,latent_16033,1667,0.003334,0.0011598472,1.0795629,Comparison with prior imaging emphasizing stability or changed findings.,"These examples, often showing high activation, feature descriptions that compare current radiologic imaging with prior studies, emphasizing stability or changes in specific clinical details, particularly concerning pulmonary, cardiac, or vascular elements. Discussions often focus on size, position, or pathological presence (or absence) of structures.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5580952380952381,0.565,0.552,0.69,100.0,100.0
+16034,latent_16034,1682,0.003364,0.0011710984,1.0880593,Direct comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The comparison to prior images rather than describing findings de novo is a typical practice in radiology to assess changes or stability over time. This pattern focuses on direct comparison with previous studies, often to evaluate interval changes or the effect of interventions.",0.4637494637494637,0.5,0.5,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5409413281753708,0.555,0.5407407407407407,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16035,latent_16035,1174,0.002348,0.0008186559,1.1305692,Focus on detailed comparison with prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently feature detailed comparative analysis with prior imaging, focusing on observational changes in the chest area such as lung volume, placement of medical devices, atelectasis, and opacities. They include explicit descriptions of changes or stability, marked by phrases like 'in comparison with' or references to previous findings.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4885496183206106,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16036,latent_16036,1316,0.002632,0.0009178113,1.2595533,Focus on changes in or status of medical devices in imaging comparison.,"Examples documenting or interpreting the placement or positioning changes of medical devices (e.g., tubes, lines, drains) during radiological comparisons exhibit high activation. This indicates focus on procedural interventions over general findings, aligning with patterns of interest around medical device management.",0.3961352657004831,0.4,0.3809523809523809,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5245472061657033,0.5326633165829145,0.5405405405405406,0.404040404040404,99.0,100.0
+16037,latent_16037,1050,0.0021,0.0007739034,1.3908737,Detailed and comparative updates on lung opacities or pleural effusions.,"Examples showcasing high activation typically involve specific and detailed changes in lung opacities, pleural effusions, and the use of comparison studies to suggest worsening or improvement in findings. They also frequently involve more complex medical conditions or interventions (e.g., chest tubes, central lines) indicating detailed examination of treatment progress or complications.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.53995399539954,0.54,0.5408163265306123,0.53,100.0,100.0
+16038,latent_16038,1422,0.002844,0.0009812431,1.0080882,Detailed comparison with prior images indicating interval changes.,The examples with high activation levels frequently involve requests for findings comparison with prior radiologic images that involve clearly described technical aspects and findings indicating interval changes. This pattern suggests the model's sensitivity to detailed technical comparison and observational changes over time in the radiology reports.,0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5148313693620479,0.5175879396984925,0.5238095238095238,0.44,100.0,99.0
+16039,latent_16039,962,0.001924,0.00066911976,0.90602756,Descriptions of unchanged or evolving abnormalities compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve observations of new or stable abnormalities in the context of a specified comparison with previous imaging, highlighting the persistence or evolution of those findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16040,latent_16040,1101,0.002202,0.00078242563,1.1687176,Necessity for descriptions in comparison with prior images.,"These high-activation examples demonstrate an explicit requirement to compare current radiological findings to prior imaging studies, which is typically used for evaluating stability or progression of findings. This pattern is characterized by requests to provide descriptions in comparison to prior examinations, utilizing explicit directives and historical imaging references.",0.5225694444444444,0.56,0.5384615384615384,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4793901427386366,0.545,0.5263157894736842,0.9,100.0,100.0
+16041,latent_16041,1540,0.00308,0.0010493727,0.97446126,Detailed comparison with prior imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activation levels emphasize detailed comparison to prior imaging studies. They consistently highlight changes or stability (e.g., 'interval change', 'unchanged since prior'), reflecting the value of these comparisons in assessing patient conditions or treatment effects. This focus on comparison, including whether imaging findings are stable or have changed, correlates with the pattern.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5087719298245614,0.58,100.0,100.0
+16042,latent_16042,775,0.00155,0.0005318083,0.89182055,Mention of comparison with prior imaging within reports.,"Examples with high activations involve a comparison with prior imaging studies. These comparisons often note changes or confirm stability, suggesting the model activates strongly when there's explicit mention of prior reports or comparative findings, indicating changes or stability in the patient's condition.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4323004031664754,0.4712041884816754,0.4666666666666667,0.7692307692307693,91.0,100.0
+16043,latent_16043,490,0.00098,0.00044390763,1.854945,Stable positioning or appearance of medical devices in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels often involve mentions of central lines, catheters, or devices that are in stable or unchanged positions when compared to previous imaging. This suggests the model is activated by consistent mentions of devices being unchanged or stable in relation to prior imaging as a pattern.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.499532772660526,0.5766871165644172,0.4166666666666667,0.238095238095238,63.0,100.0
+16044,latent_16044,1495,0.00299,0.0010845178,1.4297884,Comparative analysis of current and prior imaging studies.,"Samples emphasize evaluation and interpretation of current imaging findings against previous exams to determine changes or stability, with various expressions of comparison found across the representative examples. This comparative analysis is quintessential in ongoing patient monitoring and clinical decision-making.",0.5066495066495067,0.54,0.5263157894736842,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4868435418713833,0.53,0.5189873417721519,0.82,100.0,100.0
+16045,latent_16045,913,0.001826,0.0006464839,1.3789948,Explicit comparison with prior radiographs showing unchanged findings.,Examples with non-zero activation levels refer explicitly to radiological comparisons with prior examinations and detail findings that have remained stable or unchanged. The pattern emphasizes providing descriptions of current imaging in relation to previous studies and identifying potential changes or lack thereof.,0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4762810441302131,0.525,0.5641025641025641,0.22,100.0,100.0
+16046,latent_16046,712,0.001424,0.00059614994,2.0811276,Descriptions emphasizing unchanged or stable lung conditions in comparison to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently incorporate descriptions of lung conditions such as ""clear lungs"" or ""no pleural effusion,"" along with an evaluation referencing prior frontal images to compare findings, focusing on consistent or unchanged states rather than identifying new pathologies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5116883116883117,0.5372340425531915,0.5087719298245614,0.3295454545454545,88.0,100.0
+16047,latent_16047,923,0.001846,0.00068988476,1.4079647,Emphasis on changes over time through comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve analysis based on explicit comparison with previous imaging, showing a pattern of describing and interpreting changes or consistency over time. There is frequent mention of comparison terms like 'compared with', 'similar to prior', and 'unchanged position', indicating an emphasis on longitudinal evaluation rather than singular evaluation.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4895833333333333,0.51,0.5071428571428571,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16048,latent_16048,1715,0.00343,0.001169399,0.88392913,Unchanged or stable findings on comparison with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve radiographic comparisons where findings are specifically noted to be unchanged or stable, indicating no new pathology or interval changes since comparison to prior imaging. This pattern emphasizes stability and the absence of significant change in conditions that may have been anticipated to worsen.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,100.0
+16049,latent_16049,1936,0.003872,0.00136361,1.1463244,Emphasis on comparison to prior imaging for stability or interval change.,"Examples highly activated consistently describe specific changes or stability in radiological findings when compared to prior studies, often noting lack of change or intervals of progression such as stability, or specific alterations in condition like 'unchanged' or 'no focal consolidation.' These reports commonly express monitoring of known conditions, emphasizing monitoring intervals and historical comparison as crucial elements.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5397008055235903,0.56,0.5422535211267606,0.77,100.0,100.0
+16050,latent_16050,1936,0.003872,0.0013550092,1.1855264,Instructions to compare current findings with prior imaging results.,"The samples with high activations contain explicit instructions or prompts for comparing current findings with prior imaging results or lack thereof (phrases like 'provide a description of the findings in comparison to the prior frontal image'. This indicates a focus on change detection or consistent findings across studies, even when current and prior imaging are not present for a clear comparison.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16051,latent_16051,1311,0.002622,0.0009178616,0.86007476,Analysis of current imaging compared to prior studies for pulmonary or cardiac changes.,"Reports with higher activation levels involve detailed analysis of multiple comparative imaging studies describing changes or lack thereof in pulmonary, cardiomediastinal, or pleural aspects, focusing on differences or stability in relation to prior images. Lower activation reports lack such comparisons or detail.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4588285229202037,0.49,0.4932432432432432,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16052,latent_16052,1397,0.002794,0.0010095472,1.220112,Descriptions focusing on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation have specific references to comparisons between current and prior imaging, emphasizing interval changes or lack thereof in findings. This shows the model is sensitive to the language pattern of comparing changes in radiological observations over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5533223954060705,0.5555555555555556,0.5535714285714286,0.62,100.0,98.0
+16053,latent_16053,1326,0.002652,0.0009258639,0.94956493,Comparison across imaging studies with emphasis on change or stability.,"Examples with high activation levels describe a current radiology study and make reference to previous findings, indicating changes or stability, often using terms related to specific measurements, intervals, or consistent observations across studies.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4480980012894906,0.465,0.4740740740740741,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16054,latent_16054,355,0.00071,0.0003586872,2.7302659,Consistency in finding normalcy or lack of change upon comparison.,"Prompts with the highest activation levels consistently mention analysis and comparison between the current and previous imaging findings despite the presence or absence of acute changes, notably emphasizing a lack of significant findings or confirming normal findings. They avoid stating new findings or abnormalities, maintaining that detected structures remain normal or unchanged in configuration or size.",0.2921639854696419,0.2954545454545454,0.2272727272727272,0.2631578947368421,19.0,25.0,0.5011157005174951,0.5202702702702703,0.3380281690140845,0.5,48.0,100.0
+16055,latent_16055,1354,0.002708,0.00093320524,1.0752107,Detection of specific devices or pathologies and their changes over time.,"The examples with higher activation levels all describe specific anatomical or pathological findings such as the presence of devices or conditions like pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pneumonia, or comparisons about changes in these between current and prior images. These findings provide specific details about patient conditions or medical devices, indicating significant insights that are clinically relevant and detectable on imaging.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.514798641436196,0.525,0.5193798449612403,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16056,latent_16056,1488,0.002976,0.0010372801,1.4130259,Explicit instruction to compare current imaging to prior studies.,"The common factor among the examples with higher activation is the explicit request to provide findings compared to prior imaging. These examples highlight the linguistic structuring typical in radiology reports where findings are directly compared to earlier studies, often focusing on stability or changes in disease, devices, or structures.",0.4264214046822743,0.4285714285714285,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,24.0,0.5215431492533555,0.525,0.5213675213675214,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16057,latent_16057,1264,0.002528,0.000880224,1.0533891,Detection of changes in pulmonary opacities or similar elements through comparison with prior images.,"The highly activated examples involve annotations where comparison is made not only to a prior radiograph but also include detailed comments on changes noticed in pulmonary opacities or other elements, such as resolution or progression, that are significant in the clinical context.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.6190476190476191,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5789473684210527,0.58,0.5888888888888889,0.53,100.0,100.0
+16058,latent_16058,896,0.001792,0.00064976997,0.9925755,Radiological comparisons emphasizing unchanged findings.,"The pattern focuses on radiological findings in relation to prior images across multiple examples, emphasizing stability or change from previous exams. This often involves unchanged findings or similar device positions explicitly compared to prior radiographs, suggesting a consistent method of interpretation relative to historical imaging.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5453912235895054,0.5505050505050505,0.5569620253164557,0.4489795918367347,98.0,100.0
+16059,latent_16059,1126,0.002252,0.0007761636,1.1985617,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"These examples consistently refer to comparisons with previous imaging to assess the presence or progression of medical conditions, a common practice in radiological evaluations. The specifics of such comparisons, such as lack of new findings or the stability of existing features, are crucial for clinical interpretation of conditions like pneumonia or cardiomegaly.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4954175677067243,0.51,0.5074626865671642,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16060,latent_16060,904,0.001808,0.0007462969,1.8213532,"Concern or confirmation of pleural effusion, pneumothorax, or aspiration.","The notable pattern in these cases is the presence or concern for pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or aspiration, especially in patients with known respiratory events or conditions. These conditions often require careful monitoring through comparison of current and previous images to evaluate the interval changes and progression or resolution of these conditions.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16061,latent_16061,1139,0.002278,0.0008235137,1.4520295,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior images.,"The high activation examples consistently emphasize comparing current imaging results with prior images to assess changes or stability over time. This linguistic structure, which includes explicit mentions of changes from prior studies, is key in identifying patterns in radiology findings over time.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4822564987595729,0.52,0.512987012987013,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16062,latent_16062,1418,0.002836,0.0009929611,1.2120922,Changes in positioning or status of medical devices across images.,"Examples with high activation consistently describe changes in positioning, placement, or status of tubes, lines, or other medical devices between imaging studies, in addition to stable findings of certain underlying conditions. This suggests the model responds strongly to alterations in medical instrumentation compared to constant anatomical findings.",0.6715927750410509,0.68,0.7647058823529411,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5077755240027045,0.545,0.6,0.27,100.0,100.0
+16063,latent_16063,1381,0.002762,0.0009574551,1.0419221,Detailed findings and comparison with prior imaging emphasizing change over time.,"Examples with higher activation often involve detailed instruction sets, involving both current and prior images, with a strong focus on comparison to prior studies, and specific medical indications. This pattern reveals the AI's inclination towards detailed, context-rich cases that allow for comprehensive comparison and longitudinal analysis, which is consistent with radiological practices and reporting.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5490360011147425,0.555,0.5447154471544715,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16064,latent_16064,1831,0.003662,0.0012712736,1.0644242,Focus on comparison with prior imagery indicating change or stability.,"The examples with higher activation generally involve the comparison of current imaging views to previous ones, specifically mentioning findings or changes in structure or condition, indicating a focus on updates or differential observations in radiological assessments. Activation levels correlate with emphasis on assessing intervals or differences relative to prior imagery.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5059985885673959,0.51,0.5084745762711864,0.6,100.0,100.0
+16065,latent_16065,493,0.000986,0.00043097037,1.1325765,High activation correlates with incomplete or ambiguous prompts.,"The examples primarily featuring high activations involve prompts with incomplete instructions, often lacking key details in technique or comparison sections, yet they still request a comprehensive description of findings. This suggests the model may trigger higher activations when dealing with potentially ambiguous or incomplete tasks requiring complex interpretation or additional context.",0.3762993762993762,0.52,0.5102040816326531,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.2685185185185185,0.3670886075949367,0.3670886075949367,1.0,58.0,100.0
+16066,latent_16066,1386,0.002772,0.0009722444,1.2636886,Comparison with prior imaging findings regarding changes in chest structures or medical devices.,"The examples highlight reports that incorporate a comparison with prior imaging, focusing particularly on changes in chest structures or medical devices since the previous study, often with a focus on stability or changes in pathologies or interventions.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5439175906267202,0.565,0.5454545454545454,0.78,100.0,100.0
+16067,latent_16067,2496,0.004992,0.0017015089,1.1541581,Presence of large retrocardiac mass or hiatal hernia in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels often describe a large retrocardiac mass or hiatal hernia in the findings. This indicates a pattern of interest in identifying obscuring or large masses posterior to the heart, which can interfere with the assessment of the cardiac silhouette or present a notable displacement of the heart.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3325632139648312,0.48,0.1666666666666666,0.01,100.0,100.0
+16068,latent_16068,1153,0.002306,0.00080880197,1.2041397,Descriptions noting unchanged findings or stability in comparison to prior images.,"Activation appears linked to either a lack of noticeable change or specific comparative observations indicating stability or gradual change between current and prior images. Reports often note unchanged condition or mild changes across imaging, using words like 'unchanged', 'stable', 'similar to prior', etc., indicating close scrutiny and tracking rather than discovery of new or acute conditions.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4812520460325854,0.485,0.4819277108433735,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16069,latent_16069,1078,0.002156,0.00075843965,1.5164987,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies explicitly mentioned.,"Highly activated examples describe changes in chest imaging findings when compared to previous studies. Common phrases include 'compared to prior', 'since previous', or explicit reference to dates of past images, emphasizing the significance of tracking interval changes over time.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4769327335495344,0.5,0.5,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16070,latent_16070,1299,0.002598,0.00091388455,1.119407,Significant interval findings or changes compared to prior images.,"These examples exhibit specific references to critical findings, using language that often suggests significant changes or new information compared to prior examinations, such as worsening conditions or important new findings. Terms such as 'worsening', 'new', 'increased', 'significant interval change', and 'marked changes' highlight crucial updates in the patient's condition or imaging findings over time, often necessitating further action or clinical attention.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4841543451058505,0.495,0.4929577464788732,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16071,latent_16071,1494,0.002988,0.0010376308,0.8281566,Reports with findings of atelectasis or lung opacities.,"The pattern of activation indicates reports involving specific respiratory conditions or findings with mention of atelectasis, changes in opacities, or low lung volumes. These descriptive aspects often accompany more serious evaluations for conditions like pneumonia or pleural effusion.",0.4791666666666666,0.48,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,100.0,100.0
+16072,latent_16072,1418,0.002836,0.0009795948,1.1381662,Omission of explicit 'comparison not available' statement.,"The high activation levels are observed in cases that either specify a reference to comparison with previous studies or detail the findings without explicitly indicating comparison. In examples with high activation, there is less explicit mention of unavailable comparison, which suggests that such absence indicates a comparison implicit in the task rather than literal availability.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4705867235486109,0.485,0.4776119402985074,0.32,100.0,100.0
+16073,latent_16073,1842,0.003684,0.0012989395,1.0438726,Focus on medical device placement or change in radiographic comparisons.,"Examples with higher activations describe placement or changes in medical devices, such as tubes or catheters, as seen in radiological reports when comparing current images to prior ones. These references to device status (placement, position, or presence) indicate a consistent focus on evaluating medical device conditions.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5068438003220612,0.51,0.5119047619047619,0.43,100.0,100.0
+16074,latent_16074,1074,0.002148,0.00073929306,0.86605465,Discussion of interval changes compared to prior or other imaging.,"The high activation examples consistently involve findings being described with reference to a prior image, indicating changes, stability, or resolution since the last examination. This typically involves describing interval changes, such as resolution, improvement, or stability of opacities, infiltrates, or devices. These examples consistently narrate the progression or lack thereof compared to past imagery, focusing on detail-oriented comparison in radiological findings.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6129032258064516,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.539230151950506,0.555,0.5401459854014599,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16075,latent_16075,847,0.001694,0.00062128255,1.3101141,Lateral view added for findings comparison with previous images.,"These examples emphasize providing descriptions of findings using multiple imaging views (frontal and lateral) in comparison to previous studies. This pattern often involves a frontal and lateral view to provide a comprehensive assessment, especially when the description requests comparison with prior images to identify any changes.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5028997514498756,0.505,0.5057471264367817,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16076,latent_16076,1628,0.003256,0.0011266411,1.1451633,Comparison with previous imaging evaluating interval change or stability.,"The pattern identified involves a comparison to a previous radiographic image, where findings are reported as unchanged, or stable, or indicating incremental changes over time. This suggests an emphasis on the temporal evaluation and stability or interval change which can influence diagnosis, prognosis or clinical decisions. Conversely, images referenced as having no prior comparison generally receive lower activation.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5459824728117411,0.57,0.547945205479452,0.8,100.0,100.0
+16077,latent_16077,1174,0.002348,0.0008226039,1.0644265,Analysis includes comparison of current and prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings in chest radiographs or CT scans where both current and prior images are evaluated, allowing for assessment of changes or stability over time. These descriptions often note device positions, pleural fluid, lung densities, etc., in relation to previous images.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.5882352941176471,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4470046082949308,0.475,0.4827586206896552,0.7,100.0,100.0
+16078,latent_16078,1272,0.002544,0.0008997968,1.0694147,Detailed comparison to prior imaging noting changes or stability.,"The examples describe observations from radiology studies emphasizing changes or observations in the context of previous imaging studies. High activation levels correspond to explicit comparisons made between current and prior imaging to note changes or stability in conditions such as effusions, pulmonary edema, and cardiomegaly.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.5649021029731689,0.565,0.5670103092783505,0.55,100.0,100.0
+16079,latent_16079,1452,0.002904,0.001005073,1.2124788,Abstract or general image comparison descriptions increase activation.,"The more abstract or general the comparison description is, the higher the activation. Examples with structured, thorough observations have lower activation. It seems comparison tasks with a requirement for comprehensive analysis rather than direct or simple comparisons lead to higher activation, especially when detailed descriptions are outside of specified guidances.",0.5703301673450927,0.62,0.5714285714285714,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.4285714285714285,0.48,0.4875,0.78,100.0,100.0
+16080,latent_16080,1015,0.00203,0.0007564692,1.4292166,"Use of terms like 'unchanged', 'stable', or 'compared to prior' regarding findings or device positioning.","The highly representative examples show radiology findings described in relation to previous examinations, indicating specific points of care that are unchanged, stable, or slightly altered. Often, this involves the positioning of medical devices or descriptors like 'unchanged position' or 'stable', which highlight the importance of serial imaging in assessing patient progress.",0.467391304347826,0.4693877551020408,0.4642857142857143,0.5416666666666666,24.0,25.0,0.5292467948717949,0.53,0.532608695652174,0.49,100.0,100.0
+16081,latent_16081,1388,0.002776,0.0009541267,0.8970142,Stable findings or minor changes on comparison with prior imaging.,"Examples show minor or stable findings in comparison to previous imaging studies. These frequently feature a lack of significant change, suggesting monitoring ongoing conditions or interventions like tube placements, without acute alterations.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5106382978723404,0.48,100.0,100.0
+16082,latent_16082,1311,0.002622,0.000919801,1.0953003,Report comparing current images to prior for changes.,"These examples emphasize changes in imaging findings between current and previous radiographic examinations. This pattern is seen with components such as 'evidence of improvement', 'unchanged cardiac silhouette', or 'change in medical device position', showing specific changes or stability over time.",0.4482173174872665,0.48,0.4864864864864865,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5607419756026567,0.585,0.5578231292517006,0.82,100.0,100.0
+16083,latent_16083,1534,0.003068,0.0010730949,1.4486595,Comparison of current image findings to prior imaging studies.,High activation levels are consistently associated with the presence of a comparison between current and prior imaging studies. This is indicative of the importance of comparative analysis in identifying changes over time in medical imaging assessments.,0.6604414261460102,0.68,0.6216216216216216,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5565410199556541,0.58,0.5547945205479452,0.81,100.0,100.0
+16084,latent_16084,1030,0.00206,0.0007183414,1.118431,Detailed comparison of findings across current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve detailed comparison of radiological findings across current and prior images, while also taking into account any changes over time in specific conditions or abnormalities noted in the images.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.576087234096887,0.585,0.5658914728682171,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16085,latent_16085,1281,0.002562,0.0008921301,0.92782855,Evaluation or description of inserted devices or tubes in chest imaging.,"The examples with notable activation levels consistently involve the identification and evaluation of devices, tubes, or foreign objects (like stents or tubes) within the chest area as part of a radiological description. These examples focus on checking the position, condition, or interval changes of such items, often involving a comparison with previous imaging studies to ensure correct placement or to assess changes.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5772946859903382,0.58,0.5952380952380952,0.5,100.0,100.0
+16086,latent_16086,1451,0.002902,0.0010623413,1.2736304,Comparisons of findings with prior imaging studies indicating change or stability.,"The examples with high activation consistently involve finding comparisons relative to a prior imaging study, making explicit statements about changes, stability, or consistency of findings in text descriptions. This pattern includes mention of techniques and interpretations in light of prior imagery, which suggests the model is focused on identifying relevant temporal changes or stability over time in the described medical imaging.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.53125,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5095586027424682,0.51,0.5094339622641509,0.54,100.0,100.0
+16087,latent_16087,628,0.001256,0.00051321887,2.6632624,Cardiopulmonary findings stable or changed compared to prior imaging.,"This pattern is evident in cases where there is explicit mention of changes or stability in cardiac, pulmonary, or mediastinal findings when compared to prior imaging studies, focusing on quantitative measures such as sizes (e.g., heart size) or qualitative changes (e.g., effusion status), especially related to conditions like congestion, cardiomegaly, or edema.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4883029073698445,0.4883720930232558,0.4215686274509804,0.5972222222222222,72.0,100.0
+16088,latent_16088,1377,0.002754,0.0009562983,1.2927042,Description of findings related to stability or changes between current and prior imaging.,"These examples are about the analysis or comparison of radiographic findings, often highlighting stability or changes in specific features such as pneumothorax, pleural effusion, mediastinal changes, or other notable pathologies. The activation levels suggest a focus on findings where notable changes (or lack thereof) are observed between the current and prior imaging studies, usually related to acute or chronic conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4928573221862369,0.495,0.495575221238938,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16089,latent_16089,2053,0.004106,0.0014030649,1.1277423,Precise anatomical positioning of medical devices in radiology images.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve language that suggests precise spatial positioning of various tubes and lines within the body, often concerning their placement relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina or SVC. This detail-oriented language indicates a focus on evaluating and describing minute positional changes, crucial in assessing placement for medical devices.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5149775925780329,0.5326633165829145,0.5573770491803278,0.34,100.0,99.0
+16090,latent_16090,1106,0.002212,0.00076008175,0.8276319,Emphasis on interval changes or comparisons with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention observations related to changes over time and/or comparisons between current and prior radiographic images. For instance, they frequently involve terms such as 'compared with prior', 'interval change', 'appears unchanged', or make references to specific differences or continuity noted between the current and prior imaging assessments.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4861392832995267,0.525,0.5161290322580645,0.8,100.0,100.0
+16091,latent_16091,889,0.001778,0.0006344639,1.3832183,Comparisons of diagnostic imaging findings with prior studies to assess changes.,"Each example describes radiological findings while comparing them with previous images to show changes over time or to confirm stability. The explicit comparisons often include descriptions of changes or the lack thereof in specific features, such as nodules, opacities, or pleural effusions, hence providing detailed interval analyses.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4664713882205251,0.49,0.4929577464788732,0.7,100.0,100.0
+16092,latent_16092,1471,0.002942,0.001033048,1.0556943,Comparison with prior imaging resulting in updated findings or stability notice.,"Examples with activations close to zero contain incomplete descriptions or commands that don't clearly refer to findings, making the comparison difficult or irrelevant. Examples with higher activation provide specific findings discussed in relation to prior images, indicating updates or changes in the patient's condition relevant to prior studies.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4743560862056019,0.475,0.4766355140186916,0.51,100.0,100.0
+16093,latent_16093,1337,0.002674,0.0009548698,1.559222,Changes in cardiac silhouette or cardiomegaly on comparison images.,"The examples with high activation levels involve reports that detail specific changes in the cardiac silhouette (or cardiomegaly), while low activation examples do not emphasize changes in the heart size. This includes references to conditions like pulmonary edema or effusions, which are indirectly related to heart size changes. The references to heart conditions or the implications of changes in cardiac silhouette seem to be the key feature.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.6923076923076923,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.5208333333333334,0.25,100.0,100.0
+16094,latent_16094,1625,0.00325,0.0011209659,0.8631976,Focus on changes in medical device positioning compared to prior images.,"The examples showing high activation levels consistently include findings or actions of positional changes, insertions, or alterations in medical devices like catheters, tubes, or other lines, as well as comparisons to prior images where changes in medical device positioning are noted. This focus suggests an emphasis on detailed observations or reporting related to medical devices' state and positioning.",0.5495495495495495,0.58,0.6666666666666666,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.556355854797881,0.575,0.6271186440677966,0.37,100.0,100.0
+16095,latent_16095,746,0.001492,0.0005395439,1.039037,Comparison or evaluation involving prior images.,The pattern is that the model is highly activated by tasks requiring a description or comparison of findings in radiology studies that are supplemented with context from previous imaging studies. The consistency in requiring historical context for accurate reporting is a key feature the model is tuned to react to.,0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4301994301994302,0.5,0.5,0.85,100.0,100.0
+16096,latent_16096,871,0.001742,0.00061079586,1.1674283,Radiological comparison with current and prior images.,"The examples describe chest radiographs that reference multiple images, including current and prior images, indicating an evaluation based on comparison over time. This includes terms like 'prior frontal image', 'comparison made with', and intervals noted from previous examinations, often involving changes or unchanged features.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4837778579556493,0.535,0.5214723926380368,0.85,100.0,100.0
+16097,latent_16097,1414,0.002828,0.0009794746,1.127751,Radiology reports comparing current images to prior studies.,The examples consistently involve scenarios where current radiological findings are compared against previous imaging studies to assess changes over time. This pattern is critical in evaluating the progress or stability of medical conditions using imaging.,0.3626373626373627,0.42,0.45,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4568578419510096,0.495,0.4967320261437908,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16098,latent_16098,985,0.00197,0.00073359057,1.3823504,Detailed comparisons over time in radiological reports.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently describe comparisons to prior images, particularly focusing on changes or lack of changes in conditions over time, often with specific details about pathologies or medical devices, despite generic instructions to simply describe findings.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4792588285851513,0.485,0.4876033057851239,0.59,100.0,100.0
+16099,latent_16099,2187,0.004374,0.0015098589,1.02431,Comparison with prior images to assess changes or stability.,The highly activating examples involve direct comparisons with prior imaging studies specifically to evaluate for any changes or stability in findings rather than producing new diagnostics. This pattern reflects routine radiological procedure of evaluating trends or changes by using pre-existing imaging data as a reference point.,0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5286724273369993,0.58,0.5481927710843374,0.91,100.0,100.0
+16100,latent_16100,1172,0.002344,0.00081248867,1.0885332,Directives to compare current and prior images in the findings description.,"The examples with high activations consistently include a directive to 'Provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image.' This directive indicates that the examples are focusing on providing comparative analysis with previous images, a key pattern in radiology reporting.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16101,latent_16101,1813,0.003626,0.0012327097,0.8602101,Stable pulmonary conditions or effusions without interval change.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe changes in pulmonary conditions or effusions that are stable or unchanged over time, with no new pathology or significant changes. This stable status is often highlighted in radiology reports to convey ongoing monitoring without acute developments, which is a distinct pattern from cases showing new developments or acute changes.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5563613068545804,0.5628140703517588,0.5866666666666667,0.44,100.0,99.0
+16102,latent_16102,968,0.001936,0.0006754826,0.9710773,Description of findings compared to prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on the provision and analysis of current imaging in comparison with prior imaging, specifically emphasizing the descriptive narration of interval changes. Examples indicate a pattern where previous imaging serves as a significant context for evaluating current findings.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16103,latent_16103,1265,0.00253,0.0008570677,0.76085687,Importance of comparison with prior images for interval changes.,"Examples show common patterns when comparisons are made to prior images, focusing on findings stability or changes across studies. Reports frequently assess interval changes, notably in image features like pleural effusions, consolidation, or cardiac silhouette. Activation is high for descriptions of changes between current and prior images, such as interval change or improvement, indicating significance in ongoing monitoring.",0.6486151302190988,0.66,0.6176470588235294,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4605249507210291,0.48,0.4855072463768116,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16104,latent_16104,1078,0.002156,0.00077252375,1.1143374,Detailed descriptions of medical devices or anatomical changes.,"The key pattern in these examples with higher activations is the inclusion of specific, precise descriptions of medical devices or anatomical changes. This includes comments on previous changes, existing devices like tubes, or significant findings like fluid loss or opacity changes. This suggests a focus on details that imply specific medical interventions or evolution of conditions over time.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6363636363636364,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5644664714274987,0.565,0.5607476635514018,0.6,100.0,100.0
+16105,latent_16105,1285,0.00257,0.0008868742,1.2584069,Explicit instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior images.,"Reports with similar textual structure exhibit higher activation, particularly those involving explicit instructions to 'compare to prior' images. This pattern reflects the analytical style used when requiring temporal comparison in radiological assessments.",0.6524822695035462,0.6530612244897959,0.6296296296296297,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.4782608695652174,0.49,0.4923076923076923,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16106,latent_16106,1626,0.003252,0.0011186503,1.2058064,Comparison to prior imaging with highlighted consistency or change.,"Samples with higher activation typically involve texts that mention comparing current radiological images to prior studies, which are then followed by descriptions or impressions that clearly highlight changes, consistency, or lack of change between the studies. This reference to prior studies for evaluation of continuity or changes is key in the pattern.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.591002044989775,0.605,0.5766423357664233,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16107,latent_16107,1480,0.00296,0.0010360837,1.0405575,Emphasis on changes or stability in radiographic findings over multiple imaging comparisons.,"The examples with high activation consistently mention radiographic findings in the context of a comparison with prior imaging. This suggests that the focus is on capturing differences or stability over time concerning findings such as tissue opacities, pneumothorax, or effusion relative to past images, indicating that the AI model is trained to prioritize descriptions involving comparative analysis.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16108,latent_16108,1418,0.002836,0.0009709472,0.8855325,"Radiological findings conveyed through comparison to prior examinations, focusing on stability or interval changes.","Examples consistently include significant findings in the comparison to prior imaging, emphasizing stability or interval changes. These reports compare aspects like consolidation, opacities, effusions, cardiomediastinal silhouette, and devices, indicating the importance of changes versus stable conditions, in diagnostic imaging.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5141208624354692,0.52,0.5163934426229508,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16109,latent_16109,1524,0.003048,0.001041841,0.9335027,Detailed evaluation and description of device or tube placement.,"The pattern evident in the highly activated examples is an emphasis on placement and evaluation of devices or tubes within the body (e.g., nasogastric tube, endotracheal tube), often including their position relative to anatomical landmarks or previous locations. This pattern is outlined by descriptions emphasizing devices' positions like 'within the stomach', 'above the carina', or evaluations like 'need to be advanced'.",0.5,0.52,0.5333333333333333,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5471698113207547,0.29,100.0,100.0
+16110,latent_16110,1049,0.002098,0.0007735129,1.3779892,Comparison of current radiological images to prior images to assess changes.,"The pattern in these examples involves comparative analysis between a current radiological image and a prior one to track changes over time. This is a common diagnostic approach to identify interval changes, where findings are explicitly compared to previous images to assess stability or progression of a condition.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.424,0.46,0.4733333333333333,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16111,latent_16111,1067,0.002134,0.0007608508,1.1157403,Descriptions emphasizing interval changes compared to prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels tend to involve descriptions that specifically note interval changes such as resolution, progression, or stability of findings when compared directly to previous images. This suggests that patterns of reporting interval changes or descriptions reflective of longitudinal assessment drive the activation levels.",0.467391304347826,0.4693877551020408,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,24.0,0.5495946351716545,0.55,0.5531914893617021,0.52,100.0,100.0
+16112,latent_16112,1797,0.003594,0.0012315596,0.9021509,Descriptions reliant on specific imaging technique or orientation for comparison.,"In these examples, the findings explicitly mention 'technique' and 'comparison', indicating that the description of the findings relies on the specifics of the view or imaging angle, often specifying orientation like ""PA and lateral"" or ""portable chest"" imaging, which is crucial for interpreting changes in radiology.",0.3551587301587301,0.48,0.4893617021276595,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.5054545454545455,0.575,0.5428571428571428,0.95,100.0,100.0
+16113,latent_16113,1427,0.002854,0.0009945936,0.9434686,Current description of findings without significant evaluative comparison to prior images.,"The activation levels suggest a pattern related to detailing present pathology or changes without making significant evaluative comparisons, regardless of the available prior images for reference. The reports focus on documenting the current state of observed abnormalities.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4771038803033833,0.495,0.492063492063492,0.31,100.0,100.0
+16114,latent_16114,1099,0.002198,0.00077725225,1.255172,Evaluation or placement verification of medical devices in imaging.,"There is recurrent reference to placement or evaluation of medical devices within the imaging reports, particularly NG tubes, endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, and catheters. The descriptions emphasize positioning, evaluation, or confirmation relative to previous imaging or anatomical landmarks.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4754398920322885,0.485,0.4794520547945205,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16115,latent_16115,1862,0.003724,0.0012971363,1.3904049,Significant changes or findings in current imaging compared to prior studies.,"Examples with activations on the higher end (3.0 and above) demonstrate changes, new imaging findings, or newly recommended actions when compared to prior imaging studies. The language used refers explicitly to changes in the patient's condition compared to a prior reference image, like 'new', 'decreased' or 'improved'. These instances imply notable evaluations based on prior comparisons.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,100.0,100.0
+16116,latent_16116,1368,0.002736,0.00094142003,1.2001421,Focus on interval changes compared to previous images.,"These examples frequently emphasize changes or developments between current and previous images or measurements mentioned in reports. This pattern is reflected in phrases like 'in comparison with', 'unchanged', 'new', or 'minimal change', denoting the focus on evaluating interval changes and the stability or progression of findings over time.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16117,latent_16117,1093,0.002186,0.0007849923,1.2249613,Single frontal image analysis emphasizes opacity changes.,"The dataset examples with high activation levels notably contain descriptions based on a single frontal image or singular views and emphasize changes like increasing opacities, and quantity/image comparisons, while examples with lower activation levels often lack findings beyond basic observations.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5186110027311744,0.5326633165829145,0.5538461538461539,0.36,100.0,99.0
+16118,latent_16118,1015,0.00203,0.00069694076,1.0439149,Detailed anatomical or medical device changes and comparisons in imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently entail the presence of either explicit anatomical changes (e.g., pneumothorax, pulmonary edema), medical devices (e.g., catheters, chest tubes), or previous surgical procedures (e.g., VATS, lobectomy), in detailed descriptions. These details signal medical significance or potential complications, drawing higher activation.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5240269623831267,0.5577889447236181,0.5394736842105263,0.82,100.0,99.0
+16119,latent_16119,1279,0.002558,0.0008943349,1.2785794,"Comparison with prior, noting changes in medical devices or opacities.","Examples with high activation levels are associated with specific findings related to opacities, changes in tubes or catheters, differences in consolidations, etc., in comparison to prior images, suggesting a distinct pattern recognizing changes over time in a patient's medical imaging studies.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5765702187720536,0.58,0.5677966101694916,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16120,latent_16120,1266,0.002532,0.0008750866,0.96025455,Descriptions of radiology findings compared with prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels include explicit descriptions of the findings on the radiology study in the context of comparing current images with prior ones. Examples provide detailed comparisons between images or scans, distinguishing changes or stability over time, often indicating changes in a condition or the continued stability of observed radiological findings.",0.4084047327621379,0.42,0.4375,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4955863808322824,0.52,0.5138888888888888,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16121,latent_16121,1560,0.00312,0.001079656,1.0066103,Emphasis on comparing current and prior imaging findings to assess changes.,"Examples with higher activation levels involve comparing current and prior imaging to identify changes or stability in specific anatomical or pathological findings, even in the absence of comprehensive prior details. This suggests a focus on changes over time rather than on specific diagnostic findings alone.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4783684224678013,0.515,0.5098039215686274,0.78,100.0,100.0
+16122,latent_16122,1572,0.003144,0.001073255,0.9554392,Process of comparing current radiology imaging to prior studies for assessment.,"The presence of both the 'given' and 'prior' images in many examples, paired with comparisons made to describe changes or stability in condition, indicates an emphasis on the process of comparing current and prior imaging to assess changes. The pattern is expressed through the narrative of unchanged or changed findings over time, explicitly described in most high-activation examples.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16123,latent_16123,1187,0.002374,0.00083330483,0.97495645,Describing interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels describe radiological comparisons with prior images, highlighting interval changes. These reports explicitly mention new, changed, or stable findings compared to previous studies using phrases like 'since the prior study', 'unchanged from prior', or 'compared to most recent study'. This pattern is specific and consistent in highly activated examples.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16124,latent_16124,1742,0.003484,0.0012391348,1.0467505,Verification of changes in invasive device positioning against prior images.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently mention alterations or verification related to the positioning of tubes or hardware when comparing current and prior radiological images. This pattern is seen with descriptions of changes in placement or condition of invasive devices, such as ET tubes, feeding tubes, and vascular lines.",0.5098039215686274,0.56,0.6666666666666666,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.501426331885585,0.515,0.5223880597014925,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16125,latent_16125,1129,0.002258,0.0008167304,1.1274285,Focus on lines and tubes' presence and positioning.,"The pattern here features references to the presence and positioning of lines or tubes, such as endotracheal tubes, PICC lines, or similar devices. This is often a focus in radiological exams to assess changes in the positioning of medical apparatus from prior imaging for proper placement, which is crucial in patient management.",0.3912337662337662,0.4,0.3684210526315789,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.457829799093005,0.465,0.4545454545454545,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16126,latent_16126,1640,0.00328,0.0011215521,0.8721239,Emphasis on changes in findings compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels focus on comparisons with prior exams and emphasize changes in findings, often employing specific language to describe an interval change, persisting condition, or a lack of change since the prior examination. Conversely, examples with low activations may not focus on interval changes or comparisons, or they note normal findings indicating lack of concern.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4867149758454106,0.49,0.4913793103448275,0.57,100.0,100.0
+16127,latent_16127,618,0.001236,0.00049010315,1.4631997,"Comparison of current with prior imaging findings, noting changes or stability.","Consistently, higher activation levels are associated with scenarios that mention comparisons between current and prior findings, typically involving changes or absences thereof. This implies the pattern's focus is on assessing interval changes via comparable studies emphasizing stability or modification in specific clinical findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5500395569620253,0.5542857142857143,0.4871794871794871,0.76,75.0,100.0
+16128,latent_16128,1467,0.002934,0.0010102052,0.7970989,Detailed comparison to prior radiographic findings.,"The examples with higher activation often contain the detailed analysis of current studies in direct comparison with prior images, focusing on specific changes or stability over time in radiographic findings relative to previous examinations. These examples generally emphasize unchanged aspects or minor updates on pathologies or medical instrumentation, as opposed to significant or new findings without detail to comparison.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5812205151492217,0.585,0.5714285714285714,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16129,latent_16129,1456,0.002912,0.0010171729,1.0882539,Explicit comparisons highlighting unchanged findings from prior exams.,"The highest activation examples feature explicit analysis or observations of radiological findings with direct comparison to prior exams, often noting unchanged findings or interval changes. The inclusion of reference keywords such as 'compared to', 'unchanged', 'interval', and 'previous' is consistent, which suggests detection of familiar patterns based on past examinations is key for activation.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5384615384615384,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4866502606440687,0.515,0.5283018867924528,0.28,100.0,100.0
+16130,latent_16130,993,0.001986,0.0007470308,1.4014722,Stable findings or lack of significant change over multiple imaging exams.,"The examples with high activation levels show findings compared over multiple imaging sessions, where the image displays consistent or stable features, especially when prior reports are unremarkable. This pattern involves descriptions of findings that do not significantly change over time, often using terms indicating stability or lack of significant change.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.524036173250833,0.525,0.5274725274725275,0.48,100.0,100.0
+16131,latent_16131,1281,0.002562,0.00090119574,1.0495089,Identification of interval changes or comparisons with prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels primarily focus on identifying changes or differences between current and prior images, specifically noting any interval changes or positioning of medical devices or pathologies.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5187781148655717,0.54,0.528169014084507,0.75,100.0,100.0
+16132,latent_16132,1997,0.003994,0.0013835805,1.1236653,Emphasis on evaluating interval changes in pathology or devices compared to prior images.,"Examples that describe findings with comparison to prior imaging emphasize stability or changes over time, highlighting checks for interval changes such as size or presence of pathologies, confirming device positions, and evaluating for new developments.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5452666391070691,0.56,0.5441176470588235,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16133,latent_16133,841,0.001682,0.00065084285,1.2772267,Focus on interval change (or stability) in comparison to prior imaging.,"The referenced examples focus on identifying changes or stability in radiological features by comparing current and previous images. The examples often highlight whether certain findings like effusions, lung opacities, or device positions remain unchanged, improved, or worsened. These descriptions largely contribute to evaluating patient progress or consistency in conditions.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.477268134976763,0.4773869346733668,0.4742268041237113,0.4646464646464646,99.0,100.0
+16134,latent_16134,1240,0.00248,0.000875508,0.9299851,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings to assess interval changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels involve scenarios where the assistant is asked to compare current imaging findings with those from previous studies, and describe interval changes or similarities, often with explicit comparison statements. This pattern aligns with detailed analysis requirements in radiological interpretations where historical comparisons provide insights into progress or new developments in a patient's condition.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.5333333333333333,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4509555485165241,0.48,0.4863013698630137,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16135,latent_16135,1076,0.002152,0.00078397663,1.1668618,Evaluation of chest findings in comparison to prior images.,"The highly activated examples consistently include findings that are evaluated in comparison to prior imaging studies. This pattern is indicative of monitoring for progression or stability in conditions, displaying a specific interest in changes or lack thereof.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16136,latent_16136,1756,0.003512,0.0012235346,0.9515226,Observations of interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation levels identify changes in radiological findings either by direct comparison with previous imaging or through reference to prior images. These examples emphasize the presence or absence of changes such as intervals of improvement, progression, or status quo in specific findings.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4643438211809466,0.465,0.4672897196261682,0.5,100.0,100.0
+16137,latent_16137,835,0.00167,0.0006172558,1.1552521,Comparison to prior imaging in identifying stable findings.,"These examples emphasize the comparison of findings with prior imaging studies. Even absent explicit dates, indicative wording such as 'unchanged','similar', or 'compared with prior' shows the pattern where the current health state is evaluated relative to previous examinations, indicating a focus on stability or change over time.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+16138,latent_16138,1193,0.002386,0.00085372536,1.3508632,Comparison or stability assessment without specific prior data.,The examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate language that assesses changes over time by referring to the stability of features since the last image or mentioning comparisons without accompanying previous imaging data. These examples emphasize new assessments based on the assumption that further interpretation needs to be made without real contrast to a solid prior.,0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.518796992481203,0.52,0.5222222222222223,0.47,100.0,100.0
+16139,latent_16139,1029,0.002058,0.00072681217,1.0433152,Interval change in pathology on imaging comparison.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve descriptions of changes or comparisons to previous imaging, indicating specific changes in pathology or anatomy over time. The pattern focuses on noted differences between current and prior imaging results to assess for changes in patient condition, treatment effects, or progression of disease. Many examples prompt the assistant to detail in words the findings in current imaging, emphasizing 'interval changes' compared to past images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5981105978757275,0.615,0.6949152542372882,0.41,100.0,100.0
+16140,latent_16140,934,0.001868,0.0006784875,1.3766336,Reference to endotracheal tube placement or hyperexpanded lungs.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve either a reference to the presence of endotracheal tubes or other supports and concerns about their placement, such as mentioning distance from the carina, or descriptions of high lung/diaphragm volumes or torsions often seen in certain conditions (like COPD).",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4689678061732492,0.52,0.5526315789473685,0.21,100.0,100.0
+16141,latent_16141,1023,0.002046,0.00072511274,1.2917851,"Comparison of findings against multiple prior studies, highlighting changes or stability.","The high activation levels occur when there is an expressed need to evaluate new findings against multiple past studies, usually with an emphasis on notable changes or stability over time among the findings. Key expressions indicating such reviews are ""comparison to prior,"" ""as compared to the previous,"" and notable observations such as improvement or modification of conditions or devices.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4210526315789473,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5308641975308642,0.43,100.0,100.0
+16142,latent_16142,1169,0.002338,0.00080558367,1.1376181,"Emphasis on findings in comparison with prior images, especially interval changes.",Examples with higher activation levels have similar pattern of presenting radiological findings in relation to comparison with prior imaging studies or by requesting description of the findings in comparison to prior images. The pattern emphasizes the importance of interval change evaluation in these examples.,0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5357142857142857,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5316159250585479,0.535,0.5299145299145299,0.62,100.0,100.0
+16143,latent_16143,733,0.001466,0.00056999683,1.654117,Focus on position of tubes or catheters in the body.,"The highly activated examples show evaluations of clinical or technical placement of items (like tubes or catheters) in the body. They check positions and advancements of tubes within specific constraints (proximal or distal SVC, carina, stomach). The focus is on ensuring proper positioning without new concerning findings.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.6,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5343531723899821,0.5482233502538071,0.5606060606060606,0.3814432989690721,97.0,100.0
+16144,latent_16144,1531,0.003062,0.0010663382,1.0642296,Comparison with previous imaging emphasizing changes or stability.,"The pattern involves references to the comparison of current imaging with previous images, often focusing on changes or stability in findings over time. Examples consistently invoke comparison language like 'in comparison to prior' or 'compared with previous,' emphasizing evaluation against historical data.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16145,latent_16145,1262,0.002524,0.0008567835,0.7829156,Low lung volumes identified on chest radiograph findings.,"The pattern observed in the examples with high activation involves focusing on the identification of low lung volumes, which is indicated by terms like ""low lung volumes,"" ""lungs are low in volume,"" and ""decreased lung volumes."" This specific descriptor is consistently associated with chest radiograph findings and appears to be a distinct feature that the model is activating on.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.3943064809206542,0.475,0.4074074074074074,0.11,100.0,100.0
+16146,latent_16146,1006,0.002012,0.00072464684,1.1583885,Findings indicating change or new pathology compared to prior imaging.,"The highly activated examples involve descriptions of findings indicating changes in the current image compared to a prior image, especially notable or distinct findings such as worsening conditions or newly identified pathologies.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.6153846153846154,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4851199670476779,0.5,0.5,0.33,100.0,100.0
+16147,latent_16147,1324,0.002648,0.0009636261,1.2764902,Detailed description of findings instructing comparison to prior images.,The examples with high activation levels uniquely include instructions to describe findings by comparing them to prior images. This explicit instruction highlights contextual understanding and demonstrating consistent features or changes over time.,0.5169082125603865,0.52,0.5172413793103449,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5182657567242072,0.52,0.5178571428571429,0.58,100.0,100.0
+16148,latent_16148,729,0.001458,0.00058677635,1.3014348,Implicit comparison of current and prior images even when no direct comparison is noted.,"The examples with high activation often involve interpretation of current images against prior images despite direct notes indicating 'None' in the 'Comparison' field. This suggests a pattern where radiology descriptions include comparisons or assumptions derived from the context provided, even if formally noted as 'None'. This highlights the implicit nature of comparison even when explicit comparison details may be absent or marked as unavailable.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4398709533874735,0.4421052631578947,0.4285714285714285,0.5333333333333333,90.0,100.0
+16149,latent_16149,1512,0.003024,0.0010670897,1.1260309,Descriptions with explicit findings of change compared to prior imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently refer to a specific change or comparison between current and prior imaging studies, highlighting explicit changes or findings with direct implications to clinical conditions, whereas low activation examples typically either lack comparison details or the comparisons indicate stability.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5283018867924528,0.53,0.5340909090909091,0.47,100.0,100.0
+16150,latent_16150,1326,0.002652,0.0009312214,0.9609443,Detailed comparative analysis with emphasis on findings or device changes between images.,"The examples with high activation levels frequently discuss changes or comparisons made between current and prior imaging studies, with an emphasis on devices, prominent findings such as lung opacities or the cardiac silhouette, and specific details of positioning (especially related to medical devices like tubes and lines). These aspects are indicative of a detailed comparative analysis focusing on how certain features or conditions have changed over time via imaging.",0.5508333333333333,0.5510204081632653,0.5384615384615384,0.5833333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6363636363636364,0.64,0.6166666666666667,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16151,latent_16151,1252,0.002504,0.00087216584,1.1873149,Evaluation of interval changes related to medical devices in chest imaging.,"These examples describe findings in chest imaging reports with explicit attention to changes or stabilities related to medical devices such as tubes and catheters. The focus is on intervals, such as removal, repositioning, or confirmation of proper placement, which is key in postoperative patient management and follow-up assessments.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5294117647058824,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4285864066472701,0.455,0.4210526315789473,0.24,100.0,100.0
+16152,latent_16152,2401,0.004802,0.0016432025,0.8579886,Stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"Normalization of findings is a significant pattern where images are compared to prior studies to ensure consistency or note changes. This involves identifying unchanged pathological findings or stability in recurring conditions. Each example highlights a finding known to be persistent or stable from previous exams, confirming decisions against emergency intervention, further imaging, or offering clinical context for ongoing monitoring. Examples with high activation level indicate scenarios where prior imaging has confirmed an ongoing condition reflecting stability or no acute change. Radiologists often confirm stable findings in these reports as they plan follow-up actions or confirm disease trajectories. This process is important for clinical correlation and monitoring. Furthermore, recognizing technical nuances or changes in supportive equipment (e.g. tubes or scars) informs procedural outcomes and patient trajectories. Therefore, juxtaposing radiological findings against prior images help in maintaining a consistent clinical context to guide patient management.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4573409707567079,0.46,0.4534883720930232,0.39,100.0,100.0
+16153,latent_16153,1512,0.003024,0.0010266579,1.0591364,Explicit reference to comparison with prior images and focus on interval changes.,"Activations are high where there is a need to compare current radiography images with prior ones to observe changes or stability in medical device placements, pathologies, or anatomical structures. This pattern involves more explicit instructions or expectations regarding comparison with past exams, evident in references to specific indications, techniques, and recorded comparisons to previous studies.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4838709677419355,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.609375,0.61,0.6018518518518519,0.65,100.0,100.0
+16154,latent_16154,1538,0.003076,0.0010849794,1.2350307,Detailed descriptions of medical device placements compared to prior images.,"Samples with high activation levels often feature detailed descriptions of the placement and changes of medical devices, like Dobbhoff tubes or pacemakers, with specific comparisons to previous images showing position changes or new placements.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4166666666666667,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.487458258911237,0.505,0.5079365079365079,0.32,100.0,100.0
+16155,latent_16155,1541,0.003082,0.0010588013,0.8907769,"Describe findings compared to prior radiographic images, noting interval changes.","The examples with high activation levels consistently instruct to describe findings based on current radiographic images with comparisons to prior images, even when the prior image is not explicitly available. Unlike low activation examples, the high activation instructions request certain specific deliverables regarding changes in findings, focusing on comparisons with prior images to note interval changes.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5725958516656191,0.575,0.5652173913043478,0.65,100.0,100.0
+16156,latent_16156,976,0.001952,0.0006872022,1.367475,Presence of explicit changes in pathology or condition in comparison to prior images.,"High activation levels are associated with examples that include specific measurable changes or significant findings when compared with prior imaging studies. Such cases typically document changes in pathology, verifying suspected conditions, or stability of known conditions where previous examinations explicitly referenced to detect alterations.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,100.0,100.0
+16157,latent_16157,1254,0.002508,0.00089025043,0.89305717,Explicit statements of unchanged findings in comparison with prior imaging.,"The pattern involves frequent comparisons with previous radiological exams to assess stability or changes, often emphasizing stable features and the lack of acute abnormalities. Examples with higher activation levels often explicitly mention unchanged findings or the continuation of non-acute processes in direct language.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5833333333333334,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4834180970544607,0.507537688442211,0.5087719298245614,0.2929292929292929,99.0,100.0
+16158,latent_16158,1865,0.00373,0.0012704021,0.81887716,Stability or absence of interval change in key radiological findings.,"Examples with high activation involve comparison to prior imaging, specifically showing stability or absence of significant changes in key radiological features like heart size, pulmonary opacities, or atelectasis. This pattern focuses on the language describing unchanged conditions over time.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5247029393370857,0.525,0.5263157894736842,0.5,100.0,100.0
+16159,latent_16159,1766,0.003532,0.0012088112,1.2504437,Incomplete prompts with missing or unusual placeholders in key fields lead to uncertain radiological study descriptions.,"Examples show ambiguity revealing non-standard phrases like 'INDICATION', 'TECHNIQUE', 'COMPARISON', and 'PRIOR_REPORT' with missing or incomplete data, leading to inaccurate assessments.",0.3333333333333333,0.5,0.5,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.3396750678304076,0.495,0.4974619289340101,0.98,100.0,100.0
+16160,latent_16160,1277,0.002554,0.00088110135,1.1957006,Comparison with prior imaging to assess changes or stability.,"The pattern identified is the explicit comparative analysis of the findings on a current imaging study against one or several prior imaging studies. This comparison is clearly documented in the findings and impressions sections of the reports, emphasizing changes, stability, or progression of conditions or placements of medical devices.",0.4583333333333333,0.48,0.4857142857142857,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5649405772495755,0.59,0.5608108108108109,0.83,100.0,100.0
+16161,latent_16161,1769,0.003538,0.0012108954,1.1351452,Comparison with prior imaging focusing on changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve explicit references to comparative changes in findings from a prior radiological examination. This pattern appears indicative of emphasis on tracking changes or stability over time, such as improvement or persistent findings, as opposed to descriptions without prior comparisons or unchanged findings.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16162,latent_16162,804,0.001608,0.0006277732,2.0112135,Comparison with prior imaging identifies interval changes or stability.,"The examples with higher activation levels focus on follow-up studies where findings are compared to prior imaging to assess changes in specific conditions, intervals, or techniques.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5039219843120628,0.5076923076923077,0.4939759036144578,0.431578947368421,95.0,100.0
+16163,latent_16163,1586,0.003172,0.0010801674,1.1120619,Stability or unchanged findings upon comparison with prior imaging.,"Highly representative examples involve observations of stability, that is, the absence of new findings, changes, or progression of various conditions in radiological comparisons. These samples frequently reference 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'similar' findings over successive imaging studies.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5013975976429704,0.505,0.5060240963855421,0.42,100.0,100.0
+16164,latent_16164,1208,0.002416,0.00088378845,1.2468766,Presence of scoliosis with concurrent thoracic findings.,"High activation levels are seen when the findings include scoliosis alongside assessments for conditions like atelectasis or other pathologies identified in the thoracic region. These examples often mention scoliosis in the presence of other findings such as pulmonary conditions or device placements, indicating a significant focus of these reports is on identifying scoliosis in conjunction with other thoracic findings.",0.4414764448761534,0.54,0.75,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.3527508090614886,0.505,0.6666666666666666,0.02,100.0,100.0
+16165,latent_16165,782,0.001564,0.000553622,1.1032658,References to stable or changed positioning of lines/devices in comparison studies.,"The pattern identified involves cases where there are notable changes or consistencies in post-surgical or procedural insertion devices or lines (e.g., PICC lines, catheters, endotracheal tubes) across comparative studies. These changes or consistencies are often highlighted in contexts of post-procedural assessments, which is why activation levels are high when these devices' positions or statuses are described.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5789911380233373,0.595,0.6557377049180327,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16166,latent_16166,1647,0.003294,0.0011565294,1.1318729,"Descriptions of interval changes between current and prior radiographic images, using explicit comparison.","Highly activated examples consistently compare findings between current and prior radiological images, detailing interval changes or stability, with phrasing that indicates specific observations made due to these comparisons, such as 'unchanged', 'new', 'increased', or 'compared to prior.' This is a typical linguistic pattern in reports focusing on progression or resolution of findings in imaging studies.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5498199279711885,0.55,0.5480769230769231,0.57,100.0,100.0
+16167,latent_16167,628,0.001256,0.00051306013,1.6733944,Comparison to prior imaging for changes or stability.,Examples with activations greater than zero consistently describe cases where there is a comparison made to prior imaging or mention a follow-up examination indicating changes or stability in a medical condition. These cases illustrate the importance of monitoring progression or stability in clinical findings over time.,0.4005787515502274,0.42,0.4411764705882353,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.518697901222365,0.5284090909090909,0.472,0.7763157894736842,76.0,100.0
+16168,latent_16168,1093,0.002186,0.00081348285,1.5217392,Identifying normal or unchanged findings in chest images.,"Several examples consistently involve the model providing interpretation or descriptions of radiology findings with emphasis on noting the absence of significant findings or handling straightforward interpretations without complicating factors. The model seems highly activated when tasked with identifying and confirming the presence of clear, normal, or unchanged findings, as well as detecting the absence of complexities like pleural effusion or pneumothorax.",0.5924495924495925,0.62,0.5789473684210527,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5073015873015874,0.515,0.512,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16169,latent_16169,760,0.00152,0.0006097184,1.5515653,Reports include technical/positioning details of medical devices.,The examples with higher activation levels involve radiology reports that include technical reports and equipment-related evaluation in addition to anatomical observations and changes in pathology. These phrases often entail specifics about the positioning and status of medical devices included in the radiographic image comparisons.,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6084001782531194,0.6105263157894737,0.5701754385964912,0.7222222222222222,90.0,100.0
+16170,latent_16170,388,0.000776,0.00038503477,1.7021866,Changes or stability compared to prior imaging are described.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve explanations of radiological findings compared against prior images, specifically when this comparison involves notable changes or stable findings over time. This is a specific routine pattern in radiology where findings are contextualized against historical data to comment on progression or stability.",0.4166666666666667,0.4166666666666667,0.4,0.4347826086956521,23.0,25.0,0.3611111111111111,0.3741496598639456,0.2151898734177215,0.3617021276595745,47.0,100.0
+16171,latent_16171,2074,0.004148,0.0014313483,1.3464446,Changes in position or status of medical tubes or devices.,"The pattern is observed in examples where there's a specific reference to changes in the position or status of medical devices or tubes such as endotracheal tubes, tracheostomy tubes, or PICC lines. Descriptions include details about the position, insertion, or adjustments over time, often compared with prior images.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.499670836076366,0.525,0.5454545454545454,0.3,100.0,100.0
+16172,latent_16172,1585,0.00317,0.0011219945,2.2139626,Focus on changes in medical device positioning or procedural status.,"These examples focus heavily on describing changes in medical devices or anatomical features between current and prior images, particularly tubes, pacemakers, or lines that have been inserted, repositioned, or removed, and their implications. Key observations involve specific changes rather than a general comparison of pathologies.",0.6122448979591837,0.6122448979591837,0.6,0.625,24.0,25.0,0.6068152031454783,0.61,0.6341463414634146,0.52,100.0,100.0
+16173,latent_16173,1822,0.003644,0.001282698,1.3422602,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Examples with higher activation levels make use of language patterns that show detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging findings. These patterns often describe stable, unchanged, or resolved medical features compared to earlier evaluations, focusing less on acute observations and more on changes over time.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5719070282793182,0.575,0.5641025641025641,0.66,100.0,100.0
+16174,latent_16174,2009,0.004018,0.0013703266,1.1799662,"Comparison of imaging findings with previous imaging involves changes in medical devices, lung volume or anatomy.","The examples with higher activations consistently reference comparison between current and prior imaging, particularly in the context of changes in medical devices or anatomical structures such as tubes, catheters, or pleural effusions. These reports are often used to assess stability or progression of both devices and medical conditions from previous studies.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6090225563909775,0.61,0.6222222222222222,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16175,latent_16175,1053,0.002106,0.00075241027,0.94021887,Reports focusing on medical device positioning or placement in imaging studies.,The pattern observed in examples with high activation includes radiological reports that describe technical positioning or placement of medical devices in relation to anatomical structures. This contrasts with non-activated samples which focus on natural anatomical or pathological findings without mention of equipment positioning.,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4444444444444444,0.45,0.4375,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16176,latent_16176,1786,0.003572,0.0012371343,1.0250596,Radiology reports emphasizing comparison with prior imaging for evaluating findings.,"The examples demonstrating high activation levels consistently involve radiological descriptions comparing current findings to prior images, specifying any stability, change, or evaluation of structures and devices in typical medical terminology. This practice helps determine the progression of medical conditions or the stability of present devices.",0.5824175824175825,0.62,0.575,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4432040574437002,0.495,0.4968944099378882,0.8,100.0,100.0
+16177,latent_16177,887,0.001774,0.0006047283,0.8755337,Explicit comparison to prior imaging with focus on interval change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently reference comparisons being made with prior imaging, often focusing on specific changes or stability since the previous study. They frequently specify the location and nature of any changes, such as effusions or opacifications, noting any 'interval change', 'worsening', 'improvement', or 'unchanged' states.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4285714285714285,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4943806162549122,0.495,0.4953271028037383,0.53,100.0,100.0
+16178,latent_16178,1625,0.00325,0.0011310612,1.2864268,Cardiac silhouette or mediastinal findings compared to prior images.,"The primary pattern across high activation samples is explicit descriptions of radiological findings in the context of stated cardiac assessments, often in conjunction with lung or mediastinal evaluations, including precise terms such as ""moderate cardiomegaly"" or ""borderline size of cardiac silhouette."" Additionally, the comparison of findings involving heart size or cardiomediastinal silhouette with previous studies forms a secondary pattern.",0.3797519007603041,0.38,0.375,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4149776086562605,0.435,0.4525547445255474,0.62,100.0,100.0
+16179,latent_16179,615,0.00123,0.00045160198,1.3222833,Detailed comparison of serial imaging findings over time.,"Examples with high activations involve detailed comparisons between current and prior images, focusing on consistent, progressive, or resolved findings. It emphasizes interpretation changes over time, often noting improvements or deterioration which were absent in examples with lower activations.",0.4758237056054771,0.4897959183673469,0.5,0.32,25.0,24.0,0.5422840347847165,0.5439560439560439,0.4943820224719101,0.5365853658536586,82.0,100.0
+16180,latent_16180,355,0.00071,0.00035611703,2.227948,"Unchanged cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours.","Highly activated examples frequently mention the cardiac, mediastinal, and hilar contours as unchanged or normal, often in the context of minimal or no acute pulmonary changes. The assistant's reports focus on these unchanging aspects amidst other findings, indicating this stability as a key observation.",0.6546310832025117,0.6590909090909091,0.6,0.631578947368421,19.0,25.0,0.502389486260454,0.5374149659863946,0.3333333333333333,0.4166666666666667,48.0,99.0
+16181,latent_16181,1561,0.003122,0.0010920881,0.99310684,Instructions for comparative analysis with prior radiographs or CT scans.,"The examples with high activation levels all involve explicit instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior radiographs or CT scans. These instructions are consistent across examples, stipulating a descriptive analysis to assess changes or similarities with respect to the previous imaging studies.",0.3633276740237691,0.4,0.4324324324324324,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4705740795208428,0.505,0.5033112582781457,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16182,latent_16182,274,0.000548,0.00034515117,2.3782237,Findings based on both frontal and lateral images compared to prior images.,The highly activated examples consistently describe findings from both frontal and lateral images in comparison to prior images. This is a specific pattern where the emphasis is on using multiple views and historical data to inform the diagnosis or changes noted in the findings.,0.4168212739641311,0.4390243902439024,0.2941176470588235,0.3125,16.0,25.0,0.5306912442396313,0.5746268656716418,0.3050847457627119,0.5294117647058824,34.0,100.0
+16183,latent_16183,1176,0.002352,0.0008309894,1.16464,Detailed comparison of tube placements and adjustments with attention to interval changes.,"Examples with high activation focus on detailed comparison of tube placements or adjustments, particularly endotracheal, nasogastric, or PICC lines, along with evaluations for interval change in lung volumes or other findings.",0.6598639455782312,0.66,0.6666666666666666,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5691374770605601,0.595,0.6862745098039216,0.35,100.0,100.0
+16184,latent_16184,1691,0.003382,0.0011663364,0.9884569,Detailed comparative analysis of findings against prior images.,Instances with heightened activations consistently emphasize comparative analysis between current and prior images to identify changes in specific structures or pathologies. The model seems to be activated strongly when required to explicitly assess and describe findings in relation to previous imaging.,0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5601506610379433,0.565,0.5537190082644629,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16185,latent_16185,1059,0.002118,0.0007499169,1.1533833,Interval improvement or worsening compared to prior imaging.,"These examples emphasize the presence of substantial changes or improvements in findings or elements such as opacities, effusions, or devices, compared with a prior imaging study. Descriptive terms like 'interval improvement', 'resolution', or 'worsening' highlight these changes and their clinical implications or potential ongoing issues.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4285714285714285,0.24,25.0,25.0,0.4521130881140456,0.485,0.4705882352941176,0.24,100.0,100.0
+16186,latent_16186,946,0.001892,0.00066204916,0.85934806,No acute findings or resolution of previously noted pathology.,"High activation levels are associated with cases where there is a lack of significant findings or resolution of previously noted pathology, resulting in a 'normal' or 'clear' impression. This pattern aligns with the practice of highlighting the stability or lack of acute change in radiology reports, following a comparison to previous examinations.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4869841269841269,0.495,0.4933333333333333,0.37,100.0,100.0
+16187,latent_16187,620,0.00124,0.00059701846,2.2795122,Significant absence of abnormal findings in thoracic imaging.,"These examples that activate strongly mention clear or normal findings across multiple aspects of the thoracic anatomy, such as heart size, mediastinal and hilar contours, and the absence of significant lung pathology. This likely corresponds to a pattern where the absence of acute or notable pathologies is notable in itself, emphasizing normalcy as significant.",0.6394230769230769,0.64,0.6296296296296297,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5800000000000001,0.5885714285714285,0.52,0.52,75.0,100.0
+16188,latent_16188,1769,0.003538,0.0012131415,1.0511659,Descriptions focus on placement or change of medical devices compared with prior images.,"The examples with high activation mention placement or positional changes of lines, tubes, or other medical devices, or the presence/absence of such devices when compared to prior images. This pattern points to a focus on the evaluation of medical device placements.",0.6006725514922235,0.62,0.7142857142857143,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4723225492456261,0.485,0.4782608695652174,0.33,100.0,100.0
+16189,latent_16189,1595,0.00319,0.0010955494,1.0528605,Emphasis on comparing current findings to prior imaging studies for interval changes.,"The examples that show higher activation levels emphasize comparative findings, specifically in relation to intervals or changes from prior studies. Observations often include descriptions of new developments or the stability of clinical features. This aligns with the pattern where comparison and interval change is critical in understanding the progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4628246455434127,0.4824120603015075,0.4890510948905109,0.67,100.0,99.0
+16190,latent_16190,523,0.001046,0.00047484366,1.4420769,Comparison with prior imaging showing unchanged findings or stability.,"The activation levels indicate interest in descriptions that suggest changes, especially when comparing current imaging to prior ones, particularly in terms of tubes placement, pleural changes, or other small modifications. These examples emphasize not significant changes detected or stability phrases which reflect minor or no alteration in condition compared to prior images.",0.2860057119543043,0.3,0.2222222222222222,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.4723377038695234,0.5151515151515151,0.3584905660377358,0.2923076923076923,65.0,100.0
+16191,latent_16191,1446,0.002892,0.0010059467,1.3522171,"Explicit comparison to prior imaging findings noting stability, improvement, or progression.","High activation levels are associated with reports where specific comparisons are made between a current and prior imaging study, noting changes, or lack thereof, and documenting findings. In these reports, current status is compared with a previous reference, discussing stability, improvement, or progression of observed conditions.",0.5353535353535354,0.54,0.55,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4839550088930083,0.485,0.4835164835164835,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16192,latent_16192,1276,0.002552,0.0008935945,1.2079577,"Cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, or mediastinal changes noted or compared in images.","Highly activated examples frequently involve findings like cardiomegaly, pulmonary edema, or other cardiopulmonary changes, often in relation to heart or mediastinal assessments. Individuals may have medical history indicators suggesting these findings, like CHF or cardiopulmonary symptoms, and radiographic reports frequently suggest potential changes even if some appear stable in relation to previous imaging.",0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4545454545454545,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,100.0,100.0
+16193,latent_16193,964,0.001928,0.00072643295,1.3866888,Comparative findings in chest radiographs using prior imaging.,"These examples describe observations in chest radiographs using comparative language and imagery to infer findings. The descriptive terms often involve observation of specific radiological features like lung volumes, mediastinal contours, atelectasis, and other minor abnormalities, juxtaposed with comparisons to previous radiographs, suggesting static or unchanged conditions.",0.5033738191632928,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.7391304347826086,23.0,25.0,0.4535519125683059,0.48,0.4861111111111111,0.7,100.0,100.0
+16194,latent_16194,1125,0.00225,0.0008080328,1.1832603,Comparison with prior imaging showing changes or mentions of intervals.,"Examples with higher activation levels include those indicating a change or comparison from previous radiological studies. Phrases like 'in comparison', 'compared to prior', or mentioning differences in interval changes show a pattern of analysis based on sequential imaging studies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5384615384615384,0.7,100.0,100.0
+16195,latent_16195,1302,0.002604,0.00090725266,1.0988281,Change in position or evaluation of lines/tubes/devices.,"The model activates highly whenever there is a change indicated in monitoring or support devices between current and prior imaging. This is evident where initial placement, changes, or recommendations regarding devices such as tubes or catheters are noted.",0.5833333333333333,0.6,0.6666666666666666,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4916485112563544,0.51,0.5161290322580645,0.32,100.0,100.0
+16196,latent_16196,1269,0.002538,0.00086974626,0.9688518,Reports request comparison to a prior image that is not available or marked as 'None.',"The examples that activate most highly are those where there is an instruction to provide a description of findings in comparison to a prior image, but the prior image is not explicitly mentioned in the report or marked as ""None."" This is a pattern of instructions not aligning with the availability of comparison images.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4846779237023139,0.485,0.4857142857142857,0.51,100.0,100.0
+16197,latent_16197,1800,0.0036,0.0012499386,1.1268318,Comparison of current imaging with multiple views including lateral and frontal.,"Examples with observed activation levels often contain phrases like 'provide a description in comparison to prior imaging' along with specific additional imaging indicators, using images from multiple views (frontal, lateral, and prior frontal) in describing changes or findings.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.6086956521739131,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4904008678321854,0.495,0.4957983193277311,0.59,100.0,100.0
+16198,latent_16198,618,0.001236,0.00053249707,2.1284096,Recognition and detailed description of changes relative to prior imaging.,Examples with lower activation levels either do not involve available comparisons with prior images or contain assessments that do not focus on describing specific changes in pathology observed in current compared to prior imaging. High activation examples emphasize interval changes or stability of findings in consecutive images.,0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5183961831360675,0.5193370165745856,0.4673913043478261,0.5308641975308642,81.0,100.0
+16199,latent_16199,1041,0.002082,0.0007615858,1.4153345,Request for findings comparison to prior imaging.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve requests to provide descriptions in radiology reports that include specific comparisons to prior imaging studies. The pattern focuses on analyses where comparison with previous images is a central part of the study.,0.5416666666666666,0.5510204081632653,0.53125,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4962406015037593,0.66,100.0,100.0
+16200,latent_16200,1171,0.002342,0.00082983985,0.9693546,Comparative analysis of images emphasizing variations from prior studies.,"The examples with high activation frequently mention the task of providing a detailed description or analysis of radiological findings by comparing current images to prior images, highlighting changes or stability. This involves identifying specific comparisons in findings, whether they may be intubation positions or changes in pathology over time. This pattern indicates that detailed comparative analysis from prior reports or images is significant in this dataset.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4350873522334972,0.46,0.4718309859154929,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16201,latent_16201,1742,0.003484,0.0011938858,0.8792572,"Comparison of line, tube, and catheter placements to previous imaging.","The examples with high activation levels discuss the comparison of current imaging findings to prior studies, focusing specifically on changes or the lack thereof in line placements, tubes, and catheters. Common phrases involve descriptions of how these are positioned relative to anatomical landmarks like the carina and the importance of comparisons to prior imaging.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.625,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5601023017902813,0.57,0.6,0.42,100.0,100.0
+16202,latent_16202,1755,0.00351,0.0011985716,0.846024,Comparison with prior chest images to assess changes.,"The key pattern in these examples is explicit references to previous chest imaging studies, specified by date or description, to describe changes, stability, or comparisons in the findings. The model gives higher activation when the task emphasizes analyzing changes over time, which is central to those examples.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5156594378384262,0.555,0.535031847133758,0.84,100.0,100.0
+16203,latent_16203,1877,0.003754,0.001290365,1.3508968,Focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging findings.,"The highly activated examples primarily involve descriptions focused on interval changes compared to prior imaging, particularly focusing on resolution, deterioration, or stability of previous findings. This comparison is essential in evaluating the progression or regression of pathologies, as reflected in the improvement of symptoms or stability of certain conditions.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4743362831858407,0.4848484848484848,0.4881889763779528,0.6262626262626263,99.0,99.0
+16204,latent_16204,1153,0.002306,0.000862001,1.1027781,"Detailed comparison with prior imaging, especially involving tubes or devices.","Higher activation examples typically describe findings with reference to previous imaging for comparison and change evaluation, but they also show detailed descriptions involving specific devices or interventions (e.g. tubes, catheters) confirming their positioning or condition. This pattern likely relates to radiology assessments of intervention efficacy or stability.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4727724636589591,0.475,0.4712643678160919,0.41,100.0,100.0
+16205,latent_16205,1749,0.003498,0.0012270268,1.2015747,Evaluation of changes or stability between current and prior imaging.,"The examples consistently ask for or involve direct descriptions of imaging studies relative to current and prior images, with emphasis on evaluating changes over time. They often mention observations of structures that were already present in previous images, or describe how new images compare with past exams, focusing on stability, changes, or new findings. This process requires detailed observational analysis, which is supported by explicit comparison.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16206,latent_16206,1337,0.002674,0.00092829566,1.0103676,Pattern involves significant changes or stability in findings across temporal comparisons.,"The examples with high activation often reference findings compared directly to prior imaging or provide an impression based on significant changes or stability over time. This interpretation typically requires synchronized reading across studies to verify stability or change, suggesting a pattern focused on temporal comparison and clinical follow-up interpretation.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5656565656565657,0.57,0.5583333333333333,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16207,latent_16207,994,0.001988,0.0007077919,1.0112584,Reports detailing significant changes in radiologic findings.,"Highly representative samples detail changes in radiographic findings such as worsening pulmonary edema or interstitial markings. Meanwhile, reports that describe normal steady states or unchanged findings (e.g., stable cardiomediastinal silhouette and previous findings) exhibit low activation. This pattern highlights the model's sensitivity to descriptions of dynamic changes in patient condition.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4705882352941176,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.5685958574807037,0.585,0.639344262295082,0.39,100.0,100.0
+16208,latent_16208,1059,0.002118,0.000790744,1.9088286,Requests for comparison with prior images to assess changes.,"Examples with high activation consistently involve a request to compare current images with prior imaging studies, using specific phrasing like 'in comparison to' or 'compared with prior'. This indicates the model is recognizing the pattern of comparing current findings to past imaging studies as a salient feature.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4761904761904761,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5896306676008407,0.59,0.5957446808510638,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16209,latent_16209,1267,0.002534,0.0008867347,1.0398816,Task to compare current images without available prior comparisons.,"Examples with high activation often have findings presented without explicit prior comparison information, using phrases like 'comparison' or 'changed' but lacking specific comparative analysis. This contradiction in the task of providing a comparison description but without available reference seems to provoke high activation.",0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4477611940298507,0.3,100.0,100.0
+16210,latent_16210,1136,0.002272,0.0008024472,1.372628,"Emphasis on describing findings using PA and lateral views, with or without comparison.","The examples with high activation levels involve requests for textual descriptions based on radiological findings, often with the additional context of the presence or absence of comparison with prior images, particularly when the documentation mentions the techniques employed. This suggests an emphasis on instructive responses based on current and comparative imaging, highlighted by explicit mention of views.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5045045045045045,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16211,latent_16211,1337,0.002674,0.000938206,1.3260871,Interval changes identified in imaging between short intervals.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve changes in pulmonary or pleural conditions over short intervals compared to prior imaging. Terms like 'interval change', 'advanced', or 'resolved' indicate time-sensitive observations that are central in these examples, particularly in the context of acute or evolving conditions.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5396419437340154,0.55,0.5714285714285714,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16212,latent_16212,1087,0.002174,0.0007735772,1.3843238,Comparisons of changes in findings across serial imaging studies.,"The examples with higher activations consistently mention that findings, whether cardiac devices, pulmonary conditions, or structural descriptions, are being compared against prior imaging studies to note stability or change. This implies a pattern where the model focuses on the subtleties of serial comparisons in radiological follow-ups, regardless of the condition or device being monitored.",0.6807095343680709,0.6875,0.6451612903225806,0.8333333333333334,24.0,24.0,0.5250134068796446,0.535,0.5271317829457365,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16213,latent_16213,839,0.001678,0.00061790546,1.5105333,Reports focus on interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"These examples consistently demonstrated discussions of imaging findings that reflect changes from previous imaging studies, making interval changes or comparisons a focal point. These comparisons include follow-up or repeated evaluations where changes over time are specifically reported, like resolution, improvement, worsening, or stabilization of conditions.",0.6305418719211823,0.64,0.6060606060606061,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.553030303030303,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16214,latent_16214,1035,0.00207,0.0007580932,1.5067544,Comparison of current frontal and lateral chest images with prior imaging studies.,The pattern in this data set is reporting findings using frontal and lateral chest images and comparing them with prior imaging studies. The activations emphasize significant findings or changes in specific cardio-pulmonary features noted in the text.,0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5348837209302325,0.69,100.0,100.0
+16215,latent_16215,1501,0.003002,0.0010513406,1.0739852,Explicit descriptions comparing current to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of current imaging findings in direct comparison to findings from prior images, emphasizing explicit verbal comparisons like 'as compared to', 'compared to prior', and referencing past exam dates to assess changes.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5212428337428338,0.5276381909547738,0.5203252032520326,0.6464646464646465,99.0,100.0
+16216,latent_16216,1250,0.0025,0.0009175017,1.0595168,High activation with requests to describe interval changes or comparisons.,"Examples with high activations frequently involve comparisons with prior studies which is requested or noted in the prompt, indicating a focus on detecting changes over time in patient imaging.",0.4652406417112299,0.52,0.5121951219512195,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4519915779758299,0.525,0.5144508670520231,0.89,100.0,100.0
+16217,latent_16217,1326,0.002652,0.0009484566,1.1140665,"Detailed comparison of findings to prior images, noting changes and stability of abnormalities.","Examples exhibit the reporting style typical of radiology evaluations, which involves detailed comparison of findings with prior images, identifying changes in positions or size, presence of chronic conditions, or confirming stability of known abnormalities.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5384615384615384,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16218,latent_16218,613,0.001226,0.0004919574,1.7269284,"Apply comparative analysis of imaging findings, using terms like 'unchanged' or 'interval change'.","Samples with high activation focus on the identification of changes or absence of changes in imaging reports through comparative analysis, frequently mentioning intervals, known conditions, or listing findings. This pattern aligns with the use of comparative terminology like 'unchanged', 'interval', or 'comparison to prior'.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5566666666666666,0.5657142857142857,0.4933333333333333,0.4933333333333333,75.0,100.0
+16219,latent_16219,1552,0.003104,0.0010627578,1.0443962,Emphasis on comparative analysis with prior imaging.,"Each example with high activation (5.0 or above) explicitly includes current image comparisons, requesting descriptions of findings relative to previous images across multiple examinations. This pattern highlights frequent and detailed comparative analysis over time in radiology reports, consistent with detecting subtle changes or stability.",0.4346449570330167,0.5,0.5,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4744744744744745,0.51,0.506578947368421,0.77,100.0,100.0
+16220,latent_16220,1673,0.003346,0.0011817589,1.1219186,Comparison-focused reporting describing changes or stabilities over time.,"Examples with high activation levels repeatedly highlight changes or comparisons made between current and prior imaging. Noticeable is the focus on changes in structures or pathologies noted as stable or deteriorating, providing updates on previously observed conditions like opacities, effusions, or device placements.",0.5416666666666666,0.56,0.5428571428571428,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5254081819849569,0.542713567839196,0.5328467153284672,0.73,100.0,99.0
+16221,latent_16221,1091,0.002182,0.00075654354,1.0578829,Detailed observations of interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels include explicit and detailed descriptions of changes or stability in radiological findings over time, often due to the presence of multiple images, prior comparisons, or mentions of interval changes. This reflects the importance of tracking changes in medical imaging to evaluate treatment efficacy, disease progression or stable conditions, which is a key function in radiology.",0.6347402597402598,0.64,0.6842105263157895,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.51,0.51,0.51,0.51,100.0,100.0
+16222,latent_16222,1036,0.002072,0.0006926732,0.81901133,Changes in position or presence of medical devices in radiographs.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve changes in the position or presence of medical devices or tubes (e.g., chest tubes, pacemakers, endotracheal tubes) as documented in radiology reports. Descriptions include the removal, unchanged positioning, or new placement of these devices compared to prior images, highlighting the significance of these notations.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5294117647058824,0.54,0.5571428571428572,0.39,100.0,100.0
+16223,latent_16223,1645,0.00329,0.0011460488,0.9597058,Stability or unchanged appearance compared to prior imaging.,"The pattern involves the presence of stable or unchanged findings across sequential imaging studies or reports. This is indicated by repeated mentions of lack of change compared to prior images or consistent positioning of medical devices, suggesting that the model activates on stability or lack of progression in medical imaging over time.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.6,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5028409090909091,0.51,0.5131578947368421,0.39,100.0,100.0
+16224,latent_16224,1502,0.003004,0.0010514345,1.5543783,Description of changes or stability in findings through comparison with prior images.,"These examples involve comparing current and prior radiological images and emphasize the stability or change in specific findings. They often describe persistent or unchanged state in an ongoing evaluation context, typical for monitoring chronic conditions, or evaluating post-operative changes or tube placements.",0.5331069609507639,0.56,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16225,latent_16225,1633,0.003266,0.0011214279,1.4929863,Detailed description of endotracheal tube position.,"Highly activated examples frequently describe endotracheal tube placement with precise measurements relative to the carina. This level of detail about tube positioning is not present in the examples with low activation, which generally provide less specific information about medical device positioning.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4444444444444444,0.16,25.0,25.0,0.3757684668495223,0.505,0.5555555555555556,0.05,100.0,100.0
+16226,latent_16226,1305,0.00261,0.0008920356,0.80329156,Emphasis on interval changes in comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels include detailed analyses comparing the current imaging study to prior studies, identifying interval changes or stability in pathological findings. This is distinct from low activation examples which also describe comparisons but without the emphasis on interval changes or stability.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.531480215690742,0.5326633165829145,0.5321100917431193,0.58,100.0,99.0
+16227,latent_16227,1137,0.002274,0.0008719796,1.3419162,Detailed interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"In these examples, the pattern is that the descriptions of radiology findings focus significantly on the differences between the current and prior imaging studies. The activation is high when specific interval changes or stability in certain findings (e.g., cardiac silhouette size, presence of fluid collections) are elaborated upon in relation to prior images. The activation is low when changes are not detailed or when only current findings are emphasized without comparison.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5625,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5174603174603174,0.525,0.5333333333333333,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16228,latent_16228,1813,0.003626,0.0012350624,0.89587367,Assessment or change in positioning of tubes or catheters on imaging.,"Higher activation levels correspond to examples that include a combination of critical observations, often related to tube or catheter placements requiring assessment, adjustment, or repositioning, depending on the specifics of the findings compared to prior imaging. These observations reflect changes or check positioning rather than ongoing stability or absence of acute issues.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4941164137641848,0.5125628140703518,0.5161290322580645,0.3232323232323232,99.0,100.0
+16229,latent_16229,1114,0.002228,0.0008043153,1.00169,Evaluation of cardiopulmonary changes via comparison to prior frontal images.,"These examples focus on the interpretations involving prior frontal images to evaluate for cardiopulmonary processes. Specific details include normal cardiac silhouette, changes in lung patterns like opacification, and presence or absence of pleural effusions in comparison to prior imaging. The pattern suggests detailed analysis of heart and lung conditions against existing findings, using phrases like 'Provide a description of findings in comparison to the prior frontal image'.",0.4363929146537842,0.44,0.4482758620689655,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4231430763938504,0.455,0.4693877551020408,0.69,100.0,100.0
+16230,latent_16230,592,0.001184,0.0004911979,1.501873,Comparison to prior images with noted changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels include descriptions where findings are explicitly compared to prior images, often noting changes or stability of features. These descriptions help radiologists track the progression or resolution of identified conditions and are likely to trigger the model's pattern recognition.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4943018563357546,0.4943181818181818,0.4343434343434343,0.5657894736842105,76.0,100.0
+16231,latent_16231,1411,0.002822,0.0009890809,1.0216575,Monitoring of medical devices and interval changes in radiographs.,"The represented examples frequently involve the presence of pacemakers, tubes, lines, and other medical devices, alongside evaluations of interval changes or stability in findings. This reflects a radiology report style that focuses on monitoring or evaluating the positions and conditions of indwelling medical devices.",0.6161616161616161,0.62,0.6,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5517241379310345,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16232,latent_16232,1138,0.002276,0.0008432015,1.311086,Changes compared to prior images indicating improvement or resolution of conditions.,"Activation levels are higher when reports describe changes relative to prior images, particularly those involving improvement or resolution of conditions such as pneumothorax or consolidations. Consistency and stability findings are less frequently associated with higher activation.",0.4285714285714286,0.52,0.6,0.12,25.0,25.0,0.4071204249948636,0.495,0.4782608695652174,0.11,100.0,100.0
+16233,latent_16233,420,0.00084,0.000480168,2.3718758,Structured format indicating 'comparison not available'.,"Highly representative samples all have a structured format that includes instructions to provide a description of findings in comparison to the prior image, followed by the phrase 'INDICATION: N/A TECHNIQUE: N/A COMPARISON: N/A'. This format indicates cases where comparison with previous studies is explicitly stated as unavailable.",0.6026143790849673,0.6041666666666666,0.5714285714285714,0.6956521739130435,23.0,25.0,0.55,0.5555555555555556,0.4096385542168674,0.6415094339622641,53.0,100.0
+16234,latent_16234,1356,0.002712,0.00095543184,0.9664828,Comparisons with prior imaging emphasizing interval changes or stability.,The given examples mostly show instances where the descriptions emphasize the use of comparisons with previous imaging to report any changes or stability of observed features. This pattern highlights the process of assessing interval changes as a crucial aspect in interpreting radiology studies.,0.458048976314733,0.46,0.4642857142857143,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5834991343892922,0.592964824120603,0.5736434108527132,0.74,100.0,99.0
+16235,latent_16235,1786,0.003572,0.0012375071,0.9355592,Interpretation of imaging findings by direct comparison to previous reports or studies.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe changes in a patient's medical condition, findings, or devices in comparison to an explicitly mentioned or clearly referenced past medical imaging report, using terms like 'as compared to prior', 'unchanged from previous', or similar expressions to highlight changes or stability.",0.3905002101723413,0.42,0.4444444444444444,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4548966685189595,0.485,0.4897959183673469,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16236,latent_16236,930,0.00186,0.00067974615,1.2187651,Emphasis on stability or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging.,"These examples frequently involve descriptions that emphasize comparison between current and previous images, but notably highlight stability of certain findings, confirming no acute changes, or reinforce the presence of expected findings without progression of suspected pathologies.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5261619114830124,0.53,0.5365853658536586,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16237,latent_16237,1165,0.00233,0.00081605953,0.9625008,Comparison of current and prior imaging findings is critical.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently involve a description of radiological findings relative to previous imaging. This is illustrated by explicit instructions or prompts to compare current images with prior ones, often using the word 'comparison'. This pattern reflects a focus on temporal changes or stability in the imaging findings.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4318181818181818,0.49,0.4939024390243902,0.81,100.0,100.0
+16238,latent_16238,829,0.001658,0.00060056226,1.5052307,Specific technical findings and changes over time in radiology reports.,"Higher activation levels appear in examples that involve detailed comparisons of changes or stability of specific medical conditions over time, consistently focused on specific technical findings and their implications for procedures or diseases.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.5757575757575758,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5194805194805194,0.8,100.0,100.0
+16239,latent_16239,1388,0.002776,0.00097137457,1.1099812,Focus on evolving conditions noted in imaging comparisons.,"Examples associated with higher activations frequently describe findings such as pleural effusions, pneumothorax, or lung consolidations. In these cases, comparisons are made with prior images to note changes, which indicate evolving conditions often subject to follow-up. The activation pattern suggests sensitivity towards conditions marked by significant or notable changes when compared to baseline or previous images.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16240,latent_16240,1101,0.002202,0.0008404621,1.9133909,Emphasis on interval changes in radiological findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve reports that describe radiological changes between a current examination and a prior examination, specifically emphasizing interval changes in the clinical findings.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.5625,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.543619448832719,0.545,0.5405405405405406,0.6,100.0,100.0
+16241,latent_16241,1736,0.003472,0.0012091026,1.332766,Explicit comparison with prior imaging studies to assess interval changes.,"These examples all include direct comparisons to prior imaging studies, highlighting changes or stability in observed findings. This linguistic pattern is evident in the usage of explicit comparison with terms like 'compared to', 'as seen on prior', and 'since previous', indicating a consistent protocol in radiology reports to assess developments over time.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.6181288312732389,0.62,0.6052631578947368,0.69,100.0,100.0
+16242,latent_16242,1147,0.002294,0.0008017626,0.97775817,Multi-image comparisons for evaluating interval changes.,"The examples with high activation describe radiology findings using multiple images for comparison. They often provide a detailed narrative of the outcomes and changes over time using phrases such as 'stable', 'improved', 'persistent', or 'resolved'. This reflects the practice of evaluating changes across various studies comprehensively, rather than in isolation.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16243,latent_16243,1414,0.002828,0.00096241117,0.7719405,"Detailed comparison with prior image findings, often noting interventions or changes.","The highly activated examples show radiological descriptions with detailed comparisons to prior images, often noting changes in medical devices or diagnoses, using specific and technical language. This involves careful documentation of consistency or changes in prior findings, as well as evaluation of interventions such as device placement or health status changes.",0.6587715776796468,0.66,0.6818181818181818,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.6033240440862644,0.605,0.5929203539823009,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16244,latent_16244,1550,0.0031,0.0010606135,1.1433026,Changes in device positioning or pathology in comparison to previous imaging.,"High activation examples consistently involve radiological reports that describe changes in the presence or positioning of devices, such as tubes or lines, or significant alterations in pathology from previous exams. These types of changes often involve comparison to prior imaging to document interventions or progression of clinical conditions.",0.7777777777777778,0.78,0.85,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16245,latent_16245,1544,0.003088,0.0010517343,0.82890856,Enlarged or top-normal cardiac silhouette in radiology reports.,"These examples typically mention either significant enlargement or top-normal size of the cardiac silhouette in the respective imaging reports, often while evaluating for cardiopulmonary processes or in the setting of known cardiac issues. This is a common finding in radiological assessments and correlates with conditions such as cardiomegaly or a stable cardiac contour.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4832850544116496,0.505,0.5084745762711864,0.3,100.0,100.0
+16246,latent_16246,986,0.001972,0.00069523486,1.043556,"Comparison of findings to prior imaging, noting stability or improvement.","The pattern in the high activation examples involves a clear comparison being made with prior imaging, specifically noting changes over time. The texts describe stable or improved findings based on the comparison, often related to chronic conditions or placement of medical devices.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5296225695768204,0.5326633165829145,0.5357142857142857,0.4545454545454545,99.0,100.0
+16247,latent_16247,1049,0.002098,0.00076094654,1.1332422,Structured description and comparison of image findings to prior studies.,"The high activation levels correspond to examples that describe image findings using a standard format of providing current and prior image details, often with explicit comparison to prior studies or clear instructions on identifying changes.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4945054945054945,0.54,0.525,0.84,100.0,100.0
+16248,latent_16248,1210,0.00242,0.00083658134,0.95029557,Comparison with prior imaging and evaluation of interval changes.,"This pattern involves interpreting chest imaging by first integrating current imaging views—frontal and/or lateral—with explicit comparisons to prior imaging. It focuses on identifying interval changes, stability, or improvements in structural or pathological features such as pulmonary opacities, effusions, or device placements, indicating a clinical scenario where monitoring of recent changes is critical.",0.449204406364749,0.46,0.46875,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4500269846572948,0.465,0.4736842105263157,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16249,latent_16249,1243,0.002486,0.0008591122,0.99676484,Detailed clinical context and prior imaging comparison required.,"Highly activated examples describe a chest radiology study where an explicit procedure or evaluation context is provided, with emphasis on detailed patient history, indication, and technique notes often for comparing current and prior imaging. This setting often implies dynamic clinical scenarios demanding in-depth radiological evaluations.",0.3923611111111111,0.44,0.4615384615384615,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4696428571428571,0.5151515151515151,0.5128205128205128,0.8,100.0,98.0
+16250,latent_16250,1707,0.003414,0.0011652047,1.0813618,"Explicit comparison of current radiology study with prior imaging, noting changes or stability.","The examples exhibit a pattern where there is explicit commentary on changes between the current and prior imaging studies, with a focus on either stability ('no change') or specific alterations over time ('slight interval increase'). This reflects a common practice in radiology to evaluate and document temporal changes in imaging findings, using a comparative language structure between current and prior images.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4978554242075531,0.52,0.5140845070422535,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16251,latent_16251,1230,0.00246,0.0008726167,1.317555,"Comparison for interval changes or stability, particularly in tubes or opacities.","The examples that show high activation levels consistently reference interval changes or findings in comparison with prior studies, especially appearance or positioning of tubes and lines, as well as changes in lung opacities or consolidation. This suggests that the model activates towards identifying changes or stability in such features from prior imaging.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.491146462439927,0.505,0.5037593984962406,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16252,latent_16252,788,0.001576,0.00055416,1.4806365,Pulmonary or cardiac procedural changes or pathology in the chest imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels include references to pathology, techniques, or findings in the chest imaging studies associated with pulmonary or cardiopulmonary abnormalities like effusion, pneumothorax, or changes due to medical procedures. These patterns form an association with medical urgency or significant diagnostic findings.",0.3777599357687675,0.38,0.3928571428571428,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4972347913524384,0.525,0.5170068027210885,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16253,latent_16253,1670,0.00334,0.0011644813,1.1554073,Comparison with prior imaging showing stability or changes in condition or devices.,"The examples with high activation levels mention specific comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, often noting stability or changes in condition, particularly relating to medical devices or patient status post-procedure.",0.6666666666666666,0.68,0.6285714285714286,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5320923608991964,0.54,0.5317460317460317,0.67,100.0,100.0
+16254,latent_16254,1358,0.002716,0.0009619892,1.0893312,Focus on identifying changes between current and prior images.,"The text frequently includes directives to identify differences or similarities between current and past images, focusing on any interval changes or stability. The activation is linked to how well changes are identified and conveyed, especially with regard to specific consolidations, changes in pleural effusions, or positioning of medical devices.",0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16255,latent_16255,1298,0.002596,0.000875892,0.69345355,Stability or minimal interval change in comparison with prior imaging.,"These examples involve a comparison with prior imaging studies to evaluate stability, residuals, or improvements in certain conditions. Mention of unchanged findings or subtle changes compared to previous imaging indicates the pattern of stability or minimal interval change over time.",0.7181964573268921,0.72,0.7619047619047619,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.480866592994269,0.495,0.4925373134328358,0.33,100.0,100.0
+16256,latent_16256,1045,0.00209,0.0007805828,1.4201912,"Presence of explicit imaging details, history, or interventions.","Highly activated examples consistently include explicit data such as measurements, patient's history, presence of medical devices, or direct medical interventions. This suggests a pattern where greater detail or unusual elements in a radiology report boost the activation level.",0.3658041603247082,0.5,0.5,0.96,25.0,25.0,0.3375046006624954,0.46,0.478494623655914,0.89,100.0,100.0
+16257,latent_16257,994,0.001988,0.0007863939,1.6705263,Evaluation of image changes by comparing current and prior imaging studies.,"Patterns with high activation levels describe a direct comparison of current images to prior images, evaluating for changes or consistency in findings. The consistent use of comparative language, such as 'compared to the prior study', 'similar to the prior film', and terms like 'unchanged', or 'no significant interval change', reflects the focus on change assessment in radiology reports.",0.5755517826825127,0.6,0.5675675675675675,0.84,25.0,25.0,0.4931897370921761,0.52,0.5136986301369864,0.75,100.0,100.0
+16258,latent_16258,1092,0.002184,0.00081749156,1.4625691,Placement and position of medical tubes compared to prior images.,The pattern identified involves a focus on the placement of tubes (endotracheal or feeding tubes) and associated devices as described in the findings. The texts with highest activation consistently detail the placement or change in location of these medical devices in comparison with prior images.,0.719551282051282,0.72,0.7391304347826086,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.560623496181609,0.58,0.6379310344827587,0.37,100.0,100.0
+16259,latent_16259,1196,0.002392,0.0008339698,1.031229,"Direct comparison with prior imaging studies, assessing changes or stability.","The highly activated examples involve direct comparison with prior imaging studies, using specific findings like changes or stability in certain conditions. This pattern looks for transformations over time against previous states or examinations, as seen in radiological practice to track progression or resolution of conditions.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5555555555555556,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16260,latent_16260,996,0.001992,0.00072789344,1.276197,Significant interval changes in findings compared to prior images.,"Examples with high activation levels often involve significant interval changes observed in radiological findings between current and prior images. These examples highlight assessments of progression or resolution of medical conditions, device positioning, and other significant observations, in contrast to low activation examples which report stable or unchanged findings.",0.554367201426025,0.6,0.7777777777777778,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5395729141859174,0.565,0.6226415094339622,0.33,100.0,100.0
+16261,latent_16261,1936,0.003872,0.0013386369,1.0140676,Detailed findings and comparison of radiological changes or device positioning.,"Examples with higher activation levels focus on the presence of detailed radiological findings and measurements, such as the positioning of medical devices, identification of pulmonary conditions, and the assessment of heart and mediastinal contours. They often describe both the current state and changes or stabilities compared to prior images, emphasizing thorough examinations.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4797228839782031,0.525,0.5157232704402516,0.82,100.0,100.0
+16262,latent_16262,2068,0.004136,0.001430227,1.150769,Reports describing stable or unchanged findings compared to prior imaging studies.,"Upon analysis, reports with high activation levels tend to consistently lack significant new findings or changes since prior examinations, resulting in stable or unchanged impressions. This typically involves direct comparisons with previous imaging, where intervals show no new pathology or further improvement in the condition being monitored.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5789473684210527,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.527027027027027,0.39,100.0,100.0
+16263,latent_16263,1035,0.00207,0.0007620282,1.6157966,Interval changes in lung opacities or consolidation.,"Examples show a focus on evaluating and commenting on intervals and changes in lung findings related to opacities, consolidation, and effusion in radiology studies, emphasizing descriptions of these changes as they relate to acute or resolving pulmonary conditions.",0.5894909688013137,0.6,0.6470588235294118,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.509201290077784,0.542713567839196,0.5833333333333334,0.2828282828282828,99.0,100.0
+16264,latent_16264,961,0.001922,0.0006972486,1.388523,Evaluations involving interval change or new conditions based on prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently feature situations involving notable changes or the evaluation of specific aspects using prior imaging as a direct comparison, particularly with non-standard situations like couching changes due to treatments, interventions, or specific conditions. Prominence is given to re-evaluation due to concerns or to adjust treatment protocols.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5015766453056658,0.51,0.5079365079365079,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16265,latent_16265,1355,0.00271,0.0009539869,1.2680666,"Descriptive changes in the presence or placement of medical tubes, lines, or devices.","The dataset presents scenarios where changes are noted in the current radiological image compared to prior examinations, with particular focus on the presence and alterations in the context of medical equipment or foreign devices. Examples consistently document changes in the presence or positioning of tubes, lines, or devices, such as endotracheal tubes or PICC lines, compared to previous imaging.",0.6072757337742869,0.62,0.6875,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5494957810249022,0.5577889447236181,0.5833333333333334,0.42,100.0,99.0
+16266,latent_16266,2126,0.004252,0.00145397,0.96339256,Comparative assessments of imaging showing changes in thoracic conditions.,"Examples with high activation levels generally involve comparisons of current images with prior ones, specifically highlighting changes in lung opacities, effusions, or other pulmonary details. Changes like improvement or worsening of conditions are described. These patterns likely focus on comparative assessments that indicate monitoring or progression of specific thoracic conditions.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16267,latent_16267,1198,0.002396,0.00082521734,0.88101214,Comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"These examples feature the comparison of findings with prior imaging studies. The pattern involves assessment of changes or stability of certain conditions or medical findings. The radiology descriptions often suggest changes, stability, or progression and explicitly mention comparing new images to prior ones.",0.4208494208494208,0.46,0.4736842105263157,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5322659402225591,0.545,0.5338345864661654,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16268,latent_16268,1142,0.002284,0.0008155155,1.6325691,Comparison of current and prior chest images for changes or stability.,The examples with higher activation levels consistently reference direct visual comparison between current chest images (frontal and often lateral) and a prior imaging study. This indicates the model is detecting or prioritizing changes or stability in image findings over time.,0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5305164319248826,0.57,0.5443037974683544,0.86,100.0,100.0
+16269,latent_16269,1550,0.0031,0.0010649478,0.9619135,Comparison of current chest imaging with prior images for stability or changes.,"The examples with higher activations consistently involved assessing chest radiographs or images in comparison to prior exams, focusing on the detection of consistent or unchanged findings, such as the placement or movement of tubes, effusions, pulmonary opacities, pneumothoraces, or changes in opacities. These descriptions specifically emphasize comparing findings with previous images, indicating stability or change over time.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.478604344963792,0.505,0.503448275862069,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16270,latent_16270,1267,0.002534,0.0008950559,0.9878052,"Comparison of current and prior radiological images to determine interval changes, specifically focusing on devices and opacities.","Examples with higher activations consistently use specific comparisons to prior imaging in their findings and impressions, with an emphasis on changes in devices, opacities, consolidations, or other radiological features. They involve reevaluation for changes in medical devices or respiratory conditions based on direct image comparisons over time.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5818033455732354,0.59,0.5703125,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16271,latent_16271,953,0.001906,0.00066859095,0.8572802,Reports emphasizing interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"The highest activation examples consistently focus on evaluating findings for interval changes or stability compared to prior images, often highlighting areas of focus or change in the interval set against historical imaging data. They contain specific phrases like 'interval change' and 'compared to previous'.",0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5642701525054467,0.58,0.5579710144927537,0.77,100.0,100.0
+16272,latent_16272,859,0.001718,0.0006261931,1.5231422,Comparison of current and prior images highlighting stability or changes.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently emphasize the comparison of current images with prior images, noting stable or resolved conditions in the findings. This aligns with radiological assessment practices where multiple imaging studies are compared over time to track changes in a patient's condition.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.4666666666666667,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4475703324808184,0.46,0.4692307692307692,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16273,latent_16273,1185,0.00237,0.0008201692,0.95451134,Comparison focusing on stability or slight changes without prior interpretation.,"These examples where activation is 5 or above prominently involve findings compared to prior images but lack significant interpretation, focusing more on descriptive stabilization or slight progression of conditions. The focus is on temporal comparison stating stability or slight changes rather than diagnosing new issues, marked by lacking specific prior reports, open comparisons, or noticeable terminology indicating comparison to prior states.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4375,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.5021998742928976,0.505,0.5058823529411764,0.43,100.0,100.0
+16274,latent_16274,2215,0.00443,0.0015297064,1.1011264,Queries about interval changes in pulmonary findings from comparison images.,"Examples with higher activation levels frequently feature descriptions that directly query potential changes in pulmonary findings like pneumothorax, edema, or other opacities. These prompts often request evaluations of interval changes from comparison images, highlighting specific changes.",0.5974235104669887,0.6,0.5862068965517241,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5737104741844078,0.575,0.5675675675675675,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16275,latent_16275,1239,0.002478,0.0008833654,1.4519911,"Positioning or adjustment of medical devices (e.g., tubes or catheters) in imaging.","The pattern identified involves the mention of pre-existing or inserted medical devices, such as endotracheal tubes, nasogastric tubes, or catheters. Examples describe the positioning or adjustment of these devices in relation to anatomical landmarks, indicating a need to confirm proper placement or change over time, often using phrases like 'terminate', 'positioned', or 'advanced'.",0.3982456140350877,0.4285714285714285,0.3571428571428571,0.2083333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.4394710348017741,0.485,0.4651162790697674,0.2,100.0,100.0
+16276,latent_16276,1707,0.003414,0.0012027638,0.9022746,Comparative assessment with past imaging studies for interval changes or stability in findings.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve situations where comparative assessments are made between current and past imaging studies, explicitly mentioning intervals of change, stability, or improvement in findings from prior exams. Additionally, the presence of structured data like asymmetric pathology or correction of medical device placement enhances activation.",0.5170250896057348,0.5510204081632653,0.5405405405405406,0.8,25.0,24.0,0.5020230314347961,0.52,0.5144927536231884,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16277,latent_16277,920,0.00184,0.0006305536,0.9128633,Absence of prior imaging available for comparison.,"The examples with high activation levels often contain reports generated with no prior relevant images available for comparison. This reflects scenarios where a description is actually required without the benefit of comparing to previous studies, hence activating the need for complete assessments based on the current imaging alone.",0.4489795918367347,0.4489795918367347,0.44,0.4583333333333333,24.0,25.0,0.5352281723230929,0.545,0.5633802816901409,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16278,latent_16278,1556,0.003112,0.0010650626,1.2353284,Comparison of findings over time to assess interval change.,"These examples involve descriptions of findings in comparison to prior imaging, which is a common practice in radiology reports to track changes in conditions over time. Examples with high activation explicitly compare findings to previous studies to assess stability or change, suggesting a focus on evaluating the interval change between reports.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4542271650705386,0.47,0.4776119402985074,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16279,latent_16279,450,0.0009,0.0003974013,1.9502547,Assessment of interval changes and stability of medical device placement compared to prior images.,"These examples frequently mention changes or stability in findings as compared to prior imaging studies and the presence or position of medical devices like vagus nerve stimulators, infusion ports, and chest wall ports. This pattern indicates radiology reports assessing changes in status, particularly emphasizing device placement or stability across exams.",0.64,0.64,0.64,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6542744252873564,0.6753246753246753,0.532258064516129,0.6111111111111112,54.0,100.0
+16280,latent_16280,2167,0.004334,0.0014873412,1.1030848,Descriptive comparisons of current and prior imaging results.,"High activation levels are associated with descriptions detailing explicit comparison of findings from current and prior imaging studies, often involving changes or stability in specific pathologies such as lesions, opacities, or devices. This pattern includes phrases like 'as compared to' and mentions of specific changes noted between imaging sessions.",0.4141414141414141,0.42,0.4333333333333333,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.4624076828727262,0.485,0.4893617021276595,0.69,100.0,100.0
+16281,latent_16281,1133,0.002266,0.0008264068,1.0166023,Comparative findings between current and prior images.,"The examples with higher activation levels describe findings that mention comparative analysis between current and prior images, exemplifying changes or stability over time. This pattern is often used to monitor progression or resolution of medical conditions by comparing with past studies.",0.4065934065934066,0.46,0.475,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16282,latent_16282,1301,0.002602,0.0009329468,1.0690359,Changes in lung volumes and pleural conditions compared to prior imaging.,"Many examples describe findings in the lungs and pleura that highlight changes from previous studies, with a particular focus on lung volume and pleural conditions such as atelectasis, scarring, or effusions. The pattern captures cases where there are notable changes in lung or pleural characteristics compared to previous imaging.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5847404627892432,0.585,0.580952380952381,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16283,latent_16283,1244,0.002488,0.0008938558,1.0532441,Evaluation of changes over time in medical device placement or anatomical abnormalities.,"The examples with high activation often involve situations where the radiological evaluation includes a comparison between current and prior images, and notably involves descriptions of changes over time in relation to medical devices, anatomical changes like bone fractures, or consistent pathologies. This suggests a focus on the imaging evaluation comparing changes over time, especially involving devices or anatomical abnormalities.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16284,latent_16284,1100,0.0022,0.0007684288,1.0927048,"Comparison of current and prior imaging, highlighting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels consistently demonstrate reports that reference visual comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, particularly noting changes or stability in pathologies or anatomical structures. This pattern is reinforced by phrases indicating interval changes or stability in findings.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5631055485595333,0.575,0.556390977443609,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16285,latent_16285,1521,0.003042,0.0010623464,1.0153999,Direct comparison between current and prior imaging findings.,"These examples depict a pattern of directly comparing current imaging findings to prior studies, often referencing specific aspects that are unchanged or new. This language pattern is particularly evident in radiological reports where continuity or change over time is crucial to diagnosis.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4710609297121351,0.48,0.4841269841269841,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16286,latent_16286,1139,0.002278,0.0008285172,1.2493585,Descriptions focus on position and status of internal lines/tubes.,"The examples that have higher activation scores all explicitly describe line placements, tubes, or similar devices within the thoracic region, such as central venous catheters, pacers, or chest tubes. These descriptions include references to their position, status, or absence, which is a distinct and repeated aspect of these reports.",0.4745691467002942,0.5,0.5,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4893617021276595,0.505,0.5076923076923077,0.33,100.0,100.0
+16287,latent_16287,1681,0.003362,0.0011797565,0.95364785,Assessments involving comparison with prior images.,"The examples receiving high activation involve situations where a comparison is made against a prior image. They involve assessing changes, stability, or absence of findings in relation to a previous examination, highlighting interval changes or absence thereof.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4640605296343001,0.49,0.4930555555555556,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16288,latent_16288,1663,0.003326,0.0011779483,1.2091687,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies to assess changes.,"High activation examples consistently involve requests for current imaging findings in comparison to prior imaging studies, with specific attention to changes or stability in condition which suggests a focus on monitoring progression or resolution of a condition.",0.4906621392190152,0.52,0.5135135135135135,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16289,latent_16289,634,0.001268,0.00049876934,1.7801967,Low lung volumes noted in radiology findings.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently describe findings of low lung volumes, which is a recurrent pattern across these samples. Low lung volumes are often noted as significant in radiology reports, indicating incomplete lung inflation which can be associated with various conditions.",0.6847414880201765,0.7,0.8571428571428571,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5932146456163924,0.6358381502890174,0.627906976744186,0.3648648648648648,74.0,99.0
+16290,latent_16290,1611,0.003222,0.0011089959,1.1673545,High emphasis on summarizing image comparison findings.,"Activations are higher for examples where there is a clear task to ""provide a description of the findings in the radiology study in comparison to the prior frontal image"". This suggests a pattern where the assistant is tasked to summarize a comparison of images, which appears to trigger higher activation scores.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5794380684553216,0.585,0.5691056910569106,0.7,100.0,100.0
+16291,latent_16291,1616,0.003232,0.0011040816,1.101714,Comparison with prior imaging to assess interval changes.,"These examples refer to instances where findings from a current imaging study are compared to prior images for any relevant interval changes. Such comparisons are essential for tracking disease progression or stability. Reports include direct comparisons with prior imaging or explicit mention of previous radiographs, which helps in detecting new findings or confirming unchanged states.",0.4900040799673603,0.5,0.5,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5366079703429101,0.55,0.5373134328358209,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16292,latent_16292,1493,0.002986,0.0010488824,0.9557541,"Stable findings in current compared to prior image, highlighting unchanged conditions.","Examples with higher activation levels include a comparison between current and prior images explicitly stating unchanged conditions or subtle differences, suggesting stability in findings over time despite having prior reports making comparisons easier and direct. The phrasing often notes unchanged or similar findings over time, which is a critical pattern in assessing patient stability or monitoring changes.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.4987212276214834,0.51,0.5142857142857142,0.36,100.0,100.0
+16293,latent_16293,976,0.001952,0.00070378406,1.2937665,Direct image analysis without supplemental descriptions.,"High activation examples consistently describe the use of direct images without any additional description that complements or contrasts the image with previous studies. This pattern focuses on comprehensive analysis using only current images, often containing prior report information but heavily reliant on the current images themselves.",0.52,0.52,0.52,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5043928812795675,0.505,0.5053763440860215,0.47,100.0,100.0
+16294,latent_16294,1489,0.002978,0.001066878,1.0206667,Focus on stable cardiopulmonary features in comparison to prior studies.,"The highly activated samples consistently highlight the identification of specific cardiopulmonary patterns or comparisons, particularly focusing on interpreting changes over time through prior imaging comparisons. Additionally, there is often an emphasis on cardiac silhouette being stable or consistent, and the inspection of mediastinal or hilar contours, without identifying acute changes or processes.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5248931009477132,0.525,0.5257731958762887,0.51,100.0,100.0
+16295,latent_16295,1475,0.00295,0.0010083487,0.9123645,Stable or unchanged findings when compared to prior studies.,"Examples with high activation describe similarities or unchanged findings compared to a prior study, often without significant changes, suggestive of chronic conditions or stable findings over time. They emphasize terms like 'unchanged', 'similar', or 'stable', indicating assessment relative to prior imaging.",0.4691666666666666,0.4693877551020408,0.4782608695652174,0.44,25.0,24.0,0.5075871771681237,0.51,0.5116279069767442,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16296,latent_16296,1475,0.00295,0.0010158593,1.344403,Unchanged findings from prior reports/imaging.,"Each highly activated example includes a reference to prior reports or imaging for comparison, an indication of medical history or condition, and findings are often unchanged from previous examinations, suggesting a stable condition. Hence, examples with unchanged findings from prior reports/imaging activate strongly.",0.4597839135654261,0.46,0.4583333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5235587652649264,0.525,0.5280898876404494,0.47,100.0,100.0
+16297,latent_16297,1376,0.002752,0.0009621899,1.2919556,Unchanged or improved radiology findings compared to prior studies.,"The highly activated examples include those where the description states findings that are unchanged or improved from previous studies. This consistency or improvement compared to a previous reference is indicative of stable findings, using 'unchanged', 'improved', or 'stable'. Such language implies a lack of new or worsening pathology, which suggests a benign status.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5263157894736842,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5140158821613768,0.515,0.5164835164835165,0.47,100.0,100.0
+16298,latent_16298,1012,0.002024,0.00072105764,1.0528694,Detailed findings or complex impressions in the radiology report.,"Highly activated examples involve descriptions of findings that include detail beyond the immediate X-ray images, suggesting a focus on comprehensive, thorough examinations or cases with complexity or layered conditions that require detailed reporting. Phrases like 'diffuse interstitial opacities', 'interval placement', or 'serial comparison' contribute to this detail-rich context.",0.4357638888888889,0.48,0.4871794871794871,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.580168776371308,0.5979899497487438,0.5673758865248227,0.8080808080808081,99.0,100.0
+16299,latent_16299,1509,0.003018,0.0010497511,1.1292343,Reference to anatomical stability or change with prior focus on heart and lung.,"The pattern observed is frequent reference to anatomical structures and their stability or changes compared to prior imaging studies, with a focus on cardiomegaly and lung changes. Terms such as 'stable', 'unchanged', or 'similar' are used alongside comparisons with prior reports.",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.5555555555555556,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5123975516132379,0.53,0.5217391304347826,0.72,100.0,100.0
+16300,latent_16300,1435,0.00287,0.0010185684,1.0506868,Task-oriented language prompts for comparing current with prior imaging.,"Examples consistently contain instructions to compare current imaging findings with prior studies, regardless of the absence or presence of available prior comparisons. This pattern is representative of a task in radiology reporting where comparisons are sought to identify any changes or consistencies in findings over time, using specific language prompts asking to provide descriptions based on image comparisons.",0.5659722222222222,0.6,0.5641025641025641,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4468414647638013,0.5,0.5,0.81,100.0,100.0
+16301,latent_16301,1123,0.002246,0.00078253273,0.96023965,Comparison of current and prior imaging to assess change or stability.,"The presence of specific phrases like 'compared to prior', 'interval change', and references to previous imaging suggests that the pattern is focused on comparative analysis and assessments of change or stability between current and prior radiological images.",0.4206773618538324,0.48,0.4878048780487805,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.5037482842360892,0.53,0.5205479452054794,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16302,latent_16302,1517,0.003034,0.0010818279,1.0686009,Focus on comparison with previous imaging in context of ongoing chest conditions.,"The examples with higher activation levels frequently reference changes or evaluations in comparison to previous images, patients with a specific history of chest ailments, or changes observed in repeated cases over time. These narratives emphasize the evaluation of evolving conditions, including progressions like pneumonia, pleural effusion, chest pain evaluation, and chronic conditions assessed through changes over imaging time points.",0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4355500821018062,0.45,0.4621212121212121,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16303,latent_16303,499,0.000998,0.00037060925,1.2978239,Reports emphasize comparing current findings to prior studies.,Significant variations in activation levels are associated with instances where there is an explicit or implicit directive to compare current imaging results against prior studies. This linguistic pattern triggers high activations as it reflects key tasks in radiology such as monitoring changes over time.,0.3186813186813187,0.38,0.425,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4209616049809754,0.4259259259259259,0.3652173913043478,0.6774193548387096,62.0,100.0
+16304,latent_16304,1174,0.002348,0.00085824996,1.1775008,"Detailed comparison to prior images, noting changes or stability.","Examples with higher activation levels prominently focus on providing a thorough comparison to prior imaging studies, explaining the changes, or lack thereof, from the prior to current examination. These examples often describe stability or progression of specific findings referencing previous exams, indicating that the model is focusing on comparative analysis with past studies as a key pattern.",0.4391025641025641,0.44,0.4444444444444444,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5206740836045309,0.525,0.5210084033613446,0.62,100.0,100.0
+16305,latent_16305,1611,0.003222,0.0011028035,1.1005683,Comprehensive evaluations using both frontal and lateral chest images.,"Examples with higher activation levels typically involve radiological findings derived from both frontal and lateral chest images. Radiologists often utilize multiple views to gather comprehensive information and detect specific changes or abnormalities. Examples with both images tend to have more detailed comparison descriptions, central to the activation pattern focused on comprehensive evaluations using multi-view imaging.",0.44,0.44,0.44,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4041404598813374,0.415,0.4330708661417323,0.55,100.0,100.0
+16306,latent_16306,489,0.000978,0.000434227,1.9745263,Mention of interval changes compared to prior radiographic studies.,"The examples consistently mention comparisons to previous radiographic images to describe findings — often noting 'no significant interval change'. This focuses on assessing differences or stability in successive images, which is a common procedure in tracking patient conditions over time.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5497491471001406,0.5506329113924051,0.4301075268817204,0.6896551724137931,58.0,100.0
+16307,latent_16307,1001,0.002002,0.00068793225,1.0190767,Descriptions highlighting significant interval changes compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with high activation (5.0+) contain descriptions comparing the current findings to prior imaging, specifically noting significant changes such as worsening conditions, development of new findings, or substantial interval changes. In particular, these examples often point to new developments or resolution in lung, cardiac, or pleural conditions, demonstrating progressive or regressive changes in medical conditions.",0.4724025974025974,0.48,0.4736842105263157,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5331465919701214,0.55,0.5806451612903226,0.36,100.0,100.0
+16308,latent_16308,1053,0.002106,0.00074689963,1.2637445,Comparison with prior imaging showing significant interval change.,"Higher activations occur in examples where findings are compared between current and prior images, and significant changes are noted. Examples often describe a change or interval progression in findings, such as increased opacification or resolution of previous conditions, implying the clinical relevance of the change observed over time.",0.5384615384615385,0.58,0.7,0.28,25.0,25.0,0.4986666666666667,0.53,0.56,0.28,100.0,100.0
+16309,latent_16309,1141,0.002282,0.0008033195,1.0558333,Reports highlight interval changes or stability compared to prior images.,"Highly activated examples focus on either the presence of interval changes, updates, or new findings noted in comparison with prior imaging. These reports prompt radiologists to highlight changes that may signify developments in a patient's condition, which is crucial in ongoing patient tracking.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4332856892098598,0.435,0.4414414414414414,0.49,100.0,100.0
+16310,latent_16310,1742,0.003484,0.0011917948,0.8738378,High activation with explicit patient history/indication.,"Examples with high activation levels involve explicit patient history and indication details within reports, which appear to drive more detailed comparison and clinical context. Examples without specific historical context or comparison tend to lack this activation, reflecting less detailed or context-driven assessment.",0.5558672276764843,0.62,0.5681818181818182,1.0,25.0,25.0,0.4336222431991761,0.505,0.5029239766081871,0.86,100.0,100.0
+16311,latent_16311,976,0.001952,0.00070905546,1.2060448,Comparative assessments with interval changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently feature observations compared to prior imaging studies, demonstrating interval changes or stable conditions over time. These descriptions are detailed in conditions of stability or change in findings over time, often described in relation to historical imaging.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.6153846153846154,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4739395796624019,0.485,0.4883720930232558,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16312,latent_16312,1237,0.002474,0.00084987405,1.0171298,Pleural effusion noted in the findings.,"The pattern with the highest activation in the data provided involves the presence of pleural effusions. Most of the highly activated examples mention either presumed or confirmed pleural effusions as a significant finding in the provided radiology reports, making it a prominent pattern despite various other conditions and standard comparisons in reports.",0.609375,0.64,0.8181818181818182,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4714701758170639,0.51,0.5217391304347826,0.24,100.0,100.0
+16313,latent_16313,1026,0.002052,0.00068691705,0.6438993,High activation is linked to notable interval changes or new interventions.,"The higher activation levels are associated with examples that include dynamic findings, such as significant interval changes, new medical interventions, or notable clinical concerns expressed in the interpretations. Lower activation levels are related to reports noting stable findings or minor changes, suggesting that the model is more activated by significant diagnostic updates or changes in patient condition.",0.5623100303951367,0.5625,0.5909090909090909,0.52,25.0,23.0,0.562539283469516,0.565,0.5764705882352941,0.49,100.0,100.0
+16314,latent_16314,1273,0.002546,0.00091441016,1.2436278,"Detailed evaluation of changes compared to prior images, focusing on stability or change in lung or mediastinal features.","Examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of changes or stability in specific lung or mediastinal conditions, often in reference to prior conditions or comparisons. These include terms like 'stable', 'unchanged', or comparison to previous imaging, reflecting either consistency or attention to detailed interval changes.",0.5383380168606985,0.54,0.5454545454545454,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5229846099771535,0.525,0.5221238938053098,0.59,100.0,100.0
+16315,latent_16315,1615,0.00323,0.0011235717,0.94584215,Use of both current lateral and prior frontal images together.,Examples with higher activation frequently integrate lateral views alongside the comparison with prior frontal images. This indicates that the pattern the model is picking up on involves the juxtaposition of current lateral views with the previous frontal images to offer more comprehensive findings.,0.5308037535699714,0.54,0.5555555555555556,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.434307026106981,0.435,0.4301075268817204,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16316,latent_16316,1673,0.003346,0.0011612088,0.88333654,Precise description of medical device placement and comparison with prior imaging.,"Activation is high when there are detailed and precise descriptions of the current state or placement of medical devices like tubes or catheters, especially in relation to previous images or notes ('as compared', 'redemonstrated', 'compared with prior'). This pattern is common in radiological assessments where the focus is on precise positioning or changes of such devices over time.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6666666666666666,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4934677399132375,0.495,0.4943820224719101,0.44,100.0,100.0
+16317,latent_16317,953,0.001906,0.0006908986,1.7005801,Reports indicating stable or unchanged findings in comparison to prior images.,"This subset of radiological reports emphasizes a lack of acute cardiopulmonary changes or any significant new findings, often noting stability or mild changes. Specific linguistic patterns include unchanged, stable observations, or comparisons where no substantial new pathology has emerged between studies.",0.5192307692307692,0.52,0.5217391304347826,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.4315832988838363,0.45,0.421875,0.27,100.0,100.0
+16318,latent_16318,1706,0.003412,0.0011938309,1.2120062,"Integrative comparison of current and prior images, with detailed findings.","The examples with high activation levels consistently reference multiple framing images (frontal, lateral, and prior) and involve detailed descriptions or comparisons of findings. They often have structured interpretations of changes or lack thereof over time, providing contextual information about devices, opacities, or nodules relative to previous images.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5231331168831169,0.53,0.5241935483870968,0.65,100.0,100.0
+16319,latent_16319,1362,0.002724,0.00095414254,0.9360482,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Reports with higher activations emphasize providing comparisons to prior studies, the use of multiple imaging modalities (e.g., PA, lateral, CT), and detailed descriptions of changes in findings over time. These elements suggest the importance of tracking patient progress or stability, which are key in these reports.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16320,latent_16320,1287,0.002574,0.0008951803,0.8788722,Notable changes or stability in findings compared to prior images.,"The pattern in the high-activation examples involves the presence of direct or indirect evidence of abnormalities or acute changes determined through comparison with previous images. This is indicated by phrases about unchanged or changing features such as tubes, opacities, effusions, or interventions when explicitly compared to prior images in contexts suggestive of clinical relevance or concern.",0.56,0.56,0.56,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4938758983702804,0.5,0.5,0.61,100.0,100.0
+16321,latent_16321,1270,0.00254,0.00091974455,1.3790324,Presence of prior imaging reports or findings.,"Examples illustrating a prior imaging report are more activated, suggesting the model identifies a pattern where prior imaging comparisons or results are provided. The inclusion of findings from past reports is notable across the highly activated samples.",0.4485294117647059,0.52,0.5116279069767442,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4554512802687985,0.53,0.5172413793103449,0.9,100.0,100.0
+16322,latent_16322,1728,0.003456,0.0012043795,1.1816365,Reference to imaging comparison or interval change detection.,Activation is higher in examples where there are explicit references to imaging comparisons or interval changes observed between the current and prior images. This suggests the model detects these specific radiology linguistic constructs as significant.,0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4376061120543294,0.47,0.4797297297297297,0.71,100.0,100.0
+16323,latent_16323,1100,0.0022,0.00077029655,1.3300781,Reports with detailed comparisons to prior imaging changes.,"The examples with higher activations predominantly involve detailed descriptions of changes in imaging findings over time, particularly with report comparisons to prior studies. Phrases highlighting such chronological comparison for evaluation of progress or regression of observed features are consistent across examples with higher activations.",0.48,0.48,0.48,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5117737815211069,0.5125628140703518,0.5108695652173914,0.4747474747474747,99.0,100.0
+16324,latent_16324,1323,0.002646,0.00093512656,1.5571303,Detailed comparison and positioning of tubes and catheters in radiology reports.,"Samples with high activation levels frequently include details on the positioning and status of tubes, catheters, or lines within the body or chest cavity, often in comparison to prior images. This pattern underscores the importance of tracking and comparing these tube placements across studies.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.5374792358803987,0.5454545454545454,0.5694444444444444,0.41,100.0,98.0
+16325,latent_16325,1442,0.002884,0.0009896477,0.85645837,Evaluation of findings relative to previous studies.,"The examples where activations are high describe comparison with prior imaging studies, indicating evaluation of current findings relative to previous ones, often with explicit descriptions of stability or changes over time.",0.4252873563218391,0.44,0.4545454545454545,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4832575444398512,0.5,0.5,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16326,latent_16326,2228,0.004456,0.001526147,1.0104703,Description of changes compared to prior images.,The highly activated examples consistently mention changes or differences observed when comparing the current images to prior imaging studies. This suggests the pattern recognizes updates or modifications in radiological findings over time using comparison language and context.,0.6124031007751938,0.62,0.59375,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.5117485505035093,0.52,0.5158730158730159,0.65,100.0,100.0
+16327,latent_16327,1460,0.00292,0.0010237539,0.80857444,Instructions to compare current findings with prior images for temporal changes.,"Examples with higher activations consistently have the instructions to describe findings in the radiology study using both current and prior images, indicating explicit directions on comparing changes over time through imaging data. This format is distinct in guiding the interpreter to focus on the progression or stability of findings between imaging studies.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4373401534526854,0.45,0.4615384615384615,0.6,100.0,100.0
+16328,latent_16328,1985,0.00397,0.0013807253,1.0881922,Detailed comparison and analysis of findings in radiology reports.,"Samples with high activation engage in providing a detailed description or analysis of findings in comparison to prior images or examinations. They often include an ‘ASSISTANT’ continuation which provides further context or suggestions, indicating an instructional or informative angle, especially in the context of a medical image review. This suggests providing thorough comparisons and descriptive, analytical insights are highly representative of the pattern.",0.3489583333333333,0.4,0.4358974358974359,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5103765511339324,0.5376884422110553,0.5238095238095238,0.7777777777777778,99.0,100.0
+16329,latent_16329,1715,0.00343,0.001179347,0.8564477,Use of prior imaging for interval change assessment.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently incorporate comparisons with prior radiographs or studies, demonstrating interval change or stability in findings. These descriptions emphasize evolving pathology or unchanged conditions, often featuring interval changes or reaffirming previous diagnoses.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5104166666666666,0.53,0.5214285714285715,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16330,latent_16330,697,0.001394,0.00054059137,1.8713204,Comparison of current and prior imaging studies.,"Examples with activation levels above zero contain explicit comparisons between current and prior imaging studies, typically describing changes or stability in patient conditions. These include phrases like 'comparison is made to prior study', detailing specific changes or stability in findings. This reflects a pattern of emphasis on the temporal assessment of medical images.",0.6353496353496353,0.66,0.6052631578947368,0.92,25.0,25.0,0.4721494102228047,0.4972067039106145,0.460431654676259,0.810126582278481,79.0,100.0
+16331,latent_16331,1212,0.002424,0.00085341546,1.2977719,"Changes in lines, tubes, or device positioning between studies.","The pattern appears to be distinguishing lines, tubes, and devices identified on radiographs, such as endotracheal tubes, pacemakers, or catheters, and specific changes in their position in comparison to prior imaging studies. These reports often document the position or adjustment of these medical devices and any associated anatomical changes (e.g., effusion, pneuthorax).",0.5586380832282472,0.58,0.6428571428571429,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5429001640181765,0.575,0.6595744680851063,0.31,100.0,100.0
+16332,latent_16332,1418,0.002836,0.0009982915,0.9792154,Evaluation of tube or device positioning or changes in lung findings compared to prior imaging.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently involve specific analysis or evaluation of the positioning of tubes (endotracheal, NG, Dobbhoff), devices (pacemakers, lines), or changes in pleural effusions or lung pathology relative to previous images. This suggests the pattern involves tracking or comparing positioning of tubes/devices or changes in pathological findings over serial imaging studies.",0.3441881501582994,0.42,0.4523809523809524,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4612391499551033,0.505,0.5031847133757962,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16333,latent_16333,1402,0.002804,0.0009809495,1.2716258,Stable cardiomegaly across imaging comparisons.,"The pattern in the highly activated examples is the presence of cardiomegaly and a stable cardiomediastinal silhouette across different radiological exams. This pattern points to chronic cardiac enlargement without acute changes, which is often documented in follow-up reports where prior cardiomegaly persists without progression.",0.4057724957555177,0.44,0.3846153846153846,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.4306008042029879,0.515,0.5652173913043478,0.13,100.0,100.0
+16334,latent_16334,417,0.000834,0.0003869271,1.5669556,Vague or unclear opacities in radiological findings.,"The highly activated examples consistently involve vague opacities or challenges in interpretations, described with terms like 'vague', 'suspected', 'suggestion of opacification', often indicating uncertainty or non-specific findings which require careful assessment by radiologists.",0.5206252713851498,0.5208333333333334,0.5,0.5652173913043478,23.0,25.0,0.4959199668065096,0.538961038961039,0.3454545454545454,0.3518518518518518,54.0,100.0
+16335,latent_16335,1547,0.003094,0.0010567638,1.3057625,Detailed comparison of current and prior imaging findings.,"Many examples with high activation use explicit comparisons with prior imaging studies. They often reference specific changes, improvements, or stability in radiological findings over time, reflecting the process of monitoring or evaluating changes in a patient's condition.",0.5798319327731092,0.58,0.5769230769230769,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.4987468671679198,0.5,0.5,0.55,100.0,100.0
+16336,latent_16336,1069,0.002138,0.00078725966,1.1771185,Detailed radiological findings description from images.,"The samples with high activation describe providing a description of radiological findings. They refer to elements like image comparison or absence of prior comparison but focus on detailing current findings in a radiology study, indicating a pattern related to generating or processing detailed report analyses.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4627516689273651,0.495,0.4966442953020134,0.74,100.0,100.0
+16337,latent_16337,1152,0.002304,0.0008057887,0.9414681,"Comparison of current and prior images, focusing on stability, changes, or presence of medical devices or surgical history.","The high activation examples involve descriptions that either mention findings stabilized over time in comparison with past findings or discuss the presence or removal of medical devices (e.g., NG tubes, lines, or pacemakers) or surgical histories (e.g., CABG, sternotomy). Additionally, focus is on describing stability or changes in specific medical interventions or post-surgical states, and comparing devices' positioning between prior and current imaging.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4310916255643414,0.455,0.4680851063829787,0.66,100.0,100.0
+16338,latent_16338,992,0.001984,0.00070765615,1.1818575,"Reports highlighting interval changes since prior imaging, especially involving tube placements or interventions.","Highly activated examples emphasize interval changes or comparisons with specific techniques such as chest tube placement or endotracheal position, often highlighting subtle or significant modifications relevant to interventions or complications.",0.4981934965877158,0.5,0.5,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.5349317899958661,0.55,0.578125,0.37,100.0,100.0
+16339,latent_16339,1507,0.003014,0.0010172756,0.9294971,Comparative analysis language in radiology based on prior images.,"These examples show referenced comparisons to previous images using terms such as ""unchanged"", ""more substantial than"", ""worsened"", and similar comparative language. The pattern also frequently includes descriptions of findings that compare current and previous imaging to assess for changes or stability.",0.4505494505494505,0.5,0.5,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16340,latent_16340,879,0.001758,0.0006153245,1.1339704,Explicit analysis of image findings in direct comparison with prior images.,"Examples with high activation frequently discuss radiological findings in relation to previous images, especially when these are explicitly mentioned or compared sequentially, emphasizing changes or consistencies over time. This suggests a pattern where recognition of these comparative aspects triggers high activation, particularly if findings are longitudinally analyzed.",0.4997999199679871,0.5,0.5,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5131498470948013,0.5175879396984925,0.5126050420168067,0.6161616161616161,99.0,100.0
+16341,latent_16341,1019,0.002038,0.0007299621,0.88154495,Comparison with prior images and noting intervals or changes.,"These examples feature explicit instructions to describe findings in comparison to one or more prior images. When comparison is possible, they note changes—or lack thereof—in medical devices, anatomy, or clinical findings.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4560755336617406,0.47,0.4772727272727273,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16342,latent_16342,1165,0.00233,0.0008480359,1.2605513,Focus on support device placement and interval change assessment.,"The pattern involves the description of findings related to either the placement or interval change of pacemaker leads, other medical lines (e.g., PICC line, chest tubes), or endotracheal tubes, often including an assessment of their positions relative to anatomical landmarks (e.g., carina, SVC).",0.625,0.64,0.7333333333333333,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.4667495016955295,0.485,0.4761904761904761,0.3,100.0,100.0
+16343,latent_16343,804,0.001608,0.0006250584,1.1672466,Description of findings with focus on interval changes and stability.,"Examples with high activation describe findings primarily in terms of changes, or lack thereof, to specific structures (i.e., pulmonary opacities, pleural effusions, surgical devices) across different imaging studies, often in a time-sensitive context, suggesting a focus on interval changes and stability evaluation.",0.4318181818181818,0.44,0.4516129032258064,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5235023041474655,0.5252525252525253,0.5272727272727272,0.58,100.0,98.0
+16344,latent_16344,1178,0.002356,0.0008478345,1.2124091,Comparison of current imaging with prior imaging to evaluate changes or stability in findings.,"Examples with high activation levels involve directly comparing new radiological studies to previous images to assess changes or stability in findings, particularly focusing on specific differences or stability in findings related to potential pathologies or conditions that have been identified or needed monitoring.",0.5245969408846631,0.54,0.5294117647058824,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5354784832589576,0.555,0.5390070921985816,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16345,latent_16345,1082,0.002164,0.00076754554,0.9236711,Findings unchanged or stable compared to previous imaging.,"The examples with high activation levels involve either unchanged findings or incremental changes from previous studies, indicating stability in the absence of new developments or acute issues. This pattern emphasizes the concept of stability and lack of significant new findings in comparison to prior imaging, often described using terms like 'unchanged', 'improved', 'constant', or 'stable'.",0.5398159263705482,0.54,0.5416666666666666,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.5362435729408206,0.54,0.5487804878048781,0.45,100.0,100.0
+16346,latent_16346,1700,0.0034,0.0011497205,0.93692267,Stability of findings or unchanged features in comparison to previous imaging.,"Highly activated examples consistently involve the assessment of unchanged findings over time or stability in the presence of sequential imaging studies, reflecting a common practice in radiology reports where continuity or lack of change is emphasized using comparative language.",0.5757575757575757,0.58,0.5666666666666667,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5485589855258102,0.5505050505050505,0.5517241379310345,0.4897959183673469,98.0,100.0
+16347,latent_16347,1266,0.002532,0.0008913809,0.9693031,Explicit comparison of current findings to prior imaging studies.,"The examples that activate strongly describe radiological findings by explicitly comparing current images to prior studies. This comparison is central to the language and structure of these reports, focusing on changes (or stability) over time.",0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.4390044879640963,0.45,0.4609375,0.59,100.0,100.0
+16348,latent_16348,942,0.001884,0.0007216163,1.6738276,Documentation of interval changes in specific pathologies compared to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activation levels involve comparisons of current imaging findings to a prior reference, specifically noting changes (or lack thereof) in pathologies or conditions such as pneumothorax or pneumonic opacity. These reports tend to mention interval changes, suggesting that the common pattern involves detailed evaluation of changes over time in specific imaging findings.",0.4197679071628651,0.42,0.4166666666666667,0.4,25.0,25.0,0.48815736651947,0.49,0.4886363636363636,0.43,100.0,100.0
+16349,latent_16349,1313,0.002626,0.00091691915,0.98318875,"Emphasis on comparison across images, noting changes over time.","The highly activated samples use a consistent structure emphasizing the comparison of findings between current and prior images, often highlighting changes in specific pathologies, procedures, or interventions. They evaluate changes in clinical context, such as resolution or progression of lesions, tubes, or cardiac silhouette.",0.4325346784363177,0.46,0.4722222222222222,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.4773333333333333,0.51,0.5066666666666667,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16350,latent_16350,1346,0.002692,0.00094075367,1.1973975,Comparison with prior images to describe changes or stability.,"Examples with higher activation often involve mentioning specific references to prior imaging studies for comparison, highlighting notable radiological findings, and discussing potential interval changes. The presence of direct requests for comparative assessments is consistent among higher activations, indicating that the model is sensitive to patterns suggestive of comparing current and previous medical imaging to discern changes or consistencies.",0.375,0.4,0.4285714285714285,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5229482844486384,0.545,0.5314685314685315,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16351,latent_16351,1604,0.003208,0.0011456762,1.1385449,Thoracic aorta tortuosity or elongation.,"The pattern emerging from this data set is the observation of thoracic aorta tortuosity or elongation, often described with the presence of cardiorespiratory symptoms or conditions. These findings are generally accompanied by a description of the heart size, mediastinal contours, pulmonary opacities, or pleural effusion, but the primary identifier is the elongated, widened, or tortuous description of the aorta in these findings.",0.5238095238095238,0.6,1.0,0.2,25.0,25.0,0.3757684668495223,0.505,0.5555555555555556,0.05,100.0,100.0
+16352,latent_16352,2019,0.004038,0.0013768871,0.9909895,Emphasis on interval changes between current and prior images.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently include a comparison between current and prior images, with differences or stability of conditions often noted. This suggests the model is recognizing a pattern of radiological assessments that involve comparing sequential imaging data to track changes over time.",0.5784825371336813,0.58,0.5714285714285714,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.6045155315261195,0.605,0.5981308411214953,0.64,100.0,100.0
+16353,latent_16353,1269,0.002538,0.0008720541,1.0369141,Detailed comparison with prior images demonstrating stability or change.,"Examples with high activation levels consistently include detailed comparisons between current and prior imaging studies. The pattern indicates that inclusion of specific findings noted as stable, unchanged, or improved with explicit prior date references and comparisons contributes to higher activation.",0.68,0.68,0.68,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5121192973587767,0.5125628140703518,0.5142857142857142,0.54,100.0,99.0
+16354,latent_16354,1019,0.002038,0.0007231403,1.4822483,Comparative analysis to prior images emphasized.,Prompts with high activation focus on the requirement for a description of new findings in the current image as compared to prior listed images. This emphasis on comparative analysis to prior imaging studies seems relevant in these high activation examples.,0.3894165535956581,0.46,0.4761904761904761,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4498975299320462,0.49,0.4935064935064935,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16355,latent_16355,1397,0.002794,0.0009910043,0.9148232,"Examination of multiple images with explicit, completed comparisons to prior studies.","Examples with high activation levels consistently describe examination of multiple images (frontal, lateral, and prior), with explicit mention of comparison to assess changes over time. These examples also tend to have completed or substantial insights in sections that describe changes relative to previous studies.",0.4766505636070853,0.48,0.4827586206896552,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.4739347178035522,0.475,0.4725274725274725,0.43,100.0,100.0
+16356,latent_16356,1460,0.00292,0.0010176589,1.1300402,Use of comparison with prior imaging studies to assess disease stability or progression.,"The pattern involves examination of current imaging findings in comparison with previous imaging studies, with a focus on disease stability or progression. This involves constant elements like phrases referencing comparisons, often with a prior timeframe or exam date, determining stability or changes in specific pathologies.",0.512987012987013,0.52,0.5161290322580645,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5647332725984411,0.57,0.5573770491803278,0.68,100.0,100.0
+16357,latent_16357,1289,0.002578,0.00091247604,1.1955655,Comparative descriptions involving both frontal and lateral views.,"Examples with comparatives that include images from different perspectives (e.g., 'frontal and lateral' views) and focus on identifying consistency or changes in appearance across different directions show higher activation. This suggests the model is attuned to the presence of these detailed, multi-perspective comparative analyses.",0.6198479391756703,0.62,0.625,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5347091932457786,0.535,0.5333333333333333,0.56,100.0,100.0
+16358,latent_16358,1611,0.003222,0.0011217686,1.0925351,Recognition and description of interval changes in comparison to prior images.,"Highly activated examples consistently compare the current imaging findings to the prior ones while identifying some interval changes, whether they indicate worsening, improvement, or persistence of findings such as effusions, consolidations, or device placements. The comparisons highlight changes or lack thereof in condition.",0.6376811594202898,0.64,0.6206896551724138,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.5647279549718573,0.565,0.5619047619047619,0.59,100.0,100.0
+16359,latent_16359,1199,0.002398,0.00086392235,1.2488039,Comparison to prior images evaluating change or stability.,"Highly activated examples often focus on comparisons with prior images and the determination of stability or change in the patient's condition. Examples discuss findings in relation to previous images, emphasizing evaluation of changes in lung conditions, device placements, and bone structures. Including phrases like 'compared with prior', 'no significant change', or 'stable' are common in these descriptions.",0.3333333333333333,0.36,0.4,0.56,25.0,25.0,0.5124636313595974,0.535,0.5244755244755245,0.75,100.0,100.0
+16360,latent_16360,1285,0.00257,0.00090100284,1.3235313,Change or stability in cardiomediastinal outlines and pleural conditions within imaging comparisons.,"Examples with notable activation levels consistently involve evaluating and describing changes or stability in cardiomediastinal outlines, pleural effusions, pulmonary opacities, and mediastinal masses specifically in comparison to previous imaging studies. They present findings in terms of significant or relevant changes, with references to prior exams for tracking progression or resolution.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5039955910719206,0.505,0.5045871559633027,0.55,100.0,100.0
+16361,latent_16361,1020,0.00204,0.0007277362,1.2565271,Detailed comparisons with prior images showing changes or stability in findings.,"The high activation examples feature detailed observations about changes or stability in radiological findings when compared with previous imaging. These descriptions include specific changes, presence of new conditions (e.g., intubation, effusions, opacities), and evaluations for stability in chronic conditions, often concluding with medical diagnoses based on these comparisons.",0.6186270574066639,0.62,0.6071428571428571,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.51995199519952,0.52,0.5204081632653061,0.51,100.0,100.0
+16362,latent_16362,1275,0.00255,0.0008817644,0.8934412,Evaluation of medical device positioning compared to prior imaging.,"High activation examples describe findings related to the comparison between current and prior images, particularly focusing on the placement or alteration of medical devices (e.g. tubes, catheters). Such descriptions involve noting changes in position with appropriate assessment to ensure correct placement, which is common in medical imaging evaluation.",0.5716034271725826,0.58,0.6111111111111112,0.44,25.0,25.0,0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5882352941176471,0.4,100.0,100.0
+16363,latent_16363,1757,0.003514,0.0011958827,0.854855,Comparisons made with prior imaging to note changes or stability.,"The examples with high activation levels consistently involve detailed descriptions of findings where comparison with previous imaging studies is explicitly performed. The inclusion of phrases like 'In comparison with previous study', 'As compared to the previous radiograph', and 'No significant change from prior exam suggests benignity' characterize instances with higher activation levels.",0.4791666666666666,0.52,0.5128205128205128,0.8,25.0,25.0,0.4625878462174452,0.48,0.4852941176470588,0.66,100.0,100.0
+16364,latent_16364,1127,0.002254,0.0008095532,1.3653542,Instruction-driven focus on detailed radiological comparison with prior imaging.,"In high activation examples, there is often explicit mention of imaging being referenced for comparison or mention of specific findings from previous images, indicating these assist in evaluating changes or stability over time, but this occurs in context per the given instructions rather than as a focal point of the comparative task itself.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4574652777777778,0.5,0.5,0.78,100.0,100.0
+16365,latent_16365,1512,0.003024,0.001042065,0.89634097,Emphasis on interval changes based on comparison with prior imaging.,"This set of examples contrasts findings made in current imaging studies with those from previous studies, emphasizing changes, improvements, or stability in pathological findings. The pattern specifically highlights updates in chronic or acute conditions, either noting stability, improvement, or worsening, often with reference to specific anatomic structures and their changes over time.",0.5592948717948718,0.56,0.5652173913043478,0.52,25.0,25.0,0.569827931172469,0.57,0.5673076923076923,0.59,100.0,100.0
+16366,latent_16366,1294,0.002588,0.00092684396,1.3391572,Reports emphasize direct image comparison highlighting changes.,"Samples with high activation levels consistently involve direct comparisons to prior images, focusing on specific changes or stability in features such as pulmonary conditions, cardiac silhouette, or placement of medical devices.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,25.0,0.4274661508704062,0.445,0.4592592592592592,0.62,100.0,100.0
+16367,latent_16367,1474,0.002948,0.0010437517,1.0780374,Explicit comparison of current findings to prior imaging study results.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently include statements that contrast current findings with prior ones, highlighting changes or interval stability. This includes phrases like 'unchanged from prior', 'compared to previous', and references to specific interval changes.",0.4419181479950392,0.46,0.4705882352941176,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.565936337329475,0.58,0.5588235294117647,0.76,100.0,100.0
+16368,latent_16368,1656,0.003312,0.0011364219,0.9552746,"Decisive comparisons in radiological evaluations involving pneumothorax or effusion, or changes in chest tube status.","The examples with high activation frequently involve descriptions of comparisons between current and prior images, often with emphasis on evaluating changes or stability in specific conditions such as pneumothorax, effusion, or associated with chest tubes or intubation. The pattern highlights the importance of comparative analysis in radiological assessments especially concerning acute thoracic conditions.",0.4545454545454545,0.46,0.45,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.4760657299356989,0.505,0.5094339622641509,0.27,100.0,100.0
+16369,latent_16369,1359,0.002718,0.000963783,1.210094,Focus on interval changes in imaging findings compared to prior studies.,"The examples highlight reports that extensively analyze and describe interval changes observed in the images in comparison to prior studies. These intervals can include placement of lines/tubes, disease progression, or changes in findings, often marked by phrases like 'since prior', 'no significant change compared with', or 'interval placement'.",0.5535714285714286,0.56,0.5483870967741935,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5587027914614121,0.57,0.553030303030303,0.73,100.0,100.0
+16370,latent_16370,1397,0.002794,0.00096351095,1.4189612,Comparisons with prior imaging studies.,These examples consistently reference direct comparisons between current radiological findings and prior imaging studies. The use of terms like 'in comparison to prior frontal image' or similar phrases denotes this pattern. This indicates a typical radiological practice of evaluating changes or stability of specific conditions over time by comparing with previous images.,0.3809523809523809,0.48,0.4888888888888889,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.5347469183668012,0.565,0.543046357615894,0.82,100.0,100.0
+16371,latent_16371,1724,0.003448,0.0011747369,0.85456383,Focus on interval changes or stability compared to prior studies.,"Examples with higher activation levels consistently discuss changes in findings relative to previous imaging studies, indicating an emphasis on interpreting radiographic changes over time. They emphasize either stability or noted changes since prior imaging, with the model likely reacting to contextual aspects of temporal comparison.",0.5,0.52,0.5142857142857142,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.54242614707731,0.545,0.5391304347826087,0.62,100.0,100.0
+16372,latent_16372,1287,0.002574,0.00092227093,1.2728977,Reports detailing interval change or stability against prior imaging.,"The examples tend to show activation when the findings explicitly mention interval changes, placements of devices, or stability in conditions with respect to previous comparisons. It often involves specific updates on objects within the body such as tubes or nodules as referenced against prior reports.",0.5073891625615763,0.52,0.5151515151515151,0.68,25.0,25.0,0.5039955910719206,0.505,0.5045871559633027,0.55,100.0,100.0
+16373,latent_16373,1843,0.003686,0.0012811016,0.90281147,Direct comparison of current and prior imaging studies for interval changes or verification of findings.,"The excerpts show high activation when previous imaging studies are explicitly referenced for direct comparison, often indicating interval changes (persisting, regressing, unchanged) or specific findings like effusions, opacities, and tube positioning noted in the current and prior images.",0.5006645990252547,0.5306122448979592,0.5277777777777778,0.76,25.0,24.0,0.5108755979596691,0.5326633165829145,0.5211267605633803,0.7474747474747475,99.0,100.0
+16374,latent_16374,581,0.001162,0.0004124721,0.942505,Detailed comparison to prior imaging findings.,"The examples with high activation levels prominently feature the comparison between current and prior imaging, specifically focusing on observations or changes in the current image against a backdrop of a previously reviewed report or image. This linguistic structure emphasizes direct comparisons over time or after an intervention, which is a crucial task familiar in serial radiological assessments.",0.3990384615384615,0.4,0.391304347826087,0.36,25.0,25.0,0.5012055129727591,0.5029940119760479,0.4157303370786517,0.5441176470588235,68.0,99.0
+16375,latent_16375,1039,0.002078,0.00072560087,1.225571,Detailed comparison with prior imaging emphasizing changes.,"The examples with higher activation levels consistently involve descriptions of findings that integrate comparisons with previous imaging along with technical details like techniques used or specific radiograph types, rather than simply mentioning the comparison. This indicates an emphasis on detailed analysis of changes over time using similar imaging techniques.",0.5993589743589745,0.6,0.5925925925925926,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.5034980816971338,0.505,0.5056179775280899,0.45,100.0,100.0
+16376,latent_16376,1360,0.00272,0.00094471197,0.91090244,Use of multiple views and comparison to prior imaging.,"The examples with higher activations refer to the use of multiple radiological views, or a combination of frontal and lateral views, often with explicit references to prior imaging for comparison. This suggests that the pattern relates to the type of imaging technique and the presence of a comparative analysis with previous studies.",0.4798733604703754,0.54,0.5238095238095238,0.88,25.0,25.0,0.4071204249948636,0.495,0.4971751412429379,0.88,100.0,100.0
+16377,latent_16377,1457,0.002914,0.001049091,1.1578215,Comparative analysis of current and prior radiological images.,"Examples with high activation levels involve a request to describe current radiology findings in direct comparison to previous images, highlighting structural stability or changes. This pattern is typical in radiological analysis where diagnostics are reliant on comparing current scans with previous ones.",0.4663382594417077,0.48,0.4848484848484848,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4683159722222222,0.51,0.5064102564102564,0.79,100.0,100.0
+16378,latent_16378,859,0.001718,0.0006360258,1.4235227,Phrase 'the lungs are clear' despite mention of comparison details.,"Examples with higher activation focus on the phrase 'the lungs are clear' despite the reports including requests for comparison to prior studies. The phrase indicates a radiologist's assessment that no issues are discovered, contributing to the specificity of observations despite comparison details.",0.5166036149642708,0.54,0.5714285714285714,0.32,25.0,25.0,0.3571762505843852,0.45,0.2916666666666667,0.07,100.0,100.0
+16379,latent_16379,949,0.001898,0.00065834814,1.4630846,Significant changes in mediastinal or cardiac silhouette with emphasis on devices or abnormalities.,"Examples with high activation levels focus on findings that involve pronounced changes in the mediastinal contours or cardiac silhouette across imaging studies, which may indicate emergent or ongoing pathological changes, particularly of the mediastinum or heart. These examples often describe devices or abnormalities (e.g., catheters, masses) within the central chest that can significantly impact patient management.",0.5571658615136876,0.56,0.5714285714285714,0.48,25.0,25.0,0.5738636363636364,0.58,0.6052631578947368,0.46,100.0,100.0
+16380,latent_16380,1953,0.003906,0.0013267372,0.87641793,Comparative assessment from prior imaging studies.,"The pattern identified involves reports that include a contextualized comparison with prior imaging. High activation examples frequently describe specific comparisons and changes over time, indicating a focus on longitudinal assessment of changes, such as re-evaluation post-procedure, or progression/regression of conditions.",0.4166666666666666,0.44,0.4571428571428571,0.64,25.0,25.0,0.4579046354685253,0.51,0.5061728395061729,0.82,100.0,100.0
+16381,latent_16381,2199,0.004398,0.0015053928,0.8670674,Inclusion of lateral images is associated with the pattern.,The presence or absence of lateral images corresponds with activation levels. Cases with lateral images alone are not representative. Mixed frontal-lateral examples show high activation.,0.4949494949494949,0.5,0.5,0.6,25.0,25.0,0.5578333835795397,0.56,0.5526315789473685,0.63,100.0,100.0
+16382,latent_16382,1216,0.002432,0.0008521356,1.0882574,Comparison to prior studies or reports for stability assessment.,"These examples consistently refer to previous reports to describe stability or changes in findings, suggesting a pattern in radiology where previous imaging or reports are used as a reference to determine the changes or stability of current findings.",0.548440065681445,0.56,0.5454545454545454,0.72,25.0,25.0,0.4930428217020817,0.53,0.5194805194805194,0.8,100.0,100.0
+16383,latent_16383,766,0.001532,0.00057824573,1.5392096,Observed positional measurements of medical devices in images.,"Activation examples show a pattern where specific measurements or locations of tubes and devices (like endotracheal tube position or catheter placement) are described. These precise positional descriptions are crucial for assessing complications or functionality of these devices, and therefore closely related to the activation measurements.",0.7342511472674176,0.7346938775510204,0.7391304347826086,0.7083333333333334,24.0,25.0,0.6254369759840841,0.6387434554973822,0.6825396825396826,0.4673913043478261,92.0,99.0